HERE'S SOMETHING YOU WON'T LIKE

[Nino]

No no no. We developed and produced the shows for TLC etc... The VJs shoot and edit the shows. The point is that when we started, my wife and I shot and edited the first shows ourselves out of our living room. You can do this too. You've got the gear and you've got the know how. Cable channels pay anywhere from 50K to 300K per hour.

Michael, isn’t this misleading?
You just drop the $100,000 for a 30 min. episode down to $25,000, that's a big gap. $25,000 isn't much for any decent 30 min program. Why do you even bother to mention the $200,000/300,000 per hour when none of your VJs will ever even get close to these types of productions. For the high budgets programs, clients will hire experienced crews with real equipment.

Also, aren’t most the above shows produced and edited by your wife’s production company? How many of these shows are produced by individual VJ editing on a laptop in their living room.

Let me make this even clearer. Yes. TLC and Discovery and Food Channel pay YOU (or me) for the delivered show, and yes, they pay those kinds of numbers.

You are generalizing the industry to make your numbers and VJs look good. I'm not quesioning how much a cable company is willing to pay for a show, I know that already because I worked on many higher budgeted shows. Those high budgets are reserved for well trained and skilled professional using real production methods and real equipment, not for your VJs.

I'm quesioning how much are they paying for a VJ style produced show. Are any of the above shows, produced entirely by VJs, anywhere near the high production budgets that you keep bringing up.

 

[Photog Cowboi]

Michael:

Can I work with you? I love using technology in that manner. If I could...I would use a Dell Laptop with a Wireless connection, a firewire connection and avid xpress to cut stories fast!

 

[Thomas]

I love the contrast between the two posts above. Beautiful.

Mike, you're a patient guy. Thanks for lighting the board up again. Have a great holiday -- same to everyone as well.

 

[Rosenblum]

Ok
Lemme explain both these points very carefully. First, with respect to the 50 VJ newsroom model. This is NOT theoretical. I am already doing this with the BBC (not 24 hour news, but local and regional newsrooms across the BBC), and it works. And we DONT buy 50 cars either! Really, it works like a newspaper. Very cost effective. And as you can imagine, not everyone does one story in one day. That is one of the advantages.

Second, the cable rates. OK. Listen carefully. For VJ produced programs, (and I have done more than 300 of them), the rates that cable channels pay average over 100K per hour. Average. Some are less, some are more. They run the spectrum from 40K for a half hour on the low end to more than 300K per hour on the high end. All of these shows are done by VJs. Can I be any clearer?

And you don't have to shoot these with PD150s, it just makes it easier to get into the business if you do. Since you guys all own rigs, (and you can edit on FCP or DV Express - no one seems to argue this...but i guess that is because this is a shooter's site, and not an editors. if it were an editors, we would hear ad infinitum how FCP is not Avid. Fine. It still delivers the product. In any event. All you guys own rigs. You all know how to shoot. All it takes is an idea (or several ideas), and a pitch meeting...which any of you could get. You all have sufficient creds to get one or many. And you have sufficient creds to get a deal to produce programming.

Cable DOES NOT CARE if you shoot with a PD150 or with digibeta, so long as the show is good.

Have a happy Thanksgiving!

 

[Rosenblum]

And photog cowboy. Feel free to contact me offline. I am always looking for people who can shoot and cut and have strong technical background. Always.

 

[DFW Nights]

Originally posted by HDTV:
The operating expenses of putting massive numbers of people in the field, no matter how "creatively" you do it (short of screwing over your employees), will quickly eat up the capital savings of buying low cost equipment.

You have to compare apples to apples here. Stringers, freelancers, and other contractors are not the same as staffers. Stations have been creatively screwing those stringers for many, many years now.

It seems like some of you are more concerned with protecting your precious turf than anything else.

 

[Lensmith]

Originally posted by DFW Nights:

quote: Originally posted by HDTV:
The operating expenses of putting massive numbers of people in the field, no matter how "creatively" you do it (short of screwing over your employees), will quickly eat up the capital savings of buying low cost equipment.

You have to compare apples to apples here. Stringers, freelancers, and other contractors are not the same as staffers. Stations have been creatively screwing those stringers for many, many years now.

It seems like some of you are more concerned with protecting your precious turf than anything else.

I wasn't aware that Michael was promoting making everyone freelance? I think we can agree he wasn't...at least not yet ;o)

However when it comes to the equipment used to produce the product, the freelancer with the better gear produces the better product and gets the better clients. Period. I'm experiencing that right now. More calls are coming in from people not wanting little camera packages. The freelancers here in my area who've dumped their Beta gear and offer PD-150 packages are not getting the calls they used to. The calls they do get are bottom dollar clients looking for cheap and not paying enough to make the investment worthwhile.

I know Michael has cleared up my earlier misconception that he was involved in the BBC 24 hour channel. One of my long time freelance friends here signed a deal to use a PD-150 for the BBC 24 hour channel. He's regrets it since the money and time involved is not working to meet his needs, even with the lower camera package overhead.

It's not a matter of protecting turf. It's a matter of understanding the playing field and knowing what will and won't fly. "Fly" in the sense of having a career and making enough to live on. This is a guy who used to shoot for ABC net for years. He too bought the "little cam is the only future" fairy tale and is now suffering.

I'm not saying the future isn't in smaller gear. However quality is what still counts the most with the serious clients. When the gear gets to the level of quality expected then you'll see more of a switch...yet the small gear continues to ignore technological realities.

HDTV for one. An overall, top quality video image for another. Looking "almost as good" isn't the same as "good".

I had to smile when Michael mentioned the Final Cut Pro/Avid debate. It's a good example of something with a lot of bells and whistles compared to a more basic product that gets the job done.

You can expand that thinking somewhat into the camera gear. It's all a matter of what clients you are going after and how little you can accept as payment for your hard work and gear investment.

We all know just buying the best camera in the world doesn't automatically mean you'll have clients banging down your door to hire you. The same is true if you buy a small, less expensive camera and lap top editor.

Success is all about meeting the needs of the clients available and choosing whether you want to offer a McDonalds level of product or something which elicits a higher payoff and more respect which leads to more work. Building a cycle which generates more work and more profit.

There's always room in the world for another fast food restaurant. As long as you accept you'll only make a fast food level of profit for your efforts.

I could never take much pride in my work wearing a paper hat and pushing a third rate product ;o)

 

[NewsMan]

Scenario:

Medium market shop that uses Sony Beta SP and has shooters that don't show so well.

8 Cameras on average, 2 are down at all times.

Price to repair each camera - $3,000-$5,000

Yearly repair bill - $50,000 (minimum)

Number of PD -150's for $50,000 = 17

To me, it seems that using PD-150's as a DISPOSABLE camera would be more cost effective by far (bean counters take notice). It also seems to me that a PD-150, in an average shooter's hands, will produce much better picture quality than if they had a BetaCam (theory is that it is much easier to white balance and iris in the PD-150 than a BETA. Not to most of us... but you know what I mean - "It's not the camera, it's the shooter!). I also imagine the number of man hours on sick leave for sore backs would go down (at least the complaining would stop). Not only that, but it makes the ability to do multiple camera shoots much easier and quicker and all reporters could be issued cameras "just in case".

Something to ponder. Would this work? Dunno. Is it practical? Could be. What do you think???

 

[Lensmith]

Originally posted by NewsMan:
To me, it seems that using PD-150's as a DISPOSABLE camera would be more cost effective by far (bean counters take notice).

The sad reality is they never accept the idea of "disposable". They buy cheaper and then expect them to last as long as the higher priced gear built to last.

Your idea has legs until those same bean counters start having to replace the "disposable" cameras. Then they complain. Probably blaming the photogs instead of the less durable gear which was never designed to take the beating of day to day shooting.

 

[Rosenblum]

I see we are all escaping kitchen duties in the same place! I agree with Lensmith. The freelancers will be those with the best skills and the best gear - increasingly the gear that the stations will not make the capital expenditures to purchase. When they buy PD150s, while not thinking of them as disposable, exactly, they do tend to think of them as having a limited, probably 3 year, lifespan. In the BBC conversion, 2 have been stolen and one destroyed so far (out of about 400 in play at the moment). the reaction of managament, a shrug of the shoulders and go out and buy another one.
Have a happy.

 

[Austin Reeves]

Originally posted by Douglas:

quote: If I were running a taxi business, I would rather buy 30 Crown Victorias than one Porsche. Wouldn't you?

Your analogy is crap. A Porsche is a nice car, but unsuited as a Taxi cab. I'd rather have one Crown Victoria than 30 rickshaws. I'd rather have a few quality cameras & crews, and than 30 jackasses with substandard gear. Why do you think that more is better? That baffles me.

Quantity over quality, must be up for a promotion to management.

 

[cameragod]

Originally posted by Rosenblum:
When they buy PD150s, while not thinking of them as disposable, exactly, they do tend to think of them as having a limited, probably 3 year, lifespan. In the BBC conversion, 2 have been stolen and one destroyed so far (out of about 400 in play at the moment). the reaction of managament, a shrug of the shoulders and go out and buy another one.
Have a happy.

That’s funny because the ITN experience was of the first 12 mini cameras they bought only 3 were still working by the end of the first year and none of the radio mics were. That was largely because they were in pool circulation, always a bad idea.
As to the maintenance cost well Sony say that XDCAM is maintenance free. Digital Beta quality, no running costs… suddenly those disposable cameras look a bit more expensive.

 

[cameragod]

Look no offence to BBC local news but it’s not that they are expected to make a stellar quality product. They do a 15 min show, paid for by public funding, that doesn’t need to rate. RVO’s of cats stuck up trees, court appearances and art gallery openings not exactly real day to day news. But I bet the 6 camera coverage of Fluffy’s rescue makes it all worth while.

 

[Rosenblum]

Escape from the table: the camera kits are all personal issue and we find that people take very good care of the gear. And hey, the local TV news is just like and just as good as the local news in the States. In some cases better. Come on man, its the BBC, not public tv. and its not 15 minutes, but just like in the states, breakfast cut ins, lunch, half hour at 6:30 and another half at 11. Come on, watch it if you wanna talk about it. Off to the bird.

 

[imported_blank]

So much info here - so little time to respond, so I will only touch up on a few issues....

Originally posted by Rosenblum:
Cable DOES NOT CARE if you shoot with a PD150 or with digibeta, so long as the show is good.

What does that mean????
I think most of the freelancers here do shoot for cable every now and then. Personaly , I don't produce the whole product by myself (as mentioned earlier I'm a shooter) but most producers I know (for high-end cable) have very, very strict GEAR standards. Not just the camera but all support gear and just as importantly ALL POST PRODUCTION GEAR. Along with experienced folks running this gear.

Michael, even digi-beta won't cut it for some DISCOVERY-HD programming. Nino does a lot of work for ESPN (cable) why don't you ask him what kind of a camera package he needs???

Sure, there are some show producers that skimp, but for the most part these are """one non hit wonders" whom in the first year ruin their rep and never get a real gig again.

Take "COPS" a show that uses real betacam crews, a show that has been on network PRIME TIME for over seventeen years. On the other hand take some cops type rip-off handycam shows, they come and go....and get replaced by "RE-RUN COPS" episodes -- on CABLE!. Why the hell do you think the producer of "cops" has been using real beta crews for 17 years. Why doesn't he hire your VJs, or some other handycam VJs for $5 per hr instead???

I grant you that there may be a need for some low budget programs, to fill the non prime time cable programming void. Also, I am in favour of first response stringer footage to be purchased by the networks as well. How ever they don't need your ( $ third party $ ) vj service for this.

