pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Getty profits decline on poor istock performance  (Read 18744 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: February 26, 2015, 00:25 »
+19
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-25/carlyle-s-getty-images-said-to-run-tight-on-cash-as-profit-drops

Doesn't look good for Getty.  Bonds have declined to junk status.  Istock declining.  Cash running out.


50%

« Reply #1 on: February 26, 2015, 02:45 »
+35
They take 80% and they still manage to get in financial troubles what do you learn on these business schools?

« Reply #2 on: February 26, 2015, 02:53 »
+23
Symptomatic of many of the companies I've worked for. Too big for their boots and sitting back on the assumption that brand loyalty and marketing bonhomie is going to paper over the cracks in their service and value. Also, pursuing the diminishing returns of short-term profitability by squeezing operational costs, bullying their suppliers and failing to capitalize on new initiatives eg. Editorial and Mobilestock etc, etc....

To be fair they (IS) are not on their own in this....like a lot of successful, fast-growth start ups they leave behind the people who say "Let's do this" and replace them with people who say "Wait a second....how much is this gonna cost?"

« Reply #3 on: February 26, 2015, 03:02 »
+23
Their real problem is that they borrowed against tomorrow to live high on the hog today, with all those fabulous bonuses and profits from ramped valuations of the company, and now repaying the loans is problematic.
Still, the bonuses are safely banked, aren't they? So the management is fine.
It's SOOOOO like Greece.

« Reply #4 on: February 26, 2015, 03:23 »
-4
Their real problem is that they borrowed against tomorrow to live high on the hog today, with all those fabulous bonuses and profits from ramped valuations of the company, and now repaying the loans is problematic.
Still, the bonuses are safely banked, aren't they? So the management is fine.
It's SOOOOO like Greece.

Its so not like Greece  ;)

« Reply #5 on: February 26, 2015, 04:27 »
+14
No surprise that istock is declining.  How many of us have removed large chunks of our portfolios or left?  They made so many changes and the site never seems to work as well as their rivals.  Its inevitable that buyers will end up looking elsewhere and then there's no reason to come back.

Going to be interesting to see how this pans out.

« Reply #6 on: February 26, 2015, 04:58 »
-1
now repaying the loans is problematic

IPO will pay off the debt. No ?

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #7 on: February 26, 2015, 05:03 »
+6
for a monopolist like Getty a loss of 10-20% is no big deal, but it's certainly a sign of the times and of their bad management.

in its defence it must be said that microstock is finally killing the whole industry once and for all so everything we've been discussing here since many years ago is finally becoming reality.

there will be always a stock industry and demand for stock images, just not as well paid and profitable as before ...

as far as we're concerned there's nothing to be happy if Getty goes down the drain .. their gigantic archive will be sold for a pittance to SS or even to Adobe and then all those expensive images will become cheap subs !

once there's no Getty around who's going to pay decent fees to us ? nobody, that's who.

and it's not just Getty but also upper-class agencies like Magnum or VII ... while here we rant and rave about oversupply the reality across the editorial/publishing industry is there's just no F ing demand as in the past and many of the old rich buyers are now bankrupt or in dire straits ... even some top war photographers have barely a pot to pis-s in and are now doing workshops in order to survive.

as i see it, the entire creative world is going to crumble due to the Internet and Digital and Globalization.
it will take 10-15 more years to create a new balance and a "new order" but the golden days will never ever come back.




« Reply #8 on: February 26, 2015, 05:17 »
+3
and it's not just Getty but also upper-class agencies like Magnum or VII

Remember that Magnum is also a valuable legacy collection - owned by the members or their heirs. It runs more like a family business. And it is a completely different business anyhow - being primarily about photographs. The big stock companies, by contrast, are essentially finance vehicles. Their primary business is finance.

even some top war photographers have barely a pot to pis-s in and are now doing workshops in order to survive.

Established photographers have always often also been involved in running classes and workshops + lecture circuit. Certainly since the early 70s anyhow.

Dook

« Reply #9 on: February 26, 2015, 07:33 »
0


as i see it, the entire creative world is going to crumble due to the Internet and Digital and Globalization.
it will take 10-15 more years to create a new balance and a "new order" but the golden days will never ever come back.
You mean US and UK creative world, not the entire creative world? Because, for some of us the golden days have just started, thanks to globalization.

« Reply #10 on: February 26, 2015, 07:41 »
+5


as i see it, the entire creative world is going to crumble due to the Internet and Digital and Globalization.
it will take 10-15 more years to create a new balance and a "new order" but the golden days will never ever come back.
You mean US and UK creative world, not the entire creative world? Because, for some of us the golden days have just started, thanks to globalization.

I would really like to know who and where  is living golden days at current time when middle class is significantly vanishing all around the globe...thanks to globalization.

The rich are getting richer and all the rest are getting poorer 
« Last Edit: February 26, 2015, 07:44 by Lizard »

« Reply #11 on: February 26, 2015, 08:28 »
+16

I don't look at my iStock stats much anymore, it's kind of just on autopilot at this point. So yesterday when my payout came in I remember thinking, "That's all??" Then in looking at my stats my earnings there are way down. Back to the dismal levels of a couple of years ago.

I think the change in credit pricing was a bad move. I don't see how buyers could possibly receive it positively. All they see is the cost of a credit going up exponentially, even if it really does end up working out pretty much the same as before.

In the end it's all the same story with iStock, and they still have the same problems in front of them. Unless they do something drastic to win back customers and instill confidence in contributors, it will just be more of this same bad news for years to come.

They can save it, but I don't think they will. Doing so would require too many rich people to be a little less rich for a while, and that will never happen up there at Getty HQ.

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #12 on: February 26, 2015, 10:37 »
+2
and it's not just Getty but also upper-class agencies like Magnum or VII

Remember that Magnum is also a valuable legacy collection - owned by the members or their heirs. It runs more like a family business. And it is a completely different business anyhow - being primarily about photographs. The big stock companies, by contrast, are essentially finance vehicles. Their primary business is finance.

even some top war photographers have barely a pot to pis-s in and are now doing workshops in order to survive.

Established photographers have always often also been involved in running classes and workshops + lecture circuit. Certainly since the early 70s anyhow.

Magnum will never die but if the trend keeps going on like this they will just turn into an art gallery or a museum sooner or later.

there's nothing wrong in doing workshops but i'm not sure it's a thing for everybody, even such a top photographer like Steve McCurry (Magnum) had to give up and admitted he's not cut for teaching.



Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #13 on: February 26, 2015, 10:51 »
+3
You mean US and UK creative world, not the entire creative world? Because, for some of us the golden days have just started, thanks to globalization.

i live in one of the cheapest countries in the world and i can tell you things are changing FAST here since the last 3-4 yrs and since the euro losing 20-25% in the recent months, so bad that i'm leaving soon and going in eastern europe where the living costs are almost on par for many things ... places like Bulgaria, Serbia, Hungary, Slovakia, beautiful places, great food, decent services and infrastructure (certainly better than where i am now).

and if you think the golden days will last forever, good luck, just look at mainland china where now the salaries in the big cities are 500-1000$ for white collar jobs ...

cheap countries with cheap production costs ? you mean seriously cheap as chips ? at this point i only see India and Nepal ... the rest of Asia has booming inflation pretty much everywhere, give it 3-5 yrs at most, the whole place is going to change radically for the worse.

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #14 on: February 26, 2015, 10:59 »
+3
They can save it, but I don't think they will. Doing so would require too many rich people to be a little less rich for a while, and that will never happen up there at Getty HQ.

and now the big question is : WHO will buy Getty for a pittance ? Adobe ? SS ? who else ?


« Reply #15 on: February 26, 2015, 11:07 »
+2
Do they really need Getty??

They already have working agencies with good communities. They can just expand on what they have?

Probably the editorial section could be interesting for a large newsagency, and creative stock macro for a specialist. But who will take their micro(midstock) section?

But maybe they can find another buyer who will "invest" in the Getty myth, who knows. It is wallstreet,anything crazy is possible, they work totally outside of normal business logic.

Maybe they will make Yuri the new CEO...at least he understands what customers really want.

H2O

« Reply #16 on: February 26, 2015, 11:21 »
+8
Could they go bankrupt and then not pay their contributors? Bigger companies have.

No Free Lunch

« Reply #17 on: February 26, 2015, 11:24 »
+1
Could they go bankrupt and then not pay their contributors? Bigger companies have.

Yes, but the amount of money that I would lose would be less that what a soup & sandwich cost at my local cafe  :-\



« Reply #18 on: February 26, 2015, 11:47 »
+2
- The big stock companies, by contrast, are essentially finance vehicles. Their primary business is finance. -
How very true. And how it shows!

Dook

« Reply #19 on: February 26, 2015, 12:59 »
0
You mean US and UK creative world, not the entire creative world? Because, for some of us the golden days have just started, thanks to globalization.

i live in one of the cheapest countries in the world and i can tell you things are changing FAST here since the last 3-4 yrs and since the euro losing 20-25% in the recent months, so bad that i'm leaving soon and going in eastern europe where the living costs are almost on par for many things ... places like Bulgaria, Serbia, Hungary, Slovakia, beautiful places, great food, decent services and infrastructure (certainly better than where i am now).

and if you think the golden days will last forever, good luck, just look at mainland china where now the salaries in the big cities are 500-1000$ for white collar jobs ...

cheap countries with cheap production costs ? you mean seriously cheap as chips ? at this point i only see India and Nepal ... the rest of Asia has booming inflation pretty much everywhere, give it 3-5 yrs at most, the whole place is going to change radically for the worse.
Hobostocker, all good points here, I agree. 
I just wanted to share with all of you here that I'm happy because I'm doing well in microstock world. I know that it won't last forever and I know that for many photographers this microstock thing is just not working. I helped many fellow photographers get into this business and most of them have already given up.
If you ever decide to move to Serbia drop me a PM, I would be happy to show you around and help you.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #20 on: February 26, 2015, 13:13 »
+1
Maybe they will make Yuri the new CEO...at least he understands what customers really want.
Wasn't he supposed to be project-managing the changes which started in September?

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #21 on: February 26, 2015, 13:14 »
+2
Could they go bankrupt and then not pay their contributors? Bigger companies have.
I'm more worried about that happens to our 'assets' in that scenario, as they have strategically renamed them.

Traditionally, that was why I went for a weekly payout. That's hardly relevant (to me) now.

« Reply #22 on: February 26, 2015, 13:29 »
+12
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-26/getty-images-outlook-blurs-as-photo-rivalry-triggers-price-war

Another story about Getty's difficulties. This glosses over how much of this has been an own goal on Getty's part, IMO. Certainly Shutterstock deserves some credit (and no one would even be mentioning Fotolia if Adobe hadn't purchased them), but they have benefitted hugely from Getty's eff-ups and crappy treatment of contributors across their various segments.

« Reply #23 on: February 26, 2015, 15:18 »
+1
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-26/getty-images-outlook-blurs-as-photo-rivalry-triggers-price-war

Another story about Getty's difficulties. This glosses over how much of this has been an own goal on Getty's part, IMO. Certainly Shutterstock deserves some credit (and no one would even be mentioning Fotolia if Adobe hadn't purchased them), but they have benefitted hugely from Getty's eff-ups and crappy treatment of contributors across their various segments.


+1
but going back to the topic of this thread, i am confused because
of the words (istock poor performance)...
didn't getty buy istock to kill it since it was more or less how it appeared to me
that is what happened. getty got what they wanted (to kill istock)
and they did.
and now they kill themselves like the shark kill and got killed.

« Reply #24 on: February 26, 2015, 15:25 »
+4
now repaying the loans is problematic

IPO will pay off the debt. No ?
No, not if they can't convince anyone to spend the money on the stock. Would you invest heavily in a company who can't pay the bills or despite millions in sales monthly  has no spare cash?


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
2810 Views
Last post July 01, 2006, 11:14
by Quevaal
19 Replies
12236 Views
Last post October 17, 2009, 02:18
by RacePhoto
22 Replies
11112 Views
Last post November 17, 2011, 17:59
by rubyroo
3 Replies
3464 Views
Last post January 07, 2016, 11:12
by Zero Talent
1 Replies
2586 Views
Last post August 23, 2018, 13:22
by ShadySue

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle