C1TV - The Evolution of a Channel...


This portion of the site (moved from the old location to this blog)

is dedicated to delineating the process design evolution. C1tv is

an alternative life


network that launched out of Miami in Early 2000.

In 1999, Tantra Productions was approached by a
group of investors that gathered a small amount of capital
to purchase entertainment property the would appeal
to a "Gay Urban Male" between the age 24 to 45. The
launch approach would be to first purchase time on local cable
providers in key markets, combine it with web promo materials
programming guides with links to merchandising.
This approach functions exactly how paid programming like
Celebrity sponsored infomercials function.


The marketing plan was to purchase the time, resell that time
to other commercial ad placement to a specific niche market,
eventually gaining enough capital to broadcast their own
signal to satellite transmission distribution as a larger M.S.O.


My role, to design and creative direct the project from concept to
launch. For me an dream come true. The years in the business
taught me that it was too good to be true, clients just don't let
go of this much control. Therefore, this site is dedicated to
the process and evolution of a project and how funding affects
and frustrates projects.


A small group always grows, with new ideas and hopefully
the critical mass of dollars to keep the new project aloft. The next by product
of the growth is diversion and erosion of the idea set that move the project
off the original intent. All product and network launches have
this same life by my observations. Few gel while others slowly
bleed away, hopefully to be resurrected in a new structure and influx
of funding and creativity.


As this project grew, naturally, more capital was needed and therefore
more investors were added. More investors meant more
opinions on how the channel should be positioned and marketed
and the evolution of the network diluted through this evolution.


When the project launched, C1TV opened in 6 markets
and none of those markets really took hold as an advertising
vehicle, its original intent.


Several of the principles had tried this under a couple of other
project names prior to C1TV. To the best of my knowledge,
they continue position for a launch still holding
rights to the niche programming, their main asset.


Browse the following sections to see the growth of an idea,
the growth of a network identity and the process of our
current communication technology dividing itself to the micro-niche
of technology. Okay, this isn't Madison Avenue concepts.
It is thoughtful with study and focus.
What this site represents is how small markets/ideas evolve.


Again, from my position, this is the common formula I've seen
on most projects lacking major funding. The fun 
of the site/project was developing programming niche.
This newly defined market, very popular now with programming like 
"Queer Eye for the Straight Guy", was defined in this groups mind 
several years prior, but without the funding and tight overall concept.




 The client had preconceived the "Brand identity" to be the Gas Pump. One of the principles had a previously attempt a launch under a name, "acme" with a similarly "uniquely" branded network.

I have always felt that this pump, though random, fit the original concept of the network perfectly. "Why a gas pump" test audiences asked; the answer always came back from he same group focusing on the unique message and congnative value.



The clients left font and color to be worked in the original creative pitch. Several post-production
companies pitched to the small group of investors. The difference and I supposed the success
in the pitch was that our concepts and breadth of concept fit their multiple format delivery
concept as well as a better understanding of their target market.

So the materials on this page delineate the overall concepts. Like a litmus test, the clients reactions
were sampled during the presentation. This may be "selling" to a client, criticized 
by associates of mine, however I do believe this is the best way to achieve a consistant 
vision between the creative process the principles. If these two elements are not 
alligned, the process will never even achieve the launch



















Later, As investors were added, the logo was revisited. And typically, the rework is way 
off the mark. An unsophisticataed "C" with a "1" punched through it became
the brand. Unfortuantly too many logos started to fight for the identity; 
another unfortuate by product of too many unfocused iedas with too little 
experience driving the vision of the "product"




Please reload

Recent Posts

November 15, 2018

February 2, 2016

Please reload

Please reload

copyright ©1993, ©1996, ©1998,

©2001, © 2015,  © 2018

For demonstration

Multiple Companies & Rick Rubin


Blog is purely an opinion or satire... first & fifth amendment...