Do what I do...

Chamber005

Carbonite Member
So I've brought up a few times on these boards about everyone getting together, pooling their funds and making a feature film. Aaaand usually it's been met with rage and general loathing, lol.

But I'm still seeing lots of people trying to turn a buck, trying this way and that to find some possible way to achieve funding, etc. Yesterday there was this post about someone trying to get paid putting video ads in front of his short films. Because that in any conceivable universe will ever turn even the most remote profit...

I still feel that the members here are missing a HUGE opprotunity by not coming together as one collective force. I see how most people would have major issues with pooling financial resources on a project that may not be creator-owned. I think it's a mature, long term investment avenue to attend, but for the average 20-something, the idea of investing in anything and it not being "me, me, me" is alien and confusing.

So instead, how about the people here coming together to form an alliance of MARKETING?

Besides making the bulk of my wealth in the banking industry, on the side I work with various charities and also do marketing strategizing and implementation for small businesses.

So, for instance, I go to your local auto supply store. I ask if they'd like me to improve their profits on a strictly commission basis. (e.g. your small business makes 200K in profits annually, if I can make that profit go to, say, 275K over the course of 12 months, I get a contractual percentage of those profits). Based on what amount I believe I can improve their profits, I structure my own marketing expenditures for their business accordingly. Most small businesses can't afford a marketing person and can't afford marketing materials. I do both for "free" and make my money on the back end. I think it's a good way to service my community here in Chicago while building relationships, networking, etc.

None of that actually applies to you guys per se, but I'm hoping that maybe I can help some of you see past the immediate and think more long term. We all go to great lengths cultivating our creative projects, shouldn't there also be the same level of long-term investment in the marketing of whatever it is you created?

So let's say Barry Green, Zak, Luis and 30 other people all had features or short film collections they were trying to promote (though this would apply to comics and books as well). We all know that friends and family can only do so much. If those 30 filmmakers all got together, though, and every day, three times per day on their individual social networking sites, blogs, etc, promoted the film of one person in the group, imagine the breadth of advertising that would breed. An onslaught of people all promoting YOUR FILM on a specific day from 30 different locations all at once for a 12 month calendar year. Let's say the day was May 15th and the following month it would be June 7th, then again on July 10th, you could schedule all of your friends, families and co-workers to also email and facebook and twitter and MySpace about the "event" that is the marketing of your film.

There are really two kinds of marketing, there's branding which is a long term process that has much more to do consistency in a specific geographical area or "genre metric" and then there's the What-Everyone-Is-Talking-About style of marketing. I believe deeply in both, but the one that typically financially drowns the average small business or artist is the latter.

But let's look at the ROI of something like what I'm proposing against the typical style of branding, pay-per-click advertising.

You have a DVD for sale. Let's say you're getting a .20 click-thru average on your ads @ 500K unique impressions leaving you at about 1,000 pull-thrus and maybe a 5% sale ratio (10% is a good sales average, but with online marketing I think the average is closer to zero than it is 10%, so we'll split the difference). Those 500K unique impressions cost you, approx $100.00. At $100.00 you sold 50 DVDs. CreateSpace takes, what? 40% I think? So you charged 12 bucks per item to try and make sure you can compete with a star-filled movie that's also on DVD in your same genre, and so your at about $360.00, minus the $100 = $260.00. Not a bad profit if you can keep it going week in and week out. This particular marketing campaign might see you around $13,000 at the end of the year (after adjustments), plus you have the remaining 5200 bucks (as well as the cost of production) that you get to write-off at the end of the fiscal year.

This is just a single aspect of your marketing, if you can get the same or greater returns from 4 or 5 other sources, including local branding which would yield a much higher rate of return per DVD, it seems resonable that you could take in 60-70K annually after adjustments. That's not going to make you a millionaire overnight, but it means you have a solid following and that you'll be able to afford production costs on your next film -- and will have much lower marketing costs for it as you've already established an audience.

But let's now look at the same metric for what I'm talking about -- an ACTIVE coalition.

For 12 months, once per month, you have 30 filmmakers, all with their own networks of, say, 500 people each (that's network, internet as well as personal). You, personally, should have 500 people who you can draw off of for support (though 5,000 is better).

The 30 filmmakers equal 15,000 people. Now this is completely different than branding and "unique impressions", at least 50% of those 15K are going to be people who will actually take personal time to listen to what that person has to say. You assemble your own 500 (50% = 250 X, say, 60% of people who will actually help you, leaves you at 150 X the average person's 75 contacts (50% = 37.5 X 40% because now it's second hand = 3 = 150 + 3 X 150 totals 500, which is what your original network was which is important to maintain when figuring out your marketing strategies)

So now you have, once per month, an onslaught of marketing. It will be the same people, but if you can hit 20% over the course of a full year (which is logical based on the style of marketing which is, essentially, word-of-mouth), on the full charge of $19.99 from your personal website store for $3.00 + shipped ($3.99) DVDs, you're looking at $19.99 - $6.99 = $13.00 X 7500 + 500 @ 20% = $20,800, and that's all profit.

All because you got together with 30 other filmmakers and all of you marketed someone else's film every day and you aligned your own social network to promote you on a single day every month.

Both of these strategies are good, and of course both should be an aspect of your 4 or 5 (or more) ways that you market. But every single person sitting here on these threads today who has an independent film sitting on their shelf is literally watching more than 20 thousands dollars (as well as the additonal word-of-mouth that starts to compound once, twice, ten times over) pass them by.

For this to work, I'd advise using a system of threes. So all of the filmmakers and your own network should promote your DVD once in the morning, once in the afternoon and once in the evening for maximum exposure. And since yours in the ONLY film they have to promote that day, it's not rocket science.

So there you guys go, free advice, tons or profits, no monies required.

(and if you DON'T have a film yet and just want to make money off this kind of strategy so that you can produce your own film, build your own coalition of 20 (paid) + 20 (unpaid) filmmakers, tell them that you'll promote their movie if they promote the movie you're promoting. So now you have 20 movies to promote and 20 filmmakers who are promoting them (totalling 40 filmmakers, half of which you profit from, half of which promote your promotion so that you'll promote theirs). Obviously the movie will have had to be out of "circulation" for more than a year so that you can examine the filmmakers' previous year's balance sheet. Then you get a percentage of the profit difference from year one to year two of the film, which, if you have 20 marketed-for-profit filmmakers and they all make an additional 20K, you get 40% of that = $80,000.00 per year and presto magico you're in marketing!)

Good luck!!
 
Last edited:
Some cool ideas, and I think something like this could work. I would totally be on board to do this. I'm a marketing dufus, and it's obviously a BIG part of the business side of filmmaking that many of us ignore and dream about winning the lottery instead.


I've also contemplated a dvxuser member-funded feature and where are those threads? I'm in for that too. Attach it to a dvxfest where the entrants pay $100-200 to enter, the winner gets the money for a feature, (only for a feature not for strip-clubs Ben Slicker) and the entrants have some small stake in it, thereby giving them more incentive to participate in the marketing like you describe.

Bingo, we're all rich and famous! :)
 
My primary initial interest in dxvUser was its potential as a place to assemble production teams.

But I found other stuff to stick around for.
 
Some cool ideas, and I think something like this could work. I would totally be on board to do this. I'm a marketing dufus, and it's obviously a BIG part of the business side of filmmaking that many of us ignore and dream about winning the lottery instead.


I've also contemplated a dvxuser member-funded feature and where are those threads? I'm in for that too. Attach it to a dvxfest where the entrants pay $100-200 to enter, the winner gets the money for a feature, (only for a feature not for strip-clubs Ben Slicker) and the entrants have some small stake in it, thereby giving them more incentive to participate in the marketing like you describe.

Bingo, we're all rich and famous! :)

LOL

Where were you when I was defending everyone coming together to make a feature?? BELIEVE ME this kind of talk will get you scolded and mutilated around these parts. If people see any mention of a dollar sign (unless it's dollars coming to them) they want blood!

What's great is that in this kind of economy when everyone is running scared and terrified and just searching for some small notion of security, guys who are willing to risk their time and money are literally rulers of the financial universe. You should see people's faces when I walk in and tell them that I want to work for them at no upfront cost and that I'll be utilizing my own dollars for the marketing of THEIR shop or product. It's like you're The Angel Superman, no joke. That's why I wake up everyday EXCITED to do my JOB (even if it isn't my only job).

What's funny is that it would be IMPOSSIBLE for me to make as much money if I asked for it upfront. A commission percentage is ALWAYS more lucrative -- it's just much, much, much more risky, which is why you have to be passionate about the overall goal and future incentive.

What I think is equally hilarious is that if you look at the metric in my previous post, who is making the most money, the filmmaker who actually made a film and is trying to promote it, or the marketing guy who is just promoting the film? Seriously, 20K vs 80K. The marketing guy, the guy who has NOTHING TO SELL, is making four times more money (in that specific scenario).

That's why I always separate the creative and the business. I'm in business to make money, I'm in the arts to make art. It doesn't mean my art can't make money, it just doesn't need to for me to be successful, because I'm already successful. If my art is successful, the joy comes not from the financial gains, but from the fact that a lot of people are experiencing it.

Heck, right now I'm producing a motion picture book (that is, an audio book with pictures with minimal animation). That is a NICHE thing, man. lol But I don't care because it's what I want to do while I've extended production of the feature I'm shooting.

If 19 more people have your kind of attitude, you guys could really do something!

Of course what I was talking about was for people who already have a film to sell. To your point, though, 200 bucks a piece would be 25 X 200 = $5,000.00. That's not bad, but my former idea was about people voting (all things being geographically equal, of course).

So, let's say we have 20 filmmakers in LA on DVX. Those 20 filmmakers all vote for their favorite filmmaker, screenplay, actors, etc. They all chip in, say, 400 bucks a piece to pay for general location and food and tech expenses. (so on about $8,000.00). SOMEONE in the group will have filming equipment, obviously.

Everyone votes, one of the filmmakers becomes director, one becomes editor, assistant editor, one becomes 1st AD, 2nd AD, marketing manager and DP and the remaining 13 do various production jobs, maybe even including acting, depending on their skill set. Now you have an ensemble group. The first movie is funded, released, sold, profits are divided equally minus the 10K for the next shoot, and then they vote all over again.

The problem with this scenario is that someone might not get to direct for 20 years, lol. But, realistically, a group like this not dissolving after, say, 5 years is unrealistic. So I'd predict 3 features in 5 years which means 3 directors. BUT, people are making a profit, they're getting production credits, they're getting hella connections and are a part of something that could develop into a full fledged movie studio. And nothing says they can't use their profits to be making their own movie -- and we already talked about the marketing strategies once they get there.

Besides all of my business and charity stuff and artistic ventures, I want to someday own a massive green screen studio here in Chicago for animation and CGI work. I'm hoping to get various contracts with DePaul, Columbia, Northwestern, Loyola, UIC and every other local school that has a film department, as well as renting the space for independent filmmakers (but really it's just so I can have a massive green screen studio that pays for itself, right?). A piece of real estate the size that I want to purchase is still about 5 years out, but it's on the path. And that's what young filmmakers need to really start visualizing -- how are they going to achieve their path to becoming a successful filmmaker in today's market?

You can either spend $50,000 (or more) on a degree in filmmaking, or you can buy yourself onto some menial production where you can work with up and coming stars for five hundred bucks. Because there are very, very, very good screenplays that can be produced by people who own equipment for $8,000.00. Most of the guys here could shoot Glengary or Big Kahuna for $8,000.00.

I like your attitude, though! Hopefully 19 more people will come here and feel similar to the way you do, and BAM! You're working on a feature film that will have BUILT-IN marketing because of all the people associated with the project!
 
BELIEVE ME this kind of talk will get you scolded and mutilated around these parts.
I guess I'll believe it when you link to the threads wherein it happened.

If it's really that important to you that I believe it, I guess.

What's great is that in this kind of economy when everyone is running scared and terrified and just searching for some small notion of security, guys who are willing to risk their time and money are literally rulers of the financial universe.
The rulers of the financial universe risk other peoples' time and money, to a much greater degree than they risk their own.

And considering that once you reach the 'rulership' level, the Feds are standing there with an open checkbook to bail out your risk-taking ass when the risk comes up bad, somehow I'm not particularly impressed. Offer me an ironclad backstop to make up for whatever idiotic risk I choose to assume, and you'll see me assuming some spectacularly idiotic risks, too. Why not? Can't lose, if it's not really my money to begin with.
 
Last edited:
I guess I'll believe it when you link to the threads wherein it happened.

If it's really that important to you that I believe it, I guess.

I guess it's not THAT important. lol

But wait for it, 3...2...1, at least 10 people on these boards flamed me for saying everyone should come together, pool their financial resources and shoot a picture right here in Cafe. Every single person that flamed me said, essentially, "Why would I give money to make someone else's movie?" I've no doubt they'll all surface once again.

Aaaaaand that's why they're broke with no production credits. lol

But if they don't?!?!??!

AWESOME!!! (I doubt it won't happen, but that would be AMAZING!)

Please, stay far, far, far away everyone who is constantly negative about people coming together and forming something. If 20 people got together here I would totally put in 500 bucks and a vote, and I wouldn't even care to work on the project!

Regardless, the first two replies have been positive and awesome, let's keep this thread for people who have positive input and positive thoughts about all this!

:D
 
Last edited:
Well...

1) I am not broke. Without being crass about it, let's just say that I am a good six figures away from being broke.

2) You mean, every single person who flamed you, whose flaming is conveniently unavailable to read for content because there's no linkage provided? Are you *sure* this happened? Flaming is not a big part of the board culture around here, which is why the statement impresses me as suspicious.

3) As it happens I have a number of production credits; the number is now in excess of fifty. See #1.

4) I don't know that constructively pointing out issues in need of resolution is necessarily being negative about coming together and forming something. If people choose to offer constructive criticism, the best thing to do is either accept it, or figure out where it's wrong and offer a correction.
 
That sounds more like voicing their concern than flaming. If people don't support your notion you need to sell it better, not turn disagreement into a personal attack. To that end, implying as you did in this post that people aren't lining up to send in their funds because us young people don't understand investment like you do really isn't a good way to go about it.

As for the actual topic, while it does have potential you are in the wrong market. I don't want to invest in someone else's films. Any investments I make are going to be in something a lot more sound. The people here generally want to create their own thing. While collectives and co-ops can be a good model for that, the original point you discussed doesn't lend itself to what people want.

For the current one, the marketing co-op, yeah. That's doable. But (keep in mind I read fast) if 30 people are marketing each other's films, won't the people who see what they're doing start to ignore the suggestions halfway through?
 
Although it seems like a winner ought to compensate for some proportion of turkeys. Certainly works that way, for the majors...
 
Reading about how Ikea uses FB and other networking sites to promote their products through social sweepstakes and the advent of services like KickStart has me really intrigued.

Can't DVXFest repackage the festival winners and best runners-up into a DVD that could be promoted through more far-reaching sites like FB? I still like the idea of DVXUser collaboration, but I see a lot of landmines trying to pull off a sanctioned, underwritten project by DVXUser directly.

That's not to say that you couldn't KickStart your own DVXUser short if you had the proper concept, motivation and resources.
 
There's no harm in working on new ideas, but they need to be checked against reality. Entertainment is cheap and easy to come by, and there are many, many free options (even if some aren't legal, you're still competing against them). 20% is a ludicrously high figure. Think more like 0.2%, and even that's optimistic. Perhaps 0.02% is closer to what you might actually do -- unless you have some compelling reason for people to be interested.

If you have something specifically targeted toward an audience who's willing to pay for your specific thing, then you might get somewhere. But the spaghetti-against-the-wall approach won't particularly work -- and if you're unwilling to make something which DOES target an audience (i.e., due to "artistic integrity" concerns), you're basically playing the lottery. Maybe something will happen to catch the mood of an audience and hit (it happens once or twice a decade or so). But it almost certainly won't, especially if you have no recognizable talent involved. And you're then pretty much dealing only with people who will put up a few bucks simply to "support" whatever it is you're doing. That's not a market; that's just charity, and it won't be a living.

Anyone will watch something on YouTube. Getting them to pony up $20 is considerably harder. You have to fill a need, a want, and make something a lot of people would be willing to pay for. All the marketing and word-of-mouth in the world won't matter if you don't.

So, concentrate on making something that's marketable. Then do the marketing. You really can't do it any other way and expect to get anywhere.
 
Good points, David. The rule is that music and filmed entertainment are much democratized today. Monetizing your work, with so much competing work out there, is becoming harder and harder every day.

Another poster in another thread was mentioning today that agencies and production houses are losing market-share to independents with DSLRs who have nothing better to do than shoot spec commercials under the guise of "winning" something for their efforts. Then they graduate out of the viral market into the commercial markets they've helped dilute.

And this morning I watched a 30 minute wedding video - on purpose. It was one of the most fulfilling cinematic experiences I've had recently. So who knows what will work?
 
See, personally, if someone doesn't like my ideas I don't work with them. It's simple. I'm happy and successful. I don't change my ideas and strategies based on criticism, I simply ignore the people who are criticizing because they aren't the ones with ideas, they're the ones who say why ideas are bad.

In the end, results and brand management are all that matter. If someone has input regarding the way their brand is perceived, that's not my call. But when it comes to marketing and ROI, they have absolutely no input. If they did, they wouldn't need me.

And to using other people's money to invest. I go both ways on that, but mostly I'm not wanting money from anything that isn't a lending institution or my own personal "bank". If you have something like an Equity Based Life Insurance policy, you can actually borrower monies gaining at a 6% rate for 0% interest. It's still "borrowed" money, but at least you're borrowing it from yourself and thus retaining all of the dividends and paying no percentage.

The moment you use someone else's money you ARE risking something. I am absolutely stress free spending 10K on marketing using my own money; the second it's someone else's money, I just lost a year off of my life. Not all assets are financial. I, personally, like to exist in business based on what I do with what I achieve. If I'm running around asking people other than lending institutions for money, that's not how I feel best in life. I'd rather give money to someone else to go make me money than vice versa.

I understand the Rich Dad Poor Dad theory that everything you get should be gotten using other people's resources, but that, to me, is very much a real estate specific kind of formula. And, at best, you're talking about a partnership, which isn't something I look for in my business life. I have partners that I'm happy with; I'm simply encouraging people here to do in kind. Just trying to pass on information (another asset lol) so that hopefully they too can start building whatever it is they're hoping to build.

What I'm talking about is for the SMALL SCALE, micro-budget indie filmmakers, the guys starting out, looking to get moving in the business, utilizing the digital-based market we live in. Obviously if I need 1 million dollars to invest in something (like real estate or a film), I can't borrow that from a traditional lending institution (*I* can't). In that circumstance it makes sense. But again, *I* can't borrow a million dollars; why would anyone here, who isn't specifically in real estate transaction, be able to borrow a million dollars?

Using other people's money makes sense in some instances, but I think a lower level, more common-ground place for that same principle is the pooling of resources, finances and networks (or any one of them individually).

IMO
 
There's no harm in working on new ideas, but they need to be checked against reality. Entertainment is cheap and easy to come by, and there are many, many free options (even if some aren't legal, you're still competing against them). 20% is a ludicrously high figure. Think more like 0.2%, and even that's optimistic. Perhaps 0.02% is closer to what you might actually do -- unless you have some compelling reason for people to be interested.

If you have something specifically targeted toward an audience who's willing to pay for your specific thing, then you might get somewhere. But the spaghetti-against-the-wall approach won't particularly work -- and if you're unwilling to make something which DOES target an audience (i.e., due to "artistic integrity" concerns), you're basically playing the lottery. Maybe something will happen to catch the mood of an audience and hit (it happens once or twice a decade or so). But it almost certainly won't, especially if you have no recognizable talent involved. And you're then pretty much dealing only with people who will put up a few bucks simply to "support" whatever it is you're doing. That's not a market; that's just charity, and it won't be a living.

Anyone will watch something on YouTube. Getting them to pony up $20 is considerably harder. You have to fill a need, a want, and make something a lot of people would be willing to pay for. All the marketing and word-of-mouth in the world won't matter if you don't.

So, concentrate on making something that's marketable. Then do the marketing. You really can't do it any other way and expect to get anywhere.


See, I don't agree. If my friend Josh wrote a book and I asked my 500 friends to go and buy his book on Kindle or iBook or printed from CreateSpace, and I did it once per month, three times per day for an entire year, I'm relatively certain I could get 20% to purchase it. I think you're right in that it has to be packaged appropriately, but 20% on a REFERRAL is actually on the low end. I typically see 80-90% turn over on referrals in banking. If my same friend told his friend to go buy their comics at XYZ comic shop, I'd say there's an 80% chance he'd shop there.
 
See, I don't agree. If my friend Josh wrote a book and I asked my 500 friends to go and buy his book on Kindle or iBook or printed from CreateSpace, and I did it once per month, three times per day for an entire year, I'm relatively certain I could get 20% to purchase it. I think you're right in that it has to be packaged appropriately, but 20% on a REFERRAL is actually on the low end. I typically see 80-90% turn over on referrals in banking. If my same friend told his friend to go buy their comics at XYZ comic shop, I'd say there's an 80% chance he'd shop there.

If it were that easy, I'd have vacation homes in three cities and a private jet to take me to them. But it's not, and I don't.

I guess you'll find that out soon enough on your own.
 
See, personally, if someone doesn't like my ideas I don't work with them. It's simple. I'm happy and successful. I don't change my ideas and strategies based on criticism, I simply ignore the people who are criticizing because they aren't the ones with ideas, they're the ones who say why ideas are bad.

Sorry, but this just sounds like American Idol contestants who tell a panel of unanimous judges that they're wrong, the audition was great, and they don't know what they're talking about. Except they wouldn't be sitting behind the table if they didn't.
 
I guess it's not THAT important. lol

But wait for it, 3...2...1, at least 10 people on these boards flamed me for saying everyone should come together, pool their financial resources and shoot a picture right here in Cafe. Every single person that flamed me said, essentially, "Why would I give money to make someone else's movie?" I've no doubt they'll all surface once again.

Aaaaaand that's why they're broke with no production credits. lol

But if they don't?!?!??!

AWESOME!!! (I doubt it won't happen, but that would be AMAZING!)

Please, stay far, far, far away everyone who is constantly negative about people coming together and forming something. If 20 people got together here I would totally put in 500 bucks and a vote, and I wouldn't even care to work on the project!

Regardless, the first two replies have been positive and awesome, let's keep this thread for people who have positive input and positive thoughts about all this!

:D

There have been attempts by DVXuser members to come together and make a feature, a few times over the six-year span of the board before you joined, and not one has worked -- always for the same reasons. DVXuser can't be the only place where something similar has played out, either.

If someone told you that, and I'm sure at least one person did, it wasn't a "flame."
 
Chamber, given your confidence in this model - given that you are advising other people to expend their resources and assume risk based upon your promotion of this model - I assume that you have at least one successful project that has earned out, using it.

So, where can we see this project? Youtube? A dedicated site? The shelf at the local Blockbuster?

I mean, I assume that you wouldn't promote something like this without evidence that demonstrates its practicality, *and* apparently you don't cope very well with being questioned on anything, so how about showing us how you have successfully exploited this concept you're presenting?
 
Back
Top