Double Dutch

It all started with a short article on his company blog entitled:

“A Quick Guide To Selecting The Right Voice Talent”.

The author, Chris Johnson, is co-Founder of Simplifilm, a young company specializing in “Hollywood-style Explanation videos”. They’ll have to make a video to explain what that means, but Simplifilm says it uses animation and storytelling to demo software applications.

This does not come cheap. Back in July, the company was running a “Grand Opening Sale” offering “3 minutes of broadcast quality demo movie work for $20,000. That’s 40% off the going rate.” You do the math.

Before he became a filmmaker, Chris was Finance Director at Robert Owens for Ohio Attorney General 2008, and he worked as a loan specialist at First Ohio Home Finance.

Thanks to his financial background, Chris seems to know the value of a voiceover, and he’s not basing it on anecdotal evidence. This is how he starts his blog:

“Did you know that the right voice can make a 35% difference in conversion rate? We replaced a voice track in a video – and made no other changes, and the conversion rate went from 2.5% to 3.8% on cold traffic. (Cold traffic is people that are mostly strangers that are coming in via search engines and social media).”

I’m not sure how “2.5% to 3.8% on cold traffic” leads to a “35% percent difference,” but Johnson is definitely on to something.

VOICEOVER CONVERSION
This is not the first time a video company noticed a correlation between the choice of voice and website conversion.

The conversion rate is the percentage of website visitors taking a desired action. It often refers to the number of shoppers turning into buyers. Depending on the size of a company, even a small increase in conversion could mean a significant rise in profits.

San Diego-based Fireclick monitors conversion rates. If you want to get a better idea of industry averages, the Fireclick index will provide some insight.

For software, it averages about 2% per year, with a cart abandonment rate of 75%. That means that three quarters of online software shoppers never become buyers! Could selecting the right voice really change that?

In 2009, Ginger software asked video optimization firm EyeView to develop an introductory video for their homepage to increase the number of visitors that would actually download their software.

EyeView ran a test: 50% of the global audience saw the video with a British voice-over, and 50% saw it with an American voice. Globally, the British voice-over was 4% more effective. For US audiences, the conversion rate for the British accent was 5.5% higher than the American one.

Eyeview:

“The Brits didn’t have it all their own way. In India, the American accent was 12% more effective at converting visitors. But the most surprising statistic of all came when we looked at the comparative performance of the two accents in the UK.

For audiences watching the video in the UK, the voiceover with the American accent was 8% more effective at making visitors download Ginger’s software than the British accent, representing a significant swing away from the global trend.”

Simplifilm’s Chris Johnson confirms:

“The right voice is key to converting video watchers into new customers. When you get the right voice, it breathes life into your video productions, and you should take the time it takes to select and respect your voice talent.”

Please remember that, next time you’re tempted to low-ball yet another voiceover project!

With voice talent having such a tremendous impact on conversion, how much does Simplifilm pay per production? Bear in mind that they charge about $33,000 for a 3-minute video. Johnson:

“Generally, productions are around a couple hundred dollars. We’re not going to lord over them or dangle money like some jerk, we want to do business, be respectful and move on.”

FINDING THE PERFECT PIPES
Now, wouldn’t it be interesting to know where Chris finds the right voices? According to his article, two talents work for him on a regular basis and he tells his readers:

“If -for some reason – you need to find someone outside of your network (…) you can start with Voice123.”

Voice Coach and talent Mark Avery read the blog and responded:

“Unfortunately, many producers and end-users of voice talent have gone to the “discount superstore” mentality of hiring voices for their projects, and the results often show themselves in low conversion rates.”

Of course I had to put my two cents in. Thinking back to my interview with Bodalgo’s Armin Hierstetter, I wrote:

“Chris, most online voice casting services will accept anyone with a credit card, talent not required. It’s not unusual for voice-seekers to receive over 100 auditions for a simple project. Imagine how long it will take you to listen to all these mediocre submissions…”

These turned out to be prophetic words. That same week, Chris joined the Voice Over Professionals group on LinkedIn, and this is how he introduced himself:

“Howdy, guys, I’m new to the group. I’m a production company doing software stories. We’re looking for a stable of 4-6 males and 4-6 females for future work.”

OPEN THE FLOODGATES
You can imagine what happened next. I’ll let Chris tell the story:

“So, when I asked for submissions here – and other places – they started trickling in. Then the floodgates opened.

Last count was 400+ and I have seen no slowdown… both here, from another couple of sources.
I’m surprised because I (hopefully) didn’t represent myself as being too “giant.” I caused 400+ auditions for what will amount to $5,000 or so in fees annually – at most.

Now, how do I read through ‘em all? I put everyone in a spreadsheet, but what’s next? How do I sort people out? I need say 8 voices. If I take 5 minutes per x 500 voices, that’s 2500 minutes.

Or 42 hours JUST listening to voices. I’m not doing that.”

At this point I started to jump for joy, thanking Simplifilm’s founder for the perfect example. This is exactly why most Pay to Plays will eventually implode. Do you get my drift?

Some of my clients have worked with voice casting sites for a while, and they’re starting to realize how expensive “going cheap” can be. Think about it!

How long does it take to find a quality needle in a huge haystack made of scrap metal?

Let’s look at the numbers.

Of course it’s unusual to get 500 auditions for one job, so why not assume that Chris Johnson has to weed through (only!) 100 demos. If he spends 5 minutes on each talent (as he just wrote), this will still take him eight and a half hours!

Imagine being in Chris’s shoes. Should he hire someone to do the dirty work for him and weed through hours and hours of audio? That person needs to be paid too.

If Chris is lucky, his hired help might find the perfect voice among the first 20 contenders. However, my clients concur with Armin Hierstetter that the overall level of entries is usually way below the mark. They’re forced to listen to a deluge of demos before they finally spot the right voice at the right price. What an expensive way to find cheap talent!

Critics might say that I am exaggerating the situation just to make a point. Voice seekers don’t listen to that many demos. Or do they?

In their Client Experience Report Winter 2011, Voices.com states:

“(…) it often surprises talent that the majority of clients review all their auditions. I say majority as that includes those who reviewed “all of the auditions” (45%) plus those who reviewed “50-100 auditions” (8%).”

A while ago I noticed that so many voices.com projects were still listed as open after many, many months. Could one of the reasons be that the client simply gave up after listening to 30 mediocre auditions?

Fortunately, there is an easy solution.

Some of my clients find it much more cost-effective and less time-consuming to hand their project to an agent and let him or her select four or five voices that can all deliver the goods. Clients might end up paying union rates and agent fees, but in the end they’re saving time, trouble and money.

Bye-bye Pay to Play, and thanks for the memories!

THE BABBLE BUBBLE
Online casting services have grown exponentially in the past five years. Fast growing companies often fall victim to their own success. Quality and customer service are compromised and sacrificed in favor of rapid expansion as they’re chasing after the big bucks.

It is no secret that more and more (pseudo)voice actors are joining Pay to Plays. That means that more dogs are fighting over the same bare bones. The chances of landing a decent job at a decent rate decline rapidly.

Here’s my prediction. At some point in the near future, there is no point in joining such a service anymore. It’s not worth it.

Saturation leads to annihilation. Bubbles burst. Cheaply made balloons will pop first.

What’s left is just hot air.

Try fitting that in a 3-minute video demo!

Chris Johnson, here’s a word to the wise:

If you need new talent, call an agent.

Don’t ask for any names of agencies, though.

You might get a list of … about 500!

Paul Strikwerda ©2011
www.nethervoice.com

Technorati Tags: Armin Hierstetter, Bodalgo, Chris Johnson, conversion rate, Double Dutch, Double Dutch Blog, Dutch voice actor, explanation videos, EyeView, Fireclick, Fireclick index, Ginger Software, LinkedIn, Mark Avery, Nethervoice, Paul Strikwerda, Pay to Plays, Pay-to-Play, Simplifilm, voice over professionals, voice-over, voice123.com, voiceover, voiceover agent, voices.com, voices.com client experience report

VOICES.COM has released new numbers testifying to the success of the company. There’s every reason to congratulate the owners, David and Stephanie Ciccarelli. They proudly announced “$39,290,580 in Total Earnings by Voice Talent at Voices.com.”

Some commentators concluded that the data in the report are a summary of this company’s past year in business. Stephanie Ciccarelli states:

“These numbers are based upon the last several years of data we’ve collected at the site.”

Voices.com has been in business since 2003, starting as “Interactive Voices”. In September 2006, Interactive Voices became Voices.com.

The new report speaks of: “155,915 All-time number of jobs awarded to voice talent.”

Voices.com says on their About-page that they are “creating 6911 job opportunities on average, each and every month.” My calculator tells me that this adds up to an average of 82,932 jobs per year.

How did voices.com arrive at 155,915? The verbiage “All-time number of jobs” suggests that they started counting from the very first day of business. Was that in 2003 or as of September 2006? Let’s do the numbers:

155,915 : 7 years = an average of 22,273 jobs per year (2003-2010)

155,915 : 3 years = an average of 51,971 jobs per year (2007-2010)

And what about $39,290,580 in total earnings? Is that also “based upon the last several years of data”?

PERSPECTIVE
It’s impossible to put these numbers into proper perspective if we don’t know what time period we’re talking about. That’s exactly the problem I have with most of the numbers coming from voices.com. I’m not saying that they are pulled out of a hat, but they lack clarity and context and they don’t always stand up to simple scrutiny.

The same can be said about their “Annual Report on the Voice Over Industry”. It is not compiled by an established market research firm, but by the CEO of voices.com, David Ciccarelli.

As long as we cannot independently verify the numbers or get a clear sense of the time period during which these data were collected, I choose to look at these reports as marketing tools, more than anything else.

AVERAGE FEE
Stephanie Ciccarell broke down the $39,290,580 in Total Earnings by Voice Talent at Voices.com. “On average” -she writes- “a voice talent made $252.97 per job” using their service.

I haven’t been keeping track of the voices.com numbers over time, but it would be interesting to see whether or not the average payment per job went up or down since 2003, and if so, by how much.

Stephanie Ciccarelli concludes:

“10,000+ people have earned a respectable income from doing voice overs with Voices.com serving as a key part of their marketing strategy.”

Once again, the numbers are vague and note that the term “respectable income” is not defined.

Let’s assume a talent lands one job per week on voices.com at $252.97. That would bring in $13,154.44 per year.

The talent decides to use the voices.com SurePay escrow system, at a 10% fee per job, costing him $1315.44. This brings the gross income down to $11.839.00. Subtract 10% for expenses and we’re left with: $10,649.10. Subtract from that amount $1504 in self-employment taxes and we arrive at a grand total of $9,149.10.

The 2011 Federal Poverty Guidelines of The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services puts the income level at $10,890 for a one person household.

Of course this is a theoretical example. Some voices.com jobs pay a lot more and some pay a lot less. No professional voice-over talent should entirely depend on one source to generate leads and make a living. At the same time, not everyone will land one gig a week using voices.com. Stephanie did write:

“10,000+ people have earned a respectable income from doing voice overs with Voices.com.”

In his analysis of the report, colleague Peter O’Connel comments:

Taking the Voices.com figure ($252.97), as a P2P industry average – that figure, I believe, doesn’t reflect what the voice over customer market “dictates”.

I believe it reflects what the voice over customer market “can get away with” with the help of the pay to play (P2P) business model.

ADDING IT ALL UP
There’s no doubt about it: voices.com has become one of the market leaders in online voice casting. That role comes with responsibilities. Market leaders have the clout to be trend setters and power pricers.

Voices.com has become more than a neutral playing field where supply meets demand. It has developed into a game changer that can write the rules of engagement by dictating the terms and conditions (no one is forced to join the club and pay the annual $299 Premium membership fee or the Platinum membership at $1995.00 per year).

One of those conditions is “a minimum project posting requirement for any job posted publicly and this amount is $100.” By the way, this doesn’t mean that a voice seeker can’t go any lower than that. Voices.com states:

“If your budget is lower than $100 then you may post a job privately using the Request Quote function within our search engine or you may email talent directly with your project details and budget.”

Critics feel that the Pay to Play business model is in part to blame for the steady decline in voice-over rates and professional standards. Peter O’Connell:

I don’t believe or financially support any service in which voice talent “pays to play” i.e. pays a subscription to receive auditions. I believe such services lower the rate expectations of potential clients because so many voice talents who swim in the pay to play pool low ball their rates out of what I feel is a kind of sad desperation for revenue of any kind.

The pay to play model negatively impacts the voice over business and its practitioners, in my opinion.

It has been suggested that if voices.com is really interested in their members making a “respectable income,” they should start by raising that $100 minimum rate immediately.

Secondly, voices.com has a global network of over 25,000 members. I am one of them. I think we should expect a lot more transparency and accountability when it comes to numbers. As voices.com so aptly pointed out: they did not make $39,290,580 in total earnings. Their members did.

Paul Strikwerda ©2011
www.nethervoice.com

Technorati Tags: average voice-over fee, David Ciccarelli, Double Dutch Blog, Nethervoice, online voice casting, Paul Strikwerda, Pay-to-Play, Peter O'Connell, Stephanie Ciccarelli, SurePay, voice over market place, voice-over, voiceover, voiceovers, voices.com, voices.com report

After reality shows about dancing, cooking, singing, Trumping etcetera, it was only a matter of time before someone would come up with a show about the invisible world of voice-overs.

Is it really such a novel idea, or is the concept itself a copycat in the category of “more of the same but totally unique?”

I thought we just had our ultimate voice-over reality show:

“Ted Williams: The Road to Redemption.”

Instead, the nation eagerly awaits:

“Behind The Mic: The Voiceover Talent Search,” created by Erik Sheppard and Marc Cashman, and “America’s Next Voice” with Joe Cipriano and Randy Thomas.

Sheppard and Cashman are up in arms. They claim the concept was plagiarized. In a press release the two stated:

“We contacted certain parties and shared our concept with them at the time but they declined. It seems they are now trying to use their celebrity to market the concept for themselves even though this has long since been registered and protected.

We were not planning on going public with the show until pre-production was complete but our hand has been forced. We do not want to confuse the production companies, location owners, sponsors or anyone else we have contracts with.”

