Distribution : Sharing distribution experience by Dorian Cole

Introducing me - no big deal Hopefully some of you have expertise you are willing to share, and I'll share this with you: What I do is New Media.... and old media. New Media isn't going to replace the old, it's just another option in a forever changing marketplace. I've researched and studied this market since 2000, when I did an exhaustive study for a company, and had another thorough look at it a few months ago. It's interesting how it is unfolding. The holy grail This is the holy grail of New Media: People want new, high quality content, in the convenience of their home, at convenient times, on convenient devices. Cell phones, not so much. But people also like TV programming, and a dedicated group of them like going to a movie once a month or so, depending on their age and other factors. During the past year of launching VZX.tv (global, on high quality networks) and producing and distributing STL Comedy (just 2 episodes so far), I've learned a number of things about distributing New Media. I've seen the subscription model crumble and fall. My diagnosis is: Lack of new, high quality shows in enough quantity to justify payment, and lack of advertising. Once you get your content on a site, it is difficult for the audience to find your content. It takes advertsing. It will be interesting to see how some of the newer sites do with distribution. If you're going that route, try to get with a high profile site with a lot of activity. Advertising Advertising, which is required to get viewers anywhere, has become very difficult and costly. Older, inexpensive, methods that worked at one time (5 years ago), have been captured by larger interests and it simply takes a lot of money now. (I don't have a lot of money, and haven't discovered anything new and cost effective.) If you advertise on Google, and you have to jump through a lot of hoops to prove due diligence for Google, it costs around 25 cents a click, and takes over 5 to 10 clicks to get a customer, so on a small price movie, and a .40c streaming cost, and .32c credit card cost, you are quickly losing more money than you make on a $3.00 show. Facebook: It costs a lot of money to advertise on Facebook, and the actual returns for what I do, even after building a following, are dismal and this is reflected in information in the research in the advertising community. Return on investment is the worst. Social Media: I stopped using Twitter. It dings every minute or two, even though I don't have a lot of friends on it. It's totally distracting, and 120 characters, from what I can judge, is totally ineffective except for blather and headlines that no one has time to follow. And I'm a positive, technology oriented person with no bias - was really hoping social media would work. Facebook, as a communications and advertising medium, has not shown itself in any way to be effective for what I do. People simply won't Share on Facebook. You can put coupons on Facebook, but about the only thing that people actually Share on Facebook is funny pictures. Facebook's algorithm intentionally limits your posts to a small segment of the people you know, so communicating with a community is ineffective. In general, people get so many messages on FB, that anything important gets lost. I will be looking for a replacement for Facebook for my groups. May use Stage 32, after a trial, or set up a separate communications service to make sure that communications within the group is effective. I have a group of 10 writers and 20 actors (some are both) in my business, and communicating with them on Facebook has been a major challenge. LinkedIn: Interesting. Got to develop some big plans there with people with loads of expertise. Again, not an advertising medium with posts - biggest problem is the members are in the industry and not really interested, which is understandable. Size matters I'm not seeing good returns so far on advertising for STL Comedy, even with a 3.8 (of 5) audience rating. We don't have a big name, big name actors, or a loyal audience, or much money behind it, and this takes time to build even on successful TV programs. And we're not in enough venues yet. We don't have enough good programs yet to be on services like Roku, where we plan to be. It takes size, quality, and momentum to make things work. We're on Dish Network PPV in May. Will probably change this to ad supported, and we may have to do that temporarily in all distribution venues to build momentum. Quality matters in business I do original development. If I have an idea, and I like it, I research the market to see if it will be a strong winner. If not, out it goes - won't create losers. Everything gets market tested multiple times during development, and changed accordingly. I have to enjoy this and pay my bills. It took months for me to develop VZX.tv, a state of the art Web site that works on all devices (soon, hopefully, adapted for Roku), with some cooperation with a credit card company, and is extremely difficult for hackers to steal from (never say impossible). But it didn't cost the $100,000.00+ I was quoted. I have several other series in development with strong potential, and we've laid some good groundwork with a good global distribution platform - but those 6 series are much more expensive to produce, and require a lot more people. So, what do you think?