Hmm, just read Yuri's blog, and it practically boils down to this - anything that's sellable and easy to do is done and overdone and saturated to the point of being unprofitable; what's left to do is either images with much less sales potential or something that's not easy to do, which also means it is unprofitable; the bottom line is: microstock has become and will be getting increasingly more unprofitable.
I don't think food concepts or fringe business concepts will change the game - there're plenty of amazing photogs who specialized exclusively in food and worked prolifically for the last several years, that market is pretty much saturated too (it falls under the easy-to-do category); and non-mainstream business stuff is just not going to sell that much just for the reason of being not mainstream.
So looks like we're done here fellas... time to move on;-) Yuri might try to explore different subjects matters, but with his expensive production habits I doubt he'll see reasonable returns.

Has a turd in a toilet been done? I think that would be a good seller and I didn't see that on his list.

turds, yes, not turds in a toilet, that I found on DT or SS. 

Alamy have 32 million imgaes, when i do a search on one of my images it comes up with a handful of others, they all look like they were taken with a 3MP camera in 2002. Thats got to look bad for Alamy.

Have you ever searched editorial in other RM agencies ? They look exactly the same, unless they artificially pimp up the thumbnails in PHP or ASP (sharpened thumbs and adding a bit more contrast and saturation).

This look that you call "2002" is the same look book publishers like and buy.

It's micro images that are overprocessed, not RM images looking dull and washed out.
And indeed on Alamy there's plenty of scans from images shot on film in the'70, and they still sell.

This whole fad is going to fade, people are going to realise they arent photographers.  But there are going to be billions and billions of bad photos online.  We are in white noise time, wading through all the crap to get to the good, people will eventually realise its not worth holding onto the crap.

Fully agree on this.
What will people do when the internet will be flooded by billions of shots done with Instagram all looking the same and screaming "doctored with Instagram on a phone" ?

And apart this, none of these images are properly keyworded so nobody will ever find them, so it's like if they don't exist and same for Flickr and other photo sharing sites.

Artistic == Fine Art and Art Galleries
Macro == Creative

+1

The people images, which are at the top of the food chain, will always be profitable because:
A) Fashions change - you can pretty much reshoot your most successfully sold photos of the decade with new clothes. 
B) Hair styles change - even if that business suit rarely changes, the hair styles change, so you still can reshoot that young business man.
C) Technology changes -  If you shot someone with an older laptop, ipad, or a phone, those things change and down the road you will need to reshoot those people holding newer tech toys.
D) Cameras change - new camera tech is higher MP. If you shot an image at 12mp before, well if you reshoot the same thing at 36mp, it might gain you new traction as the demand for higher resolution image takes its toll.