Hacker News Reader

Comment by sharkweek | Hacker News Reader

I've always felt the real benefit of being on Shark Tank is the amazing publicity that the show offers, no matter whether or not a deal is obtained. I recently interviewed Proof Eyewear (http://www.iwantproof.com) on what the experience provided (I'll post it here once it's published next week). During the airing of the show and the following weekend, they could barely keep their site standing (over two million uniques in 24hrs), and the past few weeks since airing have seen huge increases in business.

Random note -- the application is sent to a @yahoo email address... I find that kind of funny all things considered -- SharkTankCasting@yahoo.com (http://abc.go.com/shows/shark-tank/casting)

View on HN

> I've always felt the real benefit of being on Shark Tank is the amazing publicity that the show offers, no matter whether or not a deal is obtained.

That's probably why the producers of the show get a 5% equity, no matter whether or not a deal is obtained.[1]

You'll notice that sometimes a presenter is very careful not to mention another company they have, typically one that's moderately successful. It's not because they don't want the sharks to get it piece, it's that they'd end up now giving up a 5% equity stake in that company too.

[1] http://a.abc.com/media/primetime/sharktank/SharkTank3OpenCal...

Yes, the main benefit of being on the show is the publicity (as long they don't skewer you). It seems that at least once per show there is a company that has little real need for funding, and I'm sure they went on there with the specific intent of getting the publicity and little else.

One peculiar thing that I noticed in those statistics is that Daymond John was leading in terms of deals. I was sure he would be dead last...I rarely see him do deals.

One peculiar thing that I noticed in those statistics is that Daymond John was leading in terms of deals.

He isn't. Look at the numbers again, Barbara Corcoran has done the most deals, Kevin O'Leary has invested the most money.

Yep. I've always figured the best thing to do (for Dragon's Den, I've seen a lot less Shark Tank but it seems identical) is to be ready to capitalize on the advertising and then aim for no-deal.

Especially since what I've heard about the process of getting the deal actually done (as opposed to TV done, a lot of them fall through post-air) is that it'll sap a lot of time and effort anyway.

It's worth noting that advertising is not free: 5% equity or 2% royalty goes to Shark Tank just for appearing. See the last page of http://a.abc.com/media/primetime/sharktank/SharkTank3OpenCal...

Yep, you have to think of that equity stake as the cost for a 5 minute Friday night commercial. I'm assuming such a commercial would cost maybe $30-50k or more, so it seems like a semi-fair deal (although since you are also the one creating the entertainment which lands the sponsor deals maybe not!)

It's better than a commercial. People actually want to watch, instead of changing channels or going to the bathroom.

I wonder if that's unique to Shark Tank. I never heard of it wrt Dragon's Den.

That said, I think if you were really going to go through with that plan you'd probably want to try to find out how often the option has actually been exercised. It may not even be entirely enforceable.

Mixed feeling, sometimes a phone call from them can open a lot of doors. But giving them 50-70% for that can be hard to get around.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com