io9 saw [EUROP] and got the poster May 06, 17:07
all the time {nm} May 06, 17:18
agree. was Margin Call first VOD and then theater? {nm} May 06, 17:21
I can't find any reference to VOD first at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margin_Call_(film) {nm} May 06, 17:24
Margin Call was day and date with theatrical {nm} May 06, 17:40
thx {nm} May 06, 17:45
most Magnolia and almost all IFC releases are ultra VOD. {nm} May 06, 17:37
again, the difference is subscription (HBO, netflix) and transactional (cable). In the most simplest terms, May 06, 21:19
That article was referring to Magnolia. I haven't checked on IFC but I'm not sure why it would be different. {nm} May 06, 17:57
well, you can believe me when i say things do change over three years. {nm} May 06, 18:05
not to be an ass, but my credentials are pretty strong. I speak on panels with IFC and Magnolia about this model {nm} May 06, 18:06
here's the last one May 06, 18:07
Facts (and lists with numbers and facts!) trump credientials every time, and the link says nothing about the issue. {nm} May 06, 18:16
Why would the vast majority be day and date 32 months ago, and flip to, say, theatrical 5 weeks after VOD since? {nm} May 06, 18:18
because magnolia owns their own theaters (landmark) {nm} May 06, 18:33
because the price point is $9.99 vs $6.99 and the placement is significantly better {nm} May 06, 18:33
Melancholia is the biggest recent example of an ultra VOD release. No Magnolia does not own cable companies May 06, 18:53
And the one example you've now given, Melancholia had a theatrical release in LA three months earlier! Geez. {nm May 06, 19:02
that was to qualify for best actress for the oscars and the vod providers didnt care {nm} May 06, 19:36
Yes, I read that in the source article I found it in, but nevertheless it eliminates Melancholia as VOD first. {nm} May 06, 19:42
50%-40%, better than theatrical {nm} May 06, 19:33
Equating 32 months to 38 years if funny indeed, and maybe funny math is better than no math, as in no $100K example yet. {nm} May 06, 18:52
thank you, no hard feelings on this end either. Example above given (you actually never asked for an example) May 06, 18:58
Well I asked for lists, which by definition contain many examples, and I set a low $100K bar further up. {nm} May 06, 19:10
The distinction can become blurred though, with many pay tv services having their own on demand channel. {nm} May 06, 19:50
Really, PPV may be a better term than VOD if we're talking theatrical box office versus video on demand equivalent. {nm} May 06, 19:51
Out of curiosity, KalElFan, are you unable to post IMs? {nm} May 06, 20:25
I'll try again, if nothing appears except this header it still doesn't work... {nm} May 06, 20:43
Nope. (I'd put "Testing" in the Additional Message). So that's why it's like I'm Tweet-bound when posting. :-) {nm} May 06, 20:48
it may be VOD, but the difference is subscription vs transactional. those rights are sold separately. {nm} May 06, 20:57
In a sense, Netflix and HBO On Demand are every bit as much VOD to the market, as a PPV cable channel is. {nm} May 06, 21:10
what magnolia calls VOD and what the market and industry call VOD are exactly the same {nm} May 06, 21:16
And acronym splitting it into SVOD and TVOD only reinforces the point that it's *ALL* VOD to the market. {nm} May 06, 21:38
it is all VOD. But I'm not sure why you think the market has a different definition for VOD than the distributors. They don't. May 06, 21:44
The VOD market is composed of 100M+ homes, Moviesnob. HBO On Demand exists, and Netflix is an On Demand pitch. {nm} May 06, 21:30
I got your rights categorization of it at 'Fine..." above, but the market does "see it all as VOD" as you concede." {nm} May 06, 21:49
I think/hope simultaneous VOD is the wave of the future, so I'd be interested in those stats too. {nm} May 06, 17:26