Quote from: helix7 on January 18, 2012, 07:45

Jodi Styner was one of those who lost their job, on her birthday no less. Bummer.

Jodi was a copywriter at istock, and she tweeted, "Spent today getting drunk with my coworkers, most of whom don't have jobs anymore either, & it was great but also sad because I love them." I'm guessing she's referring to coworkers in and around her department mostly, so I'm assuming other copywriters, maybe marketing staff, etc., are among the casualties. =

It's too bad more (or some) of these people didn't interact with us.  They might have had more insight to the issues and been able to help steer things.  From what I hear, most of the employees there really don't have an idea of what goes on at the site.  They are just doing their own thing.

The fact that their own employees were in the dark and working in silos speaks volumes about the management (or mismanagement) of that place.

This comes as no surprise. Prices have been jacked up to mid-stock prices, there are too many pricing tiers that confuse buyers, and they've COMPLETELY forgotten the reasons why iStock was successful before Getty came along and mucked things up. Shutterstock and other true microstock sites are now laughing all the way to the bank, and Getty has completely stripped iStock of what it once was. It's a shame, but again, not a shock to me.

Unless Getty lowers prices to bring back the buyers so that it can compete with other sites, iStock is in for some VERY rough times ahead. Their corporate greed and hubris have caught up to them, and now people are paying the price.  

You need a higher tier above 1,000. Lots of exclusives and independents alike are making well over this. 

I wonder how it is that some of us have stats up to 26th Nov and some haven't any for the whole of Nov.

And I wonder how it is that iStock can have such a dysfunctional IT department.  For a company of this size, this is completely unacceptable.

Was searching in forums and this was locked (I always seem to get quicker answers here) but was also wondering about cloning out things like small lights or other very minor reflected things for pictures taken through a window that wouldn't at all impact the overall image? 

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=286702&page=1

I agree with Yuri that a lot of it has to do with economy. I joined iStock a few years ago and watched my sales rise very nicely up until fall of 2008 when the economic crisis hit everyone. Since then, my sales have never fully recovered when looking at the RPI numbers.

I also think customers are much more sensitive to pricing and want to get the most they can for their dollar. The recent best match shift that pushed Agency and Vetta files to the front certainly didn't help, and I know personally of some graphic designers who abandoned iStock after many years of loyalty when that happened. They have no plans on coming back.   

A lot of people are seeking agencies that are going to provide them with imagery for the least amount of money. In their minds, that's no longer iStock. Companies these days are tightening their belts and can't spend money like they used to. As for the recession being over, I don't buy it. Unemployment is still high, people still aren't hiring and expenditures are nowhere near what they were before the crisis hit.   

The USA is trying to move toward a program where everyone has insurance.

If you wouldn't mind me asking, what percentage of your income ends up in your pocket after taxes?
[/quote]
Half of America is moving willingly towards it while half of Congress is trying to unravel those plans.   

I'm curious as to what full-timers do for health insurance for those that aren't on a spouse's health plan?  I suppose this mainly applies to Americans since every other country in the world seems to do a much better job of taking care of their citizens than we do. 

Am mulling going full time within the next 1-2 years, but this is a big sticking point for me since it would cost me a fortune to insure myself privately.

FWIW, I think they got rid of major part of the problem and found hopefully a better replacement.

Oh, you beat me by six minutes!
For us, however, the interesting,exciting/or scary bit is probably the as-ever ambiguous:
"Jonathan Klein wisely told us some time ago that as we hit the 5 million images mark, there would be many great images that simply would not be seen--and it's especially true as we near 10 million. We're looking at ways to resurface those images to get them selling again--even if it means moving them between sites. I'll be looking for your support as we roll out these exciting new options."

If it means that our things get moved to other sites involuntarily he will absolutely NOT have my support nor will he have the support of many other contributors I know.

Quote from: sjlocke on May 26, 2011, 09:09

The buyer probably didn't want to hear my words either, that prices are up everywhere.  They just want a way to complain a bit and aren't really looking for suggestions.  "Sorry, good luck" is probably an ok way to leave the vent where it is and move on.

Respectfully disagree.

I saw that yesterday and thought it was very rude.

Getting snarky with contributors is one thing. Being short with people who spend money in your store, even if they're ranting, is just utterly crappy customer service. I don't care how fed up he/they are with hearing that buyers don't want to have to wade through Agency/Vetta if they're looking for less expensive content, they can't "talk" to customers that way.

And leaving these locked threads around for everyone to read is like leaving heads on a pike outside medieval cities - you're warning others off by showing how you deal with dissenters.

As someone funnier than me said a few months back about delivering good customer support "I could tell everyone to eff off and still be doing better than iStock".

I couldn't agree more. This is basic Customer Service 101. If one of my employees had written an e-mail like this to a customer and continued on with that attitude, she'd be gone for quickly.

My opinion is that it should be a one time price.  Since all the information is stored locally, there are no hosting costs or any further costs to the writer.  It looks useful, but I wouldn't be up for a graduated monthly fee like that.

JMO...

I would agree 110%. I don't like the idea of having to pay monthly in perpetuity. I like idea of paying once and being done with it.