Let me preface this post by saying that I feel very lucky.
In the past 25 years I was able to develop a strong relationship with a number of clients. The longer we go back, the fewer words we have to waste on what each side is expecting from the other.
It’s almost like a marriage. And very much like a marriage, a lasting business relationship needs commitment from each partner. It can be love at first sight and it can also end in a divorce, due to unspoken expectations and unfulfilled desires.
Throughout the years I have heard colleagues complain about their clients:
I hate repeating myself. But once again, Paul, you’ve somehow managed to point out the realities of one or two things I’d been beating myself up over a bit lately.
I’ve been wondering how it’s possible to be ‘friends’ with every client. It isn’t. And recommendations from days gone by to “find out about your client’s families, their respective birthdays, what they do in their spare time, etc.” can almost be seen by some in our increasingly private world as stalking or, at the very least, sticking one’s nose where it doesn’t belong.
Most of your other points I was already in agreement with. Car dealerships, for instance, who state in their commercials that they have “1800 cars on the lot” or that they’re “the biggest Toyota dealership in the area” don’t understand that those statement don’t mean a blasted thing to a prospective customer. So similar claims by voice-over people have the same effect on their clients.
I’ve wondered – when some clients don’t call or email as often as they used to – whether there was something lacking in the last job I delivered to them. I want clients to know I want to hear from them if they have any concerns whatsoever. But I now know that if I don’t hear from them right after I deliver, it usually means they’re happy.
Business attitudes and behaviors change with the times. I’ll leave well enough alone.
Thanks again, Paul!
Thanks to social media, the line between public and private seems to become blurrier every day. But just because we like to expose our private lives to people we barely know, doesn’t mean we can make people care.
At times, a relationship with a client can be like a well-prepared meal. It takes time to simmer. But these days, most meals come from the microwave or from a fast food joint.
Every now and then, I still run into an old-fashioned client and I do everything I can to invest in and cherish the relationship.
I agree with almost everything you said, Paul…however, I disagree (ever-so-slightly) with points 5 and 6. I agree in the sense that that most of them won’t care, and many clients cannot tell the difference between a $400 mic and a $1,000 mic. At the same time, though, one of the things I’ve learned about doing business is to explain to my clients why I charge what I do. Earlier in my career, when they suggested a rate that was too low, I would simply say, “I’m afraid I cannot take this job for a rate below $_____,” and that would be the end of that. However, ever since I began to briefly explain to my clients the reason for my charges, I’m finding that more and more of the clients that approach me for the first time are willing to pay my rate.
I don’t go into huge detail, of course, and I never specifically mention the exact cost of what I paid for my studio or my studio equipment. I just take care to tell them that they would be getting professional-quality audio, that half of my fee would go towards maintaining my studio, and that I have years of experience under my belt. I think if you pull back the curtain a tad and let them know how your business works, they are not only more inclined to trust you, but also to pay your suggested rate. As VO talent we should certainly never expect that a client will suddenly drop all of their concerns and go out of their way to make life easy for us (they’re hiring us to do a job for them, right?), but occasionally letting them know why you charge what you do for certain jobs helps them understand you a bit more.
Mind you, I’m summarizing, and I never phrase my rate suggestions in such a way as to sound arrogant or “toot my own horn.” However, as I’m sure you agree, this business has seen an influx of newcomers who don’t understand the expectations of a career in professional VO, and so the client occasionally has a tough time hunting for a VO talent who can do their job properly. So I think talking (not complaining) about what your expenses go towards, and being very, very, very brief about it can be a good thing in that it will reassure them that their project is in good hands. Just my two cents, of course.
My philosophy is that people do things for their reasons and not for our reasons. That’s why it is essential to find out what’s important to them.
As I noted in The Amateur Infestation, some clients are crying out for quality audio. Reassuring those clients that you can deliver professional, pristine sound files, makes sense, if the question is raised.
Because of my rate, most of my clients expect nothing but quality audio. Once they’ve received a sample, there’s no question I can deliver and no need to justify my fee.
Usually, the low-budget clients offer most resistance. To them, price is one of their main concerns. Telling them I use a Neumann microphone won’t make a difference. Champagne taste and a beer budget usually don’t go well together.
I do agree that some clients need to be educated. That’s why a few of them started reading this blog!
EXCELLENT! Being on both sides of the glass, I believe Paul’s words have never been truer. I am the client easily as much if not more than I am the VO. This is the real deal. Thank you Paul for again for stressing to the community that this is a business.
My pleasure, Cliff. Understanding that this is a business also helps when dealing with so-called rejection. Not being selected is never personal.
I think, because some of this falls under justifying one’s value, that it doesn’t necessarily need to be spelled out. With that in mind, many of today’s prospective clients (I couldn’t dislike the term ‘voice-seeker’ any more strongly) seem to come across as impatient and just want to know what they’ve asked about and nothing more.
For example, right after I posted my earlier comment, I received an email through my website from a prospective client who simply said: “We heard your demos, and need a video for our website, about 300 words. How much do you charge?”
Any attempt by me to explain or justify anything would’ve resulted in annoyance, I’m sure. So, in a single sentence, I first reiterated their need (a narration for a corporate image/marketing vehicle), followed by what my fee would include, and concluding with my fee. It was short and sweet, but it still could’ve been seen as either ‘too much information’ or simply that my fee was higher than what they are hoping to spend.
Because I now realize there’s just not a lot that clients or prospective clients want to be bothered with, I can only tell ’em what they want to know and then move on.
Thanks for illustrating the point, Mike. We are busy people. Clients have a lot on their plates. Nobody has time to read a chapter from the life of voice-talent X explaining why he charges an X amount of dollars per minute or per word.
If anything, I do respond with a question because it’s often impossible to give a reasonable quote without more information about the project. In order to meet a client’s need, we have to understand it first.
Absolutely. Unfortunately, there are those prospects who won’t even take the time to answer a question no matter how relevant we might feel it is. I noticed that the woman in my example said they “heard” my demos. They didn’t go so far as to say they liked what they heard, so in my mind they only wanted an answer to their one question and nothing more.
“Wham… bam… thank you, Sam.”
Yep. Some people come in to buy. Others are just looking.
Paul,
I not only agree with most of this post, but have in one fashion or another tried to hammer this home to, in particular the Voice Over 2.0 community.
However, there is a paradigm that is now affecting v.o. in a huge way; the advocate. To at least some extent, it’s always been about “who you know…”. I’ve found this now to have far greater reach for voice over than ever before.
Behind many of the “working” v.o. talent, we find that they work for game developers, are married to or date copywriters or creatives, are best friends with an agency guy, etc.
A perfect example would be Pixar, whereby very few non A-lister talent ever stand a chance of being in one of their projects. Beyond the typical celebrity names employed, one finds that most, if not all of the other voice work is performed by employees of Pixar, close friends and relatives. It’s highly doubtful that Brad Bird’s kids would have got the nod in a standard casting.
So while conceptually one might not be able to become friends with their clients, it’s more than reasonable that ones friends can become clients.
So, in a world where the average individual has 250 individuals within their sphere of influence, it’s more than reasonable that with the huge numbers of individuals wanting to do voice over, that one or more of those 250 people is a voice talent.
I guess I should have married a Pixar employee…
In the old days this used to be called nepotism or worse, an incestuous relationship.
You’re right: part of this business has always been about who you know. Clever networking is key.
On the other hand, it can be risky to work for or with a friend or family member.
What to do when a friend is not up to the task? Should you fire him or her?
How will this affect the friendship or family dynamics?
Working for friends or family can be okay. It depends upon many things. I believe in most cases, the “situation” simply is rationalized to the point of satisfaction. As a director, I have been tasked with directing voice talent at all levels. Often, the end product is fairly adequate, produced usually by breaking the work into tiny chunks and having the would be talent deliver the lines to me by parroting them to my line reads. Painful, time consuming and probably not close to being as good as it can be. However in these instances, good is certainly good enough. At least as far as the client is concerned.
If I had to guess, I’d say that some fiorm of nepotism is perhaps responsible for as much as 1/2 of all v.o. being done today.
…as always, Paul, sound advice! Jesus once told His audience to “Let the dead bury the dead”–in other words when it’s over, IT’S OVER. Audition, book, perform with excellence and move on…
Amen to that, Herb!
“In the past 25 years I was able to develop a strong relationship with a number of clients.”
No one cares Paul, remember?
Everyone enters our business with 25 years experience it’s automatically allocated to newcomers.
Everyone needs to read what Paul has written, not to nit pick over details but to take on board the real message which is “Dear voiceoverist …get over yourself!” Get this job right and it’s better than working for a living.
Good point, Philip. No one really cares, but when I had finished my list, I felt that it would not be fair to some long-term clients with whom I’ve developed a strong relationship, to leave them unmentioned. Exceptions prove the rule.
