I’m an entrepreneur as much as I am a filmmaker, so most of the decisions I make keep customers and the audience in mind. Where Los Angeles and similar movie-centric markets obviously have the infrastructure to facilitate the business side of the industry (containing studios, massive talent agencies, a plethora of producers, etc.), Seattle doesn’t. Too many people in this area thrive on the artistic side without a game plan on how to turn it into a profit. I believe we have the capacity to do both: Generate great content and commit ourselves to the entrepreneurship that’s demanded of independent filmmakers when it’s time to find its audience. 

We have an understanding that once the movie is finished, that’s when the real work begins. Submitting to film festivals and trying to get the movie seen by audiences in a theater setting simply isn’t enough. It can take time, sometimes a year or two, to campaign with this new “product” before the hard work sees results. But because the indie market thrives on filmmaker tenacity, I know what kind of commitment I’ll need to give to it. This includes attending film festival screenings, calling and meeting face to face with distributors and sales agents, sending out press releases, talking to online publications, attending the American Film Market, and putting our skills to good use to build a great media presence for the film.

We’ve found a lot of our competitors who produce movies in Seattle are production companies owned by actors (Abundant Productions, Fireshoe Productions, etc). It’s become a means to promote a different side of the business but doesn’t always translate into a well-founded business model. It’s a difference of motivation, namely, and the end results and goals for each project. I don’t do this to get my name in the public eye or simply to break even on the investment. Financially, that’s not good enough for me, whereas some of my competitors probably can't honestly say the same.

Because of the subjective nature of our industry and what distributors believe will sell to customers at the time, the biggest unknown is whether we’ll find that perfect distributor to partner with. But that doesn’t necessarily mean a failed distribution deal is the death of a film, instead, it just means our production companies will need to do more of the work ourselves and potentially self-distribute.

While everything mentioned above is good for bringing attention to a finished film, our mission is to find distribution. Placing it with video-on-demand aggregators and on store shelves to get customers is the end goal. Furthermore, finding a distribution company that believes in us and our work to continue that relationship in the future is a derivative of that, since we aren’t a one-off film production company. We certainly don’t have just one product to offer and want to build the relationship so we can quickly move into production on future projects and create other opportunities for the partnership.

In the last five years, our team has inched the budget barometer higher and higher, starting at an INSANELY low $11,00, to increase the production value of each film while still keeping a good ROI in mind. We went on to produce more around the $50k and $75k marks, spiking as high as $220,00. We understand the struggle independent production companies have. It's challenging to find an audience and stand out from the saturated Hollywood market as a great movie worth seeing, but we know that even well-reviewed indie films can dwell in the red for years because of several factors: overspending, poor advertising, lack of actor drawing power, or just bad timing, to name a few. The widely-praised Green Room (2015) still hasn't earned back its budget, even considering its 90% Rotten Tomatoes score and the success of the director's prior film, Blue Ruin (2013). Why? Well, for one, it's budget was more than 10x its predecessor's. Even as a well-liked movie with great actors like Patrick Stewart and Anton Yelchin at the helm, it still struggles to see a profit.

While a movie like Green Room may have been great for filmmakers' careers, proving their ability to make a great multi-million dollar movie with A-list talent, it does little for the financier. Let me be clear, there's no algorithm or perfect guideline to ensure the success of the production of any decent script. And of course, hindsight is 20/20. But I do believe our team has a track record of being able to trim the fat from production that would otherwise cost two to three times more in the hands of other filmmakers.

Simple: Every investor gets a first money position + 20% interest on revenue. In addition, you get an equity share equal to 1/2 of your investment percentage relating to the total budget that's raised. The formula where "X" is your investment amount:

X ÷ 2 ÷ $100,000 (maximum budget)

For example, a $10,000 investment gives you 5% equity + $2,000 interest if/when the movie generates revenue.

Why 1/2? Because the other half remains with the production companies. You'll also receive a perk based on the amount invested, which ranges from premiere tickets to digital downloads to cool swag!

No. In fact, your equity will increase if we fail to meet our maximum $100,000 budget.