I attempted to post this on the iStock discussion forum but it was removed before I could fill my coffee cup. I was allowed to post it on the "suggestions" forum where they are sure it will not be seen.

This is the first time I have posted here so I hope I am doing it right. The following can also be found in the iStockphoto suggestion forum. I would love to hear what others think of this idea.

iStockphoto can be saved

It is obvious from sales stats and the buzz from the online community that iStock is well on its way to crash and burn.

IF the intention of Getty is to just absorb the iStock contributor�s images into Thinkstock and Getty then, while it is a shame to dump what a couple of years ago was the top of the microstock websites, it will be done.

IF instead there is a desire by Getty to revive the once respected iStockphoto brand and recreate the stable income that both owners and contributors experienced in 2010, please consider the following.


Please look at the marketing strategy of Dominos Pizza, a US chain of pizza stores that previously marketed itself on cheap pizza and fast delivery. That was fine until most all the pizza chains offered cheap pizza and delivery. Their market share diminished because they lacked one thing - a quality product. The strategy they used is almost unheard of and thus made a big impact. They admitted their shortcomings. They said that they have heard the complaints of their customers and set about to make the improvements. They marketed themselves on the fact that they were re-inventing themselves as a pizza chain that offered cheap pizza, fast delivery, and PIZZA THAT TASTES GOOD. That definitely caught the attention of their market. They continue with this strategy to this day. See more http://www.predictableprofits.com/a-tasty-million-dollar-marketing-lesson-for-every-entrepreneur/. [nofollow]


Now if iStockphoto could just stop with the current direction they are taking and do the unthinkable � Admit they have been making mistakes AND PROGRESS TO REMEDY THOSE MISTAKES. That could catch the attention of former customers which have been leaving in droves. That could make the valuable Diamond contributors that are about to jump ship stop and listen.


Go back to 2010 when things were cooking here.
- Restore reasonable pricing structure.
- Restore and honor your original contract with contributors based on canister level, something that they can control rather that make their income dependent on the whims of iStock marketing and IT.
- Require all images admitted into the iStockphoto collections to pass the same level of inspection.
 -Stop making iStock images available on other sites for pennies or free.
The list could go on but I am sure you see the direction I am going in.


I would like to challenge you to make this announcement on Feb. 2, 2013, Groundhog Day. This would be symbolic for several reasons...

-        Historically, in the US, a ground hog emerges from its hole on Feb 2nd and if he sees his shadow he is scared back into his hole, expecting more bad weather ahead. If he does not see a looming shadow he comes out and starts exploring around due to the promise if better days coming soon.
-        The movie � Groundhog Day, Bill Murray plays Phil Connors, an arrogant and egocentric Pittsburgh TV weatherman who, during a hated assignment covering the annual Groundhog Day event in Punxsutawney, finds himself in a time loop, repeating the same day again and again. After indulging in hedonism and numerous suicide attempts, he begins to re-examine his life and priorities.
-        Finally Feb 2nd seems to be a wait and see date set by a number of iSockphoto�s valuable contributors.

Please consider making an honest attempt to restore iStockphoto to its former status as an industry leader and a business that is profitable to both owners and contributors.

If you think about the most recent events, Getty pretty much simply botched up a big snatch and run corporate scheme.

Getty thought they would flood their site with the greatest amount of photo buyer traffic out of of all their sites (iStock) with expensive Getty content, and they made this move at the start of the peak fall and winter stock content buying season. It seemed like a slam dunk and a perfectly timed master plan to rake it in for a few months and impress their new partners/owners with windfall profits never seen before. They figured they would perhaps end up marginalizing some iStock contributors when the more expensive Getty stock started mopping up the sales instead of the cheaper iStock content, but no bigee they thought. A worthwhile sacrifice. And they were so absolutely confident with their new best match results (showing mainly Getty content) that the long time iStock buyers wouldn't be phased one bit. After all, the buyers could easily customize the searches for the content in the price range they want anyway if the Getty junk was too pricey for them.

What happened is they did definitely marginalize their iStock contributors almost immediately. But what also happened was that they halfway killed off the iStock brand by losing a huge amount of its buyer site traffic plus about 50% of its monthly revenue. Whoops, didn't see that coming at all did they? Oh well. Sh*t happens, right?

So that's where it is now and it has been for nearly 4 months. Long timers with fantastic portfolios are now making half or less of what they were making just a few months ago and, no matter what rabbits Getty may try and pull out of their hat now, it's always going to be a lot too little and way too late with the buyers having already migrated to lower cost stock content solutions elsewhere.

Very few businesses, except perhaps Apple, were ever able to lose so much of their customer base and then eventually turn things around and end up back on top again. But Getty isn't dynamic in that way and never were. There is no new Getty innovation forthcoming, no buzz, no cool factor, and no great value in their iStock product line to lure new and old iStock buyers back to the table.

Their exclusive contributor base of high quality shooters will continue to keep some buyers around on the site at least, but unfortunately the business model for most exclusives who do iStock as a full time vocation are slowly finding the new raw deal that has emerged from this big Getty cock up is quickly becoming financially unsustainable.   

I think Getty probably now accepts the fact that they killed off a fair amount of their iStock traffic and business in a royally bad corporate play, but their pockets are deep enough they will just suck it up, keep their game face on, keep plodding along, and continue to look for other ways to squeeze a buck out of a quarter instead.

Sadly, the biggest losers are the contributors who lost a fantastic platform for creating and selling their work. It now may take many years before another outlet as good as iStock was comes along to allow these great contributors to sell their work in high volume to the global masses again.