|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - caspixel
Pages: 1 ... 35 36 37 38 39 [40] 41
976
« on: September 19, 2010, 19:34 »
Likewise, he banned you - and the others, because he was told to do it.
Lobo is the guy who gets told. Ordered around, a peon.
I'm quite sure no one told him to ban me. He pretty much told me via sitemail that he does not like me. Such a nice thing to say to someone who frequents your business as a purchaser.
977
« on: September 19, 2010, 17:14 »
I got my forum privileges blocked too. And I haven't even been posting. Maybe ten times out of 9000 posts.
978
« on: September 17, 2010, 22:40 »
they actually tweeted the discount offer- use code REDEEM10 for 10% off credit packs of 50 or more (for one week only). so that July one is different. wonder what contributors get as a "gift" for the outage... oh wait.. nevermind.
Well that explains it. I don't follow iStock twitter...or any twitter for that matter.  Doesn't really matter for me though, as I will not be buying a 50 credit pack there.
so... where are you buying credits from these days? (am I allowed to ask that? okay if you prefer to keep that to yourself, of course). I'm working on building ports elsewhere soon as my exclusivity contract is canceled. 
At the moment, Dreamstime and StockFresh are the ones I am going to focus on. I like their lower priced credit packages, because I just don't have the purchasing power to plunk down a lot of money at this time. I also liked the quality of images I was seeing on ShutterStock, but I do not want to sign up for a subscription plan, I just don't buy enough images to justify that cost and their "OnDemand" pricing is still a little rich for my blood. I am still a pretty small buyer, but I am hoping that business will continue to pick up for me.
979
« on: September 16, 2010, 19:32 »
they actually tweeted the discount offer- use code REDEEM10 for 10% off credit packs of 50 or more (for one week only). so that July one is different. wonder what contributors get as a "gift" for the outage... oh wait.. nevermind.
Well that explains it. I don't follow iStock twitter...or any twitter for that matter. Doesn't really matter for me though, as I will not be buying a 50 credit pack there.
980
« on: September 16, 2010, 18:27 »
They're offering 10% off prices for minimum 50 credit packs for the next week as an apology for today's outage. Is that normal? Or is it a sign of other concerns?
If you read the fine print, that expired in July...or was there yet another outage where they changed the message, because this is the one I saw: To reward your patience, get 15% off your next purchase of 50 credits or more next time you visit by using promo code UPGRADE. But use it fast it's only good for a little while (offer expires July 10, 2010).In other news, I was just discussing stock photos with a colleague and told her I am phasing out iStock as my stock site and gave her the names a couple other sites. She said she did not know they existed, but was relieved to know there are others out there, because she is seeing all the Vetta images and was beginning to get outraged about the prices. And then I told her about the commission fiasco and she was appalled. She is no longer going to be shopping at iStock.
982
« on: September 16, 2010, 00:28 »
Although its been said many times already, I just have to add: Wow.
As a partner/creative director at a web design firm, I've used and steered numerous client to istock for years. I just added up our invoices and we've spent over $6000 here in the past few years.
However, once our credits run out, we will no longer purchase from istock or any other getty sites. It is insane how the contributors here are being treated, and I cannot in good conscious support a company that abuses its suppliers in these manners.
I urge you all to remember that you have a choice; creating thousands of posts is a good way to let of some steam, but I'd encourage you to spend that effort moving your content to other sites, of which I hope to see and buy your work.
Change, take action, send a message.
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=255782&messageid=4742382
983
« on: September 15, 2010, 20:58 »
The initial royalty reduction announcement was handled incredibly poorly, but I think this Agency rollout might trump even that. All I can say is wow to what I'm witnessing. I really didn't think things could get much lower. I bet vector artists are on the edges of their seats to hear what their "good news" is going to be.
984
« on: September 15, 2010, 20:49 »
Another buyer bailing, in case anyone misses it. I think the crap storm is going to hit hurricane force here again soon after a slight reduction to a tropical storm over the past couple days. I think more painful than the changes themselves was how iSP has tried to pull one over on people by:
- Making the explanation of the changes as confusing as possible (read the original thread)
- Including only positivity in the announcement of the changes, including saying things like most people would not receive less commission, which as evidenced by the vast amount of negative replies, is clearly false.
- Sticking with said positivity in their 2nd thread after a sea of negative response
- Creating this "look what we've done for you people" thread to pat themselves on the back while urging contributors to let their royalty rates get raped.
- Not maintaining a dialogue with this sentiment from their contributors throughout this debacle.
I am not a contributor...I merely came here to buy stock photos, and have spent a decent amount of money here over the past few years. I have never boycotted a business in my entirely life before now. Congratulations, iSP...you are the first! How's it feel to be #1?http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=253522&messageid=4734982
985
« on: February 22, 2009, 10:11 »
I really, honestly don't get what your problem is.
Why do you even care? Seriously, if you don't like what she is saying and it's irritating you enough to write paragraphs about it, why don't you just put her on "ignore". Like I'm doing to you, right now. No response is necessary.
986
« on: February 22, 2009, 02:37 »
---
987
« on: February 21, 2009, 19:33 »
Since when does being emotional/passionate about something = lacking credibility?
