Author Topic: Not another istock topic aka Response from the bosses (Read 15029 times)

LostOne · « **on:** September 17, 2010, 16:48 »

I just wanted to discuss what you all think about how the IS management is handling this circus. They've completely isolated themselves from anything that has to do with the introduced changes. They simply ignore all the contributors and the site is running like nothing is happening. Are they trying to say "We don't care what you think, so we'll ignore you" or are they unable to come up with a reasonable response - as we've seen all of their attempts so far backfired at them, so maybe they got scared. Are the higher ups not allowing them to respond?

I really don't think what to make of it.

PS: Yeah I know we have a lot of IS topics. Tyler if you think this should go to some other topic please move it.

ShadySue · « **Reply #1 on:** September 17, 2010, 16:51 »

Quote from: LostOne on September 17, 2010, 16:48

I just wanted to discuss what you all think about how the IS management is handling this circus. They've completely isolated themselves from anything that has to do with the introduced changes. They simply ignore all the contributors and the site is running like nothing is happening. Are they trying to say "We don't care what you think, so we'll ignore you" or are they unable to come up with a reasonable response - as we've seen all of their attempts so far backfired at them, so maybe they got scared. Are the higher ups not allowing them to respond?

I really don't think what to make of it.

PS: Yeah I know we have a lot of IS topics. Tyler if you think this should go to some other topic please move it.

In the OP of the current long thread, Kelly said, "But this is the system we need to go forward with, and there isn't any flexibility for now." What more would you expect him to say?

crazychristina · « **Reply #2 on:** September 17, 2010, 17:03 »

There are a lot of questions about Agency content (and Hulton Archive too, it seems). I think they no longer care much about contributors, but will probably get a spin doctor to make some announcement next week.

Phil · « **Reply #3 on:** September 17, 2010, 17:07 »

the simple fact is they dont have to do anything and they know it.

maybe 50? people will give up the crown, thats about 1% and maybe 50? indys will leave. From istock's perspective BFD.

the majority of people are stuck and istock know it. Most people are saying they will wait and see, like whitechilds comment about abusive relationship, stay in the relationship hope it will get better and go back to the way it was, most of them will slowly start uploading again and in a few months or so, may not be real happy but they will keep doing it. Some will work on slowly decreasing what they do istock and perhaps leave, but how many? and istock cant see it at the moment. A decent number of people are saying, my income is being cut, I have to invest more and work harder to make it up, so Istock gets even better content for less money.

Really unless about 1000 people left or gave up the crown nothing will happen.

lisafx · « **Reply #4 on:** September 17, 2010, 17:53 »

I feel bad for the Istock admins. The ones who have been there for many years and have a relationship with contributors. They are not the ones making these (terrible) decisions, and I would be willing to bet most of them are as sick about what's happening as we are.

There are a lot of questions, but I think most of us already know the answers to them.

1) Is there any room for negotiation on the royalty %? No.
2) Is the Agency collection going to have some lousy pictures in it, and are they going to be bumped ahead of good content from legitimately exclusive contributors? Yes.
3) Are Getty collections allowed to enjoy the benefits of exclusivity while being sold all over the internet at other Getty and non-Getty sites? Yes.
4) Do the folks at Getty and their bosses at H&F care what contributors think, or how much they've invested in the success of the company? No.
5) Do H&F care about the long term financial health of Istock or its contributors? No.

How are they supposed to come on and tell us that? As bad as it is for Istock's image to have contributors upset and speculating all over the forums, it would be worse to actually tell us what's really going on. Because what's going on is just plain ugly.

There is no good news to give us and more bad news or empty corporate double talk isn't going to help matters, so better to remain mum.

Graffoto · « **Reply #5 on:** September 17, 2010, 17:58 »

Excellent summation, Lisa.
You get a heart for that!

crazychristina · « **Reply #6 on:** September 17, 2010, 18:03 »

When Oracle bought Sun I believe most of the Sun execs were out before too long due to incompatible corporate cultures.

lisafx · « **Reply #7 on:** September 17, 2010, 18:06 »

Quote from: nosaya on September 17, 2010, 17:58

Excellent summation, Lisa.
You get a heart for that!

Awww. Thanks! A bright spot in my day

dgilder · « **Reply #8 on:** September 17, 2010, 18:24 »

Besides myself, I have seen at least five or six others who have said they are dropping and removing their ports. Personally, I know of four more who are in the planning process for dropping and removing. Thats a small number, but thats just what I know of, and I suspect its just the tip of the iceburg since so few are vocal in the forums out of fear.

Jan 1st will be an interesting day.

sharpshot · « **Reply #9 on:** September 17, 2010, 18:25 »

Quote from: Phil on September 17, 2010, 17:07

the simple fact is they dont have to do anything and they know it.

maybe 50? people will give up the crown, thats about 1% and maybe 50? indys will leave. From istock's perspective BFD.

the majority of people are stuck and istock know it. Most people are saying they will wait and see, like whitechilds comment about abusive relationship, stay in the relationship hope it will get better and go back to the way it was, most of them will slowly start uploading again and in a few months or so, may not be real happy but they will keep doing it. Some will work on slowly decreasing what they do istock and perhaps leave, but how many? and istock cant see it at the moment. A decent number of people are saying, my income is being cut, I have to invest more and work harder to make it up, so Istock gets even better content for less money.

Really unless about 1000 people left or gave up the crown nothing will happen.

I can see something happening this time. Feels different to the usual few days of complaints then back to normal. They have definitely pushed non-exclusives too far with commission cuts and images moved even further down the search. They aren't going to make me enough money to put up with that. I have never had exclusives PM me before, asking for the best sites to use when they drop the crown, so it looks like they have also had all they can take.

There might not be a mass exodus until January, when the commission cuts happen but the word is being spread to buyers and if a lot of them are persuaded to move, istock could be in real trouble.

crazychristina · « **Reply #10 on:** September 17, 2010, 18:27 »

I don't think they care how many people leave. They plan to promote Agency and Vetta, with select elite contributors. They'll always have enough for the bargain basement end of the site. Fact is most of us are no longer relevant to their long-term plans (Getty's that is, not H&F who have no long-term plans).

corepics · « **Reply #11 on:** September 17, 2010, 18:31 »

Quote from: Phil on September 17, 2010, 17:07

maybe 50? people will give up the crown, thats about 1% and maybe 50? indys will leave. From istock's perspective BFD.

I made a screendump of istockcharts.de the minute I read the first announcement on 7 September to get a measure of how it affects contributors behaviour. For future reference (roughly in 20 days, the first exclusives will effectively loose their crown and become independent)

7 September 2010

For reference purposes, this is what the same page looks like today:
17 September 2010

Draw your own conclusions about all the talk (with a few exceptions, of course)

Too bad I didn't take one more often, though. On the positive side, it least it is a single reference.

ETA: Felt I needed to link the source of this info - thanks for correcting me, Averil

cathyslife · « **Reply #12 on:** September 17, 2010, 18:39 »

Quote from: LostOne on September 17, 2010, 16:48

I just wanted to discuss what you all think about how the IS management is handling this circus. They've completely isolated themselves from anything that has to do with the introduced changes. They simply ignore all the contributors and the site is running like nothing is happening. Are they trying to say "We don't care what you think, so we'll ignore you" or are they unable to come up with a reasonable response - as we've seen all of their attempts so far backfired at them, so maybe they got scared. Are the higher ups not allowing them to respond?

I really don't think what to make of it.

PS: Yeah I know we have a lot of IS topics. Tyler if you think this should go to some other topic please move it.

I don't understand why so many people are holding on to that thought that "something is going to happen." It already happened, it's done happening. End of story. Take it or leave it! And by the looks of the istock charts posted above, more people are actually taking it! (I am not sure where that istock chart data comes from)

ETA: excellent summation, Lisa!

crazychristina · « **Reply #13 on:** September 17, 2010, 18:42 »

http://istockcharts.multimedia.de

cathyslife · « **Reply #14 on:** September 17, 2010, 18:50 »

Hey, I'm number 1277.

I wasn't very clear with my question. What I meant was how does this site get their info? How often is it updated?

I was very dismayed to see all the New Uploads posted by so many peoples names, but I haven't uploaded anything new in a couple of months and yet it shows next to my name. So I am not sure what constitutes New Uploads.

gostwyck · « **Reply #15 on:** September 17, 2010, 18:56 »

Quote from: cclapper on September 17, 2010, 18:50

Hey, I'm number 1277.

I wasn't very clear with my question. What I meant was how does this site get their info? How often is it updated?

I was very dismayed to see all the New Uploads posted by so many peoples names, but I haven't uploaded anything new in a couple of months and yet it shows next to my name. So I am not sure what constitutes New Uploads.

I think it is updated daily. Your 'New Uploads in Last 30 days' is -30. The 'New Uploads' next to your name is just a link to your port sorted by Age

dgilder · « **Reply #16 on:** September 17, 2010, 18:59 »

You have to add yourselves to it, they originally took a list of all the existing contributors, but they were asked to remove anyone's name who didn't want their info listed. They go through the iStock API if I'm not mistaken to get updated stats.

I did some calculations awhile back and it would take a few weeks to get a full and accurate list of iStock's users by spidering the iStock site.

cthoman · « **Reply #17 on:** September 17, 2010, 19:11 »

Quote from: corepics on September 17, 2010, 18:31

I made a screendump of istockcharts.de the minute I read the first announcement on 7 September to get a measure of how it affects contributors behaviour. For future reference (roughly in 20 days, the first exclusives will effectively loose their crown and become independent)

I was wondering how accurate a method this is. Are people completely removing their account or just removing their files? If they just remove their files, then they are still listed as a contributor, right? In my tentative plan of quitting, I was thinking about leaving a few files just to have a presence at IS.

corepics · « **Reply #18 on:** September 17, 2010, 19:12 »

Quote from: cclapper on September 17, 2010, 18:39

And by the looks of the istock charts posted above, more people are actually taking it! (I am not sure where that istock chart data comes from)

Although I have no screendump, I checked back on istockcharts.de on 8 September, and the total files went down by about 10k. Given all weekly uploads, and the Agency collection approvals (for so far they haven't been rejected afterwards), the total number of files have gone up again since.

I can only agree that it's a "fait accomplis". We still have to make up our minds, but after 10 days of tossing ideas about, I think its safe to conclude that:
1. It was so much easier to give thinkstock the big finger after Getty killed StockXpert, and cut us on subscriptions, than it'll be to say farewell to iStock, because of reasons given by Phil.
2. Despite all havoc on both MSG and the iStock forums, Very few people actually put their money where their mouth is.
3. Many contributors still have no clue what's going on, or haven't given it serious thought. (Likely to be the majority of contributors, given the stats)
4. I'm beginning to see similarities between the course of reasoning since 7 September on both forums and the Stockholm syndrome. Despite all muscular language after the first and second announcement by iStock, We are, in fact, held hostage, and most of us will eventually accept the new terms, and will begin to (try to) see the "good" in the new structure.

There isn't any good. Once we've (or most of us) have accepted the new structure, we'll be hit by more bad news.

Playing advocate of the devil: iStock's timing of this news is immaculate. September sales are usually better than the summer slow-down, and our sales are up considerably compared to previous months. Even with a 3% downgrade of revenues, we'll still make a BME.

gbalex · « **Reply #19 on:** September 17, 2010, 19:37 »

Quote from: lisafx on September 17, 2010, 17:53

I feel bad for the Istock admins. The ones who have been there for many years and have a relationship with contributors. They are not the ones making these (terrible) decisions, and I would be willing to bet most of them are as sick about what's happening as we are.

There are a lot of questions, but I think most of us already know the answers to them.

1) Is there any room for negotiation on the royalty %? No.
2) Is the Agency collection going to have some lousy pictures in it, and are they going to be bumped ahead of good content from legitimately exclusive contributors? Yes.
3) Are Getty collections allowed to enjoy the benefits of exclusivity while being sold all over the internet at other Getty and non-Getty sites? Yes.
4) Do the folks at Getty and their bosses at H&F care what contributors think, or how much they've invested in the success of the company? No.
5) Do H&F care about the long term financial health of Istock or its contributors? No.

How are they supposed to come on and tell us that? As bad as it is for Istock's image to have contributors upset and speculating all over the forums, it would be worse to actually tell us what's really going on. Because what's going on is just plain ugly.

There is no good news to give us and more bad news or empty corporate double talk isn't going to help matters, so better to remain mum.

Unfortunately I agree, before they released all of this good news they knew what the response would be and what questions we would have. They have made their decision based on numbers and they are not going to change their mind or make themselves look worse by admitting the cold hard facts!

If we continue to support them we are slitting our own throats!

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #20 on:** September 17, 2010, 20:06 »

Quote from: lisafx on September 17, 2010, 17:53

I feel bad for the Istock admins. The ones who have been there for many years and have a relationship with contributors. They are not the ones making these (terrible) decisions, and I would be willing to bet most of them are as sick about what's happening as we are.

There are a lot of questions, but I think most of us already know the answers to them.

1) Is there any room for negotiation on the royalty %? No.
2) Is the Agency collection going to have some lousy pictures in it, and are they going to be bumped ahead of good content from legitimately exclusive contributors? Yes.
3) Are Getty collections allowed to enjoy the benefits of exclusivity while being sold all over the internet at other Getty and non-Getty sites? Yes.
4) Do the folks at Getty and their bosses at H&F care what contributors think, or how much they've invested in the success of the company? No.
5) Do H&F care about the long term financial health of Istock or its contributors? No.

How are they supposed to come on and tell us that? As bad as it is for Istock's image to have contributors upset and speculating all over the forums, it would be worse to actually tell us what's really going on. Because what's going on is just plain ugly.

There is no good news to give us and more bad news or empty corporate double talk isn't going to help matters, so better to remain mum.

I'll post here the reply I made to your mirror of this in the IS forums:
I think your summary is pretty close to what's going on. In reading it, it gave me a thought about how, if at all, contributors could push back against this looting of an erstwhile very successful business' future.

For H&F to sell Getty in 3.5 years (their plan as explained by His Royal Highness Jonathan Klein here), a buyer would have to be confident about the state of the business.

The fact that all the content on iStock - except for the Hulton Archive infiltration - is free to walk tomorrow if contributors chose to do that is a very big risk for any prospective buyer. This isn't like the rest of Getty where it's wholly owned or there's some sort of contract between businesses for licensing their collections.

The more public is the contributor discontent, I'd think the more prospective buyers might be somewhat nervous about taking on the business. None of this hurts buyers of licenses as they get to purchase what they see on the site. IOW there is some leverage without hurting current sales on which we all depend.

I haven't figured out how to go about this spreading of the news (we'd have to be careful in how it was done) but that's where H&F could feel a reciprocal pinch in their wallet pocket...

sharpshot · « **Reply #21 on:** September 18, 2010, 01:46 »

Quote from: cclapper on September 17, 2010, 18:39

Quote from: LostOne on September 17, 2010, 16:48
I just wanted to discuss what you all think about how the IS management is handling this circus. They've completely isolated themselves from anything that has to do with the introduced changes. They simply ignore all the contributors and the site is running like nothing is happening. Are they trying to say "We don't care what you think, so we'll ignore you" or are they unable to come up with a reasonable response - as we've seen all of their attempts so far backfired at them, so maybe they got scared. Are the higher ups not allowing them to respond?

I really don't think what to make of it.

PS: Yeah I know we have a lot of IS topics. Tyler if you think this should go to some other topic please move it.

I don't understand why so many people are holding on to that thought that "something is going to happen." It already happened, it's done happening. End of story. Take it or leave it! And by the looks of the istock charts posted above, more people are actually taking it! (I am not sure where that istock chart data comes from)

ETA: excellent summation, Lisa!

There must be lots of us that can't afford to just dump istock but will now be working hard to get out of there. If I was exclusive, I would probably wait until the commission cut goes through before giving up the crown. So we might have to wait until at least the end of January to see the real effect of this. There will be new contributors to take the place of those that leave but it is so hard to get sales going there now, I don't think many of them will be as successful as the old established contributors.

I detest apathy and defeatism, of course istock are relying on us kicking up a stink and then falling back in line but I still have the feeling it has gone too far this time. If they get away with this, I will be getting out of microstock.

Nordlys · « **Reply #22 on:** September 18, 2010, 01:51 »

I really, really don't understand, why people continue to work with an agency treating them this bad.

I would rather starve or be begging ón the strees (might actually pay more than IS), than work with IS after the latest changes.

crazychristina · « **Reply #23 on:** September 18, 2010, 02:09 »

There was a comment or two on the istock forums about the current 'lypse in Japan. Seems the people there are having a ball. istock intends to look after it's very top contributors, those who make most of it's money. Add in the Getty content and they'll be doing well promoting higher priced content from 'select' contributors. Microstock is the new dollar bin for istock. Anyone who is not part of the select elite had better look elsewhere to make a living from micro.

Dreamframer · « **Reply #24 on:** September 18, 2010, 02:45 »

In my case it says "New files in last 30 days -119"

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Not another istock topic aka Response from the bosses (Read 15029 times)

LostOne

ShadySue

crazychristina

Phil

lisafx

Graffoto

crazychristina

lisafx

dgilder

sharpshot

crazychristina

corepics

cathyslife

crazychristina

cathyslife

gostwyck

dgilder

cthoman

corepics

gbalex

Jo Ann Snover

sharpshot

Nordlys

crazychristina

Dreamframer

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors