Author Topic: Shuterstock about to get eaten by Getty (Read 4775 times)

gnirtS · « **on:** January 07, 2025, 07:41 »

Not received the email from SS but the other side:

Quote

Dear Creator/Contributor,

As Getty Images approaches our 30th anniversary, we are excited to share the news that Getty Images and Shutterstock have announced an agreement to merge. The company will operate under Getty Images Holdings, Inc. The official press announcement can be found here.

It’s important to note that it will take time for the transaction to close. The merger is subject to the satisfaction of customary closing conditions, including receipt of required regulatory approvals and the approval of Getty Images and Shutterstock stockholders. As a result, the merger is not closed, and each company will continue to operate independently in the interim, and it will be business as usual with respect to your relationship with Getty Images.

We are undertaking this merger in large part because we expect it to provide expanded reach for your content, support for new asset types and formats and enhanced support and tools to manage your work.

We believe in creativity. We believe in the power of imagery. We believe pre‑shot solutions represent an efficient and powerful tool for our customers. We believe in the opportunity of AI, but the need to compensate creators for the use of their work. These beliefs will not change with the transaction.

Over the coming months, as we move to close, we are committed to sharing updates.

We thank you for sharing your talent, content and trust with Getty Images and we look forward to providing expanded opportunities and capabilities going forward.

Best wishes,

Craig Peters
CEO, Getty Images

Regulatory approval may take some time here.

tupungato · « **Reply #1 on:** January 07, 2025, 08:10 »

Even if the merger is granted regulatory approval (I think it's likely), I don't think the Getty/iStock/Shutterstock websites would be merged anytime soon (if ever). They have somewhat different customer base. Their respective SEO and search result positions are too valuable to waste. Right now, Adobe would benefit most from full customer website merger of SS/iS.

Shuttershock · « **Reply #2 on:** January 07, 2025, 08:23 »

Potential to loose 30% of my earnings if they merge to one website, basically my earnings are 30% SS, 30% iStock and 30% Abode, 10% Dreamtime, Pond5 etc…….based on image sales only

sinandogan · « **Reply #3 on:** January 07, 2025, 09:38 »

Even if the companies merge, I think their websites won't merge.

stoker2014 · « **Reply #4 on:** January 07, 2025, 15:32 »

I see that Getty is acquiring Shuterstock, which means that the Shuterstock board is selling their company. The merger name is nonsense, the letter clearly states that Getty will control everything.
I think that Shuterstock's revenue will fall, and the royalty percentage will be the same as Getty's.
This is bad news.

Big Money · « **Reply #5 on:** January 08, 2025, 08:24 »

Quote from: stoker2014 on January 07, 2025, 15:32

I see that Getty is acquiring Shuterstock, which means that the Shuterstock board is selling their company. The merger name is nonsense, the letter clearly states that Getty will control everything.
I think that Shuterstock's revenue will fall, and the royalty percentage will be the same as Getty's.
This is bad news.

bingo!

SpaceStockFootage · « **Reply #6 on:** January 08, 2025, 08:39 »

Quote from: stoker2014 on January 07, 2025, 15:32

I see that Getty is acquiring Shuterstock, which means that the Shuterstock board is selling their company. The merger name is nonsense, the letter clearly states that Getty will control everything.
I think that Shuterstock's revenue will fall, and the royalty percentage will be the same as Getty's.
This is bad news.

It's a merger. The letter doesn't clearly state that Getty will control everything. If the Shutterstock board were selling their company, then Shutterstock shareholders wouldn't own 45.3% of the shares of the new company after the merger... and there wouldn't be six Shutterstock board members on the board of the new company. Sure, Getty is getting the better end of the stick, but they're worth more so it makes sense. But hey, just make stuff up as you see fit... it's what we've come to expect by now, and we wouldn't have it any other way. It's a refreshing reprieve from reality.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #7 on:** January 08, 2025, 08:51 »

Interesting take on the Getty/Shutterstock news from the Millwaukee Independent

https://www.milwaukeeindependent.com/explainers/big-photo-getty-images-shutterstock-merge-3-7b-deal-form-new-visual-content-powerhouse/

So customers feel their situation was sidelined by the happy-talk from the two CEOs at yesterday's conference call:

"Representatives of Shutterstock have begun to offer reassurances to its subscribers, specifically telling the “Milwaukee Independent” that in the near term, nothing would change in how Shutterstock customers license images, videos, and other media. A company spokesperson also explained that there would be no immediate impact on how Shutterstock subscribers sourced, purchased, or managed content.

The merger is expected to offer customers more options to license content, as a benefit from the combined libraries. But despite belated efforts to reassure existing clients, the manner in which Getty Images and Shutterstock unveiled their deal has left some uneasy.

In many creative and editorial circles, the announcement sparked initial concern from businesses that rely on Shutterstock images. The fear is that the more expensive and stricter licensing by Getty Images would dictate massive changes.

Such apprehension was magnified by what critics say was an overly celebratory tone from the merging corporations by highlighting the revenue from their stocks, yet offering minimal public-facing information about the benefits to their customers.

“Both companies put all their energy into celebrating the new massive value and stock revenue windfall, while completely omitting any message or information to their extensive customer base,” said a consultant for a small nonprofit that relies heavily on stock photography via Reddit. “That only escalates the fear that policies and pricing structures could shift with little warning. It’s left people feeling anxious about how the transformation might jeopardize budgets or access to content.”

More to read:

https://www.reddit.com/r/photography/comments/1hvq4np/getty_images_and_shutterstock_to_merge/

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/getty-images-merger-shutterstock-1236103000/

https://www.fastcompany.com/91256130/getty-images-shutterstock-merge-3-7-billion-deal

The above article mentions competition from genAI images; both CEOs dismissed any impact on their licensing from genAI in the Q&A section of yesterday's conference call. Either they were just spouting the party line, or possibly that isn't really a major factor in deciding to merge?

"The merger comes at a time when companies that use still images are facing increased competition from images generated by artificial intelligence. The companies said Tuesday that they have complementary portfolios and that a merger will provide customers with a broader array still imagery, video, music, 3D, and other media."

There's a lot of overlap in the collections.

bennu99 · « **Reply #8 on:** January 08, 2025, 09:18 »

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on January 08, 2025, 08:51

Interesting take on the Getty/Shutterstock news from the Millwaukee Independent

https://www.milwaukeeindependent.com/explainers/big-photo-getty-images-shutterstock-merge-3-7b-deal-form-new-visual-content-powerhouse/

So customers feel their situation was sidelined by the happy-talk from the two CEOs at yesterday's conference call:

"Representatives of Shutterstock have begun to offer reassurances to its subscribers, specifically telling the “Milwaukee Independent” that in the near term, nothing would change in how Shutterstock customers license images, videos, and other media. A company spokesperson also explained that there would be no immediate impact on how Shutterstock subscribers sourced, purchased, or managed content.

The merger is expected to offer customers more options to license content, as a benefit from the combined libraries. But despite belated efforts to reassure existing clients, the manner in which Getty Images and Shutterstock unveiled their deal has left some uneasy.

In many creative and editorial circles, the announcement sparked initial concern from businesses that rely on Shutterstock images. The fear is that the more expensive and stricter licensing by Getty Images would dictate massive changes.

Such apprehension was magnified by what critics say was an overly celebratory tone from the merging corporations by highlighting the revenue from their stocks, yet offering minimal public-facing information about the benefits to their customers.

“Both companies put all their energy into celebrating the new massive value and stock revenue windfall, while completely omitting any message or information to their extensive customer base,” said a consultant for a small nonprofit that relies heavily on stock photography via Reddit. “That only escalates the fear that policies and pricing structures could shift with little warning. It’s left people feeling anxious about how the transformation might jeopardize budgets or access to content.”

More to read:

https://www.reddit.com/r/photography/comments/1hvq4np/getty_images_and_shutterstock_to_merge/

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/getty-images-merger-shutterstock-1236103000/

https://www.fastcompany.com/91256130/getty-images-shutterstock-merge-3-7-billion-deal

The above article mentions competition from genAI images; both CEOs dismissed any impact on their licensing from genAI in the Q&A section of yesterday's conference call. Either they were just spouting the party line, or possibly that isn't really a major factor in deciding to merge?

"The merger comes at a time when companies that use still images are facing increased competition from images generated by artificial intelligence. The companies said Tuesday that they have complementary portfolios and that a merger will provide customers with a broader array still imagery, video, music, 3D, and other media."

There's a lot of overlap in the collections.

This looks more like a take over than the presented "merger". Basically Shutterstock brings itself, Turbosquid, Pond5 and Envato on the Getty's plate.

stoker2014 · « **Reply #9 on:** January 08, 2025, 10:28 »

Quote from: bennu99 on January 08, 2025, 09:18

This looks more like a take over than the presented "merger". Basically Shutterstock brings itself, Turbosquid, Pond5 and Envato on the Getty's plate.

+100

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #10 on:** January 08, 2025, 15:30 »

Well, it can’t get worse. So far $6 this month on SS while Adobe is already at $80.

stoker2014 · « **Reply #11 on:** January 08, 2025, 15:38 »

At this rate, Getty will soon buy Adobe.

Stockhome Syndrome · « **Reply #12 on:** January 08, 2025, 15:40 »

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on January 08, 2025, 15:30

Well, it can’t get worse. So far $6 this month on SS while Adobe is already at $80.

Yes, same here. My ShutterStock is earning about $3-$5/day so far this month. Really bad.

Amazed how things can drop off a cliff so quickly. Where did the customers go? I guess Adobe. Because it sure ain't Pond5.

Pacesetter · « **Reply #13 on:** January 08, 2025, 16:25 »

What happened to Shutterstock Inc share price? The euphoria didn't last long.

I see this as Shutterstock admitting defeat.

I thought after the 2021 stock coalition attempt that it didn't work out. Well turns out it did. Quite surprising to see that the number of irate contributors following the cash grab were themselves customers, or know customers personally or worked for customers who were large organization subscribers.

The message got out there and collectively a sizeable part of Shutterstock's customer base left, probably redirecting their business to Adobe, and thus never to return, and along with that, their share price and profits with it.

Not that I think iStock is much better so I suppose this 'merger' is like birds of the same feather.

RalfLiebhold · « **Reply #14 on:** January 08, 2025, 17:13 »

Quote from: Stockhome Syndrome on January 08, 2025, 15:40

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on January 08, 2025, 15:30
Well, it can’t get worse. So far $6 this month on SS while Adobe is already at $80.

Yes, same here. My ShutterStock is earning about $3-$5/day so far this month. Really bad.

Amazed how things can drop off a cliff so quickly. Where did the customers go? I guess Adobe. Because it sure ain't Pond5.

Also had a comparatively bad day. In December for the same downloads, income would have been around twice as high.

However, my impression is that customers are definitely not running away from Shutterstock.

Only the new year reset sucks.

cobalt · « **Reply #15 on:** January 08, 2025, 17:31 »

In the presentation file they said both companies together had only 1.4 million subscribers. Over 200 countries...

We are selling into an incredibly tiny market. I always suspected this, but it is interesting to get confirmation.

Piss of producers who are also often designers and recommend agencies to their clients, then customers will leave.

Also customers follow the upload streams of good and interesting content.

Adobe is winning without changing anything, because they understand the producers are their partners, not their enemy.

I do see a little silver lining, Getty likes to raise prices.

If the competition from SS is essentially gone, prices can rise.

The downward pressure should be stopped, because they now even own envato.

But integrating these companies will keep them busy, which means Adobe can keep working with less competition.

Pacesetter · « **Reply #16 on:** January 08, 2025, 17:43 »

Quote from: cobalt on January 08, 2025, 17:31

Adobe is winning without changing anything, because they understand the producers are their partners, not their enemy.

Indeed, very well said.

cobalt · « **Reply #17 on:** January 08, 2025, 17:59 »

The other questions is how many relevant producers are there?

While in some places millions are registered on paper, actual producers who make the effort to understand the market, we are a small group.

Adobe understands these dynamics very well.

So did the old Shutterstock.

We are living in interesting times.

Which agency should we recommend?

Brasilnut · « **Reply #18 on:** January 08, 2025, 18:27 »

Maybe 3 years from now this will be considered a "good day at ShutterGetty"?

Here's my Jan 8 results...

gnirtS · « **Reply #19 on:** January 08, 2025, 19:14 »

Quote from: Brasilnut on January 08, 2025, 18:27

Maybe 3 years from now this will be considered a "good day at ShutterGetty"?

Here's my Jan 8 results...

I "sold" 2 video clips today on SS for $0.25 each. I cant wait to see sub cent videos on GettyStock in the future.

zeljkok · « **Reply #20 on:** January 08, 2025, 19:40 »

Similar here. But I vote for "Getterstock" moniker

pancaketom · « **Reply #21 on:** January 08, 2025, 20:28 »

don't you think "Gutterstock" makes more sense?

Mrblues101 · « **Reply #22 on:** January 08, 2025, 23:20 »

The industry has been dying since the creation of AI. I think what will happen in the next few years is that the biggest companies will start buying the smallest ones until only one company takes over the little market that is left...

cobalt · « **Reply #23 on:** January 08, 2025, 23:52 »

In the webcast about the merger both companies said ai had zero influence on sales and no loss occured. On the contrary their ai tools brought additional customers.

On Adobe the ai collection is a roaring success and many contributors make fantastic money with ai, while non ai ports report rising income as well.

Please stick to facts, not fantasy.

ss cut royalties drastically so produvers lost a lot of income.

As a result Adobe got recommended and preferred by the producer community.

zeljkok · « **Reply #24 on:** January 09, 2025, 01:36 »

Quote from: pancaketom on January 08, 2025, 20:28

don't you think "Gutterstock" makes more sense?

Touche!

Stay safe down there tom

zeljkok · « **Reply #25 on:** January 09, 2025, 01:38 »

Quote from: cobalt on January 08, 2025, 23:52

On Adobe the ai collection is a roaring success and many contributors make fantastic money with ai, while non ai ports report rising income as well.

Please stick to facts, not fantasy.

You live in fantasy world my dear. AI is driving hard stake through Microstock coffin, led by Firefly horror

Shuttershock · « **Reply #26 on:** January 09, 2025, 02:18 »

Quote from: cobalt on January 08, 2025, 23:52

In the webcast about the merger both companies said ai had zero influence on sales and no loss occured. On the contrary their ai tools brought additional customers.

On Adobe the ai collection is a roaring success and many contributors make fantastic money with ai, while non ai ports report rising income as well.

Please stick to facts, not fantasy.

ss cut royalties drastically so produvers lost a lot of income.

As a result Adobe got recommended and preferred by the producer community.

I have found SS to be doing better than Adobe out of the last 3 months, at least for me anyway, based on images. In Jan so far SS are beating Adobe for myself, this hasn’t been the case for me before.

cobalt · « **Reply #27 on:** January 09, 2025, 02:35 »

Good to hear it is picking up for you. But producers who had 4-6k a month in 2021 are now reporting they earn 4-600 dollars.

This means they acnnot invest into expensive model productions for ss, or adobe is the one that has to pay the bills, while ss basically gets a free ride.

Or people send the outtakes and beta shots.

cobalt · « **Reply #28 on:** January 09, 2025, 02:39 »

Quote from: zeljkok on January 09, 2025, 01:38

Quote from: cobalt on January 08, 2025, 23:52

On Adobe the ai collection is a roaring success and many contributors make fantastic money with ai, while non ai ports report rising income as well.

Please stick to facts, not fantasy.

You live in fantasy world my dear. AI is driving hard stake through Microstock coffin, led by Firefly horror

Then you should quickly run and do something else.

Stock is over for you.

Good luck with your journey.

Stocker2015 · « **Reply #29 on:** January 09, 2025, 03:14 »

Very bad news for thousands of photographers all around the world. Shutterstock changed the rules few years ago and today they came to the end of the road. Now, there are some questions:

1. Will shuttetstock.com remain and contributors continue sell images or videos?
2. Will the Shutterstock database be merged to Getty?
3. Will Getty select only a few millions of photos for their database?

