MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Has Getty Invented a New Kind of Stupid?  (Read 11421 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: May 11, 2014, 11:03 »
+24
All across the industry content providers are seeing a sudden drop in sales.

In my opinion, it's for but one reason:

Getty has put their entire inventory out for free for bloggers.

We know about the issues of internet image theft but there ARE tens of thousands of HONEST bloggers who paid for the Rights to use images.

If you're a blogger who's been paying for images and suddenly have 35 million free images to choose from, what are you going to do?

Getty is getting revenue from ad/content linking but it can't be anything close to the revenue lost from the blogger market. At least Getty can suffer financially from their stupidity.

If Getty has any sort of brains (or at least en eye on the bottom line) they will rescind this decision. The issue of image theft is a much smaller problem than losing a percentage of income, right?

For now, it remains to be seen if the Stupid continues.



Shelma1

  • stockcoalition.org
« Reply #2 on: May 11, 2014, 11:21 »
+2
Except I believe they'll use embedding to find websites that use their images and scour them for previously stolen images, then send threatening letters demanding payment...of which the contributor will not see a dime, because it's not payment to license the image.

But yes, between free embedding and DPC sales are definitely down. That's why I think it's a smart strategy for Shutterstock to target big buyers of extended licenses. These people cannot embed or steal images. They must pay to license them.

« Reply #3 on: May 11, 2014, 11:56 »
-13
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 21:19 by tickstock »

Ron

« Reply #4 on: May 11, 2014, 12:12 »
+3
These are not people that would buy images before.  It's a non-issue.
You are competing with me for the most stupid comment ever made here

« Reply #5 on: May 11, 2014, 12:16 »
+1
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 21:19 by tickstock »

Ron

« Reply #6 on: May 11, 2014, 12:38 »
0
Opinions and facts are two different things. And since when do you believe anything SS says?

Of course Jon says that, if he says SS is doomed, the shares will plummet.

The statement is ridiculous. No matter who says it.

« Reply #7 on: May 11, 2014, 12:41 »
-1
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 21:19 by tickstock »

Ron

« Reply #8 on: May 11, 2014, 12:43 »
0
Like I said, Its got nothing to do with speaking truth.

« Reply #9 on: May 11, 2014, 12:47 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 21:19 by tickstock »

« Reply #10 on: May 11, 2014, 12:48 »
+5
These are not people that would buy images before.  It's a non-issue.

While I don't necessarily agree with this, I do agree that bloggers aren't really the most profitable group for selling stock images to. That said, giving images away isn't a very healthy solution.

« Reply #11 on: May 11, 2014, 13:32 »
+4
These are not people that would buy images before.  It's a non-issue.

Don't drink that KoolAid that Getty is offering you. 

« Reply #12 on: May 11, 2014, 13:34 »
0
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 21:19 by tickstock »

MxR

« Reply #13 on: May 11, 2014, 14:24 »
+1
Getty is like a stupid lemming... running towards the cliff...

« Reply #14 on: May 11, 2014, 14:55 »
+3
These are not people that would buy images before.  It's a non-issue.


Don't drink that KoolAid that Getty is offering you.

Those are statements from Jon Oringer and Thilo Semmelbauer of Shutterstock when asked about the embed program by investors. 
http://seekingalpha.com/article/2208253-shutterstocks-sstk-ceo-jonathan-oringer-on-q1-2014-results-earnings-call-transcript?page=6&p=qanda&l=last


Same KoolAid.

Look, they'd both like to find ways to make money from images without paying producers anything.  One way to do that is to give away the images but use them to sell ads, and keep 100% of the revenue from the ads.  And one easy, obvious way to justify it  is to claim that those people would never have paid anything anyway.  It's pretty hard to dispute that claim, and watch for that group  to keep growing.   

SS doesn't yet have a program like this, but notice that Oringer was careful not to dispute Getty's justification for it.   If it looks like it's making money for Getty, SS will follow suit.


« Reply #15 on: May 11, 2014, 16:21 »
+2
They are counting on stupid (or desperate) contributors not to bow out of these ridiculous schemes. The argument that they are targeting jerks who would steal it anyway is just more self serving pap aimed to confuse the ignorant.

« Reply #16 on: May 11, 2014, 18:31 »
+3
They are counting on stupid (or desperate) contributors not to bow out of these ridiculous schemes. The argument that they are targeting jerks who would steal it anyway is just more self serving pap aimed to confuse the ignorant.

I don't know how long you have been in this game but we contributors aren't given the opportunity to bow out -at least at Istock - without closing our accounts altogether. Many of us rely on that income to make a living. So I'd appreciate if you didn't call me and other stupid or desperate.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 18:33 by Mantis »

« Reply #17 on: May 11, 2014, 18:50 »
0
newbielink:http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/getty-images-makes-35-million-images-free-in-fight-against-copyright-infringemen/ [nonactive]

40 pages of discussion, have fun :)


Yah, I know of the other thread(s) but I don't think people have put two and two together as to why sales have plummeted.

And to the person who said stealing images is a non-issue, you mean you solve the problem by giving images away for free to honest people who value the service we provide? Are you a lawyer who gets a paycheck from Getty or what?

« Reply #18 on: May 11, 2014, 18:57 »
-2
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 21:19 by tickstock »

farbled

« Reply #19 on: May 11, 2014, 19:54 »
+2
I sell a tonne to bloggers and this hasn't had any effect on my sales at all. Tempest in a teapot.

edit - and it actually may not be an issue to the Oringer's of the world. For the sake of discussion, lets assume that bloggers make up a miniscule percentage of SS's customers and if they lost them it would affect almost nothing to the company. Now, at what point is a few hundred of a few thousand sales negligible to you, the contributor, if that small percentage of buyers is your target market?
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 20:10 by farbled »

EmberMike

« Reply #20 on: May 11, 2014, 21:19 »
+2
Shutterstock has the data to back this up and the obligation to tell the truth to investors so they are probably correct in those statements.

They are telling the truth based on the data that is in front of them, but I don't think we can know just yet if they're correct. It has only been 2 months since Getty launched the embed product. We all know how small of a data set 2 months is in this business. I doubt they could see anything in 2 months that would indicate anything.


« Reply #21 on: May 12, 2014, 01:14 »
+3
I sell a tonne to bloggers and this hasn't had any effect on my sales at all. Tempest in a teapot.
So you are directly contradicting the "fact" proclaimed by Oringer (and iStock) that microstock images are only sold for advertising and not for blogging, but you're not worried?   Maybe your customers haven't cottoned on to the fact they're paying for free content yet.


Ron

« Reply #22 on: May 12, 2014, 03:03 »
+3
What happened to Tickstock (Audi 5000)? Did he get a conscious?

« Reply #23 on: May 12, 2014, 03:12 »
+2
What happened to Tickstock (Audi 5000)? Did he get a conscious?

its the first time I see someone turning into dots ;D

« Reply #24 on: May 12, 2014, 04:12 »
0
What happened to Tickstock (Audi 5000)? Did he get a conscious?

That's very strange. Changed user name and deleted all posts. Account hacked ?


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
19 Replies
9140 Views
Last post January 29, 2009, 07:26
by Phil
103 Replies
34495 Views
Last post May 19, 2009, 23:50
by KB
25 Replies
17002 Views
Last post September 07, 2010, 19:41
by RacePhoto
27 Replies
15279 Views
Last post January 06, 2013, 01:02
by RacePhoto
11 Replies
3947 Views
Last post August 03, 2013, 18:13
by LesPalenik

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors