One Way to Help DIYers

Hi, Peter Belsito here, guest blogging today.

Anyone who knows me and has listened to me mouthing off about 'our film world' knows that I have a one world view of filmmaking and the business.

That is to say I believe the US business (mainly LA and then NYC also) is tied inextricably to the indie world, to festivals, to the burgeoning DIY movement (and the companies and people affiliated with same) here in the US ... AND to all aspects of same on the international film scene. Simple, one world, one cinema.

The relentless march of technology (for now 'digital') drags us all along in its wake.

So ... what's new? What should we be paying attention to? What's it all mean?

Distribber.com and its founder Adam Chapnick provide a very good example of what's new and good...brought to us by the amazing Ted Hope on his excellent Blog had the below from Adam about distribber.com and the work they're doing, the opportunities they are offering our film community.

I cannot improve on what's below so I reprint it here in full.

http://hopeforfilm.com/ April 20 at 7:36am


Filmmakers vs. Aggregators: Distribber speaks of Win, Win!

Distribber was recently acquired by IndieGoGo, and in the wake of the publicity surrounding the announcement, we received a tremendous outpouring of enthusiasm and interest in Distribber’s service. As is inevitable, there’s been some confusion around what Distribber does and doesn’t do.

Distribber was created to help rights holders maximize the payback from their work and investment.

More specifically, Distribber was conceived as a solution to several persistent complaints from filmmakers and other creative rights holders about distributors in general and aggregators in particular. (“Aggregator” is the term used for a company that acts as a gatekeeper between a rights holder and a retail platform, such as iTunes, Netflix, Hulu or Cable VOD operators like Comcast, Time Warner, etc.)

The complaints surrounded 3 specific pain points:

Complaint #1. Eternal revenue-share for finite service

Aggregators (other than Distribber) work on a revenue-share basis, meaning that they make money by keeping between 15% and 50% of your revenue that they collect from the retail platforms on your behalf. They take this portion of revenue for the entire term of your deal with them. The complaint from filmmakers was that while aggregators take this money “forever,” they didn’t seem to be working forever. To many, it seemed that aggregators placed their film on the platforms and then moved on.

This situation was even more frustrating for larger rights holders — production companies, sales reps, etc. — who controlled the rights to several (often dozens) of titles, and who engaged in significant marketing and grassroots outreach but lacked access to iTunes, except through revenue share entities. The shared-revenue structure has continued to frustrate these larger companies as they have been the core demand-drivers.

Now, in defense of aggregators, encoding a film, ushering it through Quality Control “QC” and having the access to place it on iTunes or Netflix or Hulu or Cable VOD or anywhere else is indeed a valuable service — and often a time-consuming one.

However, it seemed that one could put a fair price on that service that accounted for the work and value of relationships, and offer it to filmmakers cleanly, without the burden of a revenue-share. This would enable a filmmaker, production company or other rights holder to know their cash outflow in advance, and enjoy 100% of the benefit of their film’s success. So, Distribber adopted a flat-fee-for-service model.

Complaint #2. Large deducted expenses, often including fees for marketing services that seemed unhelpful or nonexistent

Filmmakers complained that distributors and aggregators deducted expenses that seemed unreasonable, like $1500 for encoding, or an array of costs for marketing services that the filmmaker wasn’t sure had actually been done.

Here, the opportunity was again to charge a fair price, once. So, Distribber adopted a fair price. The $1295 one-time fee for iTunes placement was less than some rev-share companies charged for the encoding alone, and after only 185 sales at $9.99 on iTunes, rights holders have been entirely in profit.

Without putting too fine a point on it, it bears emphasizing: after 185 iTunes sales at $9.99, a rights holder is in profit for the rest of the film’s life on iTunes. Going forward, Distribber charges $79 per year for account access, collection and sales stats.

The best evidence that we were on the right track came when the Age of Stupid production team chose to use Distribber — they have been incredibly successful trailblazers in the hybrid distribution movement, and their endorsement told us that our service is providing its intended benefits for its ideal users.

To compare Distribber’s model with revenue-share models, consider the illustration below. At 1000 iTunes sales (retail price $9.99), rights holders give up 174% more money under a 15% rev-share than they pay to Distribber ($3,550 compared to $1295). Under a 25% rev-share, rights holders pay 228% more ($4,250). At 10,000 sales, Distribber’s one-time fee doesn’t change, but a 15% rev-share deal now costs ten times the Distribber fee ($13,000), while a 25% rev-share deal costs over fifteen times more ($20,000). Obviously, at 20,000 sales, the disparity only increases.

Looking at revenue, with Distribber’s flat fee, at 1000 iTunes sales, rights holders are paid 65% more than they would be with a 15% rev-share deal ($5,705 vs. $3,450), and they’re paid more than twice what they’d get from a 25% deal ($5,626 vs. $2,750). At 10,000 sales, Distribber clients keep $11,705 more than they would under a 15% rev-share, and $18,705 more than they would under a 25% rev-share. And again, at 20,000 sales, a rights holder does even better.

What A Filmmaker Is Charged, With:  What A Filmmaker Keeps, With:


Distribber

15% Rev-Share

25% Rev-Share

Distribber

15% Rev-Share

25% Rev-Share

At 1000 iTunes sales

-$1,295

-$3,550

-$4,250

$5,705

$3,450

$2,750

At 10000 iTunes sales

-$1,295

-$13,000

-$20,000

$68,705

$57,000

$50,000

At 20000 iTunes sales

-$1,295

-$23,500

-$37,500

$138,705

$116,500

$102,500




(The chart assumes Rev-share companies deduct from filmmaker’s revenue $2500 for encoding and/or marketing.)



And now, with Distribber’s addition of Amazon VOD and Netflix’s streaming service, we decided that as a limited-time promotion, for the same $1295, Distribber clients could have our Amazon and Netflix service for free. This of course only makes the above comparison even more lopsided in Distribber clients’ favor, since it adds revenue without adding any expense.



Complaint #3. Late payments, and sometimes no payment

Filmmakers complained that even after resigning themselves to a rev-share deal, and agreeing to the small payout left after expenses and revenue share deductions, they had to chase distributors and aggregators for reports and checks, and sometimes with none being sent at all.



So, Distribber has decided to do away with reports and checks, and instead employ a user account system, whereby clients login with a username and password. Here they gain access to collection stats by platform, and see their collected funds balance. Clients withdraw their own money on demand, with the click of a button. Having all sales stats and collection in one account removed a major, time-consuming headache from our clients lives for $79 a year.



Next: More Pain, More Answers



Even a casual follower of the distribution business knows that there are plenty of areas it can be improved, and in plenty of ways. Distribber is continuing to actively developing new methods and models to serve rights holders across a variety of platforms, from internet to cable to mobile.



With the proliferation of tools like Wordpress, Facebook, Twitter and all the plugins and apps that support those services, it’s more possible than ever for innovative companies, teams — or even individuals — to disrupt old marketing models and connect with audiences. Filmmaker/marketers like Gary Hustwit, Lance Weiler, Tiffany Shlain and others have shown the way to create demand via their own efforts and investment. Peter Broderick is shepherding rights holders through a hybrid strategy that teaches careful allocation of specific rights to companies that are highly specialized, with the goal of maximizing the revenue a filmmaker keeps.



The key thing to understand about Distribber is that it’s a powerful tool to help enterprising rights holders keep the most of their own money. The more skilled you are at connecting with audience, the more buzz that you’ve built, the better Distribber’s deal works for you.



ADAM CHAPNICK is CEO of Distribber.com, an IndieGoGo company that places film and TV content on digital sales platforms such as iTunes, Netflix and Amazon for a flat fee while allowing filmmakers to keep 100% of their revenue.

Adam can be reached at adam@distribber.com .