It’s awfully cold here in Pennsylvania, and I just saw a flagger directing traffic dressed up like an eskimo. At these times, I am even more grateful for the work I do. I’m in my warm studio and it doesn’t even feel like work!
Boy, Paul, you just ruined my romance with my clients!
Ya’ know your writing is getting awfully blunt these days!
I’m kidding, of course. I for one enjoy the way you’ve been streamlining your writing. It’s the mark of someone who is getting pretty good at this stuff!!!
Thanks for a good, bold and very realistic article!
Thank you, Rick.
I think bold is beautiful!
So does this mean that if you’re sleeping with a client, you shouldn’t send them flowers?
If you’re sleeping with a client, doesn’t that make you a prostitute?
If anybody needs further proof that what you say is true, all they have to do is remember that we not only provide services to our clients, we are other people’s customers, too. Do you really care how many copper fittings your plumber has to keep in stock or, how many years the FedEx guy has been picking up and delivering packages or what kind of hand truck he uses? Didn’t think so.
Very well put, Lee. Frankly my dear, I don’t give a damn!
Dear Paul;
What you said.
It’s all true.
What you amplified with each response to your readers,
also true.
The facts of life are sweet. Not scary.
Thanks for the timely reminders.
And your genrous sharing of them.
Because you’re a busy successful VO artist
I know the value of the time you invested.
Mike Hanson
Writing and responding gives me a nice break in between sessions, Mike.
I appreciate your words very much.
Have a phenomenal New Year!
Bold is ballsy and beautiful. Paul, thank you for an excellent and thought-provoking article. While I can agree with everything you’ve stated, I still feel the personal touch matters with most clients. And I truly care about them, so I can best serve them. Yes, some are cold fish, and others are engaging. We’re people, not robots. Mutual respect goes a long way. I have a number of clients who’ve kept me busy for years, and I get referrals that way. Obviously some fall off along the way, so good business sense means you must always be the best YOU you can be, especially in light of the immense competition we all face as the industry evolves. So you can get new clients. Nobody can “use you” unless you allow it. My MO has always been to be professional,keep it light and be always helpful. This adds value to yourself and the transaction. Do your job and get it right, and get outta Dodge. And I feel it helps to be easy and fun to do business with.
Happy New Year!
I subscribe to what you’ve written, Bobbin, and the things you describe usually happen over time. Fortunately, there still are caring clients and I cherish them deeply. The authors of my latest audio book (“Brains on Fire“), sent me a gift and a card saying: “Welcome to the family.” I was absolutely floored. When it comes to clients, the golden rule still applies: Treat people the way you’d like to be treated.”
More food for thought Paul.
I guess this is one of the downsides of being ‘a homeworker’. Working mainly in isolation, I find I miss the social side of things – actually ‘going to work’, the chats during breaks, catching up with a familiar director, producer, sound engineer, studio manager etc., is always real treat. On top of this when the client is also at the session – when you meet face to face and when he or she is there to pat you on the back when you leave the studio, going through the ‘That was great, hope we can work together again’ routine – all this can leave you with the (probably) false impression that you have been working with and for a friend.
Take that personal interaction away and everything changes. Perhaps the tendency to waffle is a sign that you are not totally confident, are unsure perhaps about how much to quote for the job, or are perhaps you’re not totally sure of whether this job is right for you. When one is feeling vulnerable the tendency is to seek approval, therefore you can easily fall into the trap of trying too hard to make your client ‘like’ you as much as he (hopefully) likes what your tonsils can do.
When going it alone one of the skills you need to develop along the way is the ability to sense whether a client wants to exchange a few pleasantries alongside the ‘what, when, how much’ conversation. If you can judge that correctly, a bit of small talk can help the working relationship – but at the end of the day, nine times out of ten a working relationship is what it will remain.
Most of us ‘homeworkers’ can relate to that, Helen. The digital highway allows us to share more than ever before, and yet those bits and bites hardly make up for being in the presence of people. Letters, even images on a screen cannot replace real togetherness. Observation and participation are not equal.
So many meaningful subtleties of communication are lost when we type messages while staring at a screen. Yet, that’s where it seems our culture is going. iPads, Smart Phones, netbooks and a television in every room… We’ve created touch screens to replace the human touch, and we are separated by the glass walls of our electronic devices.
Has it brought us any closer?
Well, here we are, commenting on a blog while we could be sharing a pint in a pub…
What this is all about is the ego of the actor, and how it can get in the way. An agent of mine – who is also an accomplished talent – told me yesterday that I was “the antithesis of the actor-type ego,” which I took as quite an accomplishment. I don’t consider myself an “artist,” I am a businessman in a creative profession. I realize (though I sometimes have to remind myself) that it is NOT all about me. Many actors forget that, and their business suffers for it. (Sheesh – and now I am painfully aware of the irony of how often I used the terms “I,” “me” and “my” in this post!!).
I like that: “a businessman in a creative profession.”
Over the years I have had the privilege of interviewing many high-profile personalities as a reporter. The higher up the ladder they were, the less ego seemed to play a role. The people that weren’t quite there yet, were often most self-involved, quite unpleasant and rather lonely.
It takes a wise person to realize that a strong personality does not require an ego the size of Texas.
What do you get when we put the whole ‘Me, Me, Me’ culture upside down?
That’s right: ‘We, We, We!’
Actually it looks more like ew, ew, ew, with backwards e’s, but I get your drift.
The realization that some relatively untrained voice talent could have beaten me out on an audition today with a $69 USB microphone, is enough to keep anybody’s ego in check.
Great points, Paul. All of them.
Ultimately, all any client really cares about is ‘can you solve my problem?’
Having also been on the production/casting side of the business, I know that I couldn’t have cared less about which particular talent a client chose, so long as they just chose one and production could continue. After all, nothing personal, but deadlines are deadlines.
As a producer, the problem I needed solved was the insertion of a voice track into a project. The options presented to the end client had to meet some basic requirements (ie. male/female, acceptable sound quality, within budget and deadline), but otherwise nothing else really mattered.
That’s not to say that the basics (easy to work with, fair price, great sound quality, dependable for deadlines) are not important, but rather that they are assumed as a given. It’s when you don’t have them that you stand out. They are the price of admission.
Thanks for all of your contributions to the VO community! 🙂
My pleasure, Matt, and thanks for adding your experience to this discussion. If we take away the personal element, some people might get over their rejection depression a bit faster. Too often, newcomers want to know: Why wasn’t I selected? What could I have done differently? Don’t they like my voice?
As you rightly say, it’s usually nothing personal. Perception is subjective and it tells us more about the person making the selection than about the voice actors that sent in an audition.
I read your response to Dave’s comment on #5 & 6.
Talking about your cost of doing business too easily slips into whining, but letting your customer know that you have a professional operation is important. It requires a fine touch or a blunt force implement, IME there’s no middle ground.
As for mics and fine equipment, the only value that they have is for marketing and your personal enjoyment. There are some agents and “voice seekers” who recognize the high-end brands. If your demo is good it provides a bit of credibility.
Had I foreseen how the market was moving, I might have saved $30k+ in equipment costs. Of course, I really enjoy working with fine gear, but there’s a point of diminishing returns. Finding that combination is my recommendation for people still working on their studios.
Oh yeah… “Oh Magoo, you’ve done it again!” 😉
I’d compare our relationship with audio equipment to what’s happening in the world of photography. Ultimately, it’s the power of the picture itself that counts. Some of the best shots in history have been taken with very low-end cameras.
When I look at my own experience, most of my clients simply want me to sound clean and clear, and they’re not interested in my audio chain. My colleagues are usually the ‘gear slutz‘. Some even suffer from an affliction I call ‘mic envy’. Occasionally, a new agent or a website will ask me what type of equipment I use. Perhaps they’re looking for indications of my level of professionalism.
Having said that, I have to admit that I’m fascinated with the tools of my trade. To me, being a pro means having at least a basic knowledge of what’s around and how it works. A professional musician should know about the various brands of the instrument he/she plays. If you’ve ever seen the documentary “Note by Note: The Making of Steinway L1037,” you know that no Steinway is the same. Picking and choosing the right one for you, is an art in and of itself.
In the next few weeks I will have the opportunity to test four microphones that -on paper- have the potential of being excellent tools for the type of work we do. Hopefully I will be able to answer the question: Is it absolutely necessary to spend over $1000 to get an acceptable sound? Personally, I think it’s wiser to spend $700 on room treatment and $300 on a mic, rather than the other way around.
To be continued!
Those “gear slutz” colleagues with “mic envy” have a well known condition:
G.A.S!
Also known as: Gear Acquisition Syndrome 🙂
The very finest mics only reveal their credentials in the acoustically finest environments.
No offense intended, Paul, but comparing a $5k Manley (http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/RefMicGold?utm_source=Google&utm_medium=PPC&utm_campaign=none&gclid=CJ_Dhua9wa0CFYUZQgodNGzWBg) to a $300 mic in your recording space is an exercise in futility. Even recording in a world-class studio, the spoken word is not complex enough to discern much audible difference between mics. This is not true when recording a top-shelf singer with a big voice, a smooth string, and unique characteristics; or when recording a cello or piano. …and of course, to hear the differences, you really need a suitable playback environment. 🙂
I wish I could try out a Manley, but unfortunately that’s not on my list, Steve. Rest assured that I have picked four mics that are suitable for the spoken word. The most expensive one is a microphone not yet available in the United States. Stay tuned!
I’m looking forward to it, Paul.
I think some agents and production companies are interested in your gear to see if you’re really real. The bottom line is your sound, in all ways is clean. And as Paul says “how you play”. There are a lot of newcomers who’s sound does not measure up to production or broadcast standards. This is probably why some are interested in equipment. I for one will not apologize for building my equipment and studio for being able to compete with the top of the heap. But I also continuously study and work at playing the best I can.
If you compete with the best, you have to be like the best. That’s why I love watching studio tours. There’s so much to learn.
As most of you know by now, I built my own voice-over booth last year. It gave me an opportunity to familiarize myself with an aspect of my job I had previously neglected. I learned about building materials, acoustics, reflection, soundproofing etcetera.
Since my construction project, I have a whole new appreciation for what people like Dan Lenard and George Whittam do. To see them in action, watch the East West Audio Body shop on Sunday night: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/ewabs Older shows are archived and you can watch them at your own convenience.
All I can say is “Amen!” & “Halleluja!” Paul!
When interacting with current and potential clients I just follow their lead. If they’re the chatty let me get to know you better type I will respond in kind being careful to keep my responses more brief than theirs.
I myself am a task oriented type of person. My priority is to get the job done. That’s not to say that I don’t like to have fun but I believe there’s a time and place for it. Sometimes getting the job done includes banter with the client.
Thank you, Dina. It’s excellent advice to let the client take the lead. This implies ACTIVE LISTENING, and I have noticed that some voice-overs are usually better at TALKING. Why would the be, I wonder? 🙂
Great article.
Just one “meh” from me on point #10.
We’re hired for both our capabilities and the unique sound that we each make with our voice. I don’t believe we are as easily replaceable as his quick summation may suggest. Sure, you can get another talent, but will it be the same? Oh heck no. I also believe its this notion that we are so easily replaced that prevents our rates from being where they really should be; the fear that, “if if I don’t say ‘yes’ to this crappy deal, they’ll hire the next guy.”
I don’t know what other talent experience, but most of the time when I hold my ground (or even raise my rates), i usually get the gig and a little respect to boot. Sure, a few here and there have passed (and I’ve apparently pissed off DigitalOne), but overall I’m stoked with the number of auditions and gigs I’m working with now and I can afford to pass on crap-pay, crap-clients now (thank goodness). So yeah, talent sell themselves short when they book gigs and this article doesn’t help.
But the “I’ve been in this business xx years,” and “I’ve worked for so-and-so”stuff? Totally agree. I always laugh when someone says it to me regardless of what business they are talking about.
My $0000.2
Sincerely,
Mike (I’ve been in this business for 12 years now) Vaughn
I think you’re talking about two different issues, Mike.
We are all replaceable at any time. Very few of us represent the client brand in an truly unique way because we lack the notoriety of someone like Morgan Freeman or some other highly-recognizable superstar. Only if you’ve represented a brand for more than 3-4 years, it is unlikely that your voice is associated with a client; the exception is when you’re doing an outrageous presentation.
The fact that you have the brass to raise your rates in this economy and your clients assign additional credibility to you is an entirely different matter. Businessmen respect businessmen.
I’ve been in this business a lot longer than you, Mike, but all those extra years don’t buy me a gig. The extra experience may win me a job if I can apply it to the audition for the gig or the campaign for it.
I know my worth and I don’t take “crappy pay” for fear of being replaced. I know what my bottom line is. I also know that I’m not that special. Does that mean I need to lower my rates? Heck no! It just means I know I’m not so special and yes, someone else CAN do what I do (but I do it with so much more panache ha ha!!)
Terrific stuff Paul! I will definitely use this as an inspiration to stay focused on the things that do matter – being a resource, a solution, a service.
Thanks, Lance. So much attention is going to social media these days. What do we focus on when we’re on Facebook: on colleagues or on clients? Who’s paying us for our services: colleagues or clients? I firmly believe that if people would spend as much time on cultivating clients as they are on socializing, their business would do so much better!
Absolutely, Martin. That’s what they’re paying us for.
One thing that I just realized, partucularly after Martin’s response of “Yes, you ARE a means to an end, and that’s ALL the client cares about-can you provide what I need?”, is that with very slight tinkering, Paul’s post here could apply to any one of a number of vocations, industries and professions.
I am also a copywriter, writer, artist, producer, director, and wear some other hats, and this same sort of dialog exists in so many online groups and forums.
There once was a bit of a structure to business in general that tended to at least give the illusion that the worker was cared for. I’m not sure if it becmae chicken vs. egg, or as I suppose the “power of positive thinking” people that got the workforce believing they should jump ship every time a better offer came along.
Although, obviously the actions of many businesses have been to regard much of their workforce as simply over priced tools. Thus technology is often driven by a quest to replace these inaccurate, faulty and noisey “machines”.
I forget the actual numbers, but it was something like, the average 18 year old in 1965 was expected to have 4.25 jobs in their lifetime vs. the average 18 year old in 2000, who was expected to have 12+ jobs in their lifetime. Lately, it seems this hasn’t been the choice of the worker, but back in the late 90’s it sure was.
I did some consulting back then and was privy to things like worker aquisition costs, training, etc.
The commoditization of the voice over worker is simply part of the general commoditization of all workers. While this is certainly not comforting, it does account for the huge migration of people from “conventional” work to creative pursuits, like voice over.
My take is a bit different than the many online folks who sprinkle fairy dust and unicorn blessings upon every new Tom, Dick and Harry.
I contend that people are not coming to v.o. because they are pursuing any kind of dream, but because most are trying to escape a nightmare.
They may find comfort in an embracing online voice over community, but very few will find any financial comfort or measurable success.
One reallly does need to sit down and take a personal inventory and determine just “how in it for the money” they are, and what might happen if they were only to make $5,000 per year or less as voice talent.
That is the reality. If you want some objective answers to real problems, go visit http://www.score.org Here yo can get some real life perspective on legal, financial and other questions/ problems for free.
I do my best to make my posts relevant to a wide audience and not just to the voice-over in crowd. The commoditization you’re talking about is absolutely happening, and that’s why it is crucial to be that voice above the crowd. In order to stand out, you need to be outstanding in every aspect of your profession and that is a tall order.
Is there still money to be made as a voice actor?
A few years ago, the VoiceOver Insider magazine asked their subscribers about their income. 40% of professional voice-overs made less than $25,000 per year, even after having been in the business for 10-25 years. Over one quarter of those surveyed made less than $10,000 per year.
Now, get this…
On December 20th, CNBC.COM posted a top ten of “easy, high paying jobs.” Guess what’s number one?
Voice Actor
Here’s a quote from CNBC:
“Voice acting, depending on the job, can be high-paying and requires little physical effort in terms of what one might consider traditional physical labor,” according to Stephanie Ciccarelli, co-founder and chief marketing officer of the voiceover talent agency Voices.com. “Many pros cite $100,000 as something a voice talent could make annually. …Those at the top of their game in promo and movie trailers are making over $1 million a year.”
Yes folks, it’s easy money, and you can make tons of it!
It’s comments like this from CNBC and Stephanie Cicarelli that infuriate me! Easy money? Sure some VO’s do make good money…. But remember that bankers, politicians, and many others make more – including I suspect, the owners of P2P sites! Life has never been equitable – and making big bucks is fine as long as it is not being made by exploitation, raising false hope, manipulation, empty and unrealistic promises or by taking advantage of others.
I was the reader for Billionaire Ken Fisher’s audio book, “The 10 Roads to Riches”. I can’t recall what all 10 Roads were, but I can remember that voice actor wasn’t one of them.
I read the CNBC piece an actually sent a tweet to the author. By the way, reading his piece, which clearly excluded any level of fact checking, style, personality, engagement or real substance, I think that “being a writer for CNBC” should probably replace “V.O. actor” on his list of easy, high paying jobs.
Thanks Paul, for this blog and your unflinching straight-forward advice. I’m trying to get established as a mixing and mastering engineer, and discovering your posts today has given me a real reality check. 🙂
Hi Chris, thank you so much for your kind words. I’m glad my articles have been of help to you. Just remember that it’s my subjective take on reality that is “printed” on these pages.
I just visited your site and I see you have some excellent testimonials. A masterful mix can bring a song from average to amazing, and you have a rare talent in that area!