Author Topic: Layoffs at istock (Read 136803 times)

Pixart · « **Reply #125 on:** January 18, 2012, 12:46 »

Quote from: cmannphoto on January 18, 2012, 12:28

Quote from: Pixart on January 18, 2012, 12:05
Well, I posted condolences to the staffmembers who lost their job on their Facebook wall and they were gone instantly, so someone is at home in the social media department.

Interesting because there is a post up on their FaceBook page from 55 minutes ago that is still up.
http://www.facebook.com/istock?sk=wall&filter=1

Hmmm.. now I see all kinds of mesages before it was just the poll on top from Jan 12.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #126 on:** January 18, 2012, 12:55 »

Quote from: gostwyck on January 18, 2012, 12:42

Quote from: SNP on January 18, 2012, 12:16
makes me sad. I have truly loved iStockphoto as it was.

"I have truly loved" ? Do me a favour. It was supposed to be your agency and you should have maintained a business relationship with them.

There's what you were supposed to be doing and what you actually do. I completely get the emotional attachment - and I was never a pom-pom carrier.

I think that at its very best, a successful business, particularly one that is changing how things are done, is a very exciting and engaging thing. On top of which there are a number of really wonderful contributors who were active participants in the supplier side of the community. I don't think that was illusory, even though it is now largely gone (wholly gone for me and the forums are heading for ghost towns compared to what they once were).

Call me foolish (and Douglas Freer suggested I was in need of psychiatric counseling for going exclusive!) but I was at one time very engaged with being part of the business and its growth and success. It felt like a partnership. Perhaps I just saw what I wanted to see. At any rate, I get the attachment thing (wouldn't have called it love, but that's just a quibble).

kelby · « **Reply #127 on:** January 18, 2012, 13:07 »

will be a coincidence but today the site was been down about 3/4 times

cmannphoto · « **Reply #128 on:** January 18, 2012, 13:11 »

Quote from: kelby on January 18, 2012, 13:07

will be a coincidence but today the site was been down about 3/4 times

I was thinking that same thing. I was getting blank pages yesterday as well.

What is more scary is that I have not had a single DL today, which has not happened to me on a weekday since about 18 months ago.

wut · « **Reply #129 on:** January 18, 2012, 13:17 »

Quote from: cuethesun on January 18, 2012, 12:14

Quote from: wut on January 18, 2012, 11:41
Indeed, one of the scouts was once particularly rude and overly aggressive, I'm not exaggerating by saying he was worse than Lobo. He was behaving like a cornered animal, after I relatively strongly, but respectfully disagreed with inspector's rejection.

Wow you bothered appealing to scout? what's their turn atound time like these days?

Yeah, almost a year ago. Never since then, I don't upload over there at the moment, since best match is still favouring exclusives a lot more than usually

FreeTransform · « **Reply #130 on:** January 18, 2012, 13:34 »

I wonder if KKT sent a message telling the laid off folks that money is not what's going to make them happy…

jjneff · « **Reply #131 on:** January 18, 2012, 13:36 »

Funny people here that statement is a classic "Money is not going to make you happy" Kinda of true but try living without it Kelly!

wds · « **Reply #132 on:** January 18, 2012, 14:01 »

This seems like an extremely scary time. If there are layoffs, I would expect some major change/announcement soon.

cthoman · « **Reply #133 on:** January 18, 2012, 14:17 »

Quote from: gostwyck on January 18, 2012, 12:42

"I have truly loved" ? Do me a favour. It was supposed to be your agency and you should have maintained a business relationship with them. It was entirely because of all the ridiculous pom-pom waving that Istock thought it could get away with screwing all it's contributors and all it's customers.

I'd only have been sad if they had got away with it __ because all the other agencies would probably have followed them and we the contributors (including you) wouldn't have had a business anymore. Fortunately their greed has come back to bite them hard and I hope any other agency will take notice of Istock's downfall.

I get the emotional attachment too. I don't run my business like a robot.

As far as getting away with it and others following suit... didn't they? They paid 20% for how many years and were very successful at the low rate. Other companies like DT and FT lowered their royalties a couple times. They weren't really following IS though, since they did all that before the current rate drop.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #134 on:** January 18, 2012, 14:22 »

Quote from: wds on January 18, 2012, 14:01

This seems like an extremely scary time. If there are layoffs, I would expect some major change/announcement soon.

any musician here so we can have a even more cooler annoucement

ProArtwork · « **Reply #135 on:** January 18, 2012, 14:28 »

Quote from: SNP on January 18, 2012, 11:38

Quote from: blackwaterimages on January 18, 2012, 10:18
Its just my guess, but I really think this points towards the beginning of iStock being absorbed into Getty (rather than operating as an independent site) as many other collections have. With that done, H+F can easily put Getty back on the market for resale. That's bound to happen sooner or later, and a streamlined Getty might be more easily sold.

to address contributor concerns around these layoffs.

