Tag Archives: Video

What Should a Viral Video Cost a Marketer? (Killer Post)

“The price of a thing is the worth it will bring.”

I love that quote, but the reality is that “viral” video pricing has been less about worth and more about cost plus.

If anyone should know the “fair market price” of a viral video it should be I — or me (depending on which one is grammatically correct, and I really don’t want to know, because I don’t plan on framing a sentence that way again).

After all, I interact daily with brand marketers, big and digital agencies, and video creators. Yet prices range irrationally, and the market is in desperate need of guidance. This post is a long one because this is a complex and important issue to brands and creators. I really should clean this up, and adapt this for one of the advertising and marketing trade magazines.

Nalts Discloses Fees
Let me disclose my own fee structure and hope others will do the same. I initially was happy with $1,000 per video (for Mentos and some of my early work), but soon discovered my hourly rate computed to less than minimal wage. And I was juggling more work than I could handle with a day job. I also didn’t want to junk my YouTube channel with excessive sponsored videos, which alienating my subscribers (especially since many resent YouTube’s InVid ads, which produce far less income for me than sponsored videos).

Now I’m pricing between $3,000 and $10,000, but there are a few reasons I can price this way:

  • I have a decent track record, and fortunately more demand than time.
  • I have a steady audience on YouTube so most of my videos will get at least 20-40,000 views.
  • I have a marketing background, and provide strategy and a creative brief before diving into the video.
  • I try to produce several videos so a brand can amortize the cost (and generally I get some efficiencies out of a series).
  • I have gobs of debt (hey, just keeping it real here).

How Marketers & Creators Find Each Other
There are, of course, plenty of video creators who can perhaps do better videos for less money. I have developed a network of specialists that can, for example, do a great score, logo or animation very inexpensively. But I haven’t yet discovered a good “business exchange” site where advertisers and creators can find each other (viral video could use its own eBay, Craig’s List or Match.com). I’ve thought about starting one, but it is labor intensive and not something that automates well without significant volume. And I don’t feel like being the “viral video” middleman or talent scout.

Xlntads (with whom I consult occasionally) is approaching that model because hundreds of creators have registered and sometimes partner via the site (a director and a musician team up for an ad). A brand can generate a variety of videos via Xlntads without hunting down and dealing with individual creators (not to mention multiple contract negotiations). I like that as a marketer, and as a creator I’m happy to work for a smaller fee if I can avoid some of the incredibly time-consuming and frustrating “business development and qualifying” hassle.

Going from Prospect eMail to Payment
My visibility means most of my clients find me, so I’m fortunately not cold calling (yuck). But there’s a huge cost associated with qualifying something and having multiple phone calls and documents, and some of these go nowhere. I probably ignore valid opportunities because I miss an e-mail, or it reminds me of a previous discussion in which I invested time and energy understanding the brand, building a creative brief, proposing video concepts… then the agency or brand inexplicably “went dark.”

More importantly, many video creators have no interest or experience in selling their work, and simply want to create something for a modest profit. Historically, I don’t charge until I make a video, and yet much of my value occurs earlier and I’ve been giving that away naively.

Project or Retainer Video Consulting
As of this post, I’m moving to a flat-fee model where I charge $250 an hour (or a discounted day rate) to: understand the brand’s goals, conduct some informal research of their “space” in online video, build or adapt a creative brief, and present a series of video concepts. This initial fee will help me qualify clients and provide better service initially (as opposed to scrambling together a few weak concepts 10 minutes before a conference call). Then I’ll scope and price videos separately. This seems fair, since much of my value is in the initial phase, and the fee justifies my time and makes me a partner instead of a video production guy desperately pitching a few Nalts videos in hopes that I haven’t wasted my time. If I’m not right for the client’s production (or if I’m swamped) I can refer it to other creators.

As a marketer, I’d maybe prefer to pay upon completed video, but I am accustomed to paying for my agency’s time by the hour (and usually at a rate that far exceeds $250 when you burden it with overhead).

In 2008 (recession or not) companies and agencies will need marketing/video expertise, but can’t justify a full-time employee until this space matures. Do you remember what smart agencies and clients did when paid-search was emerging as a discipline? Rather than hire a firm with overhead or pay a full-time employee, they tapped specialists who were compensated for their objectivity, expertise and time. My career goal is to move from corporate marketing to online-video consulting retainers for a few companies and/or agencies. But don’t tell my boss yet. 🙂

Various Creators. Various Fees.

There are a number of video creators that do work for hire.

  • Some are simple and some are complex teams with expensive budgets.
  • Many are brilliantly creative but couldn’t market their way out of a paper bag. Others are sound marketing strategists that suggest creative concepts that make you cringe inside (I need to start documenting some of these because they’re so unfunny they’re funny again).
  • I’ve known brands that have spent $250,000 on a series of 4 short viral videos (not kidding), and I’ve known brands that have done almost the same thing on a shoestring $5K budget.

As a marketer, I tell people to keep their costs down since there’s no guarantee the video will pop. As a creator, of course, I want to profit from my work and want the same for other amateurs.

If you make online videos, please feel free to pimp yourself below- as long as you provide some information about your pricing.

“Fixed” versus “Variable” Payments
Should a marketer pay for a video, or pay the creator based on its viralicity? I have a strong opinion here, but I need to first explain why I cringe at “per view” payments. A view isn’t a view. Views can be manipulated in various ways – I don’t know how the “viewer robots” work (and don’t really care) but I assume they replicate a view by refreshing a video in intervals using various IP addresses. Most sites are developing safeguards against this, and counting only true views as those that last more than, say, 30 seconds. I’ve notice my view count darts to 200 and then stops for a while before it reflects that actual views. Presumably someone is validating the view count before it’s reflected accurately.

  • Any video site can fudge the view counter and it would be hard for a marketer or creator to know otherwise (candidly I suspect some of the second-tier sites are manipulating view counts to make the site look popular for visitors and advertisers).
  • “Auto roll” is another way to manipulate views. My YouTube profile page has a feature where the video plays automatically on the unwitting viewer, which gives me the ability to get any video thousands of views pretty quickly.
  • Even a real view isn’t always the same as a real view. Why do we pay different CPMs to media properties? Because some are worth more than others. If I do a video highlighting a U.S. hotel chain, it’s going to be worth much more to my sponsor to have that viewed on a travel blog or golfer website than on Break.com by a 14-year-old kid in Russia. It will be years before we can target views by demographics, so we assume some degree of waste.

As a video creator I’d prefer to be paid for my time and creativity, and not be gambling on the video’s popularity to find out if I’ve made $4 an hour or $7. As a marketer I don’t want to inadvertently reward the creator to junk and manipulate views. And even if I “capped” the view incentive, it’s a pain on my budget system to hold a reserve. Try explaining to the folks in finance why you’ve set aside $20,000 in case your video gets popular.

Pay for Seeding
Finally, there are two distinct costs associated with videos. First is the “creative” cost, like producing an advertisement. Second is the “promotion” cost of getting it viewed. While that can involve direct media fees (paying a site to feature a video), this is typically a retainer-based service that involves a person or agency seeding the video and reporting on views. Generally this is a temporary retainer since most of the views will take place in the first 30 days (I’m over simplifying this, but I wouldn’t hire an agency to report on my viral video for six months if each bi-weekly report was changing by .2%). After a few months, you move on. There are a few creators that have mastered this art, and a few agencies that are claiming it but have no idea about how to do it well.

This, like public relations, is a difficult thing to sell. But rest assured that “earned” media (locating a relevant blogger and asking them to post your video) is more targeted and effective than paying to flight crappy preroll ads. My recent Mac Spoof went well past 200K, and we’ll never know that’s attributed to the timliness and humor of the video itself, or the few e-mails I sent to Mac blogs (which took about 5 minutes).

There’s an art and science to video seeding, and it’s often done inappropriately. But it’s a vital step, and I believe this will spawn a cottage industry that eventually gets consumed by big agencies, interactive shops or PR firms.

A lot of information here, and I look forward to reading the comments. I hope this spawns some discussion about this important topic. We’ll set up a forum for it too.

Another Online Video Show About… Online Video

goggleburnNext New Networks is debuting an online-video show about online video. Googleburn, which appears each Wednesday is:

“the sting in your eyes when you’ve been ogling online videos all night and it’s 6 AM on Monday and oh dear lord you can’t see anything because the Internet blasted you with whiteout,” says host Nick Douglas in the show’s first blog.

