Comments on: “Crowdsourcing” and Democratic Filmmaking

By: Vanessa

Vanessa — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 03:49:57 +0000

This seems like a new wave of sites. I read about a similar site, IndieGoGo.com, on the front page of Filmmakermagazine.com. There was something about a $10,000 succes story. Exciting stuff.

By: Don Holmsten

Don Holmsten — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 20:50:57 +0000

Yes, Shannon and Danson are correct. We are introducing an affiliate program for each film rather than having shares in the film because of strict SEC regulations. It is absolutely legal because the supporters will only be rewarded for the work they do – referring sales of the film and related products.
BTW – perhaps some of the films will make it to theatrical release, but most will only available on DVD or digital download. The affiliate program will cover all products sold via the FilmRiot store including t-shirts, posters, bound copies of the script or anything else the filmmaker chooses to make available.

By: Danson

Danson — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:07:34 +0000

I think the reason they can’t be “investors” has to do with the SEC and how complicated it is to legally make this an investment. But, but by getting a return on ticket sales via a referral program, you can accomplish something similar.
I don’t think a lot of people would do this for no return. I would also think that websites that sell tickets could do well on this by being brokers between “supporters” and ticket sales… which might of course introduce another whole strange middleman issue, but it might be inevitable…

By: Shannon

Shannon — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 14:55:41 +0000

Actually, supporters are not “investors” in the technical sense for this very reason. They are called “supporters.” You don’t get your money back for your support, you get a copy of the film and any residuals from referrals for others to see the film.
It’s not really about getting “returns” in the traditional sense. It’s more about being a part of the production process and getting the content you want to see.

By: quarterlife

quarterlife — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 14:38:37 +0000

So how do the investors get their money back? What’s the return here?

It seems like you need to establish a level of trust and credibility, not only for the transaction of the investment but also for the quality of the filmmaker. I didn’t see anything about setting up a corporation for each film to invest in. Infact, I think this probably breaks a number of SEC regulations on investment right off the bat.
Don’t get me wrong, I think the concept is great. Independent filmmakers shouldn’t have to go deep into debt to make their movies… but there is a reason that raising funding is hard.

By: Don Holmsten

Don Holmsten — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 00:41:44 +0000

Thanks, Shannon, for writing this article.
We talked about several things that didn’t make into the article. We had talked about was the idea of using FilmRiot.com to support issues based films. For instance, the issues talked about at triplePundit.com. People can come together to get a film made that supports their causes and concerns. Then the film goes on to have a life on it’s own – educating people wherever it is viewed. Wouldn’t it be great if filmmakers didn’t have to go deep into debt to make a film about an issue they are passionate about?