Why in the world would any sane person REVEAL THE SECRET of a trick publicly in the SALES TRAILER on YOUTUBE?

That's exactly what the genius's of Mental Dice have done.

Would have bought it for the $425 but now there's no point, IMO.

Thoughts?

Your point is well taken... Why spend money on something that has been so openly exposed? I would wager that there are many others who will choose to pass on this as well for the very same reason. Can't imagine how frustrating it would be to have someone announce the method during a performance because they 'saw it on YouTube.'

Best,

dc

Personally I doubt any layperson would have watched this promo

I'm with Nathan but yea it doesn't feel like the smartest advertising strategy!

-T

I don't know.

It may be a new era in transparency.

How often are tricks offered that have severe angle problems, require an extensive set up so that they are one-off first tricks only,require special knowledge of impossible sleights, etc., etc.?

Showing what the trick looks like in performance and what the modus operandi is provide important information if one is buying the trick to perform.

"A new era of transparency"? I couldn't disagree with that statement more.

I loved the presentation and that was sufficient for me to want to buy the trick. Magician or layperson. However, seeing the secret revealed made me change my mind. Especially at $425 bucks. Whomever made the decision to include the secret in such a public way should be fired. Really. Hire me and I will get your trick sold to more people, not less.....


Addressing all of what you say is pretty easy. A trick description can describe things verbally as to skills required and provide information about the trick without revealing the secret...

So a caveat: I currently have poor internet and haven't watched the video. That makes me not 100% sure on the context, but here are some thoughts:

- I second the idea that some trailers are too vague in terms of requirements/limitations. Honesty is refreshing - perhaps some of those were relevant here.

- Sometimes, you're buying a particular trick/routine. Some times, you're buying a utility prop, and the seller wants the buyer to be properly educated to know why it's great (and should be bought), so shares more. Jeff Copeland's blackbird is a particularly great example of this, and I loved how clear the trailer was. Quiver was pretty clear, too, though not quite as obvious.

- Other times, you're buying a routine, and the (overall) method is known, so a reveal doesn't matter. Why would people buy the routine? Because they want to know the subtletes/details that the magician has to offer. Or they want to support the creator and perform the routine their way.

- Just because someone knows the method doesn't mean that they can create the needed props - buying some things has a purpose.

Perhaps the situation here is some combination of the three? Again, I haven't seen the trailer (yet), but all of these are valid reasons to "why would you buy it, even though it's been revealed?" The first two can answer why they might have done so.

I say, just dumb...

Propdog do the same with most of there wallets which I had a big issue with when I returned to magic, although I'm not happy about it unfortunately things have changed these days and things like ethics, secrets etc just don't exist anymore so we just have to decide if we're willing to bite the bullet and make the purchase or use something else.

Looking on the bright side though Propdog do give an exceptional service so it's swings and roundabouts.

Magicians assume that laymen have a ravenous desire to figure out our secrets...they don't.

Firstly...we share the majority of our effects with other magicians...very,very few laymen get the chance to see most of the magic we all practice and share...WITH EACH OTHER.

Secondly...even without YouTube exposure, most laymen who are watching an effect for the sole purpose of "figuring it out" don't need YouTube for an explanation. They will defend their theory of a tricks secret regardless if it's correct or not.

Thirdly...with so much concern over how effects are accomplished and the focus on the mechanical procedures to obtain an effects outcome, there is very little discussion among magicians about presentation. We all ooh and ahh the fellow at the magic club who does impeccable double lifts and convincing retention vanishes yet when this fellow performs he bores everyone to tears with his bland presentation...but who cares?! His double lift and retention vanish are the important things! Right???

I enjoy a magic performance even if I know the secret due to the presentation...I believe audiences are no different. I have had spectators approach me after seeing my linking ring routine who are familiar with the secret, yet tell me that they loved watching it performed. Its not the trick in and of itself that makes magic an art form...its the entertainer.

Given the trend towards fake news and false persona and and confusion over which sources to trust,
why would a lay person assume the stated method is the real one? Why should a magician?

What if you spend $425 (mystery as to where you got it) on his trick in the hopes it will make you famous (mystery as to why you want that),
and you discover the real secret is different than advertised and better? Will you complain?

Have you ever purchased a trick and then been disappointed in the method, or elated over the discovery since it can be used for other things?
Either means you formed an expectation based on a guess or assumption about what the method is --
maybe you even did some Internet research on similar effects. What is different if your assumption is offered by the seller?

Consider a trick being offered for sale on the Café'. If it is so good, why is the person selling it "unopened?"
One might assume they bought it just to learn the secret and now want their money back.

What if the seller here wants to avoid the "resale" stigma and wants serious buyers who will actually perform it?

Not to say that I agree with this approach -- just that I can imagine some reasons why.

If it's unopened, then they might not know the secret - it's unopened.

But why? I can think of a bunch of completely legitimate reasons that aren't that.
- It was a gift, but it wasn't something they were excited by.
- Selling it for a friend.
- It's legitimately good, but didn't meet a requirement they have (e.g. clothing.)
- They bought a spare but don't need it, the first one is that good.

And I can think of more, too.

I don't think the analogy to a resale fits here particularly well. This is a sales trailer, to get people excited about a product to purchase it when they haven't heard of it before. They're trying to make many sales, not just one, as a consumer to another consumer.

The point that I thought I made was that this seller may wish to avoid anyone purchasing it just to discover the secret.
By revealing the secret up front they may only sell to people who wish to perform it -- and justify the high price.

Methinks the use of the term "unopened" means the prop was not played with, but the DVD may have been watched and the trick rejected.
I cannot imagine anyone who purchases a trick and doesn't at least check it out before deciding it "isn't for them."

But, your alternative suggestions are also valid. I am less trusting, I guess. "Selling for friend" does not mean the trick was not opened,
only that this friend may have said it was unopened.

You now offer opinions as to the motivations of this seller. You may be right, but the are just guesses.

My opinion is that this seller is trying to form some idea of exclusivity and to encourage its use in the field.

We are probably both wrong, or maybe both right. Maybe it is just a mistake or a scheme by an irate employee

You might want to go back and reread the original post. There's no "seller", we're talking about a sales trailer, you know, like promotional/marketing material for the product. Except the poster is complaining that it reveals too much about the method.

It's the manufacturer who made this and is trying to sell the product, *not* an individual posting a reveal, and certainly not an individual trying to sell.

Again, this was a product media, as indicated by the topic title: (emphasis mine)

Weird. I never mentioned or implied a single individual. Somebody put this on the market and expect to get a return. That is a seller.

defined "A seller is an individual or entity that exchanges any type of good or service in return for payment."

What do you mean there is no "seller?" For sale means there is a seller. Yup "promotional/marketing material" posted by a seller
in the hopes of getting someone to buy. I don't care who the "entity" is, they are trying to sell something here.

What does "product media" mean unless there is an intent to sell?
Google made more than 4 Million searches and came up with no definition for "product media."
Looked up "trailer" too just in case the definition changed in the last week. Nope, "A trailer is an advertisement or a commercial ..."

Back on topic, there may be a something to watch for in other selling attempts on the Internet. Is exposure good for sales?

Actually, I think you did imply a single individual.

First when you brought up resale (the original manufacturer doesn't typically resell magic, or at least provide promotional videos for it - a reseller would just use the original.

But more important because typically the manufacturer is different from the point of sale to the end user: Murphys produces a lot of magic, but you need a retail license to buy from them, Otherwise, you purchase it from at Penguin, Vanishing Inc, etc. Sometimes the line is blurred and a company does both (e.g. Sansminds, or Mark Mason), but even in Mark Mason's case, there's a distinction between the original creator and the retail category.

The corner store (seller) doesn't do TV spots for Twinkies - Hostess does those. You can't buy from Hostess.

That's why we usually refer to them with different terms - and the manufacturer is typically the one to put out marketing videos. An "irate employee" isn't going to slip one over on the team and release the method - it's something that takes a lot of time and money to produce. It was definitely intentional.

The "media" in product media doesn't mean it has to be for sale. It could be branding information, logos, tutorials, whitepapers/information, etc.. There's plenty companies will do to increase brand recognition without a the intent to sell something specific. Google has product media, and most of the time you're not buying something from them.

All that said, I do agree with you that I would be very interested to see some statistics on whether exposure helps or hurts sales. However, I suspect some additional breakdowns/categories for the products would be necessary - I strongly suspect that exposure of packet tricks would affect sales differently than exposure of a new kind of holdout.

Yup, there are many types of sellers - entities that offer something that will induce a buyer to act.

Why don't you write your own dictionary if you don't like the ones everyone else uses? And be sure to let Google know what "media product" is. You say they have it,
but they don't seem to realize it.

Also, "imply" is an active verb about the presenter's intent. The fact that you seem to want to extract some special interpretation is your choice,
but you don't get to dictate either my motive or intent in any post. What I did and intend to do was use "sell" in the standard and defined way
that embraces all of the activities you mention. Maybe there should be further delineation to separate fake news and ad imagineering from fact and product description.
It might be a new field for you to launch. I look forward to your book.

I wonder what it is you are trying to sell about yourself. Who are you writing these posts for? Not me, certainly since I own several dictionaries,
plus hold a Masters Degree in Organizational Communications and another in Educational Technology, and was a sales consultant and marketing consultant
for many decades. But, all that is my selling you on the notion that it is OK for you to preach to the masses, but need not use me as the lectern.

....

Why not "YouTube Exposure" for products using that platform as a subset of Internet media? That way, observers on a magic performance can go directly
from recording a magic effect on their iPhone to searching for the method to buying the product. Actually, they will not have to go to the show at all and spoil it
for everyone else. Such fun!

I could say the same to you.

I don't feel the need to throw around credentials to prove a point.
I'm glad you used to be in the industry, but things can also change quickly. Knowledge can quickly become outdated, and definitions can change.



Ok, I'll play this semantics game one last time.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/seller
"Someone who sells; a vendor; a clerk."
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/someone
"Some person."

Note how this differs from "vendor"
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/vendor
"A person or a company that vends or sells."
Which specifically calls out the company option.

Also different from "reseller"
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/reseller
Which also starts with "a company or individual".

Merriam-Webster is similar. Which dictionary are you using?
At the very least, it's somewhat ambiguous, and both interpretations seem within reason.

Here's that info about product media, it's on the first page of results: https://yourbusiness.azcentral.com/make-......940.html

And I find I'm tired of this pointless debate. (Why are we arguing?) I know, you'll find a reason for another post, to get the last word in, as you so like. I'll try hard not to reply, because I'd really rather get back to the original topic, or let the thread just die.

There you are selling again. And it is has not been a debate, another word you might look up.

If "both interpretations seem within reason" then why do you state your opinions as universal truths while attacking other's usage?
Why did you interject the meaning of "seller" at all? or make any assumptions or projection on my usage that you now say is reasonable.

Is there music to accompany this double shuffle? The solution is obvious. Just do not respond to anything I post, or even read them if it upset you so.
If you have a problem with anything I say, that is what PMs are for.

.......

I will be happy to read your opinions about the topic of this thread. It is you opinions about my opinions that is the problem.

Interesting though, that you say "definitions can change." Why should they? Who says so? If they do, what is the authority to rely on?
Good communications relies on common understanding of concepts and terms. That is why any formal debate starts with an agreement on terms.

The OP refers to a Youtube trailer (poster's opinion) connected to a product and price (selling in my archaic opinion). The important part is that
a method is revealed (may even be the real one). Is this a good idea or not? Is it a good marketing approach?
are there potential dangers to this approach?

I would be interested in your opinions on such questions. It is not any "last word." It can be a beginning.

I had no interest in the effect until I saw this thread. Having watched the video I would not be able to bring myself to spend the money to have it. The modus seems amazing but even if unknown to my audience would now be suspected if Googled. To chancy for my taste. I have dropped many things from my act because of exposer. Rather not start with something already out there for all to see.