<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
<channel>
<title>Techdirt. Stories filed under &quot;successes&quot;</title>
<description>Easily digestible tech news...</description>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<language>en-us</language>

<item>
<pubDate>Mon, 26 Apr 2010 11:20:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Avatar Sees Theater Attendance Bump After DVD Release</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100426/1032169168.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100426/1032169168.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Earlier this year, we noted that with <i>Avatar</i> still being popular in theaters, it looked as though the DVD release would occur while the movie was still available in a bunch of theaters, and <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100326/0213448725.shtml">wondered</a> what if it would actually <i>boost</i> sales at the box office.  For years, of course, movie theaters owners have <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100224/0307478286.shtml">whined</a> that they can't possibly compete against home theaters, and have <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060118/195200_F.shtml">boycotted</a> movies that tried to do a "day and date" release, where they offer the DVDs at the same time the movie is in the theater.  This seems to ignore the fact that the theatrical experience is about the social experience of going out -- which is not the same as staying in to watch a movie at home (no matter how good your home theater system is).  But most theater owners don't seem to believe this, and insist that if DVDs are out at the same time as the movie is in the theater, it will harm box office sales.
<br /><br />
<i>Avatar</i> seems to suggest that's not true.
<br /><br />
<a href="http://www.techdirt.com/profile.php?u=btrussell">btrussell</a> points us to the news of the <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100426/ap_en_mo/us_film_avatar_dvd" target="_blank">record-breaking sales of <i>Avatar</i> DVDs this weekend</a>.  His point, in submitting it, is noting that the sales were so strong even though the movie has been widely downloadable and widely downloaded for months.  So, despite the claims that file sharing is destroying the DVD market, it looks like people are still quite willing to buy.
<br /><br />
But a more interesting point is the impact on the box office.  Last weekend, <a href="http://boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/?view=&#038;yr=2010&#038;wknd=16&#038;p=.htm" target="_blank">April 16 - 18th</a>, <i>Avatar</i> averaged $2,006 at the box office per theater.  On April 22nd, the DVD was released.  This past weekend (<a href="http://boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/?view=&#038;yr=2010&#038;wknd=17&#038;p=.htm" target="_blank">April 23 - 25th</a>)?  <i>Avatar</i> averaged $2,257 at the box office per theater.  That's an increase of 12.5% over the week.  That doesn't seem to fit with the theater owners' claims, now, does it?
<br /><br />
Admittedly, a bunch of theaters stopped showing the movie this past week, probably falsely believing that with the DVD out, it would harm sales.  But... the week before, a bunch of theaters <i>added</i> <i>Avatar</i> back into their lineup.  If we go back two weeks, we have a much more apples to apples comparison.  The weekend of <a href="http://boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/?view=&#038;yr=2010&#038;wknd=15&#038;p=.htm" target="_blank">April 9 - 11</a>, <i>Avatar</i> showed in 454 theaters, with an average take of $1,860 per theater for a grand total of $844,651.  Yet, again, this past weekend, when the movie was showing in fewer theaters, 421, it brought in both a higher average take per theater at $2,257 and a higher grand total at $950,000.  So if we compare those two weeks, with fewer theaters, <b>there was a bump of 21.3% in box office sales after the DVD was released</b>
<br /><br />
As we predicted, it sure looks like the DVD release while the movie was still in the theaters actually may have driven more people to the theater, rather than taken them away from the theater.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100426/1032169168.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100426/1032169168.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100426/1032169168.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>well,-look-at-that...</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100426/1032169168</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 14 Apr 2010 16:11:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Modest Success Is Still Success For Indie Bands</title>
<dc:creator>Michael Ho</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100411/2208368956.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100411/2208368956.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ A few months ago, we <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20091204/0029527202.shtml">wrote</a> about the band Pomplamoose for its unique way of making a living by selling its music digitally.  The musical duo playfully connected with fans, sold homemade soap, and even encouraged listeners to <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Il-OFaFzHQM#t=4m42s">give goats</a> to charity.  More recently, the band has gained more attention and was <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnolku2sJc4">accepted into YouTube's Musicians Wanted program</a> where YouTube offers a 50/50 ad revenue split with independent artists who use Google's video platform.  Pomplamoose fan Joseph Johnson also <a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125783271">points us to an interview with the band</a> in which they describe their creative process and talk a bit about how they manage without the backing of a major label:
<blockquote><em>
Ms. DAWN: I mean, if you can't just do it all yourself, then you do need help. If, for example, you're somebody who writes songs, like Lady Gaga, and you need everything, you know, that's going to make you Lady Gaga, then you need a big, fat label. But if you're just a band, I don't think we're in an era anymore where you need that sort of major backing.
</em></blockquote>
<center>
<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/2vEStDd6HVY&#038;hl=en_US&#038;fs=1&#038;"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/2vEStDd6HVY&#038;hl=en_US&#038;fs=1&#038;" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>
</center>
<br />
Pomplamoose admits that the band doesn't cash $10 million royalty checks for its music, but that its two singers make a modest living doing what they enjoy doing.  They don't play in clubs too much and haven't gone on tour because it's a lot of work for them to set up live shows.  Actually, given the way they record their music videos, they don't really know how to play their own songs in a "normal" linear way without editing and remixing.  And interestingly, they seem to be making enough to pay for the mechanical rights for the songs they cover.  
<blockquote><em>
Mr. CONTE: ... we make sure that we have all our ducks in a row. We bought mechanical licenses to all of our covers before we put them on iTunes. So it's all legit and legal.
</em></blockquote>
So despite criticism that says bands like <a href="http://perezhilton.com/2010-03-31-ok-no-viral-sensation-real-life-failure">OK Go have failed</a> and can't make it <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20100309/2322198491.shtml">without a label</a>, the reality is that more bands are able to create more music -- and are getting paid in a variety of different ways.  Selling plastic disks isn't the only way to make a living.  Touring isn't the only way to make a living.  Selling T-shirts isn't the only way to make a living.  And Google ads certainly aren't going to save every struggling indie band, either.  In fact, there is no silver bullet for how a band can support itself.  Simply put, the barrier to become a famous band has dropped considerably, but that doesn't guarantee success -- however, it makes it a lot easier for a much broader array of musicians to try to become professionals doing what they enjoy.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100411/2208368956.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100411/2208368956.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100411/2208368956.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>Musicians-Wanted</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100411/2208368956</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>