Posts Tagged ‘film industry’

A Good Cook

Thursday, September 24th, 2009

The news last Friday was brief, but BIG: Dick Cook was “stepping down” as chairman of The Walt Disney Studios. Mr. Cook officially stated:

I am stepping down from my role as chairman of The Walt Disney Studios, effective immediately. I have loved every minute of my 38 years that I have worked at Disney… from the beginning as a ride operator on Disneyland’s steam train and monorail to my position as chairman of The Walt Disney Studios. To wrap up my Disney experience in a neatly bundled statement is close to impossible. But what I will say is, during my time at the Studio, we have achieved many industry and Company milestones. Our talent roster is simply the best in the business. I believe our slate of upcoming motion pictures is the best in our history. But most of all, I love the people, my colleagues, my teammates, who are the most talented, dedicated and loyal folks in the world. I know that I leave the Studio in their exceptional hands. I have been contemplating this for some time now and feel it’s the right time for me to move on to new adventures…and in the words of one of my baseball heroes, Yogi Berra, “If you come to a fork in the road, take it.”

Disney CEO Bob Iger’s short eulogy read:

Throughout his distinguished 38-year Disney career, Dick Cook’s outstanding creative instincts and incomparable showmanship have truly enriched this company and significantly impacted Disney’s great legacy. We thank Dick for his tremendous passion for Disney, and his many accomplishments and contributions to The Walt Disney Studios, including a very promising upcoming film slate. On behalf of everyone at Disney, we wish him the best with all the future has to offer.

Of course, everyone knows that there is always more to an abrupt corporate departure of this magnitude, and within days the “untold” stories began to surface in the Los Angeles Times and elsewhere. Google “Dick Cook”, and you can triangulate a fascinating story.

I had the pleasure of breaking bread with Mr. Cook a few years ago in the rotunda of the Team Disney building. As a CG supervisor with Walt Disney Feature Animation, I must admit to being pleasantly surprised that someone like Dick Cook would accept an unsolicited lunch invitation from a “below the line” frame jockey. But he was as down to earth as you can imagine: from his order of spare ribs and fries, to the candid expression of his concerns and hopes for The Walt Disney Company. Given the content of that conversation years ago, it was with sadness but no surprise that I read of his departure last week.

Time will tell what lies in store for Dick Cook and the company that he loved and served so well. “It’s just business” is a pervasive rationale in Hollywood, but for Dick Cook it never was “just” that.

Farewell, Captain Cook!

Stormy Weather

Saturday, July 11th, 2009

How are you facing the current economic situation?

Are you hunkering down until things blow over? Are you turning crisis into opportunity and branching out? Are you retraining for a different career (or a variation on your current theme)? Are you dialing back? Or is it business as usual for you? :-)

Take the poll

On The Global Animation Industry & Market

Thursday, April 9th, 2009

Your primer on the wonderful world of animation is just a mouse scroll away. ;-)

THE GLOBAL ANIMATION INDUSTRY

The business of animation can be divided into two major enterprises: production and distribution. Production involves the development, financing and creation of animated content. Distribution involves the domestic and international marketing, licensing, promotion, physical reproduction, delivery and exhibition of that content. An animation distributor will typically license the rights to theatrical and broadcast exhibition, non-theatrical markets (such as educational markets, where applicable), home video (including DVD), cable and pay-per view channels and video-on-demand. Additional rights are licensed for soundtracks, games, toys, publications and other ancillary merchandise.

As a keystone of the global entertainment industry, animation is experiencing rapid development worldwide, with a compelling slate of multi-cultural intellectual property. Properties originating outside the United States are gaining distribution and finding financial success in the North American market and elsewhere, something that was rare a decade ago. The global nature of the animation business is particularly notable in the television industry, where co-productions are the norm. Licensing and financing considerations have made international co-productions and sales essential for producers seeking to maximize revenue streams. Interestingly, while the United States remains dominant in the realm of animated features, the U.S. market is considered secondary for certain television properties with strong international sales.

The global animation industry lies mainly in the U.S., Europe, Japan and South Korea, with China and India rising to prominence. Nevertheless, one may point to almost any country in the world for notable developments in animation within the last decade. The United States is the undisputed leader on the world animation stage. In the U.S. and Europe, the animation industry is worth billions of USD annually in intellectual property and related ancillary products. Canada is a main provider of global television production, with many co-production deals, a precedent of government support, and a track record of influential talent in animation studios around the world. In contrast, South America imports most of its animation content from the U.S., Europe and Japan.

As a major animation exporter, Japan has a precise industry chain and a mature operating mechanism. Japan’s animation industry ranks highly in the national economy, and the output value of Japanese animation products exceeds that of steel. Anime has a market value of nearly $2.5 billion USD in the United States alone, with global merchandising worth almost $5 billion USD. South Korea is second only to the U.S. and Japan in the output value of its animation industry, which has become one of the six “pillar industries” in South Korea’s national economy. By the same token, mainland China is aggressively building an animation industry with widespread state support. While lacking China’s level of government intervention, the animation industry in India benefits from production costs that are lower than almost any other country in the world.

Similarly, Spain offers the lowest production costs of any European country, while still maintaining a good quality level, most recently exemplified by Kandor Moon’s animated feature “The Missing Lynx”. The United Kingdom has a strong industry and audience for children’s animated television and DVD, while Germany is Europe’s third largest animation producer and largest TV market. France is the most prolific animation producer in Europe, with a strong system of government subsidies and tax breaks. Like China, France features strict quotas and regulations on foreign participation, which have alternately helped and hurt their animation industry. Eastern Europe, with a distinguished record of artistic achievement, is gradually catching up to the rest of the world in commercial animation production. So is the Middle East, with Israel taking a leading role. Finally, it is worth noting that Africa’s first animated feature film production, “The Legend of the Sky Kingdom” was released in 2002.

Around the world, independent animation has blossomed with the advent of digital technology and in response to the conventions of major studio filmmaking. With the increase in theaters, television channels and the use of digital satellites, the rapid growth of the Internet and a wide variety of other new technologies (including the latest advances in stereoscopic and large-format projection), distributors and programmers in nearly every country require more content than ever to fill consumer demand. China is a prime example of this phenomenon.

THE GLOBAL ANIMATION MARKET

Worldwide box office returns in 2007 amounted to almost $27 billion USD, a 5% increase over the previous year. Across all media, the global animation market was worth over $60 billion USD in 2006, and is projected to become a nearly $80-billion USD industry by 2010. 2008 saw approximately 100 animated feature films released worldwide, of which about 30 were produced or distributed in the U.S. This includes theatrical releases, and direct-to-DVD.

While the international landscape has historically been dominated by the major U.S. studios, animation is becoming a truly global industry that promotes communication and exchange among different cultures, with broad development space and co-production opportunities between various nations. The international animation market has come a long way since the first public screenings of hand-painted sequences on celluloid strips. In the middle and late 20th century, developed countries began to evolve from production-oriented societies to entertainment-oriented societies. Locally produced animation properties began to succeed not only in their home territories but abroad as well, particularly in the areas of broadcast television and DVD sales. Compared to live-action, animation travels well: consumers around the world love animation, and it is relatively easy to tailor animated content to regional markets. This is not an option, but a necessity: animation companies in any country require international revenue in order to break even on their proprietary content, whether in film, television, the Internet or gaming. Many major studios owe more than half of their revenues to overseas theatrical distribution and ancillary sales. In television, international partnerships are essential to fund production, and many series can succeed in international markets without ever finding a domestic audience.

Foreign language films are often grouped with “art house films” and other independent films in U.S. DVD stores and movie listings. Unless dubbed into the native language (as most animation commonly is), foreign language films distributed in English-speaking regions usually have English subtitles. Films of this kind typically receive a limited U.S. release in coastal markets such as Los Angeles and New York. Accordingly, the marketing, popularity and gross revenues for these films are usually much less than for major Hollywood blockbusters. In addition, cultural differences between foreign and domestic films affect theatrical attendance and DVD sales. Many foreign language films never receive a DVD release outside of their home market, but foreign films that are particularly successful may be acquired by the major distribution companies for international DVD release on specialist labels. Foreign films can successfully cross cultural boundaries, particularly when the primal story, visual style and cinematic spectacle are compelling. Live-action films such as “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon”, “Amélie” and “Brotherhood of the Wolf” have enjoyed great success in Western cinemas and DVD sales. The first foreign film to top the North American box office was “Hero” in the fall of 2004, while Hiyao Miyazaki’s animated feature film “Spirited Away” won the Academy Award for Best Animated Feature in 2003.

The general pace of international roll-outs is quicker than in the past, especially from the United States. “Day and date” releases, in which films launch simultaneously around the world (pioneered by DreamWorks’ animated feature “The Prince of Egypt” in 1998), are increasingly common. Distributors and exhibitors continue to find new ways to expand the box office revenue pool. The growth of multiplexes in Europe and an increase in the number of screens in Asia and Latin America have all contributed to this expansion. Other factors include the privatization of overseas television stations, the introduction of direct broadcast satellite services and increased cable penetration. It is important to note that in the major European territories, typical television license fees surpass video license fees. In some instances, a license fee for animated feature films may be up to three times the amount paid by a video distributor for the same picture. Territorial value around the world is defined by media sophistication, ticket and rental costs, economic strength, expendable income, currency exchange rates, and of course – audience size. Following is a selection of the major international entertainment markets by estimated population as of 2008:

  • China — 1,322,000,000
  • India — 1,046,000,000
  • U.S. — 303,000,000
  • Indonesia — 238,000,000
  • Brazil — 184,000,000
  • Russia — 141,000,000
  • Japan — 127,000,000
  • Mexico — 109,000,000
  • Philippines — 93,000,000
  • Germany — 82,000,000
  • Thailand — 66,000,000
  • U.K. — 61,000,000
  • France — 61,000,000
  • Italy — 58,000,000
  • South Korea — 49,000,000
  • Spain — 45,000,000
  • Canada — 33,000,000
  • Australia — 22,000,000

(Interestingly, Australian audiences view more films than almost any country except the U.S.)

The 1980s and 1990s saw the emergence of a significant market in the form of home video. Films that performed poorly in their initial theatrical runs were now able to receive new life in the video market. The rise of the DVD format has become even more profitable to film studios, causing an explosion of “special editions” featuring extended versions, deleted scenes, “making of” segments, commentary tracks, and even original short films. Two key factors that affect home video success are the number of VCR and DVD players within a given territory, and the amount of content piracy in the region.

The Internet is by its very nature a global market that can be accessed from almost anywhere in the world. However, individual sites are not marketed equally in all countries, and computer usage, online access and download speeds vary from region to region. The Asia/Pacific region is the world’s largest Internet market, with most of the usage found in Japan, South Korea, China and India. While Internet users are quick to migrate to other sites when fees are charged for content, free access to online entertainment is commonly used as a “hook” for the advertising and sales of related products and services. Mobile wireless technology is also emerging as a potential distribution channel, though more in the gaming market than for animated entertainment. As opposed to web content, which consumers generally expect to access for free as they do television, there is evidence that a viable profit model exists for mobile game distribution and animated “mobisode” sales – with the potential of this market demonstrated by Apple’s highly successful $0.99 price point for music downloads.

Last, but certainly not least, the expansive global market for interactive gaming software encourages animation property owners to pursue this lucrative ancillary revenue stream by granting developers, publishers and distributors licenses for multiple computer & gaming console platforms on a global basis.

On The American Animation Industry & Market

Tuesday, April 7th, 2009

With respect to my January 2nd blog post “On The Chinese Animation Market”, here is some equal time for the good ol’ U.S. of A. :-)

THE AMERICAN ANIMATION INDUSTRY

The U.S. film industry is primarily based in Hollywood, California but has spread to other North American regions in recent years. In 1894, the world’s first commercial motion picture exhibition was given in New York City, using Thomas Edison’s Kinetoscope. The next year saw the first commercial screening of a projected film, also in New York. In 1938, Walt Disney’s “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” was released during a lackluster period of filmmaking from the major studios, and quickly became the highest-grossing film to that time. Interestingly, “Snow White” was an independently-produced animation production that did not feature any major studio talent. The United States has been at the forefront of film and animation development ever since, with a well-documented history familiar to most, and too lengthy to fully recount here.

The Walt Disney Studios grew from “pioneering upstart” to become the defining and dominant force in animation, with an unparalleled record of animated features and short films. This success in animation ultimately grew to encompass live-action films, theme parks, broadcast television, publishing, and a wide spectrum of other revenue streams under the auspices of the publicly traded Walt Disney Company. The renaissance of animated features at the Walt Disney Company in the late-80’s and early-90’s, starting with “The Little Mermaid” and culminating with “The Lion King”, prompted a wave of aspiring studios to get into the game, usually with poor box office results. However, within the last decade the success of Disney’s animated feature films suffered from the inevitable ebb and flow of this cyclical industry, as Pixar and direct competitor DreamWorks made incursions upon audience territory formerly ruled by the Walt Disney Company. Disney’s purchase of Pixar in 2006 is widely regarded as a bold corrective measure, but at a cost of more than $7 billion USD, it is one which has yet to play out profitably. Meanwhile, the many other animation studios in the United States, large and small, make their marks where they can in film, broadcast, internet and wireless media.

The drive to produce a spectacle on the movie screen has shaped the American film and animation industry for better and for worse. Major studios such as Disney, DreamWorks and Sony depend on a handful of enormously expensive releases each year in order to remain profitable, relying upon high production values, star power and massive marketing campaigns to attract the huge audiences required. The average cost per film among the major U.S. studios was more than $106 million USD in 2007, with 1/3 of that amount dedicated to marketing costs. It is reported that at least 60% of the total budget for DreamWorks’ animated hit “Kung Fu Panda” was dedicated to advertising and distribution costs.

While a successful blockbuster can reap substantial profits, there is a considerable risk of failure. Most studios release films that both over-perform and under-perform in a given year. The major U.S. studios supplement their large-scale productions with independent films, created with relatively small budgets outside of the studio corporation. Independent films and animation projects typically emphasize a high level of creativity and innovation, leveraging on niche marketing and critical acclaim to garner an audience. A successful independent film can have a high profit-to-cost ratio, while a failure will incur relatively minimal losses, encouraging major studios to engage in co-production or distribution relationships with these productions in addition to their high-stakes releases. Some independent companies such as Miramax have in fact become well-financed divisions of major studios. The big studios can thus capitalize on the success of the “independent” distribution division, while the “independent” distributors maintain a certain level of autonomy within the larger corporate structure. The independent companies are able to produce animated films of comparatively smaller budgets for distribution in targeted viewer markets.

THE AMERICAN ANIMATION MARKET

In 2007, the North American domestic box office grossed over $9.6 billion USD on almost 39,000 screens, a revenue increase of more than 5% over 2006. Additionally, North American motion picture distributors generated more than $7.6 billion USD in worldwide revenues in 2007, an increase of almost 6% from the year before. Despite the growing popularity of foreign films, American productions still dominate the international film markets. While more than 60% of U.S. box office earnings come from overseas, non-U.S. films currently occupy less than 5% of the American market. In 2007, the domestic box office revenues for U.S. animated feature films totaled more than $2.9 billion USD, with “Shrek the Third” and “Ratatouille” accounting for more than $500 million USD combined. Internationally, U.S. animated feature films generated more than $1.8 billion USD. “Finding Nemo” has earned nearly $900,000,000 USD, over 60% of which is from overseas.

Movies continue to draw more people in the U.S. than theme parks and sporting events combined, with admission prices significantly lower than alternative entertainment options. The core consumer base for animated feature films is the family audience. Although family films in the U.S. (G & PG-rated) have historically outperformed more restricted content, the family market continues to be underserved. While the average profitability of G-rated U.S. films between 1989 to 2003 was $79 million USD, G-rated films accounted for only 5% of the market share during that same period. On a related note, an independent study of the U.S. film market between 1995 to 2006 showed that computer-generated animated films outperformed all other feature film genres by a 10:1 ratio ($153 million USD average domestic B.O. return vs. $15 million USD average domestic B.O. return). Also noteworthy is that while the overall number of movies released in U.S. theaters remained stable from 2006-2007, 18 more independent films were released in 2007 than in 2006.

The United States is home to dedicated children’s and animation networks that account for the majority of animation hours viewed. Formerly, the three broadcast networks of ABC, CBS and NBC dominated the television animation market with programming concentrated on weekday afternoons and Saturday mornings, but this paradigm has dissolved in favor of cable channels such as Nickelodeon and Cartoon Network which run animation at all hours.

The Internet is an important source of movie information. A study conducted by the MPAA and Yahoo! found that 73% of U.S. moviegoers use the Internet to conduct research before going to the theater. Moviegoers who research films online are more likely to see a movie on opening weekend, go to the theater more often, and see some films more than once in the theater. Internet advertising expenditures continue to grow each year, but television advertising remains the largest expense at more than 1/3 of total marketing costs. About 25% of marketing costs for U.S. films is dedicated to cable TV, radio, magazines and billboards, while another 20% is spent on other non-media promotional outlets and on market research.

On the home technology front, one in seven U.S. moviegoers has invested to a great degree in content delivery and/or hardware for their households. Contrary to conventional wisdom, this segment of moviegoers goes to the movie theater more often than their lower tech counterparts.

On Distribution

Wednesday, January 21st, 2009

In the spring of 2008, I blogged on the important considerations of independent film distribution in “Disregarding Distribution”. Following are further observations on the subject.

STRATEGIES

The global animation industry is highly competitive, with much of a project’s success being directly related to the skills of the distributor’s marketing strategy, and the filmmaker’s solicitation of early feedback from potential distribution partners.

In the area of broadcast animation, the United States remains the largest and potentially most lucrative television market in the world. The traditional method of selling animation content to U.S. broadcast and cable networks is to license 13 to 26 episodes (a half-year’s or a year’s worth of shows) for a flat fee per episode, which gives the customer the right to air each show twice. Around the world, license fees paid to content creators have shrunk dramatically over the last decade, with networks sometimes demanding that producers cut their budgets as a precondition of acquisition. These fees, ranging from a few hundred USD to a few hundred thousand USD per half-hour episode, vary dramatically by budget, country, population, economic conditions and many other factors. The important point is that a considerable amount of most broadcast animation production budgets remains in deficit, and must be covered through international presales, co-production partnerships, ancillary sales or other means. Partly because of this, networks in the U.S. and around the world commonly become co-producers and co-financers in the productions they air, purchasing part or full ownership of the property, rather than simply licensing the rights to broadcast the show. As stake holders, they also receive revenues from international broadcast sales, home video & DVD, merchandising and other ancillaries. The total number of broadcast networks around the world is on the rise, and the growth in channels provides more points of entry for animated programming.

