MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: Faustvasea on January 07, 2025, 06:33
-
Dear Creator/Contributor,
As Getty Images approaches our 30th anniversary, we are excited to share the news that Getty Images and Shutterstock have announced an agreement to merge. The company will operate under Getty Images Holdings, Inc. The official press announcement can be found here.
It’s important to note that it will take time for the transaction to close. The merger is subject to the satisfaction of customary closing conditions, including receipt of required regulatory approvals and the approval of Getty Images and Shutterstock stockholders. As a result, the merger is not closed, and each company will continue to operate independently in the interim, and it will be business as usual with respect to your relationship with Getty Images.
We are undertaking this merger in large part because we expect it to provide expanded reach for your content, support for new asset types and formats and enhanced support and tools to manage your work.
We believe in creativity. We believe in the power of imagery. We believe pre‑shot solutions represent an efficient and powerful tool for our customers. We believe in the opportunity of AI, but the need to compensate creators for the use of their work. These beliefs will not change with the transaction.
Over the coming months, as we move to close, we are committed to sharing updates.
We thank you for sharing your talent, content and trust with Getty Images and we look forward to providing expanded opportunities and capabilities going forward.
Best wishes,
Craig Peters
CEO, Getty Images
-
Not great... I already have three Getty Accounts due to mergers of Corbis etc With any luck the regulators may say no but I won't hold my breath.
-
I kind of hope this could be a good thing. Getty could stop the price race to the bottom, as I think they would want to improve their profit margin and they'd only have Adobe as the main big competitor, which for now doesn't complete on price.
-
I am image exclusive, although my thousands of videos are not in Getty neither in Shutterstock (although they are in P5 that is part of SS now).
I have long not been contributing stills as the profit is not there anymore, but I still do video from time to time. Depending on what's next I might take action with my stills or even provide videos again if any of those two dinosaurs improve conditions which I am 99% sure will not happen.
In any case merged or not creative photography is already dead in the next years as Gemini , OPEN AI and others improve day after day. Video will take a little longer as it is much more complex and processor intensive, but both companies know the writing is on the wall, and they will try to suck what's left of the orange juice dry while they can.
-
These beliefs will not change with the transaction.
We Come in Peace.
We Mean You No Harm.
Trust Us.
-
I pray to god that they use Shutterstocks submission process and not that PITA one iStock use. It's one reason I don't submit much too them, takes way too long.
-
"we are excited to share the news"
;D
-
I will start to pray that istock gets a professional ss style upload system.
At least give us that as an immediate benefit.
I do believe getty will stop a race to the bottom. Not sure about overall royalties but i would be surprised if they keep the shutterstock rat race yearly reset system.
The istock exclusives will benefit most.
Getty now has a full control over the editorial market. Perhaps this means that p5 or ss editorial content will start to see sales from getty customers.
Bottom line - shutterstock mismanaged their business in the last 4 years so badly, wich led to a stellar crash of their shareprice, making them vulnerable to an attack from short sellers.
A"merger"/take over by Getty was the best way forward.
Good for Getty.
-
SS has been steadily declining for me for the last year. Half the downloads but surprisingly still almost the same income. I'm convinced we'll get the worst possible deal from that merger. I'm not even being pessimistic. I left Getty/iStock in 2017. Getty is poison
-
I kind of hope this could be a good thing. Getty could stop the price race to the bottom, as I think they would want to improve their profit margin and they'd only have Adobe as the main big competitor, which for now doesn't complete on price.
You believe Getty would stop that race to the bottom that they started in first place?
-
I am image exclusive, although my thousands of videos are not in Getty neither in Shutterstock (although they are in P5 that is part of SS now).
I have long not been contributing stills as the profit is not there anymore, but I still do video from time to time. Depending on what's next I might take action with my stills or even provide videos again if any of those two dinosaurs improve conditions which I am 99% sure will not happen.
In any case merged or not creative photography is already dead in the next years as Gemini , OPEN AI and others improve day after day. Video will take a little longer as it is much more complex and processor intensive, but both companies know the writing is on the wall, and they will try to suck what's left of the orange juice dry while they can.
Strictly speaking, an AI cannot generate new content. It can only recombine elements it has been trained on. The results are often awful and ridiculous. No matter how advanced the AI is, it'll spit out a combination of what's fed to it. If Getty or the rest of them will make it unprofitable for creative to create and submit new images (which is actually the case now already), all they will be left with is an old library of content that can only be recombined in a limited way. Well good luck selling that to your customers.
I am seeing funniest things with AI generated stuff. Being a microstock contributor since 2005 I know very well faces of popular models and many individual contributors style. Now I am seeing the same elements in generated images... it's the same stuff only weird looking.
AI is not really new. Netflix uses it to create movies and shows, and they are all a salad of past hits, and none of them work, no matter how much money or star power they throw into it. My point is, you cannot replace the creators. You can coast for a while on existing content, feeding it into AI, generating variations, fine. But then it will be over, and you will need new content, but the creators will quit the industry. Nobody works for nothing. Not paying the creators fairly is like chopping the branch you're sitting on. Maybe someone on the business side will clue in?...
-
Potential to loose 30% of my earnings if they merge to one website, basically my earnings are 30% SS, 30% iStock and 30% Abode, 10% Dreamtime, Pond5 etc…….based on image sales only
-
https://newsroom.gettyimages.com/en/getty-images/getty-images-and-shutterstock-to-merge-creating-a-premier-visual-content-company?utm_term=2-text_only-copy_1-0&utm_source=eloqua_service&utm_campaign=01072025announcement&utm_content=EML_GI_ADH_SVC_NON_2025WK02_serviceemail2_E02V01_NAM_non_none_000000_enUS&utm_medium=email&aid=62597&fbclid=IwY2xjawHqEepleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHeHW0B6ziuPGQ-Z70zzXsml8Dks23ReFx7jo04C2z7kyRf7qevnQ3fPEVA_aem_SJdqTtUkXphNwkM7CYERrw
Getty Images and Shutterstock will hold a conference call to discuss the transaction today, January 7, 2025, at 8:30 a.m. Eastern Time. The live webcast will be accessible through the Investor Relations section of the each company’s website at https://investors.gettyimages.com/ and https://investor.shutterstock.com.
-
Apparently the stock market is happy about the announcement. In pre-market trading, SSTK and GETY are up. Over 25% for SSTK and over 44% for GETY.
I'll be on the lookout for how the two companies frame this move to their investors and the business community. There'll be better clues for us (suppliers) as to how this might unfold than the warm-and-fuzzy words about expanded opportunities and trust in the contributor e-mail :)
Here's a link to the slides of the investor presentation. Note the descriptions of "synergies" they anticipate:
Content and Product Optimization
Consolidation of IT Systems
Streamlined Operating Model
https://investor.shutterstock.com/static-files/de522e71-d1ac-4861-9427-49719876344b (https://investor.shutterstock.com/static-files/de522e71-d1ac-4861-9427-49719876344b)
Not clear (to me) where the "expanded opportunities" to content creators come from (assuming you were already with both agencies).
From the article below: "The combined operations also will present a more considerable competitor for big technology companies that are leveraging generative artificial intelligence to transform the creation of visual content and could disrupt the marketplace."
https://www.investors.com/news/getty-images-shutterstock-merge-gety-adbe-ai-trump-antitrust/ (https://www.investors.com/news/getty-images-shutterstock-merge-gety-adbe-ai-trump-antitrust/)
From the Q&A at the end of the conference call this morning, Peters was asked about the overlap between the two companies from a revenue perspective. He emphasized how complementary the two businesses were - different content (Getty is focused on exclusive content), SS's broader reach into small & medium businesses, more geographic reach. Hennessey joined in to emphasize differences in people, distribution channels, asset types, platform types. He said the businesses are different.
I can see why they'd want to say that, but I don't think the differences are as great as they said. I'd guess that a major portion of the heavily licensed content (versus the total collection for both) is overlap. Additionally, when you have theoretically exclusive stock images - of an isolated apple, a potted plant, etc. - they look largely the same, and can easily be substituted with a similar non-exclusive item.
Asked about additional opportunities for the combined companies, Peters said he saw investment accelerating delivery of improvements (search, customer service, genAI) versus finding new ones.
Peters also said that they did not see any reduction of licensing content as a result of genAI. Hennessey said they had not seen any negative impact, just growth opportunities "1+1=3". Don't ask me to explain the quote!
-
Does that mean they will continue operating their individual platforms to maintain their existing customer bases and revenue streams?
For me right now SS is 60% of revenue, 25% AS and 15% iStock.
-
Does that mean they will continue operating their individual platforms to maintain their existing customer bases and revenue streams?
That's a good question! Also, SS has a fairly liberal acceptance policy for Editorial whereas iS does not. Hopefully they won't become more restrictive in that regard.
If they are going to consolidate relative to IT and such, it might imply that ultimately the two microstock platforms will merge into one.
-
I kind of hope this could be a good thing. Getty could stop the price race to the bottom, as I think they would want to improve their profit margin and they'd only have Adobe as the main big competitor, which for now doesn't complete on price.
You believe Getty would stop that race to the bottom that they started in first place?
Yes I do.
As far as I know iStock started the race, Getty just bought them later on. Recently Shutterstock was leading the race to the bottom. I disregard bottom feeders like Freepik, they don't have a large enough market share to matter much.
No business wants to reduce their prices, as that reduces their profit. They only do it to compete for market share. Now with only two big players in the market (Getty and Adobe) and Adobe not reducing their prices for some time (as far as I know), Getty might be actually able to raise their lowest price tiers and probably still be cheaper than Adobe. I don't know their exact numbers, so I can't be sure - that's just common business sense.
Obviously Getty won't increase percentage share for contributors. But if they increase their prices, contributors will still get more money.
-
One thing Getty is hot on is IP/copyright violation. It'll be interesting to see how they handle the Shutterstock library which is absolutely full of violations.
-
Does that mean they will continue operating their individual platforms to maintain their existing customer bases and revenue streams?
That's a good question! Also, SS has a fairly liberal acceptance policy for Editorial whereas iS does not. Hopefully they won't become more restrictive in that regard.
If they are going to consolidate relative to IT and such, it might imply that ultimately the two microstock platforms will merge into one.
I guess nobody knows. My two cents: they'll look for quick wins and efficiency gains, and these are probably to be found in supportive departments like HR, legal, sales, developement, ... in both companies. Both Shutterstock and Getty/iStock are well established brands with large customer bases. Throwing that away would be a loss, at least on short term so I guess they'll keep both brands and portals active for a longer period of time. But who knows, Getty might as well choose to get what they need from Shutterstock and let it die off at minimum cost.
-
I kind of hope this could be a good thing. Getty could stop the price race to the bottom, as I think they would want to improve their profit margin and they'd only have Adobe as the main big competitor, which for now doesn't complete on price.
You believe Getty would stop that race to the bottom that they started in first place?
Yes I do.
As far as I know iStock started the race, Getty just bought them later on. Recently Shutterstock was leading the race to the bottom. I disregard bottom feeders like Freepik, they don't have a large enough market share to matter much.
No business wants to reduce their prices, as that reduces their profit. They only do it to compete for market share. Now with only two big players in the market (Getty and Adobe) and Adobe not reducing their prices for some time (as far as I know), Getty might be actually able to raise their lowest price tiers and probably still be cheaper than Adobe. I don't know their exact numbers, so I can't be sure - that's just common business sense.
Obviously Getty won't increase percentage share for contributors. But if they increase their prices, contributors will still get more money.
Interesting theory! Could it be that with only a few large players, said players will be able to raise their prices?!
-
One thing Getty is hot on is IP/copyright violation. It'll be interesting to see how they handle the Shutterstock library which is absolutely full of violations.
They will have to clean that up. Also get rid of all the ai content that is creeping in without being declared ai.
-
One thing Getty is hot on is IP/copyright violation. It'll be interesting to see how they handle the Shutterstock library which is absolutely full of violations.
They will have to clean that up. Also get rid of all the ai content that is creeping in without being declared ai.
I'll be glad if they will be doing that.
-
I have been a contributor to both, but my portfolio on SSTK is somewhat larger, both because iStock is pickier, and I have not bothered to upload as much there, as it is more trouble.
That seems to go even more for others, as apparently the total number of files at SSTK is more than double what it is at iStock: https://photutorial.com/shutterstock-vs-istock/#shutterstock-has-2-times-more-content-but-i-stock-is-more-curated
iStock has taken a more restrictive view of what is acceptable, based on no known legal principles of IP. For example, I have found that they have zero tolerance for interior shots for editorial, even of public buildings where photography is permitted.
It will be interesting to see how they handle that, and whether they will cull the SSTK portfolio to eliminate images that iStock would not have accepted.
-
I have been a contributor to both, but my portfolio on SSTK is somewhat larger, both because iStock is pickier, and I have not bothered to upload as much there, as it is more trouble.
That seems to go even more for others, as apparently the total number of files at SSTK is more than double what it is at iStock: https://photutorial.com/shutterstock-vs-istock/#shutterstock-has-2-times-more-content-but-i-stock-is-more-curated
iStock has taken a more restrictive view of what is acceptable, based on no known legal principles of IP. For example, I have found that they have zero tolerance for interior shots for editorial, even of public buildings where photography is permitted.
It will be interesting to see how they handle that, and whether they will cull the SSTK portfolio to eliminate images that iStock would not have accepted.
Yes, iS is much more restrictive on Editorial than SS. However, I would be surprised if they cut off revenue from SS Editorial images that iS wouldn't normally accept...time will tell.
-
An interesting bit from the presentation
That they only have 1.4 million subscribers.
I would have thought they have ten times more.
It also shows we are selling into a tiny marketplace compared to platforms like ebay or amazon or youtube.
This is combined over both agencies and over 200 countries.
Adobe must have a lot more.
That is why it is very difficult to grow a full time income. The customer base is actually quite small.
-
Yeah, more than exciting news... minimum per sale 10 cents on SSTK + minimum per sale 1 cent on Getty => new historic low... long live microstock!
-
I have been a contributor to both, but my portfolio on SSTK is somewhat larger, both because iStock is pickier, and I have not bothered to upload as much there, as it is more trouble.
That seems to go even more for others, as apparently the total number of files at SSTK is more than double what it is at iStock: https://photutorial.com/shutterstock-vs-istock/#shutterstock-has-2-times-more-content-but-i-stock-is-more-curated
iStock has taken a more restrictive view of what is acceptable, based on no known legal principles of IP. For example, I have found that they have zero tolerance for interior shots for editorial, even of public buildings where photography is permitted.
It will be interesting to see how they handle that, and whether they will cull the SSTK portfolio to eliminate images that iStock would not have accepted.
As a side on that, the first that changed when SS bought Pond5 was the enforcing of user-declared editorial and the SS format captions on new content. That came very early on. Its quite possible the first changes will be to standardise the legal aspects, IP and so on. And i guess it'll move to the strictest (ie Getty).
I do a fair bit of editorial but a lot of what i do is fine for SS and elsewhere but not on iStock.
-
iStock is paying 15% flat commissions to photo contributors. SS currently is paying 15% to 40%. My gut feeling says there's a huge screaming "cost optimization" opportunity for managers after this merger. :-\
-
iStock is paying 15% flat commissions to photo contributors. SS currently is paying 15% to 40%. My gut feeling says there's a huge screaming "cost optimization" opportunity for managers after this merger. :-\
Just think about how more motivated we will be with the exciting news of no reset every January. Instead it will just stay at a flat 15% forever (until daddy needs a stock bump and they drop it again).
-
Potential to loose 30% of my earnings if they merge to one website, basically my earnings are 30% SS, 30% iStock and 30% Abode, 10% Dreamtime, Pond5 etc…….based on image sales only
So the 30% of people, that bought from IS will suddenly not need your images anymore? I always thought that downloads were from buyers, not from agencies?
iStock is paying 15% flat commissions to photo contributors. SS currently is paying 15% to 40%. My gut feeling says there's a huge screaming "cost optimization" opportunity for managers after this merger. :-\
Yes, that sounds logical.
Yeah, more than exciting news... minimum per sale 10 cents on SSTK + minimum per sale 1 cent on Getty => new historic low... long live microstock!
While I'm trying to wait and see and be positive, instead of just Gloomy Gus, you're right. If we loose that minimum on SS and lose the reset, we could be getting more of those wonderful Connect sales for fractions of a cent. However, being locked at 15% makes me feel better than the phony levels on SS that after rising through the year, I still got 10¢ for most downloads. Because they wanted to "reward us" for our level of effort.
The truth was, SS was discounting so heavily that the only reason we got the 10¢ was because it was their minimum, not our true percentage. 15% of that lowball discount price number, is going to be less.
It's going to be interesting and changing, for many months, while we wait for the dust to settle on the New And Improved Getty/iStock/Shutterstock, and whatever else happens. Here's the Game Changer that people asked for. Watch out what you ask for, you might get it.
Microstock will never be the same, and never be what it was.
I'm in wait and see mode.
So I'm watchin' and I'm waitin'
Hopin' for the best
No way to delay
That trouble comin' every day
Remember the landfill fires, that you could only observe, as they burn, and there's nothing anyone can do to put them out. The Merger of Getty and Shutterstock is a flaming Dumpster fire at the least, and could be a landfill full of old tires. :( All the talk and wringing of hands, isn't going to change what happens to us. We might as well buckle up and hang on for the ride. Then see what's left after the smoke clears.
(https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/great-fire-london-history-england-260nw-2257809607.jpg)
-
the merger is obviously screaming "exciting neewwwws...less royalties...but...you will make it up in volume...winkie, winkie..."
I hope it doesn't happen.
by my stats istock has an rpd of 59 cents, adobe 85. so it is lower than adobe, but the average is not 5 cents.
-
I pray to god that they use Shutterstocks submission process and not that PITA one iStock use. It's one reason I don't submit much too them, takes way too long.
. I'm used to Shutterstock's submission process, so I hope it stays the same.
-
For me, the last few years most of my sales on Getty have been basically micro stock prices. I stopped submitting to the micros seven or eight years ago (maybe longer) to focus on Getty, only to have Getty essentially turn into another micro. For years my sales on Getty were always in the hundreds of dollars per sale, but that changed a while ago and now most are micro prices. I'm not sure if this merger means anything, if it does, probably nothing good for us.
-
I know there are authors who are exclusive to Getty. They sell videos very expensively and Getty pays a lot of money for these sales. How things are going for them now, I don't know.
-
Shutterstock pays good money for AI. I don't remember Getty paying for it. Now we're going to lose that income. And it was big.
-
Luka Azman on Youtube www.youtube.com/@LukaAzman (http://www.youtube.com/@LukaAzman) is (in his own words) 'a full time stock photographer and videographer' and exclusive to iStock.
I've reached out to him on his channel to ask how he feels about microstock and again just now to ask how he feels about the merger but lately he has not been answering my questions. :-\
-
Yeah, more than exciting news... minimum per sale 10 cents on SSTK + minimum per sale 1 cent on Getty => new historic low... long live microstock!
Things will only get worse with the monopoly.
-
iStock is paying 15% flat commissions to photo contributors. SS currently is paying 15% to 40%.
But ... the IS percentage is on the selling price of the image, the SS percentage is on the cost of the customer's subscription.
If a customer has a subscription of 100 USD per month for 100 photos and downloads 25 of them, the contributor earns:
Shutterstock
- 100USD/100 photos * 15% = 0.15 cents
Istock
- 100USD/25 photos (those downloaded) *15% = 0.60 cents
Shutterstock knew very well the rate of use of its subscriptions and therefore moved its entire business from on-demand sales to subscriptions. In this way it increased its earnings significantly.
-
iStock is paying 15% flat commissions to photo contributors. SS currently is paying 15% to 40%.
But ... the IS percentage is on the selling price of the image, the SS percentage is on the cost of the customer's subscription.
If a customer has a subscription of 100 USD per month for 100 photos and downloads 25 of them, the contributor earns:
Shutterstock
- 100USD/100 photos * 15% = 0.15 cents
Istock
- 100USD/25 photos (those downloaded) *15% = 0.60 cents
Shutterstock knew very well the rate of use of its subscriptions and therefore moved its entire business from on-demand sales to subscriptions. In this way it increased its earnings significantly.
Precisely, that's why I like Istock better and have no problem waiting for a month to see for which amount something was sold and the calculation of the commission. Because their system is much more fair then what SS and AS do, namely giving you commission based on all the possible downloads that the client can do with their subscription.
-
One thing Getty is hot on is IP/copyright violation. It'll be interesting to see how they handle the Shutterstock library which is absolutely full of violations.
They will have to clean that up. Also get rid of all the ai content that is creeping in without being declared ai.
I'll be glad if they will be doing that.
I keep jumping up and down about this and am not getting an answer. As one who has had my images stolen from istockphoto and uploaded to shutterstock, I do wonder how Getty is going to handle the large number stolen images in the shutterstock collection. I hope they are not depending on us photographers to spend our time locating and reporting them, as shutterstock did.
-
iStock is paying 15% flat commissions to photo contributors. SS currently is paying 15% to 40%.
But ... the IS percentage is on the selling price of the image, the SS percentage is on the cost of the customer's subscription.
If a customer has a subscription of 100 USD per month for 100 photos and downloads 25 of them, the contributor earns:
Shutterstock
- 100USD/100 photos * 15% = 0.15 cents
Istock
- 100USD/25 photos (those downloaded) *15% = 0.60 cents
Shutterstock knew very well the rate of use of its subscriptions and therefore moved its entire business from on-demand sales to subscriptions. In this way it increased its earnings significantly.
Precisely, that's why I like Istock better and have no problem waiting for a month to see for which amount something was sold and the calculation of the commission. Because their system is much more fair then what SS and AS do, namely giving you commission based on all the possible downloads that the client can do with their subscription.
And that's why we'll make more when SS and IS raise prices, as they are no longer trying to beat each other, by offering buyers the lowest prices. Now they can sell higher priced credit packages to the largest and best image library in the world. We will get 15% of a bigger number.
-
I pray to god that they use Shutterstocks submission process and not that PITA one iStock use. It's one reason I don't submit much too them, takes way too long.
Hope so.
-
These beliefs will not change with the transaction.
We Come in Peace.
We Mean You No Harm.
Trust Us.
Resistance is futile.
-
Shutterstock knew very well the rate of use of its subscriptions and therefore moved its entire business from on-demand sales to subscriptions. In this way it increased its earnings significantly.
Did you mean from Subscriptions to Single and Other? That's the way mine changed last year. I had one month with Subs totaling under $1 for the entire month. May 2024 was the only month that Subs equaled or beat S&O and that was by one cent.
It looks to me, like they either lost the subscription clients or they moved them over to image plans, for less. I made more in 2009 with probably 200 images, @25¢ a DL, than I do now with 5,500 images. RPD is down and so are the total sales.
I sure hope this merger goes through and they get more sales. Otherwise it's just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.