<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: a voice over year in review</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.audioconnell.com/2008/12/30/a-voice-over-year-in-review/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.audioconnell.com/2008/12/30/a-voice-over-year-in-review/</link>
	<description>where the worlds of voiceover, marketing and advertising collide!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:20:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Industry Report Will Go Deeper Next Year</title>
		<link>http://blog.audioconnell.com/2008/12/30/a-voice-over-year-in-review/comment-page-1/#comment-3917</link>
		<dc:creator>Industry Report Will Go Deeper Next Year</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 16:28:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.audioconnell.com/?p=703#comment-3917</guid>
		<description>[...] voxmarketising, Peter O&#8217;Connell has some praise as well as shared some dislikes that I&#8217;d like to [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] voxmarketising, Peter O&#8217;Connell has some praise as well as shared some dislikes that I&#8217;d like to [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Ciccarelli</title>
		<link>http://blog.audioconnell.com/2008/12/30/a-voice-over-year-in-review/comment-page-1/#comment-3446</link>
		<dc:creator>David Ciccarelli</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Jan 2009 19:40:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.audioconnell.com/?p=703#comment-3446</guid>
		<description>Hello Peter and Philip,

Thanks for highlighting the report on voxmarketising.  I appreciate that you&#039;ve taken the time to assess what you liked and disliked.

By doing so, you&#039;re giving me some ideas for the type of information that pros like the both of you would appreciate seeing.

Philip,  the average payment is in the hundreds of dollars -- surprisingly close to union scale.  I&#039;m personally signing the cheques for SurePay transactions so I&#039;ll put my name on the line here.  And this isn&#039;t some ball-park guess either.  I have calculated the average based upon the previous 12 months.  Yes, they are internal numbers, so disclosing specific numbers on a month by month basis serves no one, with the exception of a competitor.

I&#039;ve taken the time to discuss your likes and dislikes on my blog The Biz here:

http://blogs.voices.com/thebiz/2009/01/industry_report_will_go_deeper_next_year.html

Be well,

David</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello Peter and Philip,</p>
<p>Thanks for highlighting the report on voxmarketising.  I appreciate that you&#8217;ve taken the time to assess what you liked and disliked.</p>
<p>By doing so, you&#8217;re giving me some ideas for the type of information that pros like the both of you would appreciate seeing.</p>
<p>Philip,  the average payment is in the hundreds of dollars &#8212; surprisingly close to union scale.  I&#8217;m personally signing the cheques for SurePay transactions so I&#8217;ll put my name on the line here.  And this isn&#8217;t some ball-park guess either.  I have calculated the average based upon the previous 12 months.  Yes, they are internal numbers, so disclosing specific numbers on a month by month basis serves no one, with the exception of a competitor.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve taken the time to discuss your likes and dislikes on my blog The Biz here:</p>
<p><a href="http://blogs.voices.com/thebiz/2009/01/industry_report_will_go_deeper_next_year.html" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.voices.com/thebiz/2009/01/industry_report_will_go_deeper_next_year.html</a></p>
<p>Be well,</p>
<p>David</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: peter o'connell voiceover</title>
		<link>http://blog.audioconnell.com/2008/12/30/a-voice-over-year-in-review/comment-page-1/#comment-3441</link>
		<dc:creator>peter o'connell voiceover</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jan 2009 20:32:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.audioconnell.com/?p=703#comment-3441</guid>
		<description>Hmmm.

Excellent points some of which I believe to have no merit ;) but most of which are well taken.

Statistics can absolutely paralyze business people because they either cannot interpret them or they haven&#039;t the foresight to see the forest for the trees.

But many business people can analyze data. The voice performance industry (unlike the acting or music performance industries) has none of this data that I am aware of which is why I see an opportunity for someone with the passion to search like David and his team may have (or they may not, that would be up to them).

As for the primary business of Voices.com, Voice 123 and their impact on the VO business you and I remain closely aligned in our unified opinion.

As for the report being able to change your business, it may not and good on you for that. But I believe the majority of existing, long-term professional voice talents in our industry would benefit from a business review with more meat on it regarding INDUSTRY sales and marketing figures (versus the rather light reading provided currently in the Voices.com report) that would VO&#039;s some perspective on where the industry stands and how they could make improvements.

It might also give the VO wanna bees pause to consider what an ill fated attempt they might be making on a variety of fronts.

It just seems to me that in ADDITION to working on getting new business, people need to have some thoughtful statistical information about the business they&#039;re in.

Right now, that information is not there. And I know that I am not the man for that job.

Terrific points you&#039;ve made here and I welcome any counter because you&#039;re opinions on industry matters do matter in this forum. Thanks Philip!

Best always,
- Peter</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmmm.</p>
<p>Excellent points some of which I believe to have no merit <img src='http://blog.audioconnell.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' />  but most of which are well taken.</p>
<p>Statistics can absolutely paralyze business people because they either cannot interpret them or they haven&#8217;t the foresight to see the forest for the trees.</p>
<p>But many business people can analyze data. The voice performance industry (unlike the acting or music performance industries) has none of this data that I am aware of which is why I see an opportunity for someone with the passion to search like David and his team may have (or they may not, that would be up to them).</p>
<p>As for the primary business of Voices.com, Voice 123 and their impact on the VO business you and I remain closely aligned in our unified opinion.</p>
<p>As for the report being able to change your business, it may not and good on you for that. But I believe the majority of existing, long-term professional voice talents in our industry would benefit from a business review with more meat on it regarding INDUSTRY sales and marketing figures (versus the rather light reading provided currently in the Voices.com report) that would VO&#8217;s some perspective on where the industry stands and how they could make improvements.</p>
<p>It might also give the VO wanna bees pause to consider what an ill fated attempt they might be making on a variety of fronts.</p>
<p>It just seems to me that in ADDITION to working on getting new business, people need to have some thoughtful statistical information about the business they&#8217;re in.</p>
<p>Right now, that information is not there. And I know that I am not the man for that job.</p>
<p>Terrific points you&#8217;ve made here and I welcome any counter because you&#8217;re opinions on industry matters do matter in this forum. Thanks Philip!</p>
<p>Best always,<br />
- Peter</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Philip Banks</title>
		<link>http://blog.audioconnell.com/2008/12/30/a-voice-over-year-in-review/comment-page-1/#comment-3440</link>
		<dc:creator>Philip Banks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jan 2009 14:41:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.audioconnell.com/?p=703#comment-3440</guid>
		<description>Aren’t there serious industry questions that you’d like answered in a report like this that would help your business?

Serious answer to this question, no.

People get wrapped up in statistics, the market, the industry and how the combination of global economic forces impact them.

Here&#039;s a piece of information. Voices.com is driving down standards in the Voice Over business and driving down prices.  Depending on the person you ask you&#039;ll either get an &quot;I agree&quot; or &quot;I disagree&quot; but in the the cut and thrust, business every day Voice Over world it is more likely you&#039;ll get &quot;never heard of them&quot; as your response.  Voices.com is over subscribed with Voice talent, based on his report is David going to cull membership so the business can support subscribers? Based on his report what is Voices,com going to do in 2009.

Here&#039;s what I know.  If I get one job per day I make a living, 2 jobs per day I make a good living, 3 jobs per day I make more than anyone on this planet really needs. As a direct results of all the information given in the report nothing has changed for my business.

Please understand, this is not about David or Voices.com, my comments are motivated by wanting people to take two steps back and see things as they are, the report contains lots of information which is largely useless at best and at worse distracting.

If anyone reading this gets paid for reading and processing information, do it and keep doing it. If anyone reading this gets paid for Voice Over work then your time would be better spent asking people with Voice jobs to give some of them to you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Aren’t there serious industry questions that you’d like answered in a report like this that would help your business?</p>
<p>Serious answer to this question, no.</p>
<p>People get wrapped up in statistics, the market, the industry and how the combination of global economic forces impact them.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s a piece of information. Voices.com is driving down standards in the Voice Over business and driving down prices.  Depending on the person you ask you&#8217;ll either get an &#8220;I agree&#8221; or &#8220;I disagree&#8221; but in the the cut and thrust, business every day Voice Over world it is more likely you&#8217;ll get &#8220;never heard of them&#8221; as your response.  Voices.com is over subscribed with Voice talent, based on his report is David going to cull membership so the business can support subscribers? Based on his report what is Voices,com going to do in 2009.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s what I know.  If I get one job per day I make a living, 2 jobs per day I make a good living, 3 jobs per day I make more than anyone on this planet really needs. As a direct results of all the information given in the report nothing has changed for my business.</p>
<p>Please understand, this is not about David or Voices.com, my comments are motivated by wanting people to take two steps back and see things as they are, the report contains lots of information which is largely useless at best and at worse distracting.</p>
<p>If anyone reading this gets paid for reading and processing information, do it and keep doing it. If anyone reading this gets paid for Voice Over work then your time would be better spent asking people with Voice jobs to give some of them to you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: peter o'connell voiceover</title>
		<link>http://blog.audioconnell.com/2008/12/30/a-voice-over-year-in-review/comment-page-1/#comment-3439</link>
		<dc:creator>peter o'connell voiceover</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 2009 20:44:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.audioconnell.com/?p=703#comment-3439</guid>
		<description>Hi Philip:

There are some definite short comings but there is still a foundation of an idea that David has created that has real merit. 

To do it right will take more time, research and a bit of money BUT I also think there are people who will pay for that kind of research.

Aren&#039;t there serious industry questions that you&#039;d like answered in a report like this that would help your business?

Best always (and congrats on being the first commentator for this blog in 2009!),
- Peter</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Philip:</p>
<p>There are some definite short comings but there is still a foundation of an idea that David has created that has real merit. </p>
<p>To do it right will take more time, research and a bit of money BUT I also think there are people who will pay for that kind of research.</p>
<p>Aren&#8217;t there serious industry questions that you&#8217;d like answered in a report like this that would help your business?</p>
<p>Best always (and congrats on being the first commentator for this blog in 2009!),<br />
- Peter</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Philip Banks</title>
		<link>http://blog.audioconnell.com/2008/12/30/a-voice-over-year-in-review/comment-page-1/#comment-3437</link>
		<dc:creator>Philip Banks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 2009 14:00:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.audioconnell.com/?p=703#comment-3437</guid>
		<description>The harder you look the less you&#039;ll find in this report.

Our voices are 82% up in terms of income. From what to what? $1 to $1.82?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The harder you look the less you&#8217;ll find in this report.</p>
<p>Our voices are 82% up in terms of income. From what to what? $1 to $1.82?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

