Capital markets tend to level-set themselves.

I understand both sides. Johannes put a certain amount of time, effort, passion and money into this project and wants to sell it for a price that he feels reflects that.

Consumers evaluate what something is worth to them, and that mostly has nothing to do with the above factors.

What will happen is what always happens. Either
1. Enough people are willing to pay the price, Johannes is happy and the rest will have to either pay as well or not get the product
2. Not enough people are willing to pay the price and Johannes will have to either adjust or walk away with less than he wanted

Only time will tell. The marketing does indeed use hype and FOMO to sell. So does a lot of other marketing. It often works, and it is a choice.

Nice recap! And honestly, I don’t know what I’m doing, I haven’t released a product like this before, I’m just following tutorials and hoping for the best. But as you said time will tell.

Thank you, Marty! It’s not an easy journey and every support means a lot!

It's a tough one, Johannes. I sincerely wish you all the best in this amazingly great project. Your thinking and the solutions you discover are always brilliant.
You do, however, have some incompatible logical choices at work here.
A wonderful trick which also:
- Cannot be demonstrated because the method will reveal itself to magicians
- Is extremely expensive, certainly for amateurs
- Is a download
- Requires some cheap, apparently easy DIY
So, some assumptions may be made, and I'm sure you've thought them through:
- The first public performance of it, based on your reasoning, will reveal it to many magicians immediately - the very reason you're not showing a full performance video. Those magicians will perform it and be seen by other magicians, and so it spreads ad infinitum
- It's a download only. MP4s, PDFs spread like wildfire through disreputable channels. Assuming that there are people who are on the cusp, the "swinging voters" who normally don't buy from pirates but have been tempted and maybe transgressed once or twice, getting quality like this for twenty bucks, instead of what I fully believe is a fair asking price if measured by hours spent on R&D, would be very, very tempting for them. So exposure grows exponentially.
- Your pricing is classic FOMO. Order it now while it's expensive before it becomes REALLY expensive. (I won't comment on the tone of the marketing, others have covered that from their perspective.)

I've been trying to figure out how you can resolve these issues. Seriously. I couldn't so I asked ChatGPT to see if a machine could figure it out. I don't think its reasoning actually cracks the problem, but it may be useful food for thought:
ChatGPT ----

He’s holding two incompatible beliefs at once:
The effect is so transparent to magicians that a full-performance video would instantly expose the method.
Selling it as a high-priced, download-only, DIY product is commercially viable once it’s in the wild.
Those can’t both be true for long. If (1) is true, then piracy + exposure is inevitable after first public performance. If (2) is the plan, then controlling exposure is already lost the moment it ships.

[Robot's suggestions]
1 Accept exposure, optimise speed
-Release fast, price confidently (ie no FOMO, full whack), show the full effect.
-Assume method will be known in months.
-Make money on first-wave legitimacy.
2 Control performance rights
-Licence it like theatre magic: limited buyers, contractual performance restrictions, high price.
This only works if he embraces exclusivity, not mass sales.
3 Sell method plus structure
-Admit magicians may infer the method.
-Sell the handling, timing, psychology, staging—the things inference doesn’t give.
-Then a full performance video actually helps him.
What he's currently doing is trying to avoid all three costs simultaneously, which is impossible.
----- End ChatGPT
After all that, I can only come to one conclusion:
The WHOLE PROBLEM comes from "magicians may infer the method".
So, inevitably, pre-sale is it.
Good luck, Johannes and I mean that sincerely. I'm not trying to rain on your parade; you have a brilliant mind and I trust you've already thought all this through. Cheers!
PS, EXTRA THOUGHT: The only other thing that just occurred to me is revise the trick so that IT'S NOT DOWNLOAD ONLY. This would be a fundamental revision and take heaps more work but if it was reframed so that it needed a unique gimmick, available only from you, it would solve most, if not all of the problems. It can't be a cosmetic add-on. It has to be fundamental. I have no idea what that would be. I know this seems to be a solution looking for a problem. Yet he problem is already there, but it's not magical, it's marketing.

Could you ask chatgpt for a tldr because I ain't reading that. I'm looking forward to the release. I placed my order on the 26th

Pre-ordered? Good! It's obviously a fantastic trick. Enjoy it!

Here's Craig Petty and Lloyed Barnes sharing their thoughts about The Breakthrough System after seeing the methods:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIysUSoSEn0&t=5685s

I am content with the original Breakthrough which sold for 20 bucks. Very easy to figure out what this newly slightly extended and overpriced version does. However, I think all the purchasers who are fair, will be mad when they see how part of the trick is not shown in the trailer. Ethically, this is trailer trash. Good trick, but now, due to the lack of ethics, which often magicians correctly bash in other tricks, a total pass for me. all you need is the original breakthrough, imho, to figure it all out.

To make such statements, I’m assuming that you’ve actually SEEN the new project?

Slightly extended? You talk like you know the full scope of the masterclass and have seen all the 15 different versions and the full routines in provides.

As already stated in my original post, this is the price of my work and 1-on-1 attention I provide to my customers and it is not for everyone.

Just as a thought exercise - if you think what you get is overpriced, (which you say without even owning the product) I invite you to take any plot you wish and create as comprehensive take on it as I have (including versions where a spectator can perform the effect) and do it on the level where all the most respected inventors and creators who witness your creation unanimously agree that this is the best take on the plot destined to become a neo-classic. Then count the hours it takes to achieve a feat like this and put a price on your work. You might price your work differently if you are able to create something like this, but this is simply the price of my work, which is not just the best in the plot, but one of the most impossible routines in magic in general - it doesn't happen every day a routine is released where a spectator can perform the effect themselves with their own item.

And as I have also stated previously, people have very different taste and understanding of magic. If you think you have more expertise and knowledge in magic than Cyril and Gregory Wilson to evaluate how valuable a certain creation is and what it takes to create something like this, then I'm not going to argue with you. It simply means you are not the audience I'm trying to reach and this product is not for you!

But I'm glad to hear you were content with my previous release and I appreciate your support!

Maybe provide 2 of the harshest but overall honest critics here an advanced copy for a unbiased review?

He doesn't have to, he already has positive comments from top pros. Buuut, I wouldn't mind having a sneak peek lol

Yeah, he def doesn't have to lol but it might take a lot of those who are on the fence to take the plunge! I don't think you've been a critic lol, so no sneak peek for you!

How many versions are shown in the trailer?

15 versions of this effect probably has a lot of duds with 99.9% of all magicians using maybe 4 versions at most.

I apologize for being a bit tough on this. But I am quite sure lunatik hit the nail on the head. You do not need 15 versions and most magicians would only use maybe 3 versions. Also, we all know that a trick will almost never get stronger with repeated different versions, also spectators tend to get bored with seeing what is a "different version", but to them, is the same thing.
As a penetration that is not visual at all, the coin or tab through can is not the hottest thing out there. I prefer something like a pen through coin, which I do with a borrowed coin and pen. They can see the penetration go in, see the pen stuck clearly through the coin, and see it come out slowly with no hole. that is a magical penetration. But the real issue is that anyone who has the original Breakthrough, has enough. And they will also know that hiding how the tab/coin gets into the can, and that it is glaringly and blatantly hidden here. Lately, I thought magicians cared about a trailer being relevant and even close to honest. This is not. So again, that is a real issue for me. I will be performing this trick but I will choose out the best version or develop my own, and do that version--what works best -- and only that. For me, repeating a trick with a different version doesn't add anything to the magic. I will do what version works best for me, do it cleanly and stop. This is a very very good trick, but there has been too much "pre-show" work here, before people see their videos, and see what was not, and what should have been in the trailer, since it is a fundamental part of the trick.

Again, you do not own the product and do not know what is being offered. In the words of Gregory Wilson who has seen all the methods and versions: “Ther are no fillers.” All of them are practical and have their place and time. The goal with all the versions is to give a performer maximum freedom and flexibility when it comes to this plot. But of course everyone is free to learn and use what they choose to.

Do the spectators in the trailer seem bored to you? When THEY are performing the same effect, even though they just saw it, it's not "the same thing". In the multi-phase routine the effect can become increasingly impossible and you can also end the routine with a super strong visual version. Why is this still a discussion, haven't you read the thread? This topic has been already covered and answered several times. If routines like this or Ambitious Card or 3 Card Monte etc are not your cup of tea, don't perform it, as simple as that!



If you are comparing this to pen through coin, then sorry I can't help you with this. Keep performing pen through coin I guess.



You are talking like you own the product or have seen the methods. If you have any questions then simply ask or listen to the people who HAVE SEEN THE METHODS. Like Gregory Wilson, Cyril, Lloyed Barnes. Watch the video I posted in the thread where Craig Petty and Lloyed Barnes discuss the effect.



Again, no-one is forcing you to buy and perform this or Ambitious Card or any other routine where an effect is repeated. If it's not your thing, it's not your thing. Why do you keep repeating yourself?



Again, you're talking like you own the product! When you are performing this as a multi-phase routine (OR just one-off) you start your performance WITH NO "PRE-SHOW", NO SET-UP, 100% IMPROMPTU - you borrow a can and that's ALL you are using - the effect can be completely self-contained in a single can, this was very clearly communicated in the trailer and also on the sales page. Are you not paying attention or are you purposefully writing this with malicious intent?


Countrymaven, at this point I have to call you out and please don't take it personally - you are not the only one here in the Cafe with this behavior, but you have a tendency to make accusations, when you actually just seem to have a question.

What you are doing is called Presumptive Accusation and it's a maladaptive behavior. And I have to shine light on this, because when members here engage with this behavior it contributes nothing productive to our discourse. It just demonstrates and communicates emotional dysregulation and cognitive laziness and it only harms the actual discussion. No-one is going to win from this. So please, people let's try to refrain from that kind of behavior to keep this community and discussions respectful and productive.

I've been very patient with people who form their questions as accusations, instead of simply asking their question respectfully if something was not clear for them. If someone here has a question you can simply ask the question with respect as other members of the Cafe have demonstrated here and get your answer. I'm a very friendly and approachable guy, I'm answering every email, every dm, every chat and I'm happily communicating with everyone who has a serious interest in my projects.

Countrymaven, by now you have made abundantly clear that you have everything figured out, you don't care if the effect is repeatable, you are not interested in this product and you are not going to buy this. Everyone here got the message already the first time. Why are you keep returning to this thread already for the fourth time just to repeat the same thing over and over again:

"Very easy to figure out"

"a total pass for me"

We get it, this product is not for you and I agree. So feel free to move on now. No need to spam this thread with the same points over and over again. You have made it very clear to everyone - it's a total pass for you and why, so now I politely ask you to move on and direct your energy elsewhere.

You said you're satisfied with what you already have in this plot - great, so just keep using what you have!

Wish you all the best!

Johannes

You are likely correct. But I don't think the ideas of multiple versions is that you would show a spectator more than one or two of them. After all it is the same effect from their POV. Perhaps you would repeat it with a different method if that cancels out the first method.

But typically the value of multiple versions is that each performer can choose the one (or two) that suits them the best. The more versions, the more to choose from. Many projects come with a ton of ideas and routines, but nobody is going to do more than one or two of them in a set.

First review is here: