Nick Griffin
Forum Replies Created
-
This certainly wasn’t researched exhaustively, but WAS blessed by the association’s legal counsel. This was put at the end of each video AND on the back cover of the DVD case.
PLEASE NOTE:
This presentation, and/or the information contained herein, is not intended to replace, or be used in place of, the Original Equipment Manufacturers or other vendor’s operating or safety instructions relating to methods, procedures, machinery, equipment or other products.
This presentation is presented for educational purposes and is therefore supplementary and not to be considered exhaustive. (Client), its officers, directors and employees as well as the programs’ authors, producers and video crews hereby disclaim any and all responsibility for any loss, injury, damage or expense directly or indirectly arising out of or relating to use or reliance on this presentation or the material contained in this presentation.
Copyright © 2008 by (Client) – All Rights Reserved
This program may not be copied in whole or in part
without the written consent of (Client).Hope this helps, but if you’re nervous present this or something like it to the client’s legal department and put it onto them to come up with the safest language. THAT SAID… a disclaimer doesn’t guarantee that you won’t be brought into a lawsuit should something happen. Better than nothing, but not ironclad protection. But the fact of the matter is should there ever be legal action you are small potatoes and the really deep pockets are obviously those of the Fortune 500 company.
-
[Mike Cohen] “If it sounds too goo to be true, it probably is.
If it sounds like it might be a bit shady, it probably is.
If you have to ask about a website or business which seems not quite kosher, chances are it isn’t.”
Ditto. No, MAJOR ditto. Ask yourself if it’s so great haven’t you heard of it before? Sure they can throw out some big names, but far more often than not the references fall part or were just for some little side projects years go, not the full blown show they are trying to sell your client.
Their big pitch is generally targeted directly to the ego of the CEO or some other top manager who is unlikely to attract national attention any other way.
The other “tell” is when the offer is some big package. Often in print this includes a full blown interview with the CEO by one of their “lead reporters,” followed by seeing your story in 5,000 copies of a business sounding magazine you’ve never heard of, 2,000 reprints for you to use, a link on the electronic version of their magazine and inclusion in their annual directory of elite companies — all for the ONE TIME price of just $10,000, but only if you can act on this week because so many others are clamoring for the deal. Is this a scam or just a poor use of marketing resources. Get the ego out of the way and you can pretty much figure it out.
-
Mark-
I really wouldn’t have had much choice once they’d agreed to pony up the additional money, would I?The un-stated aspect of this interaction so far is that they were before and after this particular issue came up, satisfied and giving us numerous other projects — some of which can use the B-roll we have sitting here on our shelves. Had they been unhappy and actually looking to change this whole thing could have easily gone another way.
-
My partner and I wrote and produced a six part / 75 minute safety video for an industry trade association in 2008, so I have some fairly recent experience with this. When the client brought up the fact that he wanted the raw footage from our shoots as B-roll for future projects, I asked why he would want to raise the price on a project which was already stretched.
When asked what I meant, I explained very simply that getting full rights and unlimited use, ie- turning over the tapes, typically involved a 25 to 30% premium because it was in essence telling the production company “we’re planning on working with someone else and want to use your materials instead of having you work on this next project.” Hence the premium. Our client accepted this logic and the topic was never brought up again.
Earlier a 10% premium was mentioned. I think that’s low, at least in our market and in my experience. But the point remains the same. If you want to take my stuff somewhere else to save a few bucks (yes, it’s always about the money) then you’re going to have to pay me for the privilege.
-
Thwack! (The sound of me smacking the middle of my forehead.) YELLOW pad?!?!? THAT’S what I’ve been doing wrong all these years??? And as far as Bill’s insight, you mean all these people walking around the set in nothing but bathrobes aren’t here for an exercise video? Boy was I naive when I took this gig.
-
[Cory Petkovsek] ” Necessities (and you mentioned objectives) are therefore defined by my client and budget, not by my philosophy.”
In business we are defined by the work we do, what we bring to the party that the next guy doesn’t. In this case moving the client towards a better end product rather than blindly accept the specifications as given.
[Cory Petkovsek] “I’m positive you already know this so I don’t know why you would even bring up my point to nitpick it.”
Cory, dude! No nitpick intended, just a discussion of making a better product than what was initially described. Try the de-caf next time.
-
[Bill Davis] “Nobody I’ve EVER met that’s done this type of work wishes they could do MORE of it. It’s usually the kind of work you do when you’re younger and move on from. But perhaps that’s just me.”
No, Bill. It’s not just you. You have hit the nail on the head with this post, especially this last paragraph.
-
[Noah Kadner] “Does the client ever pick the “A” quote?”
Noah, you know better. The vast majority pick the “C” quote and then expect the features they clearly understood when you were discussing the features contained in the “A” quote. That’s when the real selling begins.
-
It’s official, Walter. You’re my hero. (But the lamp is supposed to be in the front window where the whole neighborhood can admire it. And keep Ralphie away from it at all costs.)
-
[Cory Petkovsek] “the DVD viewer will get the same experience as an audience member.”
Respectfully, Cory, I disagree. An in-person lecturer has the benefit of eye contact and, as such more of a connection to the recipient. A lecturer via video does not. As corporate producers even though we are not making “entertainment,” we should be making content which retains viewers, keeps them awake and succeeds at relaying information. A single camera view for 90 continuous minutes — especially in this age of shortening attention spans — is far less likely to accomplish these objectives. (IMHO.)