The Slow Death of Hollywood


19 bookmarks. First posted by charlesarthur 8 days ago.


interesting riff on centralization of movie production, which leads to franchises like Marvel and Netflix cancelling after 2 seasons
hollywood 
yesterday by saranrapjs
Hi, Welcome to Big, a newsletter about the politics of monopoly. If you’d like to sign up, you can do so here . First, housekeeping. I’m launching a new section…
from instapaper
2 days ago by liebo7
Welcome to Big, a newsletter about the politics of monopoly. If you’d like to sign up, you can do so here. First, housekeeping. I’m launching a new section of Big called “From the Mailbag,” which are emails from readers. via Pocket
IFTTT  Pocket 
3 days ago by egwillim
via Pinboard (Popular items from Pinboard) https://pinboard.in/popular/
IFTTT  Feedly 
4 days ago by sbmandal
Today, Netflix, Disney, and every would-be streaming service are tossing money at producers to create content for them. And YouTube seems to be a surfeit of endless content. But these are largely mirages. Peak TV is a bubble, which will pop when the winners shake out. YouTube has been fighting over copyright for a long time, because copyrighted content is very important to the service. Moreover, the artists doing well are at the very top with everyone else left behind. In fact, median wages for writers are dropping quite quickly, down 23% from 2014 to 2016, which is a similar amount as the fall in earnings for book literary authors after Amazon launched its vertically integrated Kindle e-book reader.

In fact, without significant public policy changes, it is far more likely that the future of Hollywood much more closely resembles the sterile movie cineplex than, and less the temporarily abundant surplus of content on streaming services.
television  film  cinema  consolidation  monopoly  Netflix  marketpower  review  critique  MattStoller  2019 
5 days ago by inspiral
Hi, Welcome to Big, a newsletter about the politics of monopoly. If you’d like to sign up, you can do so here . First, housekeeping. I’m launching a new section…
from instapaper
5 days ago by loganrhyne
Hi, Welcome to Big, a newsletter about the politics of monopoly. If you’d like to sign up, you can do so here . First, housekeeping. I’m launching a new section…
from instapaper
6 days ago by indirect
Favorite tweet:

The Slow Death of Hollywood https://t.co/vWrwgv0AIi (https://t.co/XXxVu70Zfb)

— Hacker News 20 (@newsyc20) July 10, 2019
IFTTT  Twitter 
7 days ago by chetan
Hi, Welcome to Big, a newsletter about the politics of monopoly. If you’d like to sign up, you can do so here . First, housekeeping. I’m launching a new section…
from instapaper
7 days ago by handzo
Matthew Stoller:
<p>In the old system, studios sold content, often over-priced, often shoddy, but they sold it to people who bought it. The end network, either theaters or TV stations, had to choose from distributors what content to offer to customers. They had to make money to say alive. They have to follow one of the basic rules of pre-1981 American competition policy, which is that combining inputs into a final output should create a profit, an indication that the business agent has in some way generated something of value. This means that if you build a better mouse trap, or in this case, a movie or show people want to see, you can get it to market and sell it.

But Netflix violates this rule. Despite its claims of accounting profits, Netflix is a massive money-loser, projecting it will burn through $3.5bn in cash just this year. Netflix is taking inputs and combining them into something that is of less value than those original inputs. But the company doesn’t really care if people watch its content, because it doesn’t sell content. The company is selling a story to Wall Street, that, like Amazon, it will achieve dominant market power. The story is that users will buy Netflix streaming services and it will be too much trouble to switch to a different service, which is a variant of a phenomenon called “lock-in.” So no one will be able to compete, the company will be able to raise prices and lower costs, and voila, another Amazon-style monopoly. It will be one of the few left standing after the inevitable shake-out.</p>


Stoller tells this tale via comparison with old successes such as Back To The Future and The Hangover. Certainly, Hollywood is struggling - because as he says (higher in the essay) the distribution system chokes films more tightly.

And yes, the funding bubble has to burst at some point. Quite how close that point is? That's tougher.
netflix  hollywood 
8 days ago by charlesarthur