Anyone see 60 Minutes this week?

I'm not sure if it was a new report, but I assume it was. They did a
story on film piracy, the threat of the internet, etc., and they
interviewed a studio head, can't recall which one. He said 2 very
interesting things. First, he claimed that "millions" of copies of
pirated movies were downloaded every day. Second, he said that DVD
and video sales accounted for half the money a movie would make.

I think the first statement was a complete fabrication, or at least an
extreme exaggeration. I wonder where he got that number from.
Thousands, surely, but there's a big difference between thousands and
millions.

The second statement also left me wondering. For movies like Finding
Nemo where they made $300+ million domestically, that would mean that
15 million discs would be sold at $20 each. Do DVDs sell in such
numbers? I don't think so. But maybe for the smaller films it's
closer to the truth. If a movie makes, say, $40 million, then that
requires "only" 200,000 $20 discs to be sold. With Digital Bits
saying that over 55 million DVD players have been sold (in the US), a
moderately successful $40M movie could sell copies to 200,000 people
and stores. Maybe. For tiny films that maybe aren't released
theatrically or have miniscule box offices, sales and rentals could
very well be half or more of the total take.

jpeabody

On 5 Nov 2003 11:03:44 -0800, (jpeabody) wrote:

>I'm not sure if it was a new report, but I assume it was. They did a
>story on film piracy, the threat of the internet, etc., and they
>interviewed a studio head, can't recall which one. He said 2 very
>interesting things. First, he claimed that "millions" of copies of
>pirated movies were downloaded every day. Second, he said that DVD
>and video sales accounted for half the money a movie would make.
>
>I think the first statement was a complete fabrication, or at least an
>extreme exaggeration. I wonder where he got that number from.
>Thousands, surely, but there's a big difference between thousands and
>millions.
>
>The second statement also left me wondering. For movies like Finding
>Nemo where they made $300+ million domestically, that would mean that
>15 million discs would be sold at $20 each. Do DVDs sell in such
>numbers? I don't think so. But maybe for the smaller films it's
>closer to the truth. If a movie makes, say, $40 million, then that
>requires "only" 200,000 $20 discs to be sold. With Digital Bits
>saying that over 55 million DVD players have been sold (in the US), a
>moderately successful $40M movie could sell copies to 200,000 people
>and stores. Maybe. For tiny films that maybe aren't released
>theatrically or have miniscule box offices, sales and rentals could
>very well be half or more of the total take.


I would say that MILLIONS is closer to reality than you think -
especially for pirated movies that are still in theaters. Consider
that a LOT (most) of the piracy is propogated overseas where Asians
and everyone else must wait many months for movies to make it to their
country. They get hacked copies that make their way to the net and
back to domestic shores.

The whole thing about releasing the Matrix at 9am today rather than
midnight last night was ludicrous. Only 32 people were at the 9am -
considering most people work or go to school. Perhaps WB thought they
were "combating piracy" by doing this, but in reality they screwed
themselves out of selling out 3500 opening screens and generating a
lot of word-of-mouth for today's sales.

Besides, anyone who was going to pirate the Matrix would just wait an
extra day and do it anyway so once again anti-piracy attempts only
hurt the legitiment consumer.

Angry Gamer

Angry Gamer wrote on [Wed, 05 Nov 2003 20:20:42 GMT]:
> On 5 Nov 2003 11:03:44 -0800, (jpeabody) wrote:
>
> I would say that MILLIONS is closer to reality than you think -
> especially for pirated movies that are still in theaters.

EVERY day though? Maybe in total.

Justin

jpeabody wrote on [5 Nov 2003 11:03:44 -0800]:
> The second statement also left me wondering. For movies like Finding
> Nemo where they made $300+ million domestically, that would mean that
> 15 million discs would be sold at $20 each. Do DVDs sell in such
> numbers? I don't think so.

Well, let's see. The Hulk sold 2 million copies in 2 days

The current first-day and first-week record-holder is Columbia TriStar
Home Entertainment's "Spider-Man." The title sold 7 million combined
(VHS/DVD) units on its first day on sale last November and 11 million
combined units in its first week, according to the studio.

Harry Potter and the Sorcerors stone had sold 6.55 million copies as of
June 30 last year

Justin

Angry Gamer, says...
> Perhaps WB thought they
> were "combating piracy" by doing this, but in reality they screwed
> themselves out of selling out 3500 opening screens and generating a
> lot of word-of-mouth for today's sales.

Warner Bros. didn't screw themselves out of anything. It was probably a
wise move. First of all, the same number of hard-core Matrix fans will
see the movie regardless of whether the first screening was last night,
this morning, or next Friday. But it is probably smart for Warner Bros.
not to let word-of-mouth get out too early before the weekend. Warner
Bros. doesn't have to worry about the Matrix zealots that will see the
movie no matter what, they have to worry about the average movie-goer.
And here is where controlling word-of-mouth is going to pay off for
them. The film is already getting disapointing reviews. So far the
consensus seems to be that it's a little better than the second one, but
nowhere near as good as the first. If that opinion spreads too fast
before the weekend, a lot of casual movie goers will decide to skip it
after having already been disapointed by the second film.

Mark Spatny

On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 20:51:32 GMT, Mark Spatny
<> wrote:

>Angry Gamer, says...
>> Perhaps WB thought they
>> were "combating piracy" by doing this, but in reality they screwed
>> themselves out of selling out 3500 opening screens and generating a
>> lot of word-of-mouth for today's sales.
>
>Warner Bros. didn't screw themselves out of anything. It was probably a
>wise move. First of all, the same number of hard-core Matrix fans will
>see the movie regardless of whether the first screening was last night,
>this morning, or next Friday. But it is probably smart for Warner Bros.
>not to let word-of-mouth get out too early before the weekend. Warner
>Bros. doesn't have to worry about the Matrix zealots that will see the
>movie no matter what, they have to worry about the average movie-goer.
>And here is where controlling word-of-mouth is going to pay off for
>them. The film is already getting disapointing reviews. So far the
>consensus seems to be that it's a little better than the second one, but
>nowhere near as good as the first. If that opinion spreads too fast
>before the weekend, a lot of casual movie goers will decide to skip it
>after having already been disapointed by the second film.


I'm just saying that if you are going to have a SPECIAL advance
showing you'd be better off showing it at a time when people are
AVAILABLE to actually go to the movies. Matrix Reloaded had a
midnight showing that was OVERsold - they were putting chairs in the
aisle.

And yes - the movie is rather anti-climatic but people are going to
see it out of obligation whether its good or not.

Angry Gamer

Angry Gamer wrote on [Thu, 06 Nov 2003 00:25:26 GMT]:
> I'm just saying that if you are going to have a SPECIAL advance
> showing you'd be better off showing it at a time when people are
> AVAILABLE to actually go to the movies. Matrix Reloaded had a
> midnight showing that was OVERsold - they were putting chairs in the
> aisle.

Unless you're going for the "We released a movie at the same exact time
around the world first" title

Justin

On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 00:25:26 GMT, Angry Gamer <> wrote:

>I'm just saying that if you are going to have a SPECIAL advance
>showing you'd be better off showing it at a time when people are
>AVAILABLE to actually go to the movies. Matrix Reloaded had a
>midnight showing that was OVERsold - they were putting chairs in the
>aisle.

Hmm. Bet the fire marshall was pleased about that.

The Ghost of General Lee

"Angry Gamer" <> wrote in message
news...
> Second, he said that DVD
> >and video sales accounted for half the money a movie would make.

Did he mention that DVD sales consistently increase every year despite said
piracy or download issues?

> >
> >The second statement also left me wondering. For movies like Finding
> >Nemo where they made $300+ million domestically, that would mean that
> >15 million discs would be sold at $20 each. Do DVDs sell in such
> >numbers? I don't think so.

Finding Nemo: first day out over 5 million copies. Total cash sales (Gross)
over 125 mil.-according to CNN

>

>
> The whole thing about releasing the Matrix at 9am today rather than
> midnight last night was ludicrous.

Here it was 6 A.M., and from my understanding it was the directors choice,
not the studios.

ominousspiritous

Angry Gamer <> wrote in message

> I would say that MILLIONS is closer to reality than you think -
> especially for pirated movies that are still in theaters. Consider
> that a LOT (most) of the piracy is propogated overseas where Asians
> and everyone else must wait many months for movies to make it to their
> country.

I wouldn't be surprised if millions were SOLD and downloaded. But
there is no way that millions are downloaded (as the guy claimed).
Considering what a pain in the ass it is to download whole movies
(even with a broadband connection), there is no way. Until the next
generation of broadband comes along, I would say the movie studios
have little to worry about from the internet.

Now the music studios are another story...

-Eric

Eric R.