pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Nippyish note from Rebecca Rockafellar  (Read 52149 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

rubyroo

« Reply #50 on: December 08, 2012, 04:50 »
0
Nice to see them step down from the ivory tower for a fraction of a second.  I can't help feeling it's been just another case of 'I'm all right Jack... pull up the ladder' and now Jack is instructed to let the ladder down a bit because they're not all right any more.

That's the kind of thinking that really has to change.  I echo the others who have said that site fixes plus 20% commissions across the board for indies would be a good start (more for exclusives' loyalty and the risk of having all eggs in one basket, obviously). 

Ultimately though, as life experience caused my great-grandparents, grandparents and parents to echo down the generations - and I see no reason for that echo to end: 

"Actions speak louder than words".

I'm just going to watch and wait to see if these words turn into any sort of useful action.


« Reply #51 on: December 08, 2012, 05:07 »
+1
I feel Rebecca is just the messenger. She is testing the water for her bosses. I wonder what is cooking for the new year.

« Reply #52 on: December 08, 2012, 05:21 »
+1

« Reply #53 on: December 08, 2012, 05:46 »
+2
my guess is that they ARE seeing a drop in their revenue ..

Of course they are. It's mathematically impossible for so many significant contributors to be reporting drastic falls in sales for that to not be representative of the greater business. They're in a tail-spin with very little chance of pulling out of it. The greedy f*cks have blown it.

Note that she said " any rumors of iStock's impending demise are incorrect.  We are still, by far, the number 1 microstock site revenue-wise"  .... she didn't say anything about the direction the earnings are going in or how their market share has changed.


« Reply #54 on: December 08, 2012, 05:54 »
0
I didnt know who she was, so i googled her:

http://www.businessinsider.com/difference-between-men-and-women-managers-rebecca-rockafellar-istock-photo-getty-images-2012-11


Wow! Look at this:


"I was asking some colleagues to help me crystallize what makes me different as a female leader versus some of the male leaders in our organization"

Am I alone in reading that as "All right, underlings, tell me why I'm the most wonderful person in the business".

And, sure enough, "a male colleague called out is that I am able to gain the trust of others by just being very visibly confident in my own skills without boasting"

Give that boy a Christmas bonus!

Note the "called out", it wasn't a private chat, apparently, it was a question to a full room.

rubyroo

« Reply #55 on: December 08, 2012, 06:00 »
0
I see from the article that noting facial expressions is the key.

More emoticons required in iStock forum!  ;D

MetaStocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #56 on: December 08, 2012, 06:00 »
+2
Getty is just unable to run a forum, they should close it down and forget about the whole idea of community, it's just wasted energy for both parties.

These guys are the typical execs who can't accept any criticism, and since in their day job none of their subordinates dare to complain they end up thinking they're doing a great job, only to discover with horror that contributors are all pissed off and moving to other agencies in droves.

I mean look at this exec Rockfeller, she doesn't even admit IS is in dire straights, instead  in classic corporate style she now acknowledges that there's just a miscommunication issue.

But, miscommunication means that WE failed to get the message right, not that Getty is wrong.
Execs are .. NEVER wrong !

I've seen the same sh-it in so many other companies, nothing ever changes, and by the way the same is going on at Alamy forum now, threads get locked up, people get banned, and only a bunch of maybe 15 resident posters is still active in the alamy forum.



MetaStocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #57 on: December 08, 2012, 06:14 »
0
"I was asking some colleagues to help me crystallize what makes me different as a female leader versus some of the male leaders in our organization"

And, sure enough, "a male colleague called out is that I am able to gain the trust of others by just being very visibly confident in my own skills without boasting"

I'm getting so sick of these female execs in IT/ICT companies.

They wouldn't last long in harder and more competitive countries like europe or china.
All they can talk is how much female execs are empathic and have a female sixth sense, and while they are at it they hire an army of other female execs with the excuse of equal opportunities.

Is it me or all the female execs in big IT companies have been a disaster ? just to make a few names, Carly Fiorina, Meg Whitman, Carol Bartz, Rebecca Meyer, Sheryl Sandberg ...


« Reply #58 on: December 08, 2012, 06:27 »
0
"I was asking some colleagues to help me crystallize what makes me different as a female leader versus some of the male leaders in our organization"

And, sure enough, "a male colleague called out is that I am able to gain the trust of others by just being very visibly confident in my own skills without boasting"

I'm getting so sick of these female execs in IT/ICT companies.

They wouldn't last long in harder and more competitive countries like europe or china.


I wonder that she didn't get the obvious answers: "A bloke wouldn't ask a stupid question like that" or "you've got ***s, luv".

But, I suppose those aren't career enhancing responses.

rubyroo

« Reply #59 on: December 08, 2012, 06:34 »
0
LOL

Speaking as a woman... I think she should just pay more attention to listening to people with no facial expressions (i.e. in the forum), do the job and be guided by results. 

Being concerned about what makes females and males different in the role is a complete waste of time.  Just do the job and do it well.  The time for reflection on such things is after the event.

MetaStocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #60 on: December 08, 2012, 06:38 »
0
I feel Rebecca is just the messenger. She is testing the water for her bosses. I wonder what is cooking for the new year.

To me it looks like a sign of desperation.
If they've something really important to say they should use a Company Blog, not the forum.

The point is, and i've seen it by myself many times when working for other companies, execs never deal directly with the workforce or even with small and medium buyers, they only focus on big deals and internal politics, sort of living in a bubble, if they ever get fresh uncensored feedback they're usually taken aback and shocked as the picture painted by their subordinates is always rosy glassed and it can't be otherwise or they would be fired.

Maybe, just maybe, some of the complaints written by angry buyers reached the top of the pyramid and now they're realizing how bad is the situation ?

But you see, there's no solution for this, execs ARE the problem ! in a perfect world they should start from the lowest junior position, say QC temp-hire employee, and then eventually rank to the top based on meritocracy.

In the real world you can forget it, all the execs are there because of political wars and alliances, and if female there's always the option of being the lover of a top execs or a shareholder, "shagging her way to the top" as they say.

These execs have usually no experience with photography, couldn't even snap a photo with an iPhone, before they were in finance or marketing or law firms, all they know is they take orders from the CEO and they're paid to manage the drones below them.

SO, a top exec of IS being so shocked that contributors and buyers are rabid about iStock only shows how clueless these execs are of the very company they claim to run successfully.

I can't see anything positive coming out of all this, and even if we agree on her female skills i could say that all my former female managers often panicked when the crap hit the fan and ended up taking very emotional decisions doing more harm and making further chaos while blaming others for their failures.

Guess this Rockfeller lady is now also taking the forum rant and raves as a personal insult on herself ..

And that's why execs should be Male, as females can be certainly better in marketing and in dealing with buyers and dealing with people and teams in general but when it's time to make hard strategical decisions they're too emotional and only man have the balls to look at the situation in a cold and rational way.


MetaStocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #61 on: December 08, 2012, 06:53 »
0
LOL

Speaking as a woman... I think she should just pay more attention to listening to people with no facial expressions (i.e. in the forum), do the job and be guided by results. 

Being concerned about what makes females and males different in the role is a complete waste of time.  Just do the job and do it well.  The time for reflection on such things is after the event.

To be fair, what destroyed IS and what alienated its contributors and buyers was done by the previous male CEO.

However, as she's now in charge since almost two years she had all the time to focus on the endless burning issues that as a whole contributed to the fall down of IS, and she did absolutely nothing as far as we're concerned, and this only shows that she was convinced we were all happy and smiling and she was living in a bubble until someone from the trenches had the guts to show her a few angry buyers' emails or whatever.

You think this is an isolated case, no, it's the same everywhere, in every product i've worked, same story, same sh-it, same mismanagement, i remember a case where i escalated a hot issue to the ivory tower as the managers above me censored any criticism, i got menaced but the execs finally fired my manager, and yet this only earned me disrespect in my inner circle, some started seeing me as a spy or a snitch, and i've never got any promotion or benefit from all this, the execs send me a thank you email and a couple phone calls and that's it .. afterwards they moved to other companies and i moved out too just to end up in another company with the same toxic environment and power/politics wars.

