Business Models: Twilight Time vs. Other Boutique Labels

[Gregory]

There is a middle ground, though: films about which extremely little of value has been published could have a few valuable extras on their Olive releases, but Olive apparently has very little interest in that, and people will strenuously defend them anyway just on the strength of the depth of catalog titles they're making available (which is their main selling point).
My point was just that one can't always say, "If I want extras, I'll read [go-to source]" because often there's precious little of value in print, and extras would be really valuable to include. Knives's example of Criterion and Daves is totally on the money there.

[vsski]

There is a middle ground, though: films about which extremely little of value has been published could have a few valuable extras on their Olive releases, but Olive apparently has very little interest in that, and people will strenuously defend them anyway just on the strength of the depth of catalog titles they're making available (which is their main selling point).

I don't believe that Olive has no interest in publishing extras, I think this is primarily a cost driven decision. Extras either cost money to create from scratch or cost money to license if already created, and given the type of films Olive publishes, I don't think they are selling like hotcakes. While I have no insight into their business model, it always seemed to me they spend a lot of money on the licenses and are now trying like mad to release them all to make their money back and then some. While they seem not to have made the TT type agreement of paying for everything upfront, I find it hard to believe that many of their titles make a lot of money either.

[domino harvey]

Olive has produced extras-- the Boogens has a commentary track that to the best of my knowledge wasn't ported over from another edition

[HJackson]

There is a middle ground, though: films about which extremely little of value has been published could have a few valuable extras on their Olive releases, but Olive apparently has very little interest in that, and people will strenuously defend them anyway just on the strength of the depth of catalog titles they're making available (which is their main selling point).
My point was just that one can't always say, "If I want extras, I'll read [go-to source]" because often there's precious little of value in print, and extras would be really valuable to include. Knives's example of Criterion and Daves is totally on the money there.

Ultimately though, to go further than I did in my first intervention here, how valuable can these few extras you suggest really be? Are blu-rays really the most efficient way to present this extra-textual information? No edition of a film, no matter how many audio commentaries, video interviews, or essays in a booklet, has ever enhanced my appreciation for a film as much as, say, owning the Clark edition of Burke's Reflections has deepened my understanding of that text.

I find my appreciation of How Green Was My Valley, for example, enhanced much more by reading an in-depth study of Ford than by listening to McBride talk over the film for two hours. If Olive got their hands on a load of titles by a really under-estimated master like Mitchell Leisen, about whom a great deal has not (to my knowledge) been written, what is truly the best course of action: throw half of the titles on the shelf so they can commission a few essays for Midnight and Easy Living, or release the whole load bare-bones, in admirable quality, and get them out there to the wider film community where a whole lot more interest (and hopefully rich, genuinely transformative scholarship) can be generated?

The only time Olive has really been at fault is the Gallagher/Ophuls situation. I simply cannot see the logic in refusing it at all. But generally, I find it hard to disagree with their emphasis on volume over bells and whistles. In most cases I can find rewarding information elsewhere. In cases where I can't I don't fully understand how genuinely substantial material will materialise, and if it somehow does I wonder what this costs us in overall output.

[Gregory]

Well, in response to a couple comments above, I don't believe anyone suggested that Olive has no interest in extras or has never produced any. To anyone following what Olive has been doing, the Boogens commentary is pretty obviously an exception to their usual practice.

How much any extras would be valued depends entirely on who's involved and the interests of the particular viewer. If it's a question of holding things back vs. releasing them bare-bones, I'd lean toward the latter, but I'm not sure it's always such a simple calculation. Sometimes it's more a matter of will.

[Moe Dickstein]

Extras for me tip the balance when deciding between a couple different titles. All things being equal, I'll take the one with the commentary because that's important to me. If I just want the movie, then there's streaming. Owning the package is all the other things that come with it - extras, artwork, booklet essays etc.

Olive's business is not as sound as it may appear, if anyone is familiar with how Ponzi schemes work, the volume of material they release where new titles are released in quick succession to cover the returned copies that didnt sell from the previous releases. Notice that BN is not carrying the Olive titles to the degree they did (and I believe there was a big product return not long ago). This is where the Olive model is unstable where the TT model is viable.

[matrixschmatrix]

Do you actually have any evidence for the Ponzi scheme thing, or are you just spitballing that? Barnes and Noble is carrying less of pretty much everything these days, and they have slightly more Olive product that they did last year at my local one (which is to say, they added The Quiet Man to High Noon and Invasion of the Body Snatchers.)

Also, it's only a Ponzi scheme if you keep increasing whatever worthless thing it is exponentially- just putting things out at a high but steady rate isn't at all the same.

[Moe Dickstein]

It comes from knowledge of how the retail sales models work and discussions with people who work in that area.

It's not precisely the same thing, but new product must be released at a high rate in order to be "credit" for returned shipments of older product that didn't sell. That is the key reason that Olive releases so much so fast.

[zedz]

Can we all agree that their slipcovers are ridiculous?

Okay! Now let's burn down their offices!

(Seriously, is that what your beef with the company boils down to?)

[domino harvey]

Olive's business is not as sound as it may appear, if anyone is familiar with how Ponzi schemes work, the volume of material they release where new titles are released in quick succession to cover the returned copies that didnt sell from the previous releases. Notice that BN is not carrying the Olive titles to the degree they did (and I believe there was a big product return not long ago). This is where the Olive model is unstable where the TT model is viable.

Given your constant barrage of Sony boostering, claim of insider knowledge, and now this potentially libelous accusation based on a failed slashing of Occam's Razor, what is your function on this forum, exactly? Do you even watch films? Can you talk about them in some degree of depth instead of things like this?

[mfunk9786]

Hey, this guy can talk about buying films and coupons and stuff in depth. Back off, his insights into whether or not his 20% off coupon worked are invaluable to this place

[Moe Dickstein]

I think it's kind of a silly question to ask if I watch films. I get your point, but your real question is why do I come here and not talk about my thoughts on films. The business behind, design aspects, and news and other aspects of Criterion as a company are what drew me to this forum for discussion, this is the Criterion forum unless I'm mistaken and not a merely a general cinephiles forum. The business and behind the scenes aspects of releasing films is of interest to me, reading what members like Nick Wrigley have to say etc. That's what interests me. I have to say this seems to be a place with a lot of hostility to opposing views and people who don't fall in line are mocked or teased. I'm sorry if I'm using it wrong but I do believe there are at least a few others interested in discussing these matters, and if I'm wrong I can certainly just go back to reading.

[repeat]

Wow. Could we please have a thread where every user has to briefly state their "function on this forum"?

[NABOB OF NOWHERE]

Wow. Could we please have a thread where every user has to briefly state their "function on this forum"?

Perhaps there should be a notation under 'location'?
At the moment I am torn between 'Intermittent sniping gadfly' and 'Gently undulating blob of impotence'

[gcgiles1dollarbin]

[Olive's business model is] not precisely the same thing [as a Ponzi scheme], but new product must be released at a high rate in order to be "credit" for returned shipments of older product that didn't sell. That is the key reason that Olive releases so much so fast.

Moe, that is nothing like a Ponzi scheme. Ponzi schemes involve deceit at the outset and a pernicious enticement of vulnerable, individual investors, as well as the disappearance of the perpetrator once the investor's money evaporates without any return. You are using a loaded term to discredit a company that will, in fact, always and admittedly be answerable to its volume of production. Come on, brudda, give us a break. Little old ladies are not losing their nest eggs as a result of this.

Do you have a horse in this race? Are you acquainted with the TT owners? Maybe I have overlooked an answer to these questions elsewhere; if so, I apologize. I'm only kindasorta challenging you; I actually think it's commendable that you're the most vigorous defender among folks who clearly dislike this company, even if I'm a little puzzled by your tenacity and warmth. I was just curious and thought I would ask.

I, for one, have no choice but to vote with my wallet. So it's not really an elective consumer action; I just can't afford something that offers so little in return. There's no way I can justify it with my income. But like you say, in three years' time, Leave Her to Heaven, a film I adore, will be available for a less "hobbyist" company to license. And in the meantime, there is more than I could ever hope to own from far better and more affordable labels.

I would think TT could look at this thread and observe ways in which they could improve their business, but they have always struck me as essentially deaf to complaints, ornery toward critics--they do it their way, and that's it. Their rapport with their customer base has yielded at least one potential slogan that Moe has recapitulated here:

"Twilight Time: No One Has a God-Given Right to Our Blu-Rays"

[MichaelB]

Do you have a horse in this race? Are you acquainted with the TT owners? Maybe I have overlooked an answer to these questions elsewhere; if so, I apologize. I'm only kindasorta challenging you; I actually think it's commendable that you're the most vigorous defender among folks who clearly dislike this company, even if I'm a little puzzled by your tenacity and warmth. I was just curious and thought I would ask.

