|
I'm going to throw in my .02 here, just because brand preservation is something I work with each day...
We can say what we want about the "big guy crushing the little guy" and all that, but it's completely far from the truth... in fact, most of the time the opposite. In my very humble opinion, it's about "courtesy".
Most of us, being photographers, want to have the ability to sell our skills and work and trade it in some form. It's the most basic principles of entrepreneurship. We all feel that, if we have socked away the cash for the fancy camera, that's enough of a "cost of doing business" for us... when in reality, there's a bit more.
We think that anything our lens captures is "fair game" and to a certain extent... yes, there is a bit of truth to that. You CAN go out and you CAN take photos of anything and attempt to make money at selling said photos by placing them up as stock or making some sort of product around them... postcards to hockey pucks, it's your choice and your risk in the end - afterall, it's your work and your cash right?
The thing is, without sending a nice letter to the owner of the airplane, car, boat, or stuffed walleye that you've put on your product... you're kind of sluffing along with the "easier to ask for forgiveness than ask for permission" mentality. And, as long as you can sell things "under the radar" that's fine in a way. I remember going to a drug store one time when I was out with CF on the bombers and finding patriotic postcards with "Nine O Nine" and the "Dragon and His Tail" all over them... after having a chuckle, it made me grin that some guy and his Kodachrome were making a few bucks on the side by selling here, versus from the trunk of their car in the parking lot at a Collings Foundation event.
Now, unless you've got an in with the local five and dime and the customers of said store are a bit more warbird friendly, you have to somehow make enough sales of your product to balance or exceed your cost... and as a businessperson, I want to somehow enhance my ability to make money with this said product of my work. And what is the key to good sales? Enticing the audience that is most likely to act and buy with your "offer". Right product, right place (or people), right price.
In PROMOTING the product, what is the audience most likely to act? Well, in this case, it's airplane enthusiasts and members of the CAF. I know for a fact that if you took it to the local quilting society, no sales would occur. Easy.
Now if you are thinking that I am being a bit too simplistic in my tone here... I am just trying to lighten it a bit... I mean, the last thing I want to do it rile up you "passionate" warbird folks.
Hey, that's it... we're passionate! Hey, and guys like Doug R. and John B. and all the other folks over there at CAF at Fleming Field are too... I mean, hell, that's the reason why the plane is flying now isn't it?
So you have this small sales niche that's full of passionate folks... you can easily see how word gets around and that "flying under the radar" doesn't seem to work anymore huh? Here's the rub... yeah, you think you can do what you want with them... and yeah, the chances of a copyright enforcement coming down hard on you are pretty slim since your profit margin isn't exactly huge... but what about that "audience" we were talking about.
Some of the casual enthusiasts might think "hey cool" and buy it if the price is right... but I dare to venture a guess that if someone who has a sweat and tears share in that plane gets their panties in a twist over the fact that you're "profiting" off the plane... word will most likely travel fast... even more if they got one of them Twitsteree, Facy-space, or My-look-book pages out there in the tubes of the Internets!
No matter how much we all want to raise stink over copyright and our God given Bill of Rights and whatnot... none of that matters an Austin Acres rattlesnake when you got a guy (or gal) with a bee in their proverbial bonnet over you selling "their" plane.
To those few, us photographers are the "johnny come lately, two-bit, good-fer-nothin's" that are trying to make a buck off of it. Are their complaints legally binding... probably not. Will their spouting off 'round the fellas (and fellacitas) at the hangar potentially harm your sales... you bet your sweet empennage it will!
Now, I am sure that Doug R. wasn't the aforementioned "baddie" as illustrated above... I've met 'em at Geneseo and he's a pretty straight shooter... and everyone else reinforces that. Being a straight shooter, he's probably giving you good warning that there may be said "baddies" about and they might raise a cuss and stir if you maintain your present heading.
So, he was giving you a heads up before you sunk some capital into the venture, only to have someone put the kybosh on your efforts... either legally or by enough bad PR of the Ford Edsel persuasion causing similarly "stellar" sales.
So what's a photographer to do? Well, there are some channels... and it's all about courtesy... like I mentioned WAAAAY above.
So, give the folks at the CAF down at HQ a call... or better yet, start with the higher-ups in the Minn Wing. Before you go off all half-cocked and promoting a product before the necessary blessings are given, take a moment to put your ideas on paper, in a plan, and go to the right people for permission. Do it the right way and negotiate... go in with a positive attitude and get down on that knee and ask, son! The best that can happen is that they'll say "sure" from the fact that you had the courtesy to ask in the first place. Worst that can happen is a flat out "no" (which really isn't a no, as I'll explain) and somewhere in the middle is a request to ask for a cut or a royalty... and if that comes up, don't settle on anything that's more than 50% of your margin... then you cut bait and move on to a new project. It may seem like a real pain-in-the-neck and might really mess with your pride... but all business folks encounter it... from the telemarketer all the way up to the latest dotcom startups "elevator pitch" to a potential angel investor. Sometimes you have to just swallow the pride and do it... it's a part of the cost of doing business.
Now, if they give a flat-out no... which is most likely rare, unless they completely think the product is a flop... you have some wiggle room. If they haven't offered it, present the option of a royalty on all the sales... 10-20-30 percent, whatever you come to. In the end, their effort (rebuilding the plane) has come to bear fruit... so the risk is on your side, not theirs, for selling it. Unless they are completely against everything, they might realize that 10% of something is something more than they had... and offer to stock some in their gift shop as consigned... meaning that they have product to sell with no initial overhead!
If there's still resistance, then approach it like a service... you said yourself that they were interested in doing a calendar of their own... but as many organizations find, there's not been time or talent to do it. How about offering to collaborate... perhaps get others in the Wing to send in photos and tidbits and create a full Wing calendar with all the planes. Ask them to pay for the direct printing and packaging costs of the pre-arranged amount they wish to sell (thus removing the honor system that's always a problem with royalties) and offer the design and layout talent that you provide "for free" or perhaps a small amount... but make sure to require that you are granted a license to sell however many you can outside of their order to allow you to make a bit of cash for your time. That last one is a bit of a risk, but with any luck... being a calendar... the same job might come back each year. Selling a service over selling a product.
Keep in mind that the John Dibbs, Phil Makanna, Max Haynes, etcs. all take the proactive approach... and the relationships they build by being a bit humble in the start are the lifeblood of their success. Anyone with a camera has the potential to take great shots... but the relationships and connections mean more than the pictures any day... because without people in your corner, your shots will never get seen... no matter how good. I am willing to bet that they all began with a lot of "pleases" and "thank yous" and free calendars and books sent around...
I know everyone gets all riled up over the "big bad CAF brand" and all that... but I follow the line of the most unpopular majority here. I don't mind it. As has been noted here... there needs to be SOMETHING connecting the planes with the organization for the long term viability of it as a whole. It's extremely hard for us here to even fathom that Ma & Pa Kettle of Rural Road 3 in Hastings, Nebraska may not know that the B-24A is actually not an Army plane sir and ma'am... but it belongs to the Commemorative Air Force, a non-profit organization of folks, like yourselves, who wish to honor our WWII veterans by keeping their planes in the air for their children, grandchildren, and great-great grandchildren to see.
Look at the "Airshow Horrors" thread and count how many mentions of the people that think, incorrectly, that our warbirds, privately owned jeeps and tanks and the like are STILL operated by the Armed Forces... you know, the ones that say "my tax dollars are paying for this..." in argument to your insistence that they get their greezy hands off the fabric controls of your pride and joy g'dnabbit! For these folks who don't have the details to know that it's a CAF plane... its a way to identify that fact to them... and potentially allow them to come to the realization that "cool! I can become a member and perhaps even help keep them going? Perhaps someday even fly in them? Cool!"
'Cause, as far as I can see, selling memberships to existing members that are already "in the know" isn't a real, great plan for growth...
Unfortunately, with the state of airshows these days... determining the true owner of a warbird is a difficult affair. With historical accuracy standards going to new heights, every potential "branding" opportunity goes away... but with the Jack Roush's and Rod Lewis' of the world, they can afford to not promote their operation and museum, as they 100% fund it themselves. Applying the same standard to CAF planes is like comparing apples to oranges... the CAF needs to be recognized and acknowledged by people, then needs to recruit those same people to survive.
Heck, I can't tell you how long I had a picture in my album growing up, of the "movie" Memphis Belle and a re-enactor pilot and told everyone that "that's David Tallichet" because he walked around that day like he owned it! Luckily I met David in real-life when I was 15, so was happily corrected by that honor. If I could mess up for four years, all the while reading Air Classics and Warbirds International, just think of how many more have the wrong impression...
And yes, the logo needs to be more-or-less that size. I realize that most CAF planes wore at least "Operated by the Commemorative (or Confederate) Air Force in the back, under the tail by the small N-Number... but those were made to be as hidden as possible... and I bet a lot of people still asked the crew what Air Force Base they were from. They are contrasting colors for visibility, not invisibility... and they are that big to allow it to be seen from a distance, encouraging people to actually read it.
I actually think the design is better than it could have been... think a certain Sea Fury with "Orthosport" that flew around for a time... could have been that! And what if a complete reversal came around... and the planes were repainted in glossy Imron to the ol' Rebel Field colors of white with blue and red trim? Sure, there are those of you that would say "ahhh, heritage..." but others would cry blasphemy for sure!
So I challenge anyone here to come up with a "reasonable" alternative that could do the same job and be less "tacky" in your eyes...
I am sure all of you members probably think "well, I'm a dues paying member and own that just the same... well, again, I challenge you to take the bull by the horns and come up with something that will potentially get bucks in the door. Jack Roush and Rod Lewis have to make a cash sacrifice everytime they roll a historically accurate warbird out the door... if you want to do the same, you have (even if you are a high Colonel lifetimer) a few thousand dollars of mental sacrifice to build that better mousetrap and get new members for the same "cost" as some decals and recruiting may do at an airshow or event. Even if you pour thousands of hours into maintaining or working on them... that's a variable cost that warbird owners STILL need to cover above and beyond the restoration... and even then, unless you pony up the whole shebang to buy it or 100% sponsor it for life, you still need to come up with a better way.
As my boss so carefully puts it... your bit-chen' don't mean snot 'til you give me a good idea to correct it.
And as for those who think the CAF may be a bit high and mighty in preserving their brand... I'm with the CAF on that one too. As caretaker of an 80+ year old brand myself, I take incredible care to make sure that we have complete knowledge of all places where our brand is displayed... and "correct" those who shouldn't have it. Doesn't matter if it's the logo, one of our planes, or the old air traffic control tower that's something of a symbol for us... anything that infers that there is a "relationship" between us and another company or party better darn well be agreed to.
Here's why...
We've been doing the right stuff that has preserved our name for eight decades... and to that we are extremely proud. Also, we know that a party associating their company with ours lends a certain credibility to that party... and so on. However, in this age of rampant media looking for anything negative and a social media network that's inherently negative (you can see this on FB, Twitter, and WIX... people prefer ranting and bit-chen' over nice stuff on average) if your brand somehow co-mingles with a company that's not doing things right or the like, then the harm it does to your company is about 7x worse than the good it did for the other company to have you '"along for the ride".
And for every honest-to-God good person who is just trying to keep swimmin' in this big pond like Paul... there are 20 more behind him that'd rather slash and burn to make a buck... we see this in sports, pop culture, and entertainment ALL the time.
So in the end, I side with the CAF, at least on the decals and the branding because they are trying to hold tight every last thing that they can to keep things going...
Now, there are other things I may not agree with that's part of their M.O. - but that's a whole 'nuther discussion that's best suited for one-on-one's while sharing a couple of brews... and anyone who wants to join in on that, just email or call me... Phoenix is hot and beer is cold and refreshing this time of year, made better by warbird banter for sure.
'Til then, ya'll be good and don't be fixin' to upset the manure cart...
(P.S. - Thanks for reading this far...)
_________________
Ryan Keough
Stow, MA
|
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
I've always understood that anything in public is fair game. It used to be that manufacturers & orginizations & the like saw it as free publicity. Now they, thru their lawyers, see it as a free money. It boils down to it's not who's right or wrong, it's who's got the most money to pay lawyers to prove their point. Is it worth the finiancial fight for your calender? Right or wrong? A few years ago, it'd be, 'hey, this guy's putting our airplane on his calender, & it's not costing us a dime!' Now, it's "hey, this guy's putting our airplane on his calender, I wonder how much we can charge him! It's a sad state of affairs. I think I'd at least make them spend money on a lawyer before I gave in, tho. KMA!
