I'm going to take your advice.

Watch all of the cast three webisodes, they are all about alternate forms of distribution.
Steve

Thanks Steve...not sure how I missed the first two of this series!

I hear what you are saying Nathaniel but I'm afraid the moment you do that it becomes a commercial and the kids will know that. At that point it is not entertainment anymore. Sure they would like it better because they understand the old way of advertising but I'm telling them they need to be in the entertainment business as well as the retail business. I'm not saying you shouldn't do that, I'm saying I don't want to do that. I want to make entertainment that if I decide to can be moved from these websites to TV or to a feature film if the audience justifies it. Once you have a following you can make those decisions. I want to own the programming and decide what I want to do with it with regards to merchandising, distribution and more. I'm in the pre-production on one right now and testing to see how far I can get with these retailers, keep following for more.
Steve

Who pays for the content development (Just trying to get a clear picture)? Pretty much everything I watch right now for entertainment, whether online or in a theater, has branding throughout (thank you George Lucas). Am I going to buy GM because their logo and grills are used in 15% of the close up shots on Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles? No. Is it annoying? Yes, but I understand that sponsorship offsets production budgets. It's forgivable.

What I hear you saying, is that if it's actually on the company's site (GM, in this case) it's not forgivable, simply because of the context?

On all my commercial projects with small and mid size businesses, I have shared ownership over any content created and can cannibalize my work on other project with other clients should the need arise (graphics, interviews that are relevant, etc). It's never been a big deal for the companies I've done work for that are all sub 100 million a year in revenue. I just can't imagine a company like Gap sharing ownership. To be honest though, these aren't very media savvy companies either.

I'll be very curious to see how this goes for you, as I think it's a very promising model.

Thanks for the responses btw...great to see how active you guys are!

I'm funding the 12 webisode pilot. I'm hoping they will just lisence the content from me for a period of time and then have an option to renew. But I don't see them forking out any money up front which would give them that part ownership. Or any money before the start of any production. If they don't fund it, they don't own it.

Many guys out there are funing indie features, they could just as well fund a webisodic series that has a much better chance of being sold than an indie feature.
Steve

makes sense!

Thanks for the insight as to what you're up to.

I just wanted to share with you an experience I had, which I feel like could be a future, albeit potentially transitional model. Two years ago I was invited to participate in a contest run by BMW Italy, given a micro budget, and had my screenplay greenlighted with no objections whatsoever. I was under no obligation to even mention BMW in my credits and all I needed to provide them was a license to show the final video. (you can see the video here: vimeo.com/1651272 )

I think this idea of a "gold standard" will shift radically as countries with historically smaller film industries gain more influence and production capability in today's decentralized and multi-format mediascape.

I will be watching your entire series! I think one of the great aspects of how you've packaged it is that it will help get this discussion into the awareness of the over-35 crowd.

I think the main hurdle here is when the potential client (Gap, GM, whatnot) asks how many views they are going to get, and they will ask.

I had a meeting today with an ad agency that wanted a "viral video."

"We'd like to buy two viral videos please." I had to laugh.

As Steve pointed out in the clip, the old way of counting views in TV land is an arbitrary estimate which ad execs and the like love to show off over pricey power lunches. The new way of distributing videos in Web land comes along with very, very precise metrics, and until the Brand Managers themselves understand those metrics, the indie filmmaker has a better shot at selling his/her script to Dreamworks than signing a multi-million dollar deal with a brand like the Gap. DreamWorks is in the business of telling stories while The Gap sells crappy clothing.

First you have to create an audience. Its no good going into company X saying, "we just know that this is gunna be hot shit and get millions of views."

"Prove it", will be the answer you hear over and over again. And don't think that it will be easy trick to pull either. Getting a million hits on Youtube is one thing, happens all the time right? But you have to remember that there are already hundreds of millions of user on Youtube each day, and from every corner of the globe! Their there, looking for content to watch, waiting for the next video of some deadbeat dad getting kicked in the nuts by his kid. Those same viewers are not going "hang out" on the Gap's website waiting for the next video from Joe Shmo filmmaker... At least that is my opinion. I wouldn't hold my breath if I were any of you.

It is possible that in the future someone will be able to walk into a mega brand like the one's we've been talking about and sell them on such a concept. Although I think that person will already have a track record of millions of views and I'm not talking about views on Youtube or even Vimeo. I'm talking a million plus views on your own URL with your own servers, in short, your own community. Own the community and you've got something, but be warned, having a thriving group of people on Youtube, Vimeo, Ning, or whatever is not the same thing as owning your own community. You are in a sense just looking after part of someone's much larger mega community.

I completely agree with you, and your website (thewakeplace.com) is a perfect example of what I was ranting about in a previous comment. You built the space and therefore you control the space. Its a specific, specific genre, not just water sports, but specifically wake boarding. Love it!

It's me.
Steve

I know :)

...but you have just proved one point so many independent web based film makers fail to do - and that is the failure to reply to an actual statement! It's far easier for them to answer an actual question than to take on board what the end user actually wants to buy ;-)

This is what alienates the end user from the product - independent film makers can do well by digesting the content of any feedback before offering a reply.

Sorry, I don't follow you. Is there a question I missed?

In theroy that makes sense but in reality it is next to impossible to get a indie picture release in a real hollywood release (1000 theaters or more). It's even hard to get a art house release of (12 theaters in major markets released)