Who had the idea first and who came second? Do we really care?  Bob Bergen has been  pitching a VO-related reality show for years. Like-minded people often have similar ideas. Is that plagiarism, a lack of imagination or a matter of being on the same page? Is there room for more than one talent competition on TV?

Of course there’s only one way to end this row between voice-over rivals. We should ship both production teams to a remote island. Stranded and homeless, they’d have to battle it out in a survival of the sleekest.

The weapon of choice will be a shotgun mic loaded with some magic bullets. The winner gets a free tribal membership of their choice to Voices.com or Voice123.com.

You see, long before we’d ever heard of a voice-over mic-off television extravaganza, these sites created their own version of “Audition Mission Impossible,” where aspiring voice artists fight each other for a chance to become “America’s Next Cheapest Voice Talent”. I know… it’s a jungle out there.

So, Mark Burnett and Jeff Probst, are you ready for:

“I’m a Voice Talent Reality Show Producer. Get Me out of Here”?

Perhaps Ted Williams would be willing to do the promos, provided the castaways face the Ultimate Mac & Cheese challenge. Hey, it beats eating eyeballs and intestines, although the latter may be more nutritious.

I can’t wait for challenges such as:

• The Words-per-minute Speed Read Race
• The Porky Pig Roast Cartoon Voice Competition
• Who can bid the lowest on a Pay-to-Play job Challenge
• The Die a Thousand Deaths Video Game Showdown
• The Grab the Attention of a Columbus Dispatch Videographer Test
• Five Rounds of Celebrity Impersonation (not for California candidates)
• A-List Movie Star turned Voice-Over Actor Bingo

and

• Demo Critique with Nancy Wolfson for Immunity

I can already hear the trailer:

“Two Terrifying Teams fighting over One Idea. Who will come out on top, and who will lose his voice?”

And what about those infamous last words:

“The tribe has spoken. You are to leave the audition area immediately!”

Paul Strikwerda ©2011
www.nethervoice.com

PS Be sweet: please retweet!

PPS What kind of contests would you have the competitors do?

Technorati Tags: America's Next Voice, Behind The Mic: The Voiceover Talent Search, Bob Bergen, Donald Trump, Erik Sheppard, Jeff Probst, Joe Cipriano, Marc Cashman, Mark Burnett, Nancy Wolfson, Nethervoice, Paul Strikwerda, Randy Thomas, Reality TV, Ted Williams, voice talent, voice-over, voice-over blog, voice123.com, voiceover reality show, Voiceover Reality TV Show, voices.com

The Holidays are a great time to meet new people and catch up with folks you only see once or twice a year.

This season I noticed a new trend. I’d be quietly munching on a Christmas cookie, and a relative of a friend of a friend would come up to me with a glass of eggnog in his hand.

“I hear you do voices, right?”

“Well,” I said, “I’m a voice-over, if that’s what you mean.”

“You do books for the blind?” he wanted to know.

“No, not really. I….”

And before I could finish he continued:

“Because everyone’s been telling me that I have a great voice and I should be doing what you’re doing if you know what I mean. No offense, but it can’t be that hard. I bet you make some pretty good money. I said to the wife: “I talk all day long. I might as well get paid for it.”

“I wish someone would pay him to shut up for a moment,” said the wife, who had been listening to the conversation.

No matter where I went in these past few weeks, I’d always run into guys with eggnog, ready to show off their Sean Connery impersonation or some version of a “movie trailer man voice”.

All of them had three things in common:

1. They knew as much about a voice-over career as a rodent would know about the art collection at the MoMA.
2. What they did know was based on misinformation and unrealistic expectations.
3. They all wanted me to tell them how to “break into the business,” preferably in two minutes or less.

In order to make my Holiday experience a bit more enjoyable and less repetitive, I thought I’d prepare a short slide show debunking some common misconceptions about what I do for a living.

Instead of having to listen to grown-ups single-handedly reenacting entire SpongeBob episodes, I now hand them a link to my YouTube-presentation:

Have an inspirational New Year!

Paul Strikwerda © 2010
www.nethervoice.com

PS Be sweet: please retweet!

PPS Next up: Ted Williams: The Revelation behind the Internet Sensation

Technorati Tags: Bob Bergen, Dutch voice over, getting into voiceovers, getting started in voice-overs, how to get into voice-overs, Nethervoice, Paul Strikwerda, voice acting, voice casting, voice talent, voice-over, voice-over career, voice-over tips, voice-over training, voiceover casting sites, voiceover misconceptions, voiceover training, voiceovers, voices.com

The voice-over market is a buyer’s market. Voice-talents are exposed; voice-seekers are protected. As voice-over pros, we want to work. We need to work. Sometimes we’re so happy to be picked out of a pile of 100+ auditions; it’s tempting to say “YES” when we finally get a break. But would we have done so, had we known the facts?

The World Wide Web has put me in touch with the wonderful, the wacky and the weird. Anyone can pretend to be anything on the Net. That nice guy you met online might very well be the next “Craigslist Killer”. Or he could be Prince Charming! How can you be sure?

THE VOICE-OVER AS P.I. (VoPi)
I have a question for you: do you think you should have to play Sherlock Holmes if you audition for a job on a site like voices.com? Aren’t you paying the staff to do their homework to make sure you’re not connected to some creep?

If you’re a member of voice123, you might have seen the following disclaimer:

Legal note: Although Voice123 tries to establish the legitimacy of all voice seekers, you are responsible for conducting your own investigation into any and all claims made by prospective voice seekers, agents and/or clients. You assume all liability for use of any information you find through Voice123, LLC, or any of its publications.

Good luck, especially if the voice seeker is purposely hiding his or her identity! As we have seen in the case of the founder of Newspapers for the Blind, the voice123 team responded after members had complained about the way they had been treated. Make no mistake about it: at the end of the day, “You are responsible for conducting your own investigation.”

Here’s the good news: the Internet is not only a place for con-men and convicts. With so much information in the public domain, we might as well use it as a tool in our fight against the frauds, the fakes and the phonies. My story of Newspapers for the Blind is the perfect example. Before I get into that, I have an admission to make.

A GOOD CAUSE
When I was young, idealistic and hopelessly naive, I honestly believed that people involved in philanthropy must be good people. It never occurred to me to do a background check on a charity. What can I say? Even Steven Spielberg thought that Bernie Madoff was a nice guy…

After my story about Will May, some of you wondered: Is his organization a real charity?

On its website, Newspapers for the Blind (NFBT) says it’s a 501C-3 Corporation. This is a type of incorporation that is used to set up a charitable corporation, founded with the intention of providing a service to the community, rather than making a profit.

Incorporating a company makes it a legal entity, responsible for its actions in the community. This is important, because it removes a great deal of the responsibility from the person who is starting the company.

One source puts it this way: “If you start a 501(c)3 company, you want the legal liability for possible damages to be the responsibility of the 501(c)3 corporation so that your personal possessions are safe from creditors.”

FACT CHECK
So, how do you separate the chaff from the wheat? The IRS web site has a search engine that makes finding a registered charity a piece of cake. The Better Business Bureaus* have a similar function on their website. In both databases, Newspapers for the Blind does not come up as a registered charity, and I have asked the IRS and the BBB to look into this. I also checked the Maryland Charities Database (the state where NFTB is based). Again: nothing came up.

But there’s a catch: Elisabeth Leamy, the ABC News Consumer Correspondent warns:

“ (…) even if the IRS really has granted non-profit 501C-3 status to a group, that’s no indication of quality. The IRS doesn’t have the time or staff to really scrutinize those who apply for charity status. I once investigated a company that earned 501C-3 status. The IRS overlooked the fact that the founder was a convicted felon who kept most of the group’s money for himself and didn’t even register with the state as required by law.”

In her article “How to Identify a Fake Charity”, Jamie K. Wilson recommends we carefully examine a charity’s website and look for the following signs:

• A board of directors numbering at least six people, with their credentials or regular job titles and place of employment listed
• A permanent street address in the United States or your own country
• A 501(c)3 statement
• Success stories
• An outline of this charity’s goals
• Downloadable financial statements that detail where money has been expended in the past
• Accurate statistics with verifiable and legitimate sources
• Good writing, spelling, and grammar

She concludes:

“Any charitable website lacking two or more of these traits is suspect. That does not mean the charity is fake. On the contrary, it might be very new and very legitimate, but without a track record. However, fake charities generally lack at least two of the above items.”

Steven Lowell of voice123 had this to say about Will May, the founder and editor of NFTB:

“Truth is…if he is rough to deal with, and pays, that is one thing. You get your money and never work with the person again. But to pose as a charitable organization, then not pay, and pull the routine that the people who delivered work must be the problem, when he in fact hired them…It is not a better business practice, and to some extent, illegal. I am not up to date on laws governing posing as false charity, but he did promise payment, and never came through.”

WHO IS WILL MAY
Again, using what is in the public domain, what can we learn about the founder and editor of Newspapers for the Blind? Let’s first see what Will May tells us about himself on his LinkedIn profile:

Interests: I like to sail boats and fly aeroplanes

Groups and Associations: Chief Medical Examiner of the Lesbian Fighter Pilots Association

May lists himself as the owner of Nevis LLC. A Nevis Limited Liability Company is based in the Caribbean tax-haven of Nevis. For $1495 USD, you too could become the proud owner of a Nevis LLC. It has a few benefits:

• Nevis does not impose corporate tax, income tax, withholding tax, stamp tax, asset tax, exchange controls or other fees or taxes on assets or income originating outside of Nevis.
• The owners and managers are not registered anywhere, which provides for complete secrecy.
• A Nevis LLC allows you to shield your assets from lawsuits, agencies, and financial creditors.
• Owners can manage the company without becoming liable for company financial obligations or legal liabilities.

THE LAST TYCOON
Voice-over colleague Juliette Gray worked for Will May and never received a penny. She confirmed what I had suspected when I questioned where the money for Newspapers for the Blind was coming from. Juliette wrote:

“One long conversation I had with him he told me that he had put a lot of money himself into it and he was a retired real estate tycoon from NYC.”

This is confirmed by the information May listed in his LinkedIn profile under “experience”:

“Chairman of Wm. B May & Company- Real Estate from 1982  – 2006”

This is not your average local realtor. The William B. May Company once was the nation’s oldest real estate brokerage firm, and it has been in the hands of one family for four generations. The website of the New York Real Estate Institute states:

“William B. May’s impeccable reputation has been built on a singular philosophy of integrity, trust, full accountability and integrated service. To this day, we pride ourselves on unwavering ethics, steadfast client loyalty, and competitive endurance.”

In a December 2000 newsletter, the company boasts:

“With age comes wisdom. The development of 57th Street at the heart of New York City was what first put William B. May on the map in the late 1860’s. At that time, we sold property to the Carnegies, the Fricks and the Vanderbilts.”

Today, the company is no more. Only the brand William B. May has survived. The business concept is owned by Broker Services Holding, LLC and it is operated as a franchise.

On his  LinkedIn page, Will May concurs that the company as it had existed, ceased operations in 2006, after -as he put it- “a tumultuous take-over fight”.

A BLAST FROM THE PAST
Gabriel Sherman is contributing editor at New York Magazine and a special correspondent for the New Republic. Prior to 2006, he was the media reporter at the New York Observer. In April of  ’05, he witnessed the demise of the venerable family firm.

When I read his article  “William T. May Sues Agency On Century 21 Ads”, a few things fell into place. This is how it begins:

“William Talcott May is the co-chairman of the storied real-estate brokerage founded by his great grandfather in 1866 and inheritor of the New York real-estate dynasty that bears his father’s name, William B. May.

But when the 44-year-old eccentric bounded into City Bakery on West 18th Street on a recent Thursday morning, wearing a fire-truck-red Scottish kilt and a navy-blue wool sweater, his broad, leonine cheekbones streaked with charcoal-hued face paint, he looked more Braveheart than businessman.”

If you don’t have time to read the entire article, here are some of the ‘highlights’:

• Mr. May studied economics at Duke University. He dropped out in 1982 after two and half years. At Duke, Mr. May was a member of the Beta Theta Pi fraternity, played rugby and co-founded the school’s polo club with 40 ponies he said his cousin won in a craps game in South America.
• After leaving Duke, Billy May -as he was known- returned to New York and worked in William B. May’s brokerage business while managing some of his own buildings. On the job he was stabbed and shot by tenants.
• As he was flying his private plane on 9/11/’01, he witnessed the entire disaster from 10,000 feet above New York Harbor. He told Gabriel Sherman: “I was on the radio to McGuire Air Force base in 20 seconds saying there had been a terrorist attack.”
• In December of 2001, the FBI and police arrested Mr. May for leaving six fake bombs at the New Castle County Airport in an attempt to highlight lax security.
• Between trial and sentencing, he served 31 days in solitary confinement. Mr. May received a felony conviction and four years probation for the incident.
• Mr. May’s attorney at the time, Penelope Marshall, said in reports that Mr. May was not medicated for his bipolar disorder.

Sherman ends his report from 2005 as follows:

“Mr. May, who says he has already spent $1 million of his own money to stanch the attacks on his family’s business, said he will not surrender until his family wins its name back. “I’m like a one-man pack of wild dogs when I get angry,” he said.”

LESSONS
You don’t have to be  a psychologist to realize that past behavior can -to a certain extent- predict future behavior. In the case of William Talcott May, knowing about his background made me understand where his Mr. Nice and Mr. Nasty type of behavior was coming from. I just hope that he doesn’t unleash his ‘one-man pack of wild dogs’ on me. I’m more of a cat person.

As I said before: I think that Newspapers for the Blind offers a terrific service. I sincerely hope that it will survive Will May’s erratic actions. Eventually, his karma will catch up with him.

INTERNET CASTING
As for our friends at the voice-over casting sites (sometimes known as Pay-to-Plays)… we realize that you don’t have the time or the resources to conduct extensive investigations. However, it would be very helpful if you would publish information on those individuals who have pulled a fast one, and share it with your members and with other voice-over casting sites. That way, scammers who are exposed on one site, won’t be able to set up shop at another site.

Instead, you have left it up to our trusted colleague Mahmoud Taji, to come up with a Scam-Alert for our industry. As much as I applaud his hard work, this should not have been left to the efforts of one blogging voice-over talent in Egypt.

As voice-seekers, we pay you in order to take advantage of your internet voice-casting service. We don’t want to be taken advantage of, because you choose to protect your voice-seekers from our phone calls.

Come to think of it… isn’t that how we used to do business? We simply picked up the phone and introduced ourselves to a prospective client. What would Sherlock Holmes call that? Elementary, perhaps?

Paul Strikwerda © 2010

www.nethervoice.com

*The BBB Wise Giving Alliance has developed Standards for Charity Accountability to “assist donors in making sound giving decisions and to foster public confidence in charitable organizations. The standards seek to encourage fair and honest solicitation practices, to promote ethical conduct by charitable organizations and to advance support of philanthropy.”

PS Is your accent preventing you from booking gigs and if so, should you change it? My next blog is about tweaking your twang!

Technorati Tags: 501C-3 corporation, Bernie Madoff, Better Business Bureau, Charities database, Gabriel Sherman, how to spot a fake charity, Juliette Gray, Mahmoud Taji, Nethervoice, Nevis LLC, New York Observer, Newspapers for the Blind, Paul Strikwerda, Pay-to-Play, Scam alert, Steven Spielberg, Stven Lowell, voice-seeker, voice123, voiceover, voices.com, Will May, William B. May company

In July, something happened to me that had never happened before: I won a prize. Voices.com had asked members to write about their experiences with their service, and somehow, they liked my story the best. Here’s a quote from what I wrote:

“Two months ago, I decided to challenge Voices.com. My dollar-a-day membership plan paid off big time. With $2300 in the bank, I had earned more than 38 times my investment.”

The genuine article was posted on Double Dutch (and all over the Web). Thanks to this entry, I became the surprised winner of a $500 gift certificate to Sweetwater. So far so good, right? But, wait… is there something wrong with this picture? My winning entry sang the praises of a Pay-to-Play. You might have noticed that there’s even a voices.com banner on my blog. Yet, when you take a look at this blog, I seem to be “Mr. Critical” when it comes to these voice-over matchmaking sites. Could Double Dutch be accused of Double Standards? Colleague Steve Hammill put it this way:

“I must say that I had to chuckle when I saw your endorsement of a P2P site on this web page. It’s quite an elaborate endorsement.”

So, what’s the real deal with the Dutch dude?

At the time of my unexpected win, some blogging colleagues suggested that they would never take part in a competition like that, because they wanted to remain ‘impartial’. Even though I don’t agree with their assumption, I respect their point of view. I also believe that my writings have shown that my opinion is my opinion… no matter how sweet the waters may be.

INSIDER INFO
Let’s get personal for a moment. I happen to be one of those guys some psychologists eagerly label as “fixers“. A few weeks ago, I was looking for an item at my supermarket that wasn’t there. Yes… it was a product from Holland. What else could it be? Now, I could moan and groan about it for the next twelve weeks, or I could go the manager and suggest he stock this particular Dutch delicacy that nobody should live without. The first option was easier and would have taken less time. So, I picked option two. The manager listened to what I had to say and put in a request. Within a matter of weeks, I got a phone call that the item was on the shelves, and by the way…. how soon could I stop by to pick it up, compliments of the store?

It was a small thing that made a big impact. Now my friends tell me: “Stop talking about where you go grocery shopping. We get it, already!”

I happen to be a strong believer in bringing about change from within... one Dutch treat at a time. That’s why I Pay to Play. My P2P-memberships give me access to some of the inner workings of these sites, and that means that I can speak from experience when I write about them. I don’t want to be one of those armchair referees. I enjoy being out on the field, playing the game.

THE P2P ADVANTAGE
There’s no doubt about it: voice-over matchmaking sites have earned their place in the market. In fact, if you’ve been kind enough to keep track of my “ponderings” on this blog or on various LinkedIn-voiceover groups, this is a recurring theme. Every day, sites like voices.com save you and me time and money that we would otherwise have to spend on advertising, marketing and acquisition. The free podcasts, articles and expert advice are a treasure trove for beginners and old-timers alike. And occasionally, these sites even help you or me book a job. However, I’d advise any voice-over pro or amateur against totally relying on P2P’s for leads. I’m sure these sites would be the first ones to tell you that.

FAIR IS FAIR
Every medal, no matter how shiny, has two sides. I’m not one of those people who, blinded by one side, can’t see the other. There’s still so much room for improvement, and rather than being a winner or a whiner, I want to come up with ideas on how these sites can make their services even better. Sometimes they actively ask for my opinion. Sometimes I just can’t help myself, and I blog about it. At times, people even read these blogs and respond.

But let’s be honest: not all is well in voiceover land, but we can’t blame everything on P2P’s, and I don’t think I ever did. WE are part of the problem. A BIG part. Every time we take on a job for less than we deserve, we send a signal to voice-seekers that we’re willing to be taken advantage of. Every time we put in a bid that’s below what’s commonly accepted as reasonable, we’re telling our colleagues that we don’t give a bleep about the long-term consequences. We can’t force sites like voice123 to uphold minimum rates. It’s their business to run their business any way they want. They make most of their money from memberships and not based on how much we get paid per gig. That’s what agents do.

Last but not least, when we’re operating out of the bargain basement, we’re telling ourselves that our unique talent, our invaluable experience and our phenomenal skills are only worthy of a handout. If you truly believe in leading by example, is that really what you want to instill in your children? Of course I know that there’s much more to self-worth than a bunch of numbers on a paycheck. I’m not asking you to charge astronomical fees either, simply because you feel like “you’re worth it”.

All I’m asking for is that you please educate yourself by taking a good look at resources like these… many of them offered by the same voice-over sites listed in this article:

http://www.edgestudio.com/Voice-Over-Rate-Card.htm
http://www.voices.com/voice-over-rates.html
http://support.voice123.com/article/How_Much_Are_Talents_and_Voice_Producers_Charging_for_Non-union_Voice_Over_Work_Delivered_Online.html
http://www.aftra.com/documents/2009_Radio_Commercials_Ratesheet_Revised_5-6-09.pdf
http://www.voiceoverresourceguide.com/index.html

NOW WHAT?
Even the best information is totally useless if you don’t do anything with it. You have at least three options:

1. Show me that the rates listed in these resources are outrageous and out of touch with reality, and argue that you don’t deserve to be paid that much. OR…
2. Agree that these rates (no matter how average they may be) are reasonable, and stick to them when bidding and negotiating.
3. Don’t be involved in this discussion, but keep on complaining and watch from the sidelines as others are sticking their necks out.

SAVED BY THE UNIONS
Some of you have asked me: “How about the unions? Isn’t it their job to deal with remuneration? If you’re so unhappy with the current rates or the lowballing bidders, why not join AFTRA?”

I’d say: Well, if you can afford to be a union member, great! If you get paid union rates or above, even better! However, don’t walk away from your own responsibility by telling me that the unions are the only parties who can fight our fight, and that non-union members have to pay the price for not being in the union. Members are usually the first ones to tell you that things aren’t what they used to be, and that the presumed power of AFTRA, SAG, ACTRA, EQUITY and others, is fading fast. Correct me if I’m wrong, but the majority of Pay-to-Play users are non-union.

Do you remember these numbers? Almost 40% of professional voice-overs make less than $25,000 per year, even after having been in the business for 10-25 years. Over a quarter of those surveyed make less than $10,000 per year.  (Source: VoiceOver Insider magazine). I don’t see these people joining a union in the next few weeks. So, who else will stand up for the thousands of unrepresented voice-overs, who love what they do and who also wish to make a decent living?

Don’t expect SaVoa (Society of Accredited Voice Over Artists ) to go to battle for you. That’s not SaVoa’s mission. Article 2 of their STANDARDS OF BUSINESS CONDUCT clearly states:

“neither SaVoa nor its members shall collude to set or attempt to set minimum rates for voice over services.”

So, at the end of the day the ball’s back in your court… where it always was and always will be. We all choose what we want to live by, and what we’re willing to accept. The great thing about living in this free country, is the fact that in many situations, we can choose where we wish to draw the line. Sometimes it’s not so easy to see that one decision, no matter how small, has an impact on the whole. If you have any doubts about that, ask Rosa Parks.

CONTEST IN CONTEXT
And finally… here’s an update on my voices.com “success story”. I became a member on April 24th of this year, and I have no regrets. Stephanie Ciccarelli who handles the PR for “voices”, knows that my endorsement of her company was not motivated by a prize, but it was inspired by my experience at that moment in time. There’s a reason why there still is a voices.com banner on this blog.

It’s almost six months later, and I can tell you that I have landed exactly THREE jobs through voices.com. All of them were booked before I won my prize. It’s not for lack of trying. In fact, since I became a member, I’ve sent out a total of 378 demos; most of them custom-made, hand-crafted and with a touch of Dutch. I think I can do better, and I think sites like voices.com can do better. And that’s exactly why I share these thoughts with the rest of the voice-over community and beyond.

A RESPONSE
Voices.com has a dedicated LinkedIn Group for members who’d like to be involved. Whenever I write a new article, I post it under “news”, and that’s how many of you probably found out about Double Dutch.

Stephanie Ciccarelli wrote the following about my previous blog on her LinkedIn group page,:

“With regard to what has been posted re: “What Pay-To-Plays Don’t Want You to Know”, let me share the following:

These sort of postings in the Voices.com LinkedIn group are giving me cause for concern. I would request that articles deliberately questioning the integrity of services such as Voices.com not be posted in the Voices.com LinkedIn Group in the future. While the article may mention our company, or others in this space, it is unacceptable for me to let unfounded information as it pertains to Voices.com be shared through our own property.

I will be replying to the blog posting personally with my thoughts.”

I encourage you to read her thoughts in the comment section of my last post. I also urge you to share your thoughts on the following:

-Do you believe that I questioned “the integrity of services such as Voices.com?”

-Did I provide “unfounded information as it pertains to Voices.com?”

-Do you agree with Stephanie, that we should refrain from posting articles such as “What Pay-To-Plays Don’t Want You to Know” on sites affiliated to those that are mentioned in the article?

Paul Strikwerda © 2009
www.nethervoice.com

PS Are you having a hard time figuring out what to charge for your voice-over services? You’re not the only one! My next article will take you through some of the steps involved in bidding on an audio book project.

Technorati Tags: AFTRA, contest, Double Dutch, LinkedIn, non-union, P2P, Paul Strikwerda, Pay-to-Play, rates, SAG, SAVOA, Stephanie Ciccarelli, success story, union, voice-over, voice123, voiceover, voices.com

Imagine an international marketplace where suppliers and buyers meet. This business environment offers the broadest and most colorful selection from all over the globe. A fast and furious bidding process determines which supplier will sell to which buyer at what price.

Can you guess the name of this marketplace? Could it be eBay? Is it uBid? Voice123, perhaps?

TEAMWORK
Let me tell you what’s unique about this particular auction. It’s actually a cooperative, owned by about 5000 members who have united to organize their sales. Their aim is to achieve the best possible market position for its members at the lowest possible cost.

The auction I’m writing about offers a transparent market and an objective operation of the price mechanism. A fair minimum price is set for each product, based on normalized averages. If that price isn’t met, there’s simply no sale.

THE PLAYING FIELD
Here are a few other clues. The items that are auctioned off, are of some 20 thousand different varieties. And all of this takes place on the largest trading floor in the world – a conjoined complex of cavernous warehouses as large as 200 soccer fields. That’s roughly the size of Monaco! Inside, 22 million separate items are sold and distributed to buyers every weekday, mostly in Europe and North America.

The “Dutch auction method” is used for price determination. This process uses a clock, where the clock hand starts at a high price and drops until a buyer stops the clock to bid and accept (part of) the lot. The clock was invented in the 1870s by a cauliflower grower from Holland .

As a voice-over pro, fighting my own daily bidding wars, I’ll tell you what I like about this type of auction:

1. The element of collaboration. Although the members of the cooperative are competing against each other, they are working together. What a concept!
2. Vigorous quality control, based on the highest professional standards, is part and parcel of this business.
3. Set minimum prices (based on weighted averages of goods or services in a particular region during a given time period).
4. Products or services are sold to the highest bidder. Imagine that in our industry!
5. Transparency. Everyone involved knows immediately what the winning bid was and who won. Only if the quality is not as told, the buyer can complain. The products have to be paid directly.

BACK TO YOU
Of course you know where this is going, don’t you? I am going to ask you about the market place you do business in. But here’s the twist: you’re auctioning off your vocal versatility on sites like voices.com. You spot a project that might be a good fit. You record a free custom demo, and you put in a bid. Then you wait… To quote Dr. Phill: “How’s that working for you?”

Let’s go down my list again, and contrast and compare.

OWNERSHIP
1. As a member of the cooperative, you would be one of the co-owners of the business. You would elect representatives and a board that manages the daily affairs on your behalf. In other words: you could directly influence how your business is run. The board answers to its members, and every year it must give those members a detailed account of the state of the cooperative.

Compare that to the marketplace where you auction off your services. You are a member of that marketplace, are you not? Let me ask you this: do you have any say in how this business is run and by whom? And by “say” I don’t mean filling out a survey, or posting your praises on their website. There is a difference between giving feedback, having influence or actual power.

Do you get to see the balance sheet, at least once a year? And if an executive is underperforming, can you vote him or her off?

Do you work together with your colleagues to maximize results, or is it every man and women for him- or herself and against each other?

QUALITY
2. Can anyone offer their services on this voice-over marketplace you belong to, or is there a screening process based on professional standards? And once accepted, is there any type of quality control in place, to ensure that voice-seekers won’t be bombarded with third-rate ‘talent’?

PRICE
3. What does your marketplace do to promote fair trade, if anything? Are buyers (and sellers) educated about what rates are reasonable for different types of projects? Does your site set minimum prices, or is everything left to a market that has no bottom, no ethics and people who have no clue?

4. What if our on-line marketplace would operate like a Sotheby’s, where goods (or in this case services) would actually go to the highest bidder?

ACCOUNTABILITY
5. I saved the big one for last: Does your on-line auction site ever notify you of the winning bid? Let’s say a voice-seeker posts a project with a budget range of $100-$250. Wouldn’t it be interesting to know how much or little he eventually ended up paying? Don’t you want to know if the job ultimately went to an undercutting ‘underbidder’ or a habitual ‘lowballer’? Aren’t you curious to find out how successful this site really is in securing fair and reasonable deals for its members? Or is that too much to ask?

I recently read a comment from someone who regularly uses P2P’s to hire talent. He said (and I’m paraphrasing): 

“You should realize that when a job is posted with a $100 – $250 range, that over half the people who audition will offer to do it for $100. Another quarter will offer to do it for less.”

Mmm, any idea why you’re not having much luck, lately? Of course the voice-over dot coms could hit back and say: “That’s nonsense. Some people get paid even more than what the job was posted for.” My response would be: prove it! And don’t give me anecdotal evidence. I want numbers.

Am I wrong, or do you have a right to learn how many posted projects materialized into something concrete, and how many disappeared into thin air? And wouldn’t that information help you determine whether or not it would be worthwhile for you to join such a site? Why aren’t these facts available to the members who are paying for these services? What is it that these sites don’t want you to know? What are they hiding and why?

GOING DUTCH
My favorite auction is an open book. The FloraHolland flower auction is the international market leader in floricultural sales. Their auction building  in Aalsmeer is the second largest building in the world. With six locations situated close to the most important production areas in the Netherlands, 9 thousand growers sell just over one-third of all flowers sold in the world, which adds up to about 2 billion Euros each year. There are 125 thousand auction transactions every day. In other words, 12 billion cut flowers and over half a million plants a year. Business is blooming for this cooperative.

I wonder… is there anything we can possibly learn from this model? Isn’t it about time we add a touch of Dutch to our auctions? You tell me!

Paul Strikwerda © 2009

www.nethervoice.com

PS don’t miss the next installment: is it okay to endorse a voice-over website and criticize it too? Find out why I’ve been asked that “articles deliberately questioning the integrity of services such as Voices.com not be posted in the Voices.com LinkedIn Group in the future.”

Technorati Tags: auction, FloraHolland, flower auction, Nethervoice, Paul Strikwerda, Pay-to-Play, voice, voice-over, voice123, voiceover, voiceovers, voices.com

Humor and humiliation. It’s a weird combination and yet, it’s the basis of every slapstick. Charlie Chaplin, Buster Keaton, Laurel and Hardy, they all made us laugh because they made someone else cry. It’s that cake-in-your face humor, the poke in the eye joke, and the dignitary forced to parade around town in his underpants that never seems to get old.

Embarrassing people is funny business. Especially if we embarrass  those who were born without a funny bone. Sometimes it can be an effective deterrent too.

THE CONTINUING SAGA
If you’ve been following recent revelations on the limited success of Pay-to-Play sites, and the question that started it all “What happens to our demos?“, you must have noticed that this storm still hasn’t subsided. Today, voices.com Stephanie Ciccarelli wrote a two page “Clarification on the Status of Job Postings” on Vox Daily.

At the same time, voices.com has made changes to their SurePay system to prevent abuse from customers, specifically credit card fraud. And as you know, that’s not the only kind of abuse that’s going on in our industry. On the LinkedIn Working Voice Actor Group, a colleague wrote about a lead she got from a P2P site. The voice-seeker said they wanted to hire her, but instead they used her scratch track and turned it into a commercial. The next day they had it airing all over the country. The talent never got paid and she only found out about it after friends alerted her when they heard her voice on the radio.

This is what I would like to know:

• Apart from the bad guys, who should be held responsible? The talent, because she didn’t watermark her scratch track or charge the voice-seeker for recording a demo?
• Is the Pay-to-Play site to blame because they were responsible for the lead?
• Would this have happened had this been a union job?
• Would this have happened had the talent used an agent?
• What can be done to make sure other voice-talents don’t fall into the same trap?

SCAMS GALORE
Of course trusting, law-abiding citizens like you and I are getting ripped off each and every day. This Double Dutch dude does double duty as a translator, and I got burned once or twice by a client writing out a bad check. I ran to the nearest Better Business Bureau and filed a complaint, but all they could do was lower the rating of the translation agency.

However, as a member of Translatorscafe.com (a P2P site for interpreters), I have a not so secret weapon at my disposal. It’s called: “The Hall of Fame and Shame”. This is a members-only area, filled with feedback about unreliable agencies, dirty rotten scoundrels, reputable translators and anything in between. Before I take on a new job, I always enter this Hall to see what I can find. It’s by no means foolproof because not every agency is rated, but I backed out of a job a few times, because I discovered that I had been contacted by a bad apple. The thing is: con artists are notorious repeat offenders, and as soon as they are found out, they move on to another unsuspecting victim.

It’s important to note that this Hall is for people on the demand as well as the supply side. Some translators are less talented than others. Some let a computer program do all the work while they are having all the fun. Some miss their deadlines and ‘mysteriously disappear’ from the radar screen. All of that is exposed. Apart from the bad and the ugly, there’s also lots of good stuff going on in the Hall. People sing the praises of interpreters and agencies alike. In that way, the Hall serves as both a carrot and a stick.

EARLY WARNING
Wouldn’t it be great if we had such an early warning system in place in our industry? You can find hints of it on certain sites, but as far as I can tell, there’s no database that’s filled with red flags and smiley faces. There’s no blacklist of known crooks that have stolen our demos, taken our money or conveniently forgot to pay us. Translatorscafé knows who they are. How about Voices.com?

Or are these sites just a funnel instead of a filter? Is this simply beyond their control? Should we just pay them a yearly fee and trust that nothing bad will ever happen? And when it does, are we condemned to fight the thugs on our own? Donna Summers (voplanet) wrote to the working voice actor group:

“(…) you guys chose not to use agents when you joined the P2P’s. You wanted to do it all yourselves, including negotiating, booking, and monitoring your auditions and jobs. P2P’S get you the auditions and you still complain! Save that big 10% you pay an agent to deal with these issues for you. And now you expect someone to jump in and save you from the big bad ad agents? You can’t have it both ways, Talent.”

Is she right? Are we paying the price for not being willing to pay an agent? How about those of us who can’t get one? Agents are highly selective, especially in this economy. And are agents immune to scams? Let’s ask the victims of Bernie Madoff! Steven Spielberg, Jeff Katzenberg and Elie Wiesel all fell for his scheme. I’m pretty sure that all of them had good advisors.

My point is this: we can’t always prevent bad things from happening. Part of this world is still a nasty and dark place. But it’s what we do after the fact that matters. Let’s put something in place that can serve as a deterrent and as a reference. Our weapon: a “Hall of Fame and Shame”. Our punishment: public humiliation!

PARTY TIME
One final thought. Every year my street has a much anticipated block party. In fact, it’s one of the oldest in the nation that is still going strong. This year’s highlight was not the moon bounce or the Chinese auction. Any idea what was? You guessed it: it was the dunk tank.

Paul Strikwerda © 2009

www.nethervoice.com

Technorati Tags: auditions, Hall of Fame and Shame, Nethervoice, Paul Strikwerda, pay to play sites, scam, translatorscafe, voice-over, voiceover, voices.com

Ontario’s London Free Press called them “voice-over matchmakers”. Back in 2003, David and Stephanie Ciccarelli created Voices.com out of their condo. At the time this blog was published,  they had eight full-time staff and four computer developers on contract. David estimated about $11 million of business goes through the site annually.

