3 ms·
Thanks I read the article. From the study: > Thus there is a very strong, statistically significant, positive correlation between Box Office revenue and unlice
by cantSpellSober 3y ago
Thanks I read the article. From the study:
> Thus there is a very strong, statistically significant, positive correlation between Box Office revenue and unlicensed consumption
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y agoI am not sure of your point. What is the significance of that statement if not to say that increases in "unlicensed consumption" don't decrease box office revenue? The fact that they have a positive correlation is kinda the default; one doesn't affect the other and there's likely instead some other cause for the statistically significant correlation, such as popularity.
- cantSpellSober 3y agoIt's not my point, the significance is listed under Conclusions.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y agoSorry for the confusion. Stepping back to my initial reply, you asked: > That's a very generic conclusion, is it related to this article somehow? And I intended to answer the question with how their statement is related to the article by pointing out that this statement is written at the start of the article: > New research from piracy tracking firm MUSO shows that movie piracy is strongly linked to box office revenues. When pirated downloads peak or slow down, movie theater visits show a similar trend. While this may sound counterintuitive, the finding is actually quite obvious. Correlation is not causation and pirates are people too. I didn't understand your point when you responded by saying: > Thanks I read the article. From the study: >> Thus there is a very strong, statistically significant, positive correlation between Box Office revenue and unlicensed consumption What is the significance of the statement you quoted as a reply to mine? That's what I don't follow. (Thanks for the time you've taken so far with your replies!)