Memo: El Titán de los Cien Años

330UeJCU.jpg

La era de la venta directa al consumidor (DTC) aún no ha influido en la forma en que consumimos las películas de gran presupuesto y éxito de taquilla. Para ver la última producción de Marvel Studios, los consumidores siguen teniendo que aguantar el viaje al cine, comerse las caras palomitas y pagar los exorbitantes precios de los refrescos. En una conversación reciente con el cofundador de AfterMarq y miembro ejecutivo Vincenzo Landino, me enteré de por qué la era DTC llegaba al cine de gran presupuesto.

El estreno en día y fecha combina el estreno en salas con una oferta de vídeo a la carta (VOD) mientras la película se proyecta en los cines. La duración de esta ventana suele ser de 60 días, y existe una notable disparidad en el precio según el lugar de exhibición. Según un artículo de Indiewire de 2015, el alquiler tradicional a la carta cuesta al consumidor alrededor del 50% del precio de la proyección en salas. Los estudios tradicionales ganan más dinero con los estrenos en salas que con los de vídeo a la carta. Los estudios no tradicionales (Amazon, Netflix) hacen lo mismo, salvo que su economía es inversa. El streaming es más rentable para ellos que el estreno en salas (aunque los estrenos en salas físicas desbloquean el potencial de la temporada de premios). Lo veremos en alguna ocasión. Algunos ejemplos recientes son la galardonada película de Amazon Manchester frente al mar o la de Netflix Roma de Netflix.

Tanto Manchester como Roma son películas producidas por un servicio de streaming. Las películas se estrenaron con fecha y día para mejorar sus posibilidades en la temporada de premios. Pero todavía no hemos visto a ningún estudio de cine tradicional (Paramount Pictures, Twentieth Century-Fox, Sony, Universal Pictures, United Artists, Warner Brothers Pictures o MGM) apostar por el estreno en día y fecha de una película de gran tirada. Hay una razón importante para ello. Ninguno de los grandes estudios de la época controlaba la parte de exhibición entre 1948 y la actualidad. Sólo los estudios de Walt Disney están en condiciones de beneficiarse del control de principio a fin.

El poder de mercado de los estudios es menor de lo que era [en los años 40]. Los delitos per se, como la fijación de precios y el reparto de mercados, siguen siendo ilegales. Pero otros acuerdos horizontales entre competidores o acuerdos verticales entre empresas y sus socios tienen más probabilidades de ser confirmados hoy en día.

Michael Carrier, experto en defensa de la competencia de la Facultad de Derecho de Rutgers

Mucho antes de la era moderna del DTC , los estudios cinematográficos controlaban el producto desde la producción hasta la sala de cine. Esto cambió en 1948. El caso Paramount y los decretos resultantes cambiaron la industria cinematográfica durante décadas. Entre 1945 y 1948, el Tribunal Supremo ordenó la separación entre la distribución y la exhibición de películas exigiendo que los grandes estudios se desprendieran de la distribución o de sus salas de cine. Fue una decisión casi unánime desinvertir en los cines y no desinvertir en sus negocios de distribución.

Comprender los Decretos Supremos de 1948

Cuando Netflix anunció a los accionistas que jugadores como Fortnite daban más ansiedad a los ejecutivos que rivales como Hulu, YouTube o HBO, lo explicaron con esto:

Nuestro crecimiento se basa en lo buena que es nuestra experiencia, comparada con todas las demás experiencias de tiempo frente a la pantalla entre las que eligen los consumidores.

Esto es un eco de un sentimiento que Reed Hastings, CEO de Netflix, dijo a Fast Company en 2017 en un artículo titulado Sleep Is Our Competition:

Son las 8 de la tarde, estás junto a tu televisor... ¿qué mando a distancia coges? ¿El de la PlayStation? ¿El de la tele? ¿O enciendes Netflix?

Entender los decretos de la Paramount: investigación y desglose por Tracey Wallace, colaboradora de 2PM.

Tiene sentido que Netflix vea a Fortnite como un competidor principal. Para los más jóvenes, hace dos años, la respuesta a la pregunta de Hastings de 2017 habría sido Netflix. Ahora, eso está siendo desafiado por plataformas de juegos o por servicios de suscripción como MoviePass o AMC Stubs A-List. Mientras MoviePass sigue en declive debido a la escasa rentabilidad por unidad, el servicio nativo de AMC cuenta con más de 600.000 abonados que pagan al menos 19,95 dólares al mes. Servicios como el de AMC están tendiendo un puente entre los precios del streaming y la experiencia del estreno en el cine.

Por supuesto, Netflix tiene sus propios estrenos como la aclamada Bird Box o Bandersnatch o Outlaw King. Cada uno de ellos contó con un presupuesto digno de Hollywood y al menos una estrella.

Netflix terminó 2018 con 139 suscripciones en todo el mundo, 29 millones más que a principios de año. El increíble crecimiento de las suscripciones justifica claramente la subida de los precios de los abonos en Estados Unidos. Netflix registró unos ingresos de 4.190 millones de dólares, justo por debajo de las previsiones internacionales de 4.210 millones.

Netflix está experimentando un renacimiento en crecimiento de audiencia y fanfarria. ¿Qué impide a Netflix aplicar un enfoque directo al consumidor para las películas de éxito en casa? En Decreto Paramountuna ley antimonopolio de 1948, se lo impide.

En este caso histórico del Tribunal Supremo de EE.UU., se determinó que los estudios cinematográficos no podían poseer sus propias salas de cine ni conceder derechos exclusivos a salas preferentes. En aquella época (1945), estudios cinematográficos como Paramount poseían - parcial o totalmente - el 17% de los cines del país. Esto representaba el 45% de los ingresos del cine comercial estadounidense en 1945. La decisión de 1948 provocó una recesión masiva en los ingresos de los estudios cinematográficos, que duró más de dos décadas y media. En 1972, el estreno de El Padrino se convirtió en el primer éxito de taquilla moderno y el primer proyecto que aumentó los ingresos de los estudios cinematográficos a los niveles anterioresal Decreto Paramount.

La sentencia también se considera un cimiento de la legislación antimonopolio y se cita a menudo en casos en los que las cuestiones de integración vertical desempeñan un papel destacado en la redistribución del comercio justo. Pero en 2019, Netflix cuenta con 139 millones de suscriptores en todo el mundo y produce un puñado de estrenos menores propios, convirtiendo nuestras salas de estar en cines íntimos. Afortunadamente para Netflix, el Departamento de Justicia anunció recientemente que revisaría el decreto de 1948 que prohibía a los estudios de Hollywood seguir un enfoque DTC para poseer y operar teatros.

La revisión de la sentencia antimonopolio de 1948, y su posible revocación, daría a los grandes distribuidores, exhibidores y proveedores de servicios de streaming -como Netflix o Disney- poder real para funcionar más como marcas de entretenimiento directas al consumidor. La revisión de la sentencia permitiría a Netflix asociarse con empresas como AMC Theaters (o los estudios mencionados) para comercializar conjuntamente estrenos en salas y en aplicaciones.

Es poco probable que Netflix y AMC Theaters se asocien llegado el momento, pero la línea en la arena está profundamente marcada. Una vez que expiren las leyes antimonopolio, estas dos empresas ganarán mucho cooperando con los estudios. Pero no lo máximo.

El titán de 100 años a la espera

j5qJDowo.jpgNetflix es el servicio de streaming dominante, con más de 139 millones de clientes de pago. AMC Theaters tiene las mejores perspectivas en toda la vertiente cinematográfica del complejo industrial del cine. La empresa ha sorteado con éxito la economía de Moviepass instituyendo su propio programa de visionado de películas (19,95 $/mes). Aunque depende en gran medida de los ingresos procedentes de las concesiones y el alcohol, el programa de afiliación creció hasta superar los 600.000 usuarios en su primer año. Su dependencia de ingresos externos (concesiones) es el defecto del programa.

Aunque es divertido imaginar un mundo en el que Netflix ofrezca un paquete AMC Premiere en el que los consumidores paguen 50 dólares por los derechos de alquilar una superproducción de gran presupuesto el día de su estreno, AMC sigue siendo el intermediario. Según Matthew Ball, analista y antiguo responsable de estrategia de Amazon Studios:

[AMC] owes 55-67% per ticket [to distributors], with floors. [Concessions] are a big priority because of confection economics. Like gym memberships, these subscriptions only work if predicted use is <x%.

Según CNBC: en el último año, Disney ha perdido casi 1.000 millones de dólares en su negocio de streaming entre su inversión en Hulu y su trabajo con BAMtech, la tecnología detrás de ESPN+. Pero la revocación del decreto de 1948 por parte del DOJ podría cambiarlo todo para Walt Disney Studios, una empresa que comenzó su andadura sólo 25 años antes de la decisión de 1948. Y no era más que un parpadeo en el radar de Hollywood, en ese momento.

Disney espera que, con el tiempo, millones de clientes de pago se suscriban a Disney+ para disfrutar de sus nuevos contenidos originales y su biblioteca de películas y programas de televisión de Disney. No se ha revelado el precio. Netflix, que anunció sus beneficios trimestrales el jueves, tiene 139 millones de abonados en todo el mundo y acaba de informarles de que va a subir los precios entre un 13% y un 18%.

Alex Sherman para CNBC

Disney se adapta mejor a la era DTC. Existe una demanda orgánica, lealtad y los mecanismos para llevarla a la puerta de casa. Cuando la empresa anunció el fin de su acuerdo de streaming con Netflix, se veía venir. El producto Disney+ está destinado a ser el hogar exclusivo de las películas, proyectos televisivos y otros programas originales de Disney. Según Bob Iger, consejero delegado de Disney, el servicio de streaming es la prioridad de la compañía en 2019-2020. También ha asegurado a la prensa que los grandes estrenos (Marvel Studios, Star Wars, etc.) no irán directamente al servicio de streaming, aunque con el tiempo, incluso eso cambiará.

Pero a la vista de la anulación de los decretos de Paramount, es inteligente considerar las implicaciones de las palabras de Iger frente a las acciones inminentes de Disney. Cuando el Departamento de Justicia de EE.UU. revise y modifique estos decretos , Disney tendrá el poder de cobrar más por el estreno de una superproducción en streaming en tu casa. Y lo hará. Disney podrá exigir una tarifa más lucrativa que la de los estrenos tradicionales con fecha y día, y con márgenes muy superiores a los de sus competidores de streaming (Netflix), vendedores de mercado (iTunes de Apple) o competidores de cine (AMC Theaters). Antes del centenario de Walt Disney Studios, podrás alquilar un estreno taquillero a través de tu aplicación Disney. Con respecto a la anulación de los decretos de Paramount de 1948, este es el final del juego de Walt Disney.

Informe de Web Smith y Tracey Wallace | About 2PM

No. 301: Influencers and Transactional Authenticity

Just when we believed that we reached peak influencer, we are surprised yet again. We’ve favorably covered the “first family of influence”, in the past. And quantifiably, there isn’t a media conglomerate that comes close to the influence of the Jenner / Kardashian family. This week, one of them reached a new level by “bravely” discussing acne – the presentation and build up left a fractured audience in the wake of the brand partnership announcement when it was revealed to be a paid deal.

A day before the reveal, Kris Jenner, the model and entrepreneur’s mother, teased the reveal of her “deeply personal” issue on Twitter. Tabloid speculation run its course. The roll out was optimized for social media but many were left asking: is this really what’s become of influencer-driven advertising? Vox Media covered the advertising “bait and switch” in depth here. 

2PM Contributor and Founder of Doris Sleep: Tracey Wallace

Proactiv’s recent partnership with Kendall Jenner was a test of authenticity. It also may have been a watershed moment for influencer culture. Yes, it’s the most recent example of the status being used to present a vulnerable issue. In this case, adolescent acne. But authenticity is a currency all its own and volume of audience doesn’t always equal magnitude of impact.The controversy around Proactiv’s newest advertising campaign is an early sign that consumers may be beginning to discount command of advertising’s most influential family. Consumer skepticism is the antidote to influencer culture and it seems to be growing.

The focus on influencer authenticity comes as brands have begun to use more “real people” over models and entertainers. Brands are beginning to highlight people just like us but without the modelesque lighting, the photoshopping, or the narrative embellishment. Just scroll through the feeds of Andie Swimwear, Flamingo, or Chubbies for quality examples of this type of visual marketing.

These brands are succeeding because of, not in spite of, their focus on authenticity.

  • Andie Swimwear: Swimsuits made by women, for women.
  • Flamingo: We make body care, starting with hair.
  • Chubbies: The Weekend Has Arrived.

For influencers, the understanding of how partnerships like Proactiv and Kendall Jenner’s come to life diminishes empathy and therefore trust in an ad’s authenticity. This is especially the case in the era of Netflix and YouTube, where star power (influencer marketing) is used to efficiently monetize audiences. Consumers want authenticity.

The successes of influencer marketing is saturating the market. From celebrity influencers to micro influencers, consumers are being inundated by influence. Some influencers are faking brand deals to gain credibility:

Transitioning from an average Instagram or YouTube user to a professional ‘influencer’—that is, someone who leverages a social-media following to influence others and make money—is not easy,” writes Taylor Lorenz for The Atlantic. “After archiving old photos, redefining your aesthetic, and growing your follower base to at least the quadruple digits, you’ll want to approach brands. But the hardest deal to land is your first, several influencers say; companies want to see your promotional abilities and past campaign work. So many have adopted a new strategy: Fake it until you make it.

There are sincere and authentic influencers who are not embellishing their lifestyles or influence. Often enough, these are the media personalities who are slowest to launch merchandise or product lines. Figures like Youtube’s Casey Neistat or pro surfing legend Kelly Slater are having to contend with a very cumbersome question:

How do you build an authentic advertising or commerce model? And how do you do it without ostracizing long time fans and newcomers?

As 2PM has previously covered, there are businesses that focus specifically on partnering with influencers and digital publishers to create, market, sell, and distribute merchandise. We’ve compiled a list of notable commerce partners:

[table id=8 /]

There is such a demand for appealing to influencers and influential moments that an entire industry has address demand.

Taking a page from the eCommerce playbook

As DTC analysts David Perell and Nik Sharma have often cited, the most resilient brands are audiences. And for influencers to maintain their audience, there must be an evolution from the existing structure of often-gimmicky merchandising and advertising via third-party transactors. And to a method that achieves an authentic experience bolsters user experience and belonging.

The technology seems to be mature enough to address this new standard. Headless Commerce services are offered by BigCommerce, Shopify, Adobe, and ElasticPath. These services are helping to define the possibilities of fully-integrated, content-driven commerce.

Alecia, an early headless commerce pioneer, has taken a first step in this direction with their proprietary video platform. From 2PM Member Brief – Headless Commerce:

Alecia is a company that films and streams original content, letting you shop what you see. The app and the site offer a seamless content and commerce presentation for the viewer. As the product appears on the screen, it is offered (in limited quantities) along the right side of the broadcast. If you’re logged in, purchasing is essentially a two click process. Consumers aren’t clicking to an eCommerce site or an external cart. Instead, the shopping cart is a component of a headless operation, an API call to the cloud-based shopping platform that is external to the featured content.

To date, no such solution exists for influencers on major platforms like YouTube, a place where it could have the most value. way content and commerce in media has begun to alter our understanding of which publications have the most loyal audiences. From 2PM No. 280:

The digital landscape is changing beneath our feet. For publishers to continue building organic readership, they must become brands. Operating as a source of content is no longer enough. To do that, efforts can no longer be siloed, the traditional factions of legacy-styled newsrooms must fall.

It’s no longer just about eyeballs and what influencers can charge for their collection of them. Optimizing for transactional engagement could have a positive effect on the influence ecosystem. In order to earn actual transactions, consumers – more often than not – must sense sincerity, community, and loyalty. By improving bottom-of-funnel operations, influencers can address the needs of community members (potential consumers) without disrupting their experiences.

Ready for increased interactivity?

Millennial audiences are ready for built-in video interactions as evidenced by Netflix’s recent success with Bandersnatch, the “choose-your-own-adventure” augmented film powered by remote or mousepad. These types of media experiences shorten the length between watching and interacting.

But Bandersnatch is more than just a blurring of games and TV. Such interactive adventures could easily become a new revenue source, too, through super-powered product placement and eCommerce. With interactivity comes a new slew of data, and the ability to layer in products, product information and ways to buy. You can bet Amazon is figuring out how to ties its billions of dollars worth of programming into its vast e-commerce operation. And just maybe so are Disney, Apple, Warner Media and Walmart.

David Bloom for Forbes

One company that went unmentioned in Bloom’s rundown was Google. Google has the most to benefit from engineering a headless commerce solution for YouTube. Consumers and creators would both benefit from an experience that allows consumers purchase from the screen without an external redirection.There is one thing that YouTube has built into its platform that Netflix, Disney, Warner Media and Walmart do not: intuitive user control.

Expect to see a continued shift towards interactive formats; while headless commerce opportunities are further down the line – consumers are already being molded to welcome them. But the media engine of this age is the widely beloved influencer. We’re suggesting that we should reconsider how they’re influence is measured. No, influencers shifting to a headless commerce operation won’t immediately prevent media moments like the Proactive “bait and switch.”

Moving influencers away from optimizing for media impressions, social mention volume, and traditional publicity could alter things if and when creators see what can be accomplished when commerce transactions are closer to the starting line. Commerce relationships develop an authenticity that advertising doesn’t quite need. As interactive video technology continues along its adoption cycle, influencer-creatives would stand to gain a lot from building stronger relationships with their audiences.

By moving transactions closer to the top of the top of the funnel, fans and potential consumers won’t be left wondering: what’s the gimmick? Headless commerce can present that solution in a subtle but effective way by leaving the opportunity to transact to the viewer. Consumers demand authenticity from their influencers. This, especially as the lines between genuine interest and earned media continues to blur. 

Read your No. 301 curation here.

Report by Tracey Wallace and Web Smith | About 2PM

Tracey is a 2PM Executive Member and Contributor, the founder of Doris Sleep, and the Editor-in-Chief at BigCommerce. 

No. 300: Content Before Commerce

DTC growth efficiency and paying it forward. There’s a relatively new documentary on HBO called Momentum Generation. The short film chronicles a group of young surfers who were pursuing the dream of monetizing their craft (turning pro). They wanted to become professionals at a time when Americans weren’t making a living off of the sport. There is a key point in the documentary when one of the surfer’s mothers professes her appreciation for providing an informal shelter to the motley crew of young men. In her home, they wouldn’t have to worry about food or a roof over their heads. These comforts allowed them to focus on honing their abilities and building their audiences. But it also provided outsized commercial opportunity that wouldn’t have otherwise existed.

If you’ve ever followed action sports, you may recognize the names: Kelly Slater, Rob Machado, Taylor Knox, and Shane Dorian. These are but a few of the household names from that home of then-amateur surfers. The group and its household was credited with defining a sport for an entire generation. They pushed each other, they collaborated, the competed, and they complimented each other’s talents and abilities. It was the perfect storm of opportunity.

Everyone who paid attention to surf media in the 1990s will have heard of Momentum, not because it was artfully made—it wasn’t—but because the 1992 film’s screechy punk/metal soundtrack and hyper-aggressive slash-and-aerial surfing really did announce the arrival of a new generation of young dudes who shredded waves into way smaller pieces than the reigning old dudes. 

Momentum Generation is Postmodern by Accident

What’s the point? We are entering a phase of online consumerism that makes it ever harder to sell, grow, and retain customers effectively. Costs have risen and attention spans have dwindled. One solution that brands often ignore is long tail and risky: building an audience early on. Curating a community and then selling to it. From Issue No. 277 – The Law of 100:

Without a strong group of early adopters, you will not efficiently achieve the attention of the masses. The first 100 are the foundation. Without the support of the 100, the masses will not adopt. Made famous by Simon Sinek, heed the diffusion of innovation theory: the early majority will not try something until someone else tries it first. Brands are judged by this early majority.

A deeper dive into the hysteria around the pioneering group of surfers and you may recognize that this well-done HBO documentary doesn’t get made without the incredible b-roll and spare footage from the shooting of the 1991 short film and 1992 short film, “Momentum.” Produced, shot, and directed by one of the surfers themselves – Taylor Steele, he wanted a way to broadcast the lifestyle. Steele was just 20 years old at the time. His early film work catapulted his household of friends into relative stardom. And then the endorsement deals, media partnerships, and merchandising opportunities followed closely behind.

Content Before Commerce

Neistat’s intentions are largely similar to Warhol’s, albeit updated for the digital age. He laments that NYC has no real community for creators, and what it does have, frankly, “sucks.” Its his contention, however, that this is not due to a lack of energy or creative prowess, but a lack of a central location, a hub of creativity. 368 Broadway, he hopes, will fill that void. “What if,” he says, gesturing to his newly acquired fortress, “this can become the space for all creators?”

On the 368 Project

Brands should consider launching their media and community operations long before their first products hit the shelves. Whether intentionally or not, 368 is doing just that. Founded by Casey Neistat and Paul Leys, 368 is a new age spin on building the creative center of New York City and beyond. With a capable Director of eCommerce and headless commerce capability, 368 has the potential to build a customer acquisition engine. The entire organization is built to systematize the serendipity of its community member; it is a flywheel for creation, content and (eventually) commerce. And it’s an organization that many to-be entrepreneurs in the DTC space should observe.

368 on Twitter

@overtime brought 🏀 to 368 last weekend. They also brought Rachel and Larry.

When you walk into the New York building operated by Casey Neistat, you’ll feel a sensation of serendipity and opportunity. 368 is just a shared workspace to many observers, many of whom view the YouTube star’s business acumen through a skeptical lens. But it serves as more of a creative haven – a place born when its creator believes that the end is more important than the growing pains of its means.

Beme was Neistat’s venture prior to 368. This time last year, CNN and Neistat decided to part ways and you could see the anguish on his face in Neistat’s farewell video. It’s no coincidence that 368 operates within the same walls of the now-defunct headquarters of Beme. Neistat isn’t one to back down from psychological challenges. But the decision to heavily invest in 368 wasn’t just about the physical space; the space is home to competition, collaboration, and community. From our recent Member Brief, The Pivot to Tradition:

For DNVBs to position themselves for scale, it helps to have a built-in audience. Consider the successes of Fenty Beauty (Rihanna’s audience), Kylie Cosmetics (Jenner’s audience), Fashion Nova (Cardi B and 13 million Instagram followers), and Glossier (Into the Gloss).

368 has the make up to duplicate the successes of several of the top 30 community-driven brands in direct-to-consumer industry. One trait that the aforementioned brands share: they are driven by personality and relationships, not performance marketing. As such, paid marketing and advertising costs are relatively inexpensive for direct to consumer retailers like Kylie Cosmetics, Fenty Beauty, Fashion Nova, and Glossier – several of the foremost examples of DTC brands that run without the constraints of skyrocketing customer acquisition costs (CAC).

Wilson Hung on Twitter

1/ The golden era of DNVB is over. The times of inefficient growth enabled by first movers advantage & low ad-costs are over. Rising ad-costs will require brands to focus on operational excellence to maintain strong LTV:CAC ratios to sustain growth.

Adjusting to a dying era

Glossier is the child of Into The Gloss, the website Weiss started in 2010 to chronicle what women had in their beauty cabinets. It may sound simple, but there was a time when nobody curated their collections. For most, a bunch of (mostly expired) products took up all the shelf space.

Woman Made: Emily Weiss

There is a bit of irony in the story of the surfers of the “Momentum Generation”; they didn’t expect the appreciation for their lifestyle to leave the boundaries of their niche. But the content was superior and the lifestyle was appealing, even to those who’d never touch a surfboard. They validated their brand before ever selling a product, sponsorship, or media deal. A casual observer could say the same about Neistat and his 368 team. There is a $90 million / year retail operation that is ready and waiting to exist.

It’s not uncommon for early-stage DTC brands to raise $3.5 million before their first product is sold. These early-stage retailers are often in stealth mode for up to a year, developing product lines, establishing partnerships, and refining their online branding through agencies like Gin Lane, Wondersauce, and Red Antler.

Savvier brands will take this opportunity to build their own flywheels of content, community, and momentum. In doing so, founders have the opportunity to address one of the greatest limitations of this era of eCommerce – head on. Instead of buying an audience, brands should consider investing in growing authentic digital communities around their interests and product categories. Both options – paid CAC v. organic CAC – have their complications; but paying it forward offers sustainability, predictability, and an efficient path forward.

Read the No. 300 curation here.

Informe de Web Smith | About 2PM