Revision3 sucks now [Archive]

monkeyrhahn

07-07-2009, 05:33 AM

I very much so disagree with you. You failed to mention the great show that is Co-op, so you must be wrong...

Seriously though, I think you are going a bit off the deep end. Don't get me wrong, I've lost interest in all their shows except co-op. I usually download diggnation and trs, but tend to skip through most of it anymore. I'm just tired of their format, and I do agree with you on the ad overload.

There are other good shows on there but, it just feels like the same shit i can get on cable(or dish)
Diggnation is the best show on here, and there format has changed. They are all money freaks now...what ever happned to The shady kevin rose hes a sell out now

Good shows: Diggnation, TRS, Scam School, iFanBoy,
Bad shows: the Digg reel, Hak 5, JV's World, ROFL, Tekzilla, XLR8R TV

xibalba

07-07-2009, 05:50 AM

I doubt Kevin will be going anywhere anytime soon.

The "bad" shows you listed have an audience that's why they are still around. Just because you don't like them, doesn't mean everyone thinks they are bad.

speed

07-07-2009, 07:03 AM

I still like a LOT of Revision3 shows (Diggnation, TRS, Scam School and Film Riot) and I don't even mind Tekzilla (though I miss the early days when it was essentially TSS, now it's an all viewer questions show which would be ok if the majority of questions weren't stupid things like "can my desktop run when the power is out?"), but Rev3 has really been pissing me off lately. Hearing what happened to Dave Randolph and David Calkins makes my blood boil, since that was inexcusable. Many of the shows are becoming 50% ad, 20% plug for other Rev3 shows and 30% content, none of the hosts (with the exceptions of Brian, Jeff and the Film Riot guys) even seem to look at the forums, never mind read our comments. When we do comment, the moderators just say "then quit watching the show and shut up". You know what? No. It shouldn't come down to boycott to get a message across. Companies should actually care about their customers. When I had a problem with my iPhone and the store (that forced me to buy a warranty) refused to help me, I called Apple. The next day I was told that a replacement was in the mail. A week ago, I bought a Monster Energy Drink and it tasted really weird (nothing like what it normally tastes like), I shrugged it off as a bad can or whatever and tried another one: same thing. When I emailed Monster about it, I got a response within an hour following up, and asking me if I still had the can, so they could track where it came from and investigate. That's customer service. Saying "just don't support the product and we'll get the message eventually" isn't. I've never seen a company so willfully ignorant to the comments and complaints of their customers/viewers.

Maybe it's only because he's been the CEO for the majority of the time Rev3 has been incorporated, but it seems like the network started going downhill after Jim Lounderback took the helm. Obviously, I don't know how the power structure works at Rev3, so I don't know how much the CEO micro-manages day-to-day events within Rev3 so I don't want to necessarily point fingers at him, but I do have to wonder if he really is the right person to be running Revision3

phatlip

07-07-2009, 07:18 AM

phatlip

07-07-2009, 07:25 AM

What happened to Dave Randolph and that other guy you mentioned? I know he left, but what did Rev3 do to him?

I think I found what you're talking about. This is what Dave Randolph said. Apparently I was right when I said they don't care what we have to say a while ago.

That statement still haunts me to this day. I had other moments that made me drop my jaw as well. I would sit in meetings with print outs of forum post and be told to not listen to the forums. They are not a good judge of the audience.

http://bigorangecouch.com/?p=33

monkeyrhahn

07-07-2009, 07:37 AM

Everyone at Revision3 got a tast of money and now they are crazy....

Like they use to have Sponsors that made since (Netflix, godaddy, gamevee) but now they have Klondike.

Im all for boycotting....i can get my episodes of diggnation, TRS, FilmRiot else wear on the internet with out Revision3....and with out the stupid LOUD ads in the front and end of the video.

speed

07-07-2009, 07:39 AM

What happened to Dave Randolph and that other guy you mentioned? I know he left, but what did Rev3 do to him?

According to Calkins, they constantly ignored ideas he had, or segments they shot in favour of stuff like software installs, etc. and when they canceled Systm, they didn't even tell him. He found out a couple days later when it was posted on the forums. http://revision3.com/forums/showpost.php?p=532310&postcount=78

monkeyrhahn, good point on the ads. It makes no sense to force a show to run a sponsor with a show-specific promo code, then shoe-horn in a network promo code and force the show to mention the codes for other shows. How are you supporting, say TRS, if before they can say "Use TRS1 for GoDaddy" you tell the audience to use "Rev3" as the promo code and force them to point people towards the promo codes for other shows. It just seems idiotic to make the shows compete like that.

monkeyrhahn

07-07-2009, 07:50 AM

We should get this on digg so the guys at diggnation see it

phatlip

07-07-2009, 07:59 AM

I posted this on Digg....a site i still like (thanks kevin rose)

if you agree digg it so we can get on the front page to see what diggnation says...

Im not spaming just makeing a point

You might want to put that in your sig instead. Otherwise the mods will remove the link because links to Digg aren't allowed.

Just a heads up.

monkeyrhahn

07-07-2009, 08:09 AM

Thanks for the heads up

darknessgp

07-07-2009, 04:29 PM

I think I found what you're talking about. This is what Dave Randolph said. Apparently I was right when I said they don't care what we have to say a while ago.

http://bigorangecouch.com/?p=33

A great blog post and some real insight on why he left. I figured when they did the goodbye video for Dave, there was more to the story. Never knew it was that bad, but it also makes sense. It's never felt like Rev3 has listened to it's forum community, and in many ways kind of feels like a good old boys type company (where they hire friends and not necessarily good workers) I'll watch the shows I've been watching, hell 2 of them aren't even Rev3 shows... but definitely makes me not want to support Rev3.

kzap

07-07-2009, 04:52 PM

I agree the site is becoming more commercial but that's happening to all sites and I can't find anything anywhere else that's as good.
At the moment it's okay because I can block the ad in the background (though it makes the site look ugly) and skip over all the sponsors (except in filmriot) I would NEVER buy those products anyway.
I'm sad it's become more commercial and it seems to have lost it's 'indie' charm but it's still good.
The thing that worries me is where it is going, I don't want to make too many predictions and if the site stays like this it would be reasonable I just don't want it to get more commercial, they haven't lost all the good hosts let (and hopefully never will).
It's a shame but the entire Internet is becoming more commercial, we all knew it was only a matter of time, can you blame people for trying to make money out of it?
That said I still HATE it when TRS get sponsored by video games, if that happens too often I may leave, no matter how well made the show is it won't matter if all the review become biased.

Just my two cents

kzap

07-07-2009, 04:57 PM

i can get my episodes of diggnation, TRS, FilmRiot else wear on the internet with out Revision3
I understand why you might want to boycott the station but you can't get the shows anywhere else, I use Miro to get them and they are still made by Revision3 with all the same sponsors and ads in, am I missing something?

I also agree with whoever said on the forums they shouldn't just be saying "if you don't like the show stop watching and shut up" that is appalling customer service, however I'm not sure if it's actually revision3 or just the mods.

xfuuey

07-07-2009, 06:48 PM

... now it's an all viewer questions show which would be ok if the majority of questions weren't stupid things like "can my desktop run when the power is out?"), ...

hah. so true. the whole money thing is true as well, but i'll be damned if i wouldn't do the same fuckin thing, if i were in their situation. you all know damn well you would too. money makes the world go around (you're full of it if you think otherwise b/c you can never have enough)

darknessgp

07-07-2009, 07:29 PM

hah. so true. the whole money thing is true as well, but i'll be damned if i wouldn't do the same fuckin thing, if i were in their situation. you all know damn well you would too. money makes the world go around (you're full of it if you think otherwise b/c you can never have enough)

I don't think anyone is saying they shouldn't try to make money. Rev3 is a business... however, when it hurts your content because of it, you need to rethink your ad strategy... or at least inform the audience that things are really tight and this is the only way to keep the company alive... They've done neither. Like usual, they do not communicate with the audience, leaving all of us only with our assumptions of what is going on.

ArmpitOfDeath

07-07-2009, 08:45 PM

Thanks for the link to the blog post.

I get the thing about not listening to the forums - it is true that even idiots can master forum sign-on, but the point of crowdsourcing is to try and pick the good bits out of it now and again.

Problem is of course, Rev3 has to pay it's way in a recession - yet you're in an area where the dot bomb culture still has some sway. I can definitely imagine someone like Randolph being passed over by more typically bullshitter tech-media, as opposed to tech, types. It seems it was just a case of a personality mismatch to the job type.

An interesting read all the same.

tokenuser

07-07-2009, 10:18 PM

Thanks for the link to the blog post.

I get the thing about not listening to the forums - it is true that even idiots can master forum sign-on, but the point of crowdsourcing is to try and pick the good bits out of it now and again. Despite the lack of feedback from several show hosts, I know the tech staff read the forums to hear of feed and encoding issues, and a number of the producers read the forums as well.

You can bet they are following this and the Systm threads.

BUT, this is a business. @kzap attributed "if you don't like the show stop watching and shut up" to the mods. He should quote things in context though - because sentiments like that are a result of someone doing nothing but complain. The point has been made, move on. Harping on about something you don't like is not productive for anyone.

Ratings provide the biggest picture to media people ... and the only way to register that is by not watching.

xfuuey

07-07-2009, 10:26 PM

Ratings provide the biggest picture to media people ... and the only way to register that is by not watching.

True... but where's the fun in that if you can't bitch on a forum too :(

tokenuser

07-07-2009, 10:38 PM

True... but where's the fun in that if you can't bitch on a forum too :(No problem with bitching on a forum ... but some people just go on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on with the same argument.

I think everyone got it the first time.
If they were slow they probably picked up on a dislike the second time.

But some people just wont let things go and move on.

speed

07-07-2009, 11:41 PM

BUT, this is a business. @kzap attributed "if you don't like the show stop watching and shut up" to the mods. He should quote things in context though - because sentiments like that are a result of someone doing nothing but complain. The point has been made, move on. Harping on about something you don't like is not productive for anyone.

Ratings provide the biggest picture to media people ... and the only way to register that is by not watching.

But it shouldn't have to come down to that. This is one of the only companies that just ignore their users until the ratings drop (and even then, rather than see what the problem is, they often just cancel). Those who determine the content should read the forums and see what their users want. There shouldn't be people who feel the need to harp on and on, since there should be some sort of feedback from the producers and hosts letting us know that they're reading what we're saying.

xibalba

07-08-2009, 12:26 AM

I like that revision3 doesn't always listen to the forum users. The old revision3 on a few times gave into the whiners on forums demands which I thought was a bad thing to do.

I don't care about ads in the show they don't bother me in the least except those squarespace ones where an rev3 employee talk about how great it is very annoying. Actually only one employee bothers me but won't say who.

:p

tokenuser

07-08-2009, 12:38 AM

But it shouldn't have to come down to that. This is one of the only companies that just ignore their users until the ratings drop (and even then, rather than see what the problem is, they often just cancel). Those who determine the content should read the forums and see what their users want. There shouldn't be people who feel the need to harp on and on, since there should be some sort of feedback from the producers and hosts letting us know that they're reading what we're saying.You said a very important word there - users. What are we using? Besides the forums, there is no interaction with the content. We are not using anything.

We are viewers, not users.

boldfire

07-08-2009, 12:41 AM

Revision3 isn't perfect, but it's no worse than it has ever been, just different. It's just evolving from a pet-project to a viable business.

There may be a little too much advertising, but I can deal with that because it's free and on the most part quality content and the advertising funds it.

I don't like what I read on David Randolph's blog, or how they dealt with telling David Calkins about Systm and I think these are managerial and culture problems in the business that should be worked on, but ultimately don't affect us as viewers.

I have to go against anyone saying "they don't read the forums". Jeff, Brian, Veronica, Serafina, Jim and plenty of others frequently post on the forum and if you check the bottom of the homepage even staff who don't post are often online. What we say here is listened to.

Now there are some fundamental flaws in their tech-side of things programming (specifically Systmzilla) where they are cramming too much into too little time and most of what they're cramming in are ridiculously straight forward 5 second google jobbies. I get that viewer questions = interaction = good. Except the questions on the most part are boring. The early episodes of Tekzilla were really great, if they did that with their nice new set and the talents of Patrick and Veronica they'd have a winner. But each week I'm skipping through more and more of the show.

Systm *was* an excellent show back in the day, I think that maybe corporate culture killed the show and if the Systm-style fridge-pc segments in Tekzilla is what we have to look forward to I am not optimistic about it.

Recently Martin Sargent was put out of the running for the Murphy Goode job (he was #1 in viewer-votes) and the digg story got thousands of diggs and it became a Twitter trending topic. His shows were excellent, and I understand it didn't pull in the audience but he is a tremendously popular figure online and Revision3 made a bad move by letting him go.

Ultimately I would say I'm moving away from pro-revision3 because what they originally stood for and what I want from them seems to be diluted. But they still make good programming (although, ironically their out of house productions like TRS and Co-Op are the better ones) so I will keep tuned in.

ds2600

07-08-2009, 12:58 AM

It's just evolving from a pet-project to a viable business.

I think that's what's bothering a lot of people, or at least I know it is me. I understand it has to become a viable business to stay in operation, doesn't mean we can't be disappointed about the fact that it feels less "indie" than it used to. Ah well, shows are still good.

My only real problem is what you also said - managerial. It's not that hard to handle the issues they've been having in a more professional manner, and honestly, if Dave Randolph would've left on good terms, who's to say he wouldn't have come back for some guest appearances or even never have left at all?

tokenuser

07-08-2009, 01:06 AM

My only real problem is what you also said - managerial. It's not that hard to handle the issues they've been having in a more professional manner, and honestly, if Dave Randolph would've left on good terms, who's to say he wouldn't have come back for some guest appearances or even never have left at all?One of the most interesting courses I ever did at Uni (college - sheesh ...) many years ago came from the business school and was on Organisational Behaviour (OB). As departments grow from one size to the next level, or a company goes from startup to angel to IPO, there are challenges for management. Managers need to change the way they run things as things evolve ... but many are so focused on the day to day that they can't see the need to change, and when they do it comes too late. That is one reason why so many startups fail - lack of external guidance. I don't think Rev3 have that issue ... but it needs to decide if it is an indie startup or a podcast production and distribution house. Flip flopping between the modes of operation for each of those just exacerbates and magnifies internal problems. It needs to be one thing or the other. It can't successfully be both.

gta_bmx

07-08-2009, 03:17 AM

One of the most interesting courses I ever did at Uni (college - sheesh ...) many years ago came from the business school and was on Organisational Behaviour (OB). As departments grow from one size to the next level, or a company goes from startup to angel to IPO, there are challenges for management. Managers need to change the way they run things as things evolve ... but many are so focused on the day to day that they can't see the need to change, and when they do it comes too late....snip...

The Computer Science undergrad requirements at Cal State required us to take Ethics for Engineers taught by a Philosophy Prof.. Real interesting. Our textbook had real life case studies. One of them was about a medical device company that made radiation machines for oncology use that basically killed about 10 people because they paid some outside programmer 400 bucks or so (this was early 1980's) to program their interface, thus causing horrific burns on the wrong part of the body, totally missing where the cancer actually was. They had assumed "it's a computer; it can't be wrong" and allowed the machines to stay in operation longer than they should have. Anyway, long story, short, ethics should be a mandatory college course.

The fact that the higher ups at Rev3 would allow Dave Randolph to be treated that way without doing anything to help him is horrible. What kind of upper management do they have (or had)? Scary. Sounds like the type of workplace where the cool kids (friends of the higher ups) get treated well, and the rest get treated shabbily. Not cool at all.

srmccoy

07-08-2009, 03:23 AM

I've been a longtime viewer. Watched thebroken and systm back before Rev3 even existed, and continued on with the network to this day.

Here's what I've noticed: Cost-cutting is changing the way that this company is run and the content it delivers. Original Rev3 content is getting phased out in favor of outsourced shows that have already been established outside of the network. In the beginning it was mostly in-house shows and projects that catered to the tech crowd. While the tech crowd is a small niche in the world of broadcasting, an IPTV company like Rev3 is practically designed for the tech crowd. Now, it's fairly obvious that Rev3 plans to phase out their own shows and start acquiring distribution rights to other shows already out there. Almost all of the shows they've canceled thus far have been Revision3 created content. In it's place we're getting Hak5, Co Op, JV's World, and other content that was created apart from Rev3 and is usually produced outside of the studio.

From a business standpoint, this makes a lot of sense. Other people front production costs and studio time, and Rev3 can simply pay them a fee and make profits from the distribution. While it may not be exactly that simple, it's almost always going to be cheaper than having to pay for in-house studio time, a crew, and post-production work.

In this case, unfortunately, what's good for business from a financial standpoint is actually bad for business when it comes to appealing to the core audience, which is fairly tech oriented and has been around since the beginning. Instead of Systm, Web Drifter, and other original tech oriented content, we get garbage like JV's World.

phatlip

07-08-2009, 03:53 AM

You said a very important word there - users. What are we using? Besides the forums, there is no interaction with the content. We are not using anything.

We are viewers, not users.

Users, viewers- it doesn't matter. At the end of the day we're all one thing. Customers.

maynza

07-08-2009, 04:06 AM

I'm glad it is not just me that has been feeling this way, I feel terrible after reading Dave Randolph's blog post, almost like I am partly responsible for what he had to go through. Revision3 is really starting to take a dip for the worse. It has become more and more obvious since the Coor's ads that they will go to any lengths for a sponsor (IE entire shows dedicated to repeating the mantra "as cold as the rockies"). The ads have become more intrusive and part of the content, and that is not ok. When your websites main page has more ad space than content you know things need to change.

Systm was a great show, but the fact that not even David Caulkins was told the show was being shitcanned really shows how much respect they had for it. Knowing that they put up software installs ahead of actual projects makes my blood boil. It is as if they wanted it to fail so that they could stop spending money on it.

Hopefully Leo Laporte starts doing video and he can pick up some of these shows and talent because he is a man who is strictly in the business for the content and not the money, unlike leadership here who bow to the almighty dollar in favor of quality content.

monkeyrhahn

07-08-2009, 07:54 AM

I don't think anyone is saying they shouldn't try to make money. Rev3 is a business... however, when it hurts your content because of it, you need to rethink your ad strategy... or at least inform the audience that things are really tight and this is the only way to keep the company alive... They've done neither. Like usual, they do not communicate with the audience, leaving all of us only with our assumptions of what is going on.

Totaly, they should make money. But the way they are doing it sucks. Diggnation is doing it great. Also if they want ads just put comercials in the middle of the show.

------
People watch this network it should be about the people. With out people watching the shows there would be no rev3.

Also wth out Dave R. there would be no studio. he built that studio and go stuff for cheep.

scoobydiesel

07-08-2009, 12:41 PM

i still get my shows i love so i'm good.

ArmpitOfDeath

07-08-2009, 01:09 PM

The fact that the higher ups at Rev3 would allow Dave Randolph to be treated that way without doing anything to help him is horrible. What kind of upper management do they have (or had)? Scary. Sounds like the type of workplace where the cool kids (friends of the higher ups) get treated well, and the rest get treated shabbily. Not cool at all.

This is pretty much par for the course for people in media. I think, as I said before, that a lot of the TechTV people were people in media which just happened to be about tech.

amon91

07-08-2009, 02:23 PM

Well, a few months ago I did use to think like that, until I went home and thought a little bit about it. Revision3 is a business, like any other, meaning they have to make money and please the broadest audience possible.

That doesn't mean you'll like everything on this network, and you're not supposed to. Personally I'd say I watch about 70-80% of the shows on Rev3. I haven't missed an episode of Tekzilla, Diggnation, CO-OP, The Digg Reel, Film Riot, Hak5, JV's World, Pixel Perfect, Scam School and Tekzilla. But dude, that's just me, I have pretty broad interests, but the good thing about internet TV is you can just subscribe to and watch one show, and that's totally fine. You're not supposed to like everything.

popSiren, Internet Superstar and others were pretty decent shows, but fact is they weren't building an audience. Rev3 needs to make money like any other business, and that means it'll constantly get rid of shows that aren't building an audience, and try out different things. That doesn't mean Rev3 is turning into G4, because there's a huge difference: G4 is an entertainment network, Rev3 is a tech/gaming/modern culture network with very informative shows.

