Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

My last RED

Status
Not open for further replies.
Don't blame the player, blame the game

Don't blame the player, blame the game

FWIW I do agree that the ability to ROI a lot of the latest high tech gear is an issue - I just don't think blaming RED because they innovate so aggressively is fair.

Moreover, I see the recent Epic price drop as an incremental step dictated by the evolution of the marketplace and preferable to an even more radical adjustment down the road.

Cheers - #19
 
Curt Pair said:
Scott, you're right! Clients try to over simplify for sure! I was a dedicated Sony user for 20 years! When they came out with XDCam I was an EARLY adopter. I had clients tell me "well, this is cheaper than your DigiBeta so your rates should be lower!" To the "price" end, that was true... However, the feature set was so much deeper, one had to KNOW what they all were, when to use them and HOW to use them! I explained that is what they were paying for.

I'm an owner/operator. I don't rent out my gear. Calls don't really come around for that. Besides, there are rental houses here in Phoenix that take care of that market.

I'm afraid... I'm the guy who lowered the price to get the business! While the others were still shooting on 5Ds, HDcam, Varicam, etc. I started pushing Epic, Epic, Epic. I had to be an educator for the company, the brand and the abilities too! I did so willingly and happily! Price is ALWAYS a concern, so I adjusted my rates for my Epic package to be competitive with HD type packages.

My point was that I was shocked to have heard from a "non-technical" client so quickly... "I was just reading an article online about the how Red dropped their prices...." and now they expected even lower rates. This isn't typically a lower rate client either... so I realized I need to prepare for this reaction from others too! They have no problem paying my "labor" rates, but if I don't lower the Epic package rates, they'll go elsewhere or use a different camera.
Click to expand...

If you want to keep the client you have to support their choices as best you can. Sometimes that means operating their other camera, but being a competent shooter and business man you continue in your efforts to educate them so that they can understand the trade offs and make their own best descision. You can also remind them that your current rate is already discounted. If they can find the same for less somewhere else they will walk, or if they love you and you price it right they will stay.

In 20 years I'll bet you have learned to price it right. Some clients look better walking.

Hang tight and best wishes!
 
Lee Dashiell said:
My camera purchases in the future will more than likely be with Sony or Panasonic or Arri.
Click to expand...

Arri 535 five years ago $500k, now $13k on eBay:mad2:
Sony F35 five years ago $$220k, now for sale for $8k :mad2:

You see, it is not brand specific. RED retained its value reasonably well compared to some other examples.

But you raise more general question: how to manage equipment needs in this new quickly depreciating economy of progress. I have two Epics, so I "lost" $30k overnight. It is a real loss as these cameras are assets of my company, so need to make suitable entry in the books writing their value down accordingly.

It is the new cost of doing business. If your business is filiming, your cost compared to 10 years ago probably decreased dramatically, albeit it probably changed that productions now would buy the cameras with a view of of more aggressive write down in percentage terms (but not in total value terms) after the fillm is finished.

If your business is rental, then yes. Your depreciation cost can be much higher than in the "good old days". I guess old formulas: 1% - 2% purchase value per day will need to be re-evaluated and perhaps a more sustainable model is 5% per day and up to 10% for infrequently rented items.
 
Canon HV-20 five years ago $1,200, now $200.
 
so you are comparing used cameras that had been replaced 10 times, with the brand new flagship model of a brand that divide the price itself?
 
Curt Pair said:
Scott, you're right! Clients try to over simplify for sure! I was a dedicated Sony user for 20 years! When they came out with XDCam I was an EARLY adopter. I had clients tell me "well, this is cheaper than your DigiBeta so your rates should be lower!" To the "price" end, that was true... However, the feature set was so much deeper, one had to KNOW what they all were, when to use them and HOW to use them! I explained that is what they were paying for.

I'm an owner/operator. I don't rent out my gear. Calls don't really come around for that. Besides, there are rental houses here in Phoenix that take care of that market.

I'm afraid... I'm the guy who lowered the price to get the business! While the others were still shooting on 5Ds, HDcam, Varicam, etc. I started pushing Epic, Epic, Epic. I had to be an educator for the company, the brand and the abilities too! I did so willingly and happily! Price is ALWAYS a concern, so I adjusted my rates for my Epic package to be competitive with HD type packages.

My point was that I was shocked to have heard from a "non-technical" client so quickly... "I was just reading an article online about the how Red dropped their prices...." and now they expected even lower rates. This isn't typically a lower rate client either... so I realized I need to prepare for this reaction from others too! They have no problem paying my "labor" rates, but if I don't lower the Epic package rates, they'll go elsewhere or use a different camera.
Click to expand...

Curt, I'm sorry this is happening to you, but in your own words you are saying that the price of the camera didn't come into play because you had already lowered your rates to compete with less expensive, therefore, perceived lesser cameras like the 5D if based on camera cost. So now it's up to you to answer those clients with "I bought mine for the old price. When I buy a new one at the new price, THEN I'll reduce my rates."
 
sergio arguello said:
That has little to NO bearing...an asset had a value on one day it
Regardless of what it was purchased for a day later it had another.now it beginning to erk me that there is so little understanding of basic business here.
Click to expand...

Right back atcha!
 
Andrae Palmer said:
Not true at all... the sale value of the camera affects the brand perception of the camera. The brand perception of the camera affects how much people are willing to pay for it. A RED One MX selling for the same price as Canon 5D Mark III affects clients perception of the value. A good example of this is the ARRI Alexa... it's high priced and more valued. If RED hurts their brand... they also hurt my investment in their brand.
Click to expand...


Finally...well said!!!!
 
Curt Pair said:
...
My point was that I was shocked to have heard from a "non-technical" client so quickly... "I was just reading an article online about the how Red dropped their prices...." and now they expected even lower rates. This isn't typically a lower rate client either... so I realized I need to prepare for this reaction from others too! They have no problem paying my "labor" rates, but if I don't lower the Epic package rates, they'll go elsewhere or use a different camera.
Click to expand...

Curt,

I just want to say that I took a look at the work on your website. It's EXCELLENT. Anyone who doesn't hire or tries to lowball you is a fool!
 
sam karr said:
so you are comparing used cameras that had been replaced 10 times, with the brand new flagship model of a brand that divide the price itself?
Click to expand...
Well, sometimes the stores sell gear at a discounted rate, or they discontinue them. But RED sells direct, so adjusting their own prices is not the same as with other companies entirely. Again, the price drop is not as big as it appears, and the expense to owning a RED system should not be downplayed so much.
 
sergio arguello said:
That has little to NO bearing...an asset had a value on one day it
Regardless of what it was purchased for a day later it had another.now it beginning to erk me that there is so little understanding of basic business here.
Click to expand...

It has no bearing on what? If you paid $19500 for a kit that is now worth $21,300 or $22,500 and you are claiming that you lost money in the process it has a bearing. If I were the guy who made for you a camera you can afford, would retain it's value at a high rate for five years, then gave you the opportunity to buy another camera at a discount deep enough that it would appreciate in the next year in spite of a $15,000 depreciation... And you complained to me about it... It might have a bearing on whether or not I told you to fuck off.

But I'm not that guy.
 
Patrick Tresch said:
RED will be seen as cheap if people tell producer RED is cheap.

If they tell : It's the best tool on the market. RED will be seen as a quality brand.

It's up to us.

Pat
Click to expand...
Sounds like the producers in switzerland don't have a clue...I work with producers that are well on top of everything that's on set...in LA everyone from pa to EP knows of the new cheap (epic) so its not as easy here to tell them their rates shouldn't reflect the initial cost of a camera system
 
sam karr said:
so you are comparing used cameras that had been replaced 10 times, with the brand new flagship model of a brand that divide the price itself?
Click to expand...

A new Canon HV-40 cost $1,000 three years ago. Today it sells new for $600. Look at how the new prices on have dropped the Sony F3, Canon's XH's... I could go on and on, but it's not going to make you feel any better.
 
Peter Moretti said:
Curt,

I just want to say that I took a look at the work on your website. It's EXCELLENT. Anyone who doesn't hire or tries to lowball you is a fool!
Click to expand...


I'll second this statement...and third and fourth and fifth!!!
 
sergio arguello said:
Sounds like the producers in switzerland don't have a clue...I work with producers that are well on top of everything that's on set...in LA everyone from pa to EP knows of the new cheap (epic) so its not as easy here to tell them their rates shouldn't reflect the initial cost of a camera system
Click to expand...

Perhaps you could just explain to them what goes in to maintaining a camera that has been handled by clients who are knowledgeable on the one hand, and as Andre pointed out, sometimes do not know how to put the media in. Instead of cursing the darkness, start rubbing two sticks together to create some light.
 
Scott Crawley said:
It has no bearing on what? If you paid $19500 for a kit that is now worth $21,300 or $22,500 and you are claiming that you lost money in the process it has a bearing. If I were the guy who made for you a camera you can afford, would retain it's value at a high rate for five years, then gave you the opportunity to buy another camera at a discount deep enough that it would appreciate in the next year in spite of a $15,000 depreciation... And you complained to me about it... It might have a bearing on whether or not I told you to fuck off.

But I'm not that guy.
Click to expand...

The prices have no bearing!!! Here, let me spoon feed this ...if I buy a Rolex that has a value of 25,000 from a friend yet it's real
Worth is a 100,000 it value isn't what I paid its what the market will bare. That said, it goes on the books with that value
As it gets insured at that value. now all the stage 234 nonsense is irrelevant as that was RED saying thank you to us for
Believing when others didn't and enduring a beta growth process and upgrade paths were to cease after that until epic and
Nature met in Japan hence the last path was to be dragon. So there's a lot that isn't being put into the equation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top