This is an internal business matter, part of operations. It should not be anyone's business. I see layoffs everyday and most of the time is because they are not productive, lost some accounts they were in charge of, maybe some cutbacks and etc. Some employees don't adapt to changes and so they have to go. I'm sure they will hire more people to either replace those that were let go or for new projects.

ShadySue · « **Reply #136 on:** January 18, 2012, 14:36 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on January 18, 2012, 14:22

Quote from: wds on January 18, 2012, 14:01
This seems like an extremely scary time. If there are layoffs, I would expect some major change/announcement soon.

any musician here so we can have a even more cooler annoucement

You mean, you want a Media Mashup?

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #137 on:** January 18, 2012, 14:39 »

Quote from: SNP on January 18, 2012, 12:16

I have to say that I have participated very little in the FB iStock group, because it creeps me out that they are controlling the flow on information on Facebook. Facebook is a means for me to connect with my stock photo peers without moderation, and now it's basically moderated. I have little interest in participating in that.

I don't see much moderation aside from Eric deleting an employee's address...

gbalex · « **Reply #138 on:** January 18, 2012, 14:41 »

Quote from: gostwyck on January 18, 2012, 12:42

Quote from: SNP on January 18, 2012, 12:16
makes me sad. I have truly loved iStockphoto as it was.

"I have truly loved" ? Do me a favour. It was supposed to be your agency and you should have maintained a business relationship with them. It was entirely because of all the ridiculous pom-pom waving that Istock thought it could get away with screwing all it's contributors and all it's customers.

I have to agree with you, those waving the pom poms for ANY agency are asking to be screwed.

And yet there are plenty of us out there waving for all their worth. How about starting by holding them accountable for some of their actions or non actions? SS would be a good place to start the site is buggy as hell right now!

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #139 on:** January 18, 2012, 14:43 »

Quote from: gbalex on January 18, 2012, 14:41

I have to agree with you, those waving the pom poms for ANY agency are asking to be screwed.

As mentioned, IS was felt to be more of a partnership at the time. We were working together, or at least it felt like we were working successfully towards a common goal.

gostwyck · « **Reply #140 on:** January 18, 2012, 14:50 »

Quote from: sjlocke on January 18, 2012, 14:43

As mentioned, IS was felt to be more of a partnership at the time. We were working together, or at least it felt like we were working successfully towards a common goal.

That's exactly how it should be __ a partnership with common goals. That's certainly how I've felt about my dealings with SS and DT over the years. But I've never felt "in love" with them.

gbalex · « **Reply #141 on:** January 18, 2012, 14:50 »

Quote from: sjlocke on January 18, 2012, 14:43

Quote from: gbalex on January 18, 2012, 14:41
I have to agree with you, those waving the pom poms for ANY agency are asking to be screwed.

As mentioned, IS was felt to be more of a partnership at the time. We were working together, or at least it felt like we were working successfully towards a common goal.

Yes I understand that, I worked for the same in my personal life with the same results. I have come to understand that I was naive and that in order to be successful, I need to be judging people and business's by their actions. I think alot of us are taking way too much for granted and because of that we are failing to turn the boat. Who do you suppose will be the next IS?

gostwyck · « **Reply #142 on:** January 18, 2012, 14:59 »

Quote from: gbalex on January 18, 2012, 14:50

Who do you suppose will be the next IS?

There won't be another, for lots of reasons. No other agency is strong enough or their business model will not support an attractive enough package to gain exclusive contributors in sufficient numbers. C

In future contributors will also be more wary of agencies, regard them with a healthy suspicion and be less inclined to offer them their "love".

gbalex · « **Reply #143 on:** January 18, 2012, 15:02 »

Quote from: gostwyck on January 18, 2012, 14:50

Quote from: sjlocke on January 18, 2012, 14:43
As mentioned, IS was felt to be more of a partnership at the time. We were working together, or at least it felt like we were working successfully towards a common goal.

That's exactly how it should be __ a partnership with common goals. That's certainly how I've felt about my dealings with SS and DT over the years. But I've never felt "in love" with them.

How are your new images selling?

heywoody · « **Reply #144 on:** January 18, 2012, 15:03 »

Quote from: ProArtwork on January 18, 2012, 14:28

Quote from: SNP on January 18, 2012, 11:38
Quote from: blackwaterimages on January 18, 2012, 10:18
Its just my guess, but I really think this points towards the beginning of iStock being absorbed into Getty (rather than operating as an independent site) as many other collections have. With that done, H+F can easily put Getty back on the market for resale. That's bound to happen sooner or later, and a streamlined Getty might be more easily sold.

to address contributor concerns around these layoffs.

This is an internal business matter, part of operations. It should not be anyone's business. I see layoffs everyday and most of the time is because they are not productive, lost some accounts they were in charge of, maybe some cutbacks and etc. Some employees don't adapt to changes and so they have to go. I'm sure they will hire more people to either replace those that were let go or for new projects.

Nothing to do with stock, but I’ve seen this so many times in the software industry. As soon as the corporates / accountants / bean counters take over any organisation, that which made the company successful is forgotten in favour of a perceived bottom line. Letting employees go is an admission of failure, a solution that lacks any sort of imagination / vision, a short term respite at best and usually just slightly delays the inevitable collapse.

jamirae · « **Reply #145 on:** January 18, 2012, 15:17 »

Quote from: jsnover on January 18, 2012, 12:55

Quote from: gostwyck on January 18, 2012, 12:42
Quote from: SNP on January 18, 2012, 12:16
makes me sad. I have truly loved iStockphoto as it was.

"I have truly loved" ? Do me a favour. It was supposed to be your agency and you should have maintained a business relationship with them.

There's what you were supposed to be doing and what you actually do. I completely get the emotional attachment - and I was never a pom-pom carrier.

I think that at its very best, a successful business, particularly one that is changing how things are done, is a very exciting and engaging thing. On top of which there are a number of really wonderful contributors who were active participants in the supplier side of the community. I don't think that was illusory, even though it is now largely gone (wholly gone for me and the forums are heading for ghost towns compared to what they once were).

Call me foolish (and Douglas Freer suggested I was in need of psychiatric counseling for going exclusive!) but I was at one time very engaged with being part of the business and its growth and success. It felt like a partnership. Perhaps I just saw what I wanted to see. At any rate, I get the attachment thing (wouldn't have called it love, but that's just a quibble).

couldn't agree more with this sentiment. I truly felt that it was a strong partnership at one time. Until they basically thumbed their noses at all of us starting with the canister change fiasco.

gbalex · « **Reply #146 on:** January 18, 2012, 15:19 »

Quote from: gostwyck on January 18, 2012, 14:59

Quote from: gbalex on January 18, 2012, 14:50
Who do you suppose will be the next IS?

There won't be another, for lots of reasons. No other agency is strong enough or their business model will not support an attractive enough package to gain exclusive contributors in sufficient numbers. C

In future contributors will also be more wary of agencies, regard them with a healthy suspicion and be less inclined to offer them their "love".

I have come to the conclusion that we would need dynamite to blast people out of their denial. How long do you suppose buyers will be happy with your old images at SS, since our new ones have been buried for who knows how many months? Why do you suppose that is happening?

ShadySue · « **Reply #147 on:** January 18, 2012, 15:26 »

Quote from: jamirae on January 18, 2012, 15:17

I truly felt that it was a strong partnership at one time. Until they basically thumbed their noses at all of us starting with the canister change fiasco.

That was the end of any veneer of partnership: it was contributor against contributor: rivals with a potential large loss for helping someone else. Previously, co-operation could benefit individuals by raising the quality of the overall offerering.

ShadySue · « **Reply #148 on:** January 18, 2012, 15:28 »

I'm wondering if it was the people who actually caused the problems who were laid off.
More likely it was the people working under orders to the people who actually caused the problems who suffered, while the causers are sitting pretty.

gostwyck · « **Reply #149 on:** January 18, 2012, 15:29 »

Quote from: gbalex on January 18, 2012, 15:19

I have come to the conclusion that we would need dynamite to blast people out of their denial. How long do you suppose buyers will be happy with your old images at SS, since our new ones have been buried for who knows how many months? Why do you suppose that is happening?

I think new images are doing fine at SS. I've uploaded about 80 images so far this month and they've generated nearly 50 sales. Considering that I mainly do quick, cheap shoots for niche markets I think that's reasonable. I just wish other agencies did the same.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Layoffs at istock (Read 136803 times)

Pixart

Jo Ann Snover

kelby

cmannphoto

wut

FreeTransform

jjneff

wds

cthoman

luissantos84

ProArtwork

ShadySue

Sean Locke Photography

gbalex

Sean Locke Photography

gostwyck

gbalex

gostwyck

gbalex

heywoody

jamirae

gbalex

ShadySue

ShadySue

gostwyck

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors