Story   Photographer   Editor   Student/Intern   Assistant   Job/Item

SportsShooter.com: The Online Resource for Sports Photography

Contents:
 Front Page
 Member Index
 Latest Headlines
 Special Features
 'Fun Pix'
 Message Board
 Educate Yourself
 Equipment Profiles
 Bookshelf
 my.SportsShooter
 Classified Ads
 Workshop
Contests:
 Monthly Clip Contest
 Annual Contest
 Rules/Info
Newsletter:
 Current Issue
 Back Issues
 Subscribe
Members:
 Members Area
 "The Guide"
 Join
About Us:
 About SportsShooter
 Contact Us
 Terms & Conditions


Sign in:
Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features.

Name:



Password:







||
SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board

Getty Problems in the future?
David Evertsen, Photographer
Orlando | Fl | USA | Posted: 12:37 AM on 02.27.15
->> Thought this was really interesting...

http://photobusinessforum.blogspot.com/2015/02/getty-images-downward-spiral...
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Jim Karczewski, Photographer, Assistant
Hammond | IN | USA | Posted: 4:17 AM on 02.27.15
->> Such a shame. Not! I think they brought this on themselves by offering cheap stock subscriptions an the contributors surely didn't help.

This came up in a conversation 2 days ago with a close friend who's job is to find photos for marketing campaigns. Pre-Getty one fee for all she was earning $5-600 per job, post-getty it's down to $2-300 per job. She has very specific search demands like, "A woman sitting holding a towel around her neck, 3/4 view not looking at the camera"

I honestly think in the stock world it's their own damn fault for offering something akin to an unlimited amount of photos for a monthly fee.

I'm curious how a company bleeding cash is going to make a $550M debt repayment in 2020 with their current financial situation...
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Dave Miller, Photographer
Darlington | PA | | Posted: 9:48 AM on 02.27.15
->> Found this interesting...

"What is bad for news photographers has been a situation where Getty has been able to convince someone to shoot an assignment for less than it would cost to rent the equipment and hand the equipment to a monkey. Zero value has been placed on the valuable contributions of the actual photographer. That will change once Getty is gone."

So the market will be driven up?
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Doug Pizac, Photographer
Sandy | UT | USA | Posted: 3:38 PM on 02.27.15
->> Or, it could mean that once Getty is gone it will be replaced by another micro-stock agency that drives prices even lower.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Chuck Liddy, Photographer, Photo Editor
PLANET | EARTH | | Posted: 12:33 PM on 02.28.15
->> Up. No. As has been mentioned about a thousand times on this site. Once content is given away....it's next to impossible to charge for something you were providing for free (contributing).
 This post is:  Informative (2) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Kevin Krows, Photographer
Forsyth | IL | USA | Posted: 11:49 AM on 03.01.15
->> Getty is only one of MANY who have contributed to the commoditization of the entire professional photography market space. What is most alarming isn't so much "price" but the fact that poor content has become very acceptable.

Like buying expired hamburger for $1.00 a pound. Like the $1 price tag makes if perfectly fine for consumption.

No doubt, every one of us needs to rethink our business models and make changes accordingly. Sticking to and following "acceptable business practices" for professional photographers is like poem "The Charge Of The Light Brigade".
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Doug Pizac, Photographer
Sandy | UT | USA | Posted: 4:07 PM on 03.01.15
->> Regarding Kevin's take on poor content becoming the norm, quality standards have dropped in order take advantage of lower costs that gives more bang for the buck (no pun intended).

Whereas print publication has been and still is for the most part based on usage -- location and size -- that is not the case with Internet usage whose revenue stream model is based on clicks. That is why you see so many photo galleries stuffed with images that should have never made it past the first edit.

Because revenue is generated on viewership (a fraction of a penny per click), a dozen so-so images that are soft, poorly composed, off color, etc. earn 12x the income than a single Pulitzer Prize image. Thus the turning of photography into a commodity -- a business model that will not change because of economics and the plethora of RF and contributor imagery that is available.

So yes, our business models must change as do all models change when technology changes.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Jesse Beals, Photographer
Tracyton | WA | USA | Posted: 1:38 AM on 03.02.15
->> Doesn't help the weekend warriors with a Walmart Kit Camera think they are TRUE professional photographers willing to give photos away for an image published in a publication.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Doug Pizac, Photographer
Sandy | UT | USA | Posted: 6:47 PM on 03.03.15
->> Talk about shooting oneself in the foot...

Getty Images can't pay its debt because it can't generate enough licensing revenue. Yet through its iStock subsidiary in a deal with 20th Century Fox it is giving away FREE photos of Vince Vaughn and other movie cast members posing for various generic corporate stock photography images.

http://petapixel.com/2015/03/03/fox-and-getty-team-up-to-promote-movie-with.../

I don't get it. Why would any editorial business want to pay for licensing when they can now get celebrity usage at no charge?
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Mark Loundy, Photo Editor, Photographer
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 10:07 AM on 03.05.15
->> So what happens if Getty goes bankrupt and its inventory is sold for a fraction of its current value?

--Mark
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Gene Boyars, Photographer
Manalapan | NJ | United States | Posted: 10:15 AM on 03.05.15
->> Mark, that begs the question of who actually owns the content. Material made by staffers under contract is obviously owned and subject to liquidation but material submitted by freelancers? I only hope those folks read the contracts they were signing and retained ownership.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Doug Pizac, Photographer
Sandy | UT | USA | Posted: 1:17 PM on 03.05.15
->> Mark...

It all depends on the contract. Sports assignments are owned by Getty via "Work For Hire" language in the contract while those made on news assignments have a one-year exclusivity clause while the greater number of contributor photos are owned by the contributor whereupon Getty has full exclusive rights to not only market them but allow third parties to market too.

If the agency is sold, then the sports pictures are part of the tangible property just like desks and chairs. In terms of intangible property, those are marketing rights which will transfer to the new owner who would be foolish not to capitalize on the Getty name. As long as the new owner/parent company keeps the Getty name on its subsidiary all the contracts and rights will remain untouched. And even if the Getty name is replaced, there may be a contract language term such as "assigns" which could transfer all marketing rights to the new owner. But that's for the attorneys. Either way, I don't see how the photographers will come out on top.

And if the company is sold for pennies on the dollar, the acquisition is going to have to be paid for by the new owner which means another reduction of royalty payments to help finance the takeover.

Just posted Petapixel is a story about a Turkish photographer who agreed to let Getty market his images as royalty free licenses. One of them was bought by HP for $429 for use as the default wallpaper on a new laptop whereupon his cut was $6.39 for the usage. If he could get just a penny per laptop his photo could earn him $100 for every 10,000 units sold. And you know HP will hope to sell a heck of a lot more than that.
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Doug Pizac, Photographer
Sandy | UT | USA | Posted: 11:00 AM on 03.14.15
->> The co-founder of Getty Images is stepping down to be the chairman. A new CEO is being sought.

http://www.seattletimes.com/business/technology/co-founder-of-getty-images-.../
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Gene Boyars, Photographer
Manalapan | NJ | United States | Posted: 3:45 PM on 03.14.15
->> Maybe the new CEO will realize that buying a bigger truck is not the answer...you can sell all the coal you want but if you sell it at a loss you won't gain...Not financially anyway
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Kevin Krows, Photographer
Forsyth | IL | USA | Posted: 8:35 PM on 03.14.15
->> How many of you would apply for a CEO position with a company with a serious cash flow problem and 550 million in debt and counting. They have successfully imploded themselves be commoditizing their very own product. It's a hole that they can never dig themselves out of.

Time to put the horse out of its misery don't you think?
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Mark Loundy, Photo Editor, Photographer
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 12:19 AM on 03.17.15
->> Kevin, With typical CEO compensation packages, I'd apply in a nanosecond.

--Mark
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (1) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Kevin Krows, Photographer
Forsyth | IL | USA | Posted: 5:33 AM on 03.17.15
->> But what will they use to pay you? Shares of Getty Stock and rubber checks?
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Mark Loundy, Photo Editor, Photographer
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 9:21 AM on 03.17.15
->> Kevin, Even if I worked there for a week, I'd walk away with seven or eight figures.

--Mark
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Kevin Krows, Photographer
Forsyth | IL | USA | Posted: 11:29 AM on 03.17.15
->> Mark --

You are "The Man" and my Hero!
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Richard Uhlhorn, Photographer
Chelan Falls | WA | USA | Posted: 1:23 PM on 03.17.15
->> Would be nice to see a stock photographer with a business background take over.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Add your comments...
If you'd like to add your comments to this thread, use this form. You need to be an active (paying) member of SportsShooter.com in order to post messages to the system.

NOTE: If you would like to report a problem you've found within the SportsShooter.com website, please let us know via the 'Contact Us' form, which alerts us immediately. It is not guaranteed that a member of the staff will see your message board post.
Thread Title: Getty Problems in the future?
Thread Started By: David Evertsen
Message:
Member Login:
Password:




Return to -->
Message Board Main Index
The official SportsShooter.com multicolored food preparation device ::..