Creeping commercialism - will it shut us out?

[Dreadful Snake Guy]

It is probably too early to know if Adam Curry's podShow and others like it are going to catch on or not? It could be good or bad. It could create a group of 'Chosen Ones' who get advertising $$ and we all beg our buddies for one more vote on PodCastAlley. Or it could raise awareness so the pod-tide comes in and all boats rise. I just posted a full rant on this topic at http://dreadfulsnake.libsyn.com At about minute 13:00 I recorded a clandestine visit to the plantation where AC might just keep the podders working to create new content under the influence of Senseo coffee.

[podcraster]

If you want to protect yourself from larger corps, you should check out these guys' website: http://www.gengalaw.com

[jeffoest]

As long as it continues to be cheap and easy for Joe Podcaster to put up a show and as long as there is no cost barrier to podcast-reader clients, I see no restrictions.

Look, if you expect Joe Podcaster to gain a mass media following, that's probably an unrealistic goal or notion. But if you look at podcasting as the chance for normal people otherwise engaged in full-time jobs who may have some niche or talent to be heard, I don't think advertising revenues or lack of it is going to matter much.

[podcastshuffle]

It is probably too early to know if Adam Curry's podShow and others like it are going to catch on or not? It could be good or bad. It could create a group of 'Chosen Ones' who get advertising $$ and we all beg our buddies for one more vote on PodCastAlley.

Or it could cause Sequoia Capital to gain no profit on their $8.8 million investment...

Personally I think whatever anyone does to raise awareness of podcasting raises everyone's boat. Take the iTunes launch. Not everyone's but a lot of people's numbers went up or doubled or tripled, etc. Even the hideous Paris Hilton House of Wax promo podcast pushed this medium further into "mainstream". If the FoxCast or the CNN Money cast gets people aware... they'll eventually move over to more niche shows to suit their interest that "Joe Podcaster" is doing.

IMO - eventually everyone that is doing commerical podcasts with ads will soon hit a saturation point of people who will listen to them with ads versus those people who won't listen because of the ads. I've already started unsubscribing to casts that are laden with ads now. There's a balance of 'i really like the content' versus 'the adverts they're playing every 10 mins are annoying'

Cheers,
Jeff

[Hittman]

It’s a delicate balance. One of the reasons I avoid commercial radio is the ads. I’m starting to have that reaction to some podcasts.

If there’s one ad, along with a “brought to you by” announcement, no problem. But Slashdot Review, for instance, is now 1/3 ads (or at least it seems that way.) I haven’t deleted it from my podcatcher, but I don’t listen to it nearly as much, and when I’m cleaning things out I have no problem deleting shows I haven’t listened to.

[overclocked]

One of the nice things about internet publishing is that someone else's money can't silence us. At all. Ever.

It's still incumbent upon the podcaster to produce something that is actually worth listening to, and competing against commercially produced shows on a quality basis may still be an uphill battle... but if Curry is right and people are sick of *what* commercial media is doing, then the best of us actually have the upper hand.

[youngblood]

"Or it could cause Sequoia Capital to gain no profit on their $8.8 million investment..."

i'm not sure they will make a profit on their investment, i think the medium is to
new to really figure it out yet. remember, the first money thrown at the internet
was for websites like 'pets.com'- a site that was bassed on the premise of selling
dog food online.

it took books like the 'clue train manifesto' for people to truley see the flawed logic that the 'internet bubble' was based on....and shoot, most people still
dont see why online companies like AOL are tanking.



"Personally I think whatever anyone does to raise awareness of podcasting raises everyone's boat."

i agree, but it is true that commercialism has crept into podcasting...podcasting has been co-opted by an 'establishment' (similar to mainstream radio, & the RIAA for example) that many podcasters claimed they were fighitng against.

with the launch of curry's podshow (and even with the iTune and podcast alley rating system), there is (IMO) now a definite 'mainstream'/'establishment'/'corporate'/'have' side of podcasting
(i.e. all of curry's podshows and the highest ranked shows)

and a definite:

'non-mainstream'/'anti-establishment'/'non-corporate'/'have-not' side of podcasting (ie: all of the non-podshow podcasts and the non ranked shows).

i'm not saying this is a bad thing, mind you...just pointing out that with the
addtion of commercialism and 'official' rankings into podcasting that it becomes just another form of 'mainstream' media that alot of podcasters claimed that they were 'fighitng' against.

i'd bet that some of the podcasters in the new 'podshow' line up had some serious
cognitive disonance when mulling over whether to join adam curry's podshow
(the new 'clear channel' of podcasting). in the dawn and drew podcast that
they discussed joining podshow their discussion regarding joining seemed to
indicate this.

" If the FoxCast or the CNN Money cast gets people aware... they'll eventually move over to more niche shows to suit their interest that "Joe Podcaster" is doing."

well, the foxcast and cnn money cast will get people aware and then they will
first be more directed to the podcasts which are involved in the 'mainstream' podcast segment that i mentioned above. (ie. they will listen to the highest rated shows, and curry's podshows first- for example this is the route i took when i first heard of podcasting)

for joe six pack to discover the non-mainstream shows of 'joe podcaster' they
will have to dig deep: digging past the cross over podcasts (ie: foxcast) and past
the mainstream podcast segment (ie: podshow & ranked shows) so they can get to 'joe podcaster'
who doesnt have '17 million dollars...strapped to his ***' as curry says on his
show.

and b/c of this, IMO, the podosphere has now become just another
mainstream medium. just like tv and radio, a producers access to listners is now restricted by a commercial system and a producers (ie, podcasters) willingness to enter into that system.


& i dont really consider podcasts like foxcast and cnn money true podcasts. when
i'm reffering to podcasts i'm reffering to shows that only exist in the podcast
medium, not the cross over shows from radio.


also, please keep in mind that i am not bashing the commercialization of
podcasting. i'm all for it! & i'd gnaw off my left pinky finger to be a part of
curry's podshow. i'm a free market capitalist and libertarian who, some time ago, came to the conclusion that the whole notion of figthing aginst the 'system' and the 'mainstream media' to be of flawed logic.

being a pomo (postmodern) kind of guy i dont like to moralize over things in terms of 'good' and 'bad'- i prefer to just try and understand what 'is'. and this "creeping commercialization" of podcasting is just something that i feel 'is' happening to podcasting. and i feel it already has "shut us out."
(curry you can remedy this situation on my end by sending me a check!)

[smashface]

Now that so many people have realized how easy it is to add multimedia files to blog posts and/or as enclosures, I dont think they will ever stop podcasting.

Like many media outlets, you will have a few big players that command a sizable amount of market share and hundreds/thousands of small players.

[youngblood]

Now that so many people have realized how easy it is to add multimedia files to blog posts and/or as enclosures, I dont think they will ever stop podcasting.

Like many media outlets, you will have a few big players that command a sizable amount of market share and hundreds/thousands of small players.


yes, i agree.

in tv, you can get on public access. in movies, you can do an indy
film and show it at a indy film fest.

but my main point is that now, podcasting is just like the above mediums.
everybody has acess to do a podcast but the access to the largest audience is
contingent upon a 'commercialized system' and ones willingness to enter into, and
play by the rules of that system.

uhh, but i think thats what you were getting at...

[WildeGeek]

In the words of Jello Biafra (http://www.deadkennedys.com/bandmembers.htm): "Don't fight the media, BE the media!"

We are at a moment of chaos in mass media (http://www.onthemedia.org/transcripts/transcripts_040805_chaos.html). When the old media power structure, which depended on owning the transmitters and expensive production facilities, looses audience to a more democatized media creation culture.

Some people will have the talent, skills, or the charisma to produce something popular that will attract an audience. It may never be as large of a market share as was possible when the only option was to listen to the four radio stations in town (or forty, for that matter, which is the maximum number of FM stations that the FCC will allow in a market). But even a specialized niche podcaster like me (http://www.wildebeat.net/) might attact a large enough audience to financially sustain a leaner more economical operation.

One pre-podcasting broadcaster who has been doing this brilliantly for years is Jim Metzner (http://pulseplanet.com/jimmetzner.html). His two-minute daily show, Pulse of the Planet (http://pulseplanet.com/), is played on over three hundred radio stations. (It's also available as a podcast (http://pulseplanet.com/pulserss.xml).) He produces this show as a solo effort. Jim's work is funded by listener contributions, and by grants from both the National Science Foundation (http://www.nsf.gov/) and from National Geographic Society (http://www.nationalgeographic.com/). I believe that he makes a reliable living off this effort.

I see Adam Curry's Podshow show as a temporary, transitional phenomenon. As people tire of being force-fed scheduled-stream media, like satellite radio, their listening choices will become more varied and eclectic. But in the mean time, Curry is introducing a larger audience to concept of podcasts, and I for one don't see how public awareness of the medium could hurt.

[youngblood]

In the words of Jello Biafra (http://www.deadkennedys.com/bandmembers.htm): "Don't fight the media, BE the media!"



i like your thoughts...especially this quote.


'fighting' the 'establishment' only turns you into a more oppressive establishment
than you were fighitng.

see cuba for example.

Lacan had a good quote that talked about this...need to dig it up and post it
to the 'community'...something for them/us to think about...especially
people trying to 'fight' the old media.

[thebes]

'fighting' the 'establishment' only turns you into a more oppressive establishment
than you were fighitng.

see cuba for example.


It seems to me that both your statement and you example are wrong.

Fighting the establishment is ultimately what results in social change, since those in power seek to keep their power. Of course all movements change over time and as new people end up in power they seek to keep their power as well, hence a need for frequent 'revolution'.

As for Cuba, having lived in the Carribean I am absolutely convinced that even if the people there are not free they are far better off than under Batista. Of course there has never been such a thing as an Utopia, and to hope for one is a fools dream.


Likewise Podcasting will not become a media users Utopia. Success in most any venture comes with time and hard work, which are expensive. Expenses must be met (including compensation for ones time) over the long term. Compromises will be made. For podcasting to move beyond the hobby stage on a large scale will mean monitizing the larger productions. That does not mean shutting hobbiests out, the low barrier to entry will certainly help keep things fresher than on the radio and tv.

It wasn't long ago that companies thought the only way to make money with blogs was by selling blogging space. Now most major blogs have ads and its become a solid business model.

[SPThom]

'fighting' the 'establishment' only turns you into a more oppressive establishment than you were fighitng.

It's a possibility. One of the reasons it's historically occured this way so often, is that most power struggles are over a finite amount of resources (land, people, etc.). Because of such limitations, revolutions have required people agressive enough to outdo the incumbent aggressors.

On the net we have infinite real estate, and as for listeners and supporters... Well, we may hit some plateaus, but we're still nowhere near market saturation yet. (The technology still isn't 100% there, and we won't know our limitations until it gets there. Anyhow...)

If we don't like the way PodShow and Adam Curry and all of 'em are trying to run things, we don't have to "fight the establishment". We can carve out our own haunts, our on technology implements, our own way of doing things, and if those of us who want freedom as producers just help each other out enough, there's a good chance we can bypass the PodShow would-be monopoly. If we work together constructively and pragmatically, not against each other or, especially, focused against Curry.

In short, unity will get us farther than divisiveness. This would be true with or without Curry in the picture.

[ElNacho]

my idea's simple

people prefer podcasts to radio and the like because...

a)no 7 minute commercial breaks between 2 minutes of material

b)you can get it whenever you want, provided you have internet. i think itll soon be that you can download them through, say, a cell phone or satellite connection. well i mean thats what i predict, not that ive heard something or anything.

so commercialism, if it starts to take over casts...people will stop listening to them. no one wants to hear commercials and ads and such in podcasts (promos are okay, cuz they help you find new casts) cuz they can always just go subscribe to other casts that dont have commercials and the like


so yah. without readin the whole first post i hope i got the idea rite.

[crybabyemokids]

The USP of Podcasting, as mentioned before is, yes, it's free and yes to a certain extent it's "commercial free". The main reason, IMO, podcasting will become famous in the future would be because of the 'get what you want' type of situation, so instead of sitting through hours of boring radio to get to the ONE 30 minute show that you're dying to listen to.

Podcasting is yet in it's early stages and sure, there hasn't been any great commercialisation of podcasts yet. I say yet because soon podcasting is not going to remain a 'hobby', but become a full time career.

[In the next part i talk about 'famous' podcasts]

As a podcaster, when you see that you have a large audience, you automatically realise that there is a market for making some sort of revenue. Now I know most of you would reply to this saying "Oh but this is just a hobby and im doing this for fun". NO. Let's face it, all of us would want to make an extra buck. There are two ways of doing this, one would be by asking people to donate to your show, and the other would be putting ads on your show. Podcasters choose the second route for the simple reason that it's an ASSURED source of income. There's no garuntee that your listeners would donate.

As a listener, I would want a great show. Even if it has a couple of ads, I wouldn't be bothered much as I'm getting exactly what I want (content wise). I would realise that these guys are doing this for free and would need some sort of income to support this. YES, if a show is filled up with adverts, I'd definately be unsatisfied. But I'd never go out and complain. As long as it's free, you guys need to appreciate what we're doing.


My conclusion, and the most probable solution would be:

A: Podcasters put a monthly minimum subscription cost to their podcast (I know it's drastic and goes beyond the whole point of podcasting) and then keep it ad-free.

B: Podcasts remain free, but listeners realise that podcasters need to make money, hence have adverts in the show.


Well that's just my honest opinion.
Jay

[jeffoest]

Hi Jay and others - good discussion and good insights!

I think the implicit assumption that Jay is making is that people WILL listen to podcasts with advertisting in them. That, to me, is the very interesting one. It could be absolutely correct. Then again, this is a different environment.

Show X (even though very popular) starts putting advertisements in their show. Perhaps people instead bail out and go to a similar show.

I'm not claiming to say that that is what will happen but the interesting thing is that - the podcasting sceario is very different that the radio/tv/<insert media here> because of the unlimited channels and ultimited amount of people willing and eager to do this as a hobby and offer their content simply for the fun and the 'fame' of being acknowledged as doing something significant.

So show X that you love where a DJ finds podsafe/indie music to play that you like starts plopping ads in the show. How hard is it to find another DJ that also has similar tastes to yours and produces a show with no ads simply because he loves doing it? dunno. You guys tell me!

Nevertheless - it will be one of the interesting questions answered in the next two to three years.

I'm guessing (and I've rambled a bit on this point in other threads) that the podcasts that make any 'real' money will not be the "DJ" podcasts or typical amateur couple-casts or talk-casts because these are relatively replaceable (though don't get me wrong, these can be GREAT fun for the podcasters to do and can garner nicely-sized and loyal listeners).

I think the podcasters that make 'real' money will be those that also INVEST in their product. The most obvious case of investiment is in time as in time spent on researching and producing pieces with more depth and/or developing comedy with more creativity. i.e. something beyond what the typical though talented podcaster does today.

[crybabyemokids]

Show X (even though very popular) starts putting advertisements in their show. Perhaps people instead bail out and go to a similar show.

I'm not claiming to say that that is what will happen but the interesting thing is that - the podcasting sceario is very different that the radio/tv/<insert media here> because of the unlimited channels and ultimited amount of people willing and eager to do this as a hobby and offer their content simply for the fun and the 'fame' of being acknowledged as doing something significant.

So show X that you love where a DJ finds podsafe/indie music to play that you like starts plopping ads in the show. How hard is it to find another DJ that also has similar tastes to yours and produces a show with no ads simply because he loves doing it? dunno. You guys tell me!


Even though I find it hard to believe someone would leave a show due to an advert, I accept it. Say people go to podcast B. The podcaster of show B see's his ratings go up and would consider making money and the same cycle would continue.

Everyone(I presume) starts off podcasting for the 'fame' and for the thrill of it, but then if a show gets famous and advertisers come knocking on your door, you'd never refuse them..that said, if the company you're advertising has no connection whatsoever with your show, it WOULD have a negative effect on your show.

Another suggestion I could give would be, that instead of 30 second spots or whatever, have the podcaster himself 'indirectly' sell the product. This has been used in movies too, and it would be great.

For example, a podcaster can go "Oh man ive been drinking pepsi all day, this stuff is great" or something of that sort. Most people wont see it as an 'advert', but somewhere inside the listeners brain the thought of drinking pepsi would have registered and bang the product is sold.

Listeners would connect to the product more if it came out of the podcasters mouth rather than a highly editted advert filled with sweepers and music beds and the whole lot.

[WildeGeek]

A: Podcasters put a monthly minimum subscription cost to their podcast (I know it's drastic and goes beyond the whole point of podcasting) and then keep it ad-free.

B: Podcasts remain free, but listeners realise that podcasters need to make money, hence have adverts in the show.
You've managed to boil down this discussion to the only two ways that artists, writers, actors, musicians, and other creators of intangible cultural artifacts have funded their work throughout history. The terms used in the academic study of such things are: Admission PatronageAdmission is when the direct benneficiary of the work, for example the record buyer or the theater audience member, pays for access to the content.

Patronage is when someone else pays for the content to be produced or distributed. The patron may also be a benneficiary, but the support they give to the ccontent creator is not contingent on their access to the content. Patrons can have many motivations, ranging from commercial and political propoganda, to genuine altruism. Patronage sources include advertising, philanthropic grants, memberships (as in public radio), and taxpayer funding.

Of course, the reality is that most media creators and distributors use a mix of these models to fund creation and distribution. Over-the-air broadcasting in the U.S. has been funded purely by a patronage model. Performing groups such asd local theater, symphony, and dance groups are often funded by a combination of patronage and admission.

When it comes to podcasting, I think very few programs are going to be able charge admission. If you could, wouldn't you be over selling your content on a pay-per-listen basis on Audible.com (http://audible.com/) right now?

The current RSS distribution model precludes any kind of an admission system. So if you need to get income for the time you spend producing podcasts, you have to find advertising patrons, or philanthropists who think your work is valuable or important.

If it really is just a hobby for you, then you probably won't have the time to do the research, interviews, writing, editing, production, promotion, business planning, and other work needed to compete on quality of content with people who are doing it for a living. You also probably won't have the money to buy the equipment needed to produce the highest quality productions, again putting you at a disadvantage.

[crybabyemokids]

The point I was trying to make was, sure, right now podcasting is free, but a day would come when the podcasters themselves ask,"Hey what do i get out of this?"

I totally agree, I would never want to charge a fee per listen or whatever, but with more and more "professionals" getting into podcasting every day, as you rightly said, the time and effort and costs involved in keeping up with these pros is pretty darn high.

If you're podcasting solely as a 'hobby', your odds of becoming 'famous' are pretty low. Hence you needn't worry about these matters and continue podcasting to the select few who are keen on your podcast.

I'm 17, and I'd be heading off to college next year, and yes, I began podcasting as a hobby, but seeing the immense response I've gotten in less than a month, it has made me consider doing this as something more than a hobby.

My podcast 'studio' consists of Audacity and a 10$ microphone. Is my sound quality perfect? NO. Do i want to upgrade to a better studio? Of course, I'd love to. Problem is, I have no money. I'd want to ask my audience to donate, but I don't want to sound like a begger or whatever, I'd rather MAKE the money somehow through my podcast, and I'm looking at advertising as one of the methods of doing so.

Jay

[kinkysex]

I just posted an idea here:

http://www.podcastalley.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2276&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=45

I think this is kind of the same discussion, but with less poetry.

Read it and debate. ;)

[guscave]

Free is great, as long as you (the podcast producer) don't have to lay out serious cash for your hobby. But what happens if your show takes off and all of the sudden you now have a huge bandwidth bill to deal with?

Do you close shop so as not to charge listeners or have ads on your show? Or do you join the rest of the capitalist? :wink:

[mental-escher]

Free is great, as long as you (the podcast producer) don't have to lay out serious cash for your hobby. But what happens if your show takes off and all of the sudden you now have a huge bandwidth bill to deal with?

Do you close shop so as not to charge listeners or have ads on your show? Or do you join the rest of the capitalist?

Well, if you're burdened by bandwidth charges (from lots of listeners downloading your show) then adding ads to your pc would be a nice way to

1.) make some $, and

2.) lower your bandwidth charges (as no doubt a certain fraction of listeners would tune out due to the commercialization, unless the ads were done non-obtrusively, like a simple 1-2 sec "sponsored by Microsoft" comment).

