Feel robbed

[Mike Garrick]

Given we are in the 21st century...... is camera rental ( a 20th century business model when camera cost 2 or 3 of Bobs house mortgages ) model still viable ?

I should point out i'm not including the big outfits in the above statement.

P.S. Bob you have become so philosophical on this thread ; ).

 

[Andrae Palmer]

Given we are in the 21st century...... is camera rental ( a 20th century business model when camera cost 2 or 3 of Bobs house mortgages ) model still viable ?

I should point out i'm not including the big outfits in the above statement.

P.S. Bob you have become so philosophical on this thread ; ).

Is selling cameras for 19k still viable? Since we are in the 21st century shouldn't they be much cheaper? Like the EPIC at say $800?

 

[Ethan Cooper]

With how quickly technology changes & taking into account that rates are falling due to an increase in competition (mostly due to buy in costs being far less than in the past when it use to cost 2 or 3 of Bob's houses to get into the business) I'm much more apt to rent than to buy these days.

 

[Chris Lowe]

I'm not really sure what people expect when it comes to tech. Cameras always lose their value over time. It's not like the epic just came out. The typical way a camera loses it's value is because it gets replaced by a newer model from the company. At least RED isn't just releasing a completely new camera that renders the epic obsolete and thus devalued the same if not more. It's still their top of the line camera and it will get better with an upgrade costing only 6k. How pissed would you be if you bought a c300 to find out about canon's other cameras that come out only 6 months later? You know how much beta cams were at one time? You can't even sell those as paperweights now.

So out of curiousity, would you feel more or less angry if RED just announced yesterday that they are coming out with a new kickass camera that has nothing to do with the epic? So now, not only would your initial investment be devalued, but it would also be rendered obsolete as it would simply get replaced instead of being very affordable upgradable. And that's what the other camera companies do.

 

[Mitch Gross]

I replied to a thread on DVXuser with a somewhat similar issue, where people were discussing the reasons between buying an EPIC v. an F55. The point is in buying any equipment for business use one must have a well-considered business plan. Then when the value of your gear changes by someone the manufacturer lowering prices or by someone else coming along with a "better/cheaper" mousetrap (or whatever), you will still be in a strong enough position to do well. Because it is not a matter IF it will happen, only WHEN it will happen.

Anyway, here's what I wrote on the other forum.


Ha! I don't know where you guys got your business models, but back when I owned an Aaton film camera I always figured on a maximum 18-month return. And I first bought the camera almost 20 years ago. Even while I owned it, from any given date I looked at what I could sell it for used and figured that if I could not make at least that much money off of it in the next 8-12 months then it was time to sell. I finally sold it about five years ago, mainly because my work had transitioned as I'd taken my position at AbelCine. Plus I could see where the market was going for Super-16 and needed to get out (just in time).

This is not a hobby. If it is for you, then just buy whatever you want and don't worry about ever paying it off. But for a professional, you should buy gear with the idea that it should pay for itself within about a year, and frankly you should have work lined up that will pay for the first 1/4 to 1/3 of the investment. Don't buy equipment hoping it will get you a job, that means you are selling the camera, not yourself. Get the job and then buy the equipment to suit it.

I circled around buying an Aaton for a couple of years and then finally pulled the trigger when I landed a doc. that covered almost 1/3 the original purchase. From then on I used buying new gear as a sales tool: "I believe in your project. If you hire me I'll buy a videotap just for this job at no extra cost to you." It worked like a charm.

I bought a Sony Z1U early on and it was the single best return on investment I ever made. Got it for a 2-month job that paid almost twice out the cost (that's over and above my salary). While on a weekend break from that job I flew back to NY and shot a piece for Apple for the launch of Aperture, and that job paid for the entire cost of the camera over again. Two weeks later I was driving down to see my family for Thanksgiving and got a call to shoot Nicole Kidman for a last minute feed to Australia. It was on her schedule and when the Australian network needed it (uplinked to a satelite), so again it was a pretty penny, because I had the camera in my trunk which could shoot the right format and I knew the right guys.

I think that within the first year the camera had paid me back 12 times its purchase price, in part because it could capture and spit out just about every broadcast format clients cared about at the time (NTSC 4:3, NTSC 16:9, PAL 4:3, PAL 16:9, 1920/60i, 1920/50i). Now think about all the formats the Sony cameras can record internally. That's pretty attractive for certain types of camerapeople. For others if they can do it in post then that's fine, which would mean Red. But the point is that you have to look at the work YOU will get in the next year, the work YOU will generate. I didn't get any of the above mentioned work because of the cameras, I just used the cameras to earn more instead of renting. I purchased the cameras that made sense for me to own for the work I was doing at the time.

So step back and stop asking yourself what camera is better than the other. Instead ask what camera is more appropriate for the work I do. Even better, ask yourself what work will you be doing in the near future and what camera you would need for that work. Then decide if owning or renting makes the most sense, and if owning, what will satify your clients best.

Anything else is bad business.

 

[Bob Gundu]

I used to work at Alias|Wavefront (now Autodesk) and there used to be software products targeted to the Industrial Design industry that cost the end user $500,000. It eventually made it to $100,000. Same was happening to their other products like Power Animator that was moving to shift people to Maya. Maya was also around $32,000. By the time I left, it was almost $5000. This didn't even include yearly maintenance costs. Hardware costs tumbled when SGI systems were being replaced by Macs and PCs. It happens all the time in every industry. But you know what the difference was back then? There wasn't online forums to vent. So, everyone take a deep breath and pray that you are still alive, and that your house isn't under water, and that your internet works.

 

[Mike Garrick]

All valid points ...I guess in my own way I was trying to point out that the rental business has changed.

Andrae, you were discussing on another thread how you "value add" to your Kit & wouldn't be dropping the price etc. because the value wasn't in the camera. This is what I'm talking about, gone are the days of buying a back with some bits n pieces & then sitting back & let the dollars walk in....you have to be pro-active.

Ethan, yes the game is changing you could be partly right. However with what is happening in High end camera development there are business opportunities that can be exploited, it all comes down to your own particular situation.

 

[Bob Gundu]

Thanks Mitch for taking me down memory lane....

 

[Yaque Silva-Doyle]

Hey Mitch,

Very sound advice. I have learned the hard way how true this is and only blame my self.

How are you fairing through the weather over there? everything going ok?

Best,

 

[Nikhil Kamkolkar]

I used to work at Alias|Wavefront (now Autodesk) and there used to be software products targeted to the Industrial Design industry that cost the end user $500,000. It eventually made it to $100,000. Same was happening to their other products like Power Animator that was moving to shift people to Maya. Maya was also around $32,000. By the time I left, it was almost $5000. This didn't even include yearly maintenance costs. Hardware costs tumbled when SGI systems were being replaced by Macs and PCs. It happens all the time in every industry. But you know what the difference was back then? There wasn't online forums to vent. So, everyone take a deep breath and pray that you are still alive, and that your house isn't under water, and that your internet works.

Bob, I worked at Softimage and on the team that ported it to Windows NT thus playing a part in rendering SGI to the dustbin of history. I know all about disruptive technology.

The points being made here are whether RED could have allocated its profits differently. They did it in a way that excluded a bunch of users who are not very happy. Not quite the same thing as introducing a disruptive technology. Yes, they did introduce a disruptive price point.

I like RED purely because its disruptive. And its also why I DO NOT like Apple. They are closed. They send their manufacturing overseas. They keep their prices high because their product is "better", and never pass on any of their massive profits back to the user, as RED has done here.

RED did something awesome and historic here. The fallout is minor in the grand scheme of things. People will adjust. RED will grow. That doesn't mean there's no short term concern and feeling of being let down for a few users. After all, RED established a precedent where they took EXCEPTIONAL care of their users.

Its really all good. Let people express their concerns. Maybe RED will listen and do something to address.

And oh. Autodesk bought Softimage 3D not so long ago thus ending the rivalry with Maya (an upstart at the time). Things change, don't they?

 

[Valentin Paris]

[FONT=Tahoma, Calibri, Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif]Aleksey, I perfectly understand your feeling, and, even there is nothing I can do, let me just have some sympathy for you.

In solidarity.
Val.[/FONT]

 

[Michael Schrengohst]

Beautiful. Do you live in you own house? How much does it cost? For example it cost $100k , tomorrow morning you will understand that is cost $ 55k. It still have windows, doors and kitchen. Nothing changes to you? Right? Everything ok. But you look around and understand that those guys from nearest houses didnt loose cost of their property and will never loose, just because they made business with Germans.

I was truly fan of EPICs - i know everything about rigs, additional devices and all around. But im not a fan of spoofs and those types of jokes with me.

Business should not be a lottery. And RED says otherwise it is - and you have to live with that.

P.S. It looks like 17 august 1998 in Russian Federation for me today.

Heh, I guess you did not hear of the housing crash in the US in 2008????
Many people have lost big $$$$$ on their housing investment.
In some states houses have lost 1/2 their value.
Nothing is a "sure bet" any longer.
As long as you are alive there will be risk.

 

[Ben Coleman]

Is this thread a joke? :banghead:

I bought a Toyota Tacoma, the moment I drove it off of the lot, it lost $3K. I bought 2 HPX170s for $6k each and after 2 years of use I barely was able to get $2K each for them. If you wanted to protect your investment in something, buy real estate. I didn't buy my Scarlet for resale value, I bought it to make my money back by SHOOTING with it! Anything I would get from resale (if I resold it) would be pure profit.

It is threads like this that embarrass me as a Red owner and user. I think you need to take a step back and put things in perspective.

Heh, I guess you did not hear of the housing crash in the US in 2008????
Many people have lost big $$$$$ on their housing investment.
In some states houses have lost 1/2 their value.
Nothing is a "sure bet" any longer.
As long as you are alive there will be risk.

I also bought a house in 2008. It is now worth $55k more than when I bought it. People need to be smart with their investments which was not the case in many of the markets that had the huge losses.

 

[Bob Gundu]

I know.... what doesn't Autodesk own? I first started out as 3D modeler using Alias Studio on 1992, then moved on to being an Inferno artist, and then back to Alias to help people transition from Power animator to Maya. What I thought was going to be a contract job for a year, ended up being almost six! I find the more things change the more they stay the same. I'm glad I don't only have to rely on my camera work to survive. Half my business is still photography and VFX. Perhaps thats the future... diversification...

Bob, I worked at Softimage and on the team that ported it to Windows NT thus playing a part in rendering SGI to the dustbin of history. I know all about disruptive technology.

The points being made here are whether RED could have allocated its profits differently. They did it in a way that excluded a bunch of users who are not very happy. Not quite the same thing as introducing a disruptive technology. Yes, they did introduce a disruptive price point.

I like RED purely because its disruptive. And its also why I DO NOT like Apple. They are closed. They send their manufacturing overseas. They keep their prices high because their product is "better", and never pass on any of their massive profits back to the user, as RED has done here.

RED did something awesome and historic here. The fallout is minor in the grand scheme of things. People will adjust. RED will grow. That doesn't mean there's no short term concern and feeling of being let down for a few users. After all, RED established a precedent where they took EXCEPTIONAL care of their users.

Its really all good. Let people express their concerns. Maybe RED will listen and do something to address.

And oh. Autodesk bought Softimage 3D not so long ago thus ending the rivalry with Maya (an upstart at the time). Things change, don't they?

 

[Kalpesh P]

Be the man with a camera not a cameraman

Be the man with a camera not a cameraman

An image is only as good as the image-maker, so your price on your skills won't change. If people rent you for your camera then I am really sorry. If they hire you then it's time to afford better gear.

 

[Antonio Ribeiro]

Here are my thoughts:

I know people feel very pissed with the new price structure. Let's look at the pros and cons of buying into RED as a brand in light of today's incredible announcement: (let me first of all declare I own a Red Scarlet, so I am able to try and rationalise a situation that's making many people blue with rage and others pink with happiness - I don't fall into either category as I'm still trying to pay off my investment at an average speed):

PROS
- Easier for folk like me to get onto the high-end Red ladder
- 5K now more accessible to the masses, together with higher frame rates, shame about the crop factor...
- Compatible accessories, movable from Scarlet to Epic (lucky for us, unlucky for Red 1 owners)
- For those who have bought their Epics some time ago and made a loada cash on the back of their purchases, well done you! By now you have hopefully paid for your cameras several times over.
- We have two viable choices for native editing workflows, even though one stinks (FCPX), sorry I just cannot comprehend the damn thing having been a FCP editor for 8 years.
- The world is your oyster, go out there and create amazing movies because "you're worth it!" Meaning that making good movies is less about how much cash you have to spend on them and more about your creative flair.

CONS
- I have no idea how much my Scarlet is worth anymore, if I were to sell it right now to either buy an Epic or just to squander it in Blackpool, the British equivalent of Vegas.
- People who bought an Epic recently have spent $20K+ and they are only entitled to a $4,000 voucher (sounds unfair)
- People who bought an Epic in a not too recent past are not entitled to a voucher, not even to a Red branded baseball cap or key ring (sounds very unfair and makes some people think... if I buy a Sony and try and sell it in two years time, maybe it won't depreciate as much, maybe it's a bit more stable as an investment)
- If you try and sell an Epic today, don't. Just stick with Red and continue making money with it, as you won't get much money for it second hand. Just look at the Red 1. It started a revolution, yet you may find it at a car boot sale near you for the same price (or cheaper) than a vintage 16mm Bolex.

CONCLUSION
Technology is evolving at blinding speeds. In a way, the same way Red has shot to notoriety by making the first 'affordable' 4K camera the world as ever seen, leaving Arri reeling and resorting to cold war espionage techniques, they too are could loose out with their latest move, creating a mutiny amongst its faithful heard.

BUT....
- Feel the force my son! Trust your instinct and skills and continue making great movies, because in the end of the day, that's why you got into this business in the first place, right? Cameras are only a means to an end. (will I sell my Scarlet? Why?? I love it, it shoots 4K! I just bought it! Who would have thought a year or so ago I would be the proud owner of one?). The tools we have are the tools we have. I too feel compelled to just keep on buying kit and cameras, it's kind of addictive. But I would say one thing: if Red would pack their bags today and sell their company for 1 buck to a beggar on the street, they would be remembered as the company who devolved the power of making films back to the filmmakers, the guys who wouldn't dream of making a movie because they didn't have the cash or the trust of financiers and were blind enough to risk it all and come out winners on the other side.

 

[Dan Kanes]

Consider this:

When you buy a brand new car at the dealership the car is often worth 30-45% less the minute you drive it off the lot.

Personally I drive a 20 year old car so I don't feel the effects of this sticker shock, and I happen to like my old ass car.

I'm guessing most people who own these things don't even own them outright - they bought them on Credit of some sort - whether a Loan or a Lease, or something.

I think Red did you a solid by not dropping the prices more, as I'm sure they had the power to do that.

These new prices are very balanced, and if you just bought the camera last week, or even last month - then you were not paying attention to the market you were entering. Either that or you felt you had clients who are willing to pay for such things, and if you have the clients - they don't know or care whether you had a $39,000 dollar body or a $19,000 dollar body.

For those in Stage 2 or 3 - you have to be freaking kidding me if you are complaining. That's just my opinion. You got treated like royalty by being given this trade in option.

Keep your ear to the railroad tracks and look at what's coming. Pay Attention to the world around you.

First World Problems man, First World Problems.

Two years ago it was all the film dudes complaining about "These New Red Guys", now it's the "New Money" complaining about "new New Money"

In Los Angeles - the rental market is already fucked because everyone will give you a _fucking package_ for $250/day.

The part that gets me is that there are producers who complain about THOSE PRICES.

Only one solution: Get better clients, or get a new line of work.

It's already too crowded here in LA, but I don't blame the camera manufacturers.

I'm hoping in the near future I can live in the Pacific Northwest. The wife is already convinced...I just gotta grow the balls to do it for real.

 

[Emanuel A.]

Don't get into the business of owning gear unless you are prepared to be in the BUSINESS of owning gear. Otherwise it is a hobby.

Well, what else to say? Mitch's quote. Stick it.

 

[Mark_Thorpe]

Business should not be a lottery. And RED says otherwise it is - and you have to live with that. P.S. It looks like 17 august 1998 in Russian Federation for me today.

Try as I might I can't read this without using the accent of the Russian cosmonaut from the movie Armageddon.

 

[Rob Ruffo]

An image is only as good as the image-maker, so your price on your skills won't change. If people rent you for your camera then I am really sorry. If they hire you then it's time to afford better gear.

I really won't post more - but I find it amazing that people still don't understand a really simple principle:

Any filmmaker can rent any gear they want, at any time, unless they live in some remote location, which is unusual. What you own does not, except for truly low-end clients, affect their willingness to hire you or not. It has no effect - zero.

The gear is just a way to save renting from other suppliers - so you rent your own gear to your own productions to make extra money.

One year I shot over a million in billings, and at that time we owned $0 in gear, other than the computers we used in the office.

Owning gear has no effect on your abilities, will not change what you can shoot - this is true even of you think that you need the best cameras to do the best work BECAUSE YOU CAN RENT the same cameras from someone else to do the same gigs.

If cameras depreciate too quickly, then it is unwise to buy them unless you are shooting almost every day, which almost no DP does. You will have more money left over at the end of the year if you rent THE SAME CAMERAS to do THE SAME JOBS in THE SAME WAY for THE SAME CLIENTS.

Those who are upset here, at least I can speak for myself, are not upset because we think people will hire us less, or pay less for OUR TIME now that Epics and R1s are cheaper. The two things are UNRELATED. We will only make less on THE RENTAL CHARGE for the gear, which is part of the budget the client pays for. We are upset because we realize that we would have more money now had we not bought an Epic from Red last year, and we would have done the same work, renting from others.

Laptops, cars, etc. are not at all the same because no one charges these things at a day rate on their productions, and no one buys these things with a hope of an R.O.I. on their investment. The present value of my car does not affect my income, the present value of my Epic and Red One package DOES and AGAIN - NOT BECAUSE IT AFFECTS HOW MUCH PEOPLE LIKE MY AS A DP. The value of what I own does not affect that AT ALL. It affects the part of my INCOME that I get specifically from RENTING my own gear to my own productions (and sometimes to other people, but less - it's mostly an Alexa town here now).

As far as F35s being cheap on ebay now - fine - but they depreciated gradually, quite predictably, and Sony never DELIBERATELY lowered their resale value. No pro camera company has EVER done that.

Doing that is not "being different" in a good way.