I think we're all fooling ourselves if we think that piracy is some kind of new invention, that started with the internet and the mp3. It's been happening since long before the dual cassette deck of the 80's (mixed tape anyone?), and moved into movies with the advent of the VCR - which consequently, is the invention that more or less created the 'industry' of porn. It's been going on forever, and has been the plague of content producers since projectionists started cutting out single frames of their favorite blue movie starlets, so that by the end of the theatrical run, the sex scenes had all been cut out and the producer's had to supply a new reel to the theater. The internet has just made it easy, and it's made it anonymous, and no matter how much we bitch about it, it's never going to stop. The music industry almost shut down a few years ago, until they figured out a way to adjust their business strategy to this new market. Many record companies went out of business, and the one's that survived aren't making near the money they used to, but they are still making music because good music still sells. I think Hollywood deals with piracy to an even bigger extent, and it doesn't seem to even slow them down. Copies of "Dark Knight" hit the streets weeks before its theatrical run, and then went on to make a gazzillion dollars. Would it have made more? Honestly, I don't think so. I think half the people who downloaded it for free, or picked up some shitty DVD-R off a street vendor for $5 wasn't going to pay the money to see it anyway. Those people are the slice of our society that will take anything for nothing. The leeches, and the loser reality tv show wannabe's who we weren't getting anything from anyway. The other half who did it, are the hardcore fans who started rubbing one out the day they read on some fanzine that the movie went into production. And those people were first in line at the theater, and are the same one's who will end up buying it 3 times on DVD and then two more on Blu-Ray. So, they didn't lose a dime off those people. If your excuse for not being able to sell films anymore is because "So much is getting stolen that I can't make money anymore..." then you have to wonder where your fans went. Where's your 'other half' that can't wait to see your next 'thing'? The one's who have their order in on the day of release? If you don't have those people anymore, then something went wrong along the way, and maybe releasing 8 more look a like titles a month isn't the right strategy for your studio. Since I started, I've given a free DVD to everyone who simply reports seeing my content being used illegally, which created a network of watch dogs all over the world. When piracy is reported, I lawyer up and go after them. I'm lucky that I don't have to do it too often, but the cost of the free DVD's is well worth it in my book, and it tells my fans that their investment in my product is valuable to me, and I respect their loyalty. When it happens, I'm hurt and outraged, but it's never made me think of quitting. I make films for my 'other half', and just accept that every now and then I'm going to have to go toe to toe with the rest, and that's just part of working in entertainment. - Marie Madison Marie Madison 'The Franchise' Maddy G Productions www.mariesplayplace.com
licker, you owe me an apology. Calling me Gestapo is bottommost behaviour. And please read the whole thread before answering. 10GB was an arbitrary number. And I don't want this scenario to come true.
I'm not sure that I do. Where do you think the original Gestapo came from? A bunch of people had ideas like the one you wrote - that police should be allowed to invade and search your home at any time for no valid reason. It is not acceptable.10GB, 1GB, 1000GB makes no difference. What if I said you drove a car 100km last week so that proves you used it to rob a bank? There is no connection. I would not accept such a gross invasion of privacy even if it meant I could never watch a movie or play music again. Throw away our freedom in return for some trivial entertainment? Never.
What's wrong with 99cents per video for a non-tangible product? That's 99cents that would likely otherwise be zero cents. I would take many gambles and buy lots of unknown/unproven porn stuff at 99cents each. And I wouldn't be pissed off if it turned out to be crap, because it was only 99cents. Regarding Clips4Sale, people are willing to pay $1 per minute for unique one-of-a-kind niche porn that cannot be found anywhere else. I don't approve of some of their marketing practices, but what can you do, they have a monopoly. Their customer base is surely too small to support a mainstream-level porn company, but a one-man or one-woman or mom&pop operation can probably do OK. Edited by - ninja1 on 4/17/2009 1:44:57 PM
True, but that's not what I was saying. I was remarking that such a system exists to Quasar b/c he thought that something along the lines of iTunes would be a good idea for the future. A company could follow that model and establish a price per scene for their own content--directly from them. If a company like Zero Tolerance put out scene for, say, $3 apiece that were downloadable to a computer or portable device, it might work. That was the idea. The idea was not to use moviebox directly.
I realize that the porn industry must make money in order to survive... but at the same time if that is all the porn makers focus on, I do not feel bad at all if they fail. I want to see porn makers that want to make a good product first and foremost. And really, where are the artists in porn? Where are the great movie makers? What porn films are currently being made that will be remembered in the future like a Deep Throat? And my biggest complaint - I buy porn dvd's based solely on who is in it and have given up on finding porn with good stories or eroticism, and so I wonder why the vast majority of adult films stick to the formula of 5 girls, 5 similar scenes. Movies like G is for Gianna, or Alexis Texas is Buttwoman should be made way more often than they are as it would be nice to see a favorite performer in multiple scenes doing different things. But no, my guess is that the porn industry is heavily into price fixing performers pay rate, and it is cheaper for them to stick to the formula that is slowly eroding the industry into something like a fast food industry that is just bland and boring.
Any business focuses first and foremost on making as much profit as is possible. That is the reason the business exists. Most successful business also recognize that giving people the best value for their money is the surest way to guarantee those profits. Piracy takes this basic free market principle out of the equation because the quality of the product actually increases the likelihood that it will be stolen.
[Link]
Clam Digger Deactivated User
Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good. 2268 Posts 1/05
Posted - Apr 17 2009 : 3:43PM
What's wrong with $.99 if you get 50K to 100K of downloads? Your token system doesn't seem to be much different then the old fashion video peep show emporium. In my youth I would easily drop $10 or $20 at a time in those places.
Some may argue that a business exists solely to provide goods or services, and that the better those goods and services are the more profitable the business becomes. Edited by - bouges on 4/17/2009 4:00:58 PM
Is that the focus of every artist, though? Are adult film makers artists first or are they businessmen first? The answer to this question could be quite telling about the state of quality in the industry. (And this question has nothing to do with piracy)
[Link]
Clam Digger Deactivated User
Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good. 2268 Posts 1/05
Posted - Apr 17 2009 : 5:18PM
for most adult porn makers art has nothing to do with anything.
Deep Throat is first and foremost remembered for being the first adult feature hitting the mainstream theatres.The problem is that not many girls have the starpower to move enough units of a single girl production. The traditional Gonzo formula gives girls constant work. I'm curious how pay-per-view changes the industry. I'm a DVD guy and know nothing about Brazzers etc. Do they have the same variety of girls as the DVDs? Or do they focus on the DVD-covergirls?
I hope you're asking the same question(s) of the stolen content pirates (if you really have to). Their ONLY motive is to make money from the efforts and investment of others BTW, take a look at the production values of Zero Tolerance and 3rd Degree product, and watch Quasarman in one of his behind-the-scenes segments, and tell me that this isn't an artist who cares about his product. Still unconvinced? Dig out one of Extreme Associates Cock Smokers series movies, particularly the later volumes, and tell me if you don't see a difference? If you can't and/or don't care, maybe that's why porn is having such a tough time. FYI, I just got my Free Speech Coalition e-mail newsletter today, wherein we find out that Hungarian porn shoots have fallen from 300/per year to 100/per year. It's a tough time to be working in and/or producing porn for a living. I just hope that the guys like Quasarman, Jules and Stagliano are the ones left standing once the economy comes back!