On Self Distribution from Guest Blogger Peter Belsito

After discussion with various in-the-know friends and pros, the following is the UNIVERSAL UNANIMOUS recommendation for what is needed for taking out 'your film'. For a low fee you have here many options on DIY distribution ('do it yourself' strategies) and, from what I gather at this moment, they are the cutting edge. The expert-advisors in DIY must watch the film and talk to you to decide if it fits their plan. So it is not guaranteed that you are 'in there' but it is well worth the try as you will learn more with each encounter. If you do not land with a particular expert-advisor, there are other strategies (distribber.com is one which filmmakers I know love, and they are already cooperating with the suggestion below). For you to consider joining with "the one below, Orly Ravid and Jeffrey Winter's new company, you must go on their website AND READ THROUGH IT COMPLETELY, THOROUGHLY before deciding. But it is my strong recommend for you at this point if you are considering DIY distribution as a strategy. The website is:

http://www.thefilmcollaborative.org/

The Collaborative is Orly and Jeffrey's most exciting, new brilliantly conceived business and it is non profit. The new website (still developing but up and running) has dozens of films already participating. It is a one stop shop for filmmakers seeking to do their own distribution.  Everything is covered. I cannot praise it highly enough and the principals are at the cutting edge of the new DIY movement for films where filmmakers must / seek to control their own distribution. This is an important new and developing element in our world. Again, the name of the founder you will talk to is Orly Ravid. She has worked in many capacities as an executive and a film buyer for various distributors from both here and Europe and, like us at SydneysBuzz, has a completely international outlook and view. You'll love her. Her partners are very high level wonderful people. Go on the website or email orly@thefilmcollaborative.org

Also:

I have been following the progress of DIY'er Scott Bushaw and his very funny 'From Hollywood to Hollywood'. In the idiot buddy road movie comedy tradition of 'Dumb and Dumber' and 'Harold & Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay' this one has a neat website, great poster, funny trailer and a sweet heart. You can also shop very easily and buy the film and download from the site. I'd like to see more indies develop their marketing pitch to this degree.

Toronto's US Buyers and International Representation at the Festival

This blog was written for Toronto but has been updated to include more U.S. buyers who were not necessarily in Toronto. Its purpose is to list the current U.S. buyers and so it will be updated continually. ---Sydney November 1, 2009.

Of course there are the veterans which includes Sony Pictures Classics, Miramax Films, IFC, Magnolia Pictures, Fox Searchlight, Lionsgate, and perhaps Focus Features if it is still acquiring specialty films. Most of the other veterans have retained their micro size which allows them to exist and even have wider choices today. These include Zeitgeist Films, Kino International, The Samuel Goldwyn Company, Roadside Attractions, Strand Releasing, Regent Releasing incuding Here Films, Wolfe Releasing, Water Bearer Films, Troma, The Global Film Initiative, Indican Pictures, Film Forum, First Run Features, Women Make Movies, Roxie Releasing, Panorama Entertainment, The Criterion Collection/ Janus Film, Seventh Art Releasing, the essentially home entertainment companies Lorber Films, Image, Screen Media Ventures, MPI Media Group, Entertainment One, ArtMattan, or TV's LAP TV.

The new interesting labels are Marc Urman's Palladium Entertainment, Bob Berney's Apparition, Summit and Overture Films whose path seems to be diverging from specialty films.

Distributors who still need to prove their longevity include The Weinstein Company, Senator U.S., Liberation Entertainment , Film Movement, Palisades Tartan who just picked up Lourdes in Venice, Music Box Films, National Geographic , Indiepix , Film Movement, B-Side Entertainment, Oscilloscope, Figa, Gigantic, PorchLight, Indiepix and Cinema Tropical who are also looking to make a profitable deal.

Even the For-Rent-DIY distributors like Susan Jackson's Freestyle Releasing, Richard Abramowitz' Abramorama, Wendy Lidell's International Film Circuit and MJ Pekos' Mitropoulos Films, all run by truly professional vets, will be hunting future relationships.

Links will show all their films now and past.

We'll be watching.

Toronto's Sales & Industry Office director Stefan Wirthensohn reports that a number equa to last year's 3,000+ delegates from 62 countries have signed up this year. Higher numbers are in from Australia, China, Germany, Italy and Denmark. Attendance from Spain doubled this year. Fewer are on hand from Argentina which is gearing up for its new Cannes Market cobranded market Ventana Sur to be held in November after AFM, and from Japan -- though 2 last minute registrations came in just before the festival began -- which has been experiencing meltdown in the last 6 months, from South Korea, Mexico and the US. The number from US is attributable to indie prods staying at home.