#crowdfund tips

this post is intended for people who do not fluently speak english and people who are new to tumblr. however, anyone else might also find this useful.

if you have a fundraiser campaign and post it on tumblr, you might get a message or reply that offers you some kind of help. these messages are often fake.

someone reached out to me after publishing my Shelterwood crowdfunding post with some very valid stuff that I want to address. they mistakenly sent it non-anonymously (something I confirmed with them before just responding to the Ask), so in the spirit of keeping things unidentifiable around here I am going to screenshot the entire message (so you can know I'm not selectively cutting anything out) and then I'll respond to it in chunks:

A Genuine Apology

so let's start with the first chunk of text:

I'm going to be straight with you: while there were absolutely some points you made about the Shelterwood crowdfund that I agreed with, like how unreasonable the goal seemed for a show produced by a novice showrunner, something's really sticking out here. That thing is that Stephen Indrisano and Nigel McKeon are both young, white, non-binary novice showrunners who secured some high-billing talent and picked unreasonably high crowdfunding goals, but you treated one of them with a lot of grace and understanding... and then turned around and not only accused the other of essentially being the problem with the current state of podcasting, but also called them cis in the process despite having acknowledged their pronouns earlier in your write-up. That was... certainly something. It's almost like you had a specific point you wanted to make, so you just sort of conveniently forget that Stephen is non-binary to make it. That or you don't actually think Stephen is non-binary and were engaging in some passive-aggressive gatekeeping, which also sucks, just in a different way.

this is 100% something I fucked up on, I will readily admit that. my accidental erasure of Stephen's identity as a non-binary person is not okay, intentional or not.

I wrote the initial post gradually over the course of just over a week, top to bottom, and then did a quick skim of it at the end to make sure things were still up-to-date in accordance with any updates to the campaign itself. a result of this is that between when I started the post (where I included Stephen's pronouns of "he/they)" and when I was writing some of the later parts I had forgotten this. I think part of the reason is that the campaign is not really about Stephen, so it isn't like there are consistent references to him as an individual. in the few places there are, such as the intro section of the main text and the FAQ, "he" is used exclusively, which I think mistakenly put that in my mind as Stephen having a male gender identity because I hadn't seen a self-identification as being non-binary on their website or Twitter. but someone deciding to use a specific set of pronouns in the text of something like this (to avoid confusion or for any other reason) does NOT invalidate their use of other pronouns elsewhere. similarly you don't have to outwardly proclaim your gender identity for it to be respected and not assumed as cis.

I am genuinely very sorry about this, it was a mistake and I am in the process of editing the original post to reflect Stephen's proper gender identity.

now then.

let's talk about the difference between Nigel (Among the Stacks) and Stephen and the way I approached them, because you're right that there was a difference.

I think a key way that these two projects differ is that one of them was very clearly made by someone who didn't know what they were doing and was in over their head. Among the Stacks was a clear trainwreck from the moment they started revealing how bloated the cast and crew were. I had many conversations with other creators during that early time where we were all wondering how this thing could function with so many cooks in the kitchen, and how you could have a coherent story with that many characters. it was clearly a product of someone new and over-excited who didn't have a real idea of how to do what they were dreaming of.

in contrast, Shelterwood seems to be genuinely well-thought out and approached like it was created by someone who has done their research and been part of the community for a while. it has a full concept with a clearly outlined size and goals and is a very realistic sounding first project. if it weren't for the goal and the rewards we wouldn't be talking about it at all. as a pitch it is perfectly reasonable.

I went a bit easier on Nigel because just from looking a lot of us could tell that Among the Stacks was going to end in disaster. we didn't know when or how, just that there was no way a project like that could actually succeed. I also knew from interactions between Nigel and other people that she was not very good at taking critique or hearing other people out on stuff that they didn't agree with. I went into that post with the intention of being harsh but fair, because I wanted Nigel to hear what I had to say and LISTEN. not just brush it off as "someone is jealous of my amazing idea and so they are being mean". I was still a bit mean in that post at some parts, I will admit that. my tone can swing a bit far on the sarcastic side, especially the longer I spend on a given post digging into things.

Shelterwood is full of people who should know better, something that it makes a point to brag about. it isn't just one person's dream project that they don't know how to wrangle, Stephen is clearly a proficient showrunner to have pulled all of this together (and I do genuinely find the show's concept to be interesting, even if I didn't really communicate that in the post as much as I could have). Stephen has ALSO been around the block a few times in regards to working on audio dramas, whether or not they have helmed their own. this means that from the start my expectations for them were higher.

my goal was not to accuse Stephen of being "the problem", but I think that this campaign is INDICATIVE of a lot of the "the problems" going on right now with audio drama crowdfunding.

I did seriously think about pulling the last section into a completely separate post, but what I wrote applies to the context of this campaign and so I felt it was important to have that connection. if I had been able to fully communicate my thoughts on it before now, say for the Arden campaign, it would have been part of that post. but it took me a lot of time to get those words down in a way that actually communicated what I think the problem is.

I know having it as part of the Shelterwood post has an implication, and the implication is correct that this campaign is PART of the problem, but it isn't the whole problem.

It's also very weird that you lumped Shelterwood, Arden, Among the Stacks and Afflicted in with The Magnus Protocol, which was on an entirely different level. They're not comparable. Not a single one of those first four shows actually made their crowdfund goals. In Afflicted's case, the all or nothing state of the crowdfund means 100% of that money was returned to backers. The Among the Stacks crowdfund was cancelled. Which means that for 50% of your given examples, literally none of that money ended up tied up in those shows rather than being contributed to other, smaller shows. This is not comparable with The Magnus Protocol crowdfund situation, and I think you know that.

it's 100% true that The Magnus Protocol is on a whole other level than these other campaigns, I said as much in my write-up. it is not comparable and I wasn't attempting to compare nearly $1 million USD to $26,000.

what I was attempting (and may have failed) to do was to point out that what Rusty Quill did was change the playing field for the worse. when looking at those two numbers you can much more easily make attempts to justify the high goals being asked for here, because in comparison that's downright reasonable to what they raised.

as a note: TMP had a funding goal of £15,000 (approx. $19,500 USD). so they weren't actually asking for hundreds of thousands of dollars to make 3 seasons of a show. in fact, what they asked for is less than the campaigns I'm trying to call out here. that Kickstarter has a lot of things that were suspect about it and felt slimey and exploitative, but the asking price was not really one of them.

however.

just because they didn't ASK for that much money doesn't mean they didn't know it would happen (maybe not to that extent, but still). this still had the same impact, which from what I can tell is making some people think that audio drama crowdfunding is for making a profit.

as for the next point about none of the shows except for TMA 2 hitting their goals:

the amount they are walking away with isn't really the point.

at the end of the day, it's about the fact that the more stuff like this happens, the more it is NORMALIZED. and these kinds of goals getting normalized is harmful.

as an example, in the world of video games there is something called "microtransactions". for anyone who doesn't know, these are additional, small purchases you make in a game that you often have already paid upwards of $60-70 USD for. in the beginning, they were marketed as "just cosmetic" and not going to impact gameplay. and so people didn't fight back too hard when EVERY game started implementing them. but of course, what that did was move the bar. it normalized people paying extra money on top of their purchase for something that used to be included for free with a game. and so the companies started pushing the needle further. and further.

now, this isn't a direct parallel for a lot of reasons, but when greed is being put forward as normal again and again (even when it continues to result in failure) it starts to cement it as something "normal". something to be expected.

the larger problem here is that these are unsustainable amounts of money to be trying to get out of the community.

which connects to this next section:

Speaking of The Magnus Protocol, there's also an assumption being made here that someone deprived of the option of helping one of these shows reach their crowdfund goal is automatically going to donate to another show... and I need you to remember that The Magnus Protocol's final tally was something stupid like 4000% of their original goal. Lower crowdfunding goals don't stop people from contributing once that goal has been reached. People just keep donating to that project. None of those people were donating to make sure the thing got made- they were donating because they liked The Magnus Archives, and the hard to swallow pill here is that that doesn't mean they would've contributed to other crowdfunds otherwise. I have my own issues with The Magnus Protocol thing. But the statement that that crowdfund snatched money out of the pockets of smaller shows by having an unreasonably high goal just straight-up does not hold water. That's nothing. It's 4000% less than nothing. You're allowed to be mad that that campaign got such a ridiculous amount of funding when so many smaller shows are struggling. You don't need to couch it in pseudo-logic to justify feeling that way. We're all mad about it. It's okay.

this is definitely a good call-out, this person is right that someone not donating to one campaign does not mean that money will go to another. in a lot of cases, the only reason someone sees a campaign is because it is being promoted by the things they already like (in The Magnus Protocol's case that obviously being The Magnus Archives), and that means they probably aren't going to be choosing between every campaign that is out there and deciding where their $5 is going to go. they might just as easily pocket it and buy a nice coffee the next day.

and that absolutely sucks, because it would be nice for the love that some people have towards specific shows to be something that extends to the whole medium.

but I do think there's something to be said for feeling like even a small donation is making an impact. I would feel kind of bad to only be able to give $20 towards a $10k+ goal, it isn't even a drop in the bucket towards what is needed and if I care enough to donate to something I do want it to succeed. but that same $20 to a campaign only asking for $3000? that's a lot more tangible of an impact. enough so that I could feel good about splitting that $20 between two projects maybe.

that isn't 100% the point of what you were saying, I know that. the reality is that not everyone in this community has a general investment in the success of others.

I think where that becomes the biggest problem is when some people only seem to have an investment in themselves, and no one else. that's where these things become problems, when the larger needs of the community are ignored for the sake of a few who repeatedly succeed.

I'm kind of bleeding a bit into my response to the next part, so here that chunk is:

And do I agree that we as a community need to start talking about what is and is not realistic when it comes to crowdfunding? Yeah, absolutely. You have a point there. That's a valuable and timely observation and I'm glad somebody said it. Unfortunately, the value of that point was absolutely buried by the extremely obvious fact that this time, in this case, something about this project is personal for you. I don't know what it is specifically, but I do feel the need to ask: You are aware that Tal Minear is involved in the show as a graphic designer and minor actor, right? They have nothing to do with the crowdfund or the rest of production. Their name being attached doesn't mean they're secretly running the show. This is not Tal's show. They'd be credited as a producer if they were that involved. So why do you feel the need to keep bringing them up? Anyway, it's extremely difficult to take your analysis in good faith when it's so transparently motivated by some sort of personal distaste for somebody/the people in the project, and that's a shame, because some of the things you're saying have value.

I certainly didn't shy away from pointing a bit of a finger at Tal Minear for promoting this ideology, among others. their clear involvement in this project makes me immediately more suspicious, because Re: Dracula was a self-admitted cash grab. and that stain on their character is not going to go away for me.

it's less that it's "personal" for me, and more that this is a figure in the community that I have repeatedly seen presented as an expert that MUST be listened to. including by themself. ESPECIALLY when it comes to the matter of crowdfunding.

now, if I were friends with someone like that AND they were involved with my project that was about to have a campaign, would I not lean on that resource? even just for advice on how to put it together and what needs to be included. Tal just wrote a small little article for Descript that has some very generic crowdfunding tips, so they are arguably the most knowledgeable person involved in the campaign to go to for advice and feedback.

I know for a fact that Tal has given crowdfunding advice unsolicited to people running campaigns, usually in the form of asking why crew is not being paid appropriately (a valid question in most cases where actors tend to get a huge portion of the budget). so I can't imagine a world where they didn't give at least a little input to a friend for a show that they are actively involved in.

I don't think they are running anything behind the scenes, no, Tal is not part of some audio drama Illuminati. but I do recognize the high esteem to which they are held by MANY community members.

my goal was to call out the culture that has grown around audio drama crowdfunding, and the ways that I've seen it hurting most people who attempt to do it. I have noticed that Tal is a big part of what has normalized that.

as for the ways in which I brought them up, yeah I like to be a bit snide and I probably laid it on a bit thick. it's easy to get carried away in these things, especially towards someone that I am admittedly not a huge fan of.

that is the extent to which it could be considered "personal" for me, but I understand if you don't believe that or if that still had too much of an impact on taking the rest of what I said seriously. that is your choice and I respect it, it's just very difficult for me to separate out their involvement given what I know outside of this.

You're just completely undercutting that value by surrounding it with so much pointless nitpicking and snideness. What happened to "#but actually my intention is to be thoughtful and not mean"? You claim to be acting in the interest and defense of the community, but as the creator of a small podcast that nets me absolutely zero profit, I'm not feeling it. This feels like it's about you, not the rest of us.

this is absolutely fair.

