Without a box sucks
Thanks Thanks:  0
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
+ Add Reply
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Topic: Without a box sucks

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Mark started this thread.
      Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Bakersfield Ca
    Posts
    272
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Without a box sucks

    So I have been seeing this website everywhere www.withoutaboxsucks.com and I was wondering if you think what they are talking about is true?

    Related Topics:

    • #2
      Moderator   Without a box sucks 2001 Productions's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 2012
      Posts
      198
      Post Thanks / Like

      Default

      I think their facts are probably accurate.

      But here's the thing - and this is my opinion only, perhaps in the entire cosmos - Withoutabox found a niche and developed it. They made themselves the middleman, while offering a service that greatly simplified the festival submission process for independent filmmakers. At this point, they may be technically a monopoly, but there is no law preventing anyone else from offering a similar service. Problem is, Withoutabox has a tremendous head start, so the only way anyone has a prayer of unseating them is to develop an even more innovative business model that attracts both filmmakers and festivals, like the way Facebook took away MySpace's business.

      Withoutabox is owned by Amazon, which also owns IMDb. As an added bonus for signing with Withoutabox, you get your movie listed on IMDb, whose dominance in that particular niche is overwhelming as well. They are smart businesspersons with very deep pockets.

      The other part of this is - and I hope I don't get killed for this - 99% of film festivals don't really benefit filmmakers in any significant way. It's great for the ego to be accepted and screened somewhere, but most of the time you're paying out fees that really aren't generating any kind of monetary return. If you're just in it for kicks and don't care about the money, more power to you. I do think the vast majority of festivals are run by people who genuinely love film and volunteer their time to offer the best experience they can. But, at the same time, with an average entry fee of $50 per film, a filmmaker spends $1000 just to enter 20 festivals, with no guarantee of anything. And there are hundreds of festivals. Multiply that by the number of amateur and semi-pro filmmakers out there and we're talking some serious money, for not a whole lot in return. You can't blame a corporation for wanting a piece of it.

      Last edited by 2001 Productions; 02-10-2014 at 11:40 PM.

    • #3
      Junior Member   Without a box sucks CyanideSally's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 2014
      Location
      North Carolina
      Posts
      7
      Post Thanks / Like

      Default

      It sucks.


    • #4
      Senior Member   UniqueAmI's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 2012
      Posts
      911
      Post Thanks / Like

      Default

      Without a box does suck. Festivals basically suck. The only worthwhile festivals (they are rare, but out there) are ones that don't charge an entrance fee. Or their fee is so low that you don't feel you're being ripped off by entering and not be chosen.


    • #5
      Pro Member   filmmaker6563's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 2013
      Posts
      464
      Post Thanks / Like

      Default

      Festivals have entry-fees for a reason. That money goes towards the actual festival to create a high-quality experience for those two attend and sometimes pay the people who spend their time to organize and professionally execute the event. In development, filmmakers should decide if they are going to try their luck on the festival circuit, and come up with a rough estimate as to how much money should be set aside for the task. I STRONGLY disagree that festivals are only worthwhile if they have no/low entrance fees.

      Withoutabox started out as a legit site, although once sold to IMDB, these are when these problems arose. They cause both problems for festivals and filmmakers. They make festivals raise fees, as well as make filmmakers agree to an irrevocable license that states that they may do whatever they want with the content submitted.

      Don't use the site.


    • #6
      Junior Member   Without a box sucks Without a box sucks Chase's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 2014
      Location
      Los Angeles
      Posts
      6
      Post Thanks / Like

      Default

      Quote Originally Posted by 2001 Productions View Post
      I think their facts are probably accurate.

      At this point, they may be technically a monopoly, but there is no law preventing anyone else from offering a similar service. Problem is, Withoutabox has a tremendous head start, so the only way anyone has a prayer of unseating them is to develop an even more innovative business model that attracts both filmmakers and festivals, like the way Facebook took away MySpace's business.
      Actually...Withoutabox, in turn IMDb, in turn Amazon, have a patent on the process...http://stephenfollows.com/withoutaboxs-dirty-secret/


    • #7
      Junior Member   loganlend's Avatar
      Join Date
      Sep 2017
      Posts
      2
      Post Thanks / Like

      Default

      We are very fed up with Withoutabox. They don’t pay out, they don’t reactivate the new events and they don’t accept any new festivals!
      We now use Filmfreeway and WorldFilmPresentation for our festivals.


    • #8
      Junior Member   loganlend's Avatar
      Join Date
      Sep 2017
      Posts
      2
      Post Thanks / Like

      Default Without a box sucks

      We are very fed up with Withoutabox. They donít pay out, they donít reactivate the new events and they donít accept any new festivals!
      We now use Filmfreeway and WorldFilmPresentation for our festivals.


    + Add Reply

    Tags for this Thread



    Contributing Members

    Follow us on

    Twitter Facebook youtube Twitter