The Creative Class

Mike Bielenberg of MusicRevolution has posted twice this year on The Creative Class.

In April, he introduced ‘my group of people’ — ‘people from whom original thought constantly emanates‘ — whose job is to be creative and innovative or use information to solve problems.

From Wikipedia:

“The Creative Class is a posited socioeconomic class identified by American economist and social scientist Richard Florida, a professor and head of the Martin Prosperity Institute at the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto.”

In his July post, Mike reports on the job growth of the creative class in the United Kingdom between 2011 and 2013.

Analyzing data from the Office for National Statistics, he concludes:

“Information technology outpaced every category in terms of volume…. With concert ticket prices at an all time high, live music must be the primary economic driver behind the growth in music…. Nobody reads books or goes to museums anymore; because that would require the slow, meaningful absorption of text that isn’t floating on a screen with music blaring underneath. Who’s got time?”

Ultimately he’s encouraged because the ‘creative thought pie’ is not finite and will never stop growing.

My take: I think the denizens of today’s creative class are the modern equivalent of the artisans of the analogue age. In the past, you had a patron, a shop or gallery representation. Now, geography is less restrictive and digital production potentially allows for unlimited duplication. Your reach is global, but so is your competition. Looking forward to Mike’s next post on the creative class.

West-coast TV and film writers earn over $1 billion in 2014

Variety reports that motion picture writer earnings are down, whereas TV writer earnings are up for 2014:

“Hollywood screenwriter earnings slid 5.4% last year to $313.9 million — the fifth straight year of decline — while TV writing earnings rose 2.3% to $725.6 million, according to the Writers Guild of America West…. A total of 3,888 writers reported TV earnings, a gain of 39 slots. Feature film employment fell 5.6% to 1,556 writers, or 96 fewer than in 2013.”

Note that this totals over $1 billion and includes almost $400 million for residuals:

“The WGA West, which has about 8,000 members, reported that residuals surged 2.5% to a record high of $383.7 million with gains of 4.8% in TV to $245.4 million while sliding 1.5% in features to $138.3 million. But the five-year comparisons show that film has been flat while TV has been surging. Film residuals are up 2.8% since 2009 while TV has gained 60.4% since 2008.”

No word on what the WGA East writers earned in 2014.

See the WGA Schedule of Minimums.

My take: TV writing seems to earn twice as much as film work, even though film pays more. I think that’s because there are just so many more TV episodes to write. One of the takeaways for me is to learn just how few professional media writers there are actually writing.

How you will be paid, post-capitalism

For the last ten years, I’ve been wondering about the future of the media industry. I realized in 2004 when video first started showing up on the web that the old ways of doing business were threatened and would be replaced with a new model, one day.

Now, I have a glimpse of that future.

In a new book, PostcapitalismPaul Mason makes the case that we are living through the end of one era and witnessing the dawn of another. Capitalism is dying and the Collaborative Commons is rising.

Paul writes in The Guardian:

“Postcapitalism is possible because of three major changes information technology has brought about in the past 25 years. First, it has reduced the need for work, blurred the edges between work and free time and loosened the relationship between work and wages. Second, information is corroding the market’s ability to form prices correctly. That is because markets are based on scarcity while information is abundant. Third, we’re seeing the spontaneous rise of collaborative production: goods, services and organisations are appearing that no longer respond to the dictates of the market and the managerial hierarchy.”

Further:

“Today, the thing that is corroding capitalism, barely rationalised by mainstream economics, is information. Most laws concerning information define the right of corporations to hoard it and the right of states to access it, irrespective of the human rights of citizens. The equivalent of the printing press and the scientific method is information technology and its spillover into all other technologies, from genetics to healthcare to agriculture to the movies, where it is quickly reducing costs.”

So, what’s the future?

Christopher J. Dew lays out some thoughts in Post-Capitalism: Rise of the Collaborative Commons on Medium.

Christopher believes:

“Vast increases in productivity and efficiency will be realized in the years ahead through an integrated network of smart-products (termed the Internet of Things, or IoT), accessible renewable energy harvesting technologies, energy sharing across a distributed smart-grid, the decentralization of manufacturing through 3D printing, open online education, the decentralization of finance, legal contracts and governance through Blockchain applications, and the progressive automation of the workforce.”

He argues:

“On the Collaborative Commons, a new type of incentive is driving creativity and innovation. The expectation of financial reward loses relevance when prosumers begin to produce their own products for use and exchange, and marginal costs approach zero. In the Commons, the expectation of financial reward is quickly being replaced by the desire to advance the social well-being of humanity.”

How will all this be paid for? A Universal Basic Income and the Blockchain.

“Smart contracts are computer programs that can automatically execute the terms of a contract once the agreed upon conditions are fulfilled. These could include simple transactions such as an online shopping purchase, or executing the terms of a will. Moreover, as smart devices and products continue to proliferate across an Internet of Things infrastructure they will increasingly integrate and register with the Blockchain and be able to be bought, sold and operated in line with the terms of smart contracts.”