We will wait and see

Mimi the Cat · « **Reply #30 on:** January 09, 2025, 04:30 »

I'll keep the shutterstock account open until the merger happens then delete everything.

I'm lucky if I make $50 a month now compared to $300 to $400 per month a few years ago.

I'm sick of their squeezing contributors

Mrblues101 · « **Reply #31 on:** January 09, 2025, 04:50 »

Quote from: Mimi the Cat on January 09, 2025, 04:30

I'll keep the shutterstock account open until the merger happens then delete everything.

I'm lucky if I make $50 a month now compared to $300 to $400 per month a few years ago.

I'm sick of their squeezing contributors

Same here mate

cobalt · « **Reply #32 on:** January 09, 2025, 05:56 »

Both Shutterstock and Getty have bought several agencies over the years and they have always kept them open and running, they have never merged it all into one.

I think this has something to do with search engine presence and they can offer different licensing types and also the agencies might be more active in different countries or markets.

So personally I am not worried.

Customers, especially high end customer,s are offered access to all content via internal marketplaces that you cannot see from outside.

The biggest risk is what will happen to royalties.

The licensing prices might rise, because they can offer customers a lot more content.

If the customers want cheaper content, they will have to go to much smaller agencies like depositphotos or freepik or some of the other smaller players out there.

But if shutterstock and getty don't have to fight each other with cheaper prices, in principle prices can go up. Adobe was never cheap and targets mostly enterprise customers.

I hope that Adobe pays 33/35% for photo/video will help prevent a drastic drop in royalties.

We will see.

Injustice for all · « **Reply #33 on:** January 09, 2025, 06:12 »

actually since the beginning of the year SS has been doing better than Adobe for me,although I don't think it will last,and soon Adobe will be back to normal.

In any case,it's nice to see some good video sales and above-normal royalties on SS too,considering that I haven't uploaded to SS since September 2023.

in my opinion the merger with Getty will bring more customers on both platforms,it is plausible to think that it will be possible to reach Getty customers also from SS,the problem is that knowing Getty,they will probably bring SS to 15% non-exclusive,but we can't know yet.

Adobe is and remains the best agency in my opinion,and the millions of AI contents uploaded every week make no difference,what in my opinion makes the difference is the number of contributors.

It doesn't matter whether there will be billions of contents on Adobe or not,but the biggest problem that AI is bringing is the amount of contributors that is increasing,because to produce AI content you don't need expensive equipment,or being in particular locations,or paying models,and is accessible to everyone in a very simple way without particular knowledge.

with the increase in contributors the slice of the pie becomes smaller,because in my opinion a program can easily manage billions of contents,but then dividing customer requests by an excessive number of contributors I think is a different story.

but I also think Adobe will have factored this in too,I'm pretty sure they saw this coming too and we'll all continue to earn more the same over time.

although I admit that at the moment the situation appears rather dramatic!

cobalt · « **Reply #34 on:** January 09, 2025, 06:20 »

But they don't divide customer requests over contributors. They serve up content based on what customers like and the algos don't care at all how much money you make.

As long as you upload content that the ai people have not produced by the millions you will be fine. Avoid the mass duplicates, do your own thing, make sure your port looks personal to you and unique.

And personally I think the value of camera photos and camera video will go up, also because it is needed to train future ai models.

Which is why this year I am pivoting back to camera action and much less ai.

Also gives me content to go everywhere, especially video sales should increase nicely.

Longterm my goal is 1- 2k a month from video, 2k a month from images including camera and ai content.

And then we will get dataset or ai use royalties, which will probably grow nicely over time.

I will probably need 20k videos and 30k good images to get near that goal.

We will see.

Julied83 · « **Reply #35 on:** January 09, 2025, 07:22 »

It might be the reason why my last new upload don't get review for days on both agency -_-

LouisPhotos · « **Reply #36 on:** January 09, 2025, 08:16 »

will istock will desapear ?

Injustice for all · « **Reply #37 on:** January 09, 2025, 09:39 »

@Cobalt "the algos don't care at all how much money you make".

You can't know this,and I can't know either.

in my opinion,everything follows a well-defined program,and everything works exactly as it should work,and nothing happens by chance,if it weren't like this it would be chaos.

of course it also depends on what you produce,this is certainly a key part,but it is not the only variable.

@LouisPhotos no,Istock won't disappear.

LouisPhotos · « **Reply #38 on:** January 09, 2025, 10:19 »

i hope so because i have a lot of photo there and make money.

cobalt · « **Reply #39 on:** January 09, 2025, 10:41 »

The driving force is customer interactions, not chaos and not a magical computer program "looking after" contributors and "distributing" sales to us.

That would make zero sense and remove all incentive to understand customer needs..

Customers are the only people that matter for agencies. As it should be.

Mantis · « **Reply #40 on:** January 09, 2025, 10:59 »

Quote from: sinandogan on January 07, 2025, 09:38

Even if the companies merge, I think their websites won't merge.

But their 1 cent royalties will.

Injustice for all · « **Reply #41 on:** January 09, 2025, 11:45 »

Quote from: cobalt on January 09, 2025, 10:41

The driving force is customer interactions, not chaos and not a magical computer program "looking after" contributors and "distributing" sales to us.

That would make zero sense and remove all incentive to understand customer needs..

Customers are the only people that matter for agencies. As it should be.

but there's no point in insisting,because as I said,you can't know and I don't know either.

in my opinion everything is not so black and white,but it also has many shades of grey,and one thing does not necessarily exclude the other.

why you say:"That would make zero sense and remove all incentive to understand customer needs"

not necessarily,and a well-defined program does not exclude the needs of customers and the importance of what is produced.

In my opinion it's not all so black and white,but there are many nuances.

but like I said,this is just my opinion,I can't know,and neither can you,nor anyone else.

and now I think that's enough because we are deviating too much from the main theme of this discussion!

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #42 on:** January 09, 2025, 13:59 »

I always thought we were being lied to, by SS mostly, when they talked about the potential market and gains, from all the buyers that they hadn't made into customers. The 1.4 million in the world, is probably a stagnant or declining number. AI, free, pick something, it doesn't matter. The fact is, the numbers are declining.

Old data, but I don't see anything that would change the number, as people who worked Microstock, have left, and new people, with the get rich with AI and stealing, might have increased. 2018 Shutterstock, contributors with over 1,000 images. 17,877 Yet we heard and read about the millions of contributors. People signed up, people left. 35,000 is a nice number, for the top, and that doesn't mean active accounts, just accounts that are still open on SS, Adobe or iStock.

How many people are exclusive on IS? The rest of the images are likely to be the same as what SS has. The exception is, SS people who left when the new plan was introduced and SS contributors who don't bother with iStock because it's too difficult to add new work. The difference might just come down to, how many exclusives does IS have, and the rest are mostly the same images.

To end some of the rumors and speculation, here's the deal and the offer:

As per the deal, Shutterstock shareholders can elect to receive either $28.84870 per share in cash, or 13.67237 shares of Getty Images, or a mix of 9.17 shares of Getty Images plus $9.50 in cash for each Shutterstock share they own.

Based on the common shares outstanding as of the signing date, the total consideration payable by Getty Images would consist of $331 million in cash and 319.4 million shares of Getty Images.

At the close of the deal, the combined company will be 54.7 percent owned by Getty Images stockholders and 45.3 percent owned by Shutterstock stockholders.

Anyone buying SSTK at $30 is going to get $28.85 back per share, which doesn't make sense on the surface. However, if they take the 13.67 shares of GETY and it goes up, they could be earning much more. I'll show the numbers, as of today, and at the low end. Every share of SSTK at $30, if converted to 13.67 shares of GETY, at the low value of $2.50 would be worth $34.18 instead of $30. (I won't be calculating the split with the shares and money)

If someone buys SSTK at $30 a share they made $6 a share more than the cash buyout offer. Round numbers, thank you.

Members of the SSTK BOD will be on the board of GETY. This is a merger, not a take over or buyout.

Now about our future. What will the future bring? Who the heck knows. Things could improve or go down the sewer and get worse than ever. They could end up the same. I'm not counting on anything happening that will make us all more money, and if I had to bet, I'd say, we'll all make less. But how or what or what's going to happen, is just wild guessing, until the merger is approved and completed and the board gets together and figures out, what will make the new corporation the most money.

You can bet it's not going to be, by giving us a raise. On the more positive side, if we sell more, because of this, then we'll make more.

Back to the first line of this post. If the market is limited and the shares of that market are divided by SSTK, GETY and ADBE, (or PA News) then they are just moving the same buyers from one place to another, and not creating new business. Investors want growth and diversification. This merger is consolidation.

Oh one more thing.

None of the big three needs to buy any of the dregs and bottom feeders. They will go out of business and are insignificant as competition, if they stay open for business, through the next few years.

Pepsi. Coke, and Unilever are dominant. Coke is the smallest of those three in total sales size, because Unilever is more diversified. Market Share and dollars, those three are roughly 90% of all beverage sales in the world. Sure they want more, but back to Stock Photos. Getty/Shutterstock and Adobe are going to control the majority of all stock photo sales in the world, after this deal.

cobalt · « **Reply #43 on:** January 09, 2025, 14:30 »

The interesting thing about the low number of combined subscribers, is that the opinion of the producers actually matters.

Shutterstock started declining when designers started migrating more to Adobe and either stopped uploading or uploaded less.

Adobe offers 33/35%, that will hopefully not change.

Now, on paper both together have a huge number of producers. So I can imagine some paper pushers saying..oh let us cut royalties down to the ss level we will make so much more money....

They can obviously do that...but it will lead to even more content migration to Adobe.

And producers only recommending Adobe.

Losing clients this way is a slow process of course, but is making Adobe stronger really a good idea?

I would think now that they can offer more content, it is a good opportunity to raise prices.

In the other article customers were rightfully concerned about that, especially if it comes abruptly.

It will also be interesting to see how things develop at smaller places like deposit or dreamstime. They might see an influx of smaller clients.

But for this year, I doubt we see changes to anything relevant for us.

ADH · « **Reply #44 on:** January 09, 2025, 15:06 »

Quote
I would think now that they can offer more content, it is a good opportunity to raise prices.

[/quote]

Raising prices doesn’t mean more money for producers

cobalt · « **Reply #45 on:** January 09, 2025, 16:05 »

Especially if they combine it with cutting royalties, I know.

"Exciting news"...but perhaps somebody gets tired of the stupid game.

Why not build for the longterm future and build something with a win win win for customers agency and producers???

They have a chance to do it the right way...

gnirtS · « **Reply #46 on:** January 09, 2025, 18:05 »

Quote from: Injustice for all on January 09, 2025, 09:39

@Cobalt "the algos don't care at all how much money you make".

You can't know this,and I can't know either.[\quote]

Indeed we cant know that. BUT from SS point of view, if lower level customers make sales and its weighted towards them then they make more profit per same consumer price as there's less commission to pay out.

cobalt · « **Reply #47 on:** January 09, 2025, 19:07 »

injustice and me are usually playing ping pong about the adobe algos where the royalty is fixed

but you are right, agencies with multiple royalty levels can benefit financially by promoting the lower tier files.

another reason why fixed royalty is better, it removes evil suspicions.

MicroVet · « **Reply #48 on:** January 10, 2025, 05:30 »

Quote from: cobalt on January 08, 2025, 17:31

I do see a little silver lining, Getty likes to raise prices.

If the competition from SS is essentially gone, prices can rise.

You're assuming that Getty and SS raising prices means they'll pay more to artists. Absolutely wrong.

I'm on the stock business since 2007 (living exclusively out of it) and remember when SS raised what they paid to contributors for each download every year following the raise of the subscriptions to their clients. And they created the tiers that paid the artist up to $0.38 for every subscription sale.

After a few years SS stopped raising the payment per download, even if they kept raising the prices for customers. And finally they cut the $0.38 per subscription download to the current $0.10 even if you get to the higher tiers where you'd be supposed to earn more. And in all this they always raised the prices for clients.

There won't be any raise for artists even if they triple the licenses price.

Injustice for all · « **Reply #49 on:** January 10, 2025, 06:07 »

Quote from: cobalt on January 09, 2025, 19:07

injustice and me are usually playing ping pong about the adobe algos where the royalty is fixed

but you are right, agencies with multiple royalty levels can benefit financially by promoting the lower tier files.

another reason why fixed royalty is better, it removes evil suspicions.

true!

regarding Adobe,but in the end in my opinion we are both right,because one thing does not exclude the other.

regarding instead the merger between SS and Getty,it will most likely be possible to reach Getty customers by selling on SS and Shutterstock customers by continuing to contribute on Istock.

imo this merger will lead to an increase in customers and sales on both these agencies,but it is also very likely that a fixed 15% on non-exclusive royalties will also be imposed on SS.

It is also possible that content on SS will be subject to a single use license with connect sales,in short I believe that SS will become Getty style,but clearly it is still too early to say.

ShadySue · « **Reply #50 on:** January 10, 2025, 07:03 »

Quote from: MicroVet on January 10, 2025, 05:30

There won't be any raise for artists even if they triple the licenses price.

Well, that would be assuming they'd cut our already low commissions by another 66%, because if our share stayed the same, we'd get the same 3x increase.

cobalt · « **Reply #51 on:** January 10, 2025, 07:10 »

@micro

the old ss was fantastic. they saw producers as their partners, just like their customers.

that is why many people uploaded only there, some had ports with 50k files and only with ss.

not anymore.

their new attitude started a migration to adobe, who changed...nothing and suddenly got more interesting content.

if the merged company goes the ss way and production actually becomes unpayable if you live in us or europe, then even more content will be ging to only ss.

i hope they work in a sensible manner, but both companies now have a track record of change things drastically first, deal with the problems later...

we will see.

i hope the merger brings some peace and stability to the industry.

but...they now have many more producers and we are just useless ants...easy to replace...

i am trying to be optimistic, because if it is done right, the merger could be a good thing.

fotoVoyager · « **Reply #52 on:** January 10, 2025, 09:00 »

The likeliest tack they'll take is to tell us that because they've massively increased the customers available to artists through the merger, especially iStock exclusives, they are reducing royalty percentages and increasing targets, but say they expect the amount we receive to remain the same. Or they may do similar if and when they raise prices.

cobalt · « **Reply #53 on:** January 10, 2025, 09:17 »

The problem is that the returns on SS no longer pays for model released production. Many high quality producers with large people ports saying they now earn 400 where they used to earn 4000.

If istock copies that, income will drop drastically.

Then we really only have Adobe as a reliable platform.

But only Adobe is not enough for quality people production.

And on Adobe you have competition from ai people.

So working with real people, mia, a team, might become something for macrostock only.

If producer income is lowered the content will be split into hobby mobile phone images, ai production and real genuine daily life people and locations only for getty house, stocksy or smaller production houses.

But perhaps the prices for this type of content can become premium again.

Good enough and cheap - ai.

Real people production, high end prices.

I will just stick to video for this year.

Simple and easy.

Mimi the Cat · « **Reply #54 on:** January 10, 2025, 11:12 »

Quote from: LouisPhotos on January 09, 2025, 08:16

will istock will desapear ?

Will Bigstock dissappear too

MicroVet · « **Reply #55 on:** January 10, 2025, 11:46 »

Quote from: Mimi the Cat on January 10, 2025, 11:12

Will Bigstock dissappear too

If it did, people would only notice it three moths from now in the best case scenario.

08stock08 · « **Reply #56 on:** January 10, 2025, 11:50 »

What I expect from this merger:
1. The layered Levels on SS must go away. As it resets every year, no matter what kind of super star you are, you start from Zero again while the customer pays unlayered price.
2. Getty should bring the simple submission structure from SS.
3. The earned revenue from sales must be reported daily or as sale happens. One needs not to wait till month end to find how much is the earning.
4. It is pain to see the SS sales from last few years. I continued with the trust that someday new leadership will turn-around things for better.

Overall, it is good to see rusty and old SS leadership going away. The worst nightmare was if SS would have taken over Istock. In recent times, there had been crackdown on Blackbox and it should continue.
At the end it should be a fair game for everyone. We need to be paid better.

MicroVet · « **Reply #57 on:** January 10, 2025, 11:55 »

Quote from: ShadySue on January 10, 2025, 07:03

Quote from: MicroVet on January 10, 2025, 05:30
There won't be any raise for artists even if they triple the licenses price.
Well, that would be assuming they'd cut our already low commissions by another 66%, because if our share stayed the same, we'd get the same 3x increase.

Haven't they done exactly that for the past 13 years or so several times? Increasing prices for clients but keeping the same payment to artists or even lower it?

They cut my $0.38 per subscription download to $0.10 with the promise of higher payment on top tiers. Not only the top tiers payed less than the 0.38, I barely ever got more than 0.10 no matter the tier I'm in.

If you consider the price increases for clients what drop have we suffered? 90% or more? Since barely anything happened to them from the artists front, what is stopping them to do even worse?

cobalt · « **Reply #58 on:** January 10, 2025, 12:07 »

And...inspite of cutting our royalties drastically, then trying to buy up the agencies the content literally fled to, they keep losing clients and revenue and their stock price dropped drastically.

The connection that the stock producer is often also a designer or media buyer and recommends agency contracts to clients was totally lost on them.

They kicked out the ss that made the company great and didn't bring in people who understand the media market.

But Getty should understand.

And if the merged company goes the ss way...Adobe will just become bigger, smaller companies will get better content and the cycle of producers leaving the agencies that treat them badly...will just continue.

Customers leaving is not an abrupt process, but they have published a number of only 1.4 mllion subscription clients over 200 countries. That is a very vulnerable number.

And many are Adobe software customers already.

zeljkok · « **Reply #59 on:** January 11, 2025, 21:18 »

Quote from: cobalt on January 10, 2025, 12:07

And many are Adobe software customers already.

And that is the real reason for this merger. They sat down and tried to figure how to fight Adobe drain. This is why it won't be simple corporate merger, with 2 separate sites staying as is; significant change is coming to content in order to make new (merged) offering more attractive to customers. Will it work - I don't know; but I wouldn't underestimate it; both Getty and SS have been around for long time and know business well.

cobalt · « **Reply #60 on:** January 12, 2025, 03:50 »

.

i don‘t think it makes a difference for our sales if they just have a large internal marketplace or even do a full merger.

the question is - what will they do to our royaltiies?

because I am sure those will be streamlined across all platforms.

Brasilnut · « **Reply #61 on:** January 12, 2025, 07:38 »

Quote from: cobalt on January 12, 2025, 03:50

the question is - what will they do to our royaltiies?

because I am sure those will be streamlined across all platforms.

At least looking at my own numbers, Shutterstock currently isn't far off from the 15% royalties that iStock non-exclusives pay.

Therefore, we may not see much difference in the average prices at micros once they streamlined. Average prices have really crashed at SS since they introduced those ridiculous levels scam and reduced our minimum subs to 10cents from 38 cents (also whatever happened to those $2.88+ on-demand-downloads).

Footage average prices have also come crashing down at the 3 major agencies. Seems as if no difference in selling HD or 4K.

More info here: https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2025/01/11/getty-and-shutterstock-merger-what-it-means-for-contributors/

Another discussion for those with images on Getty exclusive and Shutterstock Offset at the higher-end of prices. Lots of behind-the-scenes discussions going on I'm sure.

If/when the two portals merge, what will happen to the same assets at the difference agencies? This seems like a clear loss for us. I have some 11,000 assets at both iStock and SS which are duplicated.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #62 on:** January 12, 2025, 15:21 »

Quote from: ShadySue on January 10, 2025, 07:03

Quote from: MicroVet on January 10, 2025, 05:30
There won't be any raise for artists even if they triple the licenses price.
Well, that would be assuming they'd cut our already low commissions by another 66%, because if our share stayed the same, we'd get the same 3x increase.

If we get 15% of $1 = $0.15, and they raise prices 3x to $3 for $0.45, (as MicroVet's example). We'll get more. The basic math is unavoidable.

I'm not suggesting they will raise prices or raise our commissions, just that as proposed, if they raise prices, we will get paid more at the same 15%.

I don't see collection mergers, because of the complications in the different formats and the data. I do see links, ads, and suggestions. Even the idea that one search for all images, is flawed and unlikely, because of the CV for IS and Getty vs the vocabulary allowed on SS. It is possible to have a credit system, credit packs, subscriptions, where images from both/either are offered at the same rate.

Content collections, image catalogs, whatever you want to call them, will not be merged, that's my prediction. A crossover offering, best images, portfolio, curated, could be possible.

cobalt · « **Reply #63 on:** January 12, 2025, 15:24 »

Good point, they could easily bring out curated collections for a genre or style where editors bring content together from all platforms.

These would save customers a lot of time.

zeljkok · « **Reply #64 on:** January 12, 2025, 15:39 »

Prices might be changed, but contributor commissions unlikely to get better (only worse).

This merger will be 2 stage process:

1) Major change how content is offered to customers (new subscription plans? Incentives? Content reorg (Editorial/Getty)? etc etc. Already discussed and agreed upon before merger was announced, just kept under the tight lid for now)

2) Unified Front End. This will come 3-6 months after First Stage is announced.

cobalt · « **Reply #65 on:** January 12, 2025, 16:31 »

If there is no unified front end for the companies they already own, not even after more than 10 years of owning them…why would they do it now?

What advantage would it offer?

For producers it is also best if there are many marketplaces, because not everything sells everywhere and files can find different bestseller positions if there are more platforms.

ADH · « **Reply #66 on:** January 13, 2025, 00:03 »

Guess who is going to pay for the merge…..

cascoly · « **Reply #67 on:** January 13, 2025, 13:38 »

Quote from: Pacesetter on January 08, 2025, 16:25

What happened to Shutterstock Inc share price? The euphoria didn't last long.

I see this as Shutterstock admitting defeat.

I thought after the 2021 stock coalition attempt that it didn't work out. Well turns out it did. Quite surprising to see that the number of irate contributors following the cash grab were themselves customers, or know customers personally or worked for customers who were large organization subscribers.

The message got out there and collectively a sizeable part of Shutterstock's customer base left, probably redirecting their business to Adobe, and thus never to return, and along with that, their share price and profits with it.

Not that I think iStock is much better so I suppose this 'merger' is like birds of the same feather.

more likely was just a blip based on the announcement, then quick profit taking to bring it back to the pre-annoucement price. no indication it was a 'defeat'

cascoly · « **Reply #68 on:** January 13, 2025, 13:41 »

Quote from: pancaketom on January 08, 2025, 20:28

don't you think "Gutterstock" makes more sense?

or GetStuck

SimonSays · « **Reply #69 on:** January 13, 2025, 16:47 »

Quote from: ADH on January 13, 2025, 00:03

Guess who is going to pay for the merge…..

Stockholders mostly. Shutterstock is now even down before the merger announcement and Getty's just slightly up. But nowhere near the bump they saw when the merger was announced.
Almost looks like a pump and dump scenario in a last desperate action of the company owners that had some shares to sell. You know, share news that might bump your stock and then get rid of it quickly and cash in before the ship sinks.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #70 on:** January 13, 2025, 17:06 »

Adobe at $170 this month so far.

Shutterdump at $11.

davedigitalfx · « **Reply #71 on:** January 13, 2025, 17:29 »

first 13 days of January:
- AS: 272,58 USD Download: 40
- SS: 53.81 USD Download: 30

Only videos .. no AI ...

davedigitalfx · « **Reply #72 on:** January 13, 2025, 17:35 »

POND5 for me it seems dead since the SS acquisition ...
January: 2 downloads ... 32,40 usd

Pacesetter · « **Reply #73 on:** January 13, 2025, 20:03 »

JANUARY 2025 TO DATE:

AS 170.26 USD - 55 DLS
SS 47.20 USD - 39 DLs
P5 63.68 USD - 1 DL

davedigitalfx · « **Reply #74 on:** January 13, 2025, 21:56 »

Quote from: davedigitalfx on January 13, 2025, 17:29

first 13 days of January:
- AS: 272,58 USD Download: 40
- SS: 53.81 USD Download: 30

Only videos .. no AI ...

2 years ago only SS was for me 1000usd a month ... now has decreased to 500 usd ... AS earnings have been more consistent in the last 2 years and increasing ...

cobalt · « **Reply #75 on:** January 14, 2025, 03:29 »

Quote from: davedigitalfx on January 13, 2025, 17:29

first 13 days of January:
- AS: 272,58 USD Download: 40
- SS: 53.81 USD Download: 30

Only videos .. no AI ...

That is really interesting, I didn't think that Adobe was already doing this well with video.

On pond5 I see a lot of creators blaming increased competition for their lack of sales, whereas for me it is obvious that since the takeover p5 was no longer being marketed properly.

DiscreetDuck · « **Reply #76 on:** January 14, 2025, 04:24 »

"dollar bin" prices becomes "cents bin".

gnirtS · « **Reply #77 on:** January 14, 2025, 07:40 »

So far this month Shutterdump is $103 (but $30 of that was one large sale) and AS $250.

Even taking into account the level reset the trend is clear - that doesnt explain the SS dive.
P5 is on $38

Adobe not taking editorial even gives Shutterstock a portfolio advantage of a few thousand images and 100+ videos.

davedigitalfx · « **Reply #78 on:** January 14, 2025, 10:57 »

the real deal on SS are the extended licenses ... today i sold 1 video with extended license for 30.22$
and 3 videos for 0.50$ each $:-\$

gnirtS · « **Reply #79 on:** January 14, 2025, 12:06 »

Quote from: davedigitalfx on January 14, 2025, 10:57

the real deal on SS are the extended licenses ... today i sold 1 video with extended license for 30.22$
and 3 videos for 0.50$ each $:-\$

So the extended video now earns less than the default minimum video did a few years ago.

(Anyone else remember the old days where an EL was the holy grail of image sales profit?...)

davedigitalfx · « **Reply #80 on:** January 14, 2025, 12:21 »

Quote from: gnirtS on January 14, 2025, 12:06

Quote from: davedigitalfx on January 14, 2025, 10:57
the real deal on SS are the extended licenses ... today i sold 1 video with extended license for 30.22$
and 3 videos for 0.50$ each $:-\$

So the extended video now earns less than the default minimum video did a few years ago.

(Anyone else remember the old days where an EL was the holy grail of image sales profit?...)

some years ago ... for 1 extended license i got more than 100 ... yes now are lower ..

DaLiu · « **Reply #81 on:** January 14, 2025, 15:31 »

AS 245$ - 239 downloads
SS 460$ - 1097 downloads

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Shuterstock about to get eaten by Getty (Read 4775 times)

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors