By lance weiler, March 28th, 2008

pod.jpg

This edition of TCIBR is brought to you by IndieFlix and Breakthrough Distribution – Dan Goldman is a critical acclaimed comic book artist and illustrator. His most recent project “Shooting War” went from being a free online comic to sparking a bidding war. Various major publishing and production interests battled it out for the publishing and film rights. Goldman is a strong believer in the concept of crowdsourcing and micropatrons and a number of his new ventures are embracing the concept of audience as collaborator.

For more on Dan and his work visit www.dangoldman.net

shootingwar.jpg

poddown.jpg podsub.jpg digpodbutton.gif itunes.gif
To listen NOW click the play button below.

Download Adobe Flash Player.

Download Adobe Flash Player.

  • Share/Bookmark

Posted in audience biz comics community crowdsourced discovery doc experiment interview online podcast social change

lance weiler is the founder of the WorkBook Project and also a story architect of film, tv and games. He's written and directed two feature films THE LAST BROADCAST and HEAD TRAUMA. He's currently developing a number of transmedia projects

RELATED
COMMENTS

  • btw, the way Ryan... thanks for all the thoughts... those are great insights.

  • I think it's a little early to write off cable VOD. I'm not thinking about today, I'm thinking about tomorrow. This downturn is presenting opportunities for new release windows and I'm thinking its time for us to collectively redefine the model. I'm not satisfied with the way things are. Someone will emerge with the right kind of influence and innovative spirit, I'm certain of it, to instill some serious, lasting change.

    It's like the Walmart thing -- Walmart is the biggest seller of DVDs and traditionally you need to have distribution to get your DVD there, right? but that hasn't stopped me from making an effort toward selling our film in bulk thru a subdistributer. There was a time when you had to do the same for Netflix, and more and more filmmakers are reaching brick and mortar outlets via subdistributers and fulfilling their own orders – Hunter Weeks, for example.

    I've got a short on all the internet platforms you listed via IndieFlix and I'm grateful for it. They have made incredible strides on behalf of filmmakers and I look forward to how their services will grow. But the views to $$$ ratio is not the greatest. 70% of 2¢ per view on Hulu is the reality because sponsors are not throwing much money at ad-supported content. Not enough anyway.

    I feel like iTunes aside, all internet-based VOD is a great vehicle for exposure but that DVD and the potential of Cable VOD has numbers that can truly sustain us if we can find a way to bypass the middlemen.

    Filmmakers who cultivate true fans and nurture their audience are in a great position to leverage that community's support. The truth of the matter is that most filmmakers who strike deals with distributers work just as hard to promote and market their films, only they see less income for it. You can do your own theatrical as IndieFlix proved with April Showers, or you can go to FreeStyle Releasing like "We Live In Public" did and strike a service deal.

    But man, no way am I selling my film for 20 years to an IFC should the offer come. I can do much better partnering with the right people in non-exclusive deals, strategizing my own theatrical, negotiating my own DVD bulk sales, working with IndieFlix to accomplish the things they do so well, etc, etc. Why would I develop a strategy that relies on the unreliable?

  • Hi Zak- this is based on our experience with The Graduates...

    We do NOT have a cable VOD deal, our VOD is all online, and the percentages are much better than what you outlined. On the other side, a cable VOD deal looks better especially with IFC's name attached. That's the trade-off for indies- you (currently) have to take shitty deals for exposure.

    IFC's 15K "digitization fee" is brilliantly titled. Assuming the filmmaker sends IFC the requested deliverables, you're just paying for the privilege of having cable VOD and using IFC's name (ie: not for "digitization" of anything). But there's not an alternative (that we've found).

    Filmmakers, if they're smart, can use that to their advantage though, and treat the cable release as advertising for DVD sales, theatrical runs, etc. It's a model a lot of people are talking about now, using release avenues with weak percentages to promote more traditional release avenues.

    Just one example- our Hulu release, where anyone can watch for free, is helping DVD sales and ticket sales on our ongoing theatrical run, though the actual streaming does not return a huge percentage per viewer.

    This is just my take, but the IFC model isn't really a helpful discussion because the vast majority of indies will never have to decide if that's a good deal or not. The average indie doesn't get into Sundance, doesn't get attention form IFC, etc... and focusing on these models can distract from preparing a competent or hopefully sophisticated strategy for release, using all the available tools.

    We go through IndieFlix, who takes 30% flat. For that we have good real estate on AmazonVOD, Hulu, and iTunes, and soon in some brick and mortar stores and RedBox. Because of their relationship with these companies (and because the companies often look for seasonal or themed promotions), we've been featured on the front page of these outlets at different times, driving very good traffic. For us it's been worth the 30% fee. After the digital outlets take their cut, we walk with 20%-30%. I'll take that over 6% any day. I wouldn't mind IFC-level exposure, but I'm a lot more inspired by 25%.

    iTunes and cableVOD outlets are still more exclusive: iTunes charges $700-$1000 to place a film on its site. Depending who you go through (we use Tunecore) this includes encoding to their specs. It's complicated, but for 700-1000 you can be on iTunes in two-three months. So, still huge barriers to entry: money and time. Clearly it's worse with cable.

    If the cost of delivering digital content drops by 50% every year (which is what we've heard over and over again), then the cost to filmmakers should drop as well. However, outlets and aggregators have a strong, strong hand because they control so much traffic, that they will be able to squeeze indies for many years to come. iTunes should drop their fees and bring on a lot more content, but it seems like they've deemed that bad business for them, for some reason.

    IFC knows it's name and access is worth quite a bit. If filmmakers want to circumvent weak deals like that (and often a deal like that isn't even on the table), the solution is sort of simple. You have to get really good at driving your own audience to your film. The actual cost of delivering your film to an audience is cheap, and it does drop every year, especially if you: release digitally; prepare for audience building with lots of free content; and devote time and energy to a long release window. I think this would be a much, much better focal point for the average indie.

    I could go on and on, but I wanted to jump in and hopefully steer the average indie away from worrying about IFC and cableVOD, when the reality is going to be AmazonVOD, Hulu, iTunes, Joost, etc. for soooo many filmmakers.

blog comments powered by Disqus
  • twitter
  • facebook
  • delicious
  • youtube
  • vimeo

Join the WorkBook Project mailing list - enter your email below...

WORKBOOK PROJECT flickr
DIY Days: Town Hall PanelDIY Days: Town Hall PanelDIY Days: Town Hall PanelDIY Days: Town Hall PanelDIY Days: Town Hall PanelDIY Days: Town Hall PanelDIY Days: Town Hall PanelDIY Days: Town Hall PanelDIY Days: Town Hall Panel
WORKBOOK PROJECT twitter
READ

There are no events to show at this time.

Podcast Archive