I would like you two to mull something over. (No, I'm not going to suggest you don't sell stuff. I think you *should* sell stuff.) Take some time to toss it around before even thinking about a yes or no. Give it a day or so... Discuss... Call me... Write me...
Also, I'm not going to insult you and write "In my opinion" before each sentence as we are adults and should know that OF COURSE IT'S MY OPINION!!!! And another thing. I figure you know everything I'm saying. It's not meant to be condescending (that means "talk down to") but just to.. you know... make points or something.
Ado no further - my thoughts:
What I know about The Internets:
Attention spans are short. Everything is free. Quality is rewarded.
And, as evidenced by the three previous sentences: sweeping generalizations are the norm.
1. Quality is rewarded:
Google makes great stuff. Google hires the best people, lets them work the way they want to work yet expect their products to be better than anyone else's. Even if the general public don't like or use a product. If you do any thinking about web services (I do quite a bit of it) and you think about google, you know that their stuff is going to be awesome and will only get better. And, if they do happen to make something that sucks ass in the bad way, they'll cop to it and either remove it or make it better. They've created an empire.
I imagine that this is somewhat the way you're going to operate your site. You'll be attracting the best and the brightest and let the crap float away or be improved upon. The "brand" will then be ass-ociated with quality. The folks who make crap will then be too intimidated to approach you and the best and brightest will be more inclined to use you as a web distribution channel.
Thinking about google vs. Microsoft, (who I also admire, actually), you see a huge difference. Microsoft seems byzantine, costly, corporate in the worst sense and bureaucratic vs. google's streamlined, simple, consumer-friendly and generally "nice" image. It's even reflected on their web sites. Trying to locate something at Microsoft is an exercise in clicking. Google's home page has their main feature prominently displayed and all of their other stuff readily available. It's soooo sweet.
2. Everything is free.
Right or wrong, this is the case. Your site is being built in Ruby, a free, open-source programming language. We considered building in PHP, another free, open source language. The cool thing about open source software is that many of the creators do it so you can use their free stuff to make money. What people who pirate software and music (dude, music wants to be free...) don't seem to get is that it costs money to create something of value. Even more important, quality is rewarded. But, there's a difficulty in trying to get what you deserve. It's a tough PR position. Look at Google vs. Microsoft. Metallica vs. Radiohead.
Selling music and film online is tough. No one's really figured it out. NBC just left iTunes and as peer to peer software gets easier to work, the average person is not going to see the point in paying for premium content.
I acted in a "series" for superdeluxe. They have budgets (small) and attract good talent. Their stuff is, as that annoying mattress guy says "FREE!!!"
YouTube. Revver. MySpace and all those other online video places. Free.
The numbers in Smut, the industry that created the internet, are beginning to drop because of all of the free smut content online. redtube, megarotic, pornotube and at least sixty bazillion other sites all contain free, current naughtiness of the highest caliber.
Waaayyyy back in 1998, you could make a million bucks a year posting 50 shots of a naked chick a month and charge a 49.99/month subscription fee. The market has been glutted so they're doing daily live chats, blowjob giveaways and more. (or so I hear. as a mormon child of jesus, I shun all pornography and all of satan's temptations such as women in general)
Which is why premium content has got to be really, really, really premium.
3. Attention spans are short.
The sites that are the most popular are the ones where you get in, get what you want and get out.
Google: "i need all the web addresses of lesbian goth golf clubs in downtown san francisco"
IMDB: "who won the best sound editor oscar the year i was born"
deancameron.com: "when was i born?"
Lots of clicking around and hoop jumping is a turn-off. There is an entire industry now devoted to making it so the user doesn't have to read instructions or click too many times.
My point... Finally...
I suggest you start out offering a subscription area instead of a per-unit sale model.
There are lots of reasons to do this. And, obviously, I think they outweigh the reasons to use a per-unit model or I wouldn't have written this stupid-long email.
You can keep a cache of content. It will make your site sticky instead of people being bombarded with an enormous list of the same stuff each and every time they come to you.
Instead of spending hours and hours setting prices, product IDs, remembering how to tag each film etc. you tag something for sale or not for sale.