I am just one person at the end of the day. I've talked to others, discussed the situation surrounding this campaign and others like it with them, but I am the one typing it down and inserting my voice and my take on it.

as such, I am not going to be a perfect mouthpiece for everyone's thoughts about this stuff.

I WANT to be one that is largely beneficial, however.

sometimes I lean a bit heavy into the snideness for the sake of keeping things interesting; these write-ups are LONG and as a writer I recognize you have to do something to keep people engaged so they actually absorb what you are saying.

is that the right approach? probably not for everyone, but it is part of a reflection of my own voice that it comes out like this.

"#but actually my intention is to be thoughtful and not mean" is something I wrote, something that I still want to keep in mind but sometimes I fail at that. in this case, I found it hard to stick to.

repeatedly seeing campaigns like this is disheartening to me, it wears me out. there is an amount of what a lot of people might see as "bitterness", but it's not really about any specific project or person.

I think my massive fucking rant at the end of that post about capitalism ruining audio dramas with the need to make money unsustainably says a lot about how I feel about the current financial state of the world. a lot of that "bitterness" is from this deep rage towards to the system, directed outwards where it can be. maybe the flow of it was a bit strong on this one, but it is still an accurate reflection of the way that I see things.

note, an accurate reflection to ME. it's okay if it isn't accurate to you, that's part of why the conversations need to happen.

part of why I do the math breakdowns for the budget is to help myself try and get a grasp on what those numbers mean. the human brain is not really formatted to understand large quantities of things, especially something that is usually intangible in those high amounts like money. I also do it because I want to give someone the opportunity to say "actually, you're wrong because this does add up. you are just missing part of the picture."

I know the way I approached this might come off as defensive, that's not my intention. I decided to break it down like this so that no one would think I'm trying to skip over feedback or ignore certain points that make me look bad.

everything that this person said to me is a valid response to what I wrote, including the things I pushed back on.

I am very grateful that they reached out to me, and I want to continue the conversation. ESPECIALLY if they feel that I did not hear them here.

my responses are just that. a response. they are not a claim of being right or these reactions being unjustified. we are all only in our own heads, and the conclusions we come to are usually based in rationality. my mind is open to being changed, I want to see as full a picture as possible.

if you disagree with what I've said, that is fine.

if you agree with what I've said, that is fine.

if you aren't sure, that is also fine.

we're talking about something complex and nuanced and just because I'm the one bringing these things up doesn't mean I have the RIGHT opinion or that I am the person who SHOULD be saying it.

there is a reason that I am anonymous here, and it's mostly because the conversation is more important than who is speaking.

as always, my inbox and Asks are open.

if you would like to follow along, or if you for whatever reason do not trust my screenshots of the campaign: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/among-the-stacks-season-1#/

this is going to be very long and I apologize. but when I thought about leaving out some parts to cut it down, it didn't feel like I was doing due diligence in communicating the full picture and providing constructive feedback and critique. I think I have some good notes in here for general things to keep in mind for anyone asking publicly for money to fund their passion project.

so. let's get into it.

The Campaign Video

this is the first thing you see on the page, displayed prominently at the top next to the title and goal.

but before it even starts, why is it a full 10 minutes long??? this is your elevator pitch opportunity, you need to get to the point and make your case before someone clicks away. because unless I already care I am not sticking around for 10 minutes to hear you say the same thing I can read for myself if I scrolled slightly down the page. (that's not even mentioning that any video which is exactly 10:01 long just makes me think of how youtubers pad video lengths to hit the time requirement for putting ads in the middle)

but anyway, let's talk about the video itself.

first up: the content

cut. it. down.

10 minutes is an egregious length for what is supposed to be a video that grabs attention and funnels people into taking the time to read the rest of the page. it is not meant to be a video version OF said page. even 5 minutes would be pushing it in most cases, and the most important information needs to be in the first 2. that means the elevator pitch for your story, ideally 1-2 sentences, and then an explanation of what you are asking for and why. it is fine to set the tone with an excerpt or thematic prose, but keep it BRIEF.

there is no need to spend nearly 3 minutes of the runtime playing samples of your most famous actors for clout. especially when you barely touch on the 12 people that are part of the crew .

touching on various perks of the different tiers is good, as is reiterating the goal amount, but it would be nice to have visuals to go along with the more interesting and complicated sounding ones. the visuals that are included are lackluster and the small amount of shown art is way too obscured by the "copyright" watermark.

finally: why the fuck is the last minute and forty just music. no, seriously. almost 2 minutes of time wasted for the sake of what? fade that shit out after 10 seconds and end the video, I'm not here to listen to your theme tune, I'm here to learn about the project.

also, don't use "Kickstarter" as a general synonym for "crowdfunder". it is confusing and will make people forget how to actually find your campaign.

second: the quality

you are making an audio drama, yes, so producing nice videos isn't your end goal. but it DOES still matter and is a reflection of the care you put into your work. if I like the video, then yeah maybe I go and check out the actual content you've released on the Among the Stacks feed. but your feed isn't embedded at the top of this page. your feed isn't the first impression I'm going to get of your production quality. this is.

we could nitpick how the transparent logo on the library background makes the text unreadable, or how the cast announcements aren't lined up properly with the visual transitions, or how more than one take was definitely needed because some of the stumbles are extremely noticeable. some of the issues are visual only, but there are plenty of problems with the audio itself in this video, which is especially suspect when what you are asking money for is an audio project.

so when the opening voiceover changes to a more informal description of the project, why does the quality go to shit. the first part sounds like it was recorded in a properly treated space with care for removing background noise and reducing echo and reverb. in the second, I can constantly hear birds and there was a fucking discord notification at the 1:45 mark. most bafflingly, it's the same exact voice (I assume showrunner Nigel's), so HOW can the quality be this inconsistent??? I'm not looking for fancy, I'm just looking for the bare minimum in quality for something like this.

all this tells me, is to expect inconsistency in your product. if I give you money am I going to get the treated professional approach or the slapdash one? this video is the way you are demonstrating your quality to prospective backers; you provide no other examples directly on this page so THIS is what you have presented as an acceptable representation of you and the project as a whole.

this shit matters, it really does. ESPECIALLY when you are asking for $21,000 dollars. which leads us to...

The $21k Goal

with names this prominent in the AD space attached, I did have an expectation of a somewhat higher goal than I've seen on recent smaller projects. but I was not expecting the actual goal to be this ridiculous.

let's compare this number to another high profile project that happened last year: Re:Dracula (https://seedandspark.com/fund/re-dracula)

off the bat, you can see that this project raised about $24k on it's own, but if you scroll down to the budget section it says "We estimate that this production will cost $22k. You'll note our goal is $12k - this is because we've received $10k of external funding outside of this campaign!" for a total of $34k

now you might see that and think "well anon, is that not basically the same thing? they actually raised more than that!"

there is as big difference between a project that is being spearheaded by a well-established and proven name in the audio drama space like Tal Minear and a project being driven by someone that most people haven't interacted with in any production capacity (I'm sure Tal would have their own interesting things to say about this crowdfunder, as they have quite a bit of experience themself in this realm). ADDITIONALLY, in the Re:Dracula campaign video (which is only 2 minutes if you were wondering) they state it is an "all or nothing project", meaning if they couldn't raise the necessary funds it wouldn't have happened. so when Re:Dracula asked for that money, there was an expectation built on past proven work and releases and the ask was made based on that.

(now do I also find that amount of money for Re:Dracula to be a bit ridiculous? honestly a bit yes, but as a production it is very much a professional venture within the space more than an indie project fueled by passion to tell a story. the whole thing exists to capitalize on Dracula Daily tho, so I think we all know that)

there is an expectation of quality and professionalism that is proportional to how much money you are asking people to entrust you with. it sounds shitty, and it is, but crowdfunding is about asking individuals to put faith in you and your vision, and it is your responsibility to do right by those people.

I should point out that there is no problem with a flexible goal, which means that money will still go to the project if not fully funded. but I do think it betrays that they know this goal is nonsense high.

but we will talk more in-depth about the budget breakdown in the next section.

The Donation Tiers

this is the bit that will be the most presumptive, as the nature of backer tiers is that you don't know what the goods will be like until a while after the campaign is over and stuff goes out. so this will be a more general look at the different levels, whether the perks seem to be fairly placed/distributed, etc.

my first question tho: why are nearly all of the tiers seemingly "discounted" right now (the day after launch)? is it a limited time first week of the campaign thing? if so, why aren't you using that to advertise and push people to pledge early to take advantage? in some industries this kind of thing is common practice (video games often launch with small discounts on digital platforms like Steam), but I have never seen it on any kind of crowdfunding campaign. I didn't even know it was a thing you could do.

I do like the visual cohesion with all the images used across the tiers. the yellow and purple thematically match with the show's website (which interestingly is not linked a single time on the page), though I'm unsure how legible it is when it comes to the text images within the main campaign body, definitely hides some the details of the pictures here against the parchment style background. the art styles themselves are exactly consistent, which is pretty obvious why once you realize they are all traced off other pictures or artwork (for example, this one is a clear base for this one and I was able to quickly find ). I was going to give the benefit of the doubt and assume this is a legal use of them since I can't hunt down every single one. but the hands holding a rosary image is from a site that says "attribution is required", and that sure wasn't done here so I don't know if any of the others were traced without permission or proper credit given. nowhere on the page is there a link to or mention of who created these images for the campaign. (unrelated, but alt text for images should be standard by now on sites like indiegogo, especially since so many campaigns utilize banner images instead of header text to differentiate sections)

okay let's actually look at these tiers (at the price before the discount):

there are 10 options total (plus the general donate without a perk) ranging from $6 to $267 USD. as a high and low these are good boundaries, with 6 of the options being below the $100 mark. honestly this is a really solid distribution in terms of offering options at the lower end while still giving variety at the middle and higher end.

the first four are restricted to digital content only, with the baseline offering discord access and a social media shout-out and then progressively adding digital annotated scripts, early access to episodes, and the digital "librarian guide".

the annotated scripts is an interesting perk considering it will apparently include both past and future episodes of the show. however that isn't particularly specific about whether it is even talking about season 1 scripts or if it means scripts for only the current "prologue season" as it is defined in the main text of the campaign (oh we will get there). it does has a general delivery timeframe of April 2023, but is this a one and done or will these backers continue to get new annotated scripts thru the creation of season 1? how many will that come out to? will they get all the scripts? these are not small questions when it comes to asking value, though at a price point of $12 I think most people would be satisfied with a few from throughout the first season.

similarly "early access to episodes" is too vague and needs to be more specific; when Red Valley crowdfunded last year they stated that backers would get access a full week before the public, but all the ATS campaign says is "ahead of the general public". it is worth noting that both campaigns asked $18 for this level, so we are in line there it seems.

the Librarian Guide is a neat bit of content to offer, though I wish there were mock-ups or even a little more information about the type of things that will be included aside from illustrations. "information" could mean star signs and the fact they hate cake, or it could be substantial like their background and how they came to be part of the story. the price has jumped to $33 at this tier, so sell me on why I should give another $15 for this.

from here we start bringing in physical goods, which can really drive people to giving more for that extra thing to show off.

at $44 we add a 5 count sticker pack. considering ordering minimums I think people often discount how much nice stickers can cost (assuming they go with nice ones), plus factoring in the postage from Ireland for even a regular letter envelope. so I think this is a fair jump up in price. the real question is, what are the designs? and actually, is it more than one design? because the wording is very non-specific to whether it is 5 of the same sticker you see a mock-up for in the video (which is just some black block text on a white background) or if it is 5 different designs that include actual artwork, or what. a sticker pack usually means multiple designs, but given we've only seen one thing that wasn't very impressive I don't know that that stuff is even prepared yet to send for printing. there is also nothing said about the quality of stickers in terms of vinyl, heavy duty, die cut, approx size, etc.

at $60 we add another digital reward of being thanked in the episode credits, a tier which does not have a limited number of slots, so I guess hope that it doesn't end up with 20+ names that have to be read out for every single release?

now we jump to the big leagues of pricing and physical production with the physical Librarian Guide at $128 USD. this is a pretty non-standard physical good which is an awesome thing to offer.

but here's where I feel something needs to be said about manufacturing, because that shit can go south fast. physical goods can be hard to produce on their own, and promising too much will lead down a road of stress and frustration and lots of time and money wasted if you don't know what you are doing. I know people who have goods manufactured as their entire business and it is a fucking gamble sometimes.

but also, what exactly does it mean for this to be a physical item? it is 24 pages, which is too short to be bound like a book (even an art book). is it a zine? what will the quality of the print be and will it adequately show off the artwork that you are all proud of? this is where mock-ups or a sample page would be really nice to see.

a big jump up to $171 for the addition of a t-shirt. an additional $43 is somewhat steep I think, but that's probably fine because we're factoring in a middle man and shipping costs. but on the mock-up... why is the artwork so obscured? I genuinely cannot figure out what it's supposed to look like, which is a pity because what I can see seems interesting. are you really that worried about someone stealing the design?

for only $213 there is the option to name a character. again, no limit on the number of slots for this strikes me as weird since there are only so many characters that can possible BE named? especially given that all the currently announced cast have character names, so are there more people that we don't know about and aren't named or are some of those names up for change or is this just a "in the transcript you'll see the name and maybe it will be said once" kind of deal?

another small nitpick on this one. here's the description for it:

just lose the last line. the two before it do a good job at saying "hey it will have to be approved, and we don't stand for hateful shit", so the last line comes across kind of weird? it feels somewhere between 'no fun allowed' and 'you're an idiot' and is wholly unnecessary to get across the restrictions you want.

last tier sits at $267 USD (or an even €250 EUR for those who like round numbers). this is the reward that I always fucking hate to see, and it's somehow more egregious for how it's framed here. for all that money, you can get an executive producer credit.

this is a note for everyone doing a podcast crowdfund campaign: STOP DOING THIS SHIT. do you know why this reward exists? vanity. that's literally it. it exists for someone to claim that they were part of a project they didn't do anything for to try and gain clout.

now, why specifically does THIS ONE enrage me? for one, it is literally the only addition at this highest tier. add a handwritten thank you note or a chance to talk with the writers or SOMETHING. this is wholly unsubstantial for being the ultimate backer reward. but back to the credit itself, do you know where you'll be able to find it? only on Podchaser and IMDb. no mention of being distinguished in the credits of each episode with this label, nothing about being recognized on the website. just those two places that mean nothing and will barely be seen by anyone. do you know how easy it is to get on IMDb? embarrassingly so, and nobody will ever look. this kind of title exists for putting on a resume and looking impressive, but then if someone where to ask any follow up question you're kind of screwed because you actually did nothing but pay for it. so unless your only goal is to have your name attached to a project that has some well-known actors in the tiny pond that is audio drama, this shit is worthless.

so overall, I think the tiers are reasonable theoretically (minus the last one), but the lack of mock-ups for the more interesting stuff is definitely hurting that assessment.

The Campaign Itself

"About Among the Stacks"

minor gripe right off the bat, why is everything in this section a bullet point? those are for things in a list, which this is not. just leave them as paragraphs, which is basically what you've done anyway.

sorry that was distracting me. but let's talk about the actual content and some general advice.

the first thing I expect to see here is your elevator pitch. I talked about this in the video section, but since not everyone will watch your video (especially in this case when they see it is 10 minutes) you have to put it here. tell me why I should keep reading past your first paragraph. if I only read this campaign I would have no idea what your show is about or trying to be about.

instead what we're given is the setting and framework of the project. honestly this is good to include when there is a driving idea like "[creating] an open and inclusive space for creators to tell the stories they want to tell within the framework of the Library", and I take no issue with the inclusion of this. it could be said a little tighter (something this whole campaign could have used was a bit more editing to be honest), but the core principle is communicated and it sets the tone for what this project is claiming to be.

the 4th bullet should come next as it is the first mention or hint at the podcast feed even existing already. this is your way to prove that you can and have made stuff for the project and it doesn't only exist in people's heads. also, why is there no link to it?

it is nice to get the framing of who this project is largely coming from more than just looking at the name "Nigel McKeon" (she/they according to the website) as who created the campaign. it would be nice to get links to stuff like the poetry or podcasts to get a sense of her work, especially as they are asking for this much for what is essentially blind faith based on what this page gives us.

it is worth noting that while Nigel definitely has experience as a "podcaster", they do NOT have experience making an audio drama. her projects to this point have largely been unscripted talk podcasts such as Archive Admirers or Hyperfixations, so there is no indication of the quality of writing to expect from the project, even with a team of writers working on it. speaking of...

very interesting that our last paragraph here and the only image of this section is about some of the cast. this point is devoted to bragging about 6 of the well-known actors who are already involved in the project and listing their recognizable credits. the image below shows of 20 of the actors (including those 6), and even that barely scratches the surface of the 51 actors listed on their website as cast.

yep, 51. it is unclear to me how many of those are for one-off parts or actually considered core cast, but they are are named characters and apparently listed as equals so this is what I have to work with here.

it just so happens that these listed and pictured actors are the biggest names involved. which I get to an extent, you want to attract people to the project and that's a good way to do it. but that shouldn't be the ONLY thing your success is counting on. there are SO MANY big names attached here that it's suspicious to be honest.

also. why the fuck do you only mention your crew in passing here?

I don't care how talented your cast are, they won't be able to save bad writing or editing. your crew is just as important and yet THEY get no more than a passing mention. there are some really great people attached to this project and you are giving them zero recognition for all the hard work they had to put in already. before you could record these well-known voices, people had to write the scripts and flesh out the characters. so treat them with some respect for that!

I cannot even begin to communicate how infuriating it is to see the lack of credit given to the whole creative team, because the way this is presented feels like it's just Nigel and maybe some guest writers. if that IS what it is, then fucking say that! it isn't hard to communicate this stuff, and it is your duty when asking for this much money. always err on the side of being verbose.

I do think that generally more care needs to be taken with word choice and what is being highlighted though, because as with the tier descriptions some stuff is too vague or implies something that maybe isn't true.

I don't want to make assumptions about the people involved, particularly Nigel (she/they) who's project this is, but when I look at the pictures on the website of all the cast and crew involved in the project, I see a lot of pale skin. some of this might speak generally to the problem we have in the audio drama community of being very white, and it should be recognized that there is an amount of privilege associated with having the time and money to take on these kinds of creative hobbies. even with the bar for entry being much more accessible, things are a bit homogenous. but if you are claiming to care about platforming diverse and marginalized people, you need to show that. "show don't tell" is kind of the backbone of a lot of my issues with this campaign when it comes down to it, but this is one of those places where it really fucking matters. performative activism is something that we see a lot of, and I don't want to get into it here, but just platforming queer and ND voices is not the same as being diverse. queer activism and racial activism and disability activism and economic activism are all connected when you get down to it.

don't say you have an "incredibly diverse writing team" when I can look at the website and see that everyone is pale and very young. this does not read as diverse, it reads as "I didn't realize other neurodiverse people existed until I got deep on the internet and now I understand we are a marginalized group too".

(don't get me wrong, neurodivergence is absolutely a marginalized thing; it is still incredibly difficult for many people to get accommodations and help with managing the different struggles they may have. but even in that realm, it includes more than being ADHD or autistic and I'm getting on my soapbox so I'll stop here)

aside from all of that there is a piece of incredibly important information that just isn't here. how many episodes are you trying to make with this.

saying this will fund "season 1" doesn't mean anything when a podcast season can be anywhere from 40 episodes (The Magnus Archives) to 15 episodes (Jar of Rebuke) to only 4 (Samite). what does "one season" mean to your project? this is particularly important when it comes to justifying your budget and the breakdown of that work, as I'm about to get to.

(in that vein, communicating information like approximate episode length is also helpful I think for giving people an idea of the actual scope of the project; 20 episodes at 30 minutes each is 10 hours of content, but at an hour each that's twice as much work for all involved parties)

fucking hell, onto the next section where things do not get better.

The Budget "Breakdown" and Rewards

did you even try to make a chart where the text didn't go outside of the boundary, mate? also I hate these colors, it hurts to look at.

this is the chart provided, which basically just mirrors was the first bulleted paragraph states in terms of project budgeting. obviously for this section the monetary amounts did not automatically convert for to USD, but since all money is basically worthless right now it's pretty close to a $1 = €1 conversation rate anyway.

the project budget is split into 3 big categories: cast, crew, and artists. and split no more granular than that, which is big problem #1.

especially when there is no transparency on this page about how many people are involved within each of these groups, this could mean vastly different things and send a poor message generally. some people will look at this and not understand whether it is a fair ratio or not without the context of numbers.

if I were to do some rough calculations based on the information readily available via the website, we have:

20% or €4,000 to be split among the artists, of which there only seems to be the one on the website (Claire) and the one who made the character designs pictured lower on the page (@qkayoo). so that is €2k going to each of them roughly, though I know that likely isn't the actual shake out because Claire is responsible for all the episode art in addition to any of the other work being done specifically to fully campaign rewards like the t-shirt design. I'm also guessing that promotional materials for social media are included in this, but that's unclear since there's never any mention of marketing as part of the budget or campaign overall.

30% or €6,000 to be used for crew wages, which includes writers, composers, and producers. again, no mention of how many people this is or what the breakdown of that larger percentage is to each of these groups. should I also assume that there is going to be adequate compensation for the directing even though it isn't mentioned here?

the website lists 3 people as either "music", "composer", or "original songwriter" (not sure what those distinctions mean though in this context) but are we talking about vocal tracks or ambient music or what? and how much unique content are they expected to produce? is it comparable to the expectations for the visual artists, and if so why aren't they receiving compensation that reflects that? these are the questions I ask myself when you give me this little information and don't even bother mentioning who is involved in this part of the process.

similarly we have 3 producers, most of whom wear additional crew hats. are they all working together on each episode or is the season going to be split between them to ease the workload? on that note, is there a head producer in charge of doing final mastering on all episodes to make sure they sound consistent, because that is a lot of additional work compared to the other two.

and then there are 9 writers, so I start to wonder what is the breakdown of that load. is everyone writing full episodes or are people just writing the stories and Nigel as showrunner is doing all the larger plot stuff?

basically I just want to know that people are being compensated appropriately for their time, particularly the people whose work is sometimes not thought about or invisible such as the dialog editors, mixers, quality check, etc. even if the person doing these things isn't asking to be paid for that, they deserves to be compensated for each part of the process they are devoting time to. paying yourself adequately is part of equitable pay, even when it's your passion.

50% or €10,000 for all the cast wages, which as I've pointed out is at least the 51 people credited on the website, though again there is no mention of that here. I won't assume this is to an equal extent, but even if you are listing folks who literally have just one line you still need to compensate them a base amount for the time and effort.

I'm not really gonna say much about fair wages, I think that without insight into a process you can't really pass much judgement on how much work is going in? for example, recording voice over for an audiobook is often compensated in terms of "finished hour", rather than factoring in the additional amount of time spent doing retakes and editing it all together. compared to a production that wants to pay actors for the time they spent total, including things like table reads, live-directed, and asynchronous sessions, that number is going to look very different. differently skilled actors may require more or less help and industry rates are also dependent on your level of experience in the field. some of these bigger names will have a set rate, some of them will not.

I think the largest issues with this section is just the complete lack of justification for ANY of these numbers. when you say "we have estimated it will cost this much", what got you to that number? are you using industry standard rates for general voice acting or did you consult with audio drama specific folks, because those amounts can be different. the more money you ask for, the more conscious you have to be of how it will come across. if I asked my mom to lend me a $20, she won't ask why. if I ask her for $100, she probably will. if I ask for $1000, she will definitely want to know what exactly I'm planning to spend that much on.

we're going to jump over the rewards paragraph for a second to hit the last bullet point since it really belongs up here will all this money information.

as I stated earlier, I have no issue with flexible goals. in fact, it's very nice that it is again addressed here, because I really don't think this campaign will hit that $21k USD goal.

however, what exactly does "paying equitably" mean in this context, because that phrase could be a couple different things. does it mean these same percentage breakdowns for every individually, meaning if I were going to have been paid $500 but it only gets 50% of the goal would I make $250? or does it mean that some people like the larger named actors will still make most of what they would have and people with only a few lines will make a few bucks?

the term "equitable" does not mean "equal", they are genuinely different things. so apart from the larger percentage breakdowns being the same, which were already too broad of categories, it doesn't really tell us anything.

additionally, if the project doesn't get fully funded will there be any money paid out of pocket by Nigel or other crew to cover any promised or guaranteed minimum pay? I would assume that for some people involved this is very much part of their contract/agreement, formal or informal.

also, normally I would like to see the stretch goals section up here rather than down near the bottom as it is for this campaign.

but that's all for the budget, there's not a lot of information to work with here and I've already covered pretty much everything I can think of.

okay, back up to that rewards paragraph we jumped over.

there isn't very much to say about the rewards in this section because the campaign itself says basically nothing. this is where I looked for further details on any of the items promised by the different tiers and the only thing I found was a brief paragraph, a t-shirt mockup (that you can't see the design on, this will never not baffle me), and two character designs for the Librarian Guide, which the caption mistakenly refers to as the "Library Guide". proofreading is important folks.

let's look at this one paragraph though, because there is something very incorrect about it. if this were Dora I'd ask you to point it out for me, so fucking say it at your phone if you spot it:

did you catch any of the issues/inconsistencies here?

the first one is small: "thanks on our social media pages and website". this is the first mention of the website existing anywhere in the body of the campaign, and there isn't even a hyperlink to it. the lack of links on this campaign is just generally baffling.

I'll come back to the middle ones because they are the same issue twice, and the last one is another small nitpick: if you executive producer reward is the highest tier, why are you not presenting it that way here? from reading this I would assume name a character is the top prize for backing, not the fancy vanity credit. like I said, I fucking hate it as a reward, but you are the one trying to sell it to me as such and not doing a good job of it.

okay, so the thing that actually made me stop in my tracks and scramble confused to see if I missed something is the inclusion of 2 rewards that don't seem to exist. why are you claiming that "perks for supporting the crowdfunding include" t-shirts (note this is plural), posters, and pins.

let's take a brief detour with "t-shirts" plural. if you think this sounds pedantic, it really isn't because saying "a t-shirt" was always on the table. there is no tier at which I can support and receive multiple t-shirts, there are not multiple t-shirt design options. no reason to use plural phrasing here when everywhere else it is clearly a singular, feels like a mistake or trying to sound more impressive than you are.

posters and pins however, are entirely fucking new to the conversation we're having. I will point out that the concept of a pin set is mentioned in the stretch goals section BELOW this one, so reading top to bottom as one would expect that isn't known about yet. but even if it were, this is the paragraph talking about your INCLUDED REWARDS, which DOES NOT include your stretch goals. these are the things that someone can explicitly receive for backing your campaign, not the things they might get if you make enough money.

also you can't even make the stretch goal argument for posters however, that shit is not mentioned once anywhere else on the page, not even as a digital reward.

my guess is that this section was written before stuff was finalized or scoped down to the one t-shirt and limited physical goods, and just not updated because no one read over the campaign before launch to point out that adjustments were needed.

"Other Things We'll Be Doing"

just one paragraph here, should be a quick section to review.

right?

RIGHT?

it feels incredibly strange to me that you are asking for this much money when you admit that you are new and not "established members of the AD scene". just very weird behavior generally.

but as for the actual content here.

why the fuck are you promising so much stuff that isn't part of making the show. all of these things take time and energy and people caring enough to make that worth it. if you stream yourself playing a video game for 12 hours total and no one watches, you've spent 12 hours not actually connecting with the community. streaming is work in and of itself with no guarantee of any kind of interaction. and even you do have folks in chat, it's still incredibly one-sided and the streamer's first priority is the game rather than that communication.

the same goes for all these other events, except maybe the hangouts if the entire purpose of those is to interact with chatters. but it's more likely that's just some cast and crew in a discord call that happens to be streamed rather than an interactive type of thing.

in fact, none of these events actually connect you with your fellow creators or prospective fans except, as I said, potentially the hangouts and readthroughs. where is the actual community engagement and outreach? how is any of this supposed to help the project?

this shit is some of the worst to me and it will do nothing but slow down the entire project, because ALL of this requires way more work than you think it will. work that doesn't serve any purpose as far as this campaign goes.

if you want to do these things outside of it, go right ahead. but don't pitch it as part of this or you are implicitly saying that this crowdfund is kind of also funding all of that rather than just making the show itself and fulfilling rewards. this is a lot of time commitment that people are either being paid for or being asked to do as free labor for the show.

also, we once again have issues with being vague here. how many events are you planning to do for each of these different things? who will be hosting/participating in them for the more casual ones like the gaming and TTRPG streams? are these things planned for during the crowdfund period, after the crowdfund but before season 1, during season 1, or a mix of all three?

oh yeah, and what do you mean by "a full cast readthrough of the prologue", because from what I could tell above you have 9 episodes of a "prologue season" out with however many more to go. so is this a full readthrough of this season 0 or is there a DIFFERENT prologue yet to come? and if there IS a different singular prologue episode, why should I even bother with the stuff you are releasing right now?

Milestones

I like this section, it's genuinely good stuff. enticing people to contribute for immediate bonus content is a great way to drive engagement and it can snowball as more funding means more sneak peeks means more eyes see your campaign.

WTF Are These Stretch Goals

not gonna lie, stretch goals is the first place I go when I check out a crowdfund campaign. it says a lot to me about the larger project priorities and reveals a bit more about what people deem as fair compensation for work.

first off: why did you attach a date for when you came up with the stretch goals? all this does is tell me that you potentially sat on launching this campaign for 9 days (launched March 1), which honestly doesn't matter to me but feels unnecessary for me to even wonder whether something was going wrong behind the scenes. just get rid of it, if for some reason you have to update or edit the goals you can make a note then with the date and change you made for transparency.

second: I think it's generally seen to be more effective to hide the majority of your stretch goals until the prior one is reached. this adds mystery and gets people excited dreaming up the "what-ifs". and it stops people like me from judging the feasibility of your numbers up front like this.

also, I do want to point out upfront that stretch goals are not necessarily meant to be seen as a value equivalent for what is being offered. it is an encouragement to get above and beyond and should theoretically be more about raising the overall wages of involved parties with only a small amount pulled aside for the perk.

but let's just go down the list:

"Stretch Goal 1: If we reach €22,500 we will write and perform a digital exclusive livestream of new Among the Stacks content"

so this is something that will happen for only €2,500 additional. which, to be honest, that number feels a bit off for the implied work required, but since "Among the Stacks content" could just mean one more short story, I'm not too concerned with it. just remember that a livestream also requires production work and organization to be done, especially when you are trying to plan around optimal times for your listeners and availability of actors from various timezones. the difference between GMT and PST is 8 hours fyi.

"Stretch Goal 2: If we reach €25,000, we will be able to bring out a small line of Among the Stacks related enamel pins."

yeah no. for a couple reason.

firstly, there is not even a single mockup of what these might look like so why should I care? all of the art we've been shown so far for the show would not translate well to an enamel pin because the level of details is wrong for that scale.

also, what does "a small line" mean? does that mean 3 or 5 or 10? making one pin is a lot of work, let along multiple designs that each have to go through their own proofing phase with the manufacturer.

speaking of.

I didn't really get into the manufacturing thing much when I talked about rewards earlier, but that kind of thing is a real risk. I see and know a lot of pin makers who wind up with more "B and C grade" pins than ones they feel comfortable selling for full price. so what are you going to do if you finish at €25k and there's a manufacturing issue? do you have a contingency built in? have you made selected a possible factory and made blanks with them? are you sure they aren't a scam, because that's also a real problem that goes on with places using photos from other people and then running off with your money. there's a reason this thing is an entire job to wrangle in itself, and at only €2,500 above the prior stretch goal that could be a really slim buffer to work with.

and all of that has to be done for every pin design. this isn't like stickers where you can see a mockup of the die-cut. this is hours of work and communication past just getting a design from your artist.

now, I should point out that this does not say anything about how these will be made available. with no mention about the tiers as part of this, I'm assuming it will not be something added to every tier above a certain level, which is the right choice I think. the implication to me is that this is basically the seed money to then offer it in their website store. this is not something talked about anywhere, so I am potentially making a big assumption there, but I do know they have one already. whatever the case, some people will get the wrong idea about what this goal means because it isn't being specified and maybe think that they will be getting pins in the mail for backing the campaign. clarity is important.

which, also. how much of this is going to pay the artist(s) and will your artists be getting any kind of royalties from sales of this or other store goods? I am full of questions and you aren't answering any of them anywhere.

"Stretch Goal 3: If we reach €50,000, we will be able to create physical books of our scripts featuring notes and commentary."

again, lets talk manufacturing and proofs.

there are a decent number of options for getting a book printed, but that number is cut down when you have specifications involved like "notes and commentary". what this means in practice is probably something like irregular margins to make room for these, the addition of annotations that then must be matched to the proper pages depending on book size (since no way will it be an 8"x11" sheet the way that your google doc scripts are, especially if it's a paperback).

this also means lots of time doing page layouts, checking over the whole book digitally, getting the proof to verify things are right when printed, getting cover art, etc. and which scripts are we talking about for this? prologue season and/or the whole of season 1? in that case, what's the time frame you think that kind of project would take and who is going to paid to do all that work and make sure it includes all the most updated notes and commentary?

speaking of commentary, that sounds like a lot of extra work too since that's not a normal byproduct of making a podcast. whose commentary will it be, Nigel or the writers or a mix of cast and crew?

yes, this is a full €25k above the prior goal, but that is not a lot.

also, again. where will this be available? is it another store good that anyone can buy? how much do you think you'll charge for it on top of this required stretch amount? I'm not necessarily saying you need to answer these questions now, but I need to feel like you have a plan to and I just don't.

"Stretch Goal 4: If we reach €75,000, we will be able to do some physical live shows."

this one is definitely bullshit.

first of all: "SOME"??? what does that even mean except for more than one? honestly with how spread apart some of the cast are in the world, I would be impressed if you could wrangle this amount of money into a single live show.

plus live shows are then further restricting the availability of people to attend, because whether you host it in Ireland where Nigel is from or elsewhere in the UK or Europe or US, there will be a lot of people who are disappointed that you aren't near them. you can livestream them too, but that's another layer of setup and coordination and we all know it's not really the same.

also, as a larger point we need to talk about the ableism of hosting live shows when the pandemic is still happening and killing people. you are excluding your listeners and your cast/crew who don't feel safe to travel to it, let alone be in an enclosed space for 30-60 minutes with people who likely won't be masking.

"Stretch Goal 5: If we reach €100,000, we'll reveal it if we reach Stretch Goal 4"

based on the other goals, I'm already sus what this could be. but the mystery of it is good, they should have done that for more of the goals.

"This is one suggested by Marguerite Kenner as a larger stretch goal, but if we reach €250,000, we can pay everyone involved, down to even one line performances, enough to qualify them for SAG recognition - which requires a person to have receive over £500 paid for work they have done."

this is naïve at best.

right off the bat, let's talk about what SAG is for a second. it stands for the Screen Actors Guild. SCREEN ACTORS.

let me tell you what this makes me think about your project:

you wish you were making a movie, but that's hard to break into so you settled for making a podcast.

podcasts are not for the screen, why are you trying to impress people as though they are. audio storytelling as a medium is an entirely different thing, and the best podcasts out there right now are the ones who are leaning into what makes audio unique. The Goblet Wire, The Moon Crown, and Human B-Gone are all great examples of using the medium for what it is rather than trying to turn it into something it isn't. we have awards in our space if you really care that much, there are some high profile ones too that you can submit for (tho some sure do cost a lot of money to even enter).

this drive by some audio drama creators to chase after tv and movies is a disservice to THIS medium. stop fucking doing it.

putting aside all of that, your project doesn't actually qualify for this.

the phrase "SAG recognition" isn't a real thing from what I can tell, the actual thing I think we're talking about is "SAG eligible".

one of two things needs to happen for a performer to actually be considered eligible:

proof you were employed in a position already covered by a SAG-AFTRA agreement and have worked at least one day in a speaking role

you are a paid-up member of an affiliated performers' union for a year and have worked and been paid for at least once in that union's jurisdiction

so what does that all mean? basically that this goal is pure bullshit.

also worth noting, in order to prove your eligibility to SAG-AFTRA itself, you must submit pay stubs. I don't think Among the Stacks has an official company or business registration that is being used to pay everyone? that means there is also no tax ID, and probably no formal contract which you also need. also I don't know what that looks like for anyone who ISN'T American, which a huge number of them aren't.

that's not even considering the fact that it's an application with them that needs to be approved. being eligible just means you can choose to submit. and they'll probably look at your 1 line in a random independent audio drama and say no anyway.

additionally did you know the base fee for a SAG card is $3000? and then when you have that you will need to report the ~$500 you made on your taxes, which just cuts into your earnings and gets you nothing.

I will say that it is a weirdly noble goal to be able to pay everyone a minimum of €500, even if they have a single line. but completely unnecessary and unreasonable and honestly the money could probably be better spent elsewhere.

but yeah that one made me fucking laugh.

one last more general thing: what will happen if the campaign hits €40k? will that €15k above the prior stretch goal be distributed along the same lines as the "equitable" budget split? will it go towards an emergency fund if your physical goods require more shipping than you thought or the pin manufacturer sends you largely duds?

"Alternative Ways You Can Help"

another section I have literally no problems with. it's always nice to acknowledge that not everyone who wants to support you will be financially able to. audio drama has a listener base that includes some surprisingly young people who may not have spare income, along with people paying for education, between jobs, otherwise financially strapped. especially right now.

I do think it would help these people if you had any links to your social media here though. literally any at all. even just mentioning the @ on twitter would be helpful.

The FAQ

an oft forgotten part of the campaign, the FAQ is actually super important and a great place to put information that didn't really fit anywhere else.

it is not where you should be making your show pitch.

it is for frequently asked questions about the campaign itself.

so let's look at what ATS has done with it. they only put two questions, so this will be quick.

the first question is: "What is Among the Stacks about?"

this should have been the first paragraph of your actual campaign, why is it tucked away here???

the second question is: "I haven't heard Among the Stacks - what podcasts is it similar to?"

again, this is fine information to put near the top of the main campaign page. but it's not a frequently asked question about the campaign itself.

also how have you STILL not linked the podcast feed, I am BAFFLED. also, you list a bunch of inspirations that I probably could have guessed based on your premise and pitch, but without saying anything about why or how you found these things to be impactful in the development of your idea. especially when one of your milestones is to release lists of things that inspired you, why did you include this at all?

so, what is ACTUALLY supposed to go in an FAQ?

the first thing you should talk about if you didn't cover it in the main text is when people should expect the project to start releasing the content. the "estimated shipping" dates that are on tiers are usually not a reflection of that, but more about the goods that are being offered. so it's important that you put somewhere when people should expect to hear the first episode of season 1.

it's also a good place to give people a sense for the scope of the project beyond the campaign, i.e. how many season total are you planning to make.

if you are shipping physical goods for any reward, it can also be helpful to address whether shipping costs have already been factored in or if that will be an additional fee on top of the listed prices.

tell people where to contact you if they have additional campaign specific questions. an email, twitter handle for dms, anything.

there are so many things that can go here for clarifying parts of the campaign, and you can add/edit it as actual ones do start to come in. but it is here to be about the campaign itself, and the questions should reflect that.

are we done yet? almost, I swear.

(I'm dying a little inside right now)

The Catchall

these are small general notes that don't fit anywhere in particular, but stood out to me as weird:

why is a link to the feed not within the first paragraph? on that note, why is there no link ANYWHERE in the campaign??? not to your podcast host or website or even social media. if someone stumbles across your campaign, how do they find you FROM it.

the repeated framing of this show in comparison to queer media that is distributed by larger streaming services (i.e. Netflix and Discovery) is very weird. the scale of those projects and therefore the monetary expectations are different because marketability and capitalism. anyone with a $30 microphone can create a podcast with enough work, this isn't a valuable comparison in the slightest. none of us in this space are pandering, why even draw the comparison as is done in the video.

as an added note to that last point, almost all audio drama is extremely queer, something I love. but it is not something that sets a project apart enough to stress it as much this and other productions do, especially when for many they are using the term to mean "there is a gay relationship" versus "we substantially have queerness as part of our characters and stories in ways that matter to it". both have value, but there is a difference between "this is a podcast about coffee" and "this is a podcast where people sometimes have a cup while chatting about something else"

maybe a petty one, but it's been bothering me: the logo generally looks bad in my opinion, but it looks even worse when blown up on a web page or in a youtube video because it was clearly not made with that kind of resolution in mind. I've had this issue with art I've done in the past and it sucks, but it just doesn't look good when you see those fuzzy edges. especially when the framing device of your whole story is a professional environment like a library, which would have very clean promotional material.

Closing Thoughts

this show feels like a disaster waiting to collapse in on itself. I could write a whole post about just that aspect and all the things that have made me generally suspicious of it, but from the point of view of this review of their campaign? it just feels like asking way too much for so little guarantee it will come together.

I'm not here to try and shit on a project that someone feels passionate about, I think that's a necessary part of making any good creative project and we have a staggering amount of that in the audio drama space. but people can get in over their heads or dream too big to handle if they aren't already prepared and experienced. I've talked with creators who set aside dream projects until they knew it was something they could handle. and there are so many cooks in the kitchen here, the level of coordination required to wrangle a production staff this large is not to be understated. I just don't see this turning out well for anyone involved and I think this kind of money should be spread broader in the community to help fund smaller more varied projects.

especially considering we are already for some reason getting TMA 2 and this feels like it's trying to be TMA 1.5

I get that your stance is "Capitalism is bad", but that doesn't mean we can ignore it outright. You said on you Shelterwood post "a "fair wage" is a capitalist idea that most don't benefit from", but does that mean people shouldn't be paid at all? Frankly, I disagree.

People deserve to be paid for their labor. Again, it's not fair that the budget has now become the audience's burden, but it's also not fair to say that the concept of a fair wage is bad, full stop. Especially for older content creators, we can't justify time for passion projects on shoestring budgets anymore. We can say capitalism is bad all we want, but while we're living in it, all your favorite content creators still have to play the game.

The money has to come from somewhere. Often, we crowdfund because the usual avenues of making money in podcasting isn't available to us. For what it's worth, how that's solved is a discussion many creators are having now. (This is why you'll likely see an increase in ads across the board, and I hope you have patience for shows that run ads when they happen.)

As I said, I think your heart is in the right place. And yes, there's a discussion that needs to happen regarding crowdfunding and what's realistic to expect from audiences. But I do want to make it clear that us creators aren't pulling these big numbers to swindle anyone out of their money. We just want to keep telling stories, and while we live in capitalism, we are need money to do it.

I don't know if this ask is from the same person, but either way thank you for hearing me out and giving me the benefit of the doubt in terms of my sincerity.

so I think that something that is happening here (which is something that I experience in my real life as a left-leaning person when I try to have these conversations with certain types of people) is that we are getting caught up in whether it's feasible to live within a capitalist system without being agents of it.

we are all victims to it AND victimizers. especially if you live in a "wealthy" nation (by the standards of GDP, not by the standards of how individual citizens are faring). if you shop at a chain grocery store, use Amazon, buy fast fashion, etc etc. a lot of things that are unavoidable to make it by, because doing otherwise is very expensive.

the point being, yes, we all have to survive under capitalism.

but I think where the viewpoint stated by this anon and my own differ is that we are trying to get that money to survive from different places. every content creator across all mediums (YouTubers, musicians, TikTokers, podcasters, etc.) has to figure out how to make it something that they can afford to do. things are not created out of nothing, they take time and effort and talent and MONEY.

where you are getting that money from and how you are distributing it is also really important though.

I am not against the concept of "fair wages", but the idea of this is something that exists in the realm of business. and if you are going to treat a production like a BUSINESS, then you need to actually think about what that means. a business needs to be able to support itself financially through the product it makes or service it provides. the problem is that within the context of audio drama that does not really exist as a path, it only works AFTER you have put in the un/underpaid labor to build a base of supporters.

obviously we don't really charge people to get to listen to podcasts, that doesn't work in our space unless you already have a massive base of support willing to trust blindly that it will be worth it. we kind of get around that through Patreon and Ko-fi by creators providing exclusive content, something much more akin to how a business operates. there are also now the "+" style subscriptions that some networks and apps like Apollo have started, but to me those are very similar in that they are basically aggregating the same content that people are posting to their Patreons in an attempt to be a more enticing proposition than supporting a single creator.

your podcast CAN'T be treated like a business until there is a sustainable way to support it like one, and crowdfunding just isn't going to be that.

we still need to think about what can be sustainable for the community, a point I made that you didn't really acknowledge here. crowdfunding cannot be a sustainable method in these high amounts, it is literally impossible. with campaigns this size every month, sometimes multiple at once, where is that money supposed to come from sustainably? especially in the context I've been pointing out about how people are struggling right now, something you can't ignore when the contributors to these kinds of campaigns are average people.

at that point what you are actually looking for is an investor, a very common business practice for a start-up. which is what these campaigns are basically attempting to be, so it is a logical method of getting the funds. especially when what is apparently needed is this high.

so, we need to be looking at who does have the money and would be willing to contribute to the types of things we make; groups that have the resources and connections needed to help these kinds of larger scale projects succeed.

and wouldn't you know it, there's a very obvious solution to this one problem: podcast networks.

podcast networks are a middleman in the space, seemingly collecting money with the only benefit being minimal promotion and advertising help, and of course slapping a recognizable name on there that maybe attracts a few more listeners because it has "network backing". what services are they providing with that money they are taking? it should be argued that if you are essentially paying part of your revenue to a network that they are using it substantially to help support your endeavors. I have not seen this level of support from any of them.

the closest we've gotten to this is when the Apollo app gave $10,000 to some creators last year to make something completely original and unique (for example, Ester Ellis, creator of Station Blue and The Goblet Wire, was able to create something completely unique and out of the box with Whale Song). to be honest, that obvious ploy to get into the community's good graces is more than any of the actual networks have done. it doesn't really matter that it was a calculated business decision that would benefit them, it also benefited US as creators.

making deals with a network or outside funder is ACTUALLY "playing the game" of capitalism, getting it from individuals as part of an unsustainable crowdfunding campaign is not.

and again, it really matters that these resources are being EQUITABLY spread, but that is another conversation to be had if/when these things start existing for people to take advantage of.

additionally, it is worth pointing out that there are cities/states/countries that offer artistic grants. if your project needs major funding it is part of your due diligence to look into these things as potentially avenues. ignoring these opportunities is honestly negligent and disrespectful to fans who want to see the show get made by putting the entire burden of the cost on them.

you also mentioned advertisements, something that is an annoying but everyday part of our consumer society. for a lot of content creators I know it is the ONLY way to make money (note: I include sponsorship deals within the banner of advertising personally) and I do not begrudge them that because it's just how this shit works. yeah we all dislike getting interrupted by an ad, even between distinct episodes, but I don't think anyone should get upset at that stuff unless it's truly egregious (something like 3 minutes of ads for 5 minutes of actual content is just being shitty about the value of people's time).

this is actually an example of the right type of revenue stream to be chasing. residuals and passive income are important parts of making a business sustainable, especially a content creation business where the "product" is freely available. that is literally what ads were made for, it's how network TV makes money too. no, I don't think that this alone can sustain the costs of a production team, but I do think that it's things like this that need to be where the thought and energy goes when looking for ways to supplement it. hence the popularity of monthly support options, merch, sponsorships, etc.

I would also like to point out I am also an audio drama creator, I've been very open about that. whenever I get an idea for a new project or even just making my current ones happen I am also having to ask and deal with these questions of money. and I readily admit it isn't easy, money and compensation for non-tangible services and goods is not straightforward.

but that's why I make it a priority to work within my bounds while I figure it out. my first endeavor did not include asking for more money than some people make in a year, it was me investing in a microphone and asking people if they were interested in taking part even though it wasn't paid. I figured out how to make it work by using Freesound and Audacity and spending hours googling when I desperately needed one super specific thing. I recognized that 1) it was not something I could afford to spend money at the time, 2) I had not proven myself to the community such that I would feel right asking for money without any indication of the quality of product they would be receiving, and 3) that creative budgeting was always going to have to be part of how I did this.

I know the term "creative budgeting" may not be familiar to all kinds of people, but it is pretty much exactly what it sounds like. it's something that people have to do every day to pay their bills and buy groceries and keep their businesses afloat.

asking others to pay me a business-adjacent "fair wage" for an unprovable possible product is not being responsible with funds. there are a lot of resources available that can help ease costs and get rid of the less necessary expenses, and that is part of successfully allocating funds for any kind of project.

one last thing I want to address on here:

you talk about older people not having the benefit of passion projects. while I can empathize with what you are saying, this is kind of an ageist and ableist take and I want to address it so that you can have a better understanding of why it's problematic.

first of all, I think it's fair to say that everyone is financially struggling right now. it is a privilege to even have the time and energy to create instead of having to spend every ounce of yourself just surviving, one I recognize that I personally have.

we're at a stage where identifying as an "older content creator" might just mean "Millennial", and yeah that generation has suffered a lot financially due to Gen X and Boomers. but so has everyone born after them, it is no longer a uniquely Millennial problem to have money trouble. I know plenty of people in this age group who are tight financially, but not so tight that they are actively in danger. and I know people in that group who are barely scraping together enough to eat and keep a roof over their head.

I can say the exact same thing about Gen Z. if anything, Millennials have the benefit of the hardest times hitting AFTER getting degrees and those vital first jobs that create the lucrative "job experience" that every application after will be looking for. it's nearly impossible for some younger people to land "entry level" these days.

I'm really discussing a larger issue here, but by bringing up the difference in age as a contributing factor, it somewhat feels like you are saying that you are more worthy of those types of contributions and investments because of age. which is the kind of language we all grew up hearing from our parents and from policymakers and eventually from our bosses. it's an unhelpful stance to take when all of us are more or less in the same shitty situation.

the longer I've lived the more clear it's become that these generational divides from Millennial downward have been very intentionally placed to try and make us alienated from one another. I am somewhere in that vast swathe and that's how I identify; as part of the generations who were screwed. it doesn't matter which one, when you were born at this point only has an impact on how long you've already suffered, not how long you are going to.

which is fucking bleak, yeah. but an important reminder that solidarity is important in all things, especially when it comes to the arts and expression.

your age doesn't give you more of a right to be exploitative. that is not an accusation towards anyone, it's more of a general statement about the ways in which we let a lot of the older generations who have power get away with abusing everyone beneath them.

to much more briefly touch on why it is an ableist statement, I'm just going to point out that there are lot of factors that can impact someone's life regardless of age and make things more difficult for them. I know there is a lot of neurodivergence in the community, which can be disabling for some. I also know that there are some physically disabled creators who have talked about difficulties and barriers that people twice their age haven't had to deal with. it's something that I understand can be easy to forget if you aren't faced with it every day, I do not blame people for that. but that's why I think it is important to point out here so that eventually it will be something that everyone considers.

lastly, a couple of small notes that didn't fit in anywhere above, but I wanted to include

it is worth pointing out here that it is a privilege to be able to pay someone at all, one that a lot of projects don't have the luxury of. I don't think that's right, but it is a reality of making art.

"swindling" may be a harsh word for what I think is happening with these campaigns. I certainly think it is inequitably pulling resources towards individuals, but I don't believe that people are literally getting scammed

I was sent an anonymous ask telling me I should look at the crowdfunding campaign for Arden season 3. and so I did. and I definitely have some thoughts, though I'm sorry it took me this long to get them down because things have changed a bit since then (I've already had to adjust wording and update images twice because I'm slow).

here is the link to their campaign: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/arden-s3-midsummer-in-new-york-city#/

as well as their prior campaign to fund season 2, as I will be referring to it at several point: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/arden-season-2-a-town-called-elsinore#/

let's get started then.

First Glance, Let's Talk About Goals

so. that's a big number. $26,000 USD.

if you read my other crowdfunding review for Among the Stacks, I talked in-depth about how what you are asking for defines the expectations people have as well as what you need to make sure you provide. this is something to keep in mind as we look through this campaign, particularly because this is a big ask from a production that is established and wanting to appear very professional to justify this high of a goal.

let's compare this with their season 2 campaign. while you can't see the goal on old successful campaigns, it IS mentioned in that campaign video as being $6,000. that campaign wound up raising $17,167 from 461 backers, but the initial ask was VERY low in comparison to the current.

NOTE: there is a notably different set of numbers beneath these saying it hit $15,676 from 409 backers on Feb 19, 2020. I am not familiar enough with the intricacies of Indiegogo as a platform to be able to identify what this means exactly, but my guess is that that was the originally achieved goal when the campaign ended and maybe it has/had a feature where for a short time after the campaign you could still contribute? genuinely unsure, but we'll go with the number that the page highlights rather than this one.

I think it's also worth noting that this date of February 19th, 2020 was RIGHT before the pandemic hit, so people may have had more spare income such that this project could get $10k+ over its goal. I don't know if the overwhelming success of that campaign impacted the current one's goal being so high, but if it did that was probably a mistake because people just don't have that kind of money to spare anymore.

this campaign goal is set as "Flexible", as in they will get whatever is pledged no matter what, and I don't really have a problem with that usually, BUT. I will touch on why it feels a little bit different here towards the end of this post.

but let's hold off on digging too deep into those numbers just yet, we've got some stuff between us and the budget. there will be some.... thoughts in that section though, don't you worry.

The Video

2 minutes and 10 seconds is a length I can get onboard with. in comparison to their prior campaign video (4 minutes) it looks much cleaner and less amateur than the home-video style live action they used for the season 2 one, which I think is necessary for a campaign that asks this much. granted, it still feels very budget with just still graphics and stock images so I'm not particularly impressed by it visually.

the whole thing largely focuses on broadly covering the mysteries of seasons 1 and 2, interspersed with accolades and recognition, before giving the elevator pitch for the mystery of season 3.

as an aside, they tout their first season "being nominated at the Audio Verse Awards" on equal footing with Forbes calling them one of the 10 best fiction podcasts of 2018. all of us know the AVAs are just a "pay to get a nomination" thing, probably the least impressive thing they could be bragging about for anyone in the know. I have thoughts on that whole AVA thing as well, I'll probably put them together into a small post here soon.

but back to the video content. apart from addressing "people of Indiegogo" at the very start, it takes until the 1:38 mark for the video to even get to the point that it is telling you about a crowdfund and ask for support. if you were potentially unfamiliar with the show but stumbled across this campaign, it does a good job at selling you on the mysteries of the previous two seasons without giving away too much about what happens besides a romance between the leads.

the video ends with a call to action to donate, even if it's only a small amount, and then shows on screen as well as reads and spells the url to go to. good stuff, worth including for sure.

however, it feels like there's a disconnect in what the video is expecting from you as a viewer.

if I am finding this for the first time and know nothing about the show, it's a really great elevator pitch for me to add it to my podcast backlog.

if I am already a fan of the show, it just tells me about the existence of a campaign.

there's no mention of the campaign dates so there is no sense of urgency for me to check out the show immediately or go right to the campaign. there's no mention of the goal for me to get a sense of how much my contribution could positively impact it (I do think that with a goal this high there is less opportunity for people to really feel like their contribution is making a difference compared to a 3-5k goal, but still).

the video is not about the campaign at all, and that is kind of an obvious problem.

while the video for their season 2 campaign was 4 minutes with poor production quality and really iffy audio for trying to sell me on an audio medium, it does so much more for what it was trying to achieve. just about half of the runtime is dedicated to talking about the campaign goal, what it will go towards, the exclusive rewards, and why your support matters and makes an impact. based on just these videos, I would have been way more likely to check out and support Arden season 2 than I am to do the same for season 3.

I wish they had found a happy medium between the original low quality, but very charming live action and the new joke-corporate, but not particularly endearing, tone of the current. maybe they'll get it right for season 4.

NOTE - The Update:

right now there is a pretty significant update at the top of the campaign, I am jumping over it for the moment and we will touch on the contents in the "Budget" section where it makes more sense to.

They're Baaaaaack....

it was their joke, not mine.

this first section is pretty light overall, not getting into their sales pitch right off the bat, but informing or reminding the reader that the series is well-regarded by both critics and normal listeners and has already delivered on a successful campaign in the past.

this is very good to focus on upfront here, ESPECIALLY because people will go right from seeing the huge $26k goal to reading this and you have to justify that price tag immediately to not lose them. it highlights the stretch goals and extra content that they were able to produce before going on to say that they want to be even more ambitious for this next season, so that if you were to know or look up that the previous campaign raised about $17k you could maybe extrapolate and justify the nearly $10k increase from that amount being asked for here. it does direct us to the budget breakdown section lower on the page at the mention of wanting to provide proper compensation, which is good.

it ends with another call to action, inviting you to keep reading. this also recognizes that people will be looking at this first section to decide whether they want to continue reading.

overall, good section, but I don't know why I have to keep telling people to include links in here! you should want to direct me to your website, podcast feed, social media, etc. so I can find more information if I'm curious.

Season 3 Rundown

honestly I don't really have anything to say about this section. it's very similar to the plot tease from the campaign video with a little bit more details on the mystery. it's written to get existing fans excited and it probably does that just fine.

so let's move on to more of the meat.

Perks and Rewards

luckily for me, this section is literally just a text version of the different reward tiers with more detail. I am personally very grateful since this means I can skip covering the options on their own altogether because to anyone looking to back this section is very clearly highlighted covering all the details. thank you for giving me less work <3

to that point, I think for any kind of campaign that mostly focuses on digital goods it is really good to have this kind of text breakdown. for physical product focused crowdfunding you will have a lot more tangible images to show off to get people excited. in digital goods we are working with hypotheticals a lot of the time, especially in a story-based medium where you can't take a screenshot of your script to show off that it exists without giving out spoilers to the story you want to tell.

I will briefly say that I like the consistency of the tier images. the fake corporate employee badge is a fun format (though it means nothing to me as an outsider why it is relevant to the fake-true-crime angle of this series). it's also very easily customized to each tier without being a bunch of work to have unique images, which is less exciting, but also much less work.

I do also think it's worth mentioning that NONE of the tiers have a limit to the number of backers that can sign up for them, including the really high up ones that could cause trouble if too many people picked them (like the wrap party invite and some of the more involved physical goods). I think having restrictions on some of them is good for convincing people to go for them early because they're afraid of missing their chance, but also it can mean less work in terms of eventually needing to mail physical goods or coordinate personalized benefits.

but anyway, let's look at these tiers:

NOTE: every tier includes everything from the prior tiers, which I won't point out for all of them.

$1 FRIEND OF THE POD - aka the tip jar. honestly there's nothing offensive about this kind of tier existing, though I sometimes wonder if there's a point to it. but it does have 2 backers at writing so clearly some people appreciate it being an option.

$5 THE GOOD PEOPLE - honestly this tier has a lot of bang for your buck, like seriously for just $5 these are good rewards, but let's go over them individually:

early episodes - this is great, but what exactly does "Be the first on the block to hear S3 of Arden!" mean? I brought this up before for the ATS campaign, but if you just say "early" and don't quantify that you could be talking a week or a day or just an hour and I would have no clue. depending on what "early" means here I would be more or less excited by this reward. granted, this is the first tier with a real benefit which means that everyone above this point will also get this, so it isn't as though you are trying to use it to sell your $25 and up levels. however, the mention of a Patreon in a few sentences does make me wonder whether this is also a benefit patrons will have who don't back the campaign. potentially something worth clarifying.

special thanks in the credits - boy howdy that is gonna be a lot of names you have to figure out how to read and where to put with this also included in every tier from here up. as of right now that is 102 backers and it hasn't even hit 20% funded.

exclusive backer/Patreon minisodes - this is the tier that made me wonder if early episodes would also be a Patreon included perk, which I think its fine either way but worth making clear. I do think that the minimum quantity of minisodes should be specified, if only because "and MORE" is extremely vague. I think at this low of a tier it wouldn't be a big deal if it was only one more than the 2 explicitly listed ones, but specificity is nice even here.

$10 WHEYFACE INDUSTRIES EMPLOYEE - everything from the $5 plus a few small extras:

personalized digital employee badge - honestly a very cute digital reward that seems to go with the whole "Wheyface Industries" thing. this is an example of really good branding tbh, everyone should try to have something like this. we also have a good idea of how these will look because of the tier header images.

exclusive audio commentaries - so this both gives access to season 1 and 2 commentaries as well as the new ones for season 3. I am once again curious if this is something Patreon supporters also receive?

exclusive discord access - I feel like a broken record, but again is this a discord just for crowdfunding backers or is it also for Patreon subs? to be honest for this one I think having both is to the benefit because it means a larger more active community. some discords feel like they just exist because they're supposed to and have barely any activity, which would feel like a letdown if that was part of your incentive for doubling your $5 tier pledge.

customizable digital icons - these are explicitly donor exclusive and honestly another neat idea for digital content. they seem to have a good designer and a distinct style of these things, though seeing a few examples would be nice here.

$25 WHEYFACE ADVENTURER - here's our first physical rewards added onto everything prior:

buttons and stickers - would really love to see some mock-ups or designs here. I would also like to know with more specifics how many buttons and stickers are we talking about?

digital copy of "Escape from Wheyface Radio" TTRPG - we actually do get to see the cover of this in the video/image carousel at the top of the campaign, which I think sets the tone for it pretty well as comedic action (I'm assuming). honestly a good reward, though I'm curious if this has ever been offered anywhere else (i.e. in their merch store or to Patreon supporters).

$50 WHEYCON BADGE HOLDER - more physical and digital goods:

digital dossier of in-universe season 3 prep materials - a very fitting perk for a true-crime inspired show, probably adds some genuinely cool depth to excitement for and using along with the season as it airs.

linocut print - I think the mystery here of "an important location" is fine in terms of being vague. I think you could talk about the colors and size though just to have something a little more tangible for people to get excited about

digital soundtrack across all seasons - if you have a show with original music you should absolutely be making your soundtrack available in some aspect. good reward that is easy to distribute and deliver and will likely have the added bonus of some custom cover art for each of the 3 volumes.

$100 WHEYCON ARTS PATRON - more physical and more exclusive story content:

physical Wheyface Industries ID badge - very logical step up from the digital reward from earlier. I will point out that it does not say whether this is also customized, which considering the added cost of every single badge needing to be unique is probably not the case. but to some there might be an assumption that it is based on the earlier reward and that should be clarified sooner to avoid disappointment.

in-universe article from new character - this feels on the level of the digital dossier in terms of being content that the mystery solving fans would get a lot of value from. good addition, though I would be curious how much of the information will feel unique against the digital dossier.

Andy Wheyface diary - honestly I'm a little confused by what this entails. I'm assuming it's digital, though it doesn't specify. but in terms of format is it going to have a scrapbook journal kind of feel or feel more like someone opened a google doc and started recounting their day? doesn't appeal to me but I'm also not their target here.

$250 WHEYCON VIP - the big physical tier:

professionally printed dossier - the only specifics here about this printed version of the digital good is that it will be "gorgeous", but I think it would be nice to have a little more detail and maybe even a teasing pic of how it will look.

excluive t-shirt - broken record, but show me a mock-up! please! I don't wear a lot of t-shirts, would I even like the design???

behind-the-scenes discussion with Arden composers etc. - very cool if you love the show's music, and probably pretty interesting even if it isn't something you notice that much.

$500 WHEYFACE INDUSTRIES ADVERTISER - the big bucks personal:

full-sized poster collection - 2 examples are given, but if I'm thinking about reserving wall space for something or wanting to buy frames I need to know exactly how many to be expecting and what they classify as "full-size". I've bought so many posters that are just mildly different dimensions and that really matters if you want to frame them, which I assume many people who are spending this much would to best preserve and show them off.

write and produce your own custom advertisement with the Arden team - honestly this is an extremely cool idea that again seems to fit well into the Arden universe. sound like good bang for the buck just based on this alone.

$1000 WHEYFACE INDUSTRIES BOARD - exclusive event and autographed scripts:

season 3 digital wrap party invitation - these things always sound like they'd be awkward to me since everyone else has a relationship with each other, but I also totally understand why this would be an enticing reward for people. definitely worth the price to a lot of people I'm sure.

complete printed collection of autographed season 3 scripts - I know printed scripts (especially autographed) is something a lot of people enjoy having for their favorite shows, no complaints about this reward. tho it might be nice to specify whether it'll be bound specially in any way or if they'll arrive as loose sheets held together with a binder clip.

I think overall these tiers are really good, though I would like to see mock-ups or visuals for some of the promised rewards (particularly the physical ones like a t-shirt or poster examples). I would also like to commend Arden for not selling an "Executive Producer" credit as part of the rewards, I will continue to point out how bullshit those are until people stop doing it.

but let's move onto a big one.

The Budget

IMPORTANT NOTE: so as I was putting this post together (was pulled away from it several times for real world non-anon responsibilities etc.) the campaign posted an update. on March 30th, they added the following section at the top:

Hey, folks! We have some awesome news. Thanks to some additional funding which has come in, WE NOW ONLY NEED TO RAISE $6000 TO GREENLIGHT A SIX-EPISODE SEASON 3. And as of 3/30, we are very close to hitting that goal! [I foolishly deleted the image, but it was basically the same as the one below. The only differences were no "GREENLIGHT ACHIEVED" text, the blue label saying "MARCH 2023", and the progress bar showing that it had made it to $4125 of the $6000 target. Beneath is smaller white text that reads "Help us make Arden Season 3! $6000 raised on IndieGoGo will guarantee a six-episode season, with more episodes the more we raise!" and then beneath that the shortened url to the campaign.] WE ARE ONLY $1875 AWAY FROM GREENLIGHTING SEASON 3. Every $2000 past $6000 will add an additional episode. HELP US GET THERE TODAY!

on April 2nd, it had been updated to the following:

Thanks to some additional funding and your donations, we have now raised enough to produce at least six episodes of Arden Season 3! Every $2000 raised from now until the end of the campaign will add an additional episode to the season. All rewards will be fulfilled. And look forward to Arden Season 3: Midsummer in New York City - coming to your earballs this fall/winter.

I am not going to touch on this just yet, because I think we need to go over the budget breakdown first before we can assess it with this new information.

Budget Breakdown Breakdown

fun fact: the Arden team definitely saw my original response to the anonymous ask telling me about the campaign (or a similar critique elsewhere) calling out their lack of numbers in their budget section. I know this because it has since been rectified to include actual percentages on the chart itself as well as details of the number and approx length of episodes, two things that were definitely missing before. I don't have a screenshot of that section from before, I wasn't ready to dive into another one of these at the time, but it wouldn't be fair of me to show those anyway now as a "gotcha" when clearly they are open to feedback. I don't know if they read my prior post because there are still issues here that I think need addressing, but honestly it's a huge improvement from what there was. they did not however update anything but the image with specific numbers, which isn't ideal.

someone needed to put a little more time into this graphic because the labels are not super readable and for "studio recording" the number is almost completely obscured by the label beneath. we will be referring to these numbers for the rest of the section as this is the only place they are specified.

let's start at the end because it provides some very valuable context:

"Total, we have budgeted a cast and crew of 35 people to produce thirteen episodes with runtimes of 45 min to an hour, in addition to the additional expenses listed in operating expenses."

so that means we are talking about $26k to cover 9.75 hrs to 13 hrs of content, 35 people (26 of whom are cast according to this section), and an unnamed amount of contracted work potentially for commissioned additional art and music. this also doesn't include how much additional time and effort would be devoted to minisodes, digital content, and fulfilling backer rewards, so we can't really factor that in obviously except to just assume that funds for each of those would likely be equally distributed across the average cost. because of this, I'm going to just have to ignore them entirely as a separate thing, especially since those costs will be a bit more fluid until it's clear exactly how many backers will require physical goods fulfillment.

to break that big number down on a per-episode basis, we are looking at $2,000-$2,667 per produced hour of content, or a more round average of $2k per episode. obviously not every person will be directly involved with the creation of an episode, either because music is used in multiple places, a character doesn't appear in every one, and some expenses are one-offs.

but let's take that $2k average in mind as we hit the descriptors for each of the segments in this chart. I'll be using the provided %s to calculate the amount of overall budget and per episode budgets allocated to each.

CAST - 44% - $880/ep, $11,440 total

we know this is 26 actors total, only the main two characters are specifically named. it is likely that some of these roles are extremely minor and only appear a few times at most, so we can't really break this $880/episode number down any further. if it were meant to accommodate all 26 performers being in every episode that would be $33.84 on average, but I don't think that accurately reflects the breakdown in any way.

DIRECTORS - 9% - $180/ep, $2340 total

here we actually have more to work with in terms of figuring out the pay. I will be upfront that I am less sure of what a fair wage is for directing work, numbers on that are much harder to find than for sound designers or actors.

this section says "We are currently budgeted for three directors each working five days of recording." which could mean one of a few things. either there are 5 days of recording TOTAL and all three directors are present for all of that time, there are 15 days total and each director is in charge of a third of them, or a mix of some day with multiple and some days without. it doesn't really matter that much to the budget aspect to know which it is, unless there is a "head"/"assistant" kind of dynamic for days with multiple that might impact their rates. but let's just assume that it will be equal pay and the number of days doesn't really matter. that's leaves us with $780 total for each of the three directors across the full season (though keeping in mind the full number of episodes is 13 and not perfectly divisible by 3).

SOUND DESIGNERS - 17% - $340/ep, $4420 total

this section is also budgeted for 3 sound designers, though it's unclear if that is broken down for each episode with one doing the vocal cut while another does soundscaping and effects with one in charge of mastering or something. that is I think more likely than having the episodes fully split between the three because that could result in it sounding less consistent between episodes. I'm not sure exactly how good this compensation is when split like that, but if it were a single designer doing an episode I do think $340 is decent enough.

COMPOSER - 8% - $160/ep, $2080 total

I give a per ep estimate not because I think it actually provides value here, but just as a comparison point to the other roles.

however, I do think it's worth noting that we do have information about the amount of music from prior seasons to compare to, thanks to the digital soundtrack reward from the prior section. that boasted "60 tracks of music from Seasons 1 and 2 alone", meaning we can assume around 30 tracks will be made for season 3. this is probably not entirely accurate, there's some give and take for reusing music from previous seasons. that comes out to about $69/track (nice). I don't know what the standard rate is for musicians in this kind of work to be honest, but I would assume this is at least comparable to what the composer has been paid in the past or else they probably wouldn't be returning for the third season.

GRAPHIC DESIGN - 1% - $20/ep, $260 total

again, I don't think the per episode estimate is necessarily valuable here, unless there is unique cover art for each episode which I don't think is the case because $20 for that plus any additional graphic design work doesn't seem to be a fair wage.

STUDIO RECORDING - 4% - $80/ep, $1040 total

I think this speaks for itself honestly. the price will be the price that the studio space sets. in the section about the directors it was revealed that there are 5 days of recording, which as I noted could actually be 5-15 days total. however, here it only states "a few days of in-person recording with our core ensemble", so it probably only covers a portion of that total time. whatever the case, not much can be done to lower this and I'm sure they feel the benefit of spending this money for that kind of recording space is worth it.

OPERATING EXPENSES - 17% - $340/ep, $4420 total

to be honest, $4420 feels pretty low for everything they say is in this bucket. some of these things we can't really put a price tag on like rewards fulfillment without knowing how many people are going to be receiving those. especially when considering some of the higher cost and higher effort rewards like the personalized commercials. things like shipping costs also need to be considered (unless they have it setup to charge shipping separately, I do know that IndieGoGo offers this option) and just generally compensating people for the time and materials putting the packages together.

we can probably assume that the mention of SAG (something i covered quite a bit in my last crowdfund review) is for the annual base fee of $227.42 (not counting the additional 1.575% of earnings that have to be paid). it's unlikely this is something that all the actors have, but I would assume at least the two leads do, which alone accounts for about $500 of this total amount.

and that's not counting the misc stuff like the business taxes and licensing fees for any software being used.

there's also a very weird omission here, like seriously weird. where is the funding for the writing? my best guess is that it has been wrapped into "operating expenses", but to be honest that doesn't feel like an actual explanation, so I'm a bit suspicious that writing is not being compensated at all.

I did talk about this on the ATS crowdfunding post, but even if it's your passion project to write and make this thing, you should still be compensated for the time you put in. the fact it isn't mentioned at all is very strange.

I also think we should have larger conversations about how much more we are paying cast than crew. in this budget they have set aside 44% for the cast, with only 26% for the directors and sound designers (not to mention the missing writers I pointed out). this is a BIG disparity when you consider that directors are going to be present every time actors are (with the exception of small role that might be asynchronously recorded) and sound designers will be spending at least twice as much time as that when you factor in the dialogue cut, fitting in soundscapes, music, and effects, and general mastering of the episode.

[the stretch goals should be here, at the end of the budget section, but they are instead in the FAQ so we'll touch on them there]

a note on Patreon: I do also think that for shows that also have an active Patreon/Ko-fi/other monetary support avenue, that is valuable information to provide here. if that's only bringing in $250 per month, it might not feel worth it to address it in your budget section, but I think people can get suspicious about where money you "already have" is going when you start asking for more. I did not look up their accounts to see what they are currently making, I don't think it's relevant to my judgement of what this campaign is looking to provide, BUT if you were to tell me that that was how the writers had been getting compensated for the work they already put in that would ease my concerns on that front. stuff like that is good to know and again, when you ask for this much money people are going to be weird about it, and not unreasonably so.

Let's Talk About These 3/30 and 4/1 Funding Updates

now these both answered and raised some more questions.

needless to say, that portion of it is no longer entirely necessary, but I do think that there are some valuable points pertaining to stretch goals (and the absence of them) which can provide some value to shows looking to crowdfund.

so I have kept that section in below and done a small bit of editing, but mostly unchanged from my initial thoughts on the matter.

let's start with the March update:

Hey, folks! We have some awesome news. Thanks to some additional funding which has come in, WE NOW ONLY NEED TO RAISE $6000 TO GREENLIGHT A SIX-EPISODE SEASON 3. And as of 3/30, we are very close to hitting that goal! [I accidentally deleted the image, but it was basically the same as the April updated one. The only differences were no "GREENLIGHT ACHIEVED" text, the blue label saying "MARCH 2023", and the progress bar showing that it had made it to $4125 of the $6000 target. Beneath is smaller white text that reads "Help us make Arden Season 3! $6000 raised on IndieGoGo will guarantee a six-episode season, with more episodes the more we raise!" and then beneath that the shortened url to the campaign.] WE ARE ONLY $1875 AWAY FROM GREENLIGHTING SEASON 3. Every $2000 past $6000 will add an additional episode. HELP US GET THERE TODAY!

so there is some VERY important information revealed here.

first is that they've received additional funding outside of the campaign, which honestly is great for them and somewhat needed for a goal this large.

I touched on it fairly in-depth in a now-deleted section I wrote about the lack of stretch goals, before discovering they did exist but are hidden away in the FAQ. I talked about how the high campaign goal and lack of stretch goals was likely indicative of them having been wrapped up into that $26k number, which I still think is true to an extent. I think this announcement confirms that theory, and is actually in-line with the suggestion I made in that original section to pursue that kind of financial support in addition to a lowered goal.

however, I think the lack of detail here is really not great. for one, I'm making an assumption of some kind of external support, which is not necessarily what happened in the most direct sense. there could be caveats and stipulations attached to this money that might impact whether someone would support the campaign. maybe it's a grant from an arts supporting organization, maybe they've sold the TV rights to Arden in exchange, or maybe someone has just come into a lot of money from the day job. whatever the case, more details can be provided without revealing too much, i.e. "we've partnered with a network" or "received a grant to help fund season 3 should we meet this $6k goal" or something akin to that.

transparency is a good thing, especially when it comes to mystery money and me questioning why despite that you did not lower your $26,000 goal.

further, we have no idea how much extra funding was secured, so at this point it becomes unclear what amount of the goal is "extra" and what is required for the entire season. some math can help us extrapolate based on the $2k for each additional episode number we are given.

$6,000 (6 episodes) + $2,000 x 7 episodes (based on 13 episode number from budget section) = $20,000 total

so did they secure $6,000 in funding? at this point who knows.

the second thing that this reveals is that apparently there is a version of season 3 that could work with only 6 episodes total, which is not even half of the marketed 13 episode season length they claimed to be aiming for in the actual budget section! this is a pretty massive discrepancy with no kinds of qualifiers about "we'll be able to do the story, but it will be paired down and abridged in some parts" vs "the other 7 episodes are basically filler that could be cut". I feel like I don't need to explain the difference between these two sentences and why the first is superior in every way in terms of how people view your production as a whole.

okay, third thing. the goal arguably could have been for six episodes from the start with plenty of stretch goals for adding episodes and more. now, with the additional context of our budget calculations, this brings up some significant questions.

if we are to go with the average episode cost of $2,000 that we estimated, this means that $6k on it's own is not enough to actually make 6 full episodes. however, from our earlier calculation, we estimated that they maybe received $6,000 in funding, which actually solves the potential issue of underpaying themselves for the creation of those now guaranteed 6 episodes, which is a good thing. costs are costs and don't go down just because you have less money (unfortunately for all of us living in capitalism).

without this outside funding, this brings the actual (assumed) minimum goal to $12,000. this is SIGNIFICANTLY less than the current goal (though still higher than a lot of other AD campaigns).

so yeah, quite a bit of important information here.

what this update doesn't answer at all: are minisodes still going to be made? this already feels like barely enough for the core content based on their own operating costs, so that gets called into question for me and isn't addressed.

another thing that occurs to me: are there going to be some roles that are still getting full or near full compensation? I'm mostly thinking about the graphic designer and the composer, since the extent of their episode-by-episode contributions vs the overall season isn't as clear cut as it is for actors or sound designers or even studio space costs. I'm also curious how this impacts the fact there are 3 directors involved, that's a lot of voices for as little as 6 episodes total.

and now let's look at what else was revealed by the April one, which arguably has the most off-putting and concerning sentence in the whole campaign:

Thanks to some additional funding and your donations, we have now raised enough to produce at least six episodes of Arden Season 3! Every $2000 raised from now until the end of the campaign will add an additional episode to the season. All rewards will be fulfilled. And look forward to Arden Season 3: Midsummer in New York City - coming to your earballs this fall/winter.

so. what is concerning to me is the sentence "All rewards will be fulfilled", because there is a BIG implication to how that is stated.

what this tells me is that up until this point, the backers had absolutely no guarantee of actually getting the rewards of the tier they may have chosen, despite this being a flexible campaign meaning that they would still have been giving the money in part for those rewards.

so, there are three interpretations of what this means:

if they hadn't hit $6k, season 3 wouldn't be made to any extent

honestly there's nothing to imply that this would have been the case in the campaign's wording, so I don't think this was the reality of the situation.

2. if they hadn't hit $6k, season 3 would still be made to some extent but some rewards just wouldn't be delivered

I have read through this campaign several times, and there was NEVER any implication that backers wouldn't receive the promised rewards, not at any point before this April update. and that is a big fucking problem if that was up in the air. I know we'd like to think that if someone was willing to shell out money to support a thing they will still want to without obvious rewards, but for some people we're talking about hundreds of dollars that maybe they could only justify spending for the promise of physical or otherwise unique rewards. if all it took was wanting to give support with nothing in return, people would just select to donate without a tier.

the rewards are not the point, but that doesn't mean they aren't really important to the campaign.

3. if they hadn't hit $6k, there would be refunds to some extent for backers whose rewards wouldn't be delivered

this feels unlikely considering they wouldn't have made much to begin with if we're at this point, but it is the more charitable version of the prior option.

but none of these are ideal and as far as I knew 2 days ago, none of them were even on the table! what kind of trust does that foster with your community to not have been upfront with the realities of the campaign? if they hadn't hit this point and one of these, or some unknown 4th option in which rewards wouldn't have been fulfilled as implied happened, why would I ever want to give this team money again? crowdfunding for season 4 would be basically off the table based on this.

this is what we're talking about when people say they want transparency, all of these questions brought up by these updates ARE important! it is on the Arden team to provide those answers as best they can because this is not some faceless megacorp doing behind the scenes decision-making that might trickle down to individual consumers. this is a small team that is seemingly passionate about their project and cares about fostering their community. and these are exactly the kinds of things that hurt that.

adjacent to stretch goals, a campaign having milestones is also a great way to drive engagement. and Arden does have these. on their twitter only it seems. I've heard from a lot of people (and seen it myself) that twitter is not really a great way to connect to listeners. it's a good networking tool among creators, but especially as more people leave twitter it isn't getting the reach that some people think it does. I can tell by looking at their statistics that even when a post is getting a lot of "views" (how twitter is tracking that and whether it's accurate are up for debate) it is only getting a couple of likes or retweets, or a single comment if they're lucky. I've actually seen this for a lot of AD accounts, I don't think this is an Arden problem.

BUT, that means they need to be promoting these milestones outside of this little sphere of twitter! I didn't go searching other social media, I only looked at the twitter because it came up very early in the google results, but these things should be captured ON the campaign! at time of writing, the next benchmark is at $3900, something they are only $59 away from. if I came to the campaign and saw that we were close to getting some extra content or information I would be much more inclined as a fan to immediately pledge rather than putting it off. this stuff can seal the deal and turn a scroller into a donator.

Other Ways To Help

nothing wrong with this section except that once again you should be providing links to stuff like your website and podcast feed. at least there are links to the Twitter and Tumblr accounts, with the carrot of winning prizes for paying attention to those.

FAQ

only two small sections here, but I don't think this section was utilized well generally to be honest.

all of this feels like information that should have been in the main body of the campaign. a lot of people don't even look at the FAQ because to be honest you should be using this section as a TLDR for the campaign rather than giving unique information.

When Will Season 3 Launch?

here is the reveal of a planned late summer/early fall 2023 release, information that I think would be better suited a part of the actual body of the campaign.

additionally there is mention of something known as "WheyCon" which was alluded to earlier in the campaign, but still unclear what exactly it is for the uninitiated. I assume it is a little studio event where they'll make announcements and maybe have some special stuff like a livestream. either way it is unclear and doesn't even provide a clue of where to watch for information about it.

Do you have stretch goals?

so I'm gonna be honest, I wrote this whole thing before checking the FAQ, including an entire section about why you should have stretch goals and my theory that the stretch goals were actually just rolled into the funding goal because they were fully committed to making them.

the existence of this proves me wrong.

I've salvaged what I can of it, but let's look at what is actually said here:

$27,500 - recorded version of DAY IN THE LIFE OF ANDY WHEYFACE, exclusive to donors

this $1500 above the goal is probably enough to cover this, since they probably wouldn't need as many actors or as in-depth of sound design based on the diary format.

$30,000 - special recorded Art Gallery tour with Bea and Brenda

the way that "Art Gallery" is non-specific and capitalized makes me think this is a fictional gallery within the world of Arden, but either way this is a clever use of the setting and theme of this season for something unique. I don't know how interesting it would be, but still.

at $2,500 above the prior stretch goal that probably covers the costs for something about the length of an episode, if not longer since a lot of guided art gallery tours are over an hour in length.

$35,000 - series of minisodes set behind the scenes of the Julie Capsom film

curious how many is considered a "series", but it's a logical follow-up to the prior campaign's minisode stretch goals and it's clear they enjoy making them. I think the "film" is a bit of in-universe content they've already made and is apparently popular enough for them to be interested in expanding on it.

this only being $5k more than the previous tier implies it'll be a short series (3+ episodes, much shorter length) which is probably fine enough.

$100,000 - purchase the audio drama rights to Stephen King's Under the Dome so they can say the show takes place in that universe

ngl this means nothing to me, I'm unfamiliar with that story or the potential significance of it here. but it certainly is a goal I guess, though I'm not sure this is quite how that kind of copyright stuff works.

all well and fine, but these shouldn't be here. they should be in the main section with more details. stretch goals exist as a tool to get people excited to exceed the goal, and can have an impact on how much they are willing to give extra to achieve that goal. they should be proudly advertised as part of the campaign, the same way that the donation tiers are. this is where you want people to go "wait, what might they do???", something I think the final stretch goal does actually do because of how impressive it sounds. you gotta use that temptation or it may as well not exist formally.

Closing Thoughts

Use the "Updates" Section

this is a small general note, but I found it weird that instead of using the built-in "Updates" functionality to post about the funding updates they instead just put it in the body of the campaign.

there's a couple reasons I think this is probably a mistake, the most obvious being that your supporters will get emails when you add an official update like this, but not if you just edit the campaign text. these updates could be driving your supporters back to up their pledges to help you reach your milestones. plus it keeps you on their minds so they keep posting to support you and maybe helping you gain new backers.

Funding Transparency Please

being vague about your "additional funding" just feels kinda sus, like there's a reason you don't want to share the details...

Milestones

these are a great way to drive engagement. and Arden does have these. on their twitter only it seems. I've heard from a lot of people (and seen it myself) that twitter is not really a great way to connect to listeners. it's a good networking tool among creators, but especially as more people leave twitter it isn't getting the reach that some people think it does. I can tell by looking at their statistics that even when a post is getting a lot of "views" (how twitter is tracking that and whether it's accurate are up for debate) it is only getting a couple of likes or retweets, or a single comment if they're lucky. I've actually seen this for a lot of AD accounts, I don't think this is an Arden problem.

BUT, that means they need to be promoting these milestones outside of this little sphere of twitter! I didn't go searching other social media, I only looked at the twitter because it came up very early in the google results, but these things should be captured ON the campaign! at time of writing, the next benchmark is at $3900, something they are only $59 away from. if I came to the campaign and saw that we were close to getting some extra content or information I would be much more inclined as a fan to immediately pledge rather than putting it off. this stuff can seal the deal and turn a scroller into a donator.

overall I have questions and concerns but not a horrible campaign.

it was, however, unable to convince me as a prospective donor that all this money is necessary, especially in light of the updates. I think the overall lack of transparency is concerning as a whole though.

okay that's it, I'm tired of having to look through and revise this.