No...you simply interpreted my words that way. The question was posed as a counter-question to the position that was stated. Its intent was to probe and find out to which side of the spectrum adult film-makers--in general--fall and to what extent. Clearly, there is a middle-ground--a middle-ground that I really didn't find in the original post which brought about my question. edit: changed a "which" to a "what"
Marie, I think you simplify the history of piracy too much. Digitalisation and the internet put the problem to a whole new level. You can't compare the mixed tape with a mp3 torrent. I don't know about the USA. But in Germany we have a fee on every sold blank tape or CD. The GEMA (Society for musical performing and mechanical reproduction rights) gets this money. In return up to seven private copies for your friends are considered fair use. These laws were established in the late 70s. But if you upload a file it results in infinite copies. One possible way to adapt the copyright laws to the new problems is the culture flat rate. A fee on every broadband access. The money would go to the entertainment industry to compensate for the filesharing. But I doubt the porn industry would be part of such a flat rate.Sorry, but that's nonsense. The biggest part of the potential audience is lying inbetween. They wouldn't buy an expensive limited special edition of the film but they would buy a ten dollar DVD. Since they downloaded it they've stolen these ten dollar from the film industry.
I noted in my post that I wasn't referencing piracy in any way, shape, or form. There is more than one issue at play in this conversation, and I was isolating one of those issues--and intentionally leaving one out, so that the message was more clear. As has been my position throughout this thread, I have no use for pirates of content, and their trade has little to do with art other than stealing it. But...this was not my point.I don't recall saying that Quasar wasn't an artist. And--in fact, I like the Zero Tolerance DVDs that I have in my collection. I was simply commenting on something that Quasar said and asking about it in a general context. The phrasing "Still unconvinced?" implies that I was saying things that I wasn't and only serves to obfuscate what I was asking--which was a legitimate question based on a direct quote.Of course there would be a difference between the work of two different directors. Where did I bring up Rob Black's company, and how does that relate to what I wrote? Your response to my question takes it out of context and makes it appear as though it were an attack on Quasar's work when it wasn't. If anything, it was meant to be thought-provoking about a statement that I found to be a bit too far in the other direction. No ill intent was meant toward Quasar personally. Edited by - fu_q on 4/17/2009 8:19:00 PM
Who decides who gets the money? This does not guarantee in any way that those who are downloaded the most or listened to/watched the most get the money. Sounds completely unfair to me.
Damn, everybody has an opinion about this. I think the porn industry has matured. Film, then video, then the internet changed everything. Supply has matched demand. The pay, maybe, isn't what it used to be. I can assume that the purpose of porn is to arouse the viewer and help the viewer "get off". I guess... after watching a thousand movies... you have to ask yourself, "What more do you want?" The human spirit always wants more. :)
I agree about the lack of creativity being a big problem with today's porn. I saw this trailer for A L'AVENTURE and found myself wishing it could be a hardcore movie. It looks like there's more erotic heat in this movie than in any porn I've seen recently. What bothers me about the lack of creativity, though, is that not only do many people feel that porn is nothing more than tasteless, boring crap, they feel it shouldn't be anything more than tasteless, boring crap. More than once I've heard or read people who say "Why bother with a plot? We just wanna see people FUCK!" This is why so many porn stars, no matter how gorgeous or talented as actors they may be, have so much trouble breaking into mainstream movies and TV--because people figure since they've been porn stars, they can't be any good at anything else--or worse, they don't deserve to be good at anything else. I definitely wish Stormy every success in whatever she decides to do, whether it's porn or mainstream entertainment or whatever else. I wish the same success with any other porn star. In a perfect world porn stars would be able to cross back and forth from explicit movies or TV to mainstream without any penalty or stigma. The same for mainstream stars--I'd love to see Pamela Anderson do a movie for Wicked, or any of the stars listed in the "Girls You Wished Did Porn" thread. I also wish that Stormy would stay in porn. I won't give up on it if you won't, Stormy. ________________________________________________________
"There can never be too many beautiful women Hypnotized for our pleasure."
juha, there is a Nazi living on every street in every city in the world. There is one living on your street and there is, I am sure, one living on my street. I don't mean "followers of Hitler". I mean sociopaths who believe that they should rule over us with brutal gangster tactics. The whole civil liberties movement has evolved to protect us from these people who are always among us. When you advocate a stupid policy like the one you posted in this thread, you play right into their hands. People saying stupid things like that are the reason that such regimes come to power. It always starts with something small and apparently harmless. Concentration camps take a little longer. A journey of a thousand kilometres begