Category Archives: The Mediascape

OC4: Zuck promotes first standalone VR headset

Posted on by
Reply

At the recent Oculus Connect 4 Keynote presentation in San Jose, Mark Zuckerberg promised a new VR headset that straddles the space between Mobile VR that uses your smartphone and Computer VR that uses your high-end computer: the standalone Oculus Go.

Shipping in early 2018, Oculus Go will cost $199 USD and features:

  • Crystal-clear optics
  • 2560 x 1440 resolution
  • Integrated spatial audio
  • Designed with breathable fabrics and adjustable straps

Lance Ulanoff writing in Mashable has an interesting take on the price:

“Why is $199 such a good price? It’s not super cheap, but believe it or not, it appears to trigger a response in consumers. Ask them to pay $300 or more for cutting-edge technology, especially something as unproven as virtual reality that still needs more expensive hardware to work, and they balk (Oculus sold just 355,000 Oculus units in 2016). But set a sub-$200 price, even just a dollar below that threshold, and consumers are ready to take the leap. Apple wasn’t even the first to discover this magical price point. Back in 2002, the very first iRobot Roomba robotic vacuums were priced at $199.95. Even though they’ve since gotten a lot more expensive, that initial magic price point helped launch a robot vacuum industry.”

My take: I think this will be a game changer. It’s perfect for everyone who wants to get into VR but doesn’t want to buy a Samsung phone or a PC computer.

BellMedia kills BravoFACT and MuchFACT

Posted on by
Reply

Ever since the CRTC ruled on May 15, 2017, that continued funding of BravoFACT and MuchFACT was no longer required, the indie film community in Canada has been wondering when BellMedia would pull the plug.

They acted in the middle of the night, on September 26 late last month, erasing their webpages, and thereby washing their hands of both production programs.

As quoted by Haydn Watters of the CBC, Randy Lennox, president of Bell Media and former head of Universal Music Canada, shrugged:

“The traditional viewing of a music video is… certainly not what it was. We don’t owe anyone an explanation for this…. I think after making hundreds, thousands of music videos and paying for them… I think we’re pretty good guys.”

OnScreen Manitoba reminds us:

“Since its foundation in 1995, BravoFACT has contributed $30 million to short films and emerging creators and the MuchFACT has contributed approximately $100 million since 1984. Earlier this fall, Bell Media’s Harold Greenberg Fund also closed its production equity investment program.”

Here is the current BravoFACT.com and what it used to look like two days after the CRTC’s decision.

Here is the current MuchFACT.ca and what it used to look like two days after the CRTC’s decision.

My take: I’m saddened by this news. I’ve been a recipient of a BravoFACT grant, so I know how important that funding can be to a short film. What maddens me about this news is the change management aspect. The Department of Canadian Heritage is in the midst of redesigning Canadian media in the digital landscape and has said the Broadcast Act will be overhauled this Fall. The CRTC is under its mandate. The disconnect comes when they claim: “More than ever before, our creators are ambassadors for our country. They are our inspiration at home, and reflect who we are to the rest of the world. Our new approach must continue to support a domestic space and market for Canadian content. Only by remaining strong in our approach at home will we succeed internationally. Only by playing to our strengths, by telling our stories, will we stand out in the global marketplace.” Proper change management would be to bring new programs on first before axing old ones. We just jumped off one raft and are hoping another one appears before we fall — I hope you all know how to swim!

Theatrical release becoming a loss-leader

Posted on by
Reply

Today’s post is a mashup of two recent articles that got me thinking.

First, Poppy Reid reports in Australia’s The Industry Observer that Chance the Rapper earned $33M without selling a single record this year.

That places him fifth on Forbes‘ highest-paid hip hop artists list.

Not only is all his music free, but he has yet to sign a record label deal.

As quoted in Vanity Fair, Chance claims:

“My plan was to sign with a label and figure out my music from there. But after meeting with the three major labels, I realized my strength was being able to offer my best work to people without any limit on it…. I make money from touring and selling merchandise, and I honestly believe if you put effort into something and you execute properly, you don’t necessarily have to go through the traditional ways.”

Poppy concludes with:

“It should be noted that all the top earners used hip hop as a stepping stone toward their respective successful business ventures. In fact, Diddy [number one on the list with earnings of $130 million] hasn’t released any new music in the past year. He did however, sell a portion of his Sean Jean clothing company for US$70 million.”

Second, Tatiana Siegel reports in The Hollywood Reporter on Indie Film’s Financial Paradox: More Backers But Less Box Office.

She starts by singling out the weekend of September 22, 2017, when 15 mostly independent films competed against each other at the box office, resulting in no run-away winners.

She then contrasts that with, “Despite the box-office challenges, there is no shortage of funds being poured into indie films” and cites a $50 million epic.

She adds that $30 million in P&A is required to successfully break an indie film; $20 million is not enough.

She concludes:

“Many distributors continue to buy, not because it’s financially lucrative but because it feeds another side of their business or their parent company’s overall strategy. Releasing movies has become something of a side hustle. Many other distributors are really in the VOD or streaming business or have bigger interests that overshadow how their individual films fare at the box office.”

One moment please.

Releasing movies (let’s exclude blockbusters for the moment) is now a side show to the main event? Huh.

My take: I think this speaks to the fracturing of the mediascape. Long gone are the days of orderly rollouts across windows (when) and territories (where). Today there are so many more options available to distribute projects. It’s still the wild west but streaming (how) and mobile (where) are emerging as leaders. Add in Chance’s ‘give it away’ strategy. Combining the two begs the question, what could be the ‘real’ business of indie filmmakers? Hmm. Maybe it’s not the destination, but the journey? Can we monetize that? Ideas, folks?

Netflix just invited itself to your child’s next birthday party!

Posted on by
Reply

Streaming juggernaut Netflix wants to sing your child Happy Birthday.

From their September 14, 2017, media release:

“With this new hack, parents can simply press play and kids’ favorite characters will sing them a special birthday greeting – made just for them (or so they’ll think).”

Some of the Birthdays On-Demand animated characters:

  • All Hail King Julien
  • Barbie
  • Beat Bugs
  • Dinotrux
  • Las Leyendas
  • LEGO Friends
  • LEGO Ninjago
  • Luna Petunia
  • My Little Pony
  • Pokemon
  • Project Mc2
  • Skylanders Academy
  • Trollhunters
  • Word Party

Just search for ‘birthday songs’ to find all.

(Netflix also did something similar for New Year’s Eve last year.)

My take: this is brilliant! Netflix has combined a targeted audience (children) with an annual event (birthdays) and created media that has huge long-tail appeal. This could only be better with some customization. And more characters. I’m thinking on the adult side, where accounts (in our home) are named. How difficult would it be to have Walter White or Frank Underwood spell out (or even say) my name? (Birthday is coming up soon! Hint, hint.)

“TV” shows coming to social media platforms

Posted on by
Reply

Harold Stark, writing on Forbes, believes that Snapchat and Facebook are Going to Change Television Forever.

He’s wondering about the data social networks gather on their users and how it could inform media programming:

“Social media platforms such as Facebook, Snapchat, Instagram and Vimeo already invest billions of dollars each year in order to gather data on their users. Just imagine what would happen if all these social media organizations were to implement their stacks of user-sensitive data to create the perfect television shows that users loved?”

And it’s already happening.

Facebook has begun Watch for shows “made up of episodes — live or recorded — [that] follow a theme or storyline.” They envision that:

“Over time, creators will be able to monetize their shows through Ad Breaks. We’ve been testing Ad Breaks over the past few months, and we will be slowly opening up availability to more creators to ensure we’re providing a good experience for the community. Creators can also create sponsored shows using our branded content tag.”

Sounds like TV and TV commercials, no?

In the wings are Instagram, Snap and Vimeo. Plus, Apple.

My take: Television, be scared, be very scared.

Snap Spectacles

Posted on by
Reply

Snap Inc. has sold more than 100,000 of its funky retro Spectacles.

Formerly Snapchat Inc., the social multimedia firm now considers itself…

“…a camera company. We believe that reinventing the camera represents our greatest opportunity to improve the way people live and communicate. Our products empower people to express themselves, live in the moment, learn about the world, and have fun together.”

In related news, a judge has ruled against a trademark infringement case brought against Snap by Eyebobs of Minnesota. They…

“…felt the similarity of the eyeball logos would lead a Spectacles user or Eyebobs customer to think the two companies were partners, or had collaborated.”

However, Snap…

“…denied these claims, adding that a crucial flaw in Eyebobs’s argument was the trademark in question. While Snap held a trademark on its eyeball logo, Eyebobs only had a trademark on its name, not its logo.”

Ouch!

You be the judge:

My take: I’m intrigued by the POV angle of the camera in these smartglasses but a negative is the circular 1088 resolution. And getting your video out of Snap and into something you can edit might take some finagling.

Hunger Games and Twilight Theme Park to Open

Posted on by
Reply

Lionsgate is partnering to open a South Korean theme park based on its film properties.

