How do you ignore someone?  I can't seem to find it, probably super obvious I know.   oops found it!

Jen's post and finding of the original announcement speaks volumes to me.  One more call out that will go unanswered to I'm sure.  I think it's been mentioned many times over by the same folks pointing out the Vetta saturation problem that this occurs in certain specific searches.  I have not seen anyone claim that it's the case for every search.  Also some great examples have been provided that undeniably showcase a bias toward Vetta.  

As for my 30 Vetta files, because they are vector (another area where photographers were given one deal and vector artists another, with a promise of "we'll announce changes coming soon for vectors!" which never happened,) there is no current price change and in 12 days when my exclusivity is up it won't matter anyway.  

You think buyers are going to tolerate this much longer?  How long do you think it will be before they figure out that istock�s isn�t what it�s cracked up to be?  It�s insulting to buyers and it won�t be long before they finally say �screw you� and move elsewhere.
I mean look at this example of two images that are almost identical from the same shoot that come up on the same page for a search for �family�.  One is vetta and one is not.

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-8092663-young-family.php
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-11923130-family.php

Both of these images are nice, one is worth 15 credits and the vetta is worth 70.  Buyers aren't stupid.  They will eventually go to an agent such as DT and search for �family� and find a large image that�s just as nice for 15 credits max (for a level 5 image).  If they choose a newer image with less downloads they�ll get it for even less.

Sorry but I can�t help but laugh at all of this.  It�s not funny really, not to the buyer, not to the contributor and certainly not to istock, but I can�t help laughing at istock.  Watching them make one misake after another and then desperately trying to dig themselves out of a hole is amusing to me.  I�ve never seen such a huge display of unprofessionalism in my entire life.   I�m not surprised at all that istock didn�t wait till January to bump up the Vetta prices.  It shouldn�t surprise anyone else either.  For them to break their promise now, while they�re already labelled �greedy *insult removed*� and without communicating the rise to anyone means one thing and one thing only...  they cannot meet their high targets.  

Istock have put themselves in a rut that they cannot get out of.  I said it months ago and I�ll keep saying it... they�re going down the pan!  You have upper management who don�t want to lose their jobs by missing their targets so they�re doing whatever they can to raise revenue to increase their profits... but by doing so they will no longer be competitive and will fall on their ass anyway.  

The ball�s been rolled and it�s picking up speed... they�re not coming out of it this time.

of course there's a bias towards Vetta. that isn't new, nor is it the point. you know what, you guys have your little club for the disgruntled over here. enjoy throwing sand in each others' faces and peeing in the pool.

It's not a little club, it's just that the balance of power and logic is shifting.  Prior to all of this you had a bunch of arrogant istock exclusives who were so loyal to istock that no matter what they did, who they effected, this group would defend their decisions... and their opinions domanited this forum.  istock always got by because of this loyalty but their contributors, even a lot of the exclusives have seen them for what they really are.  You and a few others are just slow waking up, that's all.

I have done a bazillion searches throughout the day because the posts today have made it sound like the best match returns are Vetta saturated...not so at all. all I can say is thank goodness the 'statisticians' here are not scientists. every search I've returned using random keywords, including big ones like 'business', 'family' and so many others I can't remember them all. the returns are a balanced mix of Vettas, flames, newer uploads and files that seem to be newer well-selling files etc.

Apparently, your "bazillion" searches missed the following:

love
new york
wildlife
berlin
train
airplane
luxury
beauty
portrait
autumn
vacation
christmas
architecture
food
cooking
drink
spring
summer
winter

Let me know if you need more examples. This was a mere 10 minute effort with 100 results per page, filtered for photos only. In the case of "business" and "family", I suspect these aren't as saturated with Vetta files due to the large number of high-flaming regular images in those categories.

Taking "new york" as an example: there are about 25,000 photos in database, only 470 of which are Vetta. Yet there are 80 Vetta images on page 1.

picking cherries, search on:

dog
woman
car
environment
communication
computer network
computer

all as per usual search returns....

picking cherries, search on:

dog
woman
car
environment
communication
computer network
computer

all as per usual search returns....

All you really need to do is check the individual portfolios of some of the top exclusives sorted by best match to get an idea how heavily Vettas are weighed. How do you think all their Vettas end up on top?

^^^ I think many new people are coming as result of the IS stuff.

And another new member

^^^ I think many new people are coming as result of the IS stuff.

I hope so. Although, I could swear I recognize some people behind their new nick names.

And we don't need new members like this: http://www.microstockgroup.com/profile/?u=4817

Because of this:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/paid-established-microstock-services/make-money-from-home/

Sorry but I can�t help but laugh at all of this.  It�s not funny really, not to the buyer, not to the contributor and certainly not to istock, but I can�t help laughing at istock.  Watching them make one misake after another and then desperately trying to dig themselves out of a hole is amusing to me.  I�ve never seen such a huge display of unprofessionalism in my entire life.   I�m not surprised at all that istock didn�t wait till January to bump up the Vetta prices.  It shouldn�t surprise anyone else either.  For them to break their promise now, while they�re already labelled �greedy *insult removed*� and without communicating the rise to anyone means one thing and one thing only...  they cannot meet their high targets.  

Istock have put themselves in a rut that they cannot get out of.  I said it months ago and I�ll keep saying it... they�re going down the pan!  You have upper management who don�t want to lose their jobs by missing their targets so they�re doing whatever they can to raise revenue to increase their profits... but by doing so they will no longer be competitive and will fall on their ass anyway.  

The ball�s been rolled and it�s picking up speed... they�re not coming out of it this time.

The Vetta price increase now, when they're actually on record saying that they wouldn't, does smack of desperation or panic. Why couldn't Istockphoto have waited until January and slipped this one in amongst all the other price 'adjustments' that they'll no doubt be implementing? That's only 3 months from now. Makes me wonder what is coming later if they are prepared to do this. It would seem that Getty are determined to milk this cash cow dry in the shortest possible time. The time horizon that they are working to cannot be too far away.

Quote from: pseudonymous on September 27, 2010, 22:16

Sorry but I can�t help but laugh at all of this.  It�s not funny really, not to the buyer, not to the contributor and certainly not to istock, but I can�t help laughing at istock.  Watching them make one misake after another and then desperately trying to dig themselves out of a hole is amusing to me.  I�ve never seen such a huge display of unprofessionalism in my entire life.   I�m not surprised at all that istock didn�t wait till January to bump up the Vetta prices.  It shouldn�t surprise anyone else either.  For them to break their promise now, while they�re already labelled �greedy *insult removed*� and without communicating the rise to anyone means one thing and one thing only...  they cannot meet their high targets.  

Istock have put themselves in a rut that they cannot get out of.  I said it months ago and I�ll keep saying it... they�re going down the pan!  You have upper management who don�t want to lose their jobs by missing their targets so they�re doing whatever they can to raise revenue to increase their profits... but by doing so they will no longer be competitive and will fall on their ass anyway.  

The ball�s been rolled and it�s picking up speed... they�re not coming out of it this time.

The Vetta price increase now, when they're actually on record saying that they wouldn't, does smack of desperation or panic. Why couldn't Istockphoto have waited until January and slipped this one in amongst all the other price 'adjustments' that they'll no doubt be implementing? That's only 3 months from now. Makes me wonder what is coming later if they are prepared to do this. It would seem that Getty are determined to milk this cash cow dry in the shortest possible time. The time horizon that they are working to cannot be too far away.

As I mentioned above, they didn't wait because they're probably not going to hit their targets... I meant their year end targets.  As I've said in a few threads, with all the changes and projects they've had on lately, they've probably blown their budgets and now they're probably getting pressure from the top to do whatever it takes to get back on plan or as close to it as possible.