[arg_discuss] is ARG just a marketing technique to the press?

[Michael Monello]

How could I forget Perplex City -- doh!

Year Zero, yeah, probably that as well, since the overall vision and  
ownership was with Trent Reznor.

Probably the strongest economic model for ARG's is IP ownership, which  
comes down to story and characters and building a large fanbase. That  
way you can economically exploit pieces of your universe across many  
channels, and the more successful the ARG is at developing audience,  
the greater your economic potential is as more possibilities open up.  
With Blair we had several books, a TV special, a soundtrack album, a 6- 
book comic series, 3 PC games, posters, calendars, Exploratory CD-Rom,  
trading cards, etc. Oh, and of course the movie.

Best,

Michael Monello
Partner, Campfire
62 White Street, 3W
New York, NY 10013
212-612-9600
http://www.campfirenyc.com



On Jan 10, 2008, at 10:21 AM, Dan Hon wrote:


> I'd add Year Zero, too. At least, if we take as read the public  

> story of Trent funding the project.

>

> And I note that there'll be a Cathy's Book sequel coming out soon,  

> too!

>

> Oh, and Perplex City. Ish.

>

> On 10 Jan 2008, at 15:12, Michael Monello wrote:

>

>> There have been ARGs (or ARG like projects) that were not marketing  

>> campaigns but instead capitalized on one piece of media to generate  

>> revenue. I would suggest Blair Witch, Freakylinks, Nothing So  

>> Strange, and Cathy's Book as projects that were truly cross-media  

>> rather than marketing campaigns for a films, books or tv shows.  

>> Despite how mass media may have characterized some of them, they  

>> were all developed to be cross media narratives, not marketing  

>> campaigns supporting a property.

>>

>> Since so many marketing ARGs have been for entertainment properties  

>> it's hard to make a distinction, but I believe there is one to be  

>> made, as in the above examples the creators of the ARG also were  

>> creators and owners of the exploitable properties.

>>

>> Obviously there's a risk involved in this model -- some of these  

>> were more successful financially than others, but they are all in  

>> their own way tackling the economic issue.

>>

>> Best,

>>

>> Michael Monello

>> Partner, Campfire

>> 62 White Street, 3W

>> New York, NY 10013

>> 212-612-9600

>> http://www.campfirenyc.com

>>

>>

>>

>> On Jan 10, 2008, at 8:46 AM, Kristian Leth DR wrote:

>>

>>> Hi Brian,

>>>

>>>

>>> "What are the upsides to ARGs being collective, hyped, anti- 

>>> establishment

>>> and not suitable for classic marketing channels? What are the  

>>> possiblities

>>> within those boundaries?"

>>>

>>> You wrote:

>>> I'm not sure I completely buy how you got to this analogy, Kristian.

>>> Comparing ARGing to the "music industry" or the "game industry" is  

>>> really

>>> requires that we think there is an "ARG industry" (there isn't)  

>>> and that it

>>> has established structures that can be disintermediated (there  

>>> aren't.)

>>>

>>> I say:

>>> I'm not comparing the two as "industries", I'm trying to make the  

>>> point that trying to fit a square peg into a round hole can be  

>>> very bothersome, and might not be the only way forward.

>>>

>>> You wrote:

>>> Anything that aggregates attention has the potential to leverage  

>>> that

>>> attention towards marketing something. Heck, they put  

>>> advertisements on

>>> zambonis at hockey matches, because they tend to collect attention  

>>> from

>>> people in the crowds (but the zamboni isn't on the ice to produce a

>>> marketing effect, it is there to smooth the ice!)

>>>

>>> I say:

>>> I actually think that the marketing ARGs have so far been the most  

>>> intruiging and enjoyable, and if you can do something as cool as  

>>> The Beast, ilovebees or Art Of The Heist then I envy you. But  

>>> parts of this discussion is "how can we change this genre into a  

>>> commercially viable one (like the _other_ game forms) without  

>>> changing what's integral to ARGs?" And while that's an interesting  

>>> discussion, I think maybe the economic model has to grow - on its  

>>> own - around a genre that believes in itself and operates on its  

>>> own terms. And we're nowhere near that yet. (And that's where the  

>>> music analogy comes into the picture.)

>>>

>>> Because this thing has grown out of the most unlikely places. ARGs  

>>> have found their form through a mix of marketing ploys and grass- 

>>> roots endeavors, and I think that that's pretty special. My point  

>>> is probably that I think the focus in this genre for the immediate  

>>> future is exploring, expanding and having fun with the genre, out  

>>> of love for it. The money isn't going to magically appear in  

>>> loads, when somebody figures out "How To Do It".

>>>

>>> For god's sake, those of us who can make money out of it should  

>>> KEEP DOING IT (and share the info!). But if that's the only reason  

>>> we're here, then we're probably on our way to doing something that  

>>> we know will put food on our tables. Let's keep it adventurous yet.

>>>

>>> The Romantic

>>> Kristian

>>> _______________________________________________

>>> ARG_Discuss mailing list

>>> ARG_Discuss at igda.org

>>> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/arg_discuss

>>

>> _______________________________________________

>> ARG_Discuss mailing list

>> ARG_Discuss at igda.org

>> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/arg_discuss

>

> _______________________________________________

> ARG_Discuss mailing list

> ARG_Discuss at igda.org

> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/arg_discuss