pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Kelly Thompson Leaving Getty January 20th  (Read 19836 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: January 19, 2012, 18:48 »
0
His beliefs and reputation will follow him, not related to iStock.  At least I think he fought for us all the way as long as he could. That is why he got the axe.

More likely just a matter of business vs. politics. I think he (and Kelly) got the axe because iStock is being absorbed into Getty, and if Getty's running its own show for iStock now, there's no place for more managers. They've already got their own management team. So folks like JJ and KK become redundant.


w7lwi

  • Those that don't stand up to evil enable evil.
« Reply #51 on: January 19, 2012, 18:57 »
0

iStock resembles a red giant star in the final stages of collapse.   Shine bright and expand then sheds its content; then a cold core cinder remains at the center slowly cooling until there is nothing left.

More like a giant star that shines brightly, then collapses into a black hole (called Getty) that greedily tries to suck everything into its gaping maw.

ShadySue

« Reply #52 on: January 19, 2012, 18:57 »
0
 At least JJRD got out with his dignity and beliefs in place.  
He hasn't got out. It's his "... clear intention to remain an iStockphoto exclusive as well as a Getty Images contributing artist. "

« Reply #53 on: January 19, 2012, 19:51 »
0
His beliefs and reputation will follow him, not related to iStock.  At least I think he fought for us all the way as long as he could. That is why he got the axe.

You can stick your faux sympathy where the sun doesn't shine. Thompson's 'beliefs and reputation' as well as his actions led to millions of dollars of commissions being diverted from contributors to Istock during his watch. He was in charge of Istock when they offered to 'grandfather' canister levels and then essentially went back on that a few months later. If he'd had genuinely 'fought for us' and not got his way then he should have resigned at the time. To not have done so, as the man in charge, meant he endorsed the changes (far more than his 'beliefs and reputation').

Under Thompson's watch the most damaging series of actions in Istock's history occurred and have resulted in the downfall of the immensely strong business he inherited. If he wasn't responsible for that then at very best he was a weak and ineffective COO promoted way beyond his capability and his level of courage. He's lost us all a lot of money. F*ck him.

« Reply #54 on: January 19, 2012, 21:02 »
0

iStock resembles a red giant star in the final stages of collapse.   Shine bright and expand then sheds its content; then a cold core cinder remains at the center slowly cooling until there is nothing left.

More like a giant star that shines brightly, then collapses into a black hole (called Getty) that greedily tries to suck everything into its gaping maw.

 :D :D :D :D

« Reply #55 on: January 19, 2012, 21:12 »
0
I'd like to say that having met them both last year, JJ and Kelly are two of the nicest people I have met in my life. very sincere, to the point that it sometimes came across poorly when communicating to contributors. on a business note, this is a frightening day for exclusives in particular. on a personal note, I will miss them both and their involvement. even when I didn't agree with it, I knew they meant what they said.

I haven't met them, and nice or not, I don't think it would take more than a couple of fingers to count the times Kelly meant what he communicated to me via the forums.

As for JJRD, who . even knew *what* he was trying to say, let alone whether or not he meant it????

« Reply #56 on: January 19, 2012, 21:15 »
0
His beliefs and reputation will follow him, not related to iStock.  At least I think he fought for us all the way as long as he could. That is why he got the axe.

You can stick your faux sympathy where the sun doesn't shine. Thompson's 'beliefs and reputation' as well as his actions led to millions of dollars of commissions being diverted from contributors to Istock during his watch. He was in charge of Istock when they offered to 'grandfather' canister levels and then essentially went back on that a few months later. If he'd had genuinely 'fought for us' and not got his way then he should have resigned at the time. To not have done so, as the man in charge, meant he endorsed the changes (far more than his 'beliefs and reputation').

Under Thompson's watch the most damaging series of actions in Istock's history occurred and have resulted in the downfall of the immensely strong business he inherited. If he wasn't responsible for that then at very best he was a weak and ineffective COO promoted way beyond his capability and his level of courage. He's lost us all a lot of money. F*ck him.

I think jamesbenet was talking about JJRD, not Thompson. But I agree with all of your statements about Thompson above, for sure.

« Reply #57 on: January 19, 2012, 21:38 »
0
His beliefs and reputation will follow him, not related to iStock.  At least I think he fought for us all the way as long as he could. That is why he got the axe.

You can stick your faux sympathy where the sun doesn't shine. Thompson's 'beliefs and reputation' as well as his actions led to millions of dollars of commissions being diverted from contributors to Istock during his watch. He was in charge of Istock when they offered to 'grandfather' canister levels and then essentially went back on that a few months later. If he'd had genuinely 'fought for us' and not got his way then he should have resigned at the time. To not have done so, as the man in charge, meant he endorsed the changes (far more than his 'beliefs and reputation').

Under Thompson's watch the most damaging series of actions in Istock's history occurred and have resulted in the downfall of the immensely strong business he inherited. If he wasn't responsible for that then at very best he was a weak and ineffective COO promoted way beyond his capability and his level of courage. He's lost us all a lot of money. F*ck him.
Agreed. Kelly was one of most ineffective leaders I've ever seen. Sure, he was a nice guy, as Stacey pointed out.  But just because you're nice doesn't mean you can run a company. 

« Reply #58 on: January 19, 2012, 22:05 »
0
His beliefs and reputation will follow him, not related to iStock.  At least I think he fought for us all the way as long as he could. That is why he got the axe.

You can stick your faux sympathy where the sun doesn't shine. Thompson's 'beliefs and reputation' as well as his actions led to millions of dollars of commissions being diverted from contributors to Istock during his watch. He was in charge of Istock when they offered to 'grandfather' canister levels and then essentially went back on that a few months later. If he'd had genuinely 'fought for us' and not got his way then he should have resigned at the time. To not have done so, as the man in charge, meant he endorsed the changes (far more than his 'beliefs and reputation').

Under Thompson's watch the most damaging series of actions in Istock's history occurred and have resulted in the downfall of the immensely strong business he inherited. If he wasn't responsible for that then at very best he was a weak and ineffective COO promoted way beyond his capability and his level of courage. He's lost us all a lot of money. F*ck him.
Agreed. Kelly was one of most ineffective leaders I've ever seen. Sure, he was a nice guy, as Stacey pointed out.  But just because you're nice doesn't mean you can run a company. 

ain't that the truth.  My ex-husband is a really nice guy (and pretty good dad to my kids), too, but he can't handle a marriage (just ask his 1st, 2nd and 3rd x-wives!) 

« Reply #59 on: January 19, 2012, 22:18 »
0
His beliefs and reputation will follow him, not related to iStock.  At least I think he fought for us all the way as long as he could. That is why he got the axe.

You can stick your faux sympathy where the sun doesn't shine. Thompson's 'beliefs and reputation' as well as his actions led to millions of dollars of commissions being diverted from contributors to Istock during his watch. He was in charge of Istock when they offered to 'grandfather' canister levels and then essentially went back on that a few months later. If he'd had genuinely 'fought for us' and not got his way then he should have resigned at the time. To not have done so, as the man in charge, meant he endorsed the changes (far more than his 'beliefs and reputation').

Under Thompson's watch the most damaging series of actions in Istock's history occurred and have resulted in the downfall of the immensely strong business he inherited. If he wasn't responsible for that then at very best he was a weak and ineffective COO promoted way beyond his capability and his level of courage. He's lost us all a lot of money. F*ck him.

I think jamesbenet was talking about JJRD, not Thompson. But I agree with all of your statements about Thompson above, for sure.


Yes I was talking about JJRD, Thomson is a whole other story.    Thomson was a manager under the Getty influence and his reality distortion and twisting were pretty contrarian to what Bruce and the old iStock were all about.   Every time he tried to fix things in a statement he shoveled deeper.   Wonder if the universe has some sort of justice system that is being served in his case.   I don't wish any of them wrong but I don't consider Kelly to be a friend of artists, he probably knew the grand plan years ago and steered the boat until it hit the rocks. He reminds me of the recent events with him jumping into the Getty lifeboat right after he saw the disaster, funny thing is the coastguard at Getty punched a big hole in his raft.

« Reply #60 on: January 20, 2012, 00:14 »
0
His beliefs and reputation will follow him, not related to iStock.  At least I think he fought for us all the way as long as he could. That is why he got the axe.

More likely just a matter of business vs. politics. I think he (and Kelly) got the axe because iStock is being absorbed into Getty, and if Getty's running its own show for iStock now, there's no place for more managers. They've already got their own management team. So folks like JJ and KK become redundant.

Dead right. If he was axed for fighting for contributors they would have put someone else in his place. If he quit in fury over them sacking his mates he would not meekly stick around for a few months to help them out by training other to do bits of his job.

What's happened is that Ms Rockefeller has completed her report on Integration and Profit Maximization at iStockphoto.com, the top dogs have approved it and it has now been implemented (incidentally, not only making KT redundant but also making him look foolish, once more. for confidently saying a few months ago that plans for iStock's development were mapped out for years ahead).

