LEADS AND READS - WEEK OF 1/07 TO 1/13

Deby Cedars · Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008, 02:49 (GMT) Post subject:

David... I find it really interesting that they are using the term "massage robots" I think they mean massage chairs. I sat for 30 min in a $3,000 dollar chair at the mall in Trumble. I was horrified that at one point the rollers massaged my shoulders really well but did not support my neck at all. If it had supported my neck I might have been tempted to get out my Visa card. The fact is though I would rather have a person massage me....not a robot. I know you didn't write the script, but if they want to use massage to get people in the store they should hire people not robots.

I used to go to that mall to get massages from a person. $10 min $12. You would sit in a special chair and it was affordable, but the best way to get a massage is to lay on soft birch wood sheets while you hear the most relaxing music, smell the soft scent of lavendar, and feel strong but gentle hands melt away your problems. It cost money.....BUT IT'S WORTH IT!

Colin Campbell · Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008, 03:21 (GMT) Post subject:

My latest attempt at "natural..." This is the STD testing website from today.

Lee Gordon · Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008, 05:00 (GMT) Post subject:

David Bosco · Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008, 05:20 (GMT) Post subject:

Deby:

I'm sure they mean massage chairs, or perhaps it's some kind of robotic device that is applied to the back. But either way, 'robots' sounds more exotic and facinating than 'chairs'. Kids listening will say "Hey Dad! Let's go see the robots!" Well written and conceived.

Lee:

My Sharper Image did not get a rating either. Maybe it's their way of being kind, by giving no rating at all rather than a 'less than 5' as a 'no rating' doesn't hurt your average.....I guess.....

David Bosco · Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008, 05:26 (GMT) Post subject:

Lee:

Whoops! I forgot I didn't submit for the Sharper Image. Embarassed

That's a sure way to get no rating!

Robert Jadah · Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008, 05:26 (GMT) Post subject:

Deby Cedars · Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008, 06:43 (GMT) Post subject:

I think when I ask for more money they are more likely not to rate me at all. It's like ....ahh she's out of our price bracket let's just move on to the next read.

I can't complain though. I'm in the 92% bracket! I love your new avatar by the way. I thought you were someone new for a while.....It suits your voice. It will help people remember your name....it's interesting and delightfully familiar. Very Happy

Lee Gordon · Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008, 10:39 (GMT) Post subject:

Diane Havens · Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008, 13:31 (GMT) Post subject:

The ratings dont tell us anything but what ranking the talent received in consideration for a gig, or no consideration. That could be based on anything. In that way, it is working the way 123 intended. If there are many leads that you answer that fit you perfectly well, and you are under consideration often, your stats are higher. It also depends how many others are doing that same thing, since it is a comparative number.
The more versatile/marketable your voice is, the better you can do on these sites. Those specific niche people are the ones who are not best served by them, and might be best marketing themselves elsewhere -- also what 123 intended to happen.

Scott Pollak · Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008, 14:25 (GMT) Post subject:

Okay, what the heck, one more since it seems to be the week for impersonations. Paul Harvey.....

David Bosco · Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008, 21:52 (GMT) Post subject:

Did anybody else have a go at this?

Open to male and female talents, the instructions were:

Voice should sound professional and knowledgeable, but also cool and real. Female voices can also be a little bit sexy - as long as it isn't at the expense of being professional and knowledgeable.

Gave me a 1 out of a 2.8 average. Obviously, that's a low average rating for most projects. But, please tell me if I was that far off the mark.

As Quick Draw used to say, "Oooh! That smarts!"

Deby Cedars · Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008, 22:10 (GMT) Post subject:

Scott...I think you got the rest of the story ok.....but you lost me on Har VE I don't remember his voice going up on pitch like that.

Diane Havens · Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008, 23:19 (GMT) Post subject:

David --

Ditto your experience. Something strange about that whole thing, though. Did you see? 102 submissions -- closed within hours with the 2.8 -- and listened to ALL 102? Perhaps rated a handful, and deleted the rest? What gives?

Neither of our reads deserved that demerit, btw. Just thought the whole chain of events was highly suspect.

Lee Gordon · Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008, 01:15 (GMT) Post subject:

Here's my 1-star rated demo for this lead. Clearly this seeker understands how the rating system works because there's no doubt that, like Dave and Diane, I obviously suck at this.

At the risk of being unscrupulous I have half a mind to contact the seeker directly and ask them to explain what I would have to improve upon to rate a 2. Actually, I'd rather they discarded my demo than take the time to rate it.

Instead I think I will contact Voice123 Support and take it up with them, although I already know what they're going to tell me: that I can use the seeker's input to help me improve.

Dave DeAndrea · Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008, 01:35 (GMT) Post subject:

David & Diane-

They actually gave me a 5 earlier today... I just checked again after reading your posts... now it's a 3. Looks like they're using the ratings system in one of the ways it's intended to be used; a means of sorting the voices that fit from the ones that don't. I would guess that as they continue to open auditions they encounter ones they like better than the previous ones and then number and sort accordingly.

Nothing wrong with your read, David... and nothing spectacular about mine.