I mean, you may think these are small issues but in the long run that's precisely why big corporations fail and why good products fail, no matter how good they are.

When the CEO of a tech company is no more an engineer you can bet the company will go down the drain in a few years.

And same when the CEO of a photo stock company is a former lawyer or a marketer, just give it some time, but it's unavoidable unless they own a complete monopoly of the market like Getty does but the slow erosion of their market share will still go on, if SS plays its cards right they can pretty much become the Getty of the future, no matter if it's gonna take 20 yrs.




MetaStocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #62 on: December 08, 2012, 06:58 »
0
I wonder that she didn't get the obvious answers: "A bloke wouldn't ask a stupid question like that" or "you've got ***s, luv".

But, I suppose those aren't career enhancing responses.

In my experience this sort of tricky questions are the norm in corporates.
They're dangerous, they're a trap, and a way to humiliate their subordinates.

What you as a male execs would ever answer to your female boss ? that you think female execs like her should be fired ? and any other small criticism will be carefully recorded for the future anyway.

A serious leader would never ever ask such silly idiotic questions.
If she's doing it, and if she's even proud about it and getting it also on newspapers then she's not fit for the job in my opinion.

Attention who-res and snakes like her can make good managers and good low level execs, but never a good CEO or a good leader.

« Reply #63 on: December 08, 2012, 07:00 »
+1
I expect that almost all the time she's been in charge her job has been to maximise apparent earnings growth, at whatever cost, to make the place attractive to a buyer. Now that it's been sold she's probably been asked by the new owners why there is so much negativity around, and been told to improve the company's image because reputation is important for sales.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2012, 07:04 by BaldricksTrousers »

« Reply #64 on: December 08, 2012, 07:06 »
0
From the IS forum, Rebecca Rockafellar post:
'' We are still, by far, the number 1 microstock site revenue-wise''


 ;D ;D ;D ;D looool ha ha haaaha .... maybe revenue/download regarding exclusives.... not even close being No. 1 site. again .... loooool

If the IS forum is read by so many admins... maybe this forum/topic is read by some IS/Getty admins...... so my question is:

Do you believe us , independents f**king idiots??
« Last Edit: December 08, 2012, 07:15 by nicku »

rubyroo

« Reply #65 on: December 08, 2012, 07:06 »
+2
Just as I feel she shouldn't be making a big deal out of her gender, I feel that assertions by  contributors and buyers shouldn't be made on the basis of gender either.

It's not about gender, it's about the ability to do the job, regardless of that.  Assess each person on their merits, nothing else.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #66 on: December 08, 2012, 07:20 »
+2
And that's why execs should be Male, as females can be certainly better in marketing and in dealing with buyers and dealing with people and teams in general but when it's time to make hard strategical decisions they're too emotional and only man have the balls to look at the situation in a cold and rational way.
So KKT was a great leader, then, being apparently male.
It's down to individuals.

« Reply #67 on: December 08, 2012, 07:45 »
+1
Anyone remember a female leader called Margaret Thatcher?  She had more balls than any of the males in her party.  She stuck to her principles and never seemed emotional about tough decisions.  So I have to completely disagree with MetaStocker's male chauvinist views about women leaders.  I'm not saying Margaret Thatcher was a great leader, people's opinions on that are biased by their political beliefs.

Anyone want to start a list of all the incompetent male business leaders :)

MetaStocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #68 on: December 08, 2012, 07:45 »
0
And that's why execs should be Male, as females can be certainly better in marketing and in dealing with buyers and dealing with people and teams in general but when it's time to make hard strategical decisions they're too emotional and only man have the balls to look at the situation in a cold and rational way.
So KKT was a great leader, then, being apparently male.
It's down to individuals.

