#Guerrilla Vid Mktg
25 messages in this thread
In the last VTU, Publisher/Editor Jim Plant wrote in his Toaster Talk
column on the subject of Guerrilla Video Marketing. I feel that a
discussion of this topic is warranted here, as there may be a number
of us involved in this type of projects. To get the ball rolling,
here are some questions to think about.
* What do you think of the moral implications of selling something
that does not yet exist?
* Does the videographer have the obligation to produce the video
regardless of the response he/she gets?
* How much work should be done before the advertisement is published
(before the decision is made on whether or not to complete the
project)?
* What criteria should the videographer use to determine whether to
complete the project? When does this decision need to be made.
* If the decision is made NOT to complete the project, what do you
feel is the minimum action to take regarding orders that were
received?
* If the response is close to the minimum number of orders, what is
the minimum quality that you would use in the creation of the
finished project? Conversely, if the response is larger than
anticipated, should some of the money be used to increase the quality
of the finished video?
Please don't feel limited to give your opinions to the above areas.
The technical side of this topic is just as important to this level
of video production as is the softer side of it.
If you are considering this type project, what is stopping you from
proceeding? If there is anyone out there involved in this type
project, let us know how it is going. If there's anyone who has
completed one or several of these projects, please also let us know
things like how it went, how you answered questions similar to the
above, and any pitfalls that you found.
Thank you all for your attention.
I don't think there's anything wrong with the concepts of guerilla
marketing, PROVIDED:
* You set aside all the received funds until you absolutely decide for
sure to produce the video, so that if you don't produce it, you
immediately have the bucks to refund the people's money.
* You decide FIRST what minimum level of quality the piece will have,
and stick to it. If you sell it for $29.95, the people should
get their money's worth, whether you're selling 100 copies or 10,000
copies. What I'm saying is that should you get the minimum number
of orders, you should definitely not downgrade the production quality
to skimp. If you felt that increasing the quality would be
feasible, there's certainly nothing wrong with that.
Another thing that might be worth considering, should you decide not
to produce the video, would be to send a nice letter to the people
along with their refund. Explain that you regret that you won't be
able to immediately produce the piece, and also enclose a discount
coupon for any of your future related productions. This might
alleviate their frustrations a bit, AND keep them LOOKING for your
future advertisements, in case you do something just a touch
different, but something that would be advertised in the same
publications.
I think your stipulations are valid. Since the funds coming in would
be in the form of checks and money orders (hopefully nobody sends
cash), it would be easy to keep them uncashed.
How would you feel if the decision was made to complete the project,
and some of the funds were put toward the final production? I mean,
say, that all of the graphics and talent shots were done already, but
the final editing is to be done and paid for after the ad date.
The return letter is also a good idea. Maybe a include a paper copy
of the plans, for example, that were going to be the topic, just as a
consolation.
I see absolutely nothing unethical about your approach; hope it goes
well! I also respect Frank's opinion on the subject, but since I read
it about 12 hours ago, can't remember enough to dig into it in
detail.
I subscribe to "Home Mechanix"; if that's the mag, I'll be watching
for your ad. I too have been considering such a project, and will
post more details later…….
Jerry,
Thanks for the bolster. The magazine is a just bit more 'popular' than
that one. If you get have any questions, just ask, as I usually find
lotsa stuff not to do when I start things like this. :()
… Nate, Emerald Video. Flyin' IFR on AP
Alright, I had to jump in here. My name is David Hopkins, and I am not only
one of the monthly columnists for VTU, but also the producer of a very
successful video training package, Taming The Wave.
When we first began work on Taming The Wave in early (very early) 1992, I knew
exactly what I wanted to put into the tape. Since I was animating the entire
tape (planned to be two hours…one on LightWave, one on Modeler), and I was
well on my way to completion, Gun For Hire (the production company I work with)
and I chose to place a full page ad in VTU. The ad stated, simply, "Coming
September 27th, 1992. The tape that will change the way you thing about
LightWave 3D." Plus, of course, the notice to call and reserve your copy. The
original price for the tape was planned to be $99.95, and all was going well.
Soon, while finishing up the LightWave section, I found that one hour was not
enough to do the subject justice to the rate that I wished. We dropped the
Modeler portion and planned on two hours of LightWave. By now it was August or
so, and we had many, many pre-orders, all of them checks. Shortly we decided
that two hours was not enough, and went to three hours, mastered on D2. More
animating (lots more), more editing…we were passed our release date.
Against the better wishes of me personally, Gun For Hire had been cashing these
checks to pay for production and advertising. We did audio at Skywalker Sound
in Santa Monica, paid dearly for top-notch packaging (claimed by many to be the
most professional packaging for such a product in the Amiga market) and things
like spiral-binding manuals. Four-color process advertisments and much more.
Gun For Hire is a major post-production facility, whose works include the "Jeep
Shots" TV campaign, Pespi, Nike, and many others. Even some TV shows. They
chose to undertake this project (which was next-to-nothing to them strictly due
to my determination to do it. I won't lie. My early buyers paid for the
completion of the production which was finally delivered in January 1993. I
got MANY upset phone calls prior to release. I assured them that we were
delaying release so as to make a better product. I gladly told anybody who
called to complain exactly what we were up to. Now, after release and the sale
of more than 1,000 units, I have had only one return. The package acheived
greater success than I had imagined, even being mentioned in the NAB issue of
Post Magazine (a very high-level mag). The best, however, was getting the fax
from Thomas Wheeler, the gentleman quoted in our ad in the last issue of VTU.
He was calling FREQUENTLY prior to release very upset about the delays. Very
upset. After finally receiving his copy, he sent me that fax which said "You
were right…it was worth the wait."
Our intention was not to defraud people in any way, nor even to handle the
situation in that way. We didn't expect a delay of the magnitude that ended up
happening. But if it weren't for that little "seed" of money, the production
would have gone way over Gun For Hire's initial budget and been cancelled. I
owe my thanks to all of those who trusted in me.
If you choose to market a video using these so-called guerilla video methods,
do me one favor. Don't defraud the people trying to help you. Give them what
you promise and play straight with them.
David Hopkins Gun For Hire Film & Tape
Let's put the shoe on the other foot. You start writing about a product that's
yet to be released… it's going to be the greatest Toaster add-on gizmo ever.
The company promises it's going to be out by a certain date; then the release
date slips by months and months, and meanwhile, they're cashing the checks.
What would you say about this in your column? Second question, did you say
anything about your product slipping in your column? And why oh why did anyone
let anyone start cashing checks? Cashing checks or submitting credit card slips
is very rude if done any significant amount of time before actual shipment of
the product – I'm willing to say it should happen the same day, and no sooner.
Cashing that payment and not shipping for 30 days is also in violation of the
Uniform Commercial Code, as far as I know.
Man alive, you let this happen to your side-line business? What sort of ethical
slipperiness do you permit in your column?
Good lord! I didn't expect to get flamed! As I explained, it was not
part of the original plan at all. And, in fact, I did keep my
readers appraised of the progress and delays on Taming The Wave. I
even quoted excerpts from the darn thing so people could get an idea
of what it was shaping up to be. Let's see other companies give away
details of products that they are still developing as I did both in
my columns and in the calls I received. You know, John, as well as I
do that magazines do have lead times, even mags with a turn around as
fast as VTU. Preparing the ads and publishing them when we did was
an important marketing move that drew attention away from the other
tapes that were starting to come out and showed people that they had
an alternative. The bit about Gun For Hire cashing the checks came
to me as just as shocking news as you point out. At the time,
however, with the entire fate of the project in their hands, I could
do nothing more than protest the fact that they did it, which I did
constantly. As far as "slipperiness" in my columns, have you read a
review of any other training tapes in my column? No. Not because
the magazine wouldn't allow it, but because I felt it was improper to
do while releasing one of my own. Equally, I have not seen any of my
competitors' tapes except for the two that originally inspired me to
make my own. My decision was based on the fact that I BOUGHT those
tapes (as opposed to having them sent free of charge which is a
benefit most every journalist has) and felt that I had been ripped
off. As I told anybody who called to complain during the delays, we
will happily refund the entire amount AT ANY TIME. Nobody chose to
take us up on that offer. Our purposes were not malicious, and you
are correct in it being a legal matter. We seem to have dealt with
the problem in a matter satisfactory to all involved and learned a
valuable lesson at the same time. If, and that's a big IF, we
produce another tape, the approach will be handled much differently.
David Hopkins
Was Jim Plant's editorial aimed at you, or was it just a coincidence? (Let me
point out that all I've ever heard about this story is what you've said here.)
You didn't expect to get flamed? Are you kidding? Whether you're ready to
admit it or not, you and your company came very close to crashing and burning
in the classic computer-company scam: You ran ads for a product that didn't
exist, you cashed the checks, and you (almost) didn't produce anything. You
screwed up the perfect ending, though – you didn't disappear with the cash.
Instead, you came here to say you're sorry. And you didn't expect to get
flamed?
I can't imagine how you can distance yourself from Gun For Hire. How many
video-savvy people are in this company? How many were directly involved in
this project? It couldn't be that many – after all, you hadn't finished the
project, all you'd been doing is running ads and cashing checks. If the
advance cashing really bothered you, and you were *not* closely linked to these
people, you could have dropped the project and left them holding the bag. You
can't have it both ways.
I know you mentioned Gun For Hire when you called Syndesis to get free product,
and although I don't remember specifics, you would have been a rare exception
among freebie-seeking writers if you didn't describe yourself as a major player
at the company. 🙂
As far as "slipperiness" in your columns… let me get this straight: You
think it was OK to talk about your tapes on a regular basis (although they
hadn't shipped and for which some people had already paid) but it wouldn't be
OK for you to talk about other people's tapes, except to say you bought them
and you were so disappointed you decided to make your own. Yeah.
How much cash are we talking about here? And did you pay full rates for your
ads in VTU?
I've had a number of complaints with Video Toaster User since its inception. I
think it has a serious lack of ethical writers. From issue one, almost all the
writers have their own products and projects to plug. (Meanwhile, the rest of
us are asked to buy ads to plug our products.) When they're not plugging their
own efforts, they're plugging the efforts of another columnist. When they're
not plugging each other's products, they're overlooking serious flaws in
products. Both Duberman and Plant have said to me, "Gee, we don't ever like to
say anything negative about a product, that doesn't do anyone any good." In
other words, the bugs don't matter, the manual doesn't matter, the interface
doesn't matter, the support doesn't matter. And now, apparently, it doesn't
matter if a company runs ads and cashes checks before the product ships, or
that this company is clearly associated with one of the magazine's columnists.
If Syndesis ran ads and cashed checks for a non-existent product, and your
money was involved, would your column say "Let's send them more money and wait
and see, I'm sure they don't have any malicious intent."?
FLAME ON.
Please use your "Return" key. Paragraphs are really a cool thing you
know. Try it, others will like it.
FLAME OFF.
Sorry about the long trains of thought. I do that because I'm trying so hard
to get my typing to keep up with my thoughts. I'll try my best. David Hopkins
David,
I really appreciate you being so straightforeward in sharing this; it's
exactly the type of input I was looking for. It looks like you've
experienced all of my biggest fears already, took a lot of heat to keep
the quality up, but you're also enjoying the results of a lot of hard
work.
What I'm working on should work out a bit easier, as it's about an order
of magnitude less complex than what you've done. That means it should
only be half the trouble. :^)
Your advice rings true; I'll do whatever I can to have the project 'in the
can' by the ad release date, and if for some reason I can't, orderers will
at least get a letter telling them what's going on. I've decided to
finish the project even if I only get two orders, anyway, just because I
want to see it done. Of course then I wouldn't be able to get your
package for a while, so I hope I sell a few.
BTW, the articles have been real nice lately, and practical, too. Glad
you stuck around. Hey, when's the next contest? For that matter, who won
the last one? How many entries did you get? Just curious.
Thanks again for the feedback, and for bringing it here to this forum.
I'm sure that it wasn't easy.
PS. I get either a smiley face or a sad one, depending on how I connec
the dots. At least I get the feeling we won't all be in the dark for
long.
… Nate, Emerald Video. Flyin' IFR on AP
Thank you for the kind words, and let me also make a second note to John
here…we also sent letters to the pre-orderers explaining the delay. Alas, it
mentioned yet another date that we ran past. The best laid plans, etc.
Anyway, on the subject of the columns, check out the next couple in both VTU
and Amiga Video. More tutorials that'll explore the less utilized functions of
LightWave and Modeler. As for contests, the Waterfall contest winner is
announced in the upcoming issue of VTU, and I'm not going to spill the beans
yet. Read and ye shall learn.
Future contests? Well, while not a contest exactly, you may want to check out
the upcoming issue of Amiga Video. I've begun a rather bold project. I've
offered anybody who wants it a city block. You build your block, send it in,
and we're going to make a monsterous animation for entry in one of the big
graphics shows as the first national cooperation animation. Should be
interesting. All of the rules and info are in that new issue, so check it out.
David Hopkins
I don't get Amiga-Video, but I have a VERY nice museum & Art Deco theater
facade which would be an excellent addition to this project.
Could you please forward me details like an address?
Thanks,
Erik Flom
Glad to hear you want to join in. Unfortunately, I'm going to have to
let you get the address out of the column because there are some VERY
specific guidelines that MUST be followed for this project to work
smoothly. Please make sure and read that before you send anything!
But, I should say the address anyway, I suppose… Mach Universe/Gun
For Hire 3019 Pico Blvd Santa Monica, CA Attn: David Hopkins
I want to respond to John's last message, but I accidently flew past
it and I'm in a hurry, so I'll put it here. First, you don't seem to
understand what I said before. I have made no mention of other
people's tapes , either good or bad, in my columns. Second, if you
go back and read those columns discussing the tape, you'll find that
I advised people that there WAS INDEED A DELAY. Further, the tape
was almost finished when we started advertising…at it's two hour
length. I suppose the fact that we chose to improve the product by
adding another entire HOUR of video, and quality third-party 3D fonts
and objects with retail values over $500 in the same package isn't a
thanks? The people who preordered at $99.95 were not charged more
after this was added. We raised the SRP to $119.95 for orders after
a certain date.
On the subject of myself and Gun For Hire, let me explain that Gun For
Hire is NOT a software/home video company. This is the company that
makes the shows, commercials, and music videos you see places like
MTV, ShowTime, and NBC among others. This video was literally of no
importance to them except that I wanted to do it. Each job is
budgeted a certain amount of money, always paid by the client (i.e.
Jeep, Nike, Pepsi). In this case, Gun For Hire was entering a field
(direct marketing) that it had never been in before. On top of that,
how many places do YOU know that would hand you $25,000 to make a
training video like this? If I objected to much, the project (and my
relationship with a VERY successful post production facility) would
be down the tubes.
At every turn, I was expecting to have the tape done in a matter of
days. Little "unimportant" things like me trying to make some income
for my family got in the way. Sorry. Certainly it would have been
better to supply the end users with a product that was just "fair" by
your statements.
As for that editorial being based on me? Nope. As for the rates I
paid? I paid rates that appear on the exact same rate card you use.
Sure, I got a bit of consideration, but not nearly to the stage you
think. I wish.
Finally, about my getting software from you. If I used Gun For Hire's
name when talking to you, it was simply to let you know the type of
work I did besides my columns. You certainly weren't pressured into
sending me software, were you? Did you not, at the time you sent me
a Beta copy of Interchange Plus to help solve a crisis I had at the
time, telling me that you wanted a writeup in the column when you
shipped? I told you that I would certainly do that if it could solve
the problem as you thought it would. It didn't, hence no coverage.
Do I write anything negative about companies? Sure. One I can think
of at the moment is the TV Objects a company released a while back.
I panned it. To a lessor degree, I berrated AntiGravity for not
doing a full LightWave conversion of Motion Man. Tell you what,
John…call up Jim and ask about all of the negative stuff that keeps
getting edited out of my columns. What do you think I have to gain
by all this stuff? Sure, I get some software at "review prices" (aka
free). I also devote a LOT of my time to teaching people how to use
software and what products will best solve problems they need
solved. There are tradeoffs everywhere in life, John, just like your
offer to send me a beta in trade for a column.
Well, since I have been pretty depressed by the quality I saw in
Amiga-Video, I won't buy another issue.
If you would like me to donate something for your project, you will
have to send me a copy of the exact requirements. (I can send you a
SASE to help defray costs.)
Hey, my friend, don't give up the ghost! I, and many many others, have been
griping and moaning about quality the last few issues as well. I'm promised by
the editor that the new issue about to hit the stands has been greatly
improved. No more mystery quotes…I hear they actually used a spell checker
and everything! I hope you, like me, will at least wait to see if it's true…
If not, I understand. I'll put together a file of info and upload it ASAP!
David Hopkins
So I'm not the only one unimpressed by the NEW Amiga Video Grafix magazine
eh? I loved AVid but don't like AVG much, I'm giving them 2 issues to
clean up their acts then cancelling my Sub If I'm still not satisfied.
I don't think you "get it" yet either. I'm saying I object to columnists in a
magazine using that platform to discuss, promote and otherwise sales- and
tech-support their for-profit projects. I don't think you "get" the fact that
you and your company engaged in unethical (if not simply illegal) business
practices.
You seem to think that by singing and dancing a little longer (adding content,
announcing delays in your column, raising the price and cashing more checks)
you've somehow shown that the "ends justify the means." Yeah, right. If you
knew there was a 2-3 month delay, you had no business cashing those checks.
Period, end of story, # 30 #.
In my eyes, you are just digging yourself deeper and deeper. You tell me that
Gun For Hire didn't care about this project, that it was all your idea. What
do you mean by "consideration" for the ads you placed? Because you were a
columnist you got good placement, free production, or what? Exactly what did
you pay, for what size ad?
And I wasn't "pressured" into sending out software? You're right, I'll get
down on my knees and bark like a dog for a little coverage. It's hard enough to
get press releases printed in VTU. (Although there's always room for the
latest "gee, isn't NewTek great" advertorial, and for press releases from GVP
about the latest phone/fax card, right across from their full-page ad.
Exchange files between LightWave, Wavefront and 3D Studio? Direct-load Imagine
objects into Toaster? Why print that?
A columnist from Video Toaster calls me, telling me that if I send him
pre-release software he'll be really grateful and maybe even write about it
because it will help him make the big bucks at his video production company.
You talk about wanting to cash checks to feed your family… at that moment,
you weren't offering to pay for what I do for a living. You were using your
position at the magazine for your own gain, and nothing else. I really don't
know if you've ever said anything about InterChange Plus in your columns.
I do know I had to kneel and woof again to get Duberman to review InterChange,
and then he has to do it side-by-side with a review of Pixel 3D Pro. He was
fully aware of the many defects in Pixel and of superior features in
InterChange, yet refused to write about them.
Trade-offs in life? I wish I could advertise products that don't exist and get
paid for them before they do, as you've done. I wish that when I sent out free
product, I knew it was going to a competent reviewer at an honest publication,
and that they weren't just asking for it because they needed it for their
latest money-making project. The former won't happen because I know it's wrong;
the latter will continue to happen with any badly-supervised magazine.
First, I would hope that we can try to keep all of this civil. I'm
happy to discuss my reasons for writing. I write because I enjoy
it. I don't make "oodles" of money off of my columns, but I also
don't make what I would if I were spending the equivelant amount
working on a graphics job. Let's clear off the subject of "profit"
in a monetary sense, because it just isn't there.
I buy a lot of software. Out of my pocket, with my money. The
magazine doesn't give me a "budget" each month to acquire things to
write about, it's my money that I earn producing graphics and
animation. Almost every company that produces a product is looking
for free mentions, and that puts a lot of pressure on a writer. You,
as a journalist yourself, should be able to understand that. If I
mention this product, what is the guy who makes the competing product
gonna say? I DON'T CARE. Now let me explain what I mean by that.
I don't play the "you scratch mine, I'll scratch yours" game. If you,
as a software manufacturer, want to make sure that I see your product
in the hopes that I will rave about how wonderful it is to those who
read my columns, the logical way to do this is to send it to me.
Otherwise, there is the possibilty that I would never see the package
and you miss the added pr. Every software company in the WORLD knows
that. But, no product is accepted by me on conditions that I
absolutely HAVE to write about it. Period.
Equally, by sending software, you take your chances. If I like it,
I'll probably write about it. I usually do (as evidenced by the good
reviews I give many products and many mentions) write about products
that OTHER people may not be familiar with which are of high
quality. If I DON'T like the product you send me, there's a good
chance I'll mention that in the column. Maybe I won't. When I write
my columns I sit down and think about the span of time since I wrote
the last column. What products have I bought/seen/been sent in that
period of time have proved to be highly useful to me as a
professional animator? What new tricks have I heard/ discovered in
that time? That's what I write.
As for the magazine itself, I will neither defend nor attack them. It
is not fair for me to do so and a person would have to be really
stupid to say something negative about the boss (they do pay me for
articles…) I will say, however, your problems with getting ANYBODY
to do ANYTHING for or about you, verify facts, etc., EXCEPT ME have
nothing to do with me. I live in Southern Cal and they live in
Northern Cal. The only time of the month that I even talk to them is
when I modem them the new column. Your problems with the magazine
and/or its publishers or writers other than me are between you and
them. Don't drag me into that.
I really hate to even mention this now because it sounds as if the
statement is merely because we've argued. It's not. But I'll tell
you exactly why I didn't write about Interchange…because I don't
care for the program. You sent me a beta version during development
as has been discussed earlier in this string to help me when I called
and asked a favor. I didn't trade a definate article or mention for
it, nothing. Why did you send it? Why me? You knew me only by a
couple of conversations on the phone and meeting once or twice at
trade shows, but you sent a beta copy of your software to me. Did
you not expect me to use it? I get my knowledge of the value of a
product by using it in my jobs. Indeed, if I wasn't allowed to use a
piece of software I was sent in my jobs for profit, they would likely
never get mentioned simply because I don't have TIME to work with a
program unless it is in the course of a professional job!
I even told you things I liked and didn't like about the program
after you sent it, didn't I? My main complaint was the interface and
having to open so many little programs didn't seem as handy as
offering them as menu-style options or buttons. Per your request, I
modemed you a DeluxePaint-drawn image of how I thought the program
might look to seem simpler and more professional. Didn't I? Why did
you want that from me? Were you, by some chance, looking profit from
my suggestions if possible?
I'm offended by your gall in accusing ME of conducting my business and
writing affairs in an improper manner. The majority of my columns
are teaching people how to produce professional animations. JOHN,
I'M TRAINING PEOPLE TO COMPETE WITH ME! Good lord, can't you see
that the column is not some sort of political battlefield to me?
You are welcome to continue in your belief that I'm scum, but let me
tell you this, John: If I find a situation where your product comes
into use to me in the course of my work, I'll be more than happy to
write it up in my column(s). Maybe I'll buy some other product you
release (since I presume you wouldn't send it to me), find it highly
useful, and rave and rave like I do with Unili Graphics. Maybe not.
I make no promises. Do YOU "get it"? David Hopkins
I've stated my beliefs. I've asked a lot of questions, which you've
consistently dodged. You and/or Gun For Hire certainly thought this video
would be profitable. They didn't invest $25K as a charitable donation. Your
"ends" of educating Toaster users do not justify your "means" of cashing checks
before a product is ready.
As for InterChange, gee, thanks for condemning it based on the beta copy. I'm
so glad I sent it. If you weren't a columnist explicitly or implicitly
promising a mention in VTU, you're right, I wouldn't have sent it. "Open so
many little programs"? Huh? In the release version of ICP, you click on one
icon to start everything. One window opens. You see, that's one of the
improvements we made in the jump from InterChange to InterChange Plus. Even if
you think you have a superior design for our user interface, why would that
prevent you from using ICP or discussing its worth in your column? If ICP does
the best conversions of 3D objects and supports more formats more accurately
than anything out there, why isn't it worth discussing?
As for Unili Graphics: I talked with them a month or so ago. They told me
they'd used InterChange Plus to convert their font objects from one format to
another, but they ran into a bug of some kind. (Is this the product of theirs
that you plug?) I knew they weren't in our registration database. I asked
which version they had and why they hadn't registered, and they said, oh, we
got a beta version of InterChange Plus from a southern California pirate board.
Needless to say, my opinion of them was formed quite quickly.
As for your potential for receiving more free Syndesis software, as long as
you're a VTU columnist, your odds remain as good as they ever were, that is,
you're at the top of the list because of the realities of this market. We sent
a batch (5?) of the release InterChange Plus to the VTU offices, I don't know
why you didn't receive a copy.
I will make my opinions known to the new editor of VTU. I've heard that he
plans to dismiss a number of writers.
I spoke to Jim Plant (Editor of VTU) regarding the moral implications
of that editorial immediately upon receiving my copy of VTU. In a
nutshell, he tells me that originally there were statements that
discussed the moral issues you and others obviously feel needed to be
addressed and that unfortunately those statements were edited out for
the sake of saving space.
Whether you buy that explanation or not
isn't really the point of the discussion, since the implications of
that sort of marketing tactic are relevant whether Jim had mentioned
it or not.
As a self employed producer of audio/video projects I have had the
oppourtunity to work with a broad spectrum of clients, some of which
were not as above board as I would have liked. Because of the usual
lead time required for advertising placement, it might be acceptable
for someone to place an ad prior to the completion of a video, in the
electronics, video, & computer industies it's done all the time, it's
called "vaporware".
However, I would like to express an opinion on the matter. I don't
feel that such an ad should be placed without the reasonable
expectation of shipping the product by the time the ad breaks. This
could be easily accomplished with allowances for normal production
delays. Floating a "test baloon" ad just to decide whether or not the
product has a demand, or to raise cash for the production of the
product isn't what I would call a valid marketing tactic, it's
dishonest.
I appreciate your input, and have also considered the things you
mention.
I'm glad that Jim considered the moral implications, but I also
understand the need to make it fit in the space alloted.
To be honest, as you may have guessed, I'm undertaking such a project
at this time. I'll give a few details; please tell me if you think
what I'm doing meets what you call a <reasonable expectation of
shipping>.
The subject is a home improvement project that I've done myself, and
feel others could benefit from. The product will be a set of plans,
and a video that will last about 25 minutes, explaining the complete
process with graphic examples and footage of actual construction.
Obviously, the construction scenes will have to be staged.
I placed the ad last week in a home improvement magazine classified
section. The issue breaks June 15th.
So far, I've taken several steps toward completing the project. The
task schedule is done. The script is essentially done, and the
storyboard started. The plans are made for the construction details
and the required jigs, as are most of the graphics screens to match.
About half of the 3D objects for animating are done, and several
scenes are ready but not yet rendered. None of the title screens
could be done until the script is done.
The talent has agreed to undertake the project, but a contract is not
yet signed. I'm doing the voice-over and the music (some buy-out
stuff and a few of my compositions).
I am doing all of the graphics and animations with equipment I
already have, and expect to shoot the live sections on my Hi-8
camcorder. I intend to edit the footage to SVHS, and render the
graphics/anims directly onto the same tape. This will be the master
for the dubs, so the dubs will be 3rd generation at worst.
This would be fine, but if the response is going to be large enough,
I'd like to shoot with rented 3/4 SP equipment and maybe a 3 CCD
B'cast camera, but could not afford this unless I could sell at least
100 copies. This would also mean going to a suite to do the edits,
with the G&A being rendered on the same tape as the footage.
In the case that there wasn't enough interest to complete this
project (say 50 orders), I plan to send out a letter of apology, a
refund, and include the printed material anyway.
The way I planned it is to do as much as I can with what I have. If
it doesn't work, I'm out about a hundred hours or so time
(experience) and the fee to the talent.
The decision I need to make is wether to make a fair quality product,
and have it ready to go (except the dubs); or, have it as ready as I
can before the ad date (all graphics and anims done and on disk, the
rest planned as well as I can) and do the shooting and editing after
the response is known, say a week after the ad hits. This would
obviously mean higher quality, but a delayed delivery.
So, Frank (and anybody else that wants to jump in), what do you
think? … Nate, Emerald Video. Flyin'
"IF" the ad were to state that the first X number of tapes sold would
be providing the "seed" money for the project I see no problem, maybe
do something like the folks who do the Videografix Today video tapes
did, give a nice Coffee Mug as a thank you for the first X # of
Buyers/investors. Perhaps I'm wrong, but as long as it's stated that
their needs to be a minimum # of orders taken I see no problem with
Jim Plant's idea.