VO-BB - 20 YEARS OLD!

[todd ellis]

i was going to post this in another thread - prompted by a comment from melissa x - but decided to start a new topic.

melissa talked about educating new VOs on rate & usage

this is something i've been seriously thinking about for the past couple of months, and will likely act on soon. on a VERY local level.

i am in a micro-market of the US. local freelance VO is done by: 80% local full-time radio folk, 18% part-time VO folk of various stripe, 2% me.

***these numbers are very unscientific but pretty darn close.

i've thought of contacting all of them i can, setting a meeting and trying to explain to them that $50 (or less in some cases) is NOT a "whoo-hoo" moment. all of this in an effort to prop up the local VO market to a level that i might be interested in participating in more than 2%.

does this make any sense to anyone? it's just been bouncing around in my head for a while and maybe ... just maybe some of them will "get it".

any ideas?
_________________
"i know philip banks": todd ellis
who's/on/1st?

[Bish]

I think that any effort made to educate people about rates, what are reasonable, and what are actually damaging to the industry is worthwhile. In this case, you are planning to educate a specific group addressing a local market, so you may actually have more of an effect (in that market) than a missive cast to the wilds of the interwebs.

I am a latecomer to the industry, and one of the first things I understood (partly from lurking around here), is that if this was going to be a career providing my prime source of income, then there was a market segment which I needed to ignore from day one.... the whole "Oooh, look! I just earned $50 for a VO and I'm now a cool VO dude!". The problem is that you will always have people who will attack the market in this way... add to that the "dolla-a-holla" radio guys and you'll never be able to eradicate low-balling completely within a market. If people want to buy the service, then maybe the customer needs educating more than the supplier?

If you contact these people and invite them into a self-help/support circle it can only be beneficial. Now, whether the benefit to you is worth your effort will require some analysis. I think the line of least resistance is the part-time VO people who may want to put the effort in to "raise their game" and even "belong" to something VO related. The tougher nut (and the larger one) is going to be the radio guys, who, in their insular world, may not even acknowledge that there's a problem.

Was that worth the proverbial $0.02 ? ... doubtful
_________________
Bish a.k.a. Bish
Smoke me a kipper... I'll be back for breakfast.
I will not feed the trolls... I will not feed the trolls... I will not feed the trolls... I will not feed the trolls.

[graemespicer]

What you just described is considered collusion, and illegal.
_________________
Graeme Spicer
Voice Actor

Member of the World-Voices Executive Board

tel • (416) 716-2246
email • graeme@graemespicer.com
graemespicer.com

[todd ellis]

naw ... i don't think so. nobody is preventing anybody from charging what they will, no deception, no "price-fixing". just a frank talk about what a product is worth. also - i am in NO WAY interested in leading some sort of weekly meeting of the VO minds - just curious as to how it might turn out.
_________________
"i know philip banks": todd ellis
who's/on/1st?

[Bruce]

As long as you discuss price ranges instead of specific rates for specific products you should be in the clear legally. Discuss union rates and rates in other small and large markets and let the participants make up their minds. Some of the P2P outfits offer suggested price ranges, too.

But it's tough to change the minds of those radio guys. $50 for a few minutes of your time when you're already earning a salary and recording just down the hallway from your work place seems awfully comfy.

Good luck!

B
_________________
VO-BB Member #31 Enlisted June, 2005

I'm not a Zoo, but over the years I've played one on radio/TV. .

[asnively]

I agree that you're in danger of running into price fixing accusations--even though you'd legally be in the clear.

How about a less single-issue laser-focused way and attempt a more holistic approach? I think you should create a VO Meetup that meets monthly.

If you create an inclusive, non-intimidating-to-lowballers environment, and set up monthly discussion topics (similar to how software users groups typically function) that address the needs that low-ballers perceive that they have, you can create a rising tide that will lift all boats.

Job one: get as many of the boats in the water.

Cliff Zellman is the man to talk to about creating a successful VO Meetup. His is somewhat different from the one I propose above, but he has really figured this thing out and will have solid advice for you, I'm certain!
_________________
the Amy Snively family of brands for all your branded thing needs.
Amy Snively
Faff Camp
FaffCon
TalkerTees

[graemespicer]

I generally never disagree with people smarter than me, but in this case Todd's meeting would clearly meet the legal definition of collusion/price fixing - any "agreement between competitors to their mutual benefit and to the detriment of others". The conversation doesn't have to be about specific prices - even discussion of "price ranges" would have the same effect.

It's closer to a violation of anti-trust law than I would want to come. Would anyone do anything about it at a local level? Don't know. But i've seen enough episodes of "Beyond Scared Straight" that I wouldn't want to try.

There's also a case to be made that it runs against the fabric of what makes the United States great. As long as a person isn't breaking the law, they should be free to sell whatever they want at whatever price they want. If they go broke - welcome to capitalism.

If someone is pricing lower than you, then demonstrate your value in other ways. You shouldn't need to depend on a cartel to keep your prices high - you only need to prove you're worth it!
_________________
Graeme Spicer
Voice Actor

Member of the World-Voices Executive Board

tel • (416) 716-2246
email • graeme@graemespicer.com
graemespicer.com

[graemespicer]

(ducking for cover while putting on my Kevlar vest)
_________________
Graeme Spicer
Voice Actor

Member of the World-Voices Executive Board

tel • (416) 716-2246
email • graeme@graemespicer.com
graemespicer.com

[todd ellis]

[melissa eX]

I think Graeme has a point - but to a point. Let's see. First I AM NOT AN ATTORNEY - nor do I play one on TV. With that out of the way I'm just thinking out loud here. Anti-trust laws prohibit price fixing yes. But the unions have a legal exception carved out that protects them against accusations of price fixing - which is why scale rates are permitted. Only when one works for an employer can rates be set. The rates are public information - most of them are available on the union websites - all of them SHOULD be. So taking public info into a meeting ( btw I think Amy's idea of a MeetUp group is PERFECT. Hey, listen to Amy. After all she built FaffCon out of just such a discussion here. ) shouldn't be seen as running afoul of anti-trust laws. oh did I say I AM NOT AN ATTORNEY.

One can tailor the discussion addressing this publicly available info. "Why are rates for Union Commercials they way they are?" That opens the door into a full discussion of conflicts, exclusivity, over-exposure etc. etc. etc. Each category of Union work can bring up its own questions and generate discussions on why the rates are the way they are in the union - which is legally able to set rates. It can be noted that these are rates deemed to be professional rates for professional talent. Well doesn't everyone either consider themselves or aim to be a professional? (I know the answer to that is "really? take a look at fiver" but we can't do anything about dollar a holler anyway - I'd rather address people who are simply ignorant but still serious about VO)
So - i.e. - a producer pays X above scale for health and retirement. Those are publicly available facts. Well if you're not union - you have to pay for health and retirement above your "salary". That's a sound business decision. And a "DUH" moment for people starting out who don't really think through what running a business is about. And this is a discussion about running a business. Gear the discussions toward pointing out that this is the level professionals work at for all of those reasons. With all of the publicly available info on union rates that one would THINK can legally be used, if the discussion is about union info wouldn't it still be a general discussion about how things are run there - albeit one with an understood focused purpose?
Another thought. Hmm. Take this into another realm. Doctors can't collude to fix prices. But your insurance company when you go out of network deems what's "reasonable and customary" by taking a survey of doctor's rates in your doctor's zip code. So if they're allowed to use "customary" rates, those customary rates have to be set somehow. How does that work?

And come to think of it - to go back to VO - would the non-union rate sheets that are posted on line as guidelines be considered collusion? Oh, in case I haven't said it before I AM NOT A LAWYER. I bet Rob Sciglimpaglia. would know the answers.

[todd ellis]

as everyone knows, i'm no amy snively - nor do i want to get into a union/non-union discussion. that said - the local work here is, clearly, non-union. i had no idea going into this discussion that price fixing would be the prominent issue. never crossed my tiny little mind. what's wrong with saying - "you eejits are leaving money on the table because you've never thought beyond the county line!" in a nice way, of course. maybe with charts and graphs ... a short powerpoint?
_________________
"i know philip banks": todd ellis
who's/on/1st?

[melissa eX]

Wasn't my intention at all to make this a union /non-union discussion and I apologize if it appeared that way. I was just thinking out loud of a way that rates could be discussed without it appearing like collusion. And using an example of rates that are excluded from the rules appeared to be a way to do it. sorry if it came across otherwise.

[todd ellis]

didn't think that at all ...
_________________
"i know philip banks": todd ellis
who's/on/1st?

[Bruce]

Price-fixing/collusion is when all the manufacturers of a product agree to sell a product that should reasonable sell for $5, for $10 instead, effectively gouging the public. Or it's when a few manufacturers agree to sell a product below market value (maybe even suffering a loss for a while) so they hurt the sales of their competitors even driving them out of the business.

The Edge Studios, Voices, Voice123 and others who list suggested rates are not in violation of the law, nor would you be for sharing their information. Agreeing among yourselves to set rates is the violation.

Many VOs publish their rates on their sites. That too is public information you could share.

B
_________________
VO-BB Member #31 Enlisted June, 2005

I'm not a Zoo, but over the years I've played one on radio/TV. .

[ballenberg]

Yes, Bruce has it right--it's agreeing to set rates that's the issue. An informational meeting is not collusion.

And like Melissa, I am not a lawyer. Though Exelberth & Ballenberg, Attorneys at Law, does have a nice ring to it. Fifty bucks per case, no extra charge for collusion