from what I have read it is said the average DVD sells about 2,000 - 6,000 copies. That is very low volume. Seems strange to me so much product is put in the marketplace by so many companies. Would make better sense to have a few companies making relatively less product. It is supply and demand when their is so musch junk out their it makes every product comparitively less valued. Also, if more $ was spent on less projects quality would go up and it would leave audiencee wanting more. Would also be much better for girls because they would do less scenes, and get paid more for each job. Lot of industry insiders on this board, hoping they could explain the rational for the current porn / especially gonzo business model.
i guess that's my point. If it was more of a consortium it would make a lot more $. For example, look at radio, bfore clear channel bought all those stations after deregulation their was a wild west type atmosphere in radio. With all the stations trying to copy each other to get each other's base. See this is what porn is like now, but if their was an oligopoly in porn the makers would have a lot of control over what is in the marketplace. Also their is not much synergy in porn. I.E. I have noticed many directors etc.. don't even have their own website then i will see their content on some random website, are original producers getting royalties on this? I guess the answer is start up costs are so low anyone can enter the field, but the point is if quality were igh across the board it would be much more dificult for new firms to enter b/c they would not be able to match the existing product.
As Hardware said, there's no chance for any regulations. Every day a new guy with a consumer cam wants a slice of the pie. I'm all for better production values and more safety like mandatory condoms. But it won't happen. Porn is about the quick buck, it's not about long term biz plans.
Your right, that is the current reality. But, for example, in retail it was always said the retailers would always be a primary local venture because in order to keep inventory etc... localities would be crucial. Well, Wal - Mart has proven by controlling the integration of retail they could take power. I am saying the porn industry is completely fragmented, Hustler is the closest thing to what I am talking about, although I don't enjoy their AV much. But if a company took over a bunch of smut shops (created a chain), and provided all the content products for the stores, that could be very succesfull, and also had a sizeable web presence that togethere would be a powerhouse.
modern radio sucks, but so does most of the porn that's produced today, and their are only a handful of studios that make non - porn feature films, many with independant subsidiaries, and who would argue the average non XXX "movie" is better than a normal studio film in comparitive quality
-Doyle
Edited by - DOYLE on 2/3/2006 11:23:37 PM
[Link]
Eric381 Deactivated User
What are you looking at? It 2452 Posts 3/05
Posted - Feb 4 2006 : 9:39AM
How much more do you want it to be? Regardless what parties are reaping the benefits of the industry's worth, it's still "up there" in terms of heavy hitting industries.
In another thread, you posted about "how the males likely get paid nothing for doing a Baker's Dozen" (B.Iron), but your crass assumptions didn't get you a reply...any wonders?
Walmart also pays their "performers" (ie-labor) $8/hour for mediocre, dead-end jobs. They also bully various markets around to get what they want in the retail business as a result of that power. Just one reason they're so "successful". Porn, AFAIC, is scrutinzed enough, and the integration of stores isn't going to happen, much less be welcome in various markets across the country (the US south, for instance). The consumers like variety in this market, so just making things 'same' & corporate-chained like Walmart isn't the answer, and that's known as well. Otherwise, all you'd have is 2 companies (Target & Walmart) fighting for the lion's share of the business, making the same redundant garbage. There wouldn't be genres that appeal to the masses, b/c in the end, only those 2 companies have the last word on what gets producted & put on their shelves. Much like what Walmart does (did?) to the music industry by taking original work from artists & watering it down less the profanity. Commercial integration, as you ask for it, would kill porn, because the companies then at the top would massacre it's production to appeal to EVERYONE, and not just the fans.
Hardware, bring on the Brittany Spears baby!! Hot me one mo' time!! Or better yet, a watered down version of Eninem! :)
Got examples, DOYLE? Of course, "studio" movies aren't shot with $10,000 camera & expensive lighting, high-priced full-time studios, and actor's making $1.2mil a film either (to my knowledge). The directors are many times on a number of sets with different talent, doing an array of sexual acts w/ various endings. This isn't a TV news station, ya know.
To create art or to go into a direction all others are not heading, you need someone behind you who is willing to finance it (flops included). That's a difficult thing when you have an audience that just wants to see specific things over and over again. Creating something special and getting people to notice it takes more time than to follow a working scheme and thousands of DVD's a year.
Maybe G.W.Bush could create governmental porn company but that could be boring.
And btw I can't imagine that radio sucks in the US more than here, where every station sounds like the other..
I guess I don't consider paying $40 a DVD at some shithole store in a run down part of the city with a cashere who looks like he is addicted to opiats a great situation for the customer. The web is so fragmented it is hard for many to finsd what they are looking for. Yes, the porn industry makes a lot of revenue but most of that heavy revenue is in cable sales, in which the cable company gets almost 80% of the sale, thus the studio makes very little of their own content. If the studio had a lot of power and could even set up their own network to distribute the porn, the consumer would be a lot beter off and pay more reasonable rates to enjoy XXXX. I know I am the new kid on the block, but I can't believe other people haven't been thainking the same thing, and no I don't thing the baker's dozen guys should get paid, Hillary Scott is prob the best bj any of those guys have gotten, as shown by their ridiculous exitement, manifested in the over the top deep throat scenes and their general uncoolness, i do watch , i have a vice for pretty girls cum glazed.
Let's bear in mind that the "2,000 to 6,000 copies" being sold is also low due to the rampant illegal copying being done with porn product.
And, I'm not just talking about consumers making copies of movies they're renting, either.
Illegal pirated copies of porn product, that even winds up being sold by legal distributors, is a HUGE problem! The bootleggers even press their own DVDs so that they look like genuine originals!
One of the ways the actual, true producers make money is by releasing and endless stream of new product based on the economic model of selling 1500+ units BEFORE the bootleggers skim-off the larger profits that 10,000 units being sold would generate (and, as a result, the higher quality product that could have been being made in the first place).
true about bootlegging i touched on that earlier, i think the answer to that is less product, b/c that would make it much easier to track the pirating. Also, bigger company could prosecute due to the availability of $$ for legal expenses.