“Lionsgate Movie World, spanning approximately 1.3 million square feet (approximately 122,000 square meters) and centered around multiple renowned Lionsgate film properties, is Lionsgate’s first branded outdoor theme park and the latest milestone in the continued ramp up of Lionsgate’s location-based entertainment business around the world. The project will be developed into seven movie zones, each themed around blockbuster Lionsgate properties which have collectively grossed nearly $9 billion at the global box office. These include ‘The Hunger Games’, ‘The Twilight Saga’ and ‘Now You See Me’ as well as the eagerly-anticipated March 2018 release ‘Robin Hood’.”

This joins their project in Dubai.

According to The Economist:

“Newfound enthusiasm for theme parks partly reflects upheaval in the media industry. As it has become harder to reap riches in television and film, companies are eager to spin gold from both their vast content libraries and to attract attention to their new offerings. Disney and Comcast have enjoyed considerable success doing this through their parks businesses, which have chugged along as reliable profit engines. Universal Studios has contributed more to Comcast’s profits over the past five years than either the broadcast network NBC or the Universal Pictures film studio, its corporate siblings. At Disney, the company’s theme-park division has generated a better return on assets than its film studio in four of the past five years.”

My take: I believe Disneyland was the first media-related theme park, and I’ve been there! Not quite transmedia, media-related theme parks are an experiential form of IP merchandizing and a way to extend film franchises into the real world.

Brand Programming

Posted on by
Reply

In a new series of videos, Zacuto Producer/Director Steve Weiss looks into the future and sees a new funding model emerging (skip ahead to 3:00 if you’re short on time):

“I think that when cable dies, which is going to happen in the next five or six years, that companies—Ford will have their own shows, Target will have their own shows. Amazon has their own shows!”

I think he’s on to something.

We can all agree making movies costs money. The question is, “Who’s paying?”

There are really only two ways to pay for the media you watch. Either you pay directly (through ticket purchases or Cable TV subscriptions, etc.), or someone else pays. And that someone else is usually Advertisers.

The problem is that Google and Facebook have disrupted the Ad Business and now take the lion’s share of the global ad spend.

The recent, pre-Internet televison model was that TV Networks (the Gatekeepers) would contract producers to make shows. How did the Gatekeepers get paid? By selling ads. This situation supported Ad Agencies and lots of Professionals to make and place those ads.

The Brand’s message was intermediated by the Ad Agency and then the TV Networks. And the shows were somewhat entertaining, if you just ignored the commercials.

The Digital Revolution (which lowered production costs and correspondingly increased content) now allows the direct delivery of both content and advertising to viewers, bypassing the Gatekeepers.

I think the real problem remains: people hate commercials that too often interrupt or otherwise annoy them.

So what if Brands worked directly with Professionals on Programming, not Advertising?

This is what Weiss is getting at, I think.

Cases in point: Red Bull TV and BMW Films. The key is to align the brand with the content: for Red Bull it’s youth and adrenaline, for BMW it’s cars, class and action.

I think this is a new frontier: local businesses working with local filmmakers to produce mutually thematic content. Shout out to Justus Lowry who is doing something very similar in a documentary vein for culinary culture here in Victoria, BC.

I hate to call this Sponsored Content. Even Brand TV misses out on the synergy I envision. Brand Programming? Can you think of a better label?

My take: This kinda harkens back to the days of the TV Soaps, you know.

IMAX to show less 3D

Posted on by
Reply

As reported on The Wrap, IMAX Entertainment CEO Greg Foster said on a recent conference call that they will be cutting back on 3D releases in order to boost profits.

“We’re looking forward to playing fewer 3-D versions of films and more 2-D versions.”

He added:

“It’s worth noting ‘Dunkirk’ was showing exclusively in 2-D, which consumers have shown a strong preference for.”

For instance, Blade Runner 2049 will be shown in 2D, even though a 3D version will be available elsewhere.

My take: it’s smart for a large company like IMAX to mine their big data to gauge consumer interest in 3D versus 2D. The conclusion seems to be that more and more moviegoers would rather not wear 3D glasses when watching large-scale movies. Nevertheless, I still believe when it comes to small-scale individual VR watching, people will choose 3D180 over 360.

Google and Facebook take lion’s share of global advertising

Posted on by
Reply

CC BY-SA 3.0 Nick Youngson

Sara Fischer reports on Axios that Google and Facebook are booking “83% of every new ad dollar,” at $80.8B and $36.3B this year respectively.

These are huge percentages of the global advertising spend:

“Google’s ad revenue is roughly the same as all print ad revenue globally and Facebook’s ad revenue nearly topples all radio ad revenue globally.”

Related: the world’s biggest advertisers with country and category breakdowns.

My take: I was curious if this is a case of growing the market or of dominating the existing market. I think it’s a bit of both. Certainly mobile is where it’s at right now.