My take: I love this big picture! Imagine a world where every piece of media was recognized by the Blockchain so its creator could be fairly compensated. I called for something like this in my short animation Right2Copy, only in this future, we don’t need any middlemen at all.

A novel way to search for films

Folks in the UK are in for a treat.

The British Film Institute has added Britain on Film to its BFI Player.

What makes this stand out is the both the film collection and the search method.

Enter the site and you’re prompted to enter a place: favourite childhood holiday, where your parents met, favourite place in the UK.

Next, you are shown a map of the spot, surrounded by markers indicating place-specific films. On the right, you can refine the results by decade and subject or simply ‘See all the films.’

From the media release:

“Many of these films have never – or rarely – been seen since their first appearance and can now be searched for by specific UK locations through BFI Player’s ground-breaking new Film and TV Map of the UK, which also enables people to share films with their family, friends and communities.”

The only catch is that you have to have a UK IP address.

In the meantime, Canadians can make do with the National Film Board‘s excellent site, albeit with standard searching. (I thought Mudflats Living was fascinating, as Victoria currently debates ‘micro-housing.’)

My take: I love maps, so I particularly like the way Britain on Film organizes searches first by location, displaying the results on a map, and then by subject. I think it would be fascinating to geo-locate scenes from all movies this way. Hey Google, can you implement this feature on YouTube soon?

Can the music industry give the film industry any pointers?

Can the music industry give the film industry any pointers when it comes to living in a digital age? For years, it’s needed to deal with piracy on one hand and new methods of dissemination on the other.

Andrew Powell-Morse of SeatSmart asks the question, “Where is the money supposed to come from to keep the lights on?” in its blog post Does The Death Of Album Revenue Spell The End For Rock Stars As We Know Them? (Link doesn’t work in Safari.)

Using colourful line and bubble charts, he graphs:

  • Top Tour Revenue vs. Top Album Revenue
  • Tours vs. Album Revenue by Decade
  • Total Tour Ticket Sales vs. Total Album Sales
  • Tickets vs. Albums Sold by Decade
  • Top Album Revenue & Sales Over Time
  • Top Tours: Revenue & Attendance over Time
  • Sum Revenue of Top Album Artists
  • Sum Revenue of Top Touring Artisits

Looking at revenue only:

“Album revenue is plummeting while tours are steadily bringing more. However, those rising tour revenues don’t even come close to compensating for what’s been lost in album sales.”

One thing the stats reveal is that:

“…both album and ticket sales are down — concert ticket prices are on the rise while the average price of an album has decreased from almost $19 in the 1980s to just over $13 today. This does a lot to explain the divergence here — each concert ticket sold is bringing a greater return over time while each album sold is bringing a declining return.”

Andrew concludes:

“While album sales are comparatively evenly distributed, tour revenue gets sucked up by a smaller number of huge acts. This points to serious concerns over an industry becoming more and more reliant on tours to fund itself. Concert ticket sales are not going to save the music industry. They may provide some artists with good revenue streams to balance lower album sales, but they don’t work equally well for everyone.”

What are the parallels with the film industry? Perhaps DVDs equate with albums and theatrical releases equate to tours. Take a look a this PWC infographic of media revenue trends. Although it shows most trends up, “Physical Home Video” is trending down.

My take: Maybe independents need to buck the trend. If vinyl is making a comeback, does that mean indie film should embrace DVDs again?

VOD Strategies

The excellent CMF Trends has released a post on How To Make Money With Video On Demand by Renee Robinson.

In it, we learn the VOD marketplace is projected to more than double in the next five years to over $60 billion.

Three models have emerged:

  • TVOD, or Transactional Video On Demand
  • SVOD, or Subscription Video On Demand
  • AVOD, or Advertising-based Video On Demand

Think iTunes, Netflix and YouTube. Or Vimeo On Demand, showmi and Crackle.

Renee discusses the models in detail, including figures for reference.

She concludes:

“As a rights holder, there is nothing stopping you from utilizing as many VOD models as possible, except for any prior agreements that may withhold specific rights. Inform yourself before agreeing on the method of delivery, device compatibility, window compression and how revenue is defined. The ability to exploit each non-exclusive model can become a small but steadily monetized stream in this new digital licensing ecosystem.”

My take: fascinating reading! The xVOD marketplace is crowded with no clear winners — yet. Interesting that the TVOD model mimics the existing theatrical model, the SVOD model mimics current premium TV and the AVOD model mimics free TV. One day this will all settle out. But until then every filmmaker needs to navigate this marketplace by themselves.

Telefilm Micro-Budget Feature Winners Announced

Telefilm Canada has revealed the 2015 finalists of its wonderful Micro-Budget Feature Production Program.

In addition, Telefilm announced that the Talent Fund will subsidize the program. This is great news as it assures stable funding for the near future:

“The Fund has raised over $15 million to date from companies, foundations and individuals. The money will be invested over a period of seven years. Sixty percent of the Micro-Budget Production Program will be financed by the Talent Fund.”

Fifteen teams now negotiate with Telefilm for $100K+ in financing for their projects.

“This is the third annual round of projects in the Micro-Budget Production Program, which supports emerging filmmakers seeking to produce their first feature-length films, with emphasis on the use of digital platforms and developing their potential for distribution and audience engagement.”

I notice that this year most of the projects came through film schools rather than film co-ops as in the past.

Future applicants should note an innovative promotion and digital distribution plan is critical:

identify the target audience;
identify the goals for audience reach and engagement;
describe the release strategy;
identify the digital platform(s) on which the main distribution of the project will be made;
describe how the project will be promoted on the chosen platforms;
enumerate the distribution and/or promotion partners that will be pursued;
provide the budget for the promotion and distribution plan;
add any other information deemed important regarding the promotion and distribution plan

My take: this remains the best way to fund your first feature in Canada. Telefilm is rightly proud to have brought 37 features into being in the last three years.

One of the best reasons to make a short film

Nathalie Sejean just posted a fascinating post on her excellent site, Mentorless.com titled To Short or Not to Short? 20 Filmmakers Who Successfully Transitioned from Short to Feature.

In it she lists twenty filmmakers from George Lucas (THX-1138) to Damien Chazelle (Whiplash) who graduated from shorts to features.

See the wonderful infographic.

Canadian filmmakers interested in this path should apply to Bell Media‘s Shorts-to-Features Program right away — the deadline is in two days!

My take: I think this is a good strategy. Particularly because we live in such a visually-dominant age, the more you can show of your storyverse to your potential fans and backers, the better. I lean towards reworking one or two scenes from your feature as a stand-alone short — now you’ve got a film and footage to cut into your crowd-finding pitch video.

Some hard numbers on film distribution

Jon Reiss recently published two posts on Filmmaker Magazine entitled, “Distribution Transparency: Four Filmmakers Reveal Their Distribution Numbers” Parts One and Two.

He interviews filmmakers from four projects:

  • Neil Berkeley (Director of Beauty Is ‘Embarrassing & Harmontown’)
  • Judy Chaikin (Director of ‘The Girls in the Band’)
  • Paco de Onís (Executive Director of Skylight Films), and
  • Jon Betz (Producer of ‘Queen of the Sun’)

It turns out that monetizing your film is long and hard work.

The takeaways?

“Knowing your goals is essential to creating a release strategy.
Know your audience and target your release to where they are; offer your audience products (event, digital or merchandise) that are interesting to them.
Split rights have a greater advantage of control and profit for filmmakers over all rights deals.
Work with distribution partners to get films on major platforms.
Engaging in distribution and marketing is very hard work and generally involves a staff or at least someone full time managing the process.
Email lists are gold – develop them constantly.
Events motivate people to go to theaters.
Events are excellent ways to connect with audience.
Event theatrical is a good/great way to promote ancillary sales.
It is possible to break even or even make a little money from an event theatrical release.
If you can, carve out direct-to-fan sales since this will give you the following advantages:
* Higher profit margin per purchase.
* Audience data for future projects
* Ability to package the film with merchandise and extra content for higher price points or to make purchasing direct to fan more attractive.
Most importantly, focus on long-term audience development since it is possible to transition audiences from one project to another if you reward them for their continued interest and keep them engaged.”

My take: fascinating reading. Hard numbers are hard to find.

U2 shows us the way with live mobile streaming

First Youtube enabled anyone to post moving images to the Internet, democratizing the movies.

Now mobile streaming apps are revolutionizing live broadcasting, once the domain of television.

Having just launched within the last three months, both Meerkat and Periscope enable anyone with a smartphone to stream live video broadcasts in realtime to the world.

Meerkat (IOS and Android) wants you to first log in to Twitter. The left column lists upcoming streams, comments are on the right and the stream is featured vertically in the middle. Meerkat loves the colour yellow.

Periscope (IOS and Adroid) was purchased by Twitter shortly after Meerkat debuted. Comments are superimposed in the bottom left-hand corner, and you can show some ‘love’ with hearts that float up the right side of the vertical screen.

You can search Twitter to find live Meerkat streams or live Periscope streams.

Or, New York digital & social agency, GLOW, offers two ways to sample multiple streams:

Rock band U2 have embraced Meerkat. During the current i+e Tour, according to The Hollywood Reporter,

“The band invites an audience member onto the B stage to shoot a stripped-down number — on this night, ‘Angel of Harlem’ — to be broadcast live via the fledgling Meerkat platform. ‘This goes out across the globe — to about 150 people, until it catches on,’ Bono quipped.”

My take: I think this is truly revolutionary. The ‘airwaves’ for traditional TV broadcasters are strictly controlled by the FCC in America and the CRTC in Canada. Now, everyone with a smartphone has a ‘TV’ camera in their pocket and can begin broadcasting to the world at any time, for free! Journalism and entertainment may never be the same again. Interestingly, both apps use a mobile-friendly vertical orientation, which is decidedly uncinematic.