4 ms·
The only way we can get hollywood to innovate is to make a convincing case that by innovating they can make more money. At 99c a pop, you would need _billions_
by newhouseb 15y ago
The only way we can get hollywood to innovate is to make a convincing case that by innovating they can make more money.
At 99c a pop, you would need _billions_ of views to compete with the income of a blockbuster [not to mention innovative] film like Avatar, which according to Wikipedia made nearly $2.8 billion. If you look at the most popular YouTube videos, you'll find things like Justin Bieber's songs with about 700 million views. Making the generous estimate that about a tenth of those viewers would pay for that content, you would make about $70 million, which is orders of magnitude less than what they do now.
- banjomonster 15y agoYou could however make quite a lot of 3min music videos for the cost of an Avatar (237m according to Wikipedia). If it cost 2m per video, you could make 100 for less than the cost of an avatar, and even if only half of these made the 70m you mention, you'd still have grossed 3.5 billion.
- notahacker 15y agoSure, but you're not going to get 70 million people paying 99 cents for a one time stream of a 3 minute music video in the foreseeable future. A better comparison point would be YouTube's HD video list, which perhaps more closely approximates the production values an independent filmmaker might aspire to. The top HD videos on YouTube mostly have <10 million views. And they're short, and free.