Archive for the ‘distribution’ Category

Shop Talk Podcast #15 – Scilla Andreen on the changing indie film business

Wednesday, October 8th, 2008

The latest podcast features a discussion with Scilla Andreen, co-founder and CEO of Indieflix, about the current state and future prospects of the independent film business.

Here’s Scilla’s official bio:

Scilla Andreen (Filmmaker, CEO & Co-Founder IndieFlix) producer, director and Emmy nominated costume designer Scilla has deep roots in the entertainment industry and is a popular speaker and tireless champion of independent film. Scilla along with producing partner Carlo Scandiuzzi created IndieFlix, an independent film distribution and discovery site founded on the principles of community, promotion, syndication and transparency. They also created indie-fest.com and are launching the Filmmaker First Initiative. IndieFlix believes Independent films can and will be profitable. You can find IndieFlix on the web at http://www.indieflix.com.

It was a great chat. You can download it here.

Highlights:

(00:50) About the US indie market

(02:20) Options to get indie films to their audiences

(06:20) Where does a filmmaker’s advance go?

(09:13) What Indieflix does

(12:03) The many ways people access films and videos today

(13:00) About the “Bridge to Everywhere”

(15:35) What is a “hit” film for Indieflix?

(19:08) Promoting the filmmaker and the story behind the film

(19:33) Making meaningful recommendations for films members might like

(21:06) “If your film is worth stealing, it must be worth something”

(22:39) Looking ahead: the future of filmmaking and film distribution

(Theme music: “Nova” by Nomo, from its album Ghost Rock)

Scilla mentioned the challenge that exists for filmmakers to get clearances to use the music they choose for the film. Today’s Wall Street Journal had an interesting article about this very subject: the settlement of a lawsuit between Yoko Ono and a documentary filmmaker over the use of 15 seconds of “Imagine.”

Tags:
, , , , , ,

Posted in content, distribution, entrepreneurism, filesharing, film, movies, podcast | Comments

Taste trumps distribution (finally) in the beer market

Wednesday, February 6th, 2008

Distribution prowess has ruled the US beer market at least since the ’70’s. (I recall a Harvard case talking about the downfall of Schlitz, focusing on Anheuser-Busch’s building a nationwide distribution network.) As a result, most consumers have had to scan shelf after shelf of Bud Light and Michelob Ultra to find a good-tasting, fuller beer.

How things have changed. The craft beer movement, starting with Sierra Nevada in the ’70s and blossoming with Samuel Adams in the ’80s, is now a full-fledged market trend. People are buying Sea Dog, Cape Cod Beer, Yuengling, Brooklyn Lager, and hundreds of other small brands. Anheuser’s market share is down, despite deals to distribute Stella Artois and Beck’s.

And now, finally, the distribution monopoly that helped Anheuser crowd out rivals in the past is crumbling. In today’s Wall Street Journal, David Kesmodel reports that distributors who had signed exclusivity agreements with A-B in exchange for promotional and cash incentives are beginning to turn away from those agreements (”Beer Distributors Want More Than One Best Bud” link – $$). Writes Kesmodel:

In recent years, some of Anheuser’s 560 independent distributors became frustrated as craft brands such as New Belgium Brewing Co.’s Fat Tire Amber Ale surged in popularity and competing distributors snatched them up. Often, the distributors adding such high-margin brews were the same ones that peddled the beers of Anheuser’s top rivals, SABMiller PLC’s Miller Brewing and Molson Coors Brewing Co.

Anheuser wholesalers “are realizing that we have made the competition stronger by basically forfeiting these brands to them,” says Chris Monroe, vice president of D. Canale Beverages Inc., a Memphis, Tenn., distributor that carried only Anheuser products until last fall.

It’s a total reversal of where we’ve been. For years, large beer companies have relied on investment in non-product-related marketing, such as advertising and distribution, for sales growth–traditional “push” marketing techniques. Now, customer demands for better tasting, more-distinctive product are forcing distributors to carry what customers want.

Sounds like progress to me.

(Photo courtesy of Cape Cod Beer)

, , , ,

Posted in Wall Street Journal, advertising, beer, distribution, marketing | Comments

Mistake Bank #12 – Don’t forget about support!

Thursday, November 15th, 2007

What follows is a sample of a project I’ve been working on called the Mistake Bank. It combines narrative, learning from mistakes, video and web2.0 in an environment that companies can use to train new employees, create a corporate history, connect workers and mentors, and bring more humanity to the workplace. Email me at inquiry@caddellinsightgroup.com if you would like to know more about the Mistake Bank.

When John Caddell began his first job as a product manager, he inherited a new product that was being sold by a large partner. And once the first sale happened, he learned that having a support strategy is not optional.

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted in alliances, distribution, information technology, international, learning, marketing, mistakes, narrative, product management, software, technical support, web2.0 | Comments

Perhaps advertising isn’t the money pit people thought it was

Friday, July 20th, 2007

The July-August Harvard Business Review contains a provocative article from Prof. Leonard Lodish of the Wharton School of Business and Carl Mela of Duke University on the decline of product brands (”If Brands Are Built Over Years, Why Are They Managed Over Quarters?“).

We’ve looked at the phenomenon before from the private-label goods perspective, Lodish and Mela approach the problem from a different angle: rather than blaming Wal-Mart and other retailers for squeezing the value out of branded products by their price-cutting philosophy and private-label strategies, they fault the brand managers themselves, who favor price promotion strategies—-which bring a rapid response from customers—-over brand-building activities, such as advertising, which only work over the long term.

By examining data on baseline sales (i.e., sales levels without promotions), and performance during promotions periods, they document persuasively how certain brands fall into a spiral of commoditization by relying on discounted sales for an increasing percentage of their sales volume. Customers learn to stock up when the product is on special, and their perceived value of the product declines accordingly. Brand equity is eroded.

[Why do brand managers prefer promotions? Lodish's and Mela's reason, perhaps good fodder for another post, is that purchase data is useful immediately, while brand equity information is less tangible and takes years to identify trends.]

By contrast, companies who hold firm on price and invest in long-term brand-building activities, such as advertising, development of new distribution channels, and product innovation (exhibit A: P&G), show higher baseline sales levels and therefore more unit profit per sale.

Think it can’t be done? Clorox bleach (a product ripe for commoditization if I’ve ever seen one) was able to raise retail prices 30% and turn a trend of revenue decline into growth by cutting promotions budgets and increasing advertising.

So, television networks, radio stations, newspapers: take heart. Perhaps marketers will fall in love with advertising all over again.

Posted in Harvard Business Review, advertising, brands, distribution, innovation, marketing, pricing, promotion | Comments