Guest Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 @ polypodium: good play. I like the idea. But I don't think Erickson is that clever or media savvy. He's an oil guy. He likely saw big dollar signs and a big payday. He didn't know what he was getting into. And now he's not working to promote his work anymore. If he was, you'd see better public relations. The one payoff for this study was the release of HD video. Here we are again with failed promises. This time by a guy blinded by dollar signs, limited vision and ignorance of how modern marketing works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VioletX Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 I like it too Polypodium...would Erickson like it??? I have no idea. I think you should call with your suggestion or suggest it to MM, if nothing more than to just see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Pruitt Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 @ polypodium: good play. I like the idea. But I don't think Erickson is that clever or media savvy. He's an oil guy. He likely saw big dollar signs and a big payday. He didn't know what he was getting into. And now he's not working to promote his work anymore. If he was, you'd see better public relations. The one payoff for this study was the release of HD video. Here we are again with failed promises. This time by a guy blinded by dollar signs, limited vision and ignorance of how modern marketing works. You couldn't be more wrong about Adrian. He knew exactly what he was getting into, and it wasn't for the money. He's far from ignorant; the guy came from nearly nothing, and is a self-made man. He's very smart, and is certainly not "blinded by dollar signs" when it comes to sasquatch research and furthering the field. Just because he hasn't fully disclosed his data, experiences, and motivations to a group of enthusiasts on the internet doesn't make him a nefarious, ignorant, or greedy person. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 +1 Matt!!! You are absolutely correct about Adrian, he is a self-made man and did not invest millions in a project because he thought he would get a return on his investment. Thanks for your post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gershake Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 (edited) EDIT: I probably shouldn't ask this on the open forums. Edited February 20, 2013 by gershake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gershake Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 This is for any Premium members who are interested... the BFF 1.0 archive has an entire thread on the Erickson project. It's very interesting because the info/rumors where fresh at the time and they do have more detail than what we are hearing today. Adrian Erickson's Kentucky Project (2009) Thanks for this link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 Adrian should go the Christopher Munch route and use Kickstarter. I'm sure it'd get funded. Anyone in contact with Mr. Erickson, show him this. http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/547992005/letters-from-the-big-man-home-video-distribution Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 ^ I've suggested the same. I have little sympathy though for the likes of Hersom and Erickson. They made dumb business decisions. Since they had real skin in the game and the most to lose, they should've taken the reigns and been responsible for marketing and PR. To allow Melba to run a one woman show has turned out to be a disastrous decision. Look at the state of the SGP website as a case in point. Even if it wasn't them in control, money should have been set aside to handle PR by acquiring an agency. And now Erickson is in the hole and he's trying to dig himself out. He has no one to blame but himself. He shouldered too much counter-party risk. He needed to keep the project relevant by doing online marketing. They did none of that. They just put a site up and let it collect dust. That is not the way to build an audience and create a following that could've generated a passive income to help fund the project. Both failed to realize the importance of public relations and perception. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steenburg Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 (edited) I posted this elsewhere but I think it applies here as well. Personally this topic has gone on so long all of these questions and issues are coming up for the third and forth time now. one big circle as earlier posts are now long forgotten. Remember this film footage of Erickson's was shown to John Green in a private viewing at his home and John was not impressed with what he saw. Also in the case of the Erickson project, many of the people he was relying on as contributors in the early going were exposed for hoaxing and other shenanigans over time. Adrian I be leave had the best of intentions but he did a very poor job checking out the credibility of those he was working with, Standing. Brisson, Etc, etc. He was at the Green summit in Harrison in April 2011, proclaiming the year of the Sasquatch! Well its now 2013 and the long awaited documentary seems to be staled indefinitely. Now this is only my opinion having only spoke to the man face to face once. But I think when the truth about certain people was reveled to him it took a lot out of his earlier enthusiasm for the whole thing. He was no different then many others in this field. Hoping that a big break through is around the corner so bad that common sense takes a leave of absence. Only to come back and slap you in the face. Resulting in the wind being taken from your sails so to speak. Just my opinion. I really hope I am wrong but I doubt it. Thomas Steenburg Edited February 22, 2013 by steenburg 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 Thomas: plus one from me. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 Well if the case Thomas, then he should fold up the tent, take down the website, turn off the lights to the office, unplug the coffee maker and shut her down. It's over. The Erickson Project is dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steenburg Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 Well if the case Thomas, then he should fold up the tent, take down the website, turn off the lights to the office, unplug the coffee maker and shut her down. It's over. The Erickson Project is dead. Or it is on a back burner with the hope something may be salvaged from it at some future date? Thomas Steenburg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Thepattywagon Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 How does one turn hoaxed video into footage that is authentic and indisputable ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steenburg Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 How does one turn hoaxed video into footage that is authentic and indisputable ? Don't really have to. Remember most documentaries are geared for the general public. People whom don't give the Sasquatch question 5 minutes of thought a year? One of my favorites was Al Wolpners, "Monsters, mysteries, or myths" back in 1975. Very good show but it wasn't written off just because the producers chose to include 12 minutes of Ivan marks footage. They just throw in phrases like purported or alleged. And let the viewing audience make up it's own mind. Erickson could still come out with something decent to watch to get folks thinking, even if the videos are not the ground breaking evidence he at one time thought they were. Thomas Steenburg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Thepattywagon Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 If his film footage was THAT convincing to him at the time he bought it, why would he and any others involved in this project suddenly be balking regarding its veracity. If it was that good, it would have been out by now, if for no other reason than to beat others to the punch. Just how many years does it take to put together a film documentary whose centerpiece is video(s) of an alleged BF and the few people who were associated with the back story? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts