Slashdot Mirror
After Monty Python Goes YouTube, Big Jump In DVD Sales
An anonymous reader writes "Apparently it with the release of all of Monty Python's material on YouTube, their sales have blown through the roof on Amazon.com. It is too bad there isn't any proper news article about this, but I think it bodes well for those who champion free content. More importantly, it forces the MPAA's feet into their mouths." Not every performer (or group of performers) has the decades-strong appeal of Monty Python, but this is a great thing to see. The linked article claims that the sales increase in the Python DVDs is 23,000 percent; there are probably some other ways to figure the numbers, but a big increase is easy to see.
it forces the MPAA's feet into their mouths.
No, for every Monty Python movie there's two dozen films the quality of "Glitter", "The Hottie and the Nottie" and "The Postman".
There's no way it would improve their average sales to have those actual films previewable on YouTube. They're much better off with a thumbnail view of the clamshell case.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
for something completely different.
But was it an increase in African or European DVD sales?
to bad warner music wont see the effect on their album sales like this because youtube busy using the content ID system to remove their content.
Now can we please live in a world where companies think of these websites as place to "preview" and not "pirate".
they say it is often more relevant then the comment above, all we know is its called the Sig!
... but couldn't at least some of that increase be from the fact that they had a big honkin' 21-disc box set released not so long ago? Sure it was just repackaging material already out on DVD (it's just the same discs from the old 16 disc box set along with the 5 single-disc "Personal Best" compilations thrown in), but it did get them a "new" release that people might stumble upon in reviews or on a new release chart.
Now Terry Gilliam can even afford to finance his own movies. ...oh wait, what was I thinking?
As an IP rights holder and someone who's trying to figure out how to survive and thrive in the world of the web (see my book at http://www.elevatorpitchessentials.com/), I do find this story interesting and perhaps heartening. However, isn't the advantage in this case due to the fact that YouTube shows clips of either degraded quality or at least reduced size? If you want to view the skits in their original quality and size, and on a TV, you have to buy the DVDs. I'm not sure how this applies to all rights holders other than maybe music holders. I do find that Limewire plays much the same role for me when it comes to music. When it comes to the songs I like, I tend to find the typical compression artifacting annoying and end up buying the MP3 somewhere. How does this apply to authors and others whose work is a bit harder to degrade without blowing the secret?
"Not every performer (or group of performers) has the decades-strong appeal of Monty Python, but this is a great thing to see."
The way Monty Python became popular was by putting their comedy on the air where millions of people could watch them for free(On TV). It's exactly the same business model as YouTube and to imply that dumping material on YouTube for the world to watch for free won't work today is just naive.
There's been several incredible deals for the "Monty Python's Flying Circus" boxed set over the past few months. That probably boosted sales a bit.
A bunch of people seeing old favorites in crappy streaming flash, I can understand, would remind people how fun a DVD-quality video of their favorites would be.
And when technology gets good enough to skip the "a dvd of this would be nice" phase, that business model will no longer work. Then look for artificial limitations (quality, advertisements) to create that differential
For now though, yes it does seem like a big fat ITYS for the content copyright holders who assumed that internets REDUCE sales.
THL phish sticks
the release of all of Monty Python's material on YouTube
Then why do I only see some 40+ video's of 2-4 minutes?
There are some classic Monty Python bits, don't get me wrong. However, by and large, the bits you remember are it. There is a lot of mediocre fare, there.
I was a kid back when Monty Python was "live". The rare PBS (in USA) airing of their shows was risque fair, forbidden knowledge, if you will, for the American audience, back in the day. Hey, you might even see "full frontal nudity" if you were lucky.
Years later, out of nostalgia, I bought the boxed set of Monty Python at Costco. This was a few years ago, something like 13 DVDs, I don't recall exactly... watched the whole TV broadcast series over the course of a few weeks, much to the consternation of my wife.
Anyhow, my take-away was, yeah, there were some classic bits, but a lot of it was just tedious.
My copy went out on eBay with both the buyer and seller happy. They got a bit of a discount off retail, and I can say I have seen every episode.
I can't say it would break my heart if all the "good stuff" fell into the public domain, and the rest just faded away...
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
The every sperm is sacred video has naked children on it! Quick, someone censor it before another pedophile rapes someone due to the sex crazed rage they will be put in from wanking to this smut!
I know I got one. I considered some of the earlier sets, but they seemed to do stupid things like not including the Dead Parrot sketch. Once I found the complete set, I asked for it for Christmas ;)
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
And my points are (sortof) being made by persons more famous than I. But I cannot retract my post, I can only say, "never mind".
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
The fact that they are an established brand doesn't make them the exception, it makes them even more impressive. Monty python has been around for a long time, you have to figure that their established fan base already owns their content. ANYTHING increasing the sales of a decades old brand like monty python by an astronomical figure like 23000% is simply amazing.
It's no different than companies, a young company increasing profits by 200% a quarter isn't that noteworthy, IBM managing to increase their sales by 200% in a single quarter would be amazing.
If we see 23,000% jump in retail sales, how much do you think it is for TPB downloads?
Virtual Betting on Facebook for non-geeks.
Even if you can download stuff for free at any moment of the day, there are a ton of people that like to collect things, to have something physical.
This is exactly why even though use and sales for online video will grow, but there will always be a substantial market for physical media (currently DVD and Blu-Ray).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The RIAA already said that people are buying the DVDs only to pirate them. Don't you see, more sales = more piracy.
If pirates couldn't buy the DVDs they couldn't pirate them or upload them to YouTube.
Stop all sales of DVDs. Stop production of DVDs. Stop breathing!!
Oh, thank god!
I thought that was a penguin on my T.V..
Yes, well, that's the sort of blinkered, philistine pig ignorance I've come to expect from you non-creative garbage.
Have gnu, will travel.
now I will like to buy their DVD's.
Many people from Latin American countries (like me)haven't ever watched this before, this kind of humor was rarely shown in latin-american television, because the "average Jose" wouldn't enjoy it if its translated into spanish. But times change...
last generations (people now in their 20's - 30's) learned english in schools (the "boom" of bilingual schools started in the 80's - lucky me), now they are getting on the internet and enjoying different flavors of humor (and many other cultural components) they find while surfing.
now that Latin America economy is growing (Peru -my country- is expected to grow 6% this year) this will surely open a new market not only for them but for whoever does a similar thing.
- Human knowledge belongs to the world
Monty Python, for one, doesn't make any sense. A movie, you watch once, and you say "I've seen that movie, too" and that's the end of it (unless there's a lot of titties). With MP, you watch it, watch it, watch it (still doesn't make sense so get real stoned), then it starts to be pretty damn funny. The Three Stooges are the same way. Or so it is as I remember back when getting stoned was like logging into slashdot (which you see, I am not doing -- haunts and so on).
How do you reach the next generation?
This seems obvious... the next generation watches youtube. When I was introduced to Monty Python, it was tv.
I saw it, it was funny, sometimes I wanted to watch it when it wasn't on tv... so I might buy it.
Now it's youtube... they saw it, it was funny, they thought it'd be neat to watch it in the car... or at least, not at the computer.
This exposure and marketing thing is not that complicated. The problem seems to be IP holder's inability to really grasp how big the internet enabled marketplace is... a tiny percentages of sale conversions, in a freakin enormous marketplaces = lots of sales.
Thing is, you have to accept the idea that you might make MORE from your body of work, by recognizing that 'enough' might not be a sale from everyone that enjoyed your work, every time they did. You can't gain the benefits of the massive free exposure of the internet, if you are not willing to concede some of the sales as marketing.
As much as I appreciate a try before I buy option, I'm not entirely sure that the success met here will translate into any kind of general result, data not being the plural of anecdote and all.
I tend to actually purchase more content now than I have in the past. Most of this has to do with actually having a decent paying job and disposable income, rather than being a poor high school or college student. Even now, however, I will tend to see if I can find a few episodes of a show available as a torrent or on some website that streams the show before I commit money towards it. Sometimes I find that I like the show and will go out and buy a season or so on DVD and other times I find out that I don't care anything for the show and won't purchase any of it.
Previously this was more legally grey but now that Hulu seems to offer popular shows a day or so after their original air date it's not that much of an issue. Then again, I don't use their service (It's not the advertisements, but mostly the fact that I need to register and completely resent having to do so), so I'm not overly knowledgeable about the variety of programming. In general, I think that the content providers are starting to realize that it's inevitable that the content is going to end up online, whether they like it or not and are starting to react to that.
In general though, I probably tend to purchase less than a third of what I preview online. Some of this is due to the fact that I can't purchase it even if I wanted to do so, but the vast majority of it isn't all that great or engaging. Personally I don't care whether or not people sample before making a purchase or time commitment. I do so all the time, but if you genuinely enjoy a TV show, music album, or movie, purchase it. The people who make that content require money from somewhere to continue to produce that content and I would feel dishonest consuming all of it without giving something back.
In short, exercise your freedoms but don't be a dick.
And hence does not apply to the RIAA and MPAA.
A sample can create new customers. iTunes does it, Proctor & Gamble does it, the Python Group Ltd./Inc./IP Holdings appears to have done it quite nicely: let the consumer get a clue about what they're buying. Just don't give your product away.
Youtube presents me with a tiny window of video (or a big blotchy one) which is not as good as what I get on a DVD. If I really want to SEE the content, I'll buy it in a better format.
Hopefully, this will knock some sense into the big production companies.
If your only tool is a hammer, every problem becomes a nail.
I am shocked an appalled by the malicious free capitalism that the Monty Python troupe has exhibited by making their skits free on YouTube without having consumers purchase them first. This is in clear violation of the principles of marketing and I will do everything within my power to see this effort is sacked.
Signed
Cary Sherman, President of RIAA (Mrs.)
Two peanuts vhere vhalking down zee strada. Unt vhon vuz assaulted.... ... ... ... ... peanut.
It's cool that they started their own channel and uploaded better videos than everyone else, then suggested people to buy the dvds with better quality and extras.
1. Create a series that can captivate the viewer (ex: heroes, LOST, 4400, whatever)
2. Release them on youtube/tv broadcast/etc weekly for free
3. Release the DVD with the _full_ season, 2 episodes from it ending.
4. ???
5. Profit
I can't believe they can't make such simple things as these. Some japanese anime producers make profit through the DVD sales by offering them with full uncensored content. You can't believe the amount of people who want to see drawn nipples.
yes, there was a deal of the day on it right before Christmas. Great deal, like $40 for 16 DVDs.
Love Amazon, have to though, because I work there ;)
Seriously - can anyone point to the actual data (I am still hoping to find it)? I clicked through to the linked article, clicked from there to a few more pages, and just found a lot of self-promoting links to more of their own blog entries - no numbers at all. All I found was pretty typical poor-quality blog writing.
The Python's just released a big boxed set with additional bonus material - we bought the set for our daughter as a Christmas present. So...
- What was the date of the YouTube release (assuming it was all at once)?
- When did the sales spike occur, exactly?
- Was it perhaps more strongly correlated with the release of the box set?
- Was it perhaps more strongly correlated with some obscure buying holiday, such as Christmas?
- How have sales of Monty Python DVDs trended around previous Christmastimes?
I'd love to find out that this story is accurate; but lately it seems like there's an epidemic of bad "data analysis" going around.
#DeleteChrome
...that MP videos show up on search results for "Biggus Dickus".
Anybody want a peanut?
20% == a bit
23,000% == a little bigger
Send your spendthrift head of state this
;-)
When you put things on YouTube, you aren't getting paid
They are, actually---Google splits the ad revenue from ads shown on video pages with content providers.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
their sales have blown through the roof on Amazon.com. It is too bad there isn't any proper news article about this
Maybe because it never happened? The linked story is a blog, which cites another blog, which claims that sales jumped to 240 times their previous value, but doesn't say where they got their figures.
As far as I can see, this is just another stupid blog rumor.
Some years ago, whenever one of us bought an LP, we'd tape it for our friends. C90 tapes had 45 minutes a side, but a typical LP was only a hour long, so we'd fill the space with something we liked. I bought loads of LPs after hearing something I wouldn't have listened to in the normal course of events.
Youtube is the modern version. Amazon suggests bands you might like, based on what you have bought. You go to Youtube to see what they are like, back to Amazon to buy it. I got into Therion (a symphonic metal group) without ever hearing them on the wireless or knowing anyone who likes them.
I keep seeing this number of 23000%
Where does it come from? As I posted (#8 on the mashable thread), the link that you'd expect to back up the claims links to overlay ads on youtube.
Either I'm incredibly dense, or this is an elaborate experiment to see how far and wide people will push completely unattributed statistics. Well, maybe both.
Seems to work fine for the book authors whose works are here:
http://www.baen.com/library/
In a world where the people with money have increasing ways to spend it, you are competing in mind share terms. If you are just starting out, you are a grain of sand on a beach. Even if you are actually a diamond, who would know?
So either you buy advertising and marketing ($$$$$), or you give stuff out free and hope that lots of people like it and tell their friends, and eventually you get something like a network effect.
Just look at the popular music and books out there. A some of them aren't really that good - it's just they are good (lucky? ;) ) enough, and then people talk about them and it becomes part of their shared experience, and so some of them will buy for themselves or for others.
Note though, if you can only create one decent work in your entire life, then giving away that only golden egg you lay isn't going to make you much money. But that just means you're not very good at that, and you should be finding a different way of earning a living.
If I can only paint one excellent picture in my whole lifetime, I shouldn't try to make money as an artist. Maybe just paint as a hobby.
Another thing: make it easy for people to pay you. Doesn't matter how they get your stuff - whether it's from P2P or from someone else's trash.
Someone had a pirate copy of GTA3, and enjoyed it so much that he wanted to buy one - but it was banned in his country. He actually went to a neighbouring country to try to buy it, but it was banned there too!
Would have been better if there was a website where he could just pay the money and not worry about shipping charges. He already has the game why pay for shipping? He's paid the "unauthorised distributors" their share - which presumably includes shipping, handling, distribution, stocking etc.
I came across Mr. Show on YouTube. I think I was linked there by some website. I ended up watching a bunch of the clips. A few months later I went and bought the whole series on DVD through Amazon. I would have never known about the show if it wasn't for YouTube.
The MPAA doesn't what free content everywhere because the majority of contents are attached to impulse buyers. The majority of music or movies are common consumer products, like a pair of trousers. They have a very short product life cycle. If they don't sell those albums, or those movies in 6 months to 1 year, they won't sell them at all. True interesting things like the Python's stuff are timeless because they are also art, not pure consumer products.
Math is beautiful... e^(pi*i)+1=0
Very True. In my opinion, 70% of more of Monty Python stuff was very tedious.
The real classic comes not from Monty Python, but from Python members John Cleese & Connie Booth -
the 12 episodes of Fawlty Towers.
Each of the 12 episodes is a classic. Each can be watched multiple times.
http://www.youtube.com/blog?entry=n-q9Enl2O2Y "For example, when Monty Python launched their channel in November, not only did their YouTube videos shoot to the top of the most viewed lists, but their DVDs also quickly climbed to No. 2 on Amazon's Movies & TV bestsellers list, with increased sales of 23,000 percent."
"It is too bad there isn't any proper news article about this, but I think it bodes well for those who champion free content. "
But not for those who argue against "perpetual" copyright income.
Shai Schticks:"You don't make peace with friends, you make peace with enemies"
Great news. Now I just need to figure out how I can use YouTube properly with open source software. I have a script that downloads the videos, but I would like to use YouTube like everyone else. I was told Gnash could do it, but I've had no luck with it so far. I'm on Debian etch. Anybody want to help me?
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
a large pink foot decends into the open mouth of an riaa executive.
[site]
The actual 23000% figure comes from this official YouTube blog entry.
The article linked from the summary is someone else rephrasing & spinning this in an ad-filled blog. You even have to click through to another of their pages to get to the primary source. Congratulations to them on getting so many ad impressions!
"The Hottie and the Nottie" and "The Postman" are two of my favorite films!
I completely agree that Glitter is crap.
You, Sir, are apparently equipped with a sense of humour akin to a sloth that just went through the grandad's secret opium stash.
Monty Python was and remains a timeless work of satiric and absurd comedy, regardless if it is in written or in acted form.
In the future, I'd recommend that you stick with such comedic shows such as "The Friends", "The American Pie" series of films and "Collected and Abridged Works of Judd Apatow" connect-the-dots-and-paint-by-numbers educational books.
Such arrangements should keep us all far happier and in better mood.
Oh, and one last thing...
SOD OFF!
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
If it's anything like what I had in Ecuador, I expect it is as good as you say - on a par with Italian, Greek, Chinese, Mexican, and Ethiopian fare, all of which do well in lots of places.
Perhaps I will end up moving down your way. The American people have lost their way, and unless they find it again pretty soon the U.S. won't be worth living in.
Does anyone else recall when transcripts of The Holy Grail and other bits of Monty Python were regularly posted on USENET in the late 80's and early 90's? That is where I became exposed to Monty Python, and it led to the sales of at least 1 Monty Python CD ("Monty Python Sings") and 4 Monty Python DVDs.
But we have known about this effect for years. About 15 years ago, there was a consistent trend among books (including new books) that were published online and made freely available: they sold much better than comparable books which were NOT made freely available online. The reason is simple, same as what happened here: free advertising. There are millions of books published each year, and most people don't have the time to go look through all the physical copies for what they want - but put it online where they can get an idea whether they want the whole book, where it is easy to quote a few paragraphs in an email to a friend or a post on a related internet discussion board, and suddenly there is a market for the book, because the people who want the information know where to find it. Many are willing and able to pay. Some are willing but not able - and those are not lost sales, they are an increase in market presence, because those readers will pass on their recommendations to others who CAN pay, and may eventually be able to pay themselves. There may be a few free riders, who would have bought the book otherwise but won't because it is free online, but these are very much the minority and are overwhelmed by the advantages of free advertising.
Humans are, generally, idiots.
Just think of that IQ curve with an average IQ being around a 100, and then remember that it means that half the humanity is BELLOW that high point.
Applying that to the blog post gives us this:
The Complete Monty Pythons Flying Circus - Collectors Edition Megaset
Series: Monty Python's Flying Circus Rating: Format: DVD
List Price: $159.95
Price: $99.99
That is the brand new boxset. 16 DVDs for 100$, quite a bargain.
BUT... the proverbial hare apparently lies in the bush bellow:
Amazon.com Sales Rank: #23,800 in Movies & TV (See Bestsellers in Movies & TV)
Popular in these categories: (What's this?)
#2 in Movies & TV > Comedy > British > Monty Python Store > Monty Python's Flying Circus: Personal Best
#5 in Movies & TV > Comedy > Television > Monty Python's Flying Circus
#17 in Movies & TV > Television > A&E Home Video > Megasets
Amazingly, an average idiot apparently believes that number ( # ) and percent ( % ) mean the same.
After all... percentage is a number as well, right?
Such cherry picking can leave us with a snail as the fastest recorded animal in the world - if the book it is recorded in is exclusively about snails, disregarding existence of any other creature in the world...
Add to that infinite limits of human stupidity and ignorance and...
We get No. 2 in a VERY limited category described as "No. 2 EVAH!!!111elven", and what is really a very low sales rank understood and described as 23000% sales increase.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Terrence Vance Gilliam, American-born British writer, filmmaker, animator and member of the Monty Python comedy troupe known for directing several well-regarded films including Brazil (1985), Twelve Monkeys (1995), and Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998). Each can be watched multiple times ; ).
"Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
Oh yeah. Brazil is one of my favorite movies of all time. I love the first line (on the TV screen after the bombing in the TV store). Fits in with the state of America after 9/11. (you will have to watch it to get the line.)
Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress
Thanks to all for the comments and feedback.
TFA http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/01/23/free-monty-python-videos-on-youtube-lead-to-23000-dvd-sale-increase/
refers to http://mashable.com/2009/01/22/youtube-boost-sales/
which allegedly refers to a mashable news from 01/21/2009, but the linked site http://mashable.com/2009/01/21/youtube-click-to-buy-overlay-ads/
has NOTHING to do with amazons bestseller lists AND there was no mashable news on 01/21/2009 about amazon at all. see http://mashable.com/page/2/ and http://mashable.com/page/3/
moreover none of amazons "Movies & TV" bestseller lists http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/dvd/ref=pd_ts_d_ldr_dvd/183-1981496-3747918 or sublists (links on the left side) has a monty python title (if it was no. 2 on 01/21/2009, like the first mashable "news" claims, then i don't think it would have been out so fast)
also the "news" doesn't mention, WHICH title was no. 2 in the bestseller list, but I think amazon's search-results are sorted by Sales Rank and the highest one in the search-results for "monty python" is http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0009XRZ92 on rank 755 in Movies & TV.
i think, the whole article is just made up.
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
With all due respect, some of the material might appear tedious to you because it's culturally specific.
I can imagine a lot of jokes about 1970s Britain (with a lot of poking at the Home Counties middle classed attitudes of the time) might completely miss you in the same way that I (as a British person) can watch US comedies with my American friends and they are falling about laughing at cultural references that all Americans take for granted and I completely miss, and just sit and think - "what's funny? this is just boring".
I suppose the same is true of all comedy, and even two people who grew up next door will find different things funny. But definitely some culturally specific stuff in there: check out Monty Python's "International Philosophy" sketch. Did you get the reference to 1966 England world cup footballer Nobby Stiles? Me and my friends fall about with hoots of laughter when the German captain in the sketch is introduced as Nobby Hegel - how many layers of humour are in there? Hegel being associated with a short toothless midfielder, a German philosopher being given an English nickname (England beat Germany in the 66' final), bit of an intellectual gag there about Nobby Stiles being a hard man on the pitch compared with Hegel's 'might makes right' philosophical leanings.
I'm not arguing that all Monty Python stuff is genius, some leaves me bored, but just suggesting that 40 years on in the UK I miss some of the gags and wonder if you might be as well. 1970s American comedies? I haven't a clue at half of the cultural references even when spelt out obviously.
As an IP rights holder and someone who's trying to figure out how to survive and thrive in the world of the web (see my book at http://www.elevatorpitchessentials.com/), I do find this story interesting and perhaps heartening.
Alright. Y'all have convinced me. I'm going to take your advice, take a chance, and GIVE away up to 100 free PDF copies of my book to Slashdot readers who e-mail me. You can get my e-mail address through my web site (see the root post for the URL). Just put SLASHDOT somewhere in the subject line.
Isn't this the same as playing songs on the radio leads to more music sales?
"Intelligence is like four wheel drive, it gets you stuck in more remote places" --Garrison Kiellor
Let me explain why.
If you have never seen (or heard) something before, whether it be a TV series, short or feature film (or music track), are you going to buy the DVD, CD or digital version?
NO!
Why? Because you have no reference or metric to judge it against other than the words and opinions of others (word of mouth). The radio is dying as the iPod takes over. Broadcast TV shows and theaters are next folks. HDTV, surround sound, video projectors, Blu-ray, etc. are all providing us with cinematic experiences in the home. TiVo is already killing broadcast advertising that provides the revenues for 99% of what is on TV. I could go on for hours on this, but the bottom line is that people aren't going to see advertisements for shows and films for much longer. They will have Facebook, MySpace, YouTube, etc. accounts and will hear about things from friends or get bored and start searching resources like YouTube for things they haven't seen before. Gee, I wonder if they will go out and buy stuff if they like what they see on a free video (or music site)? The data is saying yes, very clearly.
Oh, not to mention the positive effects that bootlegging has had on sales. People get a movie or two, a track or two from an artist or studio, like it, and then go find out what else has been done and often buy; very often! Looking at raw sales numbers in a downturning economy to defend anti-piracy is disingenuous at best.
More data is needed to find the root causes, but I assure you it's not piracy taking the lion share. My guess (as I am in the midst of gathering said data for a venture of my own) is that people are buying less new stuff due to the quality of the work, the fact that they are enjoying titles and albums that they already have, and are getting less exposed to new titles and artists due to the use of iPod and TiVo. But, that's all for the "new" stuff. Older titles don't get the exposure through mainstream media so free previews on YouTube are a good marketing tool.
You spend:
nothing on promotion (that's what YouTube and blogs are for,)
nothing on distribution, (that's what iTunes and the internet are for,)
nothing on material reproduction, (everything is digital,)
nothing on theatrical release, (its coming to a computer near you, [you supply the popcorn,])
and the damn film still gets out there.
You charge for the download of the high quality download (credit card transaction one way and film delivery the other,) and you make you money back.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
What this also tells us it that people want an honest to goodness real life physical copy of their media in professional packaging. We constantly hear how everything is going digital, and how the physical medium is dead. Personally, I have never, and will do my best to never "buy" a digital copy of media. I have given in on a couple of software applications, but those were only in programs that are updated often enough that a couple of months after receiving the media, it would already be an outdated version. For something like movies and music and games, I want to know that I can still use it when the company goes out of business, and if I have to do the manufacturing myself, I see no reason to pay.
I watch a LOT of movies, and I mean a LOT. Netflix has been my friend, and the Roku has been great. The vast majority of the movies suck, and while I will get mild enjoyment out of watching a bad movie, I will definitely not be watching them a second, third, or tenth time. The movies that I will be watching again and again, I buy on DVD. I have no interest what so ever to "buy" a download of them. I want packaging that I can put on my shelf and when I pass by and see it, it will remind me, "Oh, yeah, I think I want to watch that today." That just doesn't happen with downloaded movies and music. These numbers seem to show that I am not the only one who feels this way.
Come on slashdot readers, you are letting me down! Where is the beaten to a dead horse tag on a story that is OBVIOUSLY causation. I propose we rectify this and tag it up, stat!
Maybe this will stop the MPAA's spanish inquisition against perceived pirates...
Not every performer (or group of performers) has the decades-strong appeal of Monty Python, but this is a great thing to see.
If they don't have that kind of appeal, why should they get or expect much revenue anyway?
Just be sure to watch the Gilliam cut of Brazil, not the "Love Conquers All" version. LCA will make your mind bleed, in a very bad way.
Well, as the owner of a small publishing company, I can put in a couple of cents worth on this one...
The Internet can be very effectively used as a sort of radio for getting exposure for a book. When it comes to my company, the first 50 pages or so of each new release is made available as a free PDF and placed in a couple of spots where it can be freely shared - for public domain reprints, the entire book is made freely available online.
I do it this way for a couple of reasons (besides my company being brand-new and therefore having dick-all of an advertising budget). A large part of it is that people will download just about anything that catches their eye that is free, even if it is something they'll only ever glance at once and then forget it. This means that the average net surfer's "ferret brain," if you want to call it that, can be used for marketing purposes. That being said, most people do not want to read books on a computer or an e-book reader.
(If you don't believe me, check out the Association of American Publishers - they put out American domestic book sales figures, and they just released the figures for the month of November, 2008. The total net book sales were $743 million, with the e-book taking $5.1 million of that. This means that the e-book for November represented 0.69% of the total domestic American book market. Source: http://www.publishers.org/main/IndustryStats/IndStats/2008/Nov08stats.htm )
People tend to use computers and electronic readers for quick and easy consumption - hence the large number of newspapers that are being forced to expand online to survive. When it comes to books (which are not consumed quickly), as far as I can tell a reader will decide if they want to buy it within about 20 pages or so - so even 50 pages is more than strictly necessary for marketing purposes. Essentially, I go with whatever will get the reader far enough into the book that if they can get hooked, they will.
You don't ever want to act like you're holding something back unnecessarily, though. I do something different for the public domain reprints, as I said. The main reason is that those tend to be available off something like Project Gutenberg anyway, and holding back on the rest of the book can only make you look greedy - sort of a "who do you think you're kidding, publisher boy?" situation.
When it comes down to it, a free online sample on a file sharing service just can't hurt you. It doesn't take long to put together a PDF, and since people don't tend to consume full books online anyway, you don't have to worry about piracy taking away your sales in any great way - if somebody likes your book enough to read it all the way through, odds are they'll buy a paper copy so long as the price is reasonable. Aside from which, people who otherwise wouldn't have had your book cross their radar will now become aware of it, and that will raise your sales.
Robert B. Marks
Author, Demonsbane in Diablo Archive
Where's my correlation not causation tag?
What, not man enough to post it?
of the hacktacular idiot, the conservative mouthpiece, and the all-time-lamest asshat.
And don't forget window peeper.