[guscave]

2.) lower your bandwidth charges (as no doubt a certain fraction of listeners would tune out due to the commercialization, unless the ads were done non-obtrusively, like a simple 1-2 sec "sponsored by Microsoft" comment).

10 to 15 sec ads is what I'm doing now. I was able to get a small sponsor for our show. The money ain't anything to write home about, but that's ok since I don't have to worry about bandwidth (yet!).

I figured I'd start with a small company to see how it flows with the rest of the show before approaching bigger clients.

[crybabyemokids]

I always thought it was them(the advertisers) who approach us :?

So i have a question..At what point would you realise " if i were a sponser i'd invest in this" and how do you approach sponsers?

thanks
Jay

[SFEley]

A: Podcasters put a monthly minimum subscription cost to their podcast (I know it's drastic and goes beyond the whole point of podcasting) and then keep it ad-free.

B: Podcasts remain free, but listeners realise that podcasters need to make money, hence have adverts in the show.

There is a third option:

C: Keep it free, but ask for money on a voluntary basis.

This system works, if you can make a compelling case. Most Webcomic authors give away their product but ask for donations, and a few have brought in enough to devote themselves to their comic full-time. (And yes, most also run ads, but the income from ads is trivial unless you're Penny Arcade.)

As I just said in another thread, I've made over $2500 in donations over six months or so. That's not money going into my pocket, however -- my podcast incurs costs for content, and most of the money goes into buying more fiction to keep the show rolling. The rest of it's put aside toward some equipment upgrades, some fees for our 501(c)(3) incorporation process, and marketing.

I do think it'd be nice if Escape Pod could bring in some side income for me and the other people who work on it someday, but if we remained on a dedicated donations model, I'd feel really guilty about doing that unless we disclosed to the listeners that we were putting some of their money into staffing costs. Right now we tell them it all goes back into the podcast, so that's exactly what I do.

[SFEley]

Patronage is when someone else pays for the content to be produced or distributed. The patron may also be a benneficiary, but the support they give to the ccontent creator is not contingent on their access to the content. Patrons can have many motivations, ranging from commercial and political propoganda, to genuine altruism. Patronage sources include advertising, philanthropic grants, memberships (as in public radio), and taxpayer funding.
This is a great analysis, but I think you made one mistype: you probably meant to say that access to the content is not contingent on support they give to the content creator. (I.e., anybody can get the benefits of the content whether they choose to pay or not.)

In any case, I'm glad you highlighted the existence and benefits of this system. It's one that a lot of people seem to overlook.



When it comes to podcasting, I think very few programs are going to be able charge admission. If you could, wouldn't you be over selling your content on a pay-per-listen basis on Audible.com (http://audible.com/) right now?
Frankly, no. I'd rather have a very wide audience for free than a smaller paying audience, even if the smaller audience was more lucrative. I have certain goals I would like to achieve in terms of influencing science fiction as a whole, and the only way to achieve them is to have lots and lots of listeners. That's why I distribute on a Creative Commons license.


If it really is just a hobby for you, then you probably won't have the time to do the research, interviews, writing, editing, production, promotion, business planning, and other work needed to compete on quality of content with people who are doing it for a living. You also probably won't have the money to buy the equipment needed to produce the highest quality productions, again putting you at a disadvantage.
I don't know; I think the scales may be shifting here. Pick any niche subject -- diving, knitting, model rocketry -- and look over the slick glossy magazines dedicated to that subject at your nearest big bookstore. (I guarantee there'll be at least one, maybe two magazines.) Then go online and look up the most talked-about blogs on that subject. Which one has more useful, more compelling content?

[crybabyemokids]

That's a good point there, only problems is, Donations isn't a 'fixed' source of income. You never know, one month you may get loads of donations, the next month, not even one.

Agreed, in your case, it must've paid off, but for shows like mine, who's target audience may not even have credit cards, it's extremely difficult to be assured that you'd be getting any money.

Again, money, not for making a profit, but for the improvement of the show.


A podcaster would know how much money he would need to keep his podcast running smoothly for say, a month, so (another suggestion) why not have a system where you display like "This months total fee: XYZ $ , Total Donated ABC$" and make sure people get it up to XYZ and then halt the donations for that month.

Of course, if the podcaster wants to set himself a marginal profit, he can adjust the values accordingly.
Again, this is not an 'assured' source of income, but constant reminders on the show(obviously not sounding too pushy about it), would get people to consider donating.
Setting yourself a target amount helps as it gets into the listeners phsychi that it's no longer a 'donation', but more a 'nessesary evil'.

Jay

[Big Mike]

So i have a question..At what point would you realise " if i were a sponser i'd invest in this" and how do you approach sponsers?

That's called the $1,000,000 Question.

If I were a sponsor you'd need to convince me that my monetary investment will be worthwhile. I don't have to 'get' podcasting, just understand that it generates revenue. So you'd have to show me that.

How do you approach sponsors? I think it would be when you feel that you can come to somebody with not only the proof of desire to do your show and that you're serious, but with a firm idea of your listenership and what sponsors you're going after.

Something to think about, though: finding that stuff takes time. It could take away from other stuff more important, like school, etc. An advertising model for podcasting still isn't there yet and would be much easier to wait and see how others deal with it than to strike out on your own. On the flipside of that, you never know when someone will offer to help, either.

If it's gear you're looking for, that'll come too.

[crybabyemokids]

So i have a question..At what point would you realise " if i were a sponser i'd invest in this" and how do you approach sponsers?

That's called the $1,000,000 Question.

If I were a sponsor you'd need to convince me that my monetary investment will be worthwhile. I don't have to 'get' podcasting, just understand that it generates revenue. So you'd have to show me that.



I suppose you mean show them the numbers? (of listeners)..If so how many listeners would be appropriate?(I know it depends from person to person, but how many should i have so that i can show them without looking like an ***)

As far as my listenership, I'm 100% sure about who's listening to my podcast, and i'm 100% sure which sponsers would want to exploit this market, but yeah, it's smarter to just wait and watch.



If it's gear you're looking for, that'll come too.

Santa?

[jeffoest]

As I just said in another thread, I've made over $2500 in donations over six months or so. That's not money going into my pocket, however -- my podcast incurs costs for content, and most of the money goes into buying more fiction to keep the show rolling. The rest of it's put aside toward some equipment upgrades, some fees for our 501(c)(3) incorporation process, and marketing.

Yea, You have a compelling story to tell your audience. Hey - no contributions means I can't buy stories and this podcast cannot exist. Help out and we will continue. It's all very direct and towards your point, very accountable to your contributors and listeners. Heck, if I was into sci fi and liked the stories I heard and wanted it to continue, I would certainly put up some money. It's not like you need that much from any one individual.

But, yours is also a unique case where you directly pay for content. We all know that the majority of the amateur podcasts just get on the mic every week and blab - some naturally more talented than others. Well, for most listeners, we don't see why they would need our money for that even if we like the show.

Lesson on contributions: Have a good story/plan for your listeners contributions. Even if it's just for beer money because otherwise you go without beer. That's even compelling in it's own right.

[Big Mike]

Yes, Santa. :D

That's just it...I don't know if numbers can be the only thing. Reason why is that since podcasting is new I think there's a bit of an unsaid understanding that the numbers will come as long as the show is good.

Of course, I could be totally wrong.

I'm asking Santa for a pod so I can give Sue back hers.

[mental-escher]

I like the idea of finding Patronage- "wealthy" donors that commission works, but pay enough for the producer to "live" off, and create their own pc's inbetween commissioned works... any daddy-mega-bucks out there??

[kinkysex]

Is anyone here selling merch to pay the bills? This is the model we're gonna try.

[SFEley]

Lesson on contributions: Have a good story/plan for your listeners contributions. Even if it's just for beer money because otherwise you go without beer. That's even compelling in it's own right.
That, in fact, is almost exactly the model for the Dragon Page Winging It. >8-> Michael & Evo drink a lot of beer during that podcast, and are very entertaining about it. So they end up having a lot of beer donated to them.

Last I heard, there was a large coalition of Australian listeners banding together to send them one large shipment of beer to save on costs. This happened because M&E were given some Australian beer to try, and decided Australians didn't make good beer, leading to an outcry of "You tried the wrong brands, stupid!"