It's a perfectly fair question. Round these parts there's a tradition that, if you're an industry insider or have the ear of a particular company, you admit to such connections and potential biases upfront - Peerpee, Bikey, myself and many others have always been completely open about our various industry links and the releases that we directly contributed to.

Conversely, people who claim to have "insider info" but who prefer to remain anonymous... well, there's nothing wrong with that in principle, unless they also start badmouthing other companies with what could be read as pretty serious accusations (although I suspect the 'Ponzi' claim was a badly-chosen expression rather than an actual accusation of attempted criminal fraud). You're more likely to be taken seriously if you sign your real name to such things - and of course more likely to be accurate, given the possibility that you might be called to account later.

[Moe Dickstein]

Do you have a horse in this race? Are you acquainted with the TT owners? Maybe I have overlooked an answer to these questions elsewhere; if so, I apologize. I'm only kindasorta challenging you; I actually think it's commendable that you're the most vigorous defender among folks who clearly dislike this company, even if I'm a little puzzled by your tenacity and warmth. I was just curious and thought I would ask.

It's a perfectly fair question. Round these parts there's a tradition that, if you're an industry insider or have the ear of a particular company, you admit to such connections and potential biases upfront - Peerpee, Bikey, myself and many others have always been completely open about our various industry links and the releases that we directly contributed to.

Conversely, people who claim to have "insider info" but who prefer to remain anonymous... well, there's nothing wrong with that in principle, unless they also start badmouthing other companies with what could be read as pretty serious accusations (although I suspect the 'Ponzi' claim was a badly-chosen expression rather than an actual accusation of attempted criminal fraud). You're more likely to be taken seriously if you sign your real name to such things - and of course more likely to be accurate, given the possibility that you might be called to account later.

Apologies for the poorly chosen metaphor. It was not meant to have any criminal connotations, but merely to indicate the aspect of new releases covering shortfalls of the old ones, but of course that is too hard to separate and I was in error.

I have no official connection with any company at the moment, but through my work in LA I've been acquainted with people at several studios and also the gentlemen who run TT. I've had the chance to sit down with them over a drink and ask many of the questions you all have expressed about their business model and I got answers that satisfied me about the things that bothered me personally. As I noted above I've only just purchased my first TT disc, so I'm hardly a fanboy, but I do think there is a place for what they do and things in here just seemed awfully one sided. I have stated that before that I know Nick, but perhaps not in this thread.

I didn't see the place to post your real name here, but I use the same user name on other forums where my real name is posted and I just put up a few links to films I've directed in the share your work thread which also have my real name. In my creative work I go by the name T R Wilkinson. If any of you have the 1776 DVD, you can find my name in the booklet if you have a magnifying glass xxx. With friends, I go by Ted.

I hope you'll all call me that.

[gcgiles1dollarbin]

Ted!

[Moe Dickstein]

Now is the time on Sprockets when we hug =)

[Taketori Washizu]

Anyway this all comes back to TT and their exorbitant prices. I do not have a problem buying a bare bones disc, but I'm not going to pay $30.00 for it. There is no justification for it. It's similar to the resurgence of vinyl in the last few years and record companies charging obscene prices for a lot of reissues. If TT can't lower their prices and make a profit/ stay afloat, then these "hobbyists" should get out of this particular business. They haven't earned the reputation yet of someone like the Criterion Collection to justify these prices. If they want to continue with these set prices, they better add a lot more to the discs then. If the studios holding onto these titles don't want to release them on their own via DVD/BLU/MOD, then have a streaming service as the last resort.

Bottom line TT/Olive Films have a lot of revamping to do if they want longevity.

[Moe Dickstein]

One thought to that, I believe every TT disc has included one extra - the isolated score.

Some have also included featurettes and commentaries when they were pre-existing, though not always, so I think it's fair to say that while a great number of the releases are bare bones aside from the score track, not all of them are.

The other thing to remember about the price point is that it's no different from any other companies prices in the sense of MSRP. The difference is that other companies have a wider range of people selling them and offering discounts. If we didn't have discounts on Criterion they'd mostly all be $40. Most new studio films have a pricepoint around $30 list, but we forget that because I doubt anyone actually pays that for them.