988
« on: February 19, 2009, 10:27 »
iStock seriously needs to chill out. They are becoming the * of microstock, looking to silence any and all opposition. So a few people are disgruntled about their policies. So what? It was bound to happen the bigger and more corporate they become. But it looks really, really bad when their admins come onto other forums and personally attack their contributors and buyers.
Seriously, WTH is going on over there with their culture and their business? It's like they've become wild animals, attacking out of desperation.
989
« on: February 19, 2009, 02:22 »
Is there a new look? It's taking an eternity for pages to load, if at all.
Out of interest, why do you continue to visit the site that you keep saying charges too much and also 'makes you puke'?
That's a great question. Stacey, don't bother coming to Caspixels defense here. I'd like to see why she chooses to as well.
Because iStock ROCKS.  
990
« on: February 10, 2009, 00:25 »
Indeed - why would we really care about those hand holding needing customers ... customers - who the heck needs them ...
We are a necessary evil, aren't we? Life would be so much easier without buyers, wouldn't it?
991
« on: February 09, 2009, 13:17 »
why have the illusion of an open community.
Why even have the illusion of a community period? Like I've said before, once Getty bought the site, things began to change. That's fine. Business is business, but I just wish iStock (to clarify: the business entity, NOT the contributors) would stop acting like it cared about the buyers and contributors, when really, all they care about is milking everyone for as much money as they can. I just think it's disingenuous. I know Yahoo doesn't care about me. I know Visa doesn't care about me. I know my mortgage company doesn't care about me. And I'm fine with that. That's one of my biggest gripes about iStock. I wish they'd just be honest with us (and maybe with themselves) and just drop the pretense.
992
« on: February 09, 2009, 10:58 »
You know what else boggles the mind with iStock? That they STILL don't have 24/7 customer service/support. What international business doesn't have round the clock support in this day and age? It just ties in with this whole "makeover". It just seem so amateurish over there sometimes. And you'd think with the resources they have at their disposal...
Running 24/7 call centres is expensive and it makes business sense not to chase customers who need hand holding, particular for low ticket low margin goods
Yeah, low ticket margin goods that have apparently resulted in millions of sales. ONE call center with a few employees hardly seems like it would be that much of a drain on iStock's resoures. Especially since they seem to have a lot of money to throw around for unnecessary face-lifts. And if they outsource to say...India...like everyone else...
993
« on: February 09, 2009, 10:55 »
Ive only been on this site a couple of weeks and yet all ive witnessed so far is constant arguing in all the forums I dont get it
Yep, when users get banned or close on IS they head over here to cause trouble ...
Seems to me it's more of a case of not being able to criticize anything about iStock.
994
« on: February 08, 2009, 23:05 »
^ well, in fairness to shank, I doubt the iStock powers that be like me much either. though I have not been 'banned', I am quite vocal about the changes, and the treatment of contributors. I'm pretty sure my name is mud around IS HQ these days.
Do we even need to speculate on how they feel about me?
995
« on: February 08, 2009, 23:03 »
You know what else boggles the mind with iStock? That they STILL don't have 24/7 customer service/support. What international business doesn't have round the clock support in this day and age? It just ties in with this whole "makeover". It just seem so amateurish over there sometimes. And you'd think with the resources they have at their disposal...
996
« on: February 08, 2009, 22:45 »
I think this is part of the problem with istock to be honest ... if you don't like what the buyer (your customers) are saying then you blame them
Nail on the head.
997
« on: February 06, 2009, 13:52 »
It's interesting to me that when anyone dares to suggest that increasing prices might also correlate with decreasing sales that some people get so personally offended and feel the need to resort to attacks on the messenger. Are they afraid deep down that there might be some truth to this?
Or, back to the original topic, that some perceived "inaccuracies" in an article is a deliberate slight to iStock.
I'm also wondering how many people would be selling photos if it wasn't for all the small time designers who made microstock what it is today. Or is everyone also a contributor to Jupiter, Getty, and the like?
And one final point...without inexpensive imagery, designers could still design. They've been doing it long before microstock came along. But without designers, would there be enough people to sustain your sales?
998
« on: February 06, 2009, 11:37 »
IGNORE BUTTON 
999
« on: February 06, 2009, 10:44 »
Is there a new look? It's taking an eternity for pages to load, if at all.
1000
« on: February 06, 2009, 09:39 »
What the heck?? I don't know how Carolynne's quote got attributed to me, but please edit your posts to correct it.
Please don't use my first name. I don't mind if my friends do, but, well, I don't consider you a friend. And since I don't know your first name, I find it quite rude.
Classic. I edited my post. Please return the courtesy and remove my name from your attempts to hijack this thread into yet another diatribe on the evils of istock.
Loop, I think the quote originally got messed up in your post. The wrong name got deleted and mine was left there attached to caspixel's statements. I would appreciate it if you would fix that so that there is no confusion about who said what. Thanks!
Good. Now that that's done, I'll be using the new ignore feature again. Thanks!
Pages: 1 ... 35 36 37 38 39 [40] 41
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
