<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Ah, Hollywood Accounting!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2007/01/31/ah-hollywood-accounting/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2007/01/31/ah-hollywood-accounting/</link>
	<description>Sci-fi, comics, humor, photos...it&#039;s all fair game.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:03:41 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2007/01/31/ah-hollywood-accounting/#comment-42122</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Jun 2008 19:20:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2007/01/31/ah-hollywood-accounting/#comment-42122</guid>
		<description>I know this is an old post but I can&#039;t resist...

You&#039;re right, but don&#039;t be so surprised.  I can &quot;prove&quot; a loss on the back of a bar napkin.

Let&#039;s assume the BO gross is roughly correct (a big assumption seeing as it doesn&#039;t hurt the studios to inflate the BO grosses as they are often used as marketing ploys)

$56m - Gross
Less taxes and theatres&#039; cut (can be between 40% - 60%)

Left with $25m
Less Distrubtor&#039;s cut (can vary but lets asume 20%)

Left with $20m
Less marketing costs (not cheap and typically at least the original cost of the movie)

Left with -$10m

Also to be taken from any profit made will be Sales Agent&#039;s cut (if applicable), studio overhead (if not part of the $30m), etc, etc.

BUT!

You wisely brought up DVD sales.  This is likely to be where the studio re-couped.  Also, I&#039;m sure I saw some related toys, etc.

In the long-run they are very unlikely to have lost money but that doesn&#039;t necessarily make the claim completely untrue - it could have lost money &lt;em&gt;right now&lt;/em&gt;.

Hollywood accounting is incredible - in almost any other business it&#039;s actually called fraud but in Hollywood it&#039;s fine.


Oh, and don&#039;t forget to consider the validity of your sources

&lt;em&gt;&lt;b&gt;DreamWorks reported&lt;/b&gt; a $25-million loss&lt;/em&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I know this is an old post but I can&#8217;t resist&#8230;</p>
<p>You&#8217;re right, but don&#8217;t be so surprised.  I can &#8220;prove&#8221; a loss on the back of a bar napkin.</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s assume the BO gross is roughly correct (a big assumption seeing as it doesn&#8217;t hurt the studios to inflate the BO grosses as they are often used as marketing ploys)</p>
<p>$56m &#8211; Gross<br />
Less taxes and theatres&#8217; cut (can be between 40% &#8211; 60%)</p>
<p>Left with $25m<br />
Less Distrubtor&#8217;s cut (can vary but lets asume 20%)</p>
<p>Left with $20m<br />
Less marketing costs (not cheap and typically at least the original cost of the movie)</p>
<p>Left with -$10m</p>
<p>Also to be taken from any profit made will be Sales Agent&#8217;s cut (if applicable), studio overhead (if not part of the $30m), etc, etc.</p>
<p>BUT!</p>
<p>You wisely brought up DVD sales.  This is likely to be where the studio re-couped.  Also, I&#8217;m sure I saw some related toys, etc.</p>
<p>In the long-run they are very unlikely to have lost money but that doesn&#8217;t necessarily make the claim completely untrue &#8211; it could have lost money <em>right now</em>.</p>
<p>Hollywood accounting is incredible &#8211; in almost any other business it&#8217;s actually called fraud but in Hollywood it&#8217;s fine.</p>
<p>Oh, and don&#8217;t forget to consider the validity of your sources</p>
<p><em><b>DreamWorks reported</b> a $25-million loss</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kelson</title>
		<link>http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2007/01/31/ah-hollywood-accounting/#comment-17291</link>
		<dc:creator>Kelson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Feb 2007 18:22:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2007/01/31/ah-hollywood-accounting/#comment-17291</guid>
		<description>I thought about marketing, but... spending $50 million to market a $30 million movie?  That seems a bit excessive.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought about marketing, but&#8230; spending $50 million to market a $30 million movie?  That seems a bit excessive.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: West</title>
		<link>http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2007/01/31/ah-hollywood-accounting/#comment-17290</link>
		<dc:creator>West</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Feb 2007 17:19:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2007/01/31/ah-hollywood-accounting/#comment-17290</guid>
		<description>As I read the post, I forgot the title.  At one point, I was ready to ask what the hell was up with those numbers... then I did had a V-8 slap moment.

I don&#039;t know how much marketing costs, but I&#039;d be surprised if it &lt;i&gt;fully&lt;/i&gt; accounted for the discrepancy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As I read the post, I forgot the title.  At one point, I was ready to ask what the hell was up with those numbers&#8230; then I did had a V-8 slap moment.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t know how much marketing costs, but I&#8217;d be surprised if it <i>fully</i> accounted for the discrepancy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rialtus</title>
		<link>http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2007/01/31/ah-hollywood-accounting/#comment-17289</link>
		<dc:creator>Rialtus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Feb 2007 17:14:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2007/01/31/ah-hollywood-accounting/#comment-17289</guid>
		<description>Don&#039;t forget the marketing costs, since I&#039;m sure the studio didn&#039;t.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Don&#8217;t forget the marketing costs, since I&#8217;m sure the studio didn&#8217;t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stacy</title>
		<link>http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2007/01/31/ah-hollywood-accounting/#comment-17287</link>
		<dc:creator>Stacy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Feb 2007 16:28:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2007/01/31/ah-hollywood-accounting/#comment-17287</guid>
		<description>Disappointed with the results translates to &quot;Didn&#039;t beat Disney to a pulp.&quot; The numbers are simply a CYA measure that doesn&#039;t seem to pan out under scrutiny.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Disappointed with the results translates to &#8220;Didn&#8217;t beat Disney to a pulp.&#8221; The numbers are simply a CYA measure that doesn&#8217;t seem to pan out under scrutiny.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