One of the arguments I've heard from a TT founder is that the studios basically destroyed the percieved value of Blu Ray by selling them cheaper than DVDs, rather than as a premium product. This can work if you know you're going to sell a million copies of a major release, but it destroys the ability of more minor titles to pay their own way in the market place. That is the reasoning behind their pricepoint - that is what it takes for them to make thse titles pay their own way.

As I've said before, if you don't feel the value is there for you then simply don't purchase that title.

[swo17]

Anyway this all comes back to TT and their exorbitant prices. I do not have a problem buying a bare bones disc, but I'm not going to pay $30.00 for it. There is no justification for it.

The economic justification is that you are paying for a product that only exists in limited quantities. You and many others may not feel that this is justification enough to give them your business, but they don't need wide appeal to sustain this business model, just a small niche of rabid collectors. I don't know if 3,000 units at $30 per unit is the "sweet spot" to match limited supply with the according demand, but it doesn't sound too far fetched to me. My bigger concern at this point is the fallout from their neglectful/potentially shady customer service.

[vsski]

If the studios holding onto these titles don't want to release them on their own via DVD/BLU/MOD, then have a streaming service as the last resort.

If I understand correctly what you are saying here, TT is not an option for you because it is too expensive for what it offers. Therefore if a Studio doesn't want to release a title instead of giving the title to a TT type outfit, offer a streaming service instead.

This is exactly what the studios love to hear and have been working on (some for over a decade now), trying to find the next big cash cow now that physical home media is shrinking and one of the reasons why several years ago the number of new BD releases started decreasing. The studios in the heyday of DVD had created a price point that was so low that only a large volume of sales enabled them to make money on many titles. When sales started to decline in parts because of the recession, suddenly the numbers didn't add up anymore. BD didn't fill the hole, so rather than continuing to dump product into the market place, studios decided to focus on blockbusters, MOD services and streaming.

TT came along and said we believe there is a market for catalog titles, but they have to be sold differently. We take all the upfront risk, let's see if it works. And for better or worse they chose the Soundtrack limited edition model to go about it (for all of the reasons described in this thread) and it turns out that the model appears to be somewhat successful.

While I can understand that due to price expectations set by studios as well as individuals' financial situations a $30 price point for a BD with little to no new extras will be too high, it is one way to continue producing physical product rather than having streaming as the only alternative - and yes we all would love to have Criterion and MoC and Arrow bring all of these releases to market, but that is not realistic.

So while I don't like the limited approach of TT and the secondary market it produces, I am happy to see physical product to be released and I do fully expect that as streaming gains more and more traction and physical sales continue to decline, consumers still wanting discs will have to pay more and more and it will become more of a collector's type market with or without limited editions.

I for one hope that discs will be around for a long time and if it means having to pay more for them, so be it (and yes it will mean I will buy less since money does matter), but at least the option still exists.

[knives]

One thought to that, I believe every TT disc has included one extra - the isolated score.

That's not an extra for everyone. Some film fans suffer from some degree of deafness.

[repeat]

My bigger concern at this point is the fallout from their neglectful/potentially shady customer service.

And their image in general - I mean I don't even know what or who "Screen Archives Entertainment" is, but I've been under the impression that TT are a subsidiary or side label of some huge business venture. They have more of my sympathies now that, thanks to this discussion, I know it's a sort of a shoestring operation (though I still think they should try to adjust their business model). It's a shame they can't find the time to post here to increase transparency and confidence (although they do communicate a bit through their Facebook page, but only with their fans - there's not much criticism going on there).

They do seem to have a lot of happy fans so I don't think the price point is a problem to them, only to the few of us who feel it's somewhat high for barebones discs... Not to sound like a steelbook collector, but personally I'd be less reluctant to pay that price if they would even have limited edition worthy packaging instead of the normal crummy BD cases. I don't know if this is facetious or not and I don't want to make too much of an issue of it, but to me their presentation just doesn't communicate that sort of care and dedication as, say, MoC's - if you're saying "you're paying this much because it's a limited edition", I should feel I'm getting something that looks like one.

I don't know, someone brought up the resurgence of vinyls upthread, and part of that phenomenon is exactly their physical desirability as opposed to the disposable coasters that are CD's. With the continuing decline of physical media sales in the face of downloading most independent record companies have paid serious attention to the design aspect. I'm opposed to downloading for various reasons but if I put myself in the shoes of someone who wasn't, I'd have to ask myself what incentive would there be to burn 30-40 dollars on TT product instead of getting another Criterion or three MoC's.