Author Topic: Getty Images and Shutterstock are reportedly "exploring a merger" (Read 4764 times)

synthetick · « **Reply #25 on:** January 05, 2025, 01:28 »

Also, SS bought Turbosquid in January 2021 https://blog.turbosquid.com/2021/01/26/shutterstock-to-acquire-turbosquid-the-worlds-largest-3d-marketplace/

cobalt · « **Reply #26 on:** January 05, 2025, 01:55 »

2006 - Quit your day job!

I remember...f*** is that really nearly 20 years ago...?

I wish I had done stock full time for 20 years. My life would be very different now with 30k good files.

Injustice for all · « **Reply #27 on:** January 05, 2025, 06:52 »

exactly,I also started late in 2018,30k files that had 20 years to mature,with countless many more interactions,by now it would have been very different!

I believe that Adobe is different from other agencies,because from what I see the way in which customer requests are managed and therefore sales works differently.

if this were not the case,it would not be possible to earn more already!

the total search for content on Adobe Stock right now reports 624 million,which is at least double of when contributors started to see a decrease in sales at other agencies.

that is,how is it possible that with 624 million content in December I made 73,5% more sales and 52,2% more earnings?

this wouldn't be possible in a "random way" with the amount of content there is on Adobe today.

and then I really don't think that a company like Adobe hasn't thought about the consequences of starting to accept AI content.

what do you think they did? they said: "but yes,let's start accepting millions of contents a week,then we'll see what happens and hope for the best!"

but of course not!Adobe certainly made a long-term projection and evaluated all the consequences of this choice.

this is why in my opinion it won't matter at all on Adobe whether there will be billions of contents in the future or not,because everything has simply already been thought out down to the smallest detail,and in fact you can already see it now.

and sorry if I derailed maybe too much from the main topic...my fault sorry!

pancaketom · « **Reply #28 on:** January 05, 2025, 11:49 »

Other than maybe Adobe buying Fotolia (and this is a big maybe) I can't think of any big acquisitions that were good for the contributors. I think the worst as I see it might be the purchase of StockXpert and Getty buying IS.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #29 on:** January 05, 2025, 19:36 »

Quote from: Big Money on January 04, 2025, 20:44

Quote from: Pacesetter on January 04, 2025, 19:07
Should this proceed, it would appear the microstock industry battle lines are being drawn up into two with one being the conglomerate of iStock / Shutterstock and all its marketplaces and the other Adobe Stock.

I'm not a trader so have little understanding of it but wondering why Shutterstock would want to do this merger with iStock when they would be merging with a company that has a lot lower share price (currently GETY at $2.39 and SSTK at $31.47)?

For starters Getty has over 78 million share and SSTK as 35 million shares thus double the amount of SS.

Yes, and I wrote "Getty has 3 times the corporate value of SS, roughly. 3 Billion vs 1 Billion. Getty has double the stock value of SSTK. " That's why.

I don't really want to see the merger and I don't know if SSTK actually wants to merge, but it's the natural progression of a boom market. Many companies enter, they take profits, then there's a sorting out as the small ones get bought up or go out of business. There usually end up being 2 or 3 major providers that end up on top and some smaller ones that have specialized markets that survive in their own area.

I think of the computer games business when home computers and PCs first became popular. Companies founded on one product or a line of similar games. The single game companies, got bought out and merged into the big ones, or the smaller companies, disappeared. Look at who's left, and makes games and entertainment for Xbox and the rest of the consoles.

Here's something about Microstock. Pretty much all the same images, from all the same artists and sources are available on all the major agency sites. There's no reason, except price, for buyers to go to more than one place. If the agency they use, has the types of images that they use, that's the one they will buy from. The second reason might be choice, and who has the most images. Small agencies, have neither, in most instances. The small agencies can't survive against the big agency competition, that exists on volume with a smaller profit margin.

I still don't understand how so many small agencies are still in business. My only explanation is, they are paying artists so little, that there's still enough money to run the agency. Once there's not enough profit and the expenses exceed the income, they will disappear in a blink.

zeljkok · « **Reply #30 on:** January 05, 2025, 22:15 »

Quote from: Uncle Pete on January 05, 2025, 19:36

Here's something about Microstock. Pretty much all the same images, from all the same artists and sources are available on all the major agency sites.

Exactly right. This is one of several reasons why this merger doesn't make sense. But if happens, there are some interesting implications for contributor ports. Simple merge would not work because of duplicates. What takes precedence? Then, what would be front end facing contributors? Shutterstock is better by wide margin; but if Getty drives the merger they'd probably want to keep their model - once a month reporting ? Managed Vocabulary ? Etc.

I am quite certain merger will not happen. But it provides entertainment on Forums like this one.

YadaYadaYada · « **Reply #31 on:** January 06, 2025, 10:44 »

Quote from: zeljkok on January 05, 2025, 22:15

Quote from: Uncle Pete on January 05, 2025, 19:36
Here's something about Microstock. Pretty much all the same images, from all the same artists and sources are available on all the major agency sites.

Exactly right. This is one of several reasons why this merger doesn't make sense. But if happens, there are some interesting implications for contributor ports. Simple merge would not work because of duplicates. What takes precedence? Then, what would be front end facing contributors? Shutterstock is better by wide margin; but if Getty drives the merger they'd probably want to keep their model - once a month reporting ? Managed Vocabulary ? Etc.

I am quite certain merger will not happen. But it provides entertainment on Forums like this one.

Corporate merger doesn't mean a website merger.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #32 on:** January 06, 2025, 12:17 »

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on January 06, 2025, 10:44

Quote from: zeljkok on January 05, 2025, 22:15
Quote from: Uncle Pete on January 05, 2025, 19:36
Here's something about Microstock. Pretty much all the same images, from all the same artists and sources are available on all the major agency sites.

Exactly right. This is one of several reasons why this merger doesn't make sense. But if happens, there are some interesting implications for contributor ports. Simple merge would not work because of duplicates. What takes precedence? Then, what would be front end facing contributors? Shutterstock is better by wide margin; but if Getty drives the merger they'd probably want to keep their model - once a month reporting ? Managed Vocabulary ? Etc.

I am quite certain merger will not happen. But it provides entertainment on Forums like this one.

Corporate merger doesn't mean a website merger.

Yes, SS left Bigstock alone, and left Pond5 so far, except for cutting our percentages. Getty messed up IS, and renumbered all the assets to Getty format, when they created ESP. But the site is still iStock looking. PA media took over Alamy, if we didn't know, it looks like the same.

I'd agree with the "why would SS want to do this?" but I can see how a corporate merger could make both of them stronger, together, than each is, alone. SS is losing market share and customers, Getty is gaining buyer accounts, but not making more money. "Simple merge would not work because of duplicates." yes, that sure would be a mess.

And what of iStock Exclusives?

Fun to watch, I wouldn't want to try to guess why Getty is proposing this or why they think SS would accept. And then what?

ShadySue · « **Reply #33 on:** January 06, 2025, 14:19 »

Quote from: Uncle Pete on January 06, 2025, 12:17

And what of iStock Exclusives?

In theory, they could sell exclusive files on iStock, and all the rest on SS.
In practice, who knows? I've never been able to second-guess what Getty might do next.

zeljkok · « **Reply #34 on:** January 06, 2025, 14:56 »

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on January 06, 2025, 10:44

Corporate merger doesn't mean a website merger.

True. But accounting is completely different. Getty Fixed 15% vs SS Levels (+ Reset), once a month report vs real time downloads, etc. Does this stay as is? Do contributors still upload & specify vastly heterogeneous metadata on 2 sides? Are there still 2 copies of same asset even if there is single Getterstock behind? Exclusivity vs non-exclusivity. Where does the customer make the purchase if there are still 2 sites? Selling model (Price / Subscriptions etc) would have to be the same in order not to favour one side over the other from customer standpoint. Etc. These are non-trivial issues. It's different from when Big Fish (i.e. Getty) consumes (buys) small Fish (iStock), because now Fish is similar size.

For all of this single front (that includes "website merger") would make sense.

cobalt · « **Reply #35 on:** January 07, 2025, 01:04 »

Both Getty and shutterstock operate several agencies and offer many different license and price types.

I don‘t think they need to merge it all into one site.

I think they both offer all content from all their agencies internally.

They must have a system to deal with duplicates for that.

Both customer groups, i.e. those with a contract from one of the SS companies or those with a contract to one of the Getty companies will have the opportunity to access millions of new fresh files.

Getty has a huge exclusive collection and Shutterstock has loads of content istock does not have because many producers don‘t upload there.

And for the istock exclusives and also those with a getty house contract that will mean loads of fresh new customers.

The complicated and different upload systems will probably stay for quite a while.

Even SS hasn‘t integrated ss p5 envato etc into one system.

zeljkok · « **Reply #36 on:** January 07, 2025, 15:00 »

I really didn't think this would happen, but now it's here. It will be really interesting to see how these 2 vastly heterogeneous ecosystems co-exist and whether there will be unified front end or not.

One thing is certain though: Race to the bottom just got twice as fast.

ADH · « **Reply #37 on:** January 07, 2025, 15:15 »

Nothing good for us will came from this merge

elliottcowand · « **Reply #38 on:** January 07, 2025, 15:22 »

Quote from: pancaketom on January 04, 2025, 10:05

SS is one of the leaders in the price race to the bottom, Getty is one of the leaders in the percentage paid to the artist race to the bottom. Together they will deliver really exciting news.

. Not just lower commissions, but they'll probably reject more submissions as well.

zeljkok · « **Reply #39 on:** January 07, 2025, 16:52 »

Quote from: elliottcowand on January 07, 2025, 15:22

Not just lower commissions, but they'll probably reject more submissions as well.

What makes you think that? Not saying you are wrong, just curious.

wds · « **Reply #40 on:** January 07, 2025, 22:54 »

So as an example, SS bought POND5 a while ago.

- Did an SS memberships allow access to POND5 assets?
- Did POND5 memberships allow access to SS assets?

- What exactly happened with that merger?
- Was it just a way to consolidate back-end services, reduce commissions, and therefore increase profit?
- What was different from the customer viewpoint as result of that takeover?

alijaber · « **Reply #41 on:** January 08, 2025, 01:10 »

Quote from: wds on January 07, 2025, 22:54

- What exactly happened with that merger?

For us: they took 25% of the money of non-exclusives, 33% of the money of exclusives

stoker2014 · « **Reply #42 on:** January 08, 2025, 03:53 »

Quote from: wds on January 07, 2025, 22:54

So as an example, SS bought POND5 a while ago.

- Did an SS memberships allow access to POND5 assets?
- Did POND5 memberships allow access to SS assets?

- What exactly happened with that merger?
- Was it just a way to consolidate back-end services, reduce commissions, and therefore increase profit?
- What was different from the customer viewpoint as result of that takeover?

For many, sales on pond5 have become zero.

synthetick · « **Reply #43 on:** January 08, 2025, 05:21 »

This is a little bit going off on a tangent sorry, but as I am a fractal artist I was interested to see a fractal used in the official Shutterstock PDF for investors. https://investor.shutterstock.com/static-files/de522e71-d1ac-4861-9427-49719876344b (the full page background for the Appendix slide). They appeared to have got the file number and artist credit wrong (!) but I managed to find the image at https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/conceptual-illustration-black-holes-merging-space-2099127601 and was amused that its description is "black holes merging". Maybe some of us can related to the black hole analogy, lol.

OM · « **Reply #44 on:** January 08, 2025, 19:06 »

So....the rumours were true!

Year of the Dog · « **Reply #45 on:** January 09, 2025, 09:09 »

My sales on iStock have doubled since this merger was announced, and I haven't had a download on SS since the first news of the merger.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #46 on:** January 09, 2025, 12:27 »

Quote from: Brasilnut on January 04, 2025, 21:35

Here's a timeline of major mergers and acquisitions since 2009 that I put together.

Have I overlooked any other ones?

Source: https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2025/01/04/breaking-news-getty-images-and-shutterstock-discuss-potential-merger/

I thought about putting another column on "Has it benefited contributors", but it's very difficult to know for sure...except for perhaps the SS acquiring Pond5 one.

Updated chart, thanks Jo Ann for inputs.

Shutterstock Bought Rex Features in 2015 which was a direct competitor of Getty. https://www.shutterstock.com/blog/rex-features?msockid=2e522b4b6b636d5e2aa13b116a1d6c2e

Talk about interesting merger conflicts.

zeljkok · « **Reply #47 on:** January 09, 2025, 21:24 »

Quote from: Year of the Dog on January 09, 2025, 09:09

My sales on iStock have doubled since this merger was announced, and I haven't had a download on SS since the first news of the merger.

I don't think it's related, might be just a coincidence. Mine are exactly the same

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #48 on:** January 10, 2025, 13:17 »

Quote from: ShadySue on January 06, 2025, 14:19

Quote from: Uncle Pete on January 06, 2025, 12:17
And what of iStock Exclusives?
In theory, they could sell exclusive files on iStock, and all the rest on SS.
In practice, who knows? I've never been able to second-guess what Getty might do next.

Yes, right all around. They could also sell SS on Getty, but they would have to drain the cesspool, remove the stolen content, take out the garbage, find and remove AI, and take out the duplicates, (how would they decide that?) before they could make anything useful, with integrity. If SS can't check for AI, stolen or Dupes, who's going to suddenly spend the time and money, to vet the collection, before it goes up for sale on Getty?

That could happen if Getty has an urge to create a curated SS collection, where they just pick and offer only those. It's much cheaper to just add a link on the bottom of the page.

The most likely outcome will be the simplest answer. It's a corporate merger not a content merger, they will operate as divisions of the same corporation. They don't have to change what we're paid, as we are already below fair compensation and the uploads keep coming in by the millions. Getty is happy paying us 15% and having a system that's discouraging for people who upload spam or stolen images. Why would they want to change that?

As long as they offer growth and hope for gains to investors, the money will flow in, and that's all they care about. We and Microstock are an afterthought, not the main business. I don't know why people can't seem to grasp that. We don't matter. When someones asks, "don't they care about us?" or "if they paid more, they would get better quality" the answer is No, they don't care.

They don't care about us personally, they don't care about the crappy AI content that they accept, they don't care about timely or accurate reviews, or quality, they don't care about image theft or duplicates. All they care about is the business, profits and investors.

Yeah... 💯

Quote from: ShadySue on January 06, 2025, 14:19

I've never been able to second-guess what Getty might do next.

👍

zeljkok · « **Reply #49 on:** January 10, 2025, 22:37 »

Quote from: Uncle Pete on January 10, 2025, 13:17

It's a corporate merger not a content merger

As I mentioned privately I can't see benefit coming out of this. Content merger, in some shape or form, has to happen in order for this to make sense. Yes there are variations (iStock exclusives on Getty, rest on SS, etc etc) - but I tend to believe there will be some sort of 3rd, unified content platform. Naturally, this is not easy to implement (duplicates, crappy AI, list goes on). But this must have been discussed already. IT guys are probably hard on it as we speak.

Rest I agree with. They don't care about contributors, and why should they? It is about business and profit, anyone that believes otherwise is simply living in different dimension.
This merger was likely triggered in large part by Adobe rise as it took large share of the Market, and this is the response. If nothing, it should be interesting.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Getty Images and Shutterstock are reportedly "exploring a merger" (Read 4764 times)

synthetick

cobalt

Injustice for all

pancaketom

Uncle Pete

zeljkok

YadaYadaYada

Uncle Pete

ShadySue

zeljkok

cobalt

zeljkok

ADH

elliottcowand

zeljkok

wds

alijaber

stoker2014

synthetick

OM

Year of the Dog

Uncle Pete

zeljkok

Uncle Pete

zeljkok

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors