https://www.moodys.com/research/Moodys-changes-the-outlook-of-Getty-Images-to-Negative-from--PR_314730

Jo Ann Snover linked to this public investment research/opinion a while back on another thread.

What do they mean by midstock ? What is midstock in this context ?

They reference Shutterstock and Fotolia for Midstock so looks like Microstock = Midstock to them. And it sounds like they refer to Macro as Premium.

After reading that report it sounds like Istock is taking a severe beating and isn't doing well. Revenue is down, they aren't effectively competing with SS or FT which are both seeing growth, and it's unclear on if the Sept 2014 "relaunch" will make IS competitive again.

Reading this just confirms what I'm already seeing. Their sales are dropping. My earnings are tanking. They're in a downward spiral and the Sept 2014 changes were a major attempt to stop the nosedive.

What's really perplexing is increased operating costs such as with personnel. How could this have happened? Seems like they cut a ton of people and are operating on a skeleton crew. How did costs increase? Big raises to execs? 

I don't know. To me it sounds as if they see Getty as primarily a mid stock agency and SS/FT as primarily microstock agencies, even though Getty has iStock and SS has Offset. Mid stock is being squeezed by pricing competition from microstock sites which are gaining market share.

If subs are now 25% of Getty's revenue, that's still a minority percentage. And so far subs have only decreased overall revenue there (judging by comments made by contributors here). They'll have to get a whole lot more subscribers without cannibalizing their own customer base if they want to make that successful.

The lower rating means their cost of borrowing will go up making it even tougher for them. They either need to increase sales rapidly or increase margins. The easiest way to increase margins is to lower the acquisition cost of your inventory -- which is our content.

But they aren't talking about raising more capital, so their borrowing costs are fixed at what they were when they took these loans, aren't they? The people who made the loans, on the other hand, would only be able to sell the debt to someone else at a cut rate. At least, that's my less than expert understanding.

And this reflects the situation BEFORE the "relaunch", since when sales have tanked without any sign of sales transferring to PP - at least, not in my results.

Looking at my sales downloads of subscriptions are sharply increasing while regular sales are decreasing. I earn less per subscription download and am now earning 1/3-1/2 of what I used to after 9/14 for regular downloads. So subscription sales may actually be up for them. But that doesn't do me any good.

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on January 05, 2015, 15:03

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on January 05, 2015, 13:43

And this reflects the situation BEFORE the "relaunch", since when sales have tanked without any sign of sales transferring to PP - at least, not in my results.

Looking at my sales downloads of subscriptions are sharply increasing while regular sales are decreasing. I earn less per subscription download and am now earning 1/3-1/2 of what I used to after 9/14 for regular downloads. So subscription sales may actually be up for them. But that doesn't do me any good.

Right. Same here. I was making around $500 a month on IS and then they introduced TS.  Slowly my IS sales decline but TS revenue grew, canceling each other out. But I can officially say that the canceling out even steven is no longer the case.  I am now only making about $130 a month from Stock with 2900 images (used to be $500) and maybe between $150-$200 with TS.  So total revenue of about just over $300 a month.  But I have sold A LOT MORE IMAGES through TS, so revenue=down, sales volume=up.

Getty made a huge mistake with TS. It move away customers from iStock.
They will close TS soon to concentrate the marketing efforts in one place and bust subs sales on iStock.

Good points Mantis but I see it a little different since TS opened:

sales volume=up, revenue=down 

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on January 05, 2015, 15:03

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on January 05, 2015, 13:43

And this reflects the situation BEFORE the "relaunch", since when sales have tanked without any sign of sales transferring to PP - at least, not in my results.

Looking at my sales downloads of subscriptions are sharply increasing while regular sales are decreasing. I earn less per subscription download and am now earning 1/3-1/2 of what I used to after 9/14 for regular downloads. So subscription sales may actually be up for them. But that doesn't do me any good.

Right. Same here. I was making around $500 a month on IS and then they introduced TS.  Slowly my IS sales decline but TS revenue grew, canceling each other out. But I can officially say that the canceling out even steven is no longer the case.  I am now only making about $130 a month from Stock with 2900 images (used to be $500) and maybe between $150-$200 with TS.  So total revenue of about just over $300 a month.  But I have sold A LOT MORE IMAGES through TS, so revenue=down, sales volume=up.