If you’ve ever used their services, you know that Voices.com makes money from your subscription fees and from an optional 10% SurePay escrow fee on top of whatever the talent’s fee is, paid by the voice-seeker. According to the site:

“this Escrow fee is kept by Voices.com to cover the charges that we incur from holding the deposit for a period of time in a secure third party account”.

Stephanie Ciccarelli summarized my unease regarding audition submissions as follows:

“You’ve noted that many people are concerned to see that some of the past jobs they’ve auditioned for months ago have not yet progressed to awarding a talent, leaving them to wonder if a client is merely window-shopping or kicking tires, possibly also wondering if auditioning online is a waste of time.”

“According to a snapshot of statistics from the last four months (April 2009 through July 2009) tracking the completion rate of jobs posted at Voices.com, we can confirm that at any given stage, half of the open jobs are still being reviewed by their client and the other half are completed (that means a talent has been chosen), with over 2/3 of those completed jobs being verified and processed via SurePay.

Although this information is reassuring, we are aware that there is still room to improve and to grow.”

Stephanie cites a number of reasons as to why it appears that many voice-seekers on her site never seem to select a candidate. Allow me to paraphrase:

1. Some clients, regardless of their deadlines for finding talent, may not have a pressing need to have their voice over recorded instantly. In other words: they file away the auditions until they are ready to hire. Sometimes this could take many months, but eventually, someone gets the job.
2. Some clients use sites like voices.com, to find talent and they prefer to work with them off-site, leaving their job in an “Open” status (see the story of the Taylor family in my last blog). This explains why there are fewer “completed” jobs than there truly are.
3. Some voice talents and/or voice seekers don’t want to use the SurePay system. If that’s the case, the job won’t be registered as completed.

VOICE-SEEKERS’ PERSPECTIVE
So far we’ve heard the story from the perspective of a voice talent and from representatives of several pay-to-play sites. Be sure to check out Voice123 Steven Lowell’s comments on my previous blog. What do voice-seekers make of all this?

A former casting director for a nationally known ad agency gave me permission to share his (or her) thoughts as long as he/she would remain anonymous.

“Agencies will do a lot of casting for projects they “hope” will become a client. They will hold auditions and actors will hold their breath (after creatives fawn all over them), expect a hold or booking….alas: no call! Of course it happens that another is booked, but it does also happen that no one is booked as the agency did not get the account or budget was cut.

It also happens that an audition is used as a demo in pitch for the account and the performer never knows about it. Top brass may not even know this practice is going on at his or her agency. The Head of production is calling the shots without others in chain of command knowing anything about you (performer) being screwed. You may have been instrumental in getting an account. When time came to cast for account, you may be forgotten for a more high profile talent.

I protested this practice (to the shock of the production chief), but it was an uphill battle to have any effect on this practice I did make some headway. In short: we don’t have many options in regard to this practice. Many agencies or agents don’t participate in this practice, but it does happen.”

ISSUE RESOLVED?
There you have it. Were these answers satisfying to you? Were my initial concerns justified or were they a tempest in a teapot? Do you feel that the major pay-to-play sites offer enough accountability and transparency? Even though they’re not our personal agents, we are paying them to provide a service, so we should have some say in how our money is spent. What suggestions do you have regarding this issue?

Please keep in mind that I am looking for constructive ideas. It’s always easy to blame someone or something else for our own lack of success. However, there are so many things we can do to increase our chances of being spotted and hired. We should never completely rely on these sites to bring in all the work.

As you have noticed, sites like voice123, voplanet and voices.com are listening to us, and they don’t shy away from controversial topics. They are following up with job seekers, and they too have to work with ad agencies that are only using their service to test the waters.

And finally: as every matchmaker knows, no matter how carefully you select two interested parties, not every match ends in matrimony!

Paul Strikwerda © 2009

www.nethervoice.com

Don’t miss the next installment: “Why no one’s coming to your site“.

Technorati Tags: auditions, Nethervoice, Paul Strikwerda, Pay-to-Play, success, voice, voice-over, voice123, voiceover, voices.com, voplanet

“It’s the best thing I ever did”

“A total waste of money”

Are you new to voice-overs? When you ask fellow vo-pros what they think of voice-over casting websites, you better be ready for a heated debate! Especially when you’re getting started in the business, you’re probably trying to figure out how to spend your money wisely.

Are these sites an easy ticket to success, or a waste of time, energy and cash? Here’s my take on it.

EXPECTATIONS
1. People tend to get disappointed because of unrealistic expectations and not necessarily because “the sites don’t work”. However -as we have seen with Facebook- dissatisfied members can join forces and demand certain changes. We all know that some voice-over sites are more open to feedback than others. Ultimately, sites that don’t listen to what their members are asking for, will pay the price.

LEADS
2. Never fully rely on vo-websites for leads. These voice search engines should just be one tool in an overall marketing and lead-generating strategy. Nothing less, but certainly nothing more.

Personally, I make sure to have various streams of income. That’s why I spend part of my time as a Dutch/German translator, and part of my time recording voice-overs. Sometimes I combine both when reading copy I just translated!

RESOURCE
3. For me, the value of these vo-sites is not only determined by the number of jobs they generate. Voices-com, for example, offers an amazing wealth of information, from podcasts to blogs to rate info. It helps beginners to hone their craft, and it gives established talents the opportunity to generously share what they have learned.

Here’s the good news: you don’t need to be a full-paying member to benefit from this cornucopia of resources.

These voice-over superstores also give us a chance to scope out the competition. In a world that’s getting smaller and smaller, it’s good to know what colleagues are up to.

There’s so much great talent out there, and it’s not getting any easier to carve out a niche. Being able to listen to what others do, has given me a better sense of how to position myself in this overcrowded market.

MONEY
4. Much of this discussion about these sites has been focused on the cost of membership. Especially in this economy, is it really a worthwhile investment? One of the questions we should also ask ourselves is this: how much money and time could we potentially save by joining these sites?

If you’re like me, you probably didn’t get into this business because you’re a marketing genius. How much hard-earned cash would we have to spend individually, to get even close to reaching the client base these sites tap into each and every day? Most of us would rather spend time in front of a microphone, than drumming up new business.

In part thanks to these sites, we can focus on what we do best! Let them make the connections, do the legwork and promote our skills. And at the end of the day, they can even make sure we get paid. What’s that worth to you?

QUESTIONS
5. Now, don’t think for a moment that I believe these sites are perfect. Far from it. I worry about “artificial intelligence” matching voices to certain projects, excluding others.

I’m very concerned about the bidding war by talents who are played off against one another, deflating our rates from within. And I’m skeptical about sending in a demo when I see that 100 other hopefuls have just done the same thing.

But at the end of the day, it all comes back to the person who stares at me when I look into the mirror. Instead of blaming outside factors for my success or lack thereof, I ask myself what I can do to stand out from the crowd.

Here’s the thing: that’s something no site can or will ever be able to give you!

Paul Strikwerda © 2009

Technorati Tags: Bodalgo, Dutch voiceover, German voiceover, internet voice casting, Nethervoice, new to voiceovers, Paul Strikwerda, voice talent, voice-over casting scam, voice123, voiceover casting sites, voiceover newbie advice, voiceover translator, voices.com, voplanet