The problem is, you want all level programming to take a dive. You want the networks to dump their international betacam play-outs, in favour of sending footage via cell phone - (soon to be SL11 CARTOON) . You want to get rid of international beta crews doing stand ups, in favour of a three week vj monkey doing the stand up all by him/herself, taking care of correspondence, camera/sound, all the way to your cheap way of play out - see your starter thread post!. Tell me Mr. Rosenblum, if all these positions and gear are so archaic, a waste of money, why the heck should they pay guys like you so much. What will happen when the next Mr. Rosenblum comes in and says that your way is archaic and he/she wants only $1,000 per hour of cable programming??? It will happen. Some consultant will tell cable that paying anything over $500 per hour of programming is archaic and a huge waste of money. It will happen.

I know L.A. producers that produce low budget shows, they buy first response video for some episodes, but you know what? The stand ups are done using experienced beta crews and the post work is taken to REAL Los Angeles post houses. So maybe the show takes in $65,000 per hour (finished) but NO ONE PERSON sees that money!!! You look at the show credits and you will find that many people were involved in the show, INCLUDING REAL BETA CREWS and REAL POST HOUSE work. The first response VJs take in an average of $500 per half hour finished episode & the producer has a HUGE POOL to choose from.

Yeah, the producer I mentioned, the money he gets - he can't keep to himself. He needs to hire crews and pay for post production, etc, you on the other hand charge a little less, but you keep most of the money instead of paying for proper pre, production and post production people/gear...

Of course, the product will lack in quality and the cable guys aren't gettin' such a deal after all, not to mention slave monkey labour....

LAPTOPS

Originally posted by Rosenblum:
...this is a shooter's site, and not an editors. if it were an editors, we would hear ad infinitum how FCP is not Avid. Fine. It still delivers the product. In any event.

Michael, sometimes I find it amazing that you used to be a CBS network producer for so long. You seem to be so --much out of touch--. First of all, not all laptops are created equally (some have only cheap consumer dv codecs - some can have fully un-compressed D1 level codecs) BTW - both AVID and FCP may have cheap dv codecs all the way up to D1 uncompressed codecs.

I will grant you that the mid-level laptops may be good enough for quick eng-news quick cuts-only edits BUT you are talking about posting a whole one hour program (graphics and all) on these. You are so out of touch Michael.

Take a CBS network program like SURVIVOR. Did you know that they fly into location half a dozen or more FULL SIZED AVID packages along with AROUND THE CLOCK techs and FULL TIME editors???? I bet they need a 747 jumbo jet to take in all the post gear. I know, I know, how archaic! On top of that they have another half a dozen FULL SIZE avids & BROADCAST QUALITY GRAPHICS in Los Angeles doing the final post work - gees Michael!!!

YOUR NUMBERS

Originally posted by Rosenblum:
Channels like TLC pay $200,000 and hour, plus for programs

Mr. Rosenblum, let's be realistic here. Those numbers do not represent the amount of money one of your three week trained VJs should expect. Those numbers may represent a finished product but I doubt that one VJ with a handycam-laptop combo will make that kind of living.

The problem with you is
A) You want to charge the network 35 percent of what a show like cops charges
B) You tell the network, you are saving them 65 percent of costs
C) Your actual saving is 95 percent due to the fact that you produce the show using a monkey vj with a monkey camera and monkey post production methods. (You keep all the savings while your vj makes $5 per hr.
D) The network sees lack of viewership due to lack of quality and cancels the show
E) You move on to the next project while putting another nail in TV quality.
F) You justify this by saying less dollars per hour

Soon, the cable folks are gonna catch on to you. They will realize that they don't need you. They may need the 5 dollar per hour handycam vj monkeys to fill the void , but they will keep the profit themselves thus they won't need you.


The BBC
I watch BBC world and for the most part they use FULLY experienced real camera crews along with broadcast quality satellite play-outs. They use first responce content stringers too. Once in a blue moon they will use a VJ filler and I can spot the lack of quality within 2 seconds. This is were I seen 'em re-do stories using real crews, I swear!

Thanks for the laughs (again) Mr. Rosenblun, hope you and your family had a wonderful thanksgiving.

Truth is, without the experienced techs and corresponds and producers, to hold your monkey VJs hand or clean up their mess your VJs would be totally non existent.

Keep tellin' the naive how after three weeks they can rake in $200,000 per hr off cable...

-----------
sorry for being so brief

 

[Nino]

I think I have wasted enough of my time on this subject and it’s about time to put a lid on it.

Michael is not a consultant, he is a salesman, He throws around big numbers to give the impression (to the impressionable ones) that they can share the wealth of an industry that desperately needs programs by simply getting involved with a minimum equipment and training, especially if they take the 3 weeks VJ training course.
He reminds me of those commercial at 3 am: “Be part of a multibillion dollars industry, take our screenwriting course, scripts sell for as much as $2,000,000.00 Get your share of the wealth”.

When someone asks him more detailed budget questions, like I’ve been doing for the past six months, he gives those evasive answers that usually start as: “Listen to me carefully” and tells you about one success story without even mantioning the other 100,000 failures. And Michael will usually ends with “is that clear?

Trust me on this one, anyone under the illusion that you can spend 3 weeks taking Michael’s VJ course, buy a PD150 and a computer and potentially being paid, even the smallest cable company’s budgets to produce your program, then I have this bridge in Brooklyn that I can sell you for a very good price. You stand better odds to make money if you sell the PD150 and the computer and buy lotto tickets.

To start with, if you are a nobody in the business you will never even get past the receptionist, never mind seeing a production executive.

Providing you have a uncle in the business and make it thru the receptionis, to pitch your idea you will need to produce a good pilot program for a potential series. In order to create a good program you have to be a good producer, cameraman and editor. You will also need lots of cash because producing a decent 24 minute pilot isn’t easy or cheap. Unless you have a very exceptional idea, if you pitch any program on paper make sure to use the soft and gentle kind so you can put that paper to better use. Remember, cable companies are inundated with ideas and programs, on the contrary of Michael wants you to believe, the supply far exceed the demand.

Unless your idea for a program is very unique and proprietary, you have no protection whatsoever. Nothing will prevent the cable company from taking your idea and run with it, or commission a production company like the one that employs Michael's wife to produce the series. Let’s face it, no cable company will trust or give any production money to an individual that have no experience or proven track record.

The other reality is that most cable companies do not pay for most of their programming, even big ones like ESPN use a barter system, and if you are lucky and have a proven record they might share some of the production costs. This means that your program must have commercial value to them. If they have accepted and you have successfully negotiated running times and gathered all the demographic and audience information, you must find one or more sponsors to pay for the production and generate your profit margins. In exchange the sponsors will receive a number of advertising spots in that program. The cable company will sell the rest of the spots and that’s how they make money.

And finally, good cable companies do not use VJ styles of productions. Remember “The Season” on ESPN, right Michael? It doesn’t take a production genius to know that a good and well equipped crew using standard and organized production methods will produce in 2 days what a VJ will do in one week, so when you put numbers together, good is cheaper, this is not my opinion, this has been proven by production executives over and over. This is why Michael doesn’t answer number questions about budgeting and this is why quality companies like ESPN or Discovery do not use VJs.

 

[Rosenblum]

wrong. cable companies do not barter with production companies, they commission completed programs on a work for hire basis. wrong also. I would never recomment producing something without a commission. you are just wasting your time. I am happy to answer any of your questions about how to do this if you want to learn. But I don't think you want to learn anything. I think you just want to rant.

 

[HDTV]

Michael:

A few questions.

Roughly what percentage of the cost of a show is "above the line" for management, etc. and what percentage is for the actual production?

Is it necessary (or advisable) to partner up with a company already providing shows to a particular net?

Is an agent necessary...and if so, what kind of $$ are they looking to get...retainer, flat fee, cut of the show, etc?

Getting a foot in the door seems to be the most difficult part of this process...agree?

 

[Rosenblum]

First, never use an agent. The cablecasters almost never buy from agents. Agents, such as William Morris can be useful later on in your career when you are packaging materials and projects particularly for larger clients, but not agents to begin with. If you are going to make a sale it cable it is because the cable broadcaster believes that YOU can deliver, that you believe in the project and that you understand what they want. the nature of the personal realtionship here can not and should not be underestimated.

Getting your foot in the door is obviously the hardest part, the first time. This takes time, and again is a based on developing personal relationships. Most cable companies have fairly small commissioning and acquisition departments and you can get a pitch session with them with a little personalized effort - ie, emails, letters, calls. The first thing it to target specific people, not go generically. If you can't get to the top VP for development, you can generallly get to a producer somewhere in the company. Take a look at the credits for a show you like and write some letters - google the person first so you know something about them, then write. And write a lot. People who have been producers often become VPs for development. For example, Steve Schwartz who was the show producer for Changing Spaces is now the head of the style channel. You guys are all freelancers, you know what it is to build a relationship with assigment desks or news directors or producers, this is the same thing. This is not a mystery and it is really no more diffiult than what you do now, just slightly different.

Do not partner with a production company. They will steal your ideas (the cable company will not, they dont have in house production capability). it may be that if you pitch an idea that they like and they are uncertain as to your ability to deliver, they may partner you with a production company they feel comfortable with the first time. That is fine, but get a lawyer and get the details in writing.

The above the line, below the line division is difficult to clarify. It depends on the show and how it is done. Clearly many reality shows don't require that much in the way of staffing, if you can sell a good simple concept, and for the pilot you are probably the shooter and the producer. if you get fortunate enough to go to series, well that is another story entirely. Then it gets more complicated.

Let me emphasize that this is not easy but it is not so hard either, and it happens every day. The thing is that most of you guys already have the skills and most of the credentials to get started in this business. You have more experience than you think when it comes to this kind of stuff. What you are lacking ithe know how of how to get started. You know the freelance camera business really well, but this is no more complex or difficult than that is, just a different approach. But it is a growing market and it can be done.

 

[Nino]

wrong. cable companies do not barter with production companies

Wrong Michael, very very wrong. There are plenty of production companies that produce programs for cable using exclusively some sort of barter system arrangement. I know it because I work on many of these programs. Most outdoor shows such as fishing, hunting, boating, etc. are produced this way, programs running on ESPN included.

Bartering comes in different shapes and sizes, in fact when you hear “this program is brought to you by……” good chances are that it’s a bartered program. Even golf tournament and other major sport events are produced within a barter system.

For a cable company, there are many benefits in acquiring programs by bartering television time. The most obvious of course is that they don’t have to outlay any or very little cash for productions. The sponsors usually have available all demographic information about the targeted viewers thus making it easier for the cable company to sell the balance of the time spots.

Producers and sponsors of these types of programs can also benefit from a strong aftermarket life of the program. In fact, edited version of the program is often advertised within the program itself.

One word of caution, advertising and marketing people of potential sponsoring corporations are accustomed to high quality and experience. Show up with a PD150, a notebook computer and little training or skills and they will laugh you right out of the door.

But I don't think you want to learn anything. I think you just want to rant.

I’m not ranting Michael and I haven't stopped learning yet and I hope I never will.
Unlike you I have nothing to gain by spending my time here, I’m just offering over 30 year of experience to anyone who wants to learn and I also hope that I can prevent someone from making some stupid and expensive mistake. Our is still a business and it should be handled as a business, when the numbers don’t add up, something is definitely wrong.

You keep telling us that your system is the way of the future and is cheaper to produce, you might be right, but give us the numbers, we are big boys, we can figure it out, and if you're right you'll be a hero.