And you think Jim sucks, really? I think he's the best thing that could have happened to Revision3. Let's go back to 2007: Rev3 was a group of 10 people who did like 8 shows, some of them weren't even professionally produced. Jim moved it all to their new studio, got new offices, broadened the audience and now Rev3 is getting record years over and over again.

As a last note, you guys might have read the Rev3 newsletter. If you have, you might be pretty happy about the "tease" Jim gave us. Personally I am.

masherscf

07-08-2009, 04:29 PM

You might want to put that in your sig instead. Otherwise the mods will remove the link because links to Digg aren't allowed.

Just a heads up.

It's not so much Digg stories. Forum members aren't allowed to start threads to promote personal web content like blogs, podcasts, videos, social networking sites and stuff like that. Occasionally, we let a member post content like this if we think it's of general interest or germain to a topic or question raisied by a Revision3 program. Also, links provided as a reasonable response to an existing thread are also usually allowed.

For example, someone would not be allowed to start a thread promoting their blog. However, they could give a link to their blog in a thread whose topic included blogs.

Such links are always allowed in signatures as long as they don't violate other forum rules against extreme profanity, illegal acts, porn and other things.

maynza

07-08-2009, 05:02 PM

Jim moved it all to their new studio, got new offices, broadened the audience and now Rev3 is getting record years over and over again.

And yet they are cancelling some of their best/longest running shows and firing some of their best talent in favor of cheap shows that aren't even produced in their studio.

maxxx

07-08-2009, 05:52 PM

And yet they are cancelling some of their best/longest running shows and firing some of their best talent in favor of cheap shows that aren't even produced in their studio.

And those are what?

boldfire

07-08-2009, 06:09 PM

I'm guessing he means Co-Op, Hak5, Totally Rad Show, Diggnation... although these are my favorite Rev3 shows these days (Hak5 not so much).

gimpbully

07-08-2009, 06:17 PM

It's never felt like Rev3 has listened to it's forum community

While I have a lot in my mind about the company and the handling of employees, etc, this is a completely unfair statement to make. Show me a single other broadcast company that puts as much stock in their freaking forum. I've always been fascinated the forum hasn't been trashed after seeing the amount of employee time required to tend to it and keep everyone happy.

gimpbully

07-08-2009, 06:21 PM

Again, this is completely untrue and unfair. Those who determine the content do monitor the forums. The fact that whiney users constantly get responses from the CEO of a broadcast company is simply staggering. Again, show me a single broadcast company that would give you the time of day with a complaint, nevermind a personal reply from the chief officer.

Beyond *all* of this, if you want a say in the company, invest money and get on the board of directors.
But it shouldn't have to come down to that. This is one of the only companies that just ignore their users until the ratings drop (and even then, rather than see what the problem is, they often just cancel). Those who determine the content should read the forums and see what their users want. There shouldn't be people who feel the need to harp on and on, since there should be some sort of feedback from the producers and hosts letting us know that they're reading what we're saying.

guytheninja

07-08-2009, 06:40 PM

Now there are some fundamental flaws in their tech-side of things programming (specifically Systmzilla) where they are cramming too much into too little time and most of what they're cramming in are ridiculously straight forward 5 second google jobbies. I get that viewer questions = interaction = good. Except the questions on the most part are boring. The early episodes of Tekzilla were really great, if they did that with their nice new set and the talents of Patrick and Veronica they'd have a winner. But each week I'm skipping through more and more of the show.

I think the real problem is that today, we all live in this style over substance culture in the U.S.. I mean, just go to your local Walmart and take a look at the merchandise. The bread is 1 day from the expiration date, the tool section has knockoffs of knockoffs which break at first use, the vacuum cleaners have brush belts that break after 1 year of use. BUT, you can't resist those low low prices!!!

My grandmother had a vacuum cleaner that lasted for 30 years and was built like a tank. My granddad gave me his tools, and they are still in good shape. This basically tells me that people care far far more about presentation than actual substance today, and it could be the case that vidcasts with lots of "show" are far, far more popular than vidcasts with substance. Sorry, Dave, but that just may be the cold-hard truth.

tokenuser

07-08-2009, 06:44 PM

Nothing against DaveR (or DavidC) at all, but we only hear one side of the story in each case, and there are two sides.

darknessgp

07-08-2009, 10:07 PM

While I have a lot in my mind about the company and the handling of employees, etc, this is a completely unfair statement to make. Show me a single other broadcast company that puts as much stock in their freaking forum. I've always been fascinated the forum hasn't been trashed after seeing the amount of employee time required to tend to it and keep everyone happy.

Rev3 has numerously made comments on various shows about how important the forums are, yet those shows seemed to ignore the forums. Looking at the forums, it looks like TRS and Co-op have the most active show people that post on there, and they are licensed shows.

As for it's an unfair statement, I disagree. Rev3 has said that they think community (including the forums) is important and yet they seem to ignore it alot. Also, show me 1 company that fits the same mold as Rev3. It's unfair of you to claim that no other broadcast company "puts as much stock in their freaking forum" cause as far as I know almost every other broadcast company is not an IPTV company. Rev3 is NOT a traditional broadcast company and it shouldn't act like it is.

Oh, and just so we are clear. When I'm talking about Rev3 interaction with the forums, I don't mean fixing issues with the forum itself nor issues with codecs, etc. I'm refering to interactions with the audience, considering ideas from the audience (even if the response is "no"), keeping a line of communication and just generally letting the audience know what is going on... but if things like show hosts not knowing their own show is cancelled for days after, IMO, there is more of an issue with the company as a whole more than just how they view their audience.

[/rant]

Beyond *all* of this, if you want a say in the company, invest money and get on the board of directors.

That's a terrible response. Yet another sign that REv3 will just ignore everything and continue doing the same thing. I agree with you, we have no legitimate say. However, clearly there is an issue if a subset of your consumers are agreeing on the same issue.

gimpbully

07-08-2009, 10:23 PM

Tekzilla is basically built on comments from the forums and email. Systm pulled insane amounts from the forum. Hak5 seems very forum centric. You've already mentioned TRS and Co-Op. I'd like to reiterate, the CEO has a post count on here and has directly addressed issues.

I have a very different view of the situation, granted, but just because you don't see people responding to every single complaint and whine doesn't mean they aren't listening. It's easy to sit on a pedestal and complain but I think the comparison to broadcast companies is completely valid. Simply because a company utilizes a forum does not put it in a new category. The mere fact that you would never expect NBC's CEO to respond to a forum post but would expect this company's to do the opposite says quite a bit. It says that Rev3 has set the expectation and damnit, they've stuck to it. There's a LOT to fault the company on, this is very specifically not one of them.

It's lovely that you consider the tech team not to be part of the company, seems par for the course. But I seem to recall serafinak and jollyroger and patricknorton and hak5darren (the list goes on) coming on here all the time. There are some names you can point to that haven't, but you might also note that a good number of those individuals are no longer under the employ of rev3. I'm not saying anything about causation here, simply correlation.

I'm not speaking to the company's handling of dismissal of hosts or employees. That is rev3's business.

Beyond all that, how pompous to consider yourself worthy of hand holding and response. Again, this is a business, to get a response from a CEO is absolutely ridiculous, but yet he does. It's one thing Jim does right.

Good god, how sweet it is to not have to care about any of this.
Rev3 has numerously made comments on various shows about how important the forums are, yet those shows seemed to ignore the forums. Looking at the forums, it looks like TRS and Co-op have the most active show people that post on there, and they are licensed shows.

As for it's an unfair statement, I disagree. Rev3 has said that they think community (including the forums) is important and yet they seem to ignore it alot. Also, show me 1 company that fits the same mold as Rev3. It's unfair of you to claim that no other broadcast company "puts as much stock in their freaking forum" cause as far as I know almost every other broadcast company is not an IPTV company. Rev3 is NOT a traditional broadcast company and it shouldn't act like it is.

Oh, and just so we are clear. When I'm talking about Rev3 interaction with the forums, I don't mean fixing issues with the forum itself nor issues with codecs, etc. I'm refering to interactions with the audience, considering ideas from the audience (even if the response is "no"), keeping a line of communication and just generally letting the audience know what is going on... but if things like show hosts not knowing their own show is cancelled for days after, IMO, there is more of an issue with the company as a whole more than just how they view their audience.

[/rant]

maynza

07-08-2009, 10:30 PM

And those are what?

Martin Sargent, Sarah Lane, both Davids, Systm, Web Drifter, infected, Pixel Perfect(which thankfully came back).

Instead we get JV's World who has said he would PAY THEM to have a show here so it's safe to assume he isn't receiving much. Hak5 is nice and all, but it isn't produced in this amazing studio they spent so much money on neither are 90% of their popular shows. Digg Reel is pretty barebones, as is ROFL.

It seems like any show that actually provides some unique content is made by someone else.

dam7ri

07-09-2009, 12:42 AM

darknessgp

07-09-2009, 03:23 PM

Ya know, Rev3 isn't the only place to get what ever the heck you are looking for on the Internet. If fact, you can find educational stuff on Wikipedia, entertaining comics on Penny Arcade, I even heard that you could find porn on the Internet.

I think the only worthless thing on the 'net is forums that allow people to bitch and complain on and on about why their lives suck and who they want to blame for it.

If you don't like Rev3, go somewhere else; if you do like Rev3 but don't like a particular show (Hak5, JV's World, anything with Martin Sargeant), don't watch it. If all you want to do is bitch about anything and everything, Start drinking heavily. You (and everyone @Rev3 that doesn't have to put up with you) will be a lot happier.

Why is this thread still open?

What if I like a show, but not Rev3? You didn't cover that situation.

Also, this thread and forum is still open because someone at Rev3 still actually cares to have it open.

And why do you assume that if anyone says anything negative, it is bitching and complaining? Can we only express our opinions if they are good happy ones? Oh, and I haven't seen anyone on here blaming Rev3 for their own life problems.

tokenuser

07-09-2009, 03:45 PM

Why is this thread still open?Because of "free ... as in speech".

Yes, there is a lot of bitching and complaining in threads like this.

As a moderator, I don't mind if someone has a negative opinion, provided that it is not inflammatory or a personal attack. Personally it pisses me off having the same person saying the same thing over and over again (as I have - somewhat ironically - said before).

Life is not all unicorns and rainbows.
Not everyone is going to like decisions that are made.

abehammy

07-11-2009, 12:07 AM

i think most of the revision3 shows are still good. Diggnation never became suckish but it now looks like the old format is starting to slowly return, just look at some of the recent episodes, they were some of the best in a while and many rev3 viewers liked them alot. I think JV's world is retarded, TRS is still great, Film Riot is amazing, Co-Op is good, Tekzilla is great, ROFL and the Digg Reel are funny. I think the reason why people think Rev3 is going downhill is because Systm was merged with Tekzilla and JV's World started. If Rev3 was becoming like G4 we would be getting non-original programming and pretty much most of the programming on Rev3 is original. I think it's fine for the most part that Revision3 wants to expand a little bit. Revision3 was never directly branded as a technology programming website, it was branded as original television and they say it is internet television, so people who say Revision3 is only supposed to be a tech site are wrong. People expect it to also be the next TechTV. Plus, Revision3 still shows mostly tech programming and most of the shows have great personalities who don't act like idiots unlike G4, they just act like themselves.

abehammy

07-11-2009, 12:24 AM

There are other good shows on there but, it just feels like the same shit i can get on cable(or dish)
Diggnation is the best show on here, and there format has changed. They are all money freaks now...what ever happned to The shady kevin rose hes a sell out now

Good shows: Diggnation, TRS, Scam School, iFanBoy,
Bad shows: the Digg reel, Hak 5, JV's World, ROFL, Tekzilla, XLR8R TV

May I ask how Tekzilla is a bad show? Seriously, it is basically like a combination of The Screen Savers and Call For Help, which were great shows on TechTV.

monkeyrhahn

07-12-2009, 05:13 AM

It's not a BAD show it just needs work, Its not a show that i will sit threw the whole thing, I just skip threw parts i wana see if i even watch it at all. And like more interviews and what not

kiwifrog

07-13-2009, 09:05 AM

Systm pulled insane amounts from the forum.

Crap, Systm never uses any of the suggestions in the suggestion thread. They did occasionally pull a few emails in, and made a few mentions of the terms we were using to whinge about the show(burnig solder smell and PICAXE). I emailed a issue I had to Dave C and he replied very promptly (incorrectly but prompt) . But the forums were mostly ignored and now Dave R has told us why.

The fact is, systm died because Patrick didn't want to do it anymore and his ego is so large he considered that it couldn't work without him, this is not Jim's fault.

But systm had started to cater to the thick, just like film riot and techzilla, They keep it simple and brease through the hard stuff. Dave C never show us through or explained his code, the edit team would fast forward any electronics explanation. Film riot just shows the basics, it never shows how to use the software. Techzilla answer questions that 2 minutes with google can answer.

Its a shame that anyone with real brains ,are usually so socially inept, that they can't speak on camera without ridicule from the petrol heads, sports fans, TV presenters and binge drinkers that seam to Permeate and direct our culture.

Mike.

kzap

07-13-2009, 12:55 PM

I think the real problem is that today, we all live in this style over substance culture in the U.S.. I mean, just go to your local Walmart and take a look at the merchandise. The bread is 1 day from the expiration date, the tool section has knockoffs of knockoffs which break at first use, the vacuum cleaners have brush belts that break after 1 year of use. BUT, you can't resist those low low prices!!!

My grandmother had a vacuum cleaner that lasted for 30 years and was built like a tank. My granddad gave me his tools, and they are still in good shape. This basically tells me that people care far far more about presentation than actual substance today, and it could be the case that vidcasts with lots of "show" are far, far more popular than vidcasts with substance. Sorry, Dave, but that just may be the cold-hard truth.

True but I wouldn't say it was revision3's fault it is just the world we live in now.
The shows are very polished and there are a lot of them because that is (unfortunately) what the majority of people want [sigh].
This isn't happening to just Revision3, it happens to all podcasts when they hit a certain age and start making a lot of money.
It is sadly the world we live in not just Revision3.

Hak5 seems very forum centric..
This sort of goes with my point, I know they are an old podcast but they have only been on Revision3 a little while and they are one of my favorites terms of substance over style, they seem more free and independent, still I wouldn't say there were as good as there early stuff http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=Hak5Darren&view=videos&start=120

Look at it this way when a podcast is new you have to do loads of work and make an amazing show packed with content just to get noticed, you have to spend ages on creating the best possible show, when you are on a station with sponsors, viewers and a steady stream of income, of course you are not going to spend as much time creating the show. That's the stage most Revision3 podcasts are at the moment.
In a bad way I sort of don't want my other favorite pod-casts to get big.

secret-steve-crumbles

07-13-2009, 01:30 PM

As a moderator, I don't mind if someone has a negative opinion, provided that it is not inflammatory or a personal attack.AUSSIE! :D

tokenuser

07-13-2009, 02:57 PM

AUSSIE! :DJust don't call me a Kiwi :p

kiwifrog

07-13-2009, 10:51 PM

Just don't call me a Kiwi :p

Hay......lol......Aussie's are leaving in droves for our lovely little country.

Possibly cause we're not prudish like Aussie has become(banning that BMW ad,and the driving toddler :) ). And it's looking perhaps you'll be able to buy bread here without folic acid. :)

Mike.

tokenuser

07-13-2009, 11:03 PM

Hay......lol......Aussie's are leaving in droves for our lovely little country.Aussies are being pushed out. Isn't Wellington just an outer suburb of Bondi Beach now?

I left several years ago (1997), and live in the US now.

trunolimit

07-14-2009, 12:04 AM

Aussies are being pushed out. Isn't Wellington just an outer suburb of Bondi Beach now?

I left several years ago (1997), and live in the US now.

WOOT AMERICA YEAH

kiwifrog

07-14-2009, 01:24 AM

WOOT AMERICA YEAH

Have you been anyplace else?

tokenuser

07-14-2009, 02:09 AM

Have you been anyplace else?Stats seem to indicate that less than 26% of Americans have passports ... so apart from maybe Canada or Mexico before the border crackdowns required more than a US drivers license to cross, the odds are slim - but not impossible.

phatlip

07-14-2009, 02:56 AM

Have you been anyplace else?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xH9-_11C5Zs

trunolimit

07-14-2009, 07:28 AM

Have you been anyplace else?

I've had a passport since I was a couple months old. I've lived in another country for a couple years (most of which I was to young to remember), the Dominican Republic can be a nice place and lets just say I like running hot water and electricity so again I say AMERICA....FUCK yeah.

dumbunny07

07-14-2009, 12:55 PM

Everything is about money now! It feels like G4 and that sucks

The only good shows are Diggnation and TRS. and TRS i can just go to there own site.

I miss Systm, Internet superstar, Web Drifter, Ctrl Alt Chicken. All the shows that are there now i can just watch on G4.

The shows are one big AD. and the website is too! with the stupid beer ad that is full site.

Its going the same way techtv went...

Revision3 use to be great, i use to love waiting for the shows to come out...now i dont even watch it, its useless....

How old are you?

gimpbully

07-14-2009, 06:58 PM

no, see, the customers are the folks buying ad space.
There is a difference.
Users, viewers- it doesn't matter. At the end of the day we're all one thing. Customers.

vahnx

07-14-2009, 08:36 PM

Rev3 doesn't suck now. Sure, Diggnation etc. have "changed" and become more sponsored up all the time (ie Alex moaning Klondike that one live show) but it's still better than nothing. For pure tech etc. there's always TWiT Live (live.twit.tv).

phatlip

07-15-2009, 04:06 AM

no, see, the customers are the folks buying ad space.
There is a difference.

So are the people watching the shows, because they're the ones who click the ads and purchase the products using Rev3 promo codes. Without us you have no folks buying ads. Both are customers, and both are equally important.

jackz5o

07-15-2009, 05:14 AM

heyseuss

07-15-2009, 06:13 AM

In the beginning it was mostly in-house shows and projects

Wrong.

Now, it's fairly obvious that Rev3 plans to phase out their own shows and start acquiring distribution rights to other shows already out there.

That's obvious now? That's the plan is it ? Welcome to a year ago.

Almost all of the shows they've canceled thus far have been Revision3 created content.

Wrong.

In it's place we're getting Hak5, Co Op, JV's World, and other content that was created apart from Rev3 and is usually produced outside of the studio.

From a business standpoint, this makes a lot of sense. Other people front production costs and studio time,

Except the part when Rev3 built a $5MIL studio. It is smart to pay license to these shows that already have a large following, in a sense, they are buying new viewers and exposing new content that was cheap for them to acquire to their established audience, but it's pointless if they drop an established show to be replaced by a new show.

If they drop 'show A', which has 500 viewers, in order to acquire 'show B' which has 500 viewers, they don't have 1000 viewers they still only have 500.

It's like you weirdo's that watch every single Rev3 show there is, that's no good to them. It would cost them a fortune to produce 20 programmes viewed by the same 500 ppl over and over, especially when a marginal percent of the advertising is relevant to it's market. That's why they buy other shows, to try and combine the two viewer groups, but the JV's world fans have to come to Rev3 and like the other shows and produce an increase in ad revenue, and vice versa, Rev3 fans have to buy whatever is advertised in JV's World for it to be worth it to Rev3 to have acquired the show in the first place. It might happen, not with crap like JV's World but with other shows.

heyseuss

07-15-2009, 06:32 AM

So are the people watching the shows, because they're the ones who click the ads and purchase the products using Rev3 promo codes. Without us you have no folks buying ads. Both are customers, and both are equally important.

I've never clicked one ad or bought one thing or visited one website because I saw it in a Rev3 show. Don't call me a customer, I'm a viewer.

gimpbully

07-15-2009, 07:15 AM

No, that makes you a customer of the advertiser.
So are the people watching the shows, because they're the ones who click the ads and purchase the products using Rev3 promo codes. Without us you have no folks buying ads. Both are customers, and both are equally important.

phatlip

07-15-2009, 07:46 AM

I've never clicked one ad or bought one thing or visited one website because I saw it in a Rev3 show. Don't call me a customer, I'm a viewer.

Okay, well consider this. You're in a Best Buy. There are two kinds of people in the store- employees and customers. Everyone who ISN'T an employee is considered ( in Best Buys eyes) a customer. You may purchase something. You may not. But simply entering the store, and browsing makes you a customer (in my opinion). You may never buy anything at Best Buy, but whenever you're in their store- you're considered a customer. The same applies to to Rev3. All because you haven't bought something, doesn't mean you never will. Entering the premises, and browsing the products, or coming to the website and watching shows makes you a customer.

Just my opinion.

phatlip

07-15-2009, 07:47 AM

No, that makes you a customer of the advertiser.

Not exactly, when we're typing REV3 as a promotional code that also makes us a Revision3 customer. Rev3 want us to type Rev3. They don't want us typing in another companies promotional code. Rev3 relies on US to type in that code. By US (the viewers doing so), Revision3 makes money.

heyseuss

07-15-2009, 08:31 AM

Okay, well consider this. You're in a Best Buy.

NEVER ! I've only ever been in one once, and I got confused and asked someone in khakis if they had a copy of Beethovens Fifth for rent.

There are two kinds of people in the store- employees and customers. Everyone who ISN'T an employee is considered ( in Best Buys eyes) a customer. You may purchase something. You may not. But simply entering the store, and browsing makes you a customer (in my opinion). You may never buy anything at Best Buy, but whenever you're in their store- you're considered a customer.

Except browsing their shelves costs neither of us anything. Technically, as I'm browsing, I am merely a 'potential customer'. If I went into Best Buy and decided to leave with one of their products without paying for it, I highly doubt they would consider me a customer, they'd consider me a fugitive. The difference is ... . . .

The same applies to to Rev3. All because you haven't bought something, doesn't mean you never will. Entering the premises, and browsing the products, or coming to the website and watching shows makes you a customer

The point is, and what makes this pedantic technicality so, is that I can 'HAVE' Rev3's product for free. The only thing I pay Rev3 with, in order to watch a show, is my time. I'm a patron, a viewer, a member of their marketable demographic, but I do not become a customer until I click a link, type in a Rev3 code when checking out (and for those two examples I am not a customer of Rev3, merely of an organisation associated with Rev3), or buy a ridiculously overpriced piece of Rev3 merchandise including shipping extortion. ( really Rev3, you still can't get a decent merchandise store running? If you can't do that, can you at least make it so when I browse away from the forum, I dont have to log in again each time I want to come back and complain about BS merchandising standards or yell at noobs, my internet warriorism doesn't need to be prolonged by a login page 10 times a day, I have lil nerds to abuse! ...)

Rev3 sells adspace. That is the only thing they sell, except for previously mentioned overpriced merchandise. The only customers Rev3 has are adspacebuyers, and even most of those ppl are middlemen for the corp's advertised on Rev3.

Just my opinion.

It's a highly specific, demonstrably definitive technicality that we are discussing. Your opinion, or mine, or anyone elses, is irrelevant, because our opinions do not apply to the definition of a word. The words mean what they mean. The definition of 'customer' or any other word, isn't really debatable. You can have an opinion based on the context a word appears in, and how it's definition is extrapolated for the benefit of the use of the word, as chosen and justified by the users opinion, but, BY DEFINITION, the word 'customer' means; 'person who buys shit from another person'..... knowhatIsayin' ?

Just because I watch the Lifetime Network, doesn't mean I am Oprah or Stayfree Maxishields customer.

heyseuss

07-15-2009, 08:38 AM

Not exactly, when we're typing REV3 as a promotional code that also makes us a Revision3 customer. Rev3 want us to type Rev3. They don't want us typing in another companies promotional code. Rev3 relies on US to type in that code. By US (the viewers doing so), Revision3 makes money.

YO! Look at what you said right there. I have to type that code in, in order for me to make money FOR Rev3. I am not getting anything from Rev3 by doing so, and they are not receiving my money, the advertiser is.

Broadcasting is a melange system of whores and johns and pimps, not 1on1 customer and bizness owner.

tokenuser

07-15-2009, 12:28 PM

Not exactly, when we're typing REV3 as a promotional code that also makes us a Revision3 customer. Rev3 want us to type Rev3. They don't want us typing in another companies promotional code. Rev3 relies on US to type in that code. By US (the viewers doing so), Revision3 makes money.We are never Rev3's customers. Your argument about Best Buy is flawed because Rev3 is not a retail organisation. Compare Rev3 to NBC - or better still - NPR instead.

Rev3 attracts revenue via advertisers. Advertisers are their customers. When we type in REV3 as a promo code on the GoDaddy web site, we are not Rev3 customers - WE ARE GODADDY CUSTOMERS. The ADVERTISERS have bought airtime from Rev3 to promote their products. THEY are Rev3 customers, not us. The promo code is an indicator to them of how effective their advertising is.

kiwifrog

07-15-2009, 12:42 PM

We are never Rev3's customers. Your argument about Best Buy is flawed because Rev3 is not a retail organisation.

Not A retail organisation? Then what the hell is this http://store.revision3.com/store The Wallabies eating baked beans? :) .

Mike.

tokenuser

07-15-2009, 12:57 PM

Not A retail organisation? Then what the hell is this http://store.revision3.com/store The Wallabies eating baked beans? :) .

Mike.They are sill not a retail organization. You can buy Tshirts from NBC and NPR, and they aren't retail organizations. Hell, you can buy a Tshirt from the RSPCA and Red Cross, and you wouldn't consider them retail organizations either.

phatlip

07-15-2009, 01:30 PM

Except browsing their shelves costs neither of us anything. Technically, as I'm browsing, I am merely a 'potential customer'. If I went into Best Buy and decided to leave with one of their products without paying for it, I highly doubt they would consider me a customer, they'd consider me a fugitive. The difference is ... . . .

Well, if you want to be that damn technical, Best Buy is paying the electricity for you to come into the store. You come to Rev3, download videos, and don't pay for any of the "products" (bandwidth). You go into Best Buy, look at some DVDs and go home (electricity).

That's not the point I was really trying to make though.

The point is, and what makes this pedantic technicality so, is that I can 'HAVE' Rev3's product for free. The only thing I pay Rev3 with, in order to watch a show, is my time. I'm a patron, a viewer, a member of their marketable demographic, but I do not become a customer until I click a link, type in a Rev3 code when checking out (and for those two examples I am not a customer of Rev3, merely of an organisation associated with Rev3), or buy a ridiculously overpriced piece of Rev3 merchandise including shipping extortion.

Okay, whatever. You're reading into this way too much. All I was suggesting is this. When you step foot in a store, you're viewed as a customer. For the time you're in the store, that's what you are.

Clicking a link, or typing a promo code DOES make us Revision3's customer. They get their money from the ad companies and us. Directly? No. But we're at the very least, indirect customers. At the end of the day, they have shit we want to buy so they can make money.

That, and you mentioned the store. Something I forgot. That's something marketed directly to the Rev3 viewers. The fact they have the store makes what I said true. Okay, if you think they need to buy something to be a customer that's fine. That's not really the point I'm trying to make. The point I'm trying to make is that the person clicking the link, using the promo code, or buying a shirt is buying what Revision3 wants them to buy & thus giving Rev3 money. That makes them a customer. More indirect through ads, directly through the Rev3 store, but a customer nonetheless.

It's a highly specific, demonstrably definitive technicality that we are discussing. Your opinion, or mine, or anyone elses, is irrelevant, because our opinions do not apply to the definition of a word. The words mean what they mean. The definition of 'customer' or any other word, isn't really debatable. You can have an opinion based on the context a word appears in, and how it's definition is extrapolated for the benefit of the use of the word, as chosen and justified by the users opinion, but, BY DEFINITION, the word 'customer' means; 'person who buys shit from another person'..... knowhatIsayin' ?

The fact that terms such as "PAYING customer" even exist is proof enough that I'm not alone in my idea of what a customer is. I've work in retail, and have had other retail jobs in the past. Everyone who walks into the store other than an employee is considered a customer. So it's clearly not as black and white as you're making it out to be.

You may not click an ad, you may not use a promo code, you may not buy from the Rev3 store, but by watching the video you're watching the ad. Thats what the ad company is paying for, so that makes you what I mentioned earlier- an INDIRECT customer.

phatlip

07-15-2009, 01:32 PM

YO! Look at what you said right there. I have to type that code in, in order for me to make money FOR Rev3. I am not getting anything from Rev3 by doing so, and they are not receiving my money, the advertiser is.

Broadcasting is a melange system of whores and johns and pimps, not 1on1 customer and bizness owner.

It doesn't matter if you're getting anything directly from Rev3. You're a customer. Directly? No. Indirectly? Yes. But a customer.

phatlip

07-15-2009, 01:36 PM

We are never Rev3's customers. Your argument about Best Buy is flawed because Rev3 is not a retail organisation. Compare Rev3 to NBC - or better still - NPR instead.

Rev3 attracts revenue via advertisers. Advertisers are their customers. When we type in REV3 as a promo code on the GoDaddy web site, we are not Rev3 customers - WE ARE GODADDY CUSTOMERS. The ADVERTISERS have bought airtime from Rev3 to promote their products. THEY are Rev3 customers, not us. The promo code is an indicator to them of how effective their advertising is.

That's not true. When we click a link, use a promo code, or simply watch an ad we're indirectly customers. When we buy from the Rev3 store, we're directly customers.

masherscf

07-15-2009, 01:55 PM

That's not true. When we click a link, use a promo code, or simply watch an ad we're indirectly customers. When we buy from the Rev3 store, we're directly customers.

This act entitles you only for the goods and services you pay for. You're seeking to attach a special status your yourself as a fan or viewer. The problem is that tech fans are historically bad costumers for advertising. Many view ads with resistance or incredulity. They often purchase services based on the quality of the service and not on adversiting. Few spend money for goods and services they don't need or can obtain for free. Most either block ads or fast-forward through them... I know I do.

So, now you're a costumer? What is the value of that patronage?

You absolutely need to get over this juvenile sense of entitlement.

phatlip

07-15-2009, 02:39 PM

This act entitles you only for the goods and services you pay for. You're seeking to attach a special status your yourself as a fan or viewer. The problem is that tech fans are historically bad costumers for advertising. Many view ads with resistance or incredulity. They often purchase services based on the quality of the service and not on adversiting. Few spend money for goods and services they don't need or can obtain for free. Most either block ads or fast-forward through them... I know I do.

So, now you're a costumer? What is the value of that patronage?

You absolutely need to get over this juvenile sense of entitlement.

Really? Did you honestly just personally attack me AND call me immature in the same breath? Who is the immature one again?

I'm claiming no entitlement. I said viewers are customers and said why. All because you don't agree doesn't give you tge right too attack me personally. Especially when Im not even suggesting entitlement.

Go get a cup of coffee, and come back when you're not a grumpy ass anymore.

tokenuser

07-15-2009, 03:01 PM

So, now you're a costumer? What is the value of that patronage?So, its all about cosplay now.
You absolutely need to get over this juvenile sense of entitlement.I'm grumpy too ... and completely agree.

phatlip

07-15-2009, 03:10 PM

So, its all about cosplay now.
I'm grumpy too ... and completely agree.

Ugh. Why? I'm claiming no entitlement. I'm only saying why I think a viewer is a customer. I feel the same about television and radio.

kzap

07-15-2009, 03:16 PM

Ugh. Why? I'm claiming no entitlement. I'm only saying why I think a viewer is a customer. I feel the same about television and radio.
I agree and have been trying to show people for ages in a TRS thread a while ago. I would just give up people seem to be stuck with the STUPID preconception that you have to directly PAY for something to be a customer.
If WE didn't watch the show eventually THEY wouldn't get any money.
Therefor we are the customer.

darknessgp

07-15-2009, 03:33 PM

kzap

07-15-2009, 03:40 PM

Why are you guys arguing about what a customer is and isn't? Does it matter? NO.

The facts on the ground are... Rev3 is a production company and without an audience Rev3 would not be successful. period.
Agreed.
Look at it like a free TV network (you have those in the USA?), you may not be paying a monthly fee for the channel but you pay for it by watching the adverts, that's how that channel manages to stay alive.
The same goes for Rev3 without us viewers they would not exist, that said I don't think Rev3 should spend money trying to go back to how they were before I just think they shouldn't go any more commercial then they already are.

masherscf

07-15-2009, 04:16 PM

Really? Did you honestly just personally attack me AND call me immature in the same breath? Who is the immature one again?

Dude, maturity is a concept that young people use to justify bad behavior. It doesn't actually exist. People either act like douche-bags or they don't...their age doesn't matter.

At no time did I attack you personally of call you "immature" those are your words.

I suggest that the sense of entitlement that many viewer claim on behalf of their viewership is juvenile.

juvenile adj. Not fully grown or developed; young. Of, relating to, characteristic of, intended for, or appropriate for children or young people

I understand that you're not a child, not a teenager and that you can purchase your own beer. I do hold you in the highest regard.

However, the viewpoint that you espouse in this matter is a young person's perspective.

That's not a insult, many times the young person's perspective is a good perspective.

xibalba

07-15-2009, 04:42 PM

entitlement

Being a loyal viewer I think, no I know I am entitled to a 15" macbook pro fully loaded from revision3. :D :p ;)

phatlip

07-15-2009, 07:49 PM

Dude, maturity is a concept that young people use to justify bad behavior. It doesn't actually exist. People either act like douche-bags or they don't...their age doesn't matter.

At no time did I attack you personally of call you "immature" those are your words.

I suggest that the sense of entitlement that many viewer claim on behalf of their viewership is juvenile.

I understand that you're not a child, not a teenager and that you can purchase your own beer. I do hold you in the highest regard.

However, the viewpoint that you espouse in this matter is a young person's perspective.

That's not a insult, many times the young person's perspective is a good perspective.

Okay, but you certainly didn't use it in a positive way. You said I absolutely have to get over "this juvenile sense of entitlement". That's a bit of an insult.

That and what I said had nothing to do with entitlement. What exactly am I suggesting I'm entitled to? My argument is simply that I consider viewers of Revision3 (and television/radio in general) customers.

The above post is an example of somone who thinks their entitled to something. Simply saying you think the viewers of a network are customers and saying why insn't.

Overall, it just wasn't called for IMO. It's one thing to discuss why you feel differently on the matter, but to suggest I have a "juvenile sense of entitlement" to something here is a bit out there. Actually, it has nothing to do with what I said. That's why I took it, and still do consider it a personal attack.

gimpbully

07-16-2009, 12:30 AM

you're setting up a false dichotomy.
Okay, well consider this. You're in a Best Buy. There are two kinds of people in the store- employees and customers. Everyone who ISN'T an employee is considered ( in Best Buys eyes) a customer. You may purchase something. You may not. But simply entering the store, and browsing makes you a customer (in my opinion). You may never buy anything at Best Buy, but whenever you're in their store- you're considered a customer. The same applies to to Rev3. All because you haven't bought something, doesn't mean you never will. Entering the premises, and browsing the products, or coming to the website and watching shows makes you a customer.

Just my opinion.

gimpbully

07-16-2009, 12:35 AM

This is very specifically about entitlement. You have claimed you are entitled to hold the company to a standard. Beyond that, man, you're acting like a child right now. People pointed it out and now you're throwing a hissy-fit.
Okay, but you certainly didn't use it in a positive way. You said I absolutely have to get over "this juvenile sense of entitlement". That's a bit of an insult.

That and what I said had nothing to do with entitlement. What exactly am I suggesting I'm entitled to? My argument is simply that I consider viewers of Revision3 (and television/radio in general) customers.

The above post is an example of somone who thinks their entitled to something. Simply saying you think the viewers of a network are customers and saying why insn't.

Overall, it just wasn't called for IMO. It's one thing to discuss why you feel differently on the matter, but to suggest I have a "juvenile sense of entitlement" to something here is a bit out there. Actually, it has nothing to do with what I said. That's why I took it, and still do consider it a personal attack.

phatlip

07-16-2009, 12:53 AM

This is very specifically about entitlement. You have claimed you are entitled to hold the company to a standard. Beyond that, man, you're acting like a child right now. People pointed it out and now you're throwing a hissy-fit.

I looked through this entire thread, and I didn't find a SINGLE post I made where I claimed I hold the company to a particular standard. I didn't even hint at it.

Where are you getting this from?

gimpbully

07-16-2009, 12:57 AM

phatlip

07-16-2009, 01:10 AM

"Users, viewers- it doesn't matter. At the end of the day we're all one thing. Customers"

you are claiming you are a customer. customers hold companies to standards. You also started commenting on a thread about holding the company to a standard. forgive my conclusion, sir.

See that doesn't work, because I made no argument whatsoever regarding the company holding us to a particular standard. All because I believe the viewer is a customer doesn't suggest a juvenile sense of entitlement. I view myself as a customer when I go to McDonalds and also when I watch Comedy Central. Simply saying you're a customer, isn't holding a company to a particular standard. It's certainly not juvenile entitlment to say you're a customer at McDonalds, so why is it here, or at Comedy Central? Remember, that's all I said. I made no mention of standards, and not once in this thread did I say Rev3 should do ANYTHING because I consider myself a customer. Sure, you don't have to agree with me. But again, how is that juvenile entitlement if I made NO mention of standards Rev3 should hold BECAUSE I think I'm a customer?

gimpbully

07-16-2009, 01:12 AM

phatlip, be honest with yourself here. You're claiming you don't have a sense of entitlement when it comes to this company and their productions? Why did you bring up your opinions on being a customer? you just happened to come on here and blurt it out?
Fact is, time and again, you have used this foolish customer arguement to justify your sense of entitlement to programming catered to you specifically. We've all been there, we've all seen it.

The childish part to which I refered was your reaction to masher's first comment. You threw a freakin hissy-fit. But you can ignore that and focus on the other part.

See that doesn't work, because I made no argument whatsoever regarding the company holding us to a particular standard. All because I believe the viewer is a customer doesn't suggest a juvenile sense of entitlement. I view myself as a customer when I go to McDonalds and also when I watch Comedy Central. Simply saying you're a customer, isn't holding a company to a particular standard. It's certainly not juvenile entitlment to say your a customer at McDonalds, so why is it here, or at Comedy Central? Sure, you don't have to agree with me. But again, how is that juvenile entitlement if I made NO mention of standards Rev3 should hold BECAUSE I think I'm a customer?

phatlip

07-16-2009, 01:19 AM

phatlip, be honest with yourself here. You're claiming you don't have a sense of entitlement when it comes to this company and their productions?

I never said that though. The only problem I had with what Masher said is it came out of nowhere, unprovoked, and unrelated to what was being discussed. So I took it as an attack and to address what you said after your edit yes, I did ignore the other stuff he said. When someone is attempting to attack me or put me down, I'm not going to even consider their argument. They lost my respect at that point in the debate. Masher still has my overall respect, but once an argument turns south like that, I tune out. Thats just me though.

But to answer your question, I do hold certain standards. I wouldn't call it entitlement, and even if I were, certainly not juvenile entitlement. But I do hold standards. But I hold standards for many things. You don't have to be a customer to hold a standard.

masherscf

07-16-2009, 01:25 AM

Okay, but you certainly didn't use it in a positive way. You said I absolutely have to get over "this juvenile sense of entitlement". That's a bit of an insult.

Eleanor Roosevelt once said that no one can make you feel inferior with your permission.

You should let me be the arbiter of what I meant. If you want to be insulted by a single adjective that was not aimed you, I'm powerless. I told you it wasn't an insult. I'm sorry you think I was lying.

If you are feigning injury in a lame attempt to put me on the defensive, I've lost a lot of respect for you.

phatlip

07-16-2009, 01:27 AM

Eleanor Roosevelt once said that no one can make you feel inferior with your permission.

You should let me be the arbiter of what I meant. If you want to be insulted by a single adjective that was not aimed you, I'm powerless. I told you it wasn't an insult. I'm sorry you think I was lying.

If you are feigning injury in a lame attempt to put me on the defensive, I've lost a lot of respect for you.

Dude, you can't do that. I have what you said right here. It's not a matter of lying. You're saying one thing, but if you look at what you said it's the exact opposite. How was this not aimed at me? You quoted me and said the following:

You absolutely need to get over this juvenile sense of entitlement.

So you quoting me, and saying YOU wasn't directed at me? Seriously?

gimpbully

07-16-2009, 01:50 AM

no, you didn't say that in this thread, correct, we get that. But you certainly implied it (or.. you wouldn't have said anything, right?).

You have just said that you do hold certain standards. You have admitted as such. You have no right to hold a standard against a company for which you are not a customer. They have absolutely no responsibility to you. That's the base of the argument.

Your hissy-fit continues.
I never said that though. The only problem I had with what Masher said is it came out of nowhere, unprovoked, and unrelated to what was being discussed. So I took it as an attack and to address what you said after your edit yes, I did ignore the other stuff he said. When someone is attempting to attack me or put me down, I'm not going to even consider their argument. They lost my respect at that point in the debate. Masher still has my overall respect, but once an argument turns south like that, I tune out. Thats just me though.

But to answer your question, I do hold certain standards. I wouldn't call it entitlement, and even if I were, certainly not juvenile entitlement. But I do hold standards. But I hold standards for many things. You don't have to be a customer to hold a standard.

phatlip

07-16-2009, 01:55 AM

no, you didn't say that in this thread, correct, we get that. But you certainly implied it (or.. you wouldn't have said anything, right?).

You have just said that you do hold certain standards. You have admitted as such. You have no right to hold a standard against a company for which you are not a customer. They have absolutely no responsibility to you. That's the base of the argument.

Your hissy-fit continues.

That didn't even come up in the least bit until you directly asked me though! That's my point. I made a very simple statement and explained why. I made no mention of the stuff I was accused of. Even now, after I said I hold certain standards, I never said what. So nobody can judge whether or not it's juvenile entitlement.

Do I have certain standards? Yes. And if you want to really get down to it, yes I AM a customer. I buy from the Rev3 store. That's me giving Rev3 my money. Not Go Daddy. So according to you, a customer has a right to holding certain standards.

But again, I never said any of that in this thread. Made no mention of it until you asked me. Why? Because that's not the point I was trying to make. It didn't even cross my mind. I made a VERY simple, and honest statement. My intentions were pure. When questioned I elaborated. But I made to mention of the things I was accused of until you directly asked me.

My hissy fit doesn't continue. It's pretty obvious the handful of people here who don't like me are enjoying their beat up on Phatty day.

darknessgp

07-16-2009, 02:00 AM

phatlip

07-16-2009, 02:04 AM

Wow, you guys are really going off topic. what with the who said what and what they really meant. and this absurdity of "customer" stuff.

Last post in this thread and just summing up how I feel about the whole thing...
I watch some Rev3 shows, less now than I use to. I do not like the direction some of the shows took, and that is why they lost me as a viewer. I wish they would change because I really enjoyed and still enjoy the shows that are good.

What you said earlier is basically what I intended when I made a VERY small and simple statement about customers several pages back. Basically, there was a dispute about whether or not we were users or viewers. I basically said what you said, It doesn't matter. We're the same thing, and said we were all customers so it didn't matter either way.

SOMEHOW that got twisted into me claiming I thought I had a juvenile sense of entitlement.

gimpbully

07-16-2009, 02:06 AM

All my statements have to be taken with knowledge I've worked there. I think that makes a huge difference in your view of the absurdity of all of this. The fact that the forum hasn't been just turned off is a testament to how much this company actually does listen to their viewership. Above all, 'just turning it off' if you don't like it and being sure to catch shows you do like speaks loudest, that's for sure.
Wow, you guys are really going off topic. what with the who said what and what they really meant. and this absurdity of "customer" stuff.

Last post in this thread and just summing up how I feel about the whole thing...
I watch some Rev3 shows, less now than I use to. I do not like the direction some of the shows took, and that is why they lost me as a viewer. I wish they would change because I really enjoyed and still enjoy the shows that are good.

gimpbully

07-16-2009, 02:08 AM

phatlip, you're not paying attention again. FOCUS.
That didn't even come up in the least bit until you directly asked me though! That's my point. I made a very simple statement and explained why. I made no mention of the stuff I was accused of. Even now, after I said I hold certain standards, I never said what. So nobody can judge whether or not it's juvenile entitlement.

Do I have certain standards? Yes. And if you want to really get down to it, yes I AM a customer. I buy from the Rev3 store. That's me giving Rev3 my money. Not Go Daddy. So according to you, a customer has a right to holding certain standards.

But again, I never said any of that in this thread. Made no mention of it until you asked me. Why? Because that's not the point I was trying to make. It didn't even cross my mind. I made a VERY simple, and honest statement. My intentions were pure. When questioned I elaborated. But I made to mention of the things I was accused of until you directly asked me.

My hissy fit doesn't continue. It's pretty obvious the handful of people here who don't like me are enjoying their beat up on Phatty day.

rabidbadger

07-16-2009, 02:18 AM

phatlip~ "Clicking a link, or typing a promo code DOES make us Revision3's customer. They get their money from the ad companies and us. Directly? No. But we're at the very least, indirect customers."

Nothing more need be said. That is the bottom line. I'm a "customer" of MSNBC right now cause I'm typing this while a commercial plays during the Rachel Maddow show. I will not be buying "Centrum" tonight, but now I know it exists and what it might do. I might buy it 5 years from now. Who knows. But I am an indirect customer of Rachel Maddow, via Centrum, and vice a versa. Viewers of media with a profit motive are absolutely "customers."

Play with semantics all you want, but I been in and around advertising and marketing long enough to know... viewers are called customers.

gimpbully

07-16-2009, 02:22 AM

I disagree. The contract is signed with the ad agency, not you. If anything, you're a product of MSNBC, at that point. Your viewership is a commodity that's being traded.
[edit, nice maddow name-drop ;) ]
phatlip~ "Clicking a link, or typing a promo code DOES make us Revision3's customer. They get their money from the ad companies and us. Directly? No. But we're at the very least, indirect customers."

Nothing more need be said. That is the bottom line. I'm a "customer" of MSNBC right now cause I'm typing this while a commercial plays during the Rachel Maddow show. I will not be buying "Centrum" tonight, but now I know it exists and what it might do. I might buy it 5 years from now. Who knows. But I am an indirect customer of Rachel Maddow, via Centrum, and vice a versa. Viewers of media with a profit motive are absolutely "customers."

Play with semantics all you want, but I been in and around advertising and marketing long enough to know... viewers are called customers.

tokenuser

07-16-2009, 02:55 AM

Play with semantics all you want, but I been in and around advertising and marketing long enough to know... viewers are called customers.I thought they were called "viewers", "audiences", or "ratings".

Advertising agencies call them "target demographics", and buy access to the appropriate "target demographics" from suppliers of advertising space - be it audio, video, or dead tree mass media.

We are not customers - we are a target audience for advertisers. Sucks to be a statistic.

rabidbadger

07-16-2009, 04:06 AM

I disagree. The contract is signed with the ad agency, not you. If anything, you're a product of MSNBC, at that point. Your viewership is a commodity that's being traded.
[edit, nice maddow name-drop ;) ]

I don't have a "contract" when I buy tic tacs at 7-11, but I'm a customer. Hell, I'm a "customer" when I walk in the door, even if I can't find the tic tacs and I walk out the door buying nothing.

I'm a Rev3 customer when I load the rev3 site. Like I said. all semantics. Either way, rev3, their show sponsors, the banner ads in the forums, the rev3 stores don't exist without us "customers".

phatlip

07-16-2009, 04:23 AM

I don't have a "contract" when I buy tic tacs at 7-11, but I'm a customer. Hell, I'm a "customer" when I walk in the door, even if I can't find the tic tacs and I walk out the door buying nothing.

I'm a Rev3 customer when I load the rev3 site. Like I said. all semantics. Either way, rev3, their show sponsors, the banner ads in the forums, the rev3 stores don't exist without us "customers".

When Rev3 runs an ad for GoDaddy telling the user to use a Rev3 promo code, Rev3 is essentially selling the GoDaddy product to their viewers (customers). It's another company and product, but that happens all the time. You can go in the Apple store and buy a Macbook which is made by Apple, but you can also buy a case for your iPhone made by another company. Apple didn't make the case, but they're selling it to you. Apple and the company who made the case are getting paid for selling the product. By buying the case, you're not only an Apple customer, but also a customer to the company who made the case.

It's not exactly the same thing with Rev3 and GoDaddy, but it's VERY VERY similar. You can use other promo codes besides Rev3, but Rev3 wants YOU to use their code. That plays a role in them making money. They want you (the customer) to get that domain through them. You can also buy that iPhone case at Walmart, but Apple want's you to by the case from their store. They too want you (the customer) to pay them.

Again, it's definitely indirect but still a customer, and plays a very important role in Rev3 making money.

gimpbully

07-16-2009, 04:45 AM

I don't have a "contract" when I buy tic tacs at 7-11, but I'm a customer. Hell, I'm a "customer" when I walk in the door, even if I can't find the tic tacs and I walk out the door buying nothing.

I'm a Rev3 customer when I load the rev3 site. Like I said. all semantics. Either way, rev3, their show sponsors, the banner ads in the forums, the rev3 stores don't exist without us "customers".

Obviously we have differing opinions on the definition of customer. I personally recall that the business related definition of 'customer' is an entity that consumes a product.

I would disagree that the product of rev3 is content. I don't know how to phrase this correctly, but I know two products of rev3 that are sold, ads and studio time. I find it hard to consider freely available content a 'product.' (absent of the pesky origins of the word, 'to produce'). I'd consider content merely an asset of the company.

Regardless, I'd point out that rev3 has a sales team that one could only assume brings in money. The content, one could easily argue, only costs them money.

I fear the answer may not be hinged on the definition of customer, but rather rev3's product.

gimpbully

07-16-2009, 04:49 AM

is a sale code a product?
Does rev3 sell *you* the product code?

Maybe, coupons have an assigned value, as i recall, but it's a fraction of a cent.
Rev3 does not sell you the product code, they sell ad space to godaddy who, in turn, provides a product code as part of their ad run.

I'd call that an example of being a patron to godaddy.

I've never said the viewer isn't an important part of rev3's business model, but I would argue that the only thing that entitles your precious self to is to click the lil 'x' at the top of the window and close the window.
When Rev3 runs an ad for GoDaddy telling the user to use a Rev3 promo code, Rev3 is essentially selling the GoDaddy product to their viewers (customers). It's another company and product, but that happens all the time. You can go in the Apple store and buy a Macbook which is made by Apple, but you can also buy a case for your iPhone made by another company. Apple didn't make the case, but they're selling it to you. Apple and the company who made the case are getting paid for selling the product. By buying the case, you're not only an Apple customer, but also a customer to the company who made the case.

It's not exactly the same thing with Rev3 and GoDaddy, but it's VERY VERY similar. You can use other promo codes besides Rev3, but Rev3 wants YOU to use their code. That plays a role in them making money. They want you (the customer) to get that domain through them. You can also buy that iPhone case at Walmart, but Apple want's you to by the case from their store. They too want you (the customer) to pay them.

Again, it's definitely indirect but still a customer, and plays a very important role in Rev3 making money.

phatlip

07-16-2009, 04:53 AM

is a sale code a product?
Does rev3 sell *you* the product code?

Maybe, coupons have an assigned value, as i recall, but it's a fraction of a cent.
Rev3 does not sell you the product code, they sell ad space to godaddy who, in turn, provides a product code as part of their ad run.

I'd call that an example of being a patron to godaddy.

I've never said the viewer isn't an important part of rev3's business model, but I would argue that the only thing that entitles your precious self to is to click the lil 'x' at the top of the window and close the window.

Yeah, like I said- the two aren't exactly the same. But it was a good way of explaining my thought process on the matter. Not the same, but similar. Rev3 doesn't sell the product code, but Rev3 is essentially selling you the domain. It's through GoDaddy, but you ARE using the promo code which puts Rev3's hand in the bucket along with GoDaddy. The same way the iPhone case company's hand is in the bucket with Apple. It's more indirect than with the Apple store example, but similar.

You seem to keep forgetting the Rev3 store though. Those are products offered directly to the Rev3 viewers which does make them customers. Products I bought in addition to clicking ads and using promo codes. If I were truly interested in arguing viewer entitlement, the Rev3 store would be the guts of my argument. Viewers buying from the store definitely makes them customers, and you said customers hold certain standards.

rabidbadger

07-16-2009, 06:19 AM

Obviously we have differing opinions on the definition of customer. I personally recall that the business related definition of 'customer' is an entity that consumes a product.

So, you and me are clerks at a seven eleven. Dead sunday at 3 am. No one else in the building. You and me are making out in the beer cooler. Car pulls up, dude walks in the door, door bell beepy thing rings... we both zip up and say, "shit, a customer!!!" then bolt to the counter.

we don't say "shit, a potential customer" or "a viewer of our lovely cigarette display". It's a customer if they buy something or not. And the quicker the better, cause I wanna get you back in that cooler and heat. You. Up.

I would disagree that the product of rev3 is content.

Are you serious? What else they got but stickers and shirts based on that content? Dang, I hope you didn't pay for that business degree. sheesh. Then again, we are both working at 7-11 ;)

tokenuser

07-16-2009, 06:24 AM

rabidbadger

07-16-2009, 06:30 AM

If your example was a sound engineer and a news host at NPR say "shit, a customer" when someone changed the station to theirs, then you might be starting to have an accurate analogy.

NPR has listeners/customers 24/7 so they never have a chance to duck into the cooler.

I still say it's the same thing.

phatlip

07-16-2009, 07:08 AM

So, you and me are clerks at a seven eleven. Dead sunday at 3 am. No one else in the building. You and me are making out in the beer cooler. Car pulls up, dude walks in the door, door bell beepy thing rings... we both zip up and say, "shit, a customer!!!" then bolt to the counter.

we don't say "shit, a potential customer" or "a viewer of our lovely cigarette display". It's a customer if they buy something or not. And the quicker the better, cause I wanna get you back in that cooler and heat. You. Up.

That's an excellent example. I couldn't have said it better myself. Okay, well I could. Sorry Gimp, but replace you with someone like Megan Fox and we have an awesome example.

Haha.

Seriously though, I think you hit the nail on the head. That's why people often use further clarification when speaking of customers such as "paying customer".

phatlip

07-16-2009, 07:14 AM

I would disagree that the product of rev3 is content.

Are you serious? What else they got but stickers and shirts based on that content? Dang, I hope you didn't pay for that business degree. sheesh. Then again, we are both working at 7-11 ;)

I'd like to add something to that, because I think it's something someone is going to mention. Revision3's content is "free". So, if it's "free" does that make the viewer a customer?

I think so. Using the 7-11 example again, if I go in a 7-11 on July 11th to get my free slurpy, I'm still considered a customer even though I'm receiving a free product. The slurpy is the bait for me to come into buy other things. Maybe I'll get some gas for my car, or perhaps a hot dog that sat on a rotisserie grille for 36 hours straight. The same applies to the "free" content. That's the bait, and the ads are what they want us to buy (with their promo codes).

mr-underachiever

07-16-2009, 07:23 AM

I wanna go back to the thing about Rev3 not listening to the forums. Honestly, I don't blame them one bit. Most of the people who complain about shit are nothing but whiny little bitches who think that, just because this content is free, they're somehow entitled to something. And they actually think they know what's best for Rev3, when in reality, they really don't know what they're talking about.

It was bitching on the forums that got Gator killed off on Internet Superstar, as well as the whole format change. The result? The show basically became a shell of its former self, and it wasn't fun anymore. The biggest mistake they made with the show was actually listening to the forums.

I'm pretty forum bitching had something to do with Tekzilla becoming a viewer Q&A show, and that show is damn near unwatchable now because all the questions are, as was said on the first episode of Internet Superstar, "A bunch of incredibly simple shit that any fucktard should be able to figure out on their own."

So, yeah, I don't blame them for not listening to the forums. In fact, the smartest thing for them to do would probably be to do the exact OPPOSITE of what people on the forums want, since people on here really know how to ruin perfectly good shows.

This post will probably get ignored because of that stupid argument about customers, but whatever.

rabidbadger

07-16-2009, 07:31 AM

I'd like to add something to that, because I think it's something someone is going to mention. Revision3's content is "free". So, if it's "free" does that make the viewer a customer?

I think so. Using the 7-11 example again, if I go in a 7-11 on July 11th to get my free slurpy, I'm still considered a customer even though I'm receiving a free product. The slurpy is the bait for me to come into buy other things. Maybe I'll get some gas for my car, or perhaps a hot dog that sat on a rotisserie grille for 36 hours straight. The same applies to the "free" content. That's the bait, and the ads are what they want us to buy (with their promo codes).

Abso-tooting-lutely. I'm a customer of Rev3. Everyday. I'm a customer of NYT.com. Everyday. I am a customer of MSNBC. Everyday. I'm a customer of Twitter, even though they sell or promote nothing. If I walk in the "door" of a "business" I am a customer. I am someone they all want there for whatever THEIR reasons are.

gimpbully

07-16-2009, 08:03 AM

a) I'm flattered
b) what kind of work ethic do you think I have? Beer cooler and company? That customer's not getting served. That customer, however, has potential to buy 7/11's products. Sure, you have the ability to buy ad space, but... you're exactly going to come here looking to buy ads, you're here to consume them. This is where the 7/11 analogy breaks down. There is no equivilent to the rev3 viewer. That's why I'd make a clear distinction.

The rev3 store, I think that's a distraction. How much is a broadcast company really going to make on branded bumper sticker sales? Enough to pay even one person?

That's the problem with comparing a brick & mortar to an ad sales company. Analogies aren't made cleanly. I've never purported to have a business degree, library sciences were my thing. But I can at least try and reason it out.

I do stand behind the posit that rev3's product is not its content. It makes them no money. It's like taco bell (if we're getting into analogies... I really hate analogies), their product isn't the food, it's the fire sauce. The food is merely a delivery mechanism for fire sauce. Seriously, though, I think this is the big difference between broadcast and material sales. Broadcast has this odd delivery mechanism. They have to constantly work to make this attention grabbing vehicle for ads.

So, you and me are clerks at a seven eleven. Dead sunday at 3 am. No one else in the building. You and me are making out in the beer cooler. Car pulls up, dude walks in the door, door bell beepy thing rings... we both zip up and say, "shit, a customer!!!" then bolt to the counter.

we don't say "shit, a potential customer" or "a viewer of our lovely cigarette display". It's a customer if they buy something or not. And the quicker the better, cause I wanna get you back in that cooler and heat. You. Up.

Are you serious? What else they got but stickers and shirts based on that content? Dang, I hope you didn't pay for that business degree. sheesh. Then again, we are both working at 7-11 ;)

cryptic

07-16-2009, 07:19 PM

Rev3 content is their product. The payoff is viewers, which in turn is exchanged for cash via the placement of ads. There doesn't have to be just one customer relationship in a business model. It all depends on the parties involved.

kzap

07-16-2009, 07:53 PM

gimpbully

07-16-2009, 08:05 PM

The sale of ads is done far before the content is produced. I would agree, sure, viewers can be a customer of the rev3 store, but as far as entitlement based on patronage, that extends no farther than the store.

Perhaps the confusion lies in the distinction between a viewer and a customer. I would tend to believe there is a raw distinction between the two, especially in the broadcast arena. Whole groups are formed for handling the business of ad sales. I don't see that as far as the viewership side of shop. Again, I'm not a business guy, far from it, I do filesystems and clusters. This doesn't seem to be an important distinction until you run up against entitlement. The company has absolutely no legal obligations related to the viewer where they have very specific contractual obligations to the ad customer.

Take that to the 7/11 side of things. The customer who fails to purchase still has a reasonable expectation of standards. They can, by law, expect standards of hygiene, food safety, structural standards of the physical location, etc. I'm hard pressed to think of any reasonable standard a viewer of a broadcast can legally expect.

Rev3 content is their product. The payoff is viewers, which in turn is exchanged for cash via the placement of ads. There doesn't have to be just one customer relationship in a business model. It all depends on the parties involved.

cryptic

07-16-2009, 08:45 PM

The point I'm making is that you have two relationships here. The first relationship is Rev3 offers their product (content). The purchaser of that product is the customer, in this case is the viewer. What is the viewer paying with? Their set of eyes and time. The second relationship is Rev3 offering a product (total viewers) to the sponsors who purchase access to the viewers with money.

Viewers not paying money to view content doesn't change the fact they are customers.

gimpbully

07-16-2009, 08:57 PM

No, I get your argument. Let me pose a base question:
Is 'a viewer' a subset of 'customer'?
I do not believe it is in the context of broadcast.
I do not believe it applies to brick & mortar operations as the distinction is unnecessary.

Anyone here actually have a business degree?
The point I'm making is that you have two relationships here. The first relationship is Rev3 offers their product (content). The purchaser of that product is the customer, in this case is the viewer. What is the viewer paying with? Their set of eyes and time. The second relationship is Rev3 offering a product (total viewers) to the sponsors who purchase access to the viewers with money.

Viewers not paying money to view content doesn't change the fact they are customers.