Comments (8)

• I wish these guys all the luck in the world. That’s the good news. The… challenging news starts with overhead. That’s number one. Who is paying the rent on the office space, who is paying the staff? If nobody is getting paid, that crashes and burns in less than a year. And if the money to float the overhead is coming out of Justine’s pocket, unless someone else in the creator’s group is independently wealthy, that gets really fucking old, really fucking quick. It may be really old already, for whomever is floating fm78’s boat.

  I watched some of the Molly show, and, honestly, it’s more a web-site than a show, and she seems to spend most of the time, the whole time actually, shilling for some hand-held device. That’s not entertaining or funny or creative. That sucks. And again, who is paying for it, and how long will that person pour money down a hole? If that’s the launch show, there’s trouble ahead.

  A business model based on one product or advertiser paying for an episode or another Molly type site you click to, something like that? Again, shilling is shilling, and it’s just something people don’t want to see.

  And, these scripts, and this indie-film budget range. That means you’re talking 250,000 bottom, to a million top, to make whatever those scripts actually are – short comedies, short dramas, aka short film type things, sit-com type things, hour drama type things?

  Great. Who is going to plunk down that kind of change for that? They’ll want to know – how will you sell this? To whom? Are you going to be a company that makes product for acquisition? That means, you have to find financing, then, if you’re incredibly lucky, somebody gives you half what it cost you to make it, and you never see those 20 gross points, because they can’t do anything with it, and if they do, whoever they sell it to, keeps everything.

  Are you going to bring things to short film festivals? That’s the seventh ring of hell. Lots of little movies people put all their and their parents and dentists and lawyers money into, and it never makes back a dime. Ever. Because there is no distribution for it.

  So, people click on fm78 and they see… what? The Molly Show? They see “here’s a short film called Carl’s Problem starring Jeff Garlin? You realize no one will pay to see that, because it hasn’t been validated in the mainstream business? No theatrical release, no big festival wins(s). Even then – tough, tough sell.

  You say “Perma-shave Presents” Carl’s Problem? How much do you think you’ll get out of Perma-shave? The full budget? In return for what? They’ll be asking how you are going to get their money back, and they’ll be asking a question you can’t answer, because you don’t know, and you probably won’t be getting their money back. Any of it.

  I don’t hear, or see a business model. A common problem with the internet. “Funny or Die,” I click on every once in a while and laugh and laugh. But it’s all coming out of Will Ferrell and Adam Mckay’s pocket, just for giggles. They can afford the tiny overhead, and they get all the clips for free, and when Will is in something, he’s in it for free. That’s like, a hobby, not a serious business.

  I’m totally down with the “cut out the middle-man” stuff, but the “what A-list talent! – so…. pay for this!!!” If you’re talking Jeff Garlin, Wallace Langham Judd Nelson and Buck Henry, I figure you can raise approximately $19 on those guys. And they’re all talented guys. But money? Investors?

  It seems like Justine got so fried by saying AFTRA is a scumbag union while serving on the national board of SAG, that, she’s reached the end of her “let’s fight the man” rope and fm78 is what she’s doing with her time.

  But honestly? She’d be better off just pre-selling or raising money for an indie, hopefully a watchable one, maybe, if she’s really, really lucky, actually sort of good or funny, and get her investors money back by getting into a festival, one of literally about three where you can sell a movie, and selling some or all of it, getting a domestic release, even a tiny one, then having a DVD, foreign, cable deal set up. If she’s lucky, she walks away with $40 bucks from the whole thing.

  This is tough love, but I know whereof I speak, and it always comes down to dealing with the man, and getting the man his money back. It’s an incredible amount of work, nobody gets paid, not really, and then, it’s about a 100 to 1 shot. And that’s being generous.

  I really think fighting off this contract and making sure you can make a living, instead of throwing money down a hole, hoping investors will then throw their money down a hole, is… a little unrealistic.

  I mean, what’s the plan? I read the whole site, every word, and I don’t see a viable plan or anything approaching a business model.

  Comment by Anonymous — June 5, 2009 @ 7:35 pm  Reply to this post

• Anon, you took the words right out of my mouth. A valiant effort but does this help or hurt the artists involved in the end? It’s a great creative outlet but what happens when the mortgage shows up? Content may be king but making a living as an artist is the religion. Wasn’t that what the past 2 years has been about?

  Comment by RPB — June 5, 2009 @ 9:23 pm  Reply to this post

• A list talent ?????????
  is that Brad Pitt ? Mark Wahlberg ?, Julia Roberts ?
  or the gang that owns this enterprise
  maybe they should do a telethon

  I must say that the internet is providing more ways than ever to kill ones career in a day and become a laughing stock for the next 10 years, question, 7000 films get made a year, 450 get a wide release into theaters, what happens to the rest ?

  that is why it is so so so so hard to find real investors

  Comment by Mr Big — June 5, 2009 @ 10:13 pm  Reply to this post

• This is the 2009 equivalent of doing summer stock for $50 a week. There’s no way in a million years there’s any viable business model here but it’s fun and creative and gives actors something to do while they’re waiting for their next paying gig. If these actors are lucky, some rich benefactor will fund a few of their projects… and hopefully not care when he/she recoups nothing. It’s not about making money – it’s just playtime for a few C list actors – especially in this economy. But I wish them well.

  Comment by KIP — June 6, 2009 @ 12:01 am  Reply to this post

• A fifteen part “mini-series” means they are basically cutting up an indie comedy into fifteen pieces each what? seven to eight minutes long? and then calling them ‘webisodes’ like the kids do. Product placement and ads and sponsorship WOULD probably pay for production and then those ad buyers, probably real candy and junk food companies would then have to figure out some way to measure how much of their increased sales came from exposure on this web series. That has always been the mystery of advertising. The first commentator was true and right but a little bit harsh. Commerical sponsors have had the same sort of relationship with TV haven’t they? If FM78 can show them that “hey 3 million people watched this thing, with your commercials in it” and their sales go up – wouldn’t that encourage them to keep ad/vertising on the website ……..just like they do on TV?

  All that said. You are right. Touting all of their ,a-hem, “A listers” for their next project but meanwhile showing what they’re capable of with that horrible Molls show… you’ve got to ask WTF? THAT is your first ‘production’? a webcam show of some dipshit? Even my 15 year old daughter things it is pointless, so it’s not just me not ‘getting it’

  Basically this seems like a bunch of mid-tier hollywood types trying to get “in on the ground floor” of something but with the old hollywood mentality of “Well, WE still want to get PAID because WE are comedy genius’…so someone else has to finance it (with advertising) and we’ll make a professional product for the internet, better than all that amatuer stuff on youtube” …. oh? like the Molls show you mean? Heck they’ve all got plenty of money they SHOULD just pay for it themselves and throw it up on the internet to see if they can get a few million hits… just like all of us non-hollywood professionals do. But they’ve still got their mercedes and private schools to cough up for.

  Even a blowhard like Adam Carolla understands this. He’s got the number one podcast on itunes and it is COSTING HIM over $10,000 a month to put it up. But he’s doing it – knowing that on the internet you have to find and define your audience first, and then try to attract advertising to it.

  AS much as these people want to cut out the middleman, it is obvious that they want to BECOME the middleman. A ‘new’ kind of network delivered differently = on the internet instead of broadcast or cable, but still paid for in the same way the very first TV shows were … advertising. HEY there’s an idea – make a show about a struggling fictional cigarette company and get Phillip Morris to sponsor it. jeez.

  Comment by SQ — June 6, 2009 @ 2:02 am  Reply to this post

• What I find interesting is that all the old advertising villains are back again on the Internet. All those companies that cannot advertise on regular TV are flooding Hulu and the various network. Hard liquor, rubbers, psychotropic drugs, everything we want out ten year olds to watch.

  And believe me when I say there is no way to eliminate those ads from the Internet.

  Comment by Dave — June 6, 2009 @ 9:25 pm  Reply to this post

• Hey you naysayers I think you are forgetting one very important thing. The media companies can’t control this. That one point trumps all. So, just like the 90s we’ll see a bunch of internet production houses start up with only a few that make it. Why? Because they will pull the numbers and the advertisers will come. And just like that, they are not only the middle man but the first man and last man as well. Sure there might not be money to be made now, but it will come. If you build it, they will come. TV’s are being built with an internet port right now. And TV’s are being built larger and larger, like little movie theatres for your home. What’s that tell you?

  Comment by PB — June 7, 2009 @ 8:09 am  Reply to this post

• 60Frames. ManiaTV. HBOlab. All have tried and failed to make this model work. We’re still way off having a economically viable digital content sector.

  Comment by DigitalDude — June 9, 2009 @ 8:53 am  Reply to this post