At least Jamesbenet is right about JJ's reputation: he does seem to have an adoring fan club around the world and, no doubt, this will work in his favour in years to come. For myself, I find the hero worship on the iStock forum rather disturbing, particularly as I can't recall him ever saying anything inspirational - just some bizzarely stilted love-in exchanges between him and other officials. Did I miss something?
« Last Edit: January 20, 2012, 00:19 by BaldricksTrousers »

lagereek

« Reply #61 on: January 20, 2012, 02:19 »
0
His beliefs and reputation will follow him, not related to iStock.  At least I think he fought for us all the way as long as he could. That is why he got the axe.

You can stick your faux sympathy where the sun doesn't shine. Thompson's 'beliefs and reputation' as well as his actions led to millions of dollars of commissions being diverted from contributors to Istock during his watch. He was in charge of Istock when they offered to 'grandfather' canister levels and then essentially went back on that a few months later. If he'd had genuinely 'fought for us' and not got his way then he should have resigned at the time. To not have done so, as the man in charge, meant he endorsed the changes (far more than his 'beliefs and reputation').

Under Thompson's watch the most damaging series of actions in Istock's history occurred and have resulted in the downfall of the immensely strong business he inherited. If he wasn't responsible for that then at very best he was a weak and ineffective COO promoted way beyond his capability and his level of courage. He's lost us all a lot of money. F*ck him.

100%  true!!  everything and all BS, happend during his era, the guy is totally and utterly incompetent, ( ofcourse!  sorry for anybody getting the boot), James, however must be thinking of somebody else or totally blindfolded.

CarlssonInc

« Reply #62 on: January 20, 2012, 02:29 »
0
His beliefs and reputation will follow him, not related to iStock.  At least I think he fought for us all the way as long as he could. That is why he got the axe.

You can stick your faux sympathy where the sun doesn't shine. Thompson's 'beliefs and reputation' as well as his actions led to millions of dollars of commissions being diverted from contributors to Istock during his watch. He was in charge of Istock when they offered to 'grandfather' canister levels and then essentially went back on that a few months later. If he'd had genuinely 'fought for us' and not got his way then he should have resigned at the time. To not have done so, as the man in charge, meant he endorsed the changes (far more than his 'beliefs and reputation').

Under Thompson's watch the most damaging series of actions in Istock's history occurred and have resulted in the downfall of the immensely strong business he inherited. If he wasn't responsible for that then at very best he was a weak and ineffective COO promoted way beyond his capability and his level of courage. He's lost us all a lot of money. F*ck him.

100%  true!!  everything and all BS, happend during his era, the guy is totally and utterly incompetent, ( ofcourse!  sorry for anybody getting the boot), James, however must be thinking of somebody else or totally blindfolded.

C'mon Christian, we don't know the inner workings of iStock or what goes on behind the scene - slamming someone publicly like this isn't right nor fair.

lagereek

« Reply #63 on: January 20, 2012, 03:01 »
0
His beliefs and reputation will follow him, not related to iStock.  At least I think he fought for us all the way as long as he could. That is why he got the axe.

You can stick your faux sympathy where the sun doesn't shine. Thompson's 'beliefs and reputation' as well as his actions led to millions of dollars of commissions being diverted from contributors to Istock during his watch. He was in charge of Istock when they offered to 'grandfather' canister levels and then essentially went back on that a few months later. If he'd had genuinely 'fought for us' and not got his way then he should have resigned at the time. To not have done so, as the man in charge, meant he endorsed the changes (far more than his 'beliefs and reputation').

Under Thompson's watch the most damaging series of actions in Istock's history occurred and have resulted in the downfall of the immensely strong business he inherited. If he wasn't responsible for that then at very best he was a weak and ineffective COO promoted way beyond his capability and his level of courage. He's lost us all a lot of money. F*ck him.

100%  true!!  everything and all BS, happend during his era, the guy is totally and utterly incompetent, ( ofcourse!  sorry for anybody getting the boot), James, however must be thinking of somebody else or totally blindfolded.

C'mon Christian, we don't know the inner workings of iStock or what goes on behind the scene - slamming someone publicly like this isn't right nor fair.

Hi Martin!  well thats true, ( in a sense only)  but really, ask anybody, had he shown a bit of spunk, stood up a little bit and not been such a yes-man to the bosses, well?

You know, I dont want to paint the devil on the wall but frankly, one has got to be pretty blind, stubborn or die-hard to the point of sublimity, not to realize, under present circumbstances, that all this is just sinking the agency even further down the ladder and before its gone too far, well, you might want to start to reconsider a little bit,  spread your work or not.

all the best.  Christian :)

CarlssonInc

« Reply #64 on: January 20, 2012, 03:24 »
0
@christian

As I said, we know nothing about the actual situation. He might have put up a hell of fight, won some, lost some and probably fighting with one hand tied behind his back most of the time. We can't judge anyone, he probably had to navigate very difficult waters and I just think it is wrong to tarnish someone when we don't have the complete picture or when said someone can't freely talk/defend themselves. It is always very easy to put blame on someone.

This doesn't mean I think he was/is great nor bad - I just can't tell and refuse to base my opinion on only the few things that are visible. There is probably loads of stuff we don't know squat about. One should be very careful to judge, he has feelings and so does his family and would probably be very upset if they saw him painted as "completely incompetent". Remember that he is probably gagged for a quite a long time and can't defend/explain himself.

CarlssonInc

« Reply #65 on: January 20, 2012, 03:28 »
0
"You know, I dont want to paint the devil on the wall but frankly, one has got to be pretty blind, stubborn or die-hard to the point of sublimity, not to realize, under present circumbstances, that all this is just sinking the agency even further down the ladder and before its gone too far, well, you might want to start to reconsider a little bit,  spread your work or not."

Yes, one should always consider ones options. However, my stuff ain't solely with iStock (thank god), but quite heavily through different arrangements within the "Getty family". Time will tell, but yes the constant upheaval is taking it's toll.

« Reply #66 on: January 20, 2012, 11:44 »
0
@christian

As I said, we know nothing about the actual situation. He might have put up a hell of fight, won some, lost some and probably fighting with one hand tied behind his back most of the time. We can't judge anyone, he probably had to navigate very difficult waters and I just think it is wrong to tarnish someone when we don't have the complete picture or when said someone can't freely talk/defend themselves. It is always very easy to put blame on someone.

This doesn't mean I think he was/is great nor bad - I just can't tell and refuse to base my opinion on only the few things that are visible. There is probably loads of stuff we don't know squat about. One should be very careful to judge, he has feelings and so does his family and would probably be very upset if they saw him painted as "completely incompetent". Remember that he is probably gagged for a quite a long time and can't defend/explain himself.

 To go through life with the moniker Kelly But Money Isn't Going To Make Us Happy Thompson will be pennance enough.

« Reply #67 on: January 20, 2012, 12:19 »
0
I'd like to say that having met them both last year, JJ and Kelly are two of the nicest people I have met in my life. very sincere, to the point that it sometimes came across poorly when communicating to contributors. on a business note, this is a frightening day for exclusives in particular. on a personal note, I will miss them both and their involvement. even when I didn't agree with it, I knew they meant what they said.

Same here.

« Reply #68 on: January 20, 2012, 14:14 »
0
His beliefs and reputation will follow him, not related to iStock.  At least I think he fought for us all the way as long as he could. That is why he got the axe.

More likely just a matter of business vs. politics. I think he (and Kelly) got the axe because iStock is being absorbed into Getty, and if Getty's running its own show for iStock now, there's no place for more managers. They've already got their own management team. So folks like JJ and KK become redundant.

Dead right. If he was axed for fighting for contributors they would have put someone else in his place. If he quit in fury over them sacking his mates he would not meekly stick around for a few months to help them out by training other to do bits of his job.

What's happened is that Ms Rockefeller has completed her report on Integration and Profit Maximization at iStockphoto.com, the top dogs have approved it and it has now been implemented (incidentally, not only making KT redundant but also making him look foolish, once more. for confidently saying a few months ago that plans for iStock's development were mapped out for years ahead).

At least Jamesbenet is right about JJ's reputation: he does seem to have an adoring fan club around the world and, no doubt, this will work in his favour in years to come. For myself, I find the hero worship on the iStock forum rather disturbing, particularly as I can't recall him ever saying anything inspirational - just some bizzarely stilted love-in exchanges between him and other officials. Did I miss something?

Well said, all. And no. I don't think you/we missed a thing where JJ's mystic musings were concerned.

« Reply #69 on: January 20, 2012, 15:44 »
0
So I browsed the thread on the istock forum and see that Lobo is answering questions in typical Lobo-like fashion. So I presume he isn't one of the ones who got laid off? Does anyone know? I haven't been through all the threads yet today. Just curious. If he's staying, I guess that means the company thinks he is a doing a bang-up job.

« Reply #70 on: January 20, 2012, 19:07 »
0
So I browsed the thread on the istock forum and see that Lobo is answering questions in typical Lobo-like fashion. So I presume he isn't one of the ones who got laid off? Does anyone know? I haven't been through all the threads yet today. Just curious. If he's staying, I guess that means the company thinks he is a doing a bang-up job.

