Imagine an international marketplace where buyers meet suppliers.
This business environment offers the broadest and most colorful selection of products 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? Voices.com? Voice123, perhaps?
TEAMWORK
Let me tell you what’s unique about this particular auction environment.
Paul,
loved it!
And even more would love to see it happen.
But…
Thanks,
dc
Well Paul, you’ve either been reading my mind or somehow snuck into my diary! Yes, this is something I can totally appreciate, particularly the last point about ACCOUNTABILITY – learning if the job was either awarded or not through that PTP site would be fantastic.
Co-ownership, Quality/Professionalism, Fair Trade/Pricing and Accountability would be welcome measurement factors. The only part I can’t honestly correlate is the highest bidder concept. In essence isnt that what we DO have now? Except it’s lowest bidder, in a way!?
Side note – I have auditioned for PTP and generally I go for the fixed gigs so I stick with the posted gig rate. However, once or twice I have offered a lower rate and only once I got a gig that way. I re-booked with the this client for additional work on that same project at a higher, normal rate. I did it to get the category of gig. Conversely, I was offered a gig from a “flexible” rate and managed to increase the amount I was paid, since the client was asking for a specific amount of work and loved my voice and my samples. Both clients were very happy. The second client is referring me like crazy. But… these kinds of things can happen in the ‘agency’ world too, right? Back to the issue…
I am not renewing any of my PTP at the end of this month. I’m taking a break from them to concentrate on other VO efforts. I haven’t found the PTP overall worthy of the investment, except to say I have a lot of audition work which has served me to a point. Not enough clients to justify the costs. AND I HATE that there are no appropriate measuring statistics and think it’s pathetic. I know with my agent what happens after my audition – AND I only PAY my agent WHEN I BOOK a gig!!!
To sum it up, the business model of the PTP site is based on it being easy to find VO “pros” who will sign up and pay to audition. That is their ‘bread-and-butter”, and we are a LARGE number of folks. The hard efforts of the PTP company are focused mainly on finding those ‘producers’ who want to have easy access to the ‘roster of VP pros’ that the PTP offers. The VO talent is their inventory to the VO buyer, and we PAY to be on their shelves.
Another side note: The strange part for me has always been – why is it illegal for an in-person actor to pay for an audition, but these sites are ok? I mean serioulsy this is a similar concept isn’t it? If you know the history of acting (in person for film, tv etc) you know of this issue.
Third side note: Being skeptical, what if PTP sites were unscrupulous and were posting jobs on their site just to ensure that there was a volume of “auditions” for the VO folks to see? Some of the PTP sites post ‘verified’ but anonymous producers. How do we know that to be true – and who is checking? Yes, the PTP folks themselves are checking. So, there is an issue here of integrity in that there could be fake jobs being posted by a PTP company. I don’t know if this happens, but it certainly could, couldn’t it?
Unless someone on the VO side is really willing to get into it and be a bulldog, nothing will really change from what I can see. I’m willing to lend moral support to someone else who can do the bulldog work, but I can’t afford the time to do it myself, sadly. What I can afford to do is pull out of PTP sites for now. It’s kind of like an addiction – hard to quit, but it will be true by the end of the month.
And for those folks from PTP companies reading this, be the bulldog! I would be so excited for a PTP site to stop arguing these points and instead DO something for their “bread and butter”. They could invest in a 3rd party monitoring system, create an annual report to users about statistics, and create a VO Talent Advisory Board. It may not be to their advantage if they only see the costs of such efforts financially short-term, or if those reports and stats show it’s not worth the cost for the VO Talent!!!! Perhaps that is the truth!!
Thanks as always Paul for an interesting and provocative blog. What happens next!!??
Rebecca Michaels
http://www.LoveThatRebecca.com
I love that Rebecca, but not because she’s sharing and confirming most of my impressions!
Thanks for speaking out in this matter, Rebecca. The more people chime in, the stronger our voice will be, and the greater the chance that we will be heard.
We’re not gone to the dogs yet! Bulldogs are endearing looking creatures that are usually loyal to their master. I’m not nearly as endearing as a bulldog, and I am loyal to my profession, to my colleagues, to my passion for this work, and to the standards that I hold dear.
By being critical, it’s not my intention to engage in some cheap P2P bashing that will ruffle a few feathers here and there. That’s too easy and it usually doesn’t solve anything. I do try to offer a different perspective from a part of the world that has been my home for so long.
Pay to Play is here to stay, and sites like voices.com have earned their place in the market. But, not unlike a healthy diet, voice-overs should feed themselves with leads from many sources.
The question “Now what?” is an interesting one. Even though these voice-over matchmaking sites don’t have a cooperative structure, members can vote with their wallets. I’m sure there are more people like you, who are not renewing their membership for various reasons. I think it’s fantastic that -thanks to hard work and tons of talent- so many other doors have opened for you, Rebecca!
In my mind there are two things that could happen that will ensure that nothing will change:
1. P2P’s have the right to remain silent. The can ignore or trivialize our critique and disregard our suggestions.
2. Colleagues have the right to stay comfortably complacent, or pay lip service in public and keep on complaining in private.
If we want to get things moving into a more positive direction, two things need to happen:
1. Colleagues who are on the same wavelength need to put their money where their mouth is (voice-overs are good at that!), and should start making some noise. The more, the better.
2. The P2P’s should listen to their members. We’re their clients too, and if we’re not happy with some of what is being offered, that needs to be addressed. That’s what Facebook did. If it were up to me, I would start by becoming much more transparent and accountable.
Problems for one company might be turned into opportunities for other companies. Perhaps we’ll see the birth of a new voice-over site (a cooperative, even??), that will be open, accountable and based on professionalism, performance and quality.
You’re on a mission, Paul.
Some of the P2Ps are taking money from both sides others are not but the distinction of which side they represent is fuzzier than it is in real estate sales (with all of the attempts to straight that out).
In the case of P2Ps deriving all of their money from talent, you’d think that addressing the issues you’ve raised would be a P1 (top priority). In the case of P2Ps that in some way charge voice seekers for the service, i.e. fees for escrow, addressing your issues might bite the other hand feeding them.
So how do you suggest that we “put our money where our mouth is?” Do we build a VO site to compete with the existing services? Do we re-energize the unions? Should SoVOA grow teeth?
While technology has changed this business, it’s still pretty messy at its core. The collective whines of talent have been unheard for years, why change now?
Hi Paul,
Great blog, as ususal. I would love to know how many jobs offered really convert to jobs for talent. Why is it such a secret?
Jamee
I am so right there with you! I just left a site because they penalized you for auditioning too much! Can you imagine? The whole system is starting to bug me. I was on two separate sites at one point and I’d find the same job on both – for different rates. I’d feel better about the whole deal if they were just more transparent.
:)Tammy
Hi Tammy, welcome to the Wild, Wild West, where you pay to play without much of a say. I just noticed the same thing: one job being advertised on the first site in the $100-$250 range. Next thing you know… the same job is advertised on site number two for $100 max. I’m pretty sure they will find someone who will do it for even less.
I don’t blame a business for wanting to get most bang for their buck. That’s what I do when shopping for a new car. However, I also know that the car will ultimately be sold for a fair price because there’s a bottom line that is respected.
I’ve come to believe that on these P2P sites we’re shooting ourselves in the foot, more than anything. I am absolutely in favor of more openness and accountability, but we’re not going to get it as long as there’s no massive appeal for change. The bottom feeders have to realize that they’re dragging all of us down. You’ll never make up in volume, what you loose in price.
It’s time to bring back a few elements that seem to be missing for some: self-worth; respect for our skills as voice-overs, and a feeling that we’re all in this together. Don’t push it off to the unions, to SaVoa or even the P2P’s. It all starts with YOU!
I must say that I had to chuckle when I saw your endorsement of a P2P site on this web page, Paul.
http://www.voices.com/advantage.html
It’s quite an elaborate endorsement.
Dear Paul et al,
Thank you for opening up this discussion and affording me the opportunity to respond.
In the article, you cited areas that you would like to see accountability in from voice over marketplaces.
Voices.com serves our customers and goes above and beyond what is expected and hoped for regarding:
– Authenticity
– Transparency
– Accessibility
– Customer service
– Valuing our customers and their feedback
– Implementing customer feedback
– Setting minimum budgets for clients posting jobs
– Recognizing talent who have booked work at Voices.com with a transaction-based feedback rating
– Providing a list of Recently Hired talent where you can click through to read about their experience and learn more about who they worked with
– Conducting and featuring client case studies on our Buzz blog sharing details about individual customers and their casting experience, revealing the Voices.com Job ID and also who they hired.
While we may not disclose the winning bid, that doesn’t mean that we fall short of the mark, nor is it necessary to do so. Would you want someone to know what you quoted? Is it your right to know what someone else was paid if they were paid equitably and within the parameters given?
Some of what you wrote about is true with regard to other marketplaces or services that voice talent may list themselves with, however, it does not pertain to Voices.com.
Choosing, whether consciously or unconsciously, to include Voices.com among the kind of companies singled out is not only inappropriate but disheartening given our history serving Voices.com customers and our positive history with the writer of this article.
Having to post a reply of this nature has been upsetting for me personally and also for members of our team.
I trust that what I have shared will be considered.
Sincerely,
Stephanie Ciccarelli
Co-founder of Voices.com
“Having to post a reply of this nature has been upsetting for me personally and also for members of our team.”
Are you serious, Stephanie? You and your “team” are losing sleep over a blog post, which contains only the following direct reference to your company?
“Pay to Play is here to stay, and sites like voices.com have earned their place in the market.”
Not exactly a full frontal assault.
One thing I have noticed about the P2P sites: they are uniformly thin-skinned when responding to criticism–even constructive criticism such as what Paul has offered here.
Hi Jason,
Thank you for joining the conversation. I appreciate hearing your thoughts.
Stephanie
Stephanie…I believe voices.com is constantly striving to better their services. In the years I have been with you – I have seen your company do nothing but strive to be better. And I appreciate your work in that area.
My concern with p2p’s in general is that the playing field is too large! I was excited about the voices.com platinum membership, thinking it would thin the ranks of talent. While it has done this, I am sad to see more talent signing on. The biggest “exclusive” to this level, for me anyway, is that it is a “select” group, enjoying the search engine benefits, etc. But there should be a limit to that group. For the fee you are charging – it is only fair to those who belong to keep it “select”.
What if someone started a site where you had to audition to get in…and only the cream would be allowed? You would be invited in based on a panel of pros who want the site to stay that way…for pros. A site where there were no bottom feeders undercutting the rest of us. Pros charge what they are worth. A site where your audition was based on the quality of your product rather than how cheaply you can do the job. I’d pay more for a site like that.
Larry is right on the money, in more ways than one! We are lucky to have Freedom of Speech, where we can share opinions in an open forum. That’s what it’s all about.
It also means that talent contemplating joining these Pay-To-Audition sites will be armed with the full knowledge of what they will be getting. I wish this discussion had been posted earlier this year, because had I known then what I know now, my decision would have been different.
I have to agree with Paul. I’d like to see more transparency in the ratio of auditions to actual jobs, and what amount the client ended up paying the talent. If there’s a way to move around this p2p marketplace to our best benefit (after all, we are paying clients to the site) we should have some way to see what clients are really paying for jobs, and even, in fact, if the jobs are actually being cast.
If in fact, the jobs are going to short bids and habitual low-ballers, and this means that some of us will choose to end our memberships with a p2p that does nothing to end the practice, then that should be our INFORMED choice. We are operating on a level of blind trust. And it makes what can often be a frustrating occupation even worse.
At this point in my so-called career, I do rely on p2p auditions. It keeps my chops up, keeps me up to date somewhat on the market place and trends, and also, get’s my voice out there. Of course, my last point is entirely faith based in most cases; the constant cattle calls sometimes leave me wondering.
OK, I’ve gone on long enough.
I agree with Dorothy on many accounts, and I really appreciate Stephanie for joining the conversation. From what I know of it, I agree that Voices.com does provide the most bang for your buck out there as far as P2P sites go. Voices.com also provides a lot of valuable information, insightful articles, and even in-person get togethers in different cities. I think Voices.com is doing a lot to create more of a global v/o community with a personal touch, which I really admire.
But as far as the auditioning process goes, the p2p sites leave me with a lot of questions. In the real world, I’ve booked on average probably one out of every 7 or 8 jobs I audition for, which seems reasonable to me. Even if my average were a bit worse, it would seem reasonable. (Of course, I rely on clients I’ve established over the years for the bulk of my work.) However, on Voices123, which is the only site I’ve ever personally been a part of, I booked 0 jobs out of 37 auditions. I didn’t submit to anything I was not suited for, and I bid only for jobs that were within my normal rate range, and I bid my normal rate. Now, that could be the luck of the draw, but I know a lot of pro voice talents, and all of their stories seem to be the same. Tons of auditioning, nearly no bookings. We tend to feel like we’re constantly being under bid. There is also the distinct feeling (we have no proof of this at all) that some of the jobs are simply generated to give the talent the feeling that there is lots going on.
For me, as a pro voice talent, it simply isn’t worth the time. It seems to me that what is already happening among the people I know is these sites will lose more and more experienced pro talent and get more and more newbies. If I were just starting out, I would be very attracted to a P2P. What a wonderful way to get practice auditioning, and of course I’d low ball it. Previously, I was making no money as a voice talent, so yeah, $150 would seem like a lot to me. Plus, it would be a credit! Remember how hungry you used to be for your first v/o credits? You can’t really blame them. I did my first job for $100 and I was thrilled! To tell them to charge as much as we do right off the bat is silly. THEY wouldn’t feel right doing that in a bidding situation, and they shouldn’t. Over the years, I’ve raised my rates slowly as I had more experience to offer, just like in every other business.
I’ve been a pro v/o artist for 10 years now. I joined Voices 123 and ended my membership after a year of auditioning, and I think, being underbid consistently. In the end, I decided that it was wiser to spend my time and money marketing myself on my own – the way I built my business originally. I’ve been happy with that decision.
I have a group of friends who are all pro voice talents and we’ve discussed this a lot. We WOULD join a site where the rates were set, the talent was screened, and the jobs were never anonymous. I don’t know if that would ever come about though because by screening talent, the site would really limit the money it is able to make. However, if anyone does start it, sign me up! Until that day, I’ll keep doing my v/o in the real world.
Jeannie
As a relatively new VO talent, I am sooo glad that I happened upon this discussion. It reinforced two things for me: 1) some P2P’s are better than others and 2)the most sustainable business model for VO success is the combination of good coaching, lots of practice, dedication to improvement and- most importantly- self-marketing…preferably with real people (agencies, casting directors, production houses, studios, etc.). Oh, and it doesn’t hurt to have decent recording equipment if you’re not in a pro studio!
Full disclosure: I joined Voices.com and have found the information about the industry to be excellent and useful to me. I’ve had a number of jobs come my way. I’d say the experience has been worth the money so far. By contrast, I’ve looked into Voices123 and it just doesn’t have the same professional feel, either to the site or to their model itself. I’ve chosen not to sign up with them. Just my choice, not a general condemnation.
The market will continue to dictate whether or not the P2Ps survice or fail. Like others who have commented, though, an open and transparent site would probably attract both good seekers and professional providers. Water seeks its own level!!
If voices.com posted numbers of unopened auditions, actual paid prices, etc., I feel they’d lose their best talent who would likely feel the model doesn’t work for them.
Accountability and transparency are two words that don’t seem to go well with the P2P model.