Quote from: raclro on January 20, 2012, 00:01

I have searched in vain to find more than rumors about rumors about rumors.   The analysis of some seems rather far reaching.  I see JJ is leaving, but his statement does not seem to be cause for alarm, in fact quite the contrary.  I am not saying there is no problem, but must the sky always be falling each time something changes?  Along with all of you, it has always seemed like poor policy on the part of iStock to  remain quiet so long during times of change, they have to see how the rumors explode and unsettle those trying to pay attention.  Sorry for my outburst, I need to take another monthly sabbatical from the forums.

Try searching a bit harder: http://www.bjp-online.com/british-journal-of-photography/news/2140045/jobs-shed-getty-images-absorbs-istockphoto

"We are completing the process of full functional integration across the two brands," says Getty Images' co-founder and CEO Jonathan Klein.... while confirming 30 redundancies at iStock (not at Getty) and then needlessly mentioning that they are not going to shut up shop at Calgary (which might suggest it is something he has been thinking about doing - there's a new rumour for you).

Fact 1: 30 staff, estimated at between 15% and 30% of the entire staff being fired
Fact 2: Senior management figures KT and JJRD among those fired
Fact 3: Sackings declared by Getty chief to be part of an "integration process" with Getty
Fact 4: "Integration" involves downsizing iStock, not Getty, making it plain iStock is being "integrated" into Getty, not the other way round.
Fact 5: Earlier part of integration process involved pushing low-grade Getty collections into iS at high price points and pushing most of iStock's collection into other Getty subsidiaries, TS and PP
Fact 6: Istock was stripped first of its CEO then of its COO and now of whatever JJRD is. The CEO job is considered too insignificant to merit a full-time in-house boss, instead it is made part of the duties of a Gettyimages employee.
Fact 7: (I almost missed this one) according to Klein's statement, iStock is no longer thought of as a company, it is regarded as a Getty "brand" (see his quote above).

From being a self-contained, self-governing, stand-alone unit, as Bruce Livingstone was promised it would remain when he sold it, it has become one of "the Gettyimages collections" and Calgary has become a Getty branch office rather than the headquarters of a company.

But you're right. The sky has not fallen in. People will continue to buy and sell image licences at iStockphoto and the name will remain a proud part of the Gettyimages group, alongside the other famous collections. Tony Stone, the Bettmann Archive etc.

However, while the marketing, quality control and accounting functions may remain in Calgary, the financial control, strategic planning and budgeting will be done in Seattle, where due consideration will need to be given to the competing demands of other active collections, such as TS, Photos.com and, of course, the main Gettyimages collection. That is what "integration" is about.

So it is still iStock, Captain, it's just not iStock as we knew it.  

Quote from: stockastic on January 20, 2012, 15:00

I've already read that the captain didn't exactly 'trip and fall' into a lifeboat - he landed in one when the ship's deck tilted to 70 degrees and he slid off the deck.   

I wonder what the chances of *that* are, and if other people had as fortuitous a sliding.

Quote from: caspixel on January 20, 2012, 17:07

Do these people need to be hit upside the head with a wrecking ball? Has the company's behavior the last five years not told them anything?

Speaking of people that "need to be hit upside the head with a wrecking ball" have you dared venture onto the "Thanks" thread yet? There appears to be some kind of mass-hysteria thing going on in there, not dissimilar to the 'official media' portrayal of Kim Jong-Il's death. I didn't think anyone has actually died at Istock recently but now I'm not sure. Maybe.

Not to be read on a full stomach unless you want to ruin your keyboard;

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=339825

I scanned some of it when it first when up. I had enough of the cultish adoration after a couple pages. No way I could stomach 12 of them!

If Jon Oringer decided to leave SS to sail the world or save the rainforest - how many people would be posting in his farewell thread?  

It�s not about comparing agencies. Just respecting peoples heartfelt emotions.

...I have never met Jon Oringer, so I really don�t get why some members here adore him so much. Looks just as overhyped to me as our reactions to JJRD�s departure probably look to you.

Quote from: stockastic on January 20, 2012, 15:00

I've already read that the captain didn't exactly 'trip and fall' into a lifeboat - he landed in one when the ship's deck tilted to 70 degrees and he slid off the deck.  

I wonder what the chances of *that* are, and if other people had as fortuitous a sliding.

Quote from: cobalt on January 20, 2012, 18:34

...I have never met Jon Oringer, so I really don�t get why some members here adore him so much. Looks just as overhyped to me as our reactions to JJRD�s departure probably look to you.

Not at all. Actually it's strange to me that you don't understand why people like Jon, yet you understand why they like JJRD. Jon is a nice guy, helpful, very dedicated to the company and contributors. I don't understand why the fact that you personally don't know him prevents you from being open to the idea that he is, in fact, very liked in the SS community.

^ you are laughing at people for trying to find nice ways to say thanks to someone they like and found inspiring ?

That is all it is.