Category: Monetizing

Categories
Distribution Item of Interest Monetizing

Indie Success through Branded Entertainment

Indie Success through Branded Entertainment, Syndication http://tinyurl.com/2ehkerb

Report from a panel at the New York Television Festival Digital Day panel.

Almost all of the panels emphasized that branded entertainment is the best way to go to monetize independent online video. Nonetheless, many producers and executives seemed to view brand integration as a necessary evil, yearning for when it is no longer needed. Even Ben Silverman, whose company Electus exclusively does branded entertainment, mentioned that brand integrations helped keep television afloat in its early days before the platform matured.

Categories
Distribution Item of Interest Monetizing

Distribution U., coming to NY and LA

Distribution U., coming to NY and LA http://bit.ly/cVEsfV

Very few events get my unqualified endorsement but I attended Distribution U last year and learnt a lot and thoroughly recommend it to anyone that is even considering doing independent distribution.

In fact, go to any Conference or Seminar where either Scott Kirsner or Peter Broderick are speaking: they’re always interesting.

The event has a couple objectives:

    – Let filmmakers connect, find new ways to collaborate, and help one another succeed.

    – Talk about what’s changing in terms of funding, distribution, and audience-building, with actual examples and case studies, rather than theoretical predictions.

    – Hear directly from filmmakers about what they’ve done successfully with their most recent films to get them seen by a large audience, and earn a solid return. (We also talk about what didn’t work, and wasn’t worth the time or investment.) 

    – Enable participants to sit down with industry experts for small group lunch conversations on very specific topics, like working with the media and bloggers… understanding the way VOD deals work… organizing theatrical screenings that make money… and more.

    – Provide ideas and strategies to several filmmakers in the audience, as part of an on-stage brainstorming session.

    – Get participants charged up and excited about new possibilities, as opposed to depressed about how things are changing.

Categories
Item of Interest Monetizing New Media

The real cost of Free

The real cost of Free http://bit.ly/cd8njl

I read responses like these and I really wonder why anyone cares about mainstream media, with their lack of research, wholesale publication of press releases (without disclosure) and the tendency to push headlines (and page views).

Apart from Guardian columnist Helienne Lindvall publishing material with zero research, making claims that were simply not true about Doctorow’s speaking fees, but manages to completely misunderstand that no-one has ever said that “content wants to be free”. Many business models include free content: commercial radio, broadcast Television and newspapers have long used free content as part of their business model.

Doctorow makes the point:

The topic I leave my family and my desk to talk to people all over the world about is the risks to freedom arising from the failure of copyright giants to adapt to a world where it’s impossible to prevent copying. Because it is impossible. Despite 15 long years of the copyright wars, despite draconian laws and savage penalties, despite secret treaties and widespread censorship, despite millions spent on ill-advised copy-prevention tools, more copying takes place today than ever before.

As I’ve written here before, copying isn’t going to get harder, ever. Hard drives won’t magically get bulkier but hold fewer bits and cost more.

Networks won’t be harder to use. PCs won’t be slower. People won’t stop learning to type “Toy Story 3 bittorrent” into Google (NSDQ: GOOG). Anyone who claims otherwise is selling something – generally some kind of unworkable magic anti-copying beans that they swear, this time, will really work.

So, assuming that copyright holders will never be able to stop or even slow down copying, what is to be done?

What is to be done are that new business models must be created around free content and there have been any number of success stories, particularly in film and music. Remember that all Corey Doctorow’s books are available free under a non-commercail Creative Commons license. He has had two books on the New York Times bestseller list for the past two years. He knows what he’s talking about from his own experience.

Read the whole article, it’s well worth it.

Categories
Distribution Item of Interest Monetizing

For Independent Films, Piracy is a Red Herring

For Independent Films, Piracy Is A Red Herring http://bit.ly/bpLA5Y & http://bit.ly/dkXHqq

To date no-one has actually been able to prove a single penny of lost revenue due to unauthorized distribution. The RIAA/MPAA surveys on the subject are great works of fiction, completely without factual basis (or even rational discourse).

So when the LA Times published an article with filmmaker Greg Carter claiming that he had lost “hundreds of thousands” of dollars due to unauthorized distribution. Unfortunately, like all these type of articles, any fact, substantiation or – dare I say – proof, is completely lacking. The article is a fact-free zone supporting the assertion.

Well, both Techdirt.com and some other independent filmmakers take on the assertion and dismiss it.

From Techdirt:

Reader jjmsan was the first of a few of you to send over this silly piece in the LA Times claiming thatindependent filmmakers are being hurt by unauthorized file sharing, but it’s completely devoid of any actual evidence. It kicks off with the story of one indie film director who released a movie and insists that he’s been harmed. But what’s the evidence? Well, a lot of people have downloaded his film. Ok. So? When other movie makers saw that, they put in place smart business models toencourage people to buy something, and they did quite well because of it. By embracing file sharingand combining it with smart business models, tons of filmmakers who never would have been able to do anything with their film have now been able to build an audience and make a living.

But probably more relevant is the response on incitecinema.com from other independent filmmakers :

It’s undeniable that piracy has substantial impact on studio films. The higher profile the film, the more ‘leakage’. For independent films, though, it’s extremely rare for piracy to noticeably affect revenue. The independent film audience by and large has no interest in stealing content. They just don’t. The fact that a film is out there on file sharing sites doesn’t prove that a single person has downloaded the film and watched it. In fact, some of the most visible file sharing sites aren’t file sharing sites at all. They’re fishing sites that use every film title under the sun as bait to lure unsuspecting users into thinking they’re downloading a film or other content only to have their machine infected by a virus and/or taken over by a bot.

I think they’re wrong in the (again unsubstantiated) assertion that “piracy has substantial impact on studio films. Once again, no-one has provided evidence that would support that assertion. High profile “leaked” films have gone on to set box office records and do great business with no apparent harm.

Categories
Distribution Item of Interest Monetizing

The marketing of ‘Freakonomics’

The marketing of ‘Freakonomics’ http://bit.ly/aKTPXj “

Eamonn Bowles, president of Magnolia Pictures, who are the US distributors for the film says:

“The business model for independent film has collapsed, and anyone who thinks otherwise is basically borderline delusional,” … “So we try to stay open-minded about the commerce of film.”

I agree that developing a market for independent film (and future independent TV projects) is difficult so every approach that someone tries is a case study for all of us to learn what works now, and what no longer works.

Categories
Business & Marketing Item of Interest Monetizing New Media

How Social Media has Changed Documentary Filmmaking

How Social Media has Changed the Game for Documentary Filmmaking http://bit.ly/94hKV5

Case studies on how Social Media has changed:

  • Outreach
  • National networks
  • Funding
  • Connecting with other filmmakers
  • Festivals.

The article concludes with “new approaches”. To me, Social Media in its many variations is key to building and monetizing audiences.

Categories
Distribution Item of Interest Monetizing

Are Apple TV Rentals Too Cheap?

Are Apple TV Rentals Too Cheap? http://bit.ly/c0ETzV Hell no! They’re too expensive already. http://bit.ly/bz7MKn

I’ve written about this before, at the second link above, but now Barry Meyer, Chariman of Warner Bros. Entertainment, is arguing that the 99c rental fee is too low:

The paper quotes Meyer saying that he doesn’t want to “open up a rental business in television at a low price.” His biggest fear seems to be that cheap rentals will hurt the licensing of entire seasons to other broadcasters.

 

Categories
Item of Interest Monetizing

Developer of Minecraft Game sees Piracy as promotion

Two versions of a story  of a game developer working with ‘piracy’ as promotion. http://bit.ly/adO5Bo http://bit.ly/9haBji CwF+RtB

Although Minecraft already has 658429 registered players, due to the fact that it’s widely available on torrent and warez sites, many of these are unauthorized users.

But what’s most impressive is that at the time of writing, 155521 (23.62%) of these have already bought the game of their own free will. In the last 24 hours alone, a 11804 people registered to play, and 4910 of them bought the game. (updated statshere)

Those are good numbers regardless of whether or not everyone pays. Despite the propaganda from the RIAA, MPAA and their ilk, not every download would have been a sale, so converting a good portion that increases sales can’t be a bad thing. I’m pretty sure my HD Survival Handbook has been “pirated” but the legit sales are enough to have covered the time and effort that went into it, so I’m just not worried about something I can’t stop.

The developer also comments (somewhat obscurely I think):

“Piracy will win in the long run. It has to,” says Notch. “The alternative is too scary.”

Categories
Item of Interest Monetizing

The Attack Of Branded Content

The Attack Of Branded Content: Who Will Control TV On The Web? (TCTV) http://tcrn.ch/aa3VKG

I’m a much bigger fan of “branded content” than advertising because:

  • Branded Content is going to be relevant to the content, so it’s got a much bigger chance of being relevant to me if I’m watching the program;
  • Branded Content integrates the product promotion into the show so it’s less disruptive than unrelated advertising shoved at the audience;
  • It provides the brand a clearer message: they’re the only message associated with the show.

Now, Erick Shonfeld of Techcrunch is less of a fan of Branded Content than I am, but I think he makes a fundamental mistake in his introductory paragraph:

I’ve got to admit, the concept of “branded content” on the Web makes me cringe. It is generally used to refer to Web videos created and packaged specifically for an advertiser. Maybe I am old-fashioned, but I like my videos created for the audience first, not advertisers. And yet, in the budding Web video industry, branded content is bringing in some serious dollars and even some serious talent.

He makes the mistake that “videos [are] created for the audience”. Television Content has only one customer: the advertiser. The producer makes a show that the network/cable channel thinks they can sell to enough advertisers to get a return. The audience is never an important factor, other than there needs to be enough of them to sell the advertiser on advertising on the show.

Branded Content is more likely to be made for the audience because if it’s not then the brand is going to get much less value from it. On a recent Terence and Philip Show Terence Curren told the story of a mom-focused show sponsored by Kraft, but looking at the video the only obvious intrusion of the sponsorship by Kraft was a strategically placed bottle of Kraft dressing in a family meal shot. Terry says he would not have noticed other than he knew that Kraft sponsored the show.

Advertising – creating an audience that you can then ‘sell-out’ to advertisers by interrupting the entertainment to force you to watch advertising. With Branded Content we choose what we want to watch, in return we’ll probably see one or two branded items. If that’s well integrated into the show, it’ll only be obvious because broadcast and cable have become “brand phobic”: unless the brand is a sponsor they blur the brand out, or use fake brands.

Read the article and tell me in the comments whether you think Branded Content is a good thing or not. I think it’s better for the audience and better for the advertiser/brand.

I like the model that Mark Pesce promulgated in Piracy is Good? (or on video) where he explains the principles of Hyper-distribution: single sponsor, integrated product promotion; free and widespread distribution.

Categories
Distribution Item of Interest Monetizing

Artists Make More Money in File-sharing Age than before.

Artists Make More Money in File-Sharing Age Than Before It http://bit.ly/a2ccxk

An extensive study into the effect of digitalization on the music industry in Norway has shed an interesting light on the position of artists today, compared to 1999. While the music industry often talks about artists being on the brink of bankruptcy due to illicit file-sharing, the study found that the number of artists as well as their average income has seen a major increase in the last decade.