Of course, the best possible initial release for an animated feature film is release in theaters. In addition to its own potential revenue, theatrical release can generate demand for other media release platforms such as broadcast television and DVD, as well as consumer interest in ancillary products. For a film in initial release, the exhibitor will pay a percentage of the revenues from ticket purchases to the distributor (referred to as the “film rentals”). Film rentals customarily diminish over the length of a film’s theatrical run. Depending on the distribution agreement, the producers and investors are entitled to a percentage of film rentals, after the distributor recovers its distribution fee, marketing expenses and distribution expenses.

Other media releases for the film are calculated in a similar fashion. For instance, in the U.S., a home video company pays an amount to the distributor for the right to stock its video stores with the title. From these fees, the distributor will deduct its distribution fee, advertising costs and other distribution expenses in order to recover costs. The producers and investors then receive their agreed-upon revenues as set out in the distribution agreement. The same goes for television and ancillary rights. The total of the money received by the distributor from the exercise of all rights that it is entitled to is called the “distributor’s gross”. Every distribution agreement is different; however, there are similarities common to all. The distributor receives a distribution fee, which is the percentage of the profits that the distributor will receive from the gross. The distributor is then entitled to recover its marketing costs and distribution expenses. The remaining sum is payable to the producers and investors, and is generally called the “producer’s gross” or the net sum.

Independent animation producers have several ways of distributing feature films. For the widest distribution, they must partner with a major studio, although this means giving up significant rights. Typically, when major studios get involved early in the production, they finance most or all of the animated film’s development and production budget and also handle distribution. In return, they receive all rights (including the copyright) and control all creative, marketing and distribution decisions. While filmmakers can benefit financially from the guaranteed exhibition and broad audience reach provided by such deals, final compensation may be far less than expected once significant studio fees and expenses are deducted.

Fortunately, there are alternatives to this strategy for the independent animation producer to consider. Major studios and independent distributors (such as The Weinstein Company) can simply distribute an animated film, controlling marketing and distribution but not production. The distributor usually gets involved only after it sees the completed film, and production funding comes from elsewhere. In this scenario, the distributor takes approximately 35% of gross distribution revenues returned from the theaters, and then deducts expenses before remitting the remainder to the producer. While the relatively lower distribution take and the retention of creative control and copyright are attractive incentives to the producer, there is the very real risk of creating an animated film that is considered “unmarketable”. Distributors routinely reject films that they suspect will be under-performers at the box office due to lack of audience appeal or a clear market position.

A “middle way” is to negotiate with a major international distributor to distribute the animation production prior to completion. While the distribution cut is higher in this case (at least 50%), the distributor’s early involvement brings valuable market insight to the development and production process, includes an advance against revenues upon delivery of the completed negative, and provides the benefit of helping the producer to gain additional financing. Signed distribution agreements can be used as collateral for bank loans, and as incentives for other investors to join the enterprise. This type of deal is known as a “negative pickup”, in which the distributor receives distribution rights, usually in all media, for a specified length of time. When possible, it is in the producer’s best interest to negotiate options based upon performance milestones, which allow the distribution rights to return to the producer if the distributor fails to actively market the film.

Some studios and distributors may also choose to come on board as co-producers, which creates a level of involvement somewhere between owning all rights and simply distributing the film. The studio provides a degree of production financing, has creative input, oversees marketing and distribution, and shares back-end revenues, but does not take full control. The financial details of such arrangements vary greatly.

As these examples demonstrate, studios and distributors can license animated films at various points during the production process: while the film is being financed, during production, or after completion. The more that existing elements seem to point to box office success, the more likely a distributor is to pick up the film early in the process. However, distributors are generally reluctant to get involved early in the production process of independent animated films. The independent producer usually must finance and produce the film without any distribution presale money, and then try to find distribution through success on the international film festival circuit in venues such as Sundance and Cannes, or at markets where films are sold such as the American Film Market. The hard reality is that only a small percentage of companies pitching their films at festivals succeed in securing distribution deals.

Those independent animation productions that are fortunate enough to find distribution will often sign one deal for their domestic territory, and another for international territories. However, deals with major studios and distributors can encompass the entire world, with the major studios subcontracting to local distributors in countries where they may not have operations. Due to the fact that most animation properties do not turn a profit from theatrical release alone, distributors typically want rights to all media including home video & DVD, soundtracks and merchandising. In response, independent producers will usually license home video & DVD to the distributor, but retain rights to the revenue streams for soundtracks and other ancillaries.

Independent distributors have an advantage in releasing low-budget animated films, since they have the experience and patience necessary to handle the slower “platform” method of release. A platform release strategy involves opening a film in a select few cities, building on the film’s word-of-mouth, and gradually widening the release to add more cities and more screens to the release schedule. Positive buzz, festival success and strong reviews all add to a film’s platform.

RELEASE WINDOWS

The typical method of releasing animated feature films begins with domestic theatrical exhibition, which gives value to the various film “windows” (the period following a domestic release before a film can be released in other markets). Historically in the United States and Europe, the sequencing pattern for feature films has been to license international theatrical exhibition, home video & DVD, cable television distribution, broadcast television rights and other ancillary rights. As the rates of return shift among these different sources, changes are made to the sequencing strategy. It is important to note that the release windows for gaming and publishing ancillaries usually precede the initial theatrical release of a film by one to three months.

Distributors around the world plan their release windows with certain target audiences in mind. Given the high costs of film prints, even a relatively modest theatrical distribution of 1000 screens can exceed $2 million USD in initial expenses. For this reason, and as noted above, low-budget films will often receive platform release windows in selected major cities that feature substantial populations of cosmopolitan filmgoers. In this way, the film is given a build-up to a wider release that may occur several weeks later.

ANCILLARIES

Animated films and television properties generally turn a profit not on the initial theatrical or broadcast release, but through the exploitation of ancillary revenue streams. Animated films and television shows do very well on video and DVD, especially when the properties are well-known or appeal to a devoted niche market. For example, DreamWorks’s “Shrek” sold 2.5 million DVDs and 4.5 million VHS cassettes in its first three days on the market in 2001. Together the sales of these home video products totaled $420 million USD for 20 million units sold within two months. “Shrek’s” U.S. box office gross was almost $268 million USD, while its worldwide gross was over $480 million USD. Animated foreign films can experience similar success, although on a more modest scale. Japan’s Pioneer Entertainment released the anime hit “Akira” on DVD after restoring it at a cost of $1 million USD. The DVD release hit the number-one spot on U.S. home video bestseller lists. DVDs are subject to a high degree of piracy on the Chinese mainland, but as noted previously, this can serve as an ironic form of underground advertising for the animation property and its associated ancillary products.

Interactive gaming software is an increasingly important revenue stream for animation properties. This category can easily amount to 50% or more of all ancillary activity, and can rival the revenue of the core theatrical or broadcast distribution for animated films and television shows. Gaming software is also a good way to increase awareness for an animated property, especially when released prior to the screening or airing of the production. On 3D CGI productions, digital assets can be shared between the producers of the animation and the producers of the games. This is often done simultaneously, and can enhance the development of story and characters for both. Games often introduce new story lines and sometimes new characters that expand the world established in the original entertainment property. Platforms include PC, console, mobile and Internet formats.

While book and comic book publishing is usually not the top ancillary category in the United States, books and comics are still an important revenue stream in the West, and an extremely popular and profitable one in the East. Book and comic ancillaries generate awareness with the target audience, provide a means to extend story lines, backstory and character development beyond the original animation property, and enhance the brand image. Typical formats, depending on the age of the consumer and the nature of the content, include board books, story books, magazines, comic books and graphic novels, film novelizations (adaptations of the animation script) and derivative novels (“prequel” and “sequel” stories).

Many animation producers and executives take soundtrack sales into account when they plan the music for a film. By including musical acts that are popular with children and pre-teens (the primary purchasers of animation sound tracks), the producer can enhance sales of the album even among those consumers who have not seen the film. This marketing synergy can also work in the other direction: having a popular singer or band play an important role in the soundtrack can bring people into the theaters who might not otherwise see the film. Music videos are naturally an important part of this equation, and are often planned in conjunction with animation production to create tie-ins between the live action performers and the animated characters.

Toys are the main ancillary product category for most children’s animation projects, with dolls, action figures and board games among the most popular items. There is also an expanding market for collectible “urban vinyl” toys and cast resin figurines among teenaged and adult animation fans. Toys are often one of the first licenses granted for an animation property due to the long lead times required for product development and manufacturing. Some animation-based toy lines are narrowly focused. A licensor of a new, relatively unknown animation property might choose to self-distribute toys, or to license the sale of a small range of toys over the Internet. This approach allows the producer to test the market and gauge demand. For example, in 2001 the United States’ Cartoon Network chose to test a dozen products based on its “Samurai Jack” series, with sales initially limited to their website.

While home video, interactive games, publishing and toys are the primary ancillary categories for animation properties, the number of possible products is unlimited, depending on the nature of the content and its audience. Clothing, stationery, food and beverages are among the available revenue streams. Tactical considerations for maximum profits include the timing of product introduction in each country where the property is released, the product categories chosen, whether to grant exclusive or non-exclusive rights, and the choice of retail outlets. While under-stocking can reduce revenues, over-stocking can shorten the life of the product licensing program, and even have an adverse impact on the animation property itself by creating a negative consumer reaction.

Product placement within a film, common to American live-action properties, is generally not encouraged within animation properties, as it tends to reduce the “classic” status of the animated film. Threshold Animation Studios’ animated feature “Food Fight” launched a direct assault on this principle by setting a story in an American supermarket filled from top to bottom with name-brand household products, and using the fees charged to fund production. The ultimate results of this approach remain to be seen, but the negative online buzz from animation fans prior to release is noteworthy, as is the film’s difficulty in finding theatrical distribution. A commercial ancillary phenomenon common in mainland China is the inclusion of corporate logos in the end credits of feature films – in many cases from companies having nothing whatsoever to do with the production itself.

As you can see, the world of film distribution is “wild & woolly”, so it pays to familiarize yourself with it BEFORE you start production.

Begin with the end in mind. :-)

My Forbidden Kingdom For A Screen!

Saturday, January 10th, 2009

As mentioned in the previous blog post, China has a total population in excess of 1.3 billion individuals - one billion more people than there are in the entire United States of America (1,322,000,000 vs. 303,000,000 estimated as of 2008). But there is a HUGE disparity between the number of people in China and the number of available movie screens. The U.S. boasts nearly 39,000 movie screens across the country. And how many movie screens does China have? Barely 3,900. 3,900 movie screens for 1.3 billion people! Let’s think about this for a moment. Despite having a population four times that of the U.S., China has merely one-tenth the number of screens. This works out as a screen-to-viewer ratio of approximately 1:7,800 in the U.S. vs. approximately 1:339,000 in China. Talk about an untapped market!

Another factor to consider is that the national Chinese per capita income as of 2006 was just around $2000 USD. Even when increased to $3500 USD in urban areas (as indicated in a subsequent 2008 study), this is still far below the U.S. average per capita income which exceeds $38,000 USD. Yet the average theater admission in the United States is only $7 USD (sorry, residents of Los Angeles and NYC) while in China movie tickets are priced at an average of $70 RMB: more than $10 USD. This additional disparity represents a hefty entertainment commitment for most Chinese families looking for a night out, and may go some way towards explaining the popularity of pirated DVDs on the mainland. Why pay more than $40 USD for your family to watch “Kung Fu Panda”, when you can view it repeatedly for a dollar? This is not to justify content piracy, but it certainly makes the phenomenon more “gettable”.

Cultural mores also make a contribution to the problem. Decades ago many Chinese watched movies for free, especially in rural areas and no doubt due to the “instructional value” of the medium at that time - a didactic approach to filmmaking that the Chinese are only now beginning to snap out of, after watching their lunch being eaten by creators of more entertaining content. Yet even today in modern China, going to the cinema is still seen by many as a luxury - especially at the current price point.

The prescription for China:

  1. Build more theaters
  2. Reduce admission prices
  3. Create more compelling content
  4. Allow more foreign films into the marketplace
  5. Distribute more Chinese films on the international stage

And not necessarily in that order. Making films that people actually want to SEE is certainly a good place to start. If you must dispense medicine, at the very least do so with a spoonful of sugar. ;-) And since personal bests are almost always improved by stiff competition, it doesn’t hurt to run alongside the “big boys” in the marketplace. This means letting more foreign films IN, and getting more Chinese films OUT. Finally, leverage upon China’s incredible population advantage by showing more films on more screens for less money per person, but greater revenue on the whole.

Tapping the Chinese film market to the fullest will take a revolution in storytelling, movie-making, financing and distribution… but then again, China knows a little something about revolutions.

“I-Gad!” (Begin With The End In Mind)

Sunday, September 21st, 2008

When is an $8M opening weekend good news? When you see it coming. :) Hopefully, the creators of “Igor” did. Producer John Eraklis commented in the October issue of Animation Magazine that: “We don’t need to generate hundred-plus million dollar returns for all the investors in the company to be happy.” That’s good, because the recent history of independent CG animated feature returns is a far cry from the lofty heights enjoyed by Pixar and Dreamworks/PDI:

Film Opening B.O. Global Gross
Hoodwinked (2005) $12.4M $110.0M
Valiant (2005) $5.9M $61.7M
The Ant Bully (2006) $8.4M $55.2M
Barnyard (2006) $15.8M $116.5M
Doogal (2006) $3.6M $26.8M
Everyone’s Hero (2006) $6.1M $16.2M
Happy Feet (2006) $41.5M $384.3M
The Wild (2006) $9.7M $102.3M
Arthur & The Invisibles (2007) $4.3M $113.0M
Happily N’Ever After (2007) $6.6M $38.1M
TMNT (2007) $24.3M $95.0M
Fly Me To The Moon (2008) $1.9M $13.5M
The Pirates Who Don’t… (2008) $4.3M $12.9M
Star Wars: The Clone Wars (2008) $14.6M $62.2M
Space Chimps (2008) $7.2M $33.2M
AVERAGE:
$7.7M $62.4M

I employed the good practice of culling the highest and the lowest figures (”Happy Feet” and “Fly Me To The Moon”, respectively) before determining the average, and also took the liberty of removing idiosyncratic properties based on the popular, pre-existing franchises of “Star Wars” and “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles”. What we’re left with is a fairly sobering assessment of the economic realities of independent CG feature animation. And by this token, we can see that the opening weekend for “Igor” adhered very closely to precedent ($8M vs. the $7.7M average). And this isn’t “bad” news… if you begin with the end in mind.

So, what’s the difference between popping champagne over Sunday brunch as your $8M opening weekend B.O. crawls in vs. closing the garage door and starting the car? Whether you anticipated it or not. Whether you planned for it or not. In short: whether you stand to make a profit at that rate… or not. Nevertheless, first-time filmmakers and seasoned pros alike commonly proceed with so-called “conservative” projections that are still wildly optimistic, and/or budgets that qualify as “lean” only by comparison to the wasteful excess of major studio production.

People always want to know what was spent to make a given animated feature film (you can see this question raised by a student during one of my recent lectures on film production planning). I’m going to advance the radical notion that it doesn’t matter. Nor does it matter what a movie makes. What matters is HOW MUCH YOU KEEP. Of course, how much you keep is indeed based upon what the movie cost to make vs. how much it earned, and this is where the wonderful world of film feasibility analysis come in: pragmatic film feasibility analysis (as opposed to the starry-eyed fantasy that often passes for such).

The beauty of feasibility analysis is that we don’t really need to know what the comparative films cost. We simply need to consider what the average returns are, and then plan our own costs accordingly. For example, as a producer of an independent CG animated feature film, I’m going to look at that average $62.4M global theatrical gross, round it down to a flat $60M for good measure, and then make the following napkin projection:

Global B.O. Gross $60.0M
Exhibitor Share $30.0M (50% to theater owners)
Distributor Share $30.0M (remainder)
Global Home Video/DVD $75.0M (approx. 125% of B.O.)
Global Broadcast/Ancillaries $25.0M (less than half of B.O.)
DISTRIBUTOR GROSS: $130.0M
Production Budget $25.0M (actual production cost)
P&A $35.0M (prints & advertising)
TOTAL COST: $60.0M
GROSS INCOME: $70.0M
Distributor’s Fee $35.0M (50% under this deal)
PRODUCER/INVESTOR NET: $35.0M (remainder)

The general rule of thumb is that in order for a film to be considered economically feasible, the distributor gross should be at least twice the total cost of the picture - a consideration which this projection satisfies. In addition, the film’s investors stand to not only recoup their initial nut of $25M, but also to reap 100% profit, leaving the producer with $10M to cash out and/or reinvest in upcoming projects. Of course, this scenario is predicated upon obtaining feature-quality production values within the parameters of a $25M budget. Certainly not impossible, but requiring the utmost efficiency in production planning (which, lucky for you, is Animation Option’s bread and butter).

Of course, we all hope that our gorgeous, ground-breaking labor of love will be another “Happy Feet”: raking in a $40M+ opening weekend, nearly $400M worldwide, and an Oscar to boot. And here’s to that! :) But is this assumption the most responsible business plan? Will it satisfy your investors? Will it sustain your studio or production company? Will it keep you from spending opening weekend vomiting as the actuals roll in?

BEGIN WITH THE END IN MIND. You’ll be glad you did. ;)

DreamWorks vs. DreamWorks?

Saturday, September 20th, 2008

This may prove interesting. As reported in the Wall Street Journal, Animation World Network and elsewhere this week, DreamWorks and Indian media company Reliance have inked a deal to create a new $1.2 billion studio.

Like many in the animation industry, I did a double-take, since DreamWorks Animation’s partnership with Thomson Technicolor at Indian animation studio Paprikas is already well-known. So, another DW studio in India?

The distinction is that the deal just announced is between Reliance and DreamWorks Pictures. DreamWorks Animation spun off into its own publicly-traded company in 2004 (with animated films distributed by Paramount, but fully independent). Live-action “studio” DreamWorks Pictures was purchased by Viacom (parent company of Paramount) in 2006, and there’s been no love lost between the DW players and the Paramount folks since that time.

So, here’s the billion-dollar question: will the new DreamWorks/Reliance studio distribute animated films created by DreamWorks Animation at Paprikas? Or will the new studio create its own animation division that will in effect compete with Paprikas - pitting “DreamWorks against DreamWorks”?

Time will tell… or perhaps a commentator will below. ;)

Kangaroo Court Jester, Excerpt 4

Sunday, September 7th, 2008

Last but not least, here is excerpt #4 from my informal presentation on independent film business planning, delivered at the Griffith University Film School in Brisbane.

This clip includes partial coverage my take on the fundamentals of distribution pitches (teaser, comparative analysis, etc…) and the ins and outs of distributor feedback.

Once again, the document that I refer to in this presentation is the Animation Options “Independent Animated Feature Film Development & Production Plan”, which is freely available on the AO “Resources” page.

Cheers! :-) ~KG

Kangaroo Court Jester, Excerpt 3

Friday, September 5th, 2008

Here is excerpt #3 from my presentation on independent film business planning at Griffith University in Brisbane.

In this clip I touch upon test screenings and the greenlight process.