...or he just missed this round of cuts. Complete assimilation hasn't yet occurred...

« Reply #71 on: January 21, 2012, 05:34 »
0
So I browsed the thread on the istock forum and see that Lobo is answering questions in typical Lobo-like fashion. So I presume he isn't one of the ones who got laid off? Does anyone know? I haven't been through all the threads yet today. Just curious. If he's staying, I guess that means the company thinks he is a doing a bang-up job.

...or he just missed this round of cuts. Complete assimilation hasn't yet occurred...

Agreed. When Getty shuts down the istock forums he'll be out of a job. Not nice to have contributors complain about poor monthly sales all the time. Better to keep people in the dark and not discuss opinions or ideas.

« Reply #72 on: January 21, 2012, 12:28 »
0
His beliefs and reputation will follow him, not related to iStock.  At least I think he fought for us all the way as long as he could. That is why he got the axe.

You can stick your faux sympathy where the sun doesn't shine. Thompson's 'beliefs and reputation' as well as his actions led to millions of dollars of commissions being diverted from contributors to Istock during his watch. He was in charge of Istock when they offered to 'grandfather' canister levels and then essentially went back on that a few months later. If he'd had genuinely 'fought for us' and not got his way then he should have resigned at the time. To not have done so, as the man in charge, meant he endorsed the changes (far more than his 'beliefs and reputation').

Under Thompson's watch the most damaging series of actions in Istock's history occurred and have resulted in the downfall of the immensely strong business he inherited. If he wasn't responsible for that then at very best he was a weak and ineffective COO promoted way beyond his capability and his level of courage. He's lost us all a lot of money. F*ck him.
Agreed. Kelly was one of most ineffective leaders I've ever seen. Sure, he was a nice guy, as Stacey pointed out.  But just because you're nice doesn't mean you can run a company. 

ain't that the truth.  My ex-husband is a really nice guy (and pretty good dad to my kids), too, but he can't handle a marriage (just ask his 1st, 2nd and 3rd x-wives!) 

Sounds like he's been 'let go' a few times himself!

« Reply #73 on: January 21, 2012, 13:24 »
0
His beliefs and reputation will follow him, not related to iStock.  At least I think he fought for us all the way as long as he could. That is why he got the axe.

More likely just a matter of business vs. politics. I think he (and Kelly) got the axe because iStock is being absorbed into Getty, and if Getty's running its own show for iStock now, there's no place for more managers. They've already got their own management team. So folks like JJ and KK become redundant.

Dead right. If he was axed for fighting for contributors they would have put someone else in his place. If he quit in fury over them sacking his mates he would not meekly stick around for a few months to help them out by training other to do bits of his job.

What's happened is that Ms Rockefeller has completed her report on Integration and Profit Maximization at iStockphoto.com, the top dogs have approved it and it has now been implemented (incidentally, not only making KT redundant but also making him look foolish, once more. for confidently saying a few months ago that plans for iStock's development were mapped out for years ahead).

At least Jamesbenet is right about JJ's reputation: he does seem to have an adoring fan club around the world and, no doubt, this will work in his favour in years to come. For myself, I find the hero worship on the iStock forum rather disturbing, particularly as I can't recall him ever saying anything inspirational - just some bizzarely stilted love-in exchanges between him and other officials. Did I miss something?

Really doesn't it say more about the mindset of a large subset of microstock submitters.  No wonder the sites feel they can rape and pillage at will.  Needing to feel like you are part of a perceived special community is very different than actually belonging to a authentic dynamic community.

Perception is not reality, however successful business's always have dynamic people within it who are masters at manipulating perceptions.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2012, 13:25 by gbalex »

« Reply #74 on: January 21, 2012, 13:45 »
0

Really doesn't it say more about the mindset of a large subset of microstock submitters.  No wonder the sites feel they can rape and pillage at will.  Needing to feel like you are part of a perceived special community is very different than actually belonging to a authentic dynamic community.

Perception is not reality, however successful business's always have dynamic people within it who are masters at manipulating perceptions.

What really bothers me about it is that so many people seem so eager to create a cult figure to look up to. That's not about JJRD or iStock in particular (it would be less disturbing if it were).


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
2962 Views
Last post November 19, 2008, 22:43
by hali
22 Replies
6107 Views
Last post September 21, 2010, 11:24
by Case
107 Replies
23732 Views
Last post April 13, 2011, 04:53
by ShadySue
87 Replies
13025 Views
Last post November 27, 2015, 01:49
by shiyali
206 Replies
36721 Views
Last post September 01, 2017, 19:42
by Zero Talent

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results