[qzar9999]

Originally Posted by LK

You're right, I forgot how it is a statement's author that is most important to its merit, not its content. Anything worth being listened to requires an identity people respect, with its attached reputation and history. Similarly, someone's reputation and history are important factors to consider when deciding whether to trust someone or not with an investment opportunity like this.

I don't fully believe Dave Sammons knows how to do better. To be clear, I'm not saying anything about you, qzar.

Don't get me wrong, my intent isn't negativity and disparaging your project. I view this as informing the uninformed audience that there is a large risk / Buyer Beware situation inherit in your pitch. The fact that it goes against your interests is the side effect, so I understand your reaction.

I've thrown my money around at anything that has even the faintest whiff of fetish material and taken hits on things others would be hard pressed to -- such was my desire and susceptibility to the hype of a hint of process material. I've also sold plenty of material and seen the business strategy for getting fetish folks to part with their money. I know how eager our audience is. I've hobnobbed with clip producers, seen how the internet warps a person, and been exposed to the liars, the cheats, and the fakes. That's who I am.

I gave Dave about $2000 years ago, thinking about starting up a studio, investing in his potential, and was sorely disappointed with what I got in return. Since that time, I've seen little improvement in his standards and execution. He's always been several steps behind in models, technology, and in his execution. Now he wants $15,000! That's a very, very large amount of money in these circles.

He's consistently outclassed by more talented and more attractive producers in a highly competitive arena.

I do not have faith that investing in Dave Sammons will bring you what you expect for your money, but our audience has bankrolled worse.

Take this as one man's opinion who has pretty high standards, though -- nothing to get angry about. See it for what it is.

OK, something about you qzar: post count's a pretty shitty way to measure someone's worth.

You know, I would agree that post count isn't the most important thing in measuring someone's worth, you're right there. However, when someone seems to have an agenda (i.e. "Don't give money to this project!") and their post count is in the single digits, it does merit consideration. Similarly, an extremely low post count means they don't say much--that is, they don't contribute, and they don't praise other people's contributions--so that also is worth thinking about when they suddenly decide to talk shit about something that a longtime contributor is doing. Ordinarily I wouldn't judge based on post count but you have to admit I have a point.

Originally Posted by Kong

Great.... then the steps are pay the $100 donation in the link you brought us and write the script in "comments" box, right? Or is it better to send you an email?

Much, much better to send an email, please.

Originally Posted by LK

Yes, I'm saying he's used to churning out a subpar product. No quality control. Effects mistakes IN THE FINAL CUT! He's relying on his audience to be horny and hungry enough to look past things no person with pride in their own work would release.

Here's who I'd give money to: someone has a plan for a project. THEIR plan. They aren't whoring themselves out to the public looking for ANY idea (each idea having its own technical challenges, requiring different props and funding to accomplish). They have a track record of quality releases -- you can see what they've done and have a reasonable expectation of what they'll produce based. I wouldn't pay to enable someone to get better tools unless they've already proven they can do some amazing stuff with the tools they have. Even then, the profit they make from their releases should have some amount set aside for gradual tool upgrades.

There was this guy on here, RedParrot, produced some *amazing* test footage, had a real good eye and concept. Blew everything of Dave's out of the water. No single-shot, unmoving camera film-making. No terrible editing and cutting. NO MORPHS! He got creative with what he had.

He's had the opportunity for a decade now to create, and all of his releases have had some issue with editing, sound, effects, composition, directing. They just look *bad* even by fetish clip standards.

The problem is not his tools or studio. The problem is Dave. Pay your money to an artist to realize your vision, or go with one of the established outfits who'll be more than happy to do your custom with far more enthusiasm and energy.

This pitch promises the WORLD! Only $15,000 to make it happen!

Look, some of what I write is speculative, but my bottom line is: This is all highly suspicious. Buyer Beware.

The more recent stuff has a lot fewer technical problems, don't know if you've noticed. He's really cleaned up the green screen errors and effects mistakes. There is still the odd issue here and there, but it's nowhere near as bad as it was (because, you're right, there were some bad ones).

For the record, Dave and I both actually make money at the current level of production. We don't NEED this upgrade, we're not seeking it out of greed. Both of us genuinely want to make something better, and he's tired of not being able to shoot like he wants to.

I understand that you had a bad experience with Dave before, and thus would be suspicious of any further attempts to raise money involving him. However, *I* invested about $1500 last year with him and I've already made my money back and then some, so I'd say it could go either way.

I'd like to point out that we aren't asking for handouts, here. We're basically accepting clip commissions, and using the money from them to upgrade. Someone donates their money, they WILL receive what we offer for it, so it's not like there's some kind of con going on.

Originally Posted by Rachel Bronwyn

I'm all for informing the general public of potential harm but hijacking qzar's thread and commanding people in as many words not to contribute is basically taking a giant shit on qzar. Don't do dat. By all means, raise awareness if you think there's monkey business going on but not here and, as a general rule I think valuable, maybe don't give other grownups commands? Give them the information (elsewhere) and I'm sure they can use their own judgment to make a decision that's right for them.

I'm going to take an exam I'm nowhere near prepared for now. I don't know why because I'm taking the course again to hammer the material into my head. This should be a gas.

In the meantime, can we be kind to one another?

Thank you, Rachel, for nailing down exactly how this was feeling to me. If someone has an issue with Dave or doesn't think this is worth contributing to, that's their opinion and they're welcome to it, but don't try to tell others what they should or shouldn't do, and don't use your personal bias to try to sabotage this project.