MacDirectory magazine is the premiere creative lifestyle magazine for Apple enthusiasts featuring interviews, in-depth tech reviews, Apple news, insights, latest Apple patents, apps, market analysis, entertainment and more.
Issue link: https://digital.macdirectory.com/i/1496181
For decades, films were valued by simple metrics, past consumer interest. Action films are still the dominant genre when it comes to overall box office revenue but they require high production and marketing budgets. But in recent years Parrot Analytics studies have shown that horror films have produced a greater profit compared to their production budgets. The internet’s penetration changed some of those initial calculations and streaming changed it even more. Today, a title that attracts new subscribers is valuable and more so if it keeps them from cancelling or if it reaches a demographic they have been struggling to reach. To predict and understand the demand, streamers have come to rely on Parrot Analytics’ content valuation measurement system. The goal is to understand how demand for a title can be translated/monetized by the content provider and buyer at various stages of the production cycle as well as its value to the organizations content library. Translation? It takes a lot of the gut-level decisions out of the equation so the apparently arbitrary additions and deletions aren’t as arbitrary as you thought. While dramas have slowly declined when it comes to box office returns, they have proven to be valuable to streamers. As a result, there have been a number of co-financing projects with film distributors and SVOD partners so that both end up with a better return on investment. Most dramas earn between $1-5 in streaming value a year per every dollar they make at the box office. In addition, streaming demand increases slightly as people look for a wider array of films. The same goes for thrillers, which sees up to $8 per every $1 at the box office. Sundance broke the mold – slowly – for documentaries which were previously treated as entertainment charity cases. Agents weren’t interested, unions weren’t interested, distributors were even less interested and they were treated as pet projects that were nearly always independently financed