here's the rub on Amazon. Amazon doesn't give a damn if your film does well or not.....
....Lets say for instance you list your film on Amazon. Lets say you list it at $12 for a dvd disk and you sell 1000 copies..... I am convinced we beat Amazon hands down apples for apples, but if you aren't convinced, then at least use us as the second bullet in your gun.
The strength about Amazon is their fulfillment system. If you're not handling DVD fulfillment (which I assume you're not) then it's not apples for apples. I'm also fairly sure Amazon doesn't use torrents to distribute.
So yes you have millions of potential customers but what you don't have is millions of people visiting that site to find their next favourite film.
Access to thousands - billions of people pacifically looking for enjoyable films in torrent form. billions is not over estimating it. Any look into the numbers backs this up.
I don't think there are billions of people that own torrent enabled devices in the world. I don't think the majority of the world can afford it.
Torrents add a lot of problems to the equation. First and foremost, is there a strategy to disassociate the word torrent from Piracy and stealing? Aren't you concerned that when you use the name torrent, you're targeting an audience that has little to no intention of paying? Don't you think your potential clients may be concerned with this?
Even if all that wasn't a problem, I cannot think of a single method that protects you from those torrents spreading to other torrent sites, thus avoiding your "call to action" to donate if they enjoyed the film.
Last question on torrents. If exposure was the aim, why wouldn't someone go to the largest torrent site and just upload it there and politely ask for donations if they like the final product? I assume the leader is still Pirate Bay?
To put it a different way - how many people torrent multi-million-dollar Hollywood movies without paying for them? Millions of people? What percentage of those think that it's worthy of their monetary support and then go and pay for the film? 5%? 10%? Even 20%? ..... If the majority of people were kind-hearted enough to donate to a movie after they'd already torrented it and watched it for free, do you think the studios would be going after those people so aggressively?
There are case studies that showed that smaller films have benefited from their film hitting torrent sites. While the numbers of people converting to paying customers I'd assume is very low (if any), the exposure, if done right and capitalized right can turn into sales. I suspect the donation model won't work, as a big component is the conversion to sales through the buzz and marketing the torrents brought movies, not the donations that came from that market.
It doesn't work for the studio films as they've already created their own exposure through advertising and promotion.
One, it gives us a financial basis ie your $15 or $30 fee on which to market the site from day dot. Two, by having a price there, we are confident that the average teen who has filmed his brother swinging a light saber in the back yard is not going to send his footage in. He will upload it to youtube for free as he has always done. This means that really only serious film and music producers will even apply.
There's a basic premise of sales. Removing the barrier to entry. When you're new and have to build up credibility, you have to remove, each and every barrier to entry. When you're getting too many responses to handle, then it's ok to raise a barrier or two and continue do to so until you've reached the correct balance.
You're at the pre-start up phase. If your business model is to get the clients to pay up front and stiff them, you at least need to build up a base where you appear successful up front. At the moment, you're a ghost town with no success stories, there is little to no reason for someone to sign up to your service. If you're going to continue, you need to think long and hard about this.
You need to work out where the majority of your money will come from. The cut of the donations or the up front fees. If it's the up front fees, then I suspect people will see through your operation and walk away. If you're going to make the majority of your money from the donations, why on earth are you scaring everyone away by demanding they take all (by paying you the fee to be considered) the risk?
Next issue, expecting only serious producers to apply... umm... where do I start there. Serious producers tend to understand marketing, distribution windows, what the goals for each window is etc. While you may get a serious producer on board, I don't see it happening until they've exhausted all other windows, and also assumes they don't see any value in ongoing distribution.
-PPC or pay per click is a waste of time. Most people have add blocker now.
Thats why we will avoid online add's, they are often blocked from view.
This makes me want to cry. Does it matter if they don't see your advert? You're only paying for results. If they don't see it, they cannot click on it. They don't click, you don't pay. Aren't those who don't block the adverts more susceptible to the advertising or are you assuming everyone is exactly like you?
I am sorry for making such a long answer but it was necessary to properly tell you why we are the right choice.
While I'm sure you won't see it this way, I have to question your sales abilities. I saw multiple instances where you stated the problem, built it up and ignored where you were to explain why you were the obvious choice.
Another point, you're a filmmaker. What happens to your distribution business (and everyone elses film) when you're making a film? What happens to those paid submissions when you're spending a month or more making a film? Will there be employees?
While I applaud you to come up with an idea I haven't seen before, from what I can see, it's a business model that has more plot holes than a typical no budget film. If I were you, I'd stop wasting time on it and find something else to concentrate on.
