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.
But was it an increase in African or European DVD sales?
... 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.
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 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!
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.
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!!
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
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.
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.)
;-)
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.
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.
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.
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