On the Voice123.com blog, Alex Torrenegra offers his thoughts on the voiceover industry as a whole and where it is headed headed in the future. I think Alex has hit the nail on the head several times in his comments. I’d love to hear what you think. Comments are open.
By the way, Alex wrote his post in honor of the 5th anniversary of the founding of Voice123.com. My best wishes to Alex and all of the team there on this occasion.
Interesting read…
Brian,
Yes, I thought so too.
Be well,
Bob
Well there is a lot to agree with in that post (business and tech skills becoming more important for example), I find the whole post a little troubling. I know it wasn’t the intent of services like V123 to de-value VO, but since web casting emerged as a viable tool we’ve seen much more “access” to much lower paying jobs. I don’t believe that this race to a lowest common denominator (paralleled by SAG and AFTRA’s contract negotiating/in-fighting) is something we should be celebrating.
I wont re-post it here, but I completely agree with Dick Ervasti’s comment on the post.
Juan,
Alex is, if nothing else, a bright and insightful man. I’ve had the please of several in-person and phone conversations with him. You’re right. He understands a great deal about the way things are and where they are moving.
I believe that while some flattening of rates is inevitable with the changes wrought by the Internet as a whole (and the web casting sites in particular), companies who care about quality are still very willing to pay professional rates for professional work. The big difference is in whether they are willing to jump through the myriad hoops necessary to do the work under union contracts. The answer to that implied question is found in a statistic quoted to me a few weeks ago by a talent agent in Texas: 90% of the voiceover work (in her observation) is non-union. Certainly not in every market or market segment yet, but it’s moving there and quickly.
The squabbles between the unions is only accelerating these shifts. It’s a great pity that there seem to be so many who appear focused on their own positions of internal power rather than on the good of the membership(s) as a whole. At least that’s what it looks like to me from over here on the sidelines.
Be well,
Bob
Well, over the country 90% sounds about right, but I would say that’s number of jobs not dollar value of jobs. When I was at Abram’s we rarely did Non-Union, and usually it was just to negotiate on behalf of a Fi-Core client, not a job we submitted talent on.
Not to call you out, but I think it would be very important for non-union talent to examine some of the hoops producers have to jump through. A lot of them are included to protect actors from unfair use and buyouts, really just negotiating points. Also a lot of Union talent are getting around the non-union issue by developing relationships with signatories.
I’m not claiming “nefarious deeds” or anything LOL, but online casting lives or dies by the number of talent subscribing, and the number of jobs coming through. I just feel SOME of Alex’s predictions border on hopeful thinking for the future of his current industry.
Not that we aren’t all hopeful about where our careers might go…
I do not believe Alex to be a Sage or indeed the fount of all wisdom in the Voice Over business. He has a basic grasp of the obvious and seeks to overstate certain changes in a business to support the case for his business, that’s good business. I would never judge a life insurance salesman for using a discussion on mortality rates to pedal his wares and see Alex’s blog in much the same way.
The industry is changing and will continue to change, most of Alex’s general comments were as up to date 10 years ago as they are today and will be in 10 years time.
You will notice that in all his “downward trend” statements and statistics he did not mention that one statistic remains constant, the odds on making anything as a Voice Over are stacked against most people, his paying subscribers included. He wouldn’t mention that would he? That’s not good for his business.
In the future, sites like Mr Torrenegra’s will come and go and most who pay to join will end up a few hundred dollars the poorer but may be a little wiser.
Juan,
I agree that the “hoops to be jumped through” aren’t so terribly onerous, but I’m not the one doing the hiring of voiceover talent the vast majority of the time. I’m sure much of the onerous aspect comes in contrast to the (mostly) effortless simplicity of hiring non-union.
But, please understand, I work under union contracts as often as possible and don’t wish any ill on the unions. I just think these inter-family squabbles are doing more harm that good. I suspect we see pretty much eye-to-eye on that score.
And Philip, I completely subscribe to Banksey’s Axiom: 95% of those who become professional voiceover artists will never make money at it. Certainly, it would not be in Alex’s best interests to broadcast that truth as it would diminish his pool of potential clients in a hurry.
As for the dollars poorer and slightly wiser matter, I love Pat Fraley’s comment on the subject: “Experience isn’t the best teacher, it’s the slowest teacher.” Which is why I repeat your Axiom when and where ever I can. Maybe some souls will gain wisdom before they’re those hundreds of dollars (or sterling or euros) poorer.
Be well,
Bob
I agree with Juan and Philip 100%. Very troubling comments about how he thinks jobs will be valued at how long it takes to do them as opposed to where they are used (national jobs included). Someone who runs a business like his should not be putting predictions of the future like this in his blog. He seems to be trying to steer the trends on Voice123 with comments. And with so many people being members (me not being one of them) it is troubling.
I would think agents would view this in a horrible light and eventually demand their talent only market their own services if they wish and not be on sites that pit talent and against talent in regards to rates. It is a race to the bottom otherwise and agents will be out of business because of Voice123.
I would rather have an agent negotiating on my behalf and theirs trying to get the best rates possible than have to guess what the other talented guys across the country are going to bid and whether 10 of them are going to try and undercut decent rates because they need the money.
Just my opinions and thoughts.
Ben,
Thanks for your comments. I very much appreciate your thoughts. I guess I didn’t see all of Alex’s predictions with the same weight. But, maybe you’re right. Maybe Alex is hoping to foster a commiditization of voiceovers.
Voiceovers by the pound, anyone?
Be well,
Bob
The point most people miss is why certain jobs pay more, it has nothing to do with time.
Think about this. In the UK the top rated soap is called Coronation Street, averages around 10 millions viewers. You have just heard that the commercial broadcaster is no longer allowed to transmit TV commercials. In order to stimulate demand Ford has reduced the price of family cars by £500 and the marketing people know that viewers of Coronation Street are the ideal market. The only way to get their message out there is for someone with the right voice to call at every home and say to everyone in the home.
“Ford have reduced the price of their family cars by £500”.
Here’s the deal. You’ve got the job, it’ll take you 300 years to do it. If you are paid the average wage in the UK of £21,000 PA the cost to Ford not including travel and other expenses would be around £7,000,000.
Thanks to TV commercials and Voice Over work you are able to do your part of the job in around an hour, thanks to TV commercials you have lost 320 years of regular employment.
If we ignore for a moment the fact that AFTRA and SAG are in a mess we can at least see part of the logic in the rate structure. Film, TV and radio is able to capture your work and allow countless others to benefit from it. In the 1950’s commercials were live performances on American TV. Actors, singers, muscians and voices all had work for a day, every day the commercial was broadcast. Now one performance will do instead of being in work for 13 weeks you are employed and unemployed within the space of an hour.
Pay to play sites want people to price their services based on cost. A CD costs around 10 cents, try buying the latest (insert favourite music artist) for 10 cents. We need to assess true value and price accordingly.
Philip,
I very much appreciate your cogent and thorough analysis. Thank you.
Be well,
Bob
I’m with Philip on this, but there’s one little bit of information that was in Alex’s post (relating to lowering costs) that he, himself seems to have forgotten.
Without going into it, or reposting links which I’ve posted in the past, Alex has been promoting the idea of lowering the costs for VO talent for quite some time (don’t believe me, do a google search for any .doc, .xls, or .ppt documents on the various 123 sites).
When you’re using the muscle of your company to promote VO to the lowest common denominator for both subscribers and those looking to employ them, basic economic theory holds that such things will happen, with quality being the primary casulty.
Basically, of course he’s warning everyone about such things. That’s because he’s trying to promote them. As Philip and others have stated, it’s in his best interest to do so.