Nathalie Sejean of Mentorless.com recently blogged that We Are All Unique, But We Are Not Special (or Why We Should Stop Asking for Ridiculously High Amount of Money from Potential Backers to Let Them See Our Film).
She argues that:
“Setting $50 as an entry point to see your film in a crowdfunding campaign is neither okay nor a good idea.”
She discusses the Established System and the emerging Neo-System.
In the Established System you needed to convince FINancers that you were the right person to make the project and that it would make a profit.
Whereas, in the Neo-System, you need to convince people to become FANancers.
“In the Neo-System, you don’t need to convince people that you can do the job, they assume you can do it, you just need to convince them your story is worth seeing the light of day. People don’t give money to our projects because they want to make more money (not yet at least). They don’t care if our film makes big bucks. Honestly, they don’t even care if it hits theatres. In the Neo-System, the first thing backers care about is seeing our film. Within the Neo-System, our story matters more than we do.”
She wants filmmakers to make sure they don’t mistake FANancers as FINancers.
“Why ask for 4 or 5 times what someone would pay at the theater to give them the “privilege” to see our film? By doing that, we are sending the wrong message. We are telling people that they don’t deserve to watch our film unless they can pay what is essentially five months on Netflix. We are telling people that we are special.”
My take: I really like Nathalie’s insights into crowd-funding. The whole article is worth reading.
I totally disagree. You can set whatever price you want for your film. I never understood how musicians make a go from selling songs for $1s. Movies cost millions of dollars to make but we sell the experience for so cheap, it’s quite crazy. If someone wants to buy the film after it’s done, then they can. if some one wants to support a film in the early stages.. that’s something else. Crowd funding has been going on long before indiegogo / kickstarter by people like PBS and the Knowledge Network that is the model to follow. If you donated money to them, it’s about helping the cause. https://www.knowledge.ca/partners/shop $150 for a pen but seriously good on them. The money needs to be worth your time as a filmmaker too. You are special and all films are special. They being said you need to make your film special and the experience special and put the time into a well thought out campaign. and have a film really worth while. Don’t under sell yourself and don’t under value your art. Your film would cost $100,000s to make – either with cash or donated time. Selling it for low prices makes no sense. Netflix only works because of scary Walmart-like volume. You as a filmmaker will most likely not reach that. And Netflix should be charging way more for their service. It’s completely undervaluing everything. I say charge at least $100 for a viewing perk, it is a donation after all. Sell it for $10 after you have had it’s festival run and exhausted all other ways as a last resort. The people who worked on your film will thank you.
Hi Jeremy! Thanks for the comment.
I’m not sure the public television model is a good one. Remember, they give away the programs for free, then interrupt them with very long commercials. You’re left wondering: if you give money, will they go back to the show sooner?
Okay, $10 might be too low. But $100 is too rich for a digital download. Given that two people will probably watch it and there will be expenses, how about $25? Interestingly, that’s the most popular perk on both Kickstarter and Indiegogo.
I’m not suggesting only having a $25 perk. You probably want $5, $25, $50, $75, and $100 perks plus larger ones for your biggest fans.
The real point I’m making is that crowd-funding is first about introducing your story to your audience and pre-selling them a ticket to watch and second about raising the money to make it. That’s why I think a better name is crowd-finding.