PS: wouldn’t it be funny if he pitched these videos as a Trojan horse senerio to pitch new biz (open doors) for FC? Would explain why they seem to be an afterthought instead of why they’re there ;)

The first problem with that Vibe situation is not allocating the proper budget to hire people that knew what they were doing. The second problem is that filming and editing are two entirely different disciplines. In general, you want to hire ONE shooter and ONE editor, not ONE PERSON to do both.

Also, having a system means nothing. Hiring a button-pusher is only one step above the content creator learning to edit him/herself. Quality editing is done by feel and understanding. You can’t buy that in a store. It doesn’t come standard with a Macbook Pro. It’s not included in the FCP instructions.

Unfortunately, the more someone claims to be able to do for less money, the more likely it is that they’re a hustler and just trying to get your dollars. According to what you said, Vibe trapped themselves by wanting to do more than was probable with their low budget. There was no way out, except to fire that guy and hire someone who costs more, but will actually provide them with well-shot, well-edited content. If that had been an option, they would have gone that route from the get, so they got what they got.

It’s kind of funny, but mostly pathetic how companies don’t/can’t differentiate between UGC and video commissioned to be produced. It’s the difference between “America’s Funniest Home Videos” and “Diff’rent Strokes”. Do NOT try to make a sitcom on a UGC budget.

As far as Fast Company, Robert Scoble said:

“Fourth, after we joined up Shel’s sponsor pulled out because of the recession. That was right before we started shooting and that significantly hurt our ablity to hire people (FastCompany made it clear that this effort had to stand on its own two feet and not be subsidized by Fast Company).”

So… No. Fast Company is NOT going to put money into these video productions, because this is actually a SCOBLE production, which for some reason, FC has agreed to run under their brand name.

He also mentions:

“11th, I funded Shel’s shows out of my own pocket once he lost his sponsor.”

So, pretty much, we can take Fast Company out of the equation altogether.

I didn’t know this before I wrote my post, so I assumed that a company that would have something under its brand would be PAYING FOR IT, affording them creative control over the product. It’s even funnier *now* that I entitled this post “you get what you pay for”.

-tm

Very good article. It really helps understand what is involved and how costs add up.