As a man who worked long time in corporates i've just no respect for execs in general, no matter if men or women but women really have this tendency to go over the top, to be too emotional, to talk and talk about being female leaders, there are hundreds of hideous articles on female leaders in female magazines and gossip newspapers, all focusing on pure BS factors as if having a * could be of any help when a company is losing billions and the best manager left already for greener pastures and the whole workforce is alienated and sending CVs to job seekers.

KKT : no idea, we should ask his former colleagues about it, but until proven otherwise with KKT at the helm iStock was still nr.1 in the micro market, what about this Rockfeller lady instead ?

She's been there 2 yrs as a female leader and now suddenly she discover (shock ! horror !) that the site is slow and buggy and that the fees are too low for us and that both buyers and contributors are moving to other agencies, and all she can say is accusing us of misunderstanding her messages and the other execs of miscommunication ? if this is the ring leader, imagine the rest of her team...

Notice also she wrote nothing proactive, no empty promises about fixing the buggy site, zero, as she knows she's not risking her job as getty has been sold for a hefty profit and the new owner trust her and the whole getty management so if sh-it happens it will take a couple years to notice it and she's got all the time to move as a CEO in another company.

Thanks god there are forums like this without the whole censorship attached or many of us would be as much clueless as Rockfeller about what's really going on in the micro market.

Sooner or later all the forum in agencies will be closed down and it will be back to business, no more community BS, maybe they will leave just a section for tech support, exactly as they do in any other IT/ICT company.

Let's face it, it's already a good thing they tolerate independent forums as they could pretty much sue MSG and any other photo forum or blog for whatever silly reason.

MetaStocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #69 on: December 08, 2012, 07:53 »
0
Anyone remember a female leader called Margaret Thatcher?  She had more balls than any of the males in her party.  She stuck to her principles and never seemed emotional about tough decisions.  So I have to completely disagree with MetaStocker's male chauvinist views about women leaders.  I'm not saying Margaret Thatcher was a great leader, people's opinions on that are biased by their political beliefs.

Anyone want to start a list of all the incompetent male business leaders :)

Thatcher had no balls, but she had full support and financial backup by people with big balls and big pockets.

She's the one who started the destruction of UK, and i'm sure they chosen a woman as their puppet as nobody had the guts to put their (male) face on the mess they created.

Suffice to say she's now the heroine of the mainstream media, movies, documentaries, books ... in the meantime the UK is unrecognizeable and millions of brits had to migrate overseas in disdain replaced by unskilled and underpaid foreigners, Thank you Thatcher !

I repeat, all these power politics game are always a mirror covering the real culprits.
A woman at the helm of iStock could have been put there for similar reasons, who knows what kind of snakes run Getty after all, we photographers are the very last of their problems.




PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #70 on: December 08, 2012, 08:04 »
0
I feel Rebecca is just the messenger. She is testing the water for her bosses. I wonder what is cooking for the new year.

Good possibility. The new owners may have finally looked under the hood of what they just bought and told her to fix the mess they just found. They thought they bought a vintage Ferrari they could flip for a profit and found out it's a bondo'd kit car.

Perception goes a long way toward success. Look at Apple.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2012, 08:06 by PaulieWalnuts »

« Reply #71 on: December 08, 2012, 08:04 »
+1
my guess is that they ARE seeing a drop in their revenue ..

Of course they are. It's mathematically impossible for so many significant contributors to be reporting drastic falls in sales for that to not be representative of the greater business. They're in a tail-spin with very little chance of pulling out of it. The greedy f*cks have blown it.

I don't think you can be so sure about this. For every significant contributor, say an exclusive on 40%, who is seeing falling income there will be a handful of highly productive newbies creating even better work, at 25-30% royalty. I am seeing this in occasional research on the site. And it doesn't matter much to iStock if overall sales are in fact down. If they've covered the difference with their higher take, all is well as far as they are concerned. 10 to 15 percent difference in royalty payout can cover a lot of lost sales.

It is also fair to observe that iStock still presents better quality work than competitors. There are two reasons why this is not so easy to see. Quality has gone up across the board, so at first glance it seems competitors offer work just as good as iStock. Additionally, if you're an old contributor like ourselves, we are somewhat blinkered, we tend to research the contributors we've known of for years. But I think the quality that disgruntled buyers keep coming back to iStock for, despite all troubles, is now largely coming from new talent, people you're not even aware of. The distinction can be subtle, but I'm seeing high end work on iStock that you definitely cannot find elsewhere.

Do some deeper research and you will find that the situation at iStock is more complex than it appears and the oversupply of quality work from new talent is key.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2012, 08:06 by ffNixx »

MetaStocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #72 on: December 08, 2012, 08:05 »
0
Just as I feel she shouldn't be making a big deal out of her gender, I feel that assertions by  contributors and buyers shouldn't be made on the basis of gender either.

It's not about gender, it's about the ability to do the job, regardless of that.  Assess each person on their merits, nothing else.

It can only work in some fields where you can be measured by data-driven results, for instance in sales and marketing.

But, if we talk about management, that's a whole different story.

It's the shareholders having the last word, if the management is doing good and there are a few bad apples they can pretty much be happy with it and forget it, in other case they can fire the whole board with a phone call, just as they fired Carol Bartz (Yahoo) and just as they fired Carly Fiorina and her cronies after a quick meeting.

So, there's no clear rule about it, some companies run massive re-orgs every 2 years (microsoft ?), others keep the same faces around for decades no matter the ups and downs in Wall Street or Nasdaq.

All this focus on meritocracy is pure BS apart rare cases, it's usually the best in power-politics who rise to the top, never the ones who deserve it.

Women are very good in politics, they're great liars by nature, they smile, they know how to please men, they know how to set people at ease, they've all the skills you need to succeed in such a toxic environment
but where dealing with people and opposing views is the biggest and most important factor.

So why are they failing in such disastrous ways in IT/ICT ? because you see, before or later, the sh-it always hits the fan, their castles of cards fall down along their whole careers based on lies and deceptions.

Money talks, BS walks.


rubyroo

« Reply #73 on: December 08, 2012, 08:09 »
0
Well I thought Thatcher had more masculine traits than any man I've ever known.  Which is my point really... gender in itself is pretty meaningless.  There are differences between feminine and masculine traits, but each of us is made up of a different balance of each. 

I do agree with you on the existence of power-politics - but I'm afraid I'll never agree with anyone on points where they generalise 'all women' or 'all men'.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2012, 16:03 by rubyroo »

« Reply #74 on: December 08, 2012, 08:16 »
+6
Just as I feel she shouldn't be making a big deal out of her gender, I feel that assertions by  contributors and buyers shouldn't be made on the basis of gender either.

It's not about gender, it's about the ability to do the job, regardless of that.  Assess each person on their merits, nothing else.

Exactly. All the sexist nonsense, apart from being patently untrue, is distracting from the real issues.

In any real sense Rebecca isn't actually "in-charge" of iStock. Her job title is "General Manager of Istockphoto". I very much doubt she has the authority to make real decisions in the way that Jon can do at SS for example. Even if she happened to think that it was in iStock's best interests to abandon the RC system and return independents to 20% commission for example __ could she do it? Unlikely. The big decisions are made by Getty. All she's doing is trying to keep a steady hand on the tiller and attempt to maintain impossibly high profit targets.

I thought it was very telling that she's spent the last year or so hiding behind the 'HQ Admin' moniker, or whatever it was called. She clearly doesn't want to take ownership of all the issues that she doesn't actually have the authority to address.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
3842 Views
Last post March 26, 2007, 15:37
by yingyang0
7 Replies
4337 Views
Last post March 21, 2010, 20:43
by Lizard
0 Replies
1933 Views
Last post August 19, 2013, 01:48
by picture5469
4 Replies
3724 Views
Last post January 24, 2014, 13:39
by fotoroad
15 Replies
4479 Views
Last post May 12, 2015, 15:11
by Hobostocker

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle