MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: Gui Siebert (Creative Income) on May 02, 2019, 16:57
-
I stumbled upon an interesting graph when writing an article about what are the best stock agencies, in my humble opinion.
(Read it here if you are interested (http://bit.ly/stockAgencies))
It's interesting to see how Getty and iStock were the kings long ago and how things went south right when Shutterstock appeared.
On the other hand, the same appears to be happening now that Adobe Stock is here and Shutterstock stopped growing at the very same moment.
Do you guys think AdobeStock has what it takes to beat Shutterstock?
(http://creativeinco.me/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/stock-agencies-search-along-the-time-1024x541.png)
There are more graphs and data in the article and I would love to hear your opinion about the conclusions I take.
Link: "Best Websites to Sell Stock Photos & Footage (http://bit.ly/stockAgencies)"
-
Definitely not. They don't take editorial and reject a bunch of stuff.
-
Wow, the graph looks very impressive.
One of the main reasons why I left exclusivity was the feeling (that was becoming more and more intense every month) that it will be an unforgivable loss for my income not to have my portfolio on Adobe. Especially in 5 years, 10, 15 etc.
Every single image I ever made was created/enhanced/processed with Adobe products. Every single one. They are the source of all this creative content.
This is the big relief that now we have more than 2 big players. And I hope we will have more in the future. But Adobe will be at the top I'm sure.
-
Adobe's got what it takes but their lawyers are too scared to allow them to accept editorial. They can't take over till they do.
-
Adobe's got what it takes but their lawyers are too scared to allow them to accept editorial. They can't take over till they do.
Totally agree. Editorial would make a big difference there.
-
Adobe's got what it takes but their lawyers are too scared to allow them to accept editorial. They can't take over till they do.
They don’t take editorial images or video from contributors because they have previous arrangements for editorial images. Nothing to do with scared lawyers.
https://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/editorial-video-in-adobe/ (https://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/editorial-video-in-adobe/)
“Our editorial content is sourced through outside agencies at this time. We are not accepting editorial submissions from individual contributors. - Mat Hayward”
-
Adobe's got what it takes but their lawyers are too scared to allow them to accept editorial. They can't take over till they do.
They don’t take editorial images or video from contributors because they have previous arrangements for editorial images. Nothing to do with scared lawyers.
Sorry but not true. I've spoken to their content manager and it's the lawyers who won't let individual contributors submit editorial. They have deals with some news agencies for editorial for sure but's that's not why they won't let individual contributors submit.
My guess is that the contracts with the news agencies call for the news agencies to take the brunt of any lawsuits. If they start taking editorial from individuals, adobe is left holding the bag in a lawsuit as they are the only big fish.
-
Getty's estimated revenue for the year ending Sept 2018 was about $867 million according to Moody's investor services. Shutterstock 2018 revenue was $623.3 million. Adobe has made a dent, but unlike the other two companies, licensing media is not their primary business, so it isn't getting 100% of their attention.
I'd like to see Adobe really take on Shutterstock, but I think they're happy to have stock licensing as a way to bind their subscribers more tightly to them and will do just enough to make that happen; probably not more.
Getty has messed up in a million ways, but while they're saddled with massive debt and don't appear to have much in the way of innovation going on, they're still used all over the place. I think dying is overstating things, in that they're still huge.
Shutterstock has lost the plot, but momentum counts for a lot and they'll fight harder as it's their only business, so they may yet find it again.
Follow the money...
-
.
-
The lead up to the IPO and IPO itself may have been a significant factor towards SS's ascending "interest over time"
-
and Pond5 making big mistake.
sigh
-
I read you among other stock related blogs from time to time, it is good that you people share tyour knowledge.
Here is a newbies question:
Do you guys think AdobeStock has what it takes to beat Shutterstock?
Isn't in our interest the best to support all agencies (that pay well) instead of searching "A vs B vs C"?
(...asked the guy that went all the way with P5... :P )
-
I stumbled upon an interesting graph when writing an article about what are the best stock agencies, in my humble opinion.
(Read it here if you are interested ([url]http://bit.ly/stockAgencies[/url]))
It's interesting to see how Getty and iStock were the kings long ago and how things went south right when Shutterstock appeared.
On the other hand, the same appears to be happening now that Adobe Stock is here and Shutterstock stopped growing at the very same moment.
Do you guys think AdobeStock has what it takes to beat Shutterstock?
([url]http://creativeinco.me/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/stock-agencies-search-along-the-time-1024x541.png[/url])
There are more graphs and data in the article and I would love to hear your opinion about the conclusions I take.
Link: "Best Websites to Sell Stock Photos & Footage ([url]http://bit.ly/stockAgencies[/url])"
Search terms for Adobe seems wrong to me. You can't use Adobe cause most people go to their website for the software and information/forum, not stock. Also take into account that Adobe is bypassing Google to find buyers, by using search functions in creative clouds and software... so these wouldn't appear here.
Would be fun to see Adobe Stock+Fotolia thou.
-
Not sure you can draw much from search trends. I mean if you know shutterstock you'll go to shutterstock... you're unlikley to search for it. If you don't know shutterstock then you'll search for stock videos or stock photos and shuttterstock might come up in the list. I mean, any drops in numbers might just mean that they've saved that site in their bookmarks, so there might be one less person searching for it the following month, but the same amount of users/visitors. The Alexa data holds more weight from a standpoint of who the biggest agencies are, but a historical chart with Alexa data would be much more telling.