Same for keeping track of sales. Say the site earns $500 in february, you make your disbursement equally among your content providers. Ass-uming you planned on paying your providers once they hit a certain amount, you won't have to keep track of 2 dollar pay periods. You end every pay period free and clear with each one of your providers.
If someone's not selling, you don't want them stuck on your site with their stale content. You can keep them on the free area or set them a-sea.
Yes, of course it's easier to program but not that much. The difference in the time you'll spend maintaining it will be night and day. Hours a month vs. hours per day.
Once the site begins going gangbusters you move to a per-item model. It's done all the time.
As a matter of fact... tightcircle was a money-making venture because people grew to love the service which wasn't even understood when it began so much that $36/year was worth it to them. And that trust from the users to the service was one of the things attracting the folks who ended up buying tightcircle (and subsequently not doing a damned thing with it...)
Subscription will also motivate your providers to pimp the site all the time and provide great stuff. You might want to make the numbers available to them. If they see someone getting 1 download to their 20, pressure will be put on the 1 download guy to step it up instead of the 1 download guy saying "aw screw it... i'll just leave the thing up there. someone's bound to buy it someday... what do I care?" I know how gossipy the comedy world is. If everyone's participating in everyone's profit, everyone will push harder. Reward it.
So that's that... Make sense? It's quite late now, so it may have gone off into a miasma of madness.
Because I happen to know a thing or two about how to make money on the Internet, and I'm concerned that if I speak my mind and voice an unpopular position, I will suffer at the hands of my fellow performers.
Ironically, I'm writing this from my hotel room in Las Vegas, having just spoken at BlogWorld on the need for podcasters to hone their craft and find their natural voices - to be more professional at what they do.
But...I've made my living as a talk show host and talking head for years, taking positions that, to me, make eminent sense, yet to others seem counterintuitive. And I've also figured out ways to make several millions of dollars on the Internet over the last 15 years or so, affording me a unique perspective on what works, what doesn't and why (thanks, Howard Fine!) - along with what will work in the future.
So, here goes.
I'm saddened and angered that the WGA has gone on strike. I think the WGA strike, and the approach to these contract negotiations, have been the wrong way to fight the wrong battle. I think they've squandered any goodwill they had in this negotiation by picking the wrong area over which to have a fight. And the danger goes far deeper than that, as my other unions echo WGA's chants.
Let me explain.
No one, I repeat, no one, is making real money on the Internet with webisodic content right now. I'm always amazed that anyone is willing to pay me, other actors, writers and other performers to be in webisodics - and I'm on a fair number of well-known and well-respected webisodic series myself. Please watch Goodnight Burbank and Infected on Revision3. Save the ones artificially monetized as a blatant corporate sales tool (I'm happily in Pepsi/Mountain Dew's Cyberpunx, taking SAG-level pay), none is making any money.
None.
Few are spending money - actors are working for free, green screen rooms are begged, borrowed or stolen, cameras and cinematographers are being cajoled into supporting their fellow performer, but very few dollars are being spent. Most of the breakdowns we see for these shows are copy, credit and meals. The rare payments to performers in this space are welcome and cherished.
You know I'm right. You've seen Actor's Access, Now Casting and LA Casting.
It's all a big experiment, with relatively few real production dollars at risk and none coming back in return. People are dabbling. And spending very little producing to receive absolutely nothing in income. Zip. Nada.
The income side is just as abysmal. If you're producing content for the Internet, for YouTube and that ilk, if you're aggressive, you can count on a few dollars in subscription fees (I own ShowTaxi.com, so I see the numbers) and even less in advertising dollars. We're talking pennies here. And not per play.
So the Internet's Emperor currently has no clothes (or food or shelter, for that matter). And if we're honest with ourselves, we must ask: why fight for money that doesn't exist? And (this is where you'll have to trust that I know what I'm talking about) - WON'T exist for several contract cycles.
My problem is, I've suffered through this righteous indignation on the part of my unions before. And I didn't speak up. I regret that.
See, a few years ago, AFTRA pulled a similar stunt, negotiating what they thought was a very progressive victory: a triple session fee for a performer if a performer's commercial appeared on the Internet. Great, you say? We AFTRA performers all make more money, you say?
No. Not even close.
It resulted in the ad agencies that produced the spots simply refusing to authorize Internet play of those spots, and forced radio stations to drastically change their online automation playback, and to blank out those spots with AFTRA performances in their live streams with public domain classical music. So AFTRA performers never got paid that hard fought triple session fee, and AFTRA unnecessarily burdened every commercial radio station in America.
The current landscape in Internet production of video, audio, Flash, YouTube videos and the like, is still, and will remain so for the next several years, a speculative one, and one with no foreseeable income.
Why?
Here's why. While the public loves to consume online content, no one has successfully gotten them to pay for it. No model has emerged, including subscription and advertising, that generates even the most meager incomes on the most runaway popular videos.
And when does emerge, like iTunes, it gets called not a godsend, and what consumers want and are willing to pay for. No. It gets labeled "the ruin of the music industry" by NBC/Universal's leadership in their zeal to maintain outmoded budgets. Slap.
This is the important fact: the most outrageously successful videos on the biggest outlet online, YouTube, generate 7-figure plays, and low 2 and 3 figure *monthly* incomes, with short-attention-span shelf life of a few months at best, as users find the next darling to virally spread. And no one is madly clicking on the ads on YouTube pages or anywhere else. How many times have you left a video playback page on YouTube by clicking on an ad?
I find myself shaking my head in rueful concern over next summer's actor's contract negotiations when I see my SAG leader, Alan Rosenberg, sending me an email stating that "their fight (WGA's) is our fight."
Let me be very clear. I loved him as the alcoholic lawyer on The Guardian a few years back on CBS, but here, today, Rosenberg is dead wrong, and he is endangering our chances to negotiate proper and real increases in our pay rates and health benefits. He is doing so in favor of chasing after the Internet market. There is no Internet market to fight over yet. There is no market in the foreseeable future on the Internet.
Certainly, he and others are distracted by the fact that some websites like YouTube and Facebook have moronic, emotion-filled capital valuations the likes of which haven't been seen since the dot-com bust, but none are making money, and none have the near- or mid-term potential to make the kind of money that merits those valuations. Thankfully they're not individual public companies, and today's Henry Blodgetts can't hype them to death on the markets.
Unfortunately, what those websites do have is the ability to take viewers away from network and cable TV, and what have been very, very lucrative network audience and ad dollars, but darn the luck...they don't replace the lost network ad money with online ad money. And no one running these websites are telling the truth on that - it would harm their negotiations to be bought by the likes of Microsoft, Google or Yahoo.
No, it's just the same old romantic dot-com hype the mainstream press has been known for since they started covering the Internet, cluelessly, in the 90's. And in the end, the Internet's really just another delivery mechanism, another wire, with a more painful-to-watch output point (gather the family around the computer monitor?), not an incredible new market place.
Not yet.
And to make matters even worse, the mainstream media, in their zeal to cover sites like Napster, BitTorrent and Kazaa with such glowing admiration, has trained a whole generation of users to steal, or at the very least, expect everything to be free. That means that if a market does emerge, we have some really damaging speed bumps in getting the public to pay and advertisers to pay.
That, so far, has been the reality for the folks on the other side of the negotiating table.
Certainly for some producers and writers, they might make money with very little outlay by making a great piece online, creating a demand for that creative work via viral success, then selling the series as DVDs or by creating series that air on traditional channels. That's self production. That's creating your own content, so go negotiate with yourself. Most of the people producing webisodes now are doing so, hoping they'll hit a home run...and a network will notice. That's not revolutionary at all. It's what indie artists have been doing for years on the music side of things.
So the WGA, our acting and performance membership, outspoken activist celebrities and our Guild and Federation leadership are, to me, out walking the picket lines, encouraging us to do the same, posturing themselves and our futures over a vast empty wasteland that currently is being experimented with - to no predictable success.
I believe that we are far too early in the infancy of this delivery mechanism to be defiantly sticking our chins out, demanding money that doesn't exist, when DVD sales and on-demand cable plays are clearly demonstrable and are far more lucrative to producers and distributors, and from which we should be able to extract a more reasonable percentage. My advice? Go back to the table, demand to rework the DVD and VOD formulas and keep an eye on the Net over the next few years, looking for real income, but don't throw down the precious gauntlet over it.
I believe that if the WGA gets what they want, they'll find that they fought over hardly anything, and squandered an opportunity to do something useful for their membership.
And before the conspiracy theories start, I am no shill for the producers. I believe that you train people how to treat you and how well to remunerate you - and that we, as performers, are usually woefully underpaid. We deserve as much money as we are willing to demand and that the other side is willing to pay.
But in saying all this, I fear that some of you will shun me as that smart ass capitalist Ayn Randian objectivist Ruth's Chris steak-eating barbarian who doesn't grasp the fundamentals of what it's like to be a struggling artist. And there, you would be correct, right up to the "doesn't grasp..." part of that sentence. I struggle every day as an actor, a writer, a filmmaker, a voice talent and more. But those of you know know me, know that I often find a way to success, especially on the Internet.
Not, however, as a webisodic producer. There's no money in it. Yet.
So there we are. What do I do?
Do I keep silent, knowing that if I speak my mind, from what I consider to be a very informed position of first hand knowledge, I could be ostracized by my fellow performers? Or do I clearly and succinctly speak up, hoping someone, somewhere in the WGA leadership receives this message as a forward, even a "can you believe how stupid this guy is?" forward, and changes their tactics to deal with the real and pressing issues they have?
I've made up my mind. Here goes:
I support the troops, but I don't support the war.
I support my fellow writers' quest for better pay and better benefits, but I do not support the WGA strike over Internet production I think it is a mistake to get wrapped around the axle on demanding monies for Internet usage. And, I believe that not only should the WGA take this demand off the table, I believe that if SAG and AFTRA pick up this fight next summer, they will be doing all of their members, including me, a grave disservice. The producers will balk, knowing there really, really, really is no money to be shared, and will not be willing to capitulate. And then we'll strike, and we will all waste more time on the picket lines, labeling our employers incorrectly as being "unfair".
There.
I urge you to pass this on to others in our community. And I welcome your comments, screams, threats and more at 888-488-DAVID. You can also send your email to me here or at davidlawrence@aol.com.
Thanks.
David Lawrence
I look forward to hearing the tales of the death threats and weeping "what am i going to do!?!" emails to him.
In Chicago. Sort of a paid vacation. Doing two shows.
Nice dinner with Victor this evening after our flights.
Not only did Victor have to wait for ME for the first time ever before we left, I seem to have forgotten to pack the "Dean Cameron" robe and the Ibrahim Abacha clothes.
Ah well. Fortunately, WE'RE NOT IN SCOTLAND and they have shops here where you can purchase clothes for not so much money.
In other news...
I'm pretty sure I make no secret that I'm one of those silly Libertarians who believe that people do best when left to their own devices and most folks are fine if you leave them alone to enjoy their lives.
A sort of tangential group, The Drug Policy Alliance, aksed me to record a spot for them and I jumped at the chance. I love doing stuff where I can actually do work for them, after they've helped me (to feel extremely lonely and sad that most people want a senator to do everything for them) to examine lots of things I used to believe and then change those beliefs and, most importantly, educate myself a bit.
Apparently, it recently passed the 100,000 views mark. Not too bad.
Someday my sleep patterns will return to normal. Maybe not. Regardless:
I got all inspired by doug stanhope and rewrote the text on the security edition home page. It's probably too on the nose, but I sure do like it.
Doug Stanhope. Holy toledo. The Bill of Rights - Security Edition: The First Ten Amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America, printed on each side of a sturdy, playing-card-sized, pieces of metal.
Highlighted in red is the extremely controversial fourth amendment; the "search and seizure" amendment, which makes much of law enforcement so dificult. The Bill of Rights - Security Edition is available for purchase as a Single Card, the Trinity Pack of Three Cards or the wildly popular Five Card Frequent Flier Pack.
You may take the Bill of Rights - Security Edition with you the next time you travel by air. When directed to, however, please cooperate with the courageous men and women of the TSA, and quickly toss your rights in the convenient plastic bin provided for your use at no extra charge. Please do not hold up the line and delay other passengers. It's best for you and your fellow citizens if you listen closely and follow instructions. Once you've been searched and cleared by the busy agents, your rights will be returned to you.
If the rights are somehow misplaced or confiscated, please be aware of other travelers behind you who may want to get to their gate and would appreciate your haste. The faster you get through the security checkpoint, the more time you may have to have a cocktail at the airport bar and watch the game or discuss politics. You chose to travel with the Bill of Rights - Security Edition. Any difficulty you are having was brought upon by yourself. You can't expect to be treated any differently than anyone else. It wouldn't be fair. Remember: it's the sense of collective cooperation and camraderie which defines true citizenship in our great country.
These are dangerous times and safety is the number one priority of your Democratic and Republican leaders.
Though this is a highly charged and emotional time, I trust that you will keep a cool head and continue to support the bill of rights and the rights of law abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.
I'm sure you are getting calls and pressure to create more gun laws, but you've been around long enough to know that more laws won't stop criminals from doing something bad.
I stumbled upon some videos of a guy who calls himself "the amazing racist". It's sort of like Jackass or Borat with no ideas and completely missing the point.
It's possible that the people he's harassing are the best actors ever, but I find that difficult to believe.
Basically, he has a small video crew film him as he harasses people who have a different skin color than his.
His domain is registed with godaddy.com
So, I sent this note to tech support.
MY LETTER TO GODADDY.COM
I have several domains registered with you. Not enough to really make a difference, but a few.
I am a firm believer in the 1st amendment of the U.S. Constitution and, an equal supporter of the free market, which is why I'm writing to you.
I am thrilled that I live in a country that allows www.theamazingracist.net to exist. It is a great thing that this man has the freedom to air his racist views and make videos of himself treating people horribly and posting them on the web. Seriously. Good for him. We're so lucky to live in this country.
I'm also thrilled that your terms of service include the following paragraph.
quote
"Except as set forth below, Go Daddy may also cancel Your use of the Services, after thirty (30) days, if You are using the Services, as determined by Go Daddy in its sole discretion, in association with spam or morally objectionable activities. Morally objectionable activities will include, but not be limited to: activities designed to defame, embarrass, harm, abuse, threaten, slander or harass third parties; activities prohibited by the laws of the United States and/or foreign territories in which You conduct business; activities designed to encourage unlawful behavior by others, such as hate crimes, terrorism and child pornography; activities that are tortuous, vulgar, obscene, invasive of the privacy of a third party, racially, ethnically, or otherwise objectionable; activities designed to impersonate the identity of a third party; illegal access to other computers or networks (i.e., hacking); distribution of Internet viruses or similar destructive activities; and activities designed to harm or use unethically minors in any way. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, in the event Go Daddy cancels Your Services during the first thirty (30) days after You purchase the Services, You will receive a refund of any fees paid to Go Daddy in connection with the Services being canceled. In the event Go Daddy deletes Your Services because they are being used in association with spam or morally objectionable activities, no refund will be issued. You agree You will not be entitled to a refund of any fees paid to Go Daddy if, for any reason, Go Daddy takes corrective action with respect to Your improper or illegal use of its Services."
end quote
Though none of his videos are on his web site right now, he does have them posted on various video hosting sites. It looks as though "The Amazing Racist" engages in "activites that are... racially... objectionable..." and, to a lesser extent "activities designed to defame, embarass, harm, abuse, threaten, slander or harass third parties..." and uses his site to promote these activities.
Again, it is terrific that this man can say what he wants about anyone he wants to anywhere he chooses. It's also great that the free market guarantees that his fellow citizens can apply financial pressure on businesses to end their associations with him.
I'm not "outraged" or "horrified" or "disgusted" or any of those words that one is supposed to use when something like this is encountered. Not at all. I'm excited. I'm excited to see our system work the way it's supposed to. I'm excited to see an important decision being made without the involvement of the government. We get to watch "the marketplace of ideas" in action. We're adults. We can handle things like these like grown-ups. We don't need a babysitter to step in and take care of it.
I urge you to cancel "www.theamazingracist.net" as soon as you legally can.
