Nobody is exclusive at SS. I really don�t think you can compare any praise heaped on Oringer to the way we wooyayed at istock.

The independents can just sit back and relax and see which agency rises and falls. their files are everyhwere.

Jon Oringer at least said in one of his recent interviews that SS currently has 600 000 customers and he estimates that there are another 70 million out there.

Rebecca tells us that the market as ended, new contributors and new files will mean we inevtably lose sales and that there is no future. Also the traffic at gettyimages itself keeps going down. So they have no organic expansion, unless they buy other people�s businesses.

Like others have said "meeting expectations" is not growing.

SS sees a huge world market, Getty doesn�t.

Who do you think will have more growth in the next few years?

No business grows forever. Take Tesco for example. Until recently they were so successful that �1 in every �8 spent by UK consumers was spent with them. Where do they go from there? Can they get to �1 in every �1? Of course not. They've tried to expand into the US but had to retreat in embarassing defeat.

So yes, I am looking at options, like I suppose are most exclusives. Unfortunatly not everyone is as talented as Sean. I wish I could build something like accordstock.

Once a company goes public, the founders inevitably lose control - that's what "going public" means. It's not about opening the doors to tour groups - it's about surrendering control in exchange for money.  First-round investors don't just want profits - they want increasing profits, in fact increasing at a certain rate.  That's how they intend to make money on their investment - by boosting the share price.  They're not in it for the dividend checks.   THis is a web company, not an electric utility.  It's not a long-term holding.

Corporate America eventually arrives at the same end result regardless of the starting conditions.   It's a mill that grinds slowly, but grinds exceedingly fine.

Yes, you can include it and it works fine, mostly, out of the box.  You'll be limited a bit if you can't program a little and have lots of time to fiddle.  Also the existing management options and controls can be confusing.

Everyone seems to like the 'zoom' which is in the regular code.  It isn't great for bandwidth tho, because it sucks down a large file with every detail page load - I think the image on the page is just the larger image resized with CSS.

Quote from: stockastic on December 13, 2012, 15:25

Once a company goes public, the founders inevitably lose control - that's what "going public" means. It's not about opening the doors to tour groups - it's about surrendering control in exchange for money.  First-round investors don't just want profits - they want increasing profits, in fact increasing at a certain rate.  That's how they intend to make money on their investment - by boosting the share price.  They're not in it for the dividend checks.   THis is a web company, not an electric utility.  It's not a long-term holding.

Corporate America eventually arrives at the same end result regardless of the starting conditions.   It's a mill that grinds slowly, but grinds exceedingly fine.

Do you watch The Dragons Den? Here in the UK its a program about 5 investors and entrepreneurs pitch their idea or business  to them and when the investors see a profitable pitch they will invest. But what I get from them is that they want a is a good working relationship, get their money back as fast as possible, but they never want to run a business into the ground to make a quick buck. What good is it do them do get their profits and then run it into the ground? They want to get that % equity for as long as they can. They invest their money, expertise and resources and work with the entrepreneurs to build a successful sustainable business. So why would SS investors ruin a business? Because its done over at IS doesnt mean all investors work like that. Plus he is still majority stake holder so he calls the final shots. If he doesnt want his business to be run into the ground, it wont happen.

Quote from: gbalex on December 13, 2012, 16:43

Quote from: cobalt on December 13, 2012, 14:33

Jon Oringer at least said in one of his recent interviews that SS currently has 600 000 customers and he estimates that there are another 70 million out there.

Rebecca tells us that the market as ended, new contributors and new files will mean we inevtably lose sales and that there is no future. Also the traffic at gettyimages itself keeps going down. So they have no organic expansion, unless they buy other people�s businesses.

Like others have said "meeting expectations" is not growing.

SS sees a huge world market, Getty doesn�t.

Who do you think will have more growth in the next few years?

Venture Capitalist's like to see a return on their investment and if they can grow to the point they no longer see future growth you can be sure they and Mr. Oringer will cash out before the company starts it's decline. The VC's seem to have placed key people in SS management to assure that they maximize their investment.

Now if you were trying to sell stock... what would you be telling potential investors about your potential market?

What VC's? It was an IPO. Oringer himself retains 56% of the business. End of.

Thank you! I will look into this with someone who is more computer literate than me. My humble website needs an overhaul anyway. Maybe we could include this.

I guess as an exclusive I really know nothing about the world out there, do I?

^^^ Too late mate. The VC's may have provided funding until the IPO. They won't be there afterwards. Their job is done, their money is made and will now be ploughed into new ventures. The clue's in the name.