Forum Settings
       
1 2 3
Reply To Thread

RetaliationFollow

QuoteReply
#27 Dec 25 2014 at 9:59 AM Rating: Good
Timelordwho
View User Forum
Unplanned
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Smasharoo wrote:
There's pretty much zero chance this movie doesn't make more money than it would without the NK cyberattack angle.

Impossible to disprove, but Hollywood Stock Exchange had the film estimated for $57 million at the box office after four weeks and maybe $70 million total before it left theaters. So it would have to make both that by streaming it PLUS the people who would have seen it via "video on demand" anyway but who are now part of the first figure. Last night, nine of us saw it for less than the price of a single theater ticket. Granted we probably wouldn't have all bought tickets but I bet at least two of us would have (one couple). At least one other who would have rented it or saw it on demand (for a fee) who now won't.

The movie wasn't bad and didn't need some giant stunt to salvage it. If it comes out that I'm wrong I guess I'll say "Welp, I was wrong" but I don't see the benefit. Depends a lot on the reports from its take on Christmas Eve and Day since I'd guess most "Yay America" people will watch it then and not a week from now.

Edited, Dec 25th 2014 8:22am by Jophiel


9 people watching it is a net loss for them, but if the average is in the 1-4 person range I think they win. It's cheaper for the consumer to see in every case though, but they miss out on the privilege of having loud talkers disrupting their viewing experience. It has value also as a test case for the model. When the numbers come in, we shall see.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#28 Dec 25 2014 at 10:08 AM Rating: Good
TirithRR
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
I guess you can also factor in those that chose to buy rather than rent.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#29 Dec 25 2014 at 10:11 AM Rating: Excellent
Jophiel
View User Forum
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Yeah, that's why I'm willing to wait on numbers before a final decision but I'm not on the "of course it was a stunt!" train. You'll have more people watching it today but some of that will be cannibalizing people who would have rented it via streaming later. But if they can't break fifty million dollars in the next couple weeks, you probably can't say this was more profitable
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#30 Dec 25 2014 at 10:14 AM Rating: Good
Smasharoo
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
Yeah, that's why I'm willing to wait on numbers before a final decision but I'm not on the "of course it was a stunt!" train. You'll have more people watching it today but some of that will be cannibalizing people who would have rented it via streaming later. But if they can't break fifty million dollars in the next couple weeks, you probably can't say this was more profitable

The idea that profit per sale digitally is the same as the profit per sale of someone sitting in a theater is insane. In no way does it need to do $50M in revenue to be as profitable as $50M in box office.

That said, it probably will.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#31 Dec 25 2014 at 10:23 AM Rating: Good
TirithRR
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
The idea that profit per sale digitally is the same as the profit per sale of someone sitting in a theater is insane. In no way does it need to do $50M in revenue to be as profitable as $50M in box office.

That said, it probably will.


But, doesn't it have to make back what it cost to produce either way?

Edit:
Which according to the interwebs was 44 million.

Edited, Dec 25th 2014 11:24am by TirithRR
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#32 Dec 25 2014 at 11:01 AM Rating: Excellent
Jophiel
View User Forum
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smasharoo wrote:
The idea that profit per sale digitally is the same as the profit per sale of someone sitting in a theater is insane. In no way does it need to do $50M in revenue to be as profitable as $50M in box office.

That said, it probably will.

Sure, get back to me with the true percentages they get from each format and we can have a non-insane chat about it.

Edited, Dec 25th 2014 11:02am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#33 Dec 25 2014 at 3:32 PM Rating: Decent
Turin
Keeper of the Shroud
*****
13,632 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
It's my duty to support my country and not cause incidents overseas, therefore the logical thing to do is to illegally bootleg it.


It's like you read my mind. It may or may not be downloading now...
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#34 Dec 25 2014 at 5:07 PM Rating: Decent
Smasharoo
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
Sure, get back to me with the true percentages they get from each format and we can have a non-insane chat about it.


Won't be necessary, there will be a big news story about what a great success it was long before I'd need to bother.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#35 Dec 25 2014 at 6:27 PM Rating: Excellent
Jophiel
View User Forum
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Standard back of the envelope numbers are that 50% off the box office goes to the studio. They'd have to be getting over 80% from Google and Microsoft to keep pace, ticket to "rental". The Seetheinterview website apparently was a debacle: working poorly, refusing to run purchases and letting others save a copy of the movie as easily as right-clicking and picking "Save As..." According to the Googlewebz, it is getting torrented all to hell which I guess makes sense when you have to see it via computer (or tv app) anyway.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#36 Dec 25 2014 at 7:02 PM Rating: Good
TirithRR
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
I don't see it being a gain over box office. Instead I see it negatively affecting the idea of films being offered as day one digital release instead of theaters only.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#37 Dec 25 2014 at 10:27 PM Rating: Good
lolgaxe
View User Forum
+1
*******
50,767 posts
Jophiel wrote:
The Seetheinterview website apparently was a debacle: working poorly, refusing to run purchases and letting others save a copy of the movie as easily as right-clicking and picking "Save As..."
Someone just got blacklisted in all things digital.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#38 Dec 25 2014 at 11:37 PM Rating: Good
Timelordwho
View User Forum
Unplanned
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Standard back of the envelope numbers are that 50% off the box office goes to the studio. They'd have to be getting over 80% from Google and Microsoft to keep pace, ticket to "rental". The Seetheinterview website apparently was a debacle: working poorly, refusing to run purchases and letting others save a copy of the movie as easily as right-clicking and picking "Save As..." According to the Googlewebz, it is getting torrented all to **** which I guess makes sense when you have to see it via computer (or tv app) anyway.


They are pulling 70% from Google and MS channels. We'll see if the net numbers are better than expected, although that still may not mean that with the same buzz and theater channels still open that viewership would have been the same.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#39 Dec 26 2014 at 5:47 AM Rating: Good
Elinda
View User Forum
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
My husband bought the 5 buck Youtube link. Apparently a purchased 'link' to view the movie could be shared without restriction.

The movie was ok. It was pretty standard Seth Rogen stuff - crude but funny. There was nothing about that would have made it a box-office hit.

As soon as I heard the about the youtube deal, a little asylum voice-in-my-head said, 'Smash was right'. Smiley: glare hate that!
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#40 Dec 26 2014 at 5:52 AM Rating: Good
TirithRR
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
Elinda wrote:
Apparently a purchased 'link' to view the movie could be shared without restriction.


Elinda wrote:
As soon as I heard the about the youtube deal, a little asylum voice-in-my-head said, 'Smash was right'. Smiley: glare hate that!


That the digital release will be just as profitable, if not more so, than a box office release? (But... youtube links can be shared without restriction?)
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#41 Dec 26 2014 at 6:04 AM Rating: Good
Elinda
View User Forum
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
TirithRR wrote:
(But... youtube links can be shared without restriction?)

I don't know the proper terminology, but the link that was provided after purchasing access to the movie was not restricted. It was shared it with both my kids who were also able to watch the movie (with-in the 48-hour time period) with out paying 5 bucks.

Heck maybe we could have watched it without paying the 5 bucks. Didn't try it.


____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#42 Dec 26 2014 at 6:45 AM Rating: Good
TirithRR
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
Elinda wrote:
Heck maybe we could have watched it without paying the 5 bucks. Didn't try it.

Just do what Joph did, and have a couple dozen people come over and watch the screening. You could even mark up 100-200% on food and drink during the event...

Edit:
Apparently it grossed $1 million in theaters opening day.

Edited, Dec 26th 2014 6:01pm by TirithRR
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#43 Dec 27 2014 at 10:42 AM Rating: Excellent
Xsarus
View User Forum
ZAM Administrator
*****
10,601 posts
Well as of yesterday afternoon it had been viewed 77.5 million times apparently, but seeing that you can share the link, it's not clear how many of those people payed. A good chunk of them certainly. If 50 million did then that's still just under 250 million at 70%. It can't hurt that it's been the first thing everyone sees when they go to youtube.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-interview-is-owning-youtube-right-now-2014-12-26

This is a terrible website, it sources itself when you click the link for the numbers, so who knows if the number is actually meaningful.

Edited, Dec 27th 2014 10:50am by Xsarus
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#44 Dec 27 2014 at 3:07 PM Rating: Good
Timelordwho
View User Forum
Unplanned
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
Well as of yesterday afternoon it had been viewed 77.5 million times apparently, but seeing that you can share the link, it's not clear how many of those people payed. A good chunk of them certainly. If 50 million did then that's still just under 250 million at 70%. It can't hurt that it's been the first thing everyone sees when they go to youtube.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-interview-is-owning-youtube-right-now-2014-12-26

This is a terrible website, it sources itself when you click the link for the numbers, so who knows if the number is actually meaningful.

Edited, Dec 27th 2014 10:50am by Xsarus


If those numbers are accurate, and the movie budget was 44m, budget + marketing ~80, they are making a tidy profit. Even if an average of 4 different views were from one purchase, regardless of the number of people watching each of those streams, it will be profitable. But i'm not sure that they are accurate.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#45 Dec 27 2014 at 3:21 PM Rating: Good
TirithRR
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
I'm sure it is an accurate "view" count. But of course when you factor in unique and paying, I'm sure it's a much smaller number.

Edit:
Also: Rogen. Interview This!

Edited, Dec 27th 2014 4:50pm by TirithRR
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#46 Dec 29 2014 at 11:09 AM Rating: Excellent
Jophiel
View User Forum
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
News reports today are saying that The Interview made a "whopping" $15 million from online viewing over the holiday weekend. "Whopping" was a direct quote from one headline. Another said it "Beat theaters" which I found funny since it was barely in any theaters. Anyway, $15 million this weekend was no doubt its peak so I find it hard to believe it'll make the estimated $50 mil it would have in theaters. I suppose if the 70% to studios number is accurate, it would only have to make around $35 million online to to hit ~$25 million in revenue and match the same estimated take from a traditional showing.

I'd guess that all the "America, fuck yeah!" people and insatiable curiosity media-whores watched it four days ago though so I'm skeptical about it doubling its viewership in the next couple weeks. In any event, this debacle wasn't some money printing machine for Sony.

Edited, Dec 29th 2014 11:10am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#47 Dec 29 2014 at 12:49 PM Rating: Decent
Yodabunny
Scholar
****
4,593 posts
Jophiel wrote:
I'd guess that all the "America, fuck yeah!" people and insatiable curiosity media-whores watched it four days ago though so I'm skeptical about it doubling its viewership in the next couple weeks.


I'd guess a good number of that crowd are unaware of or don't understand what's happened and/or, by a larger percentage than the non-"America, fuck yeah!" people, are incapable of finding and using online movies that require online payment and need to be watched on a computer.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#48 Dec 29 2014 at 1:36 PM Rating: Default
Almalieque
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
I noticed the hyperbolic numbers as well. If all of the theaters had showed the movie, I'm sure it would have made more money (welcome to the world of Black movies). I don't see the numbers increasing. Unlike in a theater, every person doesn't haven't to pay to watch a movie online, even if legally purchased.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#49 Dec 29 2014 at 1:40 PM Rating: Excellent
Jophiel
View User Forum
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Almalieque wrote:
(welcome to the world of Black movies)

Looking forward to the numbers on Tyler Perry's Madea's North Korean Vacation
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#50 Dec 29 2014 at 3:19 PM Rating: Default
Almalieque
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
(welcome to the world of Black movies)

Looking forward to the numbers on Tyler Perry's Madea's North Korean Vacation
Tyler Perry movies are in their own genre disliked by most.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#51 Dec 29 2014 at 4:00 PM Rating: Decent
Smasharoo
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
News reports today are saying that The Interview made a "whopping" $15 million from online viewing over the holiday weekend. "Whopping" was a direct quote from one headline. Another said it "Beat theaters" which I found funny since it was barely in any theaters. Anyway, $15 million this weekend was no doubt its peak so I find it hard to believe it'll make the estimated $50 mil it would have in theaters.

Was projected to open under $20 million in theaters prior to any shenanigans. I have no idea if the week 2 grosses in theaters is more than it is from on demand viewing, but I think "it was forecast to $20m in theaters and it only did $16 million, FAILURE!" is a little rushed. Let's just look at the gross at the end of 2015, which is where that $50 mil projection is intended to forecast. Or not, I guess. I have no real stake in this. If you want to play pretend that Sony was surprised and alarmed and reacted, feel free. Blame Obama if you like, it's your wooden nickel.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

▲ Page top
1 2 3
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 326 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (326)
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC