MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Do you think SS will one day be as 'evil' as IS/FT?  (Read 15909 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: November 24, 2011, 00:18 »
0
gostwyck doesnt need any help/lawyer or other but he is 100% right and I am not understanding where he is talking "badly" about Oringer or SS or Bruce.. he is just saying the real truth about some actions that they have made and how they stand now.. quite frankly I love these kind of topics.. dont understand why there is the need of fight.. keep it cool and informative


lagereek

« Reply #51 on: November 24, 2011, 01:23 »
0
Well Luis my boy,  " no need for fight" quote. coming from you thats a revelation. You must have seen the light? :D

« Reply #52 on: November 24, 2011, 03:30 »
0
The sale happened 5 years ago, it is completely irrelevant today.

Sorry, but no it isn't.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #53 on: November 24, 2011, 09:36 »
0
Hey everybody, why don't we form a union or a stock site?  ;)

Microbius

« Reply #54 on: November 24, 2011, 09:55 »
0
Hey everybody, why don't we form a union or a stock site?  ;)
lol  :D

rubyroo

« Reply #55 on: November 24, 2011, 09:58 »
0
<bangs head on table repeatedly>

SNP

  • Canadian Photographer
« Reply #56 on: November 24, 2011, 13:35 »
0
<bangs head on table repeatedly>

your avatar is funny, even though it is a little creepy too.

I don't think we can say that the sale of iStock is irrelevant. the details of the sale between Bruce and Getty may no longer be relevant (maybe that's what you meant Jasmin?). but the sale has completely shifted the iStock infrastructure. I wouldn't say in directions that are all bad. I think having a powerhouse corporation like Getty behind us has launched us into the stratosphere in terms of visibility. but the price for this is largely being footed by contributors. I'd say that's pretty relevant.

rubyroo

« Reply #57 on: November 24, 2011, 14:26 »
0
Awww.. I didn't mean for it to be creepy.  I'd never put headphones on a kitten myself, but I liked the idea of one getting down to some funky music.

« Reply #58 on: November 24, 2011, 15:22 »
0
How many here have experienced problems with new uploads and or drops in search engine placement for images with long term high RPI.  

Have you also been experiencing issues with missing images, double images in your port or search engine bugs such as images not searchable by their keywords or combinations of keywords?

If so, what issues are you seeing, how frequent are they occurring and how long has this been going on.

In the end if you are experiencing these problems do you think these issues are causing you to miss out on sales?  

SNP

  • Canadian Photographer
« Reply #59 on: November 24, 2011, 16:50 »
0
How many here have experienced problems with new uploads and or drops in search engine placement for images with long term high RPI.  

Have you also been experiencing issues with missing images, double images in your port or search engine bugs such as images not searchable by their keywords or combinations of keywords?

If so, what issues are you seeing, how frequent are they occurring and how long has this been going on.

In the end if you are experiencing these problems do you think these issues are causing you to miss out on sales?  

this reminds me of a telemarketing survey....

« Reply #60 on: November 25, 2011, 09:43 »
0
"I don't think we can say that the sale of iStock is irrelevant. the details of the sale between Bruce and Getty may no longer be relevant (maybe that's what you meant Jasmin?). but the sale has completely shifted the iStock infrastructure. "

I meant that it is the decision of the CURRENT management that is giving us the results we see. They could have decided to continue it along the path Bruce set up.

And most of the people I know are earning a lot more now than in 2006 and those who are good at shooting vetta and agency are doing extremely well. And I don't see any site out there that can replace istock's earning power. If you go independent, you still have to sign up with at least 4 agencies to replace what you got from as an exclusive. If the other business managers are so much better, why haven't they overtaken istock? They've had 5 years since the sale...?

I see a lot of blame being shifted to Bruce, which IMO deflects from the responsibility of the current management.

They, and they alone are responsible for how the business is being run.

I am sorry, but all that nostalgia about Bruce wont get us anyhwere. And again, nobody knows if he really would have continued to be successful with istock if Getty had bought a different stock site. He wasnt the only player in the market and getty was out to buy a company. You cannot just take a point of time in the past and "extrapolate a better present". That is wishful thinking.

Also for me being part of Getty is a very positive thing, because I really enjoy how well my portfolio is doing over there. This is money and an opportunity that I would not have had, if this sale had not taken place.

Again - those in charge NOW are responsible. Noone else.

I also dont buy into this "but Getty always behaves like that"- getty is a business. It has owners. It has managers. Nobody is stopping them from evolving as a company, bringing in new technology, hiring new managers with a solid background in growing a business on the internet. Every single day those managers take decisions. Every day they have to realign their business with the current market situation.

It is not a law of nature for getty "to behave in a certain way"

They can take their company any direction they like. Or any directions the owners want it to go. It is a free enterprise, not a state run bureau.

