- alexa (6)
- Aurora (7)
- Canada (9)
- celebrity (100)
- CEPIC (29)
- Cnn (6)
- commercial stock (135)
- copyright (71)
- corbis (127)
- Corpocrates (1)
- Cosmos (3)
- digg (4)
- E Reader (10)
- editorial (304)
- filter (30)
- finance (113)
- flickr (83)
- focus (28)
- france (42)
- getty (220)
- google (55)
- gumgum (11)
- HOLGA (10)
- idee (15)
- IPTC (28)
- Jupiter (26)
- keyword (62)
- law (52)
- lens (37)
- lensbabies (8)
- license (170)
- magazine (169)
- Magnum (16)
- mediastorm (17)
- Microstock (153)
- Midstock (35)
- msnbc.com (14)
- multimedia (76)
- news (155)
- newspaper (70)
- Newsweek (16)
- No sense (56)
- PACA (26)
- Pacific coast news (6)
- photojournalism (214)
- Photoplus (3)
- photoshop (11)
- Piclens (3)
- pictogram (2)
- picturemaxx (2)
- Plus (8)
- prosumer (78)
- Royalty free (98)
- Search (86)
- SIPA (12)
- slideshow (66)
- Social Media (1)
- technology (201)
- TIME (31)
- transaction (129)
- Tweet (1)
- Uncategorized (26)
- Waste of time (1)
- web 2.0 (142)
- wire service (37)
- yahoo (14)
- Zymmetrical (6)
- July 29, 2010: Message in a Bottle
- July 26, 2010: Crowdtaste this !
- July 22, 2010: In search of Goodenough
- July 19, 2010: A genius talks
- July 15, 2010: I and them
- July 13, 2010: The Future of Photojournalism (Fixed)
- July 12, 2010: It's Official : Media and Photography Break up !!
- July 8, 2010: Getty hits a bump (and runs away)
- July 6, 2010: Of unintended consequences
- July 5, 2010: Photo burqa
Blogroll
Important Destinations
Subscribe Here :
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
The Fall
Getty Images’s decision to close it’s wholly-owned production division is a clear signal to the commercial stock industry that the market has shifted forever. If producing images that correspond to a market demand without having to pay any commissions and licensing them via the biggest distribution channel worldwide is not profitable anymore, than nothing is. Producing market research wholly-owned content was to be the new El Dorado of the commercial stock photo industry. It is now a ghost town.
Coupled with the announcement from Jonathan Klein that Istock has made $850,000 in sales in one day, then it all becomes very clear. Even after paying commission, Istock, and thus microstock, is more profitable than traditional stock. No production fees, no market research, no high end editing and post production generates more hard cash than all the talent of the world combined. If I had a traditional RM or RF operation right now, I would be very, very worried. If not desperate.
There not even a comfortable exit strategy for thousand of RM and RF companies worldwide. It is doubtful that any will be purchased anymore and its even too late to dump all their production into microstock. Even that is getting heavily saturated.
Getty also has a huge advantage by being able to safely mine both Istock and Flickr for new content for its traditional RM and RF offering at almost no cost. While anyone could source Flickr, no one has the time nor manpower.
From a recent internal memo released by John Harrington, Getty Images will also heavily invest in on-line automated sales in the upcoming years, taking a cue from Istock and trimming down on its operational cost. It is obvious that if RM and RF sales are going to decline both in volume and in price, it will be too expensive to have a full size sales force.
Once again here, smaller operation will not have that opportunity. They already function at minimum staff and have no room for downsizing with also losing revenue. They certainly do not have the extra cash to invest in automated sales.
From the same memo, we were told that Getty has made no overall revenue growth in 2008 and 2009 doesn’t look much better. Probably mostly because the fall in traditional RM sales was not compensated by Istock 35% growth. That is a huge statement, isn’t it ?
As for Corbis, they seem to continue their cutting cost approach to profitability. Every year now, for as far as the memory goes back, this has been their time to hit the headlines with another round of layoff. This year, London was apparently the most hit. Still no sign of profitability for the (very rich) ugly duckling of the commercial stock industry. But as long as they are having fun, right ?
The recent melding of minds at the PACA conference in Miami should have been a funeral announcement. Most talks were oriented at escaping the commercial stock market for the hopefully more lucrative commercial footage. However, it’s more like choosing which cliff to jump from.
Finally, for those who really want to understand the current state of the industry, they HAVE to read Allen Murabayashi entry on the Photoshelter blog, it’s brilliant and right to the point.
3 Responses to “The Fall”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.

October 23, 2009 at 12:09 pm
Thanks for the insights Paul. We all knew this would happen it just takes a while for the reality to set in and the numbers to prove it. The industry was susceptible to crowd sourcing and today there is no defense. At the end of the day, controlling the distribution platform is where the money is to be made. Paying $50 million for iStock in 2006 was the deal of a lifetime and makes Getty look pretty genius in hindsight. They saw it coming and reacted accordingly.
October 27, 2009 at 10:40 am
Very interesting article, thank you.
“… smaller operation … do not have the extra cash to invest in automated sales.”
Most small vendors seem to use commercial software that costs under $2,000, which is a tiny, tax-deductible expense to generate such a percentage of a company’s income. Most commercial software can, or soon will, offer automated sales.
Those who commission bespoke IT solutions should be able to justify the expense of upgrading to automated sales and billing.
Or am I missing something?
October 27, 2009 at 2:04 pm
Leege,
When I wrote “automated sales”, I was not talking about an e-commerce solution that would charge per download, only adapted to RF licenses, but rather a system that can track, report and invoice usage as it appears, either online or in print. As well as a technology platform that would more intelligently find the appropriate image for the appropriate client, as well as the correct pricing.
All can be done, however with extensive study and programming. Nothing of the sort exists off the shelf. Nor will it, for a very long time, if ever.
Sorry for my poor explanation.