TV at events, who pays who?

[TEX]

So, let's say you have video coverage of your event. Either for a cable TV show, or a video to be sold for profit. So, who pays who?

Does the production company pay the promoter for the priviledge of filming something that they'll turn around & use for profit? Does the promoter pay for the exposure that they so desperately need? Or, is it a freebie that just happens to benefit both parties?


TEX

Edit, I'm also looking for WHY you THINK it "should" be one way or the other

[bigdude]

A video crew should pay the promoter a percentage based on the revenue they recieve from their finished product. Just my opinion.

A TV show doing a feature/story; I'd just take the exposure and call it good.

[TEX]

Kinda along the lines of what I was thinking, with one exception - if the TV crew is doing a full-blown feature episode specifically on that event, then I think they should pay (say a 1/2 hour or more specifically covering a competition). OTOH, as a promoter I'm almost ready to spend a little $$$ for the exposure, provided I can get someone to say "We're coming to film" far enough in advance that I can use that as leverage with potential sponsors. So, I dunno. I can see it from all the angles as being beneficial to everyone any way you go.


TEX

[RedBullJeep]

TV is a totally different world than most would expect...TV in the US is by far the worst for being tightwads and not giving value to the productions.
MOST sporting events actually pay for placement within the TV market, having to buy commercial time in order to get theri program on. In addition to that, the event must pay the producer to tape, edit, and deliver the product to the market so its a double whammy.
In order for the event to become PAID for their production, it must have become a definite money winner fro the TV broadcaster in terms of getting companies BEGGING for commercial time during the airing of that event. The broadcaster can raise the price of the commercial time as really, it is more valuable if more people are watching (SuperBowl foor example), so they can justify actually paying the events for the production and delivery of the footage.
For a small event like rock-crawling, we'd have little interest from the general TV public (they'd rather watch Friends) so the promoters would probably have to pay the full amount for a production company to make a "for TV" piece (which is totally different than making a video like Big Rock or the others currently do), plus find companies to buy the commercial time during ther time slot they want to have the show aired.
There really is a ton more to this, but those are the basics on how things work.

[TEX]

Originally posted by RedBullJeep
MOST sporting events actually pay for placement within the TV market, having to buy commercial time in order to get theri program on. In addition to that, the event must pay the producer to tape, edit, and deliver the product to the market so its a double whammy.

I know this is kind of how NMRO does theirs now. They pay someone to film, edit, produce (etc). Then, they pay for the airtime & chase sponsors to cover their expenses. Fortunately for them, they can afford the $75k or more up front to do this. I can't, but I *might* be able to cough up some expense money for a video crew just to get SOME exposure. Debating the pros & cons now.


TEX

[Paul Gagnon]

You might want to check with some of your local universities or technical schools to see if they have a Broadcasting class willing to take on the project.

[Grumpy_old_fart]

I know by looking at my event that it would be rather easy to obtain at least 24 editable hours of tape, with four cameras. Any competent director of photography could pick the spot to record from, and get 6 hours of film done four ways, and use that film to make a half hour showcase out of.

I wont pay anyone to take tape, since my operating capitol is so small. It would be nice to get exposure, but that is a double edged sword as well.

Since I run an event for the every day guy off the street, and not just for high dollar big money shinefest rigs, more exposure might not be the best thing. I am limited to one day for the event, with no time to tech vehicles in the day before. That exposure would provide more vehicles than my small venue could manage, and would be a detriment to a small track.

I would love to think that I can make the exposure do my event a great justice, but in that same glance, I can see it not helping with the real reason I do it. I really dont want to shoot myself in the foot. If people want to videotape, they can bring the camera, but no professional videography is allowed.

Just my not so humble opinion....