Using vocabulary matched only by Entertainment Weekly’s Owen Gleiberman, NewTeeVee’s Jackson West says the show is “slightly warped yet smartly erudite sensibility and a disaffected delivery.”

melbourne sunglasses interview australian party guyThis week’s spoof is well timed, as it features an interview with the sunglasses of Australian party thrower Corey Delaney (Worthington), who was widely seen on YouTube, in this embarassing interview. Embarassing, I think, for the host who asked loaded questions, lacked objectivity, nagged, and became part of the story (must have missed that “Intro to Television News” course in college, honey). I thought this was a prank at first, but it might well be real.

My BubbleGumTree Show, of course, is going for a more retrotarded angle on online video, featuring the interesting people of the space. Watch for a debut with Mark Day Comedy next week.

This “online video shows about online video” arena is starting to remind me of the short-lived websites that featured the best websites back in the late 90s. But it will be fun while it lasts. Via Mike Abundo’s Inside Online Video).

Another Great Site for Free, Royalty Free Music

The online-video community is in constant need for good, royalty free music that doesn’t cost money. Most of us don’t make enough on our videos to warrant paying a lot. And we’re all sick of the canned stuff that comes with the editing software.

For a while, Kevin MacLeod of Incompetech.com had filled that void. Now the musician has helped his friend, Jonathon Roberts serve the same need. If you use the New Yorker’s music in your video, simply credit him and consider a modest $5 Paypal donation. As an example, here’s a clip we made (Squirting Water Boats) yesterday on our first day of vacation. The song is called Ragtime, and it brings an otherwise boring video to life.

Thanks to these guys for helping make online videos more interesting. It will only be a matter of time before Jonathon’s clips are pervasive as Kevin’s.

The Power of Blogs for Video Viralization (MacBook Air Parody Case Study)

gizmodo1.pngAs I mentioned in my recent eBook (“How to Become Popular on YouTube Without Any Talent“), Obama-Girl creator Ben Relles taught me about the power of blogs to get a viral video to a tipping point. Candidly, I’m usually too lazy to go searching for blogs that might like a video, and kinda hope they’ll find it on their own. But Gizmodo (a very popular blog) recently posted about my “MacBook Air Obsessed With Thin.”

Back story: this short parody of a Mac ad (see original post) took about 20 minutes — from idea to upload. So I decided to invest another 5 Googling a few Mac blogs, and sending them the video’s URL. I had to move quick because the Ambien, at this point, was bringing me down like a tranquilized elephant with a dart hanging from his neck.

This paid off. I would have forgotten about my little self-promotion binge (I’m prone to “black outs” after my post-Ambien activities). But this morning I noticed the Mac parody had 40K views already, which far exceed my YouTube inbound linknumber of subscribers (27K) and what I’d normally get by being the 3rd-highest rated comedy of the day. Paranthetically, my antecdotal feebdack suggests the video has some innate viral elements because a) my wife liked it (rare), b) I got a call from my advertising agency about it, and c) the CEO from Xlntads sent me an e-mail about it.

Still, a little “blog gasoline” on the “viral spark” is well worth its time.

Is it working? Google your video’s unique title to see if there’s uptake. Also, 0n YouTube, you can select “links” under a video (it’s easy to miss), and see if any individual site is tossing a lot of traffic your way. I don’t usually notice a lot of activity here, but I do recall finding an Asian porn site throwing my “HappySlip on eBay” video a lot of views).

Today it shows that 12K of the 39k views were coming from Gizmodo. I couldn’t recall sending them the URL, but it appears they posted about the video and credited Cult of Mac (I suppose I had sent the video to Cult of Mac before Ambien shut me down completely). Oddly, Gizmodo reports 6000 people reading that post, but I’m seeing 12,000 coming to my video via Gizmodo. Huh? YouTube usually drastically under reports the inbound links.

Are you paying attention or glazing over this in an ADHD fog? Let me summarize with the “least you need to know”: if you do a video that has viral potential, find some bloggers who might be interested in the story.

Don’t spam bloggers, but send them a personalized, relevant note and connect the video to their readership so it doesn’t look too self pimpin’. And I wouldn’t advise this tactic unless you’re fairly confident they’ll get a chuckle over the clip. It also makes a big difference if you’re a regular reader of their blog and can demonstrate that. I’ll confess I wasn’t a regular reader of Cult of Mac, but now I’m hooked.

Cambridge Who’s Who: Is it a Scam? My Story on Video.

The other day I had the funniest adventure dealing with Cambridge’s Who’s Who. I chronicled it in this absurdly long (10 minute) video. I really thought this video would die a quick death even though I had terrific fun making it (and I watched it four times, giggling like a grade child in Church).

Much to my surprise, it’s now the second highest rated comedy video of the day on YouTube. I imagine that rating is from sympathy votes because people like a “scam” exposed. Certainly it’s not the production quality, as I shot it in one take using a cheap camera with horrible pixelation.

Here’s a nice blog post that explores the validity of the Cambridge “Who’s Who” offering, which boasts a free listing. After a lengthy interview, the “mark” is told they “rank,” and asked if they want the $600 or $800 package. It’s a rather bazaar experience. Here’s the official site of Cambridge, which according to the telemarketer has 25 million visits and 250,000 “members.” Hmm.

The kicker is that my credit card had maxed out (as I chronicle in this follow-up video) so I was spared the charge. But I can’t help but wonder if other people have had positive experiences with Cambridge, or if people feel as suckered as I would have felt had my Mastercard not exceeded its balance.

One of my favorite things about online video is the accountability it can provide consumers. Can scams continue if people are brave enough to admit to being duped, and broadcast it to others?

Apple MacBook Air is Obsessed With Thin

Apple MacBook Air commercial parodyLast night I got an e-mail from Mac that showcased the new Apple MacBook Air. The product is interesting and the spot was simple with a contagious song called New Soul by Yael Naim. Although I was already well into my nightly Ambien, I felt I couldn’t pass on a quick parody. About 19 minutes later, I uploaded “Apple MacBook Air Thin Obsession,” which parodies the ad.

My work HP computer (I wouldn’t treat my own so poorly) is watching the ad, and goes on a binge & purge diet. Fortunately my wife had taped a recent episode of Oprah which featured a tearful discussion about weight loss, which lent itself well to the portrayal of sadness the HP feels watching the new models. The parody culminates with my HP bent over the toilet, vomiting its optical drive.

I didn’t monetize the clip on YouTube, because it contains the original song and clips from Oprah. But it’s topical and seems to be well received, although clearly not “PC.” It’s currently the fourth highest rated comedy of the day on YouTube (which usually doesn’t happen within 8 hours), and we’ll see if it viralinates or gets pulled…

I suppose the lesson here is that what this clip lacks in polished production in editing it perhaps makes up for in topicality, quirkiness, and speed. Given that it took less than 20 minutes to conceive, shoot, edit and upload. It shows that there are other variables to viral that are more important… Like making fun of a society obsessed with beauty and thin, and capitalizing on what I’m sure will be a fairly intense media blitz by Apple.

Sales of My Free eBook Skyrocket Due to TechCrunch Coverage

Nalts on TechCrunchWell, you loyal WillVideoForFood.com readers, please reserve your front row seats, because the auditorium may be filling with some TechCrunch visitors. They actually crunched about my eBook. Here’s my original post about the book, titled “How to Become Popular on YouTube (Without Any Talent).” Here’s my video reaction to the coverage.

Or maybe TechCrunch didn’t write about me, and it’s a weird dream. I’m kinda sleep deprived. But if it’s a dream, then so is this post. So at least I’m not at risk of embarrassing myself by claiming something that… never mind.

Sales of my free eBook have tripled almost instantly. Naturally I promised TechCrunch a return link, because you know how desperate they are for inbound links. Mike Arrington’s always e-mailing me with this “can’t pass reciprocal link deal,” and I’m like… “find your own audience, dude.”

So if you have popped by for the standard 8-second “do I care about this site?” determination, take off your shoes, subscribe and stay a while. I’m Nalts. These are the other people reading this blog. They’re a little more quiet than me, but they’re here alright.

We cover online video trends, personalities and websites. We tracks interesting “viral video” case studies. And we reviews how marketers and agencies can leverage this visceral new online-video medium to engage people relevantly and promote their brands. Oh, and we occasionally self promote ourself. But at least we’re transparent, right? We don’t usually use the “royal” we, but we’re sleep deprived, remember?

To subscribe, paste this into your reader:

  • https://willvideoforfood.com/feed/

If you want comments too, paste this:

  • https://willvideoforfood.com/comments/feed

Or subscribe to WillVideoforFood via one of these readers:

And if you have a YouTube account, you can subscribe to my “Nalts” videos by clicking here.

New Weekly Show Featuring 50 Interesting Online-Video Personalities in 2008: The Bubblegum Tree Show. Yey!

Bubblegum Tree Show logoHad enough of horrible big-media interviews of your favorite online-video “weblebrities”? The same questions over and over? The 7 hours you spend, as a video creator, meeting with a television network, only to find your interview has been reduced to a 12-second soundbite?

Well it’s time for The Bubblegum Tree Show! Yey! (See trailer).

It’s my new weekly show that will feature 50 of the most interesting (not necessarily the most popular) online video personalities in 2008. There is, of course, no shortage of shows that feature online-video creators. In fact I also do one for Metacafe called Metacafe Unfiltered. And then there’s Veoh’s Viral.

But this one’s different. You see, there’s bubblegum. The interviewed guest will be chewing gum, and send it to me at the end. Next, the gum will be affixed to the official “Bubblegum Tree,” which eventually will be populated by dozens of pieces of chewed gum (each beside the name of its weblebrity chewer). The show is designed to be fast, quirky, informal and interesting. The balance I’m trying to establish is making it cheeky, but giving people a real glimpse of the creator’s personality.

Subscribe now (only 25 elite subscribers as of this post), and be the first to catch the premier. Who will be first? CharlesTrippy? MarkDay? LisaNova? We’re after all of them. And if you’re an interesting online-video personality with a fat talent agent, send them our way via “bubblegumtreeshow dot com at g mail.” Because before long getting booked on The Bubblegum Tree Show will be like trying to get your book on Oprah (a woman who has a television show).

“How to Become Popular on YouTube (Without Any Talent)” – A Free eBook

YouTube Popularity bookThank you, dear readers, for your help finalizing this version 1.5 of “How to Become Popular on YouTube Without Any Talent.” Honestly, if I look at this document another moment I’m going to boot. If you’re looking for my real book, “Beyond Viral,” published by Wiley & Sons in 2010, please click here.

(Warning- clicking the image to the right will cause you to download the book, which is annoying but probably what most people expect).

This post marks the official release of the book. You can download it (for free) by clicking this link, which will open the 30-page PDF: “How to Become Popular on YouTube (Without Any Talent), version 1.5” by Kevin Nalts, WillVideoForFood.com. If you post the PDF on your own blog or website, please keep that title, and my name and URL. You might want to list this post’s permalink, since it will point to future downloadable versions.

While you’re waiting for Adobe to open (insert “car rusting” joke here), I hope you’ll RSS this blog so we can keep each other current. If you’re a YouTuber and haven’t subscribed to my videos, visit YouTube.com/Nalts, then select the orange button labled “subscribe.” Okay- enough self promotion for one day. I’m going to take a nap.

Here’s the book on Skribd for easy access.

Here’s a free 2-page synopsis of my book, “The Prophet of Online Video.” If you want to use this outline and write your own book, go ahead. I’m so not writing for a while.

YouTube Is My Life (Destined for Feature)

YouTube is My LifeI don’t think there’s been a video in 2007 that I’ve watched as many times as this recent discovery, “YouTube is My Life.” Seriously. I think I’m up to 19 views.

It’s by ChurchofBlow (aka WeepingProphet). His real name is either Jeremiah McDonald or Bernard Smith, and he’s a former film student based near Boston. (Parenthetically this is the first Google result if you search “Kevin Nalts real name… stalker! :). As he waits for his career to take off (and I’m quite confident it will), he has worked in the coffee industry among other places. Here’s the musician behind the most excellent score.

I’m on a mad campaign to get this featured by YouTube editors because it’s just perfect. Clever, well produced, fantastic cameos by some YouTube weblebrities (TheHill88, MarkDay and Sean Bedlam). It’s a totally addictive song, it’s well lit, the sound effects are fantastic, the acting is dead pan, the humor is intellectual, the camera movements are thoughtful, and the stop-animated finger puppets are just plain cute. It’s a great example of what an amateur with talent can do with scarce resources.

Here’s another one we seem to be watching some what obsessively (Farting Elves from JibJab).