TFC Tidbit of the Day 2-Evaluating a Platform
A good thing to find out is the extent to which any given platform or distributor licensing to platforms have marketing tools and/or commitments in place. Will doing a deal with them be like having your film in the basement of a crap dvd store in a strip mall in Iowa (no offense to Iowans), or, will it be like having it on the shelves facing out in a big chain with some advertising, or will it be somewhere in between? Not all distributors and aggregators market films well or even at all so choose carefully or have a back-up marketing plan.
Much of this information can be found within our Digital Distribution Guide, available to our members. For this week, you can gain access to the full Guide by contributing $35 to our IndieGoGo campaign.
Orly Ravid June 28th, 2010
Posted In: Digital Distribution, Distribution Platforms
Tags: Digital Distribution, digital distribution guide, digital platforms, independent film, indiegogo, TFC, The Film Collaborative
TFC Tidbit of the Day 1-Choosing a Digital Platform
In this tidbit series, we hope to give good insight into the world of digital distribution in a way that is helpful to the filmmaker.
Digital platforms should be treated like online visual media stores, not distributors. For this reason, one should be very mistrustful if a company asks for exclusive license rights. Even when dealing with aggregators, they should only have exclusive rights to get the film onto specific platforms and at most they can ask you to follow specific windows in handling other platforms (By way of comparison, such a request from a brick-and-mortar video store such as Blockbuster would be occasional at best, and then they would pay a lot for that and it would only be for a short window of time, such as six (6) months).
Much of this information can be found within our Digital Distribution Guide, available to our members. For this week, you can gain access to the full Guide by contributing $35 to our IndieGoGo campaign.
Orly Ravid June 27th, 2010
Posted In: Digital Distribution, Distribution Platforms
Tags: Digital Distribution, digital distribution guide, digital platforms, independent film, indiegogo, TFC, TFC tidbit of the day, The Film Collaborative
MAKING SENSE OF DISTRIBUTION PANELS – POST LAFF’s SEIZE THE POWER SYMPOSIUM
The Film Collaborative was recently on a panel at the Los Angeles Film Festival as part of their SEIZE THE POWER SYMPOSIUM which focused on DIY & DIGITAL Distribution. This was the description of the panel we were on and that I moderated and will discuss below:
NEW DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION INITIATIVES
Leading digital distribution executives present new solutions for distribution
as they explain their business models and the opportunities they offer
filmmakers to reach audiences and bring in revenue for their films.
Erick Opeka, New Video
Nolan Gallagher, Gravitas Ventures
Orly Ravid, The Film Collaborative (TFC)
Scilla Andreen, IndieFlix
After the panel was over someone asked how he could decide which one of us to work with; he liked us all. It was clear to me that even though we had just finished an hour long panel at which we each presented our respective companies and then answered questions, it was not enough to make clear to everyone the way in which to relate to each company and how to make decisions about whom to work with in distribution.
Recently on Ted Hope’s blog
Jon Reiss and Ted Hope and many others including filmmakers discussed the relevance of panels and expert books and even more recently Jon Reiss wrote a blog titled “Coping with Symposium Workshop Brain Fry”. That is what I want to address here, specifically in relation to the panel I moderated and was on called “New Digital Initiatives”.
At the LAFF Panel all the companies discussed what they do and here’s some of that information below, and what we recommend a filmmaker do to make sense of information given at a panel.
Gravitas Ventures talked about its focus on Cable VOD and the fact that it works with Warner Brothers (WB) which (when WB takes a film) can lead to a film being available in up to as many as 50,000,000 homes via about 30 – 40 cable operators and up to 80,000,000 – 90,000,000 homes when one factors in digital. When WB does not take the film on Gravitas can at least get the film out to about up to 12,000,000 – 15,000,000 Cable VOD homes. Of course one in this circumstance has to realize that when WB is in the picture, there are two fees being taken as well as two companies being relied on to provide information and to pay. The other aspects to analyze are 1. the benefits of having a studio involved in VOD and Digital often leads to HIGHER revenues from Cable MSOs (Multi System Operators) and digital platforms and also MARKETING LEVERAGE. But, 2. the Studios are also glutted and not necessarily focusing on your film and you may get lost or inadvertently shafted (and I know it’s happened) so one has to have contractual commitments or protective clauses, and 3. They won’t let you keep digital rights usually, though maybe Netflix SVOD; and 4. accounting can be soft on the details. Gravitas does 2-year deals and about 350 -400 films per year and is the largest VOD aggregator at this time. Gravitas noted revenues per film ranging from as low as $5,000 – $250,000. A FILMMAKER must ADDRESS MARKETING and COSTS RECOUPMENT whether in dealing with Gravitas or any other Cable VOD & Digital Aggregator (e.g. TFC also works with Brainstorm Media & Fluent / Lions Gate), or any of the other studios who are or will be opening up to “independent product”.
The Film Collaborative’s entire purpose is to help sift through the information available at the time your film is ready or will be ready for release and help you resolve your COMPLETE DISTRIBUTION STRATEGY. Gravitas Ventures can get you the VOD and digital access you need but they don’t necessarily do much in the way of marketing so that will be more up to you to either have them commit to that effort or do it yourself (and perhaps in collaboration with us and our marketing partners). A marketing plus (+) though for Gravitas is that if WB gets behind your film, they can get iTunes and the Cable Operators to give your film a bigger marketing push. This can be very valuable.
New Video is a very well respected DVD distributor that is known for doing a great job, including on the marketing side, and for being very transparent, filmmaker friendly and very reasonable in its fees. It takes for example just 15% fee for digital distribution, and 20% for Cable VOD but again, like Gravitas, it works with Warner Brothers so that’s two fees there.. (but no different than many distributors who do their digital and VOD through Warner Brothers, such as Oscilloscope, Strand, Wolfe, I think Kino, etc.) Their encoding is all done in-house and all one has to do is supply an uncommpressed file) and it seems to be done cheaply (Gravitas who refers out to Fotokem I believe). New Video noted an “Online Management” service to help track your placement and revenues. New Video noted for digital revenue only that revenues range from a similar low as Gravitas did, $5,000 – $150,000 but I also know there have been times that New Video has generated over $250,000 in revenue for a film but that included DVD sales. It should also be noted that VOD is newer to New Video and also the company’s presented revenue range on the panel was regarding docs. It should also be noted that most films with Gravitas don’t get up to the high, and that high is more for the rare hits such as The Secret and Crips & Bloods. New Video notes the success of films that appeal to young men or tech culture (films such as Helvetica and Purple Violets were successful). And of course all the obvious factors help films success in distribution, names, the right genres, niche appeal, and theatrical release (especially if it goes well).
IndieFlix is a very filmmaker friendly and transparent option too and they don’t lock up your rights and as Scilla Andreen mentioned, they take a more HOLISTIC approach and do more grassroots outreach and public / community screening work for films. They give filmmakers a royalty of 70% (NET but modest and capped expenses if desired). They can do DVD releases and they can get you onto iTunes, Netflix and Hulu, all good platforms, Hulu being the least so but actually quite worthwhile for certain films and it can also simply help drive other transactions too. On the Cable VOD & Broadcast side Scilla noted that IndieFlix was providing content for Broadcast and Cable VOD. IndieFlix explained this to me after the panel about their handling of VOD: they do it “via Gravitas and New Video for now until we are able to deliver direct. Gravitas refers content to us and New Video will place content on our site. We all play together very well in the sandbox. I think the real strength is in the partners marketing powers. We do tell filmmakers so that if they choose to go direct they can. All have chosen to go through us since we work so closely with the filmmakers to market.” IndieFlix is also starting a “FILM FESTIVAL IN A BOX” initiative that seems cool. This is what they say about it: “Film Festival in a Box is a social gaming platform that connects people through movies. A game changer no pun intended and a completely out of the box form of distribution and audience building tool in a tiny little package. Film Festival in a Box is a game bridging on and off line communities and connecting people through movies. It’s another delivery platform and revenue stream for the filmmaker. It’s non-exclusive. It’s a game. It’s a social experience. It’s marketing. It incorporates brands in a meaningful way. It is audience building. It’s data collection. It directly connects the filmmaker with his/her audience. It’s more than a game.”
So all in all to answer the QUESTION asked at the PANEL about how do you CHOOSE between service providers and how to sift through the INFORMATION presented on PANELS. HERE’s HOW:
- Recognize that VOD is still 78% of the revenue in the digital space and if your film has Cable VOD potential (names, major fest awards, solid theatrical release, strong niche appeal, genre appeal) then one ought to find the most financially efficient and productive way to have Cable VOD distribution that takes into account the marketing required to drive awareness and transactions.
- Not only do the PERCENTAGE of FEES being taken and HOW MANY FEES are taken but knowing you are comparing right elements… some companies make take a smaller fee but also get less from the platforms or MSOs so do ALL THE MATH.
- Not all companies are right for all films so assessing special talents and interests at companies and experience in handling films that relate yours is key and get REFERENCES.
- Compare Financial terms of the deals on all fronts (including costs recoupment, Delivery / Encoding…)
- Look into your ability to split rights when / if in your best interest.
- Evaluate willingness to memorialize all verbal commitments and promises in writing.
- and again – MARKETING — who is doing what (and if not you, get it in writing).
— ALL THESE DETAILS MATTER — and where we, The Film Collaborative come in is what we note below about helping you know all your options and analyze and implement them AND of course we also offer direct digital distribution for either 15% fee or nominal flat fees (e.g. $500 – $1,200 depending) and we can get your films onto Cable VOD through our various partners (and we don’t take extra commissions for that); and we can get your film onto iTunes in the same way Distribber does and we’re also working with Distribber too (w/out charging an extra fee) and we are direct with many platforms (all the usual suspects) as listed on our site and the list keeps growing… We’ve very excited some new digital platform deals with two big retailers that we have not officially announced yet, stay tuned! We will be direct with some Cable MSOs (VOD) but that will take some more time. And we do have a MARKETING SERVICES menu and complete menu of marketing service options that we can service in-house and in tandem with our top-notch marketing service partners. TFC is committed to end-to-end distribution education and distribution solutions.
Our first written testimonial (we’ve had many oral ones) really fits into the subject of this blog entry:
“The Film Collaborative fills a void. In Indie distribution you can go out and hire a pricey consultant that seems to withhold information and contacts to lure filmmakers along with the proverbial distribution pot of gold, or you can attempt to wade through all the landfill that exists on the internet yourself (it’s all there but good luck!). This is where the Film Collaborative, come in. They have sifted through it all and presented in a transparent way so filmmakers can determine for themselves where their film sits and take action where it best makes sense.”
– Mark Hug, filmmaker of LOVERS IN A DANGEROUS TIME
That’s truly what we’re about, being a trusted and transparent informational resource and strategic partner / connector to all your distribution and marketing options so you can find and customize the best possible distribution solution for your film.
Orly Ravid June 27th, 2010
Posted In: Comcast, Digital Distribution, Distribution Platforms, DIY, Hulu, iTunes, Marketing, Netflix
Post Cannes, Panels, and Publishing — June 2010
On Ted Hope’s website, there is a discussion brewing about the relevance and right pricing of panels and seminars and the degree to which filmmakers should be attentive to and responsible for the business side of their film’s release.
Film is a relatively new art form. It is the most expensive art medium in the world. My thinking is, if it’s your money it’s your decision. If it’s grant money, it’s really a non-issue. If investors are counting on their money back, it behooves you to either let them know up front what the realistic possibilities are, or commit yourself to supporting the return on their investment. TFC’s entire purpose and mission is to try to make up for the fact that the US does not have the same funding as Europe does that supports an industry of art film.
At Cannes I was invited to be part of the Cannes Producer’s Network networking breakfasts and through that I spoke to producers about The Film Collaborative. I have been and will continue to be invited to speak at panels and seminars and all of that industry stuff and seen as an “expert”. I think there’s good and bad that comes with all that. The good is that some great information is often shared, and often for free or for a lot less than one would pay for it if one had to reach out to each panelist individually. One makes connections one might not otherwise. The bad is that filmmakers sometimes think they now have the answers and that is not enough. AND, panels at festivals and markets are often put together by people who actually are not in the day-to-day world of distribution and/or sometimes festivals are swayed by other influences and panels are stacked with not-so-appropriate panelists. Sometimes panels are positioned as having all the information about a topic but are actually quite limited either because of time or the panel itself. The saying “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing” can and does often apply. And in today’s new media world, intimate knowledge with the present space and all its ever-and-quickly-changing nuances is critical. It’s also important not to apply information that may not apply to your film.
The “expert” books are useful (Jon Reiss’ is one we’re fond of especially for docs that can be segmented and merchandized, and Scott Kirsner’s is good too for fan building, and of course Roberta Munroe’s for short films) but with regard to actual distribution details, books are quickly out-of-date for anything new media oriented or related to business opportunities. Whether one likes it or not, people handling lots of films tend to be ahead in knowing about distribution and marketing opportunities and the knowledge is more real and detailed and nuanced. I’m not advocating old world anything; I don’t even believe in rights licensing model but I do believe in the best distribution possible per film, and it’s different per film.
Lawyers love to charge by the hour or take a big commission for their “expertise” and I suggest that a lawyer who has no or little distribution background relating to your deal but doing a distribution contract will get you a great air tight contract perhaps, but a crap distribution deal and a big fat waste of time and money and rights into the film. It’s not black and white of course, I’m just making a point. Every “expert” has a limited perspective to his/her experience and an agenda, and of course that includes me too. So think for yourself, cross-reference, and keep up-to-date, or designate someone on your side to. The digital space is truly changing weekly. The MSOs behind the Cable VOD space are not letting go of their turf any time soon, whilst Google makes its play, and all the Telcos make theirs… CinemaNow is going to be working its Digital Locker at Best Buy (digital) and Blockbuster (digital) and we shall see what happens with iTunes, Hulu and Netflix etc etc. On the DIY digital distribution front — I always await the numbers intel regarding platforms such as FansofFilm, and to see if Amazon VOD can ever generate business for the DIY releases — and for some, 4 and 5 figures of revenue is as much as they could have hoped for or expected, but some it’s not. The dilemma is really evaluating the numbers when a licensing option is an option because there is a certain leverage in the marketplace that bigger distributors still have over the DIY model and unless you’re a brand like Banksy whereby you already have a built in following, your film may have just enough commercial potential to need the distribution and marketing muscle of a company that may be able to do more than you can do via DIY. And yet, for many films, there is no such company that will step forward and a lot one can do on one’s own.
But back to panels – I will say this, I don’t think Ostrow & Company is an appropriate company to be introduced to filmmakers in a panel or industry networking setting (and they have been) because they ask for more than $10,000 up front (I think it’s up to $11,000 or $14,000 on average) and I don’t know of too much good they have done for anyone. Neither do any of my ‘industry’ peers.
My last thought before I sign off… This past week it was announced that TFC brokered a deal with IFC for Made in China. We did and we’re very proud of our service and always impressed by the impeccable taste and service to films at IFC (even though I cannot say I am in love with their $$ waterfall). We charge a fraction of what sales agents charge and we don’t recoup for fancy dinners in Cannes. I want a world in which sales agents are used for what they do best, getting filmmakers deals they cannot get themselves, there are buyers around the world and I do believe there is a place for a company to get films to market and do business that otherwise would not be done, especially for theatrical films or where good TV deals are still viable. I do however wish for filmmakers to save themselves and their investors the waste of big fees and expenses being recouped out of a deal one could have done directly.
Film is the most expensive art medium in the world, it’s also presently the most powerful. If you’ve already made a film, you might as well stay committed to its exhibition and your end of the bargain with investors and above all, your ability to keep making your work, for your audience.
At your service,
– O/R for TFC
Orly Ravid May 31st, 2010
Posted In: Amazon VOD & CreateSpace, Best Buy, Blockbuster, Digital Distribution, Distribution Platforms, DIY, Hulu, Mobile / Wireless, Netflix, Uncategorized
Distribution: Decisions, Windows, and Timing
Back from a quick stint @ SXSW. What an impressive festival / new technology conference. So many great panels and stats, some of which we will synthesize later this week in one new post. But today, as we come out of Beta, I wanted to guide people on how take in the plethora of information that comes about from panels and posts and articles about distribution.
Cable and Satellite VOD is on everyone’s mind and a common discussion topic on panels and in articles because it is still the lions share of revenue in digital distribution (it has been about 80% and now sliding down to upper 70’s and will soon be in the 60’s as Internet / Broadband and IPTV grow). The first thing I noticed is not everyone means the same thing when discussing Cable VOD revenues and terms and not every filmmaker knows to ask the right questions. So first off, when reading about or discussing revenues, remember there are three kinds of revenues and “Gross” may not mean Gross to *YOU* the filmmaker. One may want to clarify if the numbers are the Gross that the cable operators get? the Gross that the Distribution company or Aggregator gets? or to the FILMMAKER? There’s a big difference. And when analyzing VOD options one will want to know how many middle men are in between the revenue coming from the Cable operators, what sort of traction and pull the middle men have with the cable operators in terms of placement (because there’s a big difference between 12,000,000 homes and 50,000,000 homes and there are about 40 operators, Comcast and Time Warner being the leading two among them). And one will want to know the splits with the Cable operators — IFC and others get 50%. Studios can get more than that, i.e. better splits, and also better promotional leverage but will only take on more commercial films, generally speaking. Cable and Satellite VOD is an important revenue generator but it’s not the only one and it’s not going to happen for every film so we encourage filmmakers to do their homework before hyper-focusing on that. Non-Theatrical & Automated-House Party-Screenings can generate even more money than Cable VOD, depending on the film… so that brings us to the focus of this blog entry — in Distribution, it’s all about making informed decisions, and utilizing as many windows and the best timing possible. You can’t do online distribution before Cable VOD but you can do it afterward. If you are doing a theatrical then ideally coordinate that with Cable VOD, knowing that operators want to premiere films if possible or benefit from a successful theatrical. Both IFC and Magnolia do day and date and find that to be a mutual beneficial driver of revenues. Both the RENTAL and TRANSACTIONAL windows make money on Amazon and iTunes so no reason not to do both in their respective ideal times. Whether one uses the FREE model as a driver for transactional (e.g. B-Side and W.O.M screenings), or VOD & Theatrical Day & Date as mutual drivers (as Magnolia and IFC and others do).. or the $1 transactional price-point that works so well for iTunes and Red Box or a subscription model that works so well for Netflix and that Hulu is trying. As noted below, YouTube is trying a rental model so that filmmakers can set their own prices and viewers know that revenues are going to them.. we support this of course but until its a proven model, we encourage filmmakers to utilize as many options as possible and all in their right time.
At SXSW there was a panel called: “Nobody Wants to Watch Your Film: Realities of Online Film Distribution #watchyourfilm
The panelists were: Efe Cakarel (The Auteurs.com), Graham Leggat (San Francisco Film Society), Peter Becker (Criterion Collection), Sara Pollack (YouTube)
Here is a link to it: http://magnetmediafilmsinc.com/blog/2010/03/sxsw-nobody-wants-to-watch-your-film-realities-of-online-film-distribution-watchyourfilm/comment-page-1/#comment-23
TFC’s comment: We love all the platforms and services at the panel and frankly there has always been a combination of Rental, Transactional and Subscription and Ad-Supported / Free as a transactional driver business and we believe there always will be and all are sustainable and valuable and should be utilized together. We love Efe at The Auteurs and will be working with them, and are very impressed with YouTube’s new model and look forward to working with them too and of course hope it works well over time. We are helping filmmakers build their own brands and platforms as we build ours and connect them to all key revenue generating ones as well. Therein lies a total solution so filmmakers should not have to choose between parts. Platforms are stores, not distributors and just like all good brands, one’s film should be ubiquitous and for as long as the bigger platforms are key revenue generators and audience aggregators, we will continue to treat them all like stores, with no exclusivity -for the best health and sustainability of the filmmakers. And we don’t take rights either!
Today The Film Collaborative (TFC) comes out of Beta whilst we continue to develop our Yelp for Distribution. Stay Tuned!
Orly Ravid March 15th, 2010
Posted In: Digital Distribution, Distribution Platforms, Uncategorized
Long Tail glut, the pending SVOD Wars and solutions we’ll find in 2010
Topics on my mind: The dilemma of the long tail and social networking glut and the trends of the giants. 2010 will oversee the SVOD wars as everyone competes with Netflix for a viable subscription VOD model… Hulu, Cinema Now, Blockbuster, Amazon et al, and including Apple will compete with Cable VOD too. And of course there’s Google which I’ll cover in the next edition. According to Jon Reiss (filmmaker, blogger, and author of Think Outside the Boxoffice), ‘Studios are experimenting with releasing catalog titles via Amazon’s CreateSpace’ (which one can read about in The Digital Distribution Guide on our website: http://www.thefilmcollaborative.org/digitaldistribution.html ) — and he postures that may create an appetite in consumers and a comfort level in getting non-blockbuster content via the web. Studios are experimenting with release windows to work up consumer appetites.
Avatar is a game changer as far as the experience audiences will learn to expect. 3D film is a growing business. There’s an impact on indie cinema? Mergers continue as Comcast bought NBC Universal and rumors resurfaced of Amazon’s potential acquisition of Netflix (both covered below). Gigantic was a smaller start-up platform that did not make sense to me because it was too small and too unspecific and offered nothing special and indeed Mark Lipsky has ankled it this week. And now, in answer to Comcast, The Walt Disney Co. and CBS have expressed interest in cutting deals with Apple to offer programming as part of a monthly Internet TV subscription service. The media companies are in early discussions with Apple on the service, which is being positioned as a competitor to cable and satellite TV. (This is not new, Netflix has already had streaming video content deals with TV networks, such as Starz and MTV for example). Comcast (the leading cable company) and the bigger Cable VOD platforms are decreasing their appetite for Indie cinema, at least in the short-term, and going for the more sure things, such as studio library content, marquee driven content and TV. The rise in supply of indie cinema has made it harder for individual films to compete in a crowded market place of blockbusters and media conglomerates who cover them. I cover this more below.
Old rumors never die. In our Digital Distribution Guide we have previously covered the rumor that “Amazon may be buying Netflix”. BusinessInsider.com and Reuters reporter Anupreeta Das have all pointed to heavy trading activity on Netflix (Nasdaq: NFLX) call options as the speculative root of the born again rumor. Amazon.com (Nasdaq: AMZN) is the logical suitor, as always. Given Amazon’s ownership of IMDB and WithoutABox and its search technology maybe having the two merged will help the long tail films better find their audiences. Amazon, Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL), and Blockbuster (NYSE: BBI) have been struggling in selling digital celluloid. Cable giant Comcast (Nasdaq: CMCSA) is losing video subscribers. In that time, Netflix is a great trusted brand that knows its customer and its customers know how to find films. Amazon needs a digital distribution solution better than its current offerings.
Speaking of Netflix which recently initiated a partnership with retail giant Best Buy, CinemaNow is now directly competing. CinemaNow’s founder went to work for Lions Gate (the studio behind the release of Precious) but CinemaNow is still in the game. The partnership between Best Buy and CinemaNow includes both physical and digital media. More particularly, the deal will allow consumers to buy DVDs from Best Buy, then watch the same movie through CinemaNow on their computers, smartphones or Blu-Ray players. It’s almost like buying a DVD and getting a digital copy on the second disc, but now you require just an Internet connection rather than the digital file. The exact details of the partnership have yet to be revealed, but it’s expected the service will launch in early 2010, just as soon as some studios jump on board. (Of course we presume some day soon Studios will be direct with customers off their own sites).
Best Buy’s plan will require a DVD to be bought, but there’s no guarantee that the DVD will stay with the buyer, or that the stream will. If it does work, however, it will add yet another streaming service to our media boxes. As it stands with Netflix, Amazon Video, Blockbuster OnDemand, Hulu among others, we already have quite a few. I expect some attrition and survival of the fittest.
Back to the topic of Long Tail and the increased competition in the indie film space. I wanted to link to an interesting article in The Economist: http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14959982
I select and quote a few key paragraphs from the article below. In summation, it’s about how the growth of “Long Tail” (as Chris Anderson of Wired coined it) has lead to a glut, a competitive crowded space where only the strongest survive, and hence its own demise. Some niche content maintains its appeal but much of the middle never makes the radar and the biggest blockbuster films continue to rise because they are the most known and talked about.
From The Economist:
“Ever-increasing choice was supposed to mean the end of the blockbuster. It has had the opposite effect “NOVEMBER 20th saw the return of an old phenomenon: the sold-out cinema. “New Moon”, a tale of vampires, werewolves and the women who love them, earned more in a single day at the American box office than any film in history. The record may not stand for long: next month “Avatar”, a three-dimensional action movie thick with special effects, will be released… There has never been so much choice in entertainment. Last year 610 films were released in America, up from 471 in 1999. Cable and satellite television are growing quickly, supplying more channels to more people across the world. More than half of all pay-television subscribers now live in the Asia-Pacific region. Online video is exploding: every minute about 20 hours’ worth of content is added to YouTube. The Internet has greatly expanded choice in music and books. Yet the ever-increasing supply of content tailored to every taste seems not to have dented the appeal of the blockbuster. Quite the opposite. This is not what was predicted by one of the most influential business books of the past few years. In “The Long Tail”, Chris Anderson, editor-in-chief of Wired, a technology magazine (and before that a journalist at The Economist), argued that demand for media was moving inexorably from the head of the distribution curve to the tail. That is, the few products that sell a lot were losing market share to the great many that sell modestly. By cutting storage and distribution costs, the Internet was overturning the tyranny of the shop shelf, which had limited consumers’ choices. And, by developing software that analysed and predicted consumers’ tastes, companies like Amazon were encouraging people to wallow in esoterica. Such companies did not just supply niche markets—they helped create them….” (Note: The article sites research and statistics from the music industry, television, film and books and concludes)… “In short, just because people have more choice does not mean they will opt for more obscure entertainments. That is especially clear in the book trade. But nobody knows quite what to do. The old-media world of limited choice, in which any product that was not too objectionable was guaranteed a decent audience, was a comfortable place. Pleasing a customer who can choose from several hundred films and television programmes even without getting up from the sofa, by contrast, is an unnerving prospect.”
I referenced at the beginning of this post that I wanted to cover the clutter in social network marketing as well. Huffington Post is going to offer sponsored Tweets. Every other blog or article in this business waxes prolific about Facebook and Twitter… how will unique voices continue to be heard and find more listeners when corporate brands use this space as much as they do Second Life to hock their wares. We’ll have more about this and more about digital distribution platforms (especially mobile) and opportunities for Indie Filmmakers in the next edition. One thing we can be sure of, there will always be independent filmmakers and their audiences. We’re committed to connecting them as directly, dynamically, efficiently and inexpensively as possible, always.
The Collaborative will keep the information and service support coming in 2010.
Have a happy and safe new year!
Orly Ravid December 26th, 2009
Posted In: Amazon VOD & CreateSpace, Best Buy, Blockbuster, Comcast, Digital Distribution, Distribution Platforms, Gigantic, Hulu, iTunes, Long Tail & Glut of Content, Marketing, Retailers
Emerging Distribution that Film Festivals are offering to Filmmakers
This blog is focused on Digital Distribution and new media. The link to our Digital Distribution Guide on our site is below. Recently, I’ve been thinking about the emerging distribution film festivals are offering to filmmakers. Unofficially TriBeCa noted that they will start being a full on distributor for about 10 – 12 films, but mostly name-driven films, so there’s that limitation. This will sometimes include theatrical and also DVD and definitely key VOD and digital platforms they are resolving with (Comcast, Charter, Cox, Time Warner) under the TriBeCa brand. Sundance is offering theatrical exhibition for one day at its affiliated Art House screens across the country for 8 films. The pending announcement of the Amazon VOD Digital Pass to Sundance is great, it’s just one platform (it should be noted that I have not heard a peep about this since Amazon first noted it to me a couple months ago. Some Sundance films will be exhibited on YouTube, that much is true). We keep encouraging festivals to behave like The Collaborative and extend distribution to more films and more platforms. Studios are working with theatres on narrowing the gap in windows between theatrical, DVD and VOD and remunerating theatres accordingly and I have always suggested alternative modes of public exhibition such as split screens, calendar bookings and event screenings in close tandem with all other distribution to best utilize marketing and awareness and finally the studios and theatres are following suit. I’ll expand on this soon.
Some key updates that tickle my fancy:
- DIGITAL LOCKER: The concept of a Digital Locker is being tested whereby one price would be paid for the right to access the film digitally on any and all platforms for a one-time fee.
- NETFLIX announced Best Buy as latest instant movie streaming partner. CinemaNow also has a partnership with Best Buy. NETFLIX also announced its plans to have its streaming be international next year. This coupled with pan territory iTunes distribution potential and Sundance Channel having a platform channel in France, Benelux and Singapore so far, and other territories coming soon suggests the real viable option of worldwide digital distribution.
- HULU announced it plans to offer a subscription service. Can it compete in film???
- COMCAST’S On Demand Service will go live in December. Details of Comcast’s On Demand Online service surfaced at the NewTeeVee Live conference with the big news being that the service will launch next month. Comcast Interactive Media President Amy Banse didn’t give a specific launch date for the service that will put popular TV content onto PCs, but she said it would launch before Hanukkah, which starts Dec. 11. On Demand Online, which is Comcast’s version of Time Warner’s TV Everywhere, has been in beta testing with 5,000 users since July. Comcast currently has 24 programmers lined up to provide content to On Demand Online via Comcast.net and Fancast.com. The service is free to Comcast’s subscribers. Banse said when Comcast subscribers log on to either of the sites for the first time to use the service, a Move Networks player and authentication device will be downloaded. The authentication device will allow subscribers to access the same content they currently pay for, such as HBO on Demand, on their PCs. Banse said customers can authenticate up to three devices. “Breaking news: You’ll be able to use it both in the home and out of the home,” Banse said.
- VERIZON announced: In the five years since the FiOS network was first deployed, Verizon has introduced the only national fiber-to-the-home TV service and has been an industry leader in high-definition TV; pioneered blistering broadband speeds of 50 Mbps (megabits per second) downstream and 20 Mbps upstream; and blurred the lines between cable TV and Internet with, among other tools, an interactive media guide that merges content from broadcast TV, the Internet and a customer’s private photo, video and music files.The FiOS platform, capable of integrating Internet and TV functions, has fostered the development of dynamic new on-screen TV widgets that enrich the entertainment experience by linking Web resources to what appears on-screen. Verizon’s Facebook and Twitter widgets, for example, turn static TV into social TV by letting subscribers connect with others while watching their favorite shows. FiOS TV’s RedZone and ESPN Fantasy Sports widgets convert a living room into a virtual sports bar, with instant access to statistics, scores, news and real-time critical plays.
- Now on shelves: Flo TV’s Personal Television.
Mobile television provider Flo TV’s first independent device hit store shelves today.
The portable television, dubbed Flo TV Personal Television, is currently available at Amazon.com and Best Buy. RadioShack will begin selling the device in the coming weeks. “The Flo TV Personal Television is a dedicated device for consumers’ on-the-go lifestyle that is perfect for sharing with friends and family, as well as for personal viewing time,” said Bill Stone, president of Flo TV. As part of the launch, Flo TV is providing six months of service free with the purchase of the device, which retails for $250. The Personal Television features a touchscreen and a 3.5- inch QVGA display Click here!. The device’s battery supports more than five hours of viewing time and 300 hours on standby. Flo TV, a subsidiary of Qualcomm, announced in October that it would be launching direct-to-consumer services independent of its carrier partners AT&T and Verizon Wireless. It earlier landed a deal with Audiovox to provide in-car mobile television. - AT&T recently lowered the price for its white-labeled mobile television service to $10 per month and launched a new mobile-television-enabled handset, the Samsung Mythic.
Please see the DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION GUIDE for information on platforms and the Tips for Filmmakers and rights definitions.
Orly Ravid November 12th, 2009
Posted In: Digital Distribution, Distribution Platforms, Film Festivals