ALL PLEASE READ: Would You...

clive said:
Horses,

Water,

Drink etc.

Thanks for reminding me why I won't work with UK producers anymore.
Click to expand...

Not at all Clive and I'm stunned you take that opinion. I know what you are saying and I appricate the advice. The fact I dont agree shouldnt make me less of a producer/person.

I have been in the Uk industry for a while now and its getting tighter and tighter. I want, with the contacts I have and the outlets I know, to try something different, to break to mould, to think outside of the box.

If it fails then so be it but if it desnt, just think about what it could lead to.
 
Phil it's not about whether you agree with me or not -- it's about the fact that you asked for feedback on your idea -- you got a negative response to your proposal across the board -- and then instead of thinking "Maybe I need to rethink this" you go "Well, I'm going to do it anyway, because I'm sure I'm right."

Every UK producer I've ever met is exactly the same -- they're all incapable of admitting that they're wrong and as a consequence they make the same business errors over and over and over again.

It gets tedious after you've seen exactly the same thing played out three or four times.

The reason that UK producers are like this is that they are obsessed with control -- they'd rather keep a project small than loose control. So when things go wrong with funding, they always look for solutions that are their best shot at retaining control, rather than looking at what the best business options are. This is fine, but the people who end up paying for their need to retain control are the people who work for them.

The whole UK film industry is consistently screwed by guys who have a pathological need to keep things small.

I took me ten years to realize that it's waste of time working with people like that and also the reason I've refused three options on my screenplays from UK producer already this year.
 
directorik said:
It's fun to see this evolving. Now you are closer to a fairly standard model - an investment group. The different levels might work. You aren't promising anything to 15 to 20 thousand people.

Even so, as a producer I see this as a logistical nightmare - 2,000 to 5,000 investors. Just as an example:

5 Platinmum Plus (£5,000) - £25,000
20 Platinmum (£2,500) - £50,000
30 Gold (£750) £22,500
50 Silver (£100) £5,000
95 people for a total of £102,500
You will still need 1,900 people at £25 or 4,750 people at £10 to meet the budget.

How much of the £150,000 is going into managing a group of investors that large? It seems like a big, full time job managing all these donations and all the perks. It's difficult keeping a small investment group happy - say 30 people investing £5,000 - I can't imagine keeping in contact with 2,000 to 5,000 people who all feel they now are part of this movie. Even if only 5% want to be kept informed, someone has to keep 100 to 250 people happy. It's hard to tell someone who is a part of the movie to stop calling, or to only communicate via e-mail without upsetting them

As an "investor" I just don't see any real advantage to being part of this. The £1,000 to £5,000 level is a serious investment. Few people checking indie film sites and messageboards are willing to go that high. I wonder if that level of investor is really interested in signed Certificates and T-Shirts or having an appearance in the film?

The £100 to £500 level is even more troublesome - that's a serious amount of money for your typical non-investor looking to be part of a movie. How many movie makers are willing to donate that kind of money for someone else's project? How many movie buyers are willing to donate that much to be listed on the DVD?

And in the "pack of cigs's" level, people aren't getting much. Can you make 2,000 to 4,000 people really feel a part of the movie?

I kind of see how attracting 30,000 donations at £5 would be an interesting marketing hook but I don't see how that helps all of us or even how it would make the "investor" feel part of the film.

I hope you keep us informed during the next six months.
Click to expand...

Rik - the idea is to take this beyond the film people, who are always less responsive & prickly when having to deal with the concept of other films that aren't theres, and open this across across the web and the UK to a bigger audiance, to people who still think that being part of a film is special. Who think that £5 is a small ammount and worth the chance. And there are several thousand of them out there! (well I'm hoping at least 30,000!!!)

If posting on this board has tought me one thing is that you guys are the wrong audiance. EVERYONE else (over 500 people) I ahve directly chatted or emailed this idea to, inclduing people in the industry, think it's an inovtaive idea that could work. Could.

As for the admin. Yep it's going to be a bitch but that's whay I employ PA's!!! Well my partner. And by employ I mean cook dinner. Occacionaly. Ha! But seriously most of it will be automatic and require min extra work (especially on the lower amounts).

And natch will keep you updated!
 
clive said:
Phil it's not about whether you agree with me or not -- it's about the fact that you asked for feedback on your idea -- you got a negative response to your proposal across the board -- and then instead of thinking "Maybe I need to rethink this" you go "Well, I'm going to do it anyway, because I'm sure I'm right."

Every UK producer I've ever met is exactly the same -- they're all incapable of admitting that they're wrong and as a consequence they make the same business errors over and over and over again.

It gets tedious after you've seen exactly the same thing played out three or four times.

The reason that UK producers are like this is that they are obsessed with control -- they'd rather keep a project small than loose control. So when things go wrong with funding, they always look for solutions that are their best shot at retaining control, rather than looking at what the best business options are. This is fine, but the people who end up paying for their need to retain control are the people who work for them.

The whole UK film industry is consistently screwed by guys who have a pathological need to keep things small.

I took me ten years to realize that it's waste of time working with people like that and also the reason I've refused three options on my screenplays from UK producer already this year.
Click to expand...

Beileve it or not I can admit I'm wrong. And often do... but just because a bunch of film makers don't like the idea, doesnt maen it cant work if marketed right and to thr right audiance. I have chatted to about 500 people directly on this and the non film makers love the idea, menaing that at least in theory I am £2500 towards the goal ammount. I have been targeting the idea to different groups.

I knew that the response here would be tepid because, for the most part, film makers are a more hostile crowd and especially here (no offense guys).

As for errors... Clive I spent 2 years producing a film with no money so I have learnt from my mistakes. I have spent 5 years working with studios on ideas, projects and productions to see them ammount to nothing. Trust me I have learnt from my mistakes.

You make like the way or working that you do. Fine. I'd rather stay independent and make the movies I want to make, break the mould and try different ideas.

But you say about changing the idea, by the same token how many scripts have been tunred down by studios left right and centre and the writer keeps pushing them until finally they are bought up (True Romance is one example of this and there are many more). Just because the majority disagree doesn't make you wrong Clive.

Okay I take your opinion and views but at the same token I spent 5 years getting screwed by studios and ptroducers who wanted to go big, BIGGER, BIGGEST! The reason we do what we do is because our ultimate aim is to foster an independent Roger Corman style studio in the UK, a business that makes it's own money and funds it own films.

It's not about control it's about ensuring the best return for your money and investment. There are reasons that all but one of the films directly funded by the UK lottery fund have not turned a profit. That most British films over the past 10 years have not made hardly a dime back (and I'm not talking the Universal funded Notting Hill type films).

And it's simply because they are budgeted wrong, target the wrong audiance and are films that just dont make money. The Uk need s Corman style genre production house. It's genre films that cost so little and make so much that help studios fund the bigger films. You'd be suprised how much a Segal film sells for... and that's what i want to achieve here.

So rather than knocking
 
There are reasons that all but one of the films directly funded by the UK lottery fund have not turned a profit. That most British films over the past 10 years have not made hardly a dime back (and I'm not talking the Universal funded Notting Hill type films).

And it's simply because they are budgeted wrong, target the wrong audiance and are films that just dont make money
Click to expand...

I agree UK producers don't know how to make money because they make the wrong kind of films, don't understand script development and always think too small (In terms that they make films for the UK market that by itself is too small to sustain the cost of production of even sub £1M budgets).

Maybe you're the exception to that rule.

But what you have to remember is I've heard what you just posted from dozens of UK producers and it doesn't sound like thinking outside of the box to me -- it is identical to the spiel of every other UK indie producer I've ever spoken to.

It doesn't sound fresh to me -- indie producers all think they're breaking new ground -- and yet they all say exactly exactly the same things. What I don't see is any evidence that they are able to turn these concepts into actual business.

If you were able to show investors that they'd get a 25% return on their investment in one year, with a less than 25% risk of loss, then you wouldn't have any problem finding investors, because you would then be on par with another high yield, high risk investments and people could slot your film into their portfolio.

Your problem is that you can't provide a solid financial case for ROI, you can't even guarantee to those people who are investing £5 that they'll ever see that £5 again.

This is why funding in the UK feels difficult -- it's because every UK indie producer goes in knowing deep down that their investors are going to get shafted.

It's deeply cynical game, played by frankly selfish people, who always manage to find a wage for themselves out of the budget.
 
Clive - I took nothing from Left For Dead, and still haven't, making sure everyone who was involved in the film got their share. They money left we have invested into another film. Myself and my company have a reputation where poeple WANT to work for us, because we treat them right and make sure they don't loose out.

We have downside sales estimates of over £250k for FIXERS, based on a £150k budget and based on the package we have. Whilst I don't ever say we can guarentee a return (letrs be honest what film can - espeically Brit films), we have proven we can take a film with a modets budget, make it look several 100 times more than it cost, sell it and turn a profit.

With that in mind I'm sure MOST investors (and again I'm not selling this as an investment) will see that there is a high chance of getting their money back with a little on top.

But I guess it's down to how we sell this and how we make the offer seem attractive. And to be honest I would never ask someone to invest in something that I knew wouldn't ever make a return.

I pride myself on the honest and open way I work and the honest way I deal with people. That's why we have a rep where people want to work with us, be it UK actors or major US genre stars.

And that's why there will be clauses enabling people to get their money back if the film doesnt film or if the money we raise isn't enough.

And whilst you may have heard this before, does that mean we cant do this better, more attractively than anyone else? Does that mean i should give up? Or does it mean I need to try harder to get people's interest and make people an offer they can't refuse?

Clive - believe it or not I do have a clue of what I'm doing, what the market will pay for the kind of films I make, what the market is the film will be heading to and what it's chances of sucsess will be. I also know that the UK industry is in the worst state it has been in years and that the films being made are failing to break even across the board because the majority of UK film makers have to high asperations, waste far too much money and have budgets that are unsustainable. That most UK film makers have no concept of why the US industry has been so sucsessful and sustainable (read Genre production - modest/small budgets, high returns)and think their rom com or drama will break big and net them millions when in fact it will struggle to get sold, never see a US cinema run and will die after a few screenings at the local Odeon. And that most angel investors or invesment companies will only look at certain types of films, the one's they believe will make money but never do.

I have my feet firmly on the ground.
 
Ha! Clive it's not like that at all. I value your point of view, and that of the others around here.

The point I'm trying to make is that to do the film the way we want we are having to look at different ideas, which if they work, will benifit others in the long run. And that comes from expereince of dealing in the UK market for almost 10 years, meeting companies at cannes and finding out what we have and what we can aciheve with that.

It comes from the most realistic research, taking the script, the cast and the crew to the people who are selling these films and find out what budget range we have to set it at to ENSURE the film makes back it's money and to ENSURE that the investors get the money back in the current market place (which is a very bleak place by all accounts).

I understand that with a different cast or a different director or a different this that and the other we could set the budget higher, get a better cast and make the film easier (well raising the finance) but I'd be doing that in the knowledge of the investors probably never seing their money back, which happens with 95 of all pure UK films regardless of genre.

And that's why we are in the catch 22.
 
mr-modern-life said:
Rik - the idea is to take this beyond the film people, who are always less responsive & prickly when having to deal with the concept of other films that aren't theres, and open this across across the web and the UK to a bigger audiance, to people who still think that being part of a film is special. Who think that £5 is a small ammount and worth the chance. And there are several thousand of them out there! (well I'm hoping at least 30,000!!!)
Click to expand...
We aren't always less responsive an picky - sometimes our past experience leads to a different point of view. Frankly, if a producer showed that 30,000 people are willing to donate £5 to be part of a film then I would instantly jump on the band wagon. My curiosity isn't disapproval or meant to cast aspersion. My experience in this kind of project suggests there are barely 30,000 people willing to buy a film like this - and that's with great marketing. Getting 30,000 people to invest, to feel they are part of the production with nothing really to show for it, seems like one hell of a hurdle. Much harder than getting 30 people to invest £5,000
If posting on this board has tought me one thing is that you guys are the wrong audiance. EVERYONE else (over 500 people) I ahve directly chatted or emailed this idea to, inclduing people in the industry, think it's an inovtaive idea that could work. Could.
Click to expand...
We may not be the audience who will donate £5, but many of us are working filmmakers who have some experience with investors and marketing. And many of us buy movies to support our fellow indie filmmakers. A £5 donation isn't out of the question for us fellow filmmakers.

Anyway, it seems you already have a huge response! 500 people think it's a great idea. With a start of £2,500 you are on your way to creating a new investment model.
As for the admin. Yep it's going to be a bitch but that's whay I employ PA's!!! Well my partner. And by employ I mean cook dinner. Occacionaly. Ha! But seriously most of it will be automatic and require min extra work (especially on the lower amounts).
Click to expand...
Which is why I'm curious about these people feeling part of the project. People feel a part of something if that can ask questions, talk to the producer, go to meetings, go to the set, show the finished film to their friends with their name on it, direct their friends to their IMDb page. Simply by sheer volume you will not be able to make 10,000 or 5,000 or even 1,000 people who have given you £5 feel a part of the project. You can dismiss my opinion because I'm a filmmaker, but I also am a partner in an investment group and a consumer of movies. As that consumer - someone who buy a lot of movies in this style - I just don't see how my £5 will make me a part of the film. A password protected site and automated emails doesn't seem personal enough.

But I'll pony up my two shares (£10) the day you reach 10,000 investors.
 
Rik - you make a few very good points.

People
It's a numbers game and the more we get it out to and how we spin it to each audienace will get us the numbers. Using local, national and regional press contacts we can reach millions of people. Then it's just making it worth there while investing which is what we are still looking at.

IMDB
Hell if I can I'll list everyone possible on the IMDB. I see how nice they feel that day!!!

Making People Feel A Part
Thinking on this there will be a forum and an open email address that anyone can email or ask us questions regarding the film. There will be email updates as well, inviting anyone in the area to visit the set or meet the cast & crew events (which will be number limited but done on a first come first served basis and then next time you will go behind others that havent come), a weekly updated blog. We'll even put behind the scenes doco's on the site and maybe a patron of the week where we run a profile on an investor per week.

But this is what I wanted... any ideas that would make you, the film maker, feel part of this. I want ideas from you guys, that's why I posted this. I want you to suggest things I may not have thought about. Believe it or not and contray to popular suggestion I AM open to ideas but constructive ones within the frame work of what we are trying to achieve not comments like (and Rik this doesnt apply to you) that will never work.

I can work. And will.
 
mr-modern-life said:
Rik - you make a few very good points.

But this is what I wanted... any ideas that would make you, the film maker, feel part of this. I want ideas from you guys, that's why I posted this. I want you to suggest things I may not have thought about. Believe it or not and contray to popular suggestion I AM open to ideas but constructive ones within the frame work of what we are trying to achieve not comments like (and Rik this doesnt apply to you) that will never work.

I can work. And will.
Click to expand...

Well, I love brainstorming, just for the sake of doing it, so here are a couple of ideas:


#1: Obviously, this concept needs to have a huge buzz factor in order to really work. (after reading all the interesting previous posts). I say sign up an edgy actor to star in an edgy script, (think of something on the order of Napolian Dynomite actor starring in Napolian Dynomite II or some such script), and spent some cash developing and implementing a viral campaign, I'd imagine you might have a better chance of success with a edgy comedy - over any other 'genre,' but maybe I'm wrong. Of course, it will be a LOT of work to locate and court the right actor who would be up for this sort of thing.

#2: The 'right' webiste is crucial. Nothing too high tech (averge joe would think: why are you asking for $$ if you've got the dough for bells and whistles), but clever and filled with 'extras' like a trailer, a video of the star pitching the project in a unique way, script sample, audition tapes, a visual guage of how close you are to reaching your $$ goal (or not?? it might back fire), and some of the content should be updated regularly, i.e., a blog.

#3: Consider developing a way to be upfront with people and circumvent the paper work nightmare. Tell them up front that they will not get anything else from you for their $10 DONATION, beyond what they will receive immediately after their donation. Say, for example, they donate $5 and are immediately and automatically emailed a 'donation certificate,' and an autographed photo of the star. You are gaining their participation simply because they want to be 'in' the 'in' crowd and have their collector's item donation certificate and photo. Or something to that idea. I'm not a tech wiz, so I'm sure there are loopholes in implementing this kind of thing. I"m not a lawyer, either. But avoiding the word 'investment' is obvious.

#4 Have a sign in guest book on your website where donator's can leave a message for all to see.

#5 I would absolutely avoid holding any give-aways, contests, sweepstakes, etc. Those kinds of things are a legal and logistical nightmare for anyone but the very experienced and well-represented. You will all but guarantee your failure by doing anything that smacks of a contest. Lawyers will be on your butt in a hot second. Internet fraud? Mail fraud? Yes, that's what they'd come after you for - because the rules for this kind of activity (at least in the US) are thick and stringent.

#6 Pitch yourself to late night tv shows, call in radio shows, newspapers (a steady stream of press relases emailed to select news sources). Hire a good PR agent (yes, spend a bit of dough on the right person and it can pay off. Of course, you could wait till you start to take off, then approach a PR house and see if they'll take you on, pro bono for the... PR value. Yep. They want good PR, too) Regular contact with a simple follow up call that's not pushy, just friendly. A helluva lot of work, yes.

Well, if these are the kinds of ideas you're looking for, there you go. This discussion has been very interesting and I see valid points made in all posts. Good luck!
 
Media hero... great ideas.

1. See what you mean about the give aways. That needs to be looked at.

2. Def keep the website simple. As for owner ship and involvement we are thinking behind the scenes videos and maybe even live streaming if we can. Also we had an idea about letting people vote of different edits of a scene again to raise owner ship and involvement. If done right people willbe happy to have a say, no matter how small in the making.

3. PR will be relentless! That's one thing I am good at!

Thanks!
 
I think a live webcast of a movie shoot would be a pretty cool thing to see. although not really exciting for most of it.
 
Hold on -- I've a better, more innovative and simpler idea.

Pre-sell a limted edition DVD direct to the public.

Ask people to invest $20 -- for which they'll get an exclusive "investors" DVD of the film posted to them on completion.

It's a simple direct to the consumer pre-sales deal -- you don't have to worry about finding a return for the investors and they are guranteed to get something for their money.

If you have a fixed run of about 20,000 DVDs the unit cost is going to be less than $2 a unit, $5 max with shipping

K.I.S.S.
 
clive said:
Hold on -- I've a better, more innovative and simpler idea.

Pre-sell a limted edition DVD direct to the public.

Ask people to invest $20 -- for which they'll get an exclusive "investors" DVD of the film posted to them on completion.
Click to expand...

This is an intereting idea. Any legal ramifications, I wonder? Beyond avoiding the word 'investment?' I'm guesing, in order to implement this legally, you might have to provide a physical item, i.e., emailed photograph of the cast, or something inexpensive that can mail cheap (email is best), that people get for their money up front, in addition to the DVD of the completed film.

Don't forget to add in postage to mail the DVD into your budget for this scenario.
 
clive said:
Hold on -- I've a better, more innovative and simpler idea.

Pre-sell a limted edition DVD direct to the public.

Ask people to invest $20 -- for which they'll get an exclusive "investors" DVD of the film posted to them on completion.

It's a simple direct to the consumer pre-sales deal -- you don't have to worry about finding a return for the investors and they are guranteed to get something for their money.

If you have a fixed run of about 20,000 DVDs the unit cost is going to be less than $2 a unit, $5 max with shipping

K.I.S.S.
Click to expand...

I've always suspected that no one reads my posts...
 
I think John's suggestion shows just how difficult Phil's idea can be. If one cannot pre-sell 20,000 units of an unproduced movie, then it seems impossible to get 20,000 people to donate (or invest) with the promise of a discount on the finished DVD. Have you considered this method, Phil?

As most of us know, selling 20,000 to 30,000 units of a finished movie takes marketing and distribution contacts beyond what most producers can handle - or want to handle. That's why we need distributors. What Phil is trying to do is essentially market and distribute a movie that hasn't been made.

Phil - I'm curious about the 500 people who think this is an idea that could work. How many of them have agreed to invest?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top