So that is why for me, the past is over, and whatever Bruce did or did not do makes no difference to me.

I focus on the here and now, always.  
« Last Edit: November 25, 2011, 10:04 by cobalt »

« Reply #61 on: November 25, 2011, 10:10 »
0
my ipad does not allow me to scroll down, so I'll add it here:

only with my own site do I have full control. As soon as I decide to work through an agency, I give up control. I will only do this if it makes financial sense. And of course I have to always follow what the management does and if I believe that their decisions will bring me more money.

If I believe they're decisions will not bring in more money, I have to think of a different solution, or finally open my own store. Of course opening your own place and driving customers there will take 3 years, like any new business.

But it is always my choice.

Obviously if for instance Shutterstock or any other site reached a level that made it clear they have reached the earning power of istock, I might move my portfolio.

Many others are moving now. Their decision.

But again nobody knows if the growth of ss will last.

« Reply #62 on: November 25, 2011, 11:01 »
0
... They could have decided to continue it along the path Bruce set up.

I see a lot of blame being shifted to Bruce, which IMO deflects from the responsibility of the current management.

I am sorry, but all that nostalgia about Bruce wont get us anyhwere. And again, nobody knows if he really would have continued to be successful with istock if Getty had bought a different stock site. He wasnt the only player in the market and getty was out to buy a company. You cannot just take a point of time in the past and "extrapolate a better present". That is wishful thinking.

So that is why for me, the past is over, and whatever Bruce did or did not do makes no difference to me.

I focus on the here and now, always. 

Yeah, right! I thought you were the one who keeps mentioning Livingstone and telling us how wonderful he was. You even brought his name up 4x in your post telling how irrelevant he is now and how you supposedly only focus "on the here and now".

« Reply #63 on: November 25, 2011, 15:14 »
0
deleted - why waste my time...
« Last Edit: November 25, 2011, 15:37 by cobalt »

Tryingmybest

  • Stand up for what is right
« Reply #64 on: November 26, 2011, 11:16 »
0
Don't believe the hype! Every business has a botton line and that is to keep themselves sustainable once they are established. They will do what it takes to keep themselves sustainable. That's just business!

And that is why businesses like that eventually collapse.

antistock

« Reply #65 on: November 26, 2011, 12:41 »
0
Don't believe the hype! Every business has a botton line and that is to keep themselves sustainable once they are established. They will do what it takes to keep themselves sustainable. That's just business!

And that is why businesses like that eventually collapse.

i wonder how much can they squeeze more out of their contributors ... is the 85% cut taken by IS not enough already ?

selling good photos for as low as 1 credit ? dollar bins ? free photos of the day ? and the list goes on....

i can't remember any other industry where you only keep 15% of a sale.
Apple is doing the same thing as stock agencies but is more than happy keeping its 30% cut.
how come stock agencies pushed up to 85% and will move quickly to 90% ?

and of course SS will follow suit and become greedy, and who can blame them, stock photographers are simply taken by the balls, it's a dying industry however you look at it, only the top agencies will stay afloat, at least for a while.

let's face it, the market is simply oversaturated and soon all these millions of shiny microstock images will not be worth a dime and given away for free or next to nothing.

SS was probably the first realizing this and grabbing the lion's share in the subs market.

anyone can produce decent or "good enough" stock images nowadays, it's a fact and it's getting easier and easier for the amateurs to reach the miminum requirements to join the biz, all they need is an entry level DSLR, a 18-55 kit lens, a laptop with Lightroom, and an internet connection.

i can't see much future for this industry, no matter if with IS or SS or whatever next.

exclusive images of celebrities, news, and sports will always raise high prices, but the stock stuff sold today on the micros is a dead man walking, why do you think Getty is dumping most of his outdated RM archive into RF microstock and subs ? they know pretty well what's going on and unsurprisingly they also test the waters with Flickr collection and push for more creative and weird imagery.

microstockphoto.co.uk

« Reply #66 on: November 26, 2011, 15:23 »
0

anyone can produce decent or "good enough" stock images nowadays, it's a fact and it's getting easier and easier for the amateurs to reach the miminum requirements to join the biz, all they need is an entry level DSLR, a 18-55 kit lens, a laptop with Lightroom, and an internet connection.

i can't see much future for this industry

Judging from my list of 70 referred photographers at SS, only 6 of which passed the test, and only 4 of which are somehow active, I wouldn't say it's so easy.

It's true that anyone can buy a dSLR nowadays, but there's a lot more to a successful career in photography, be it stock or else. And people will always need images, so - although possibly different from microstock as we know it - there's a future in this industry.

I basically agree with your other points though, especially the need to push more creative and weird pictures. It's a market that agencies are overlooking based on a supposed lcv which isn't true imo.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2011, 15:29 by microstockphoto.co.uk »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
22 Replies
14918 Views
Last post April 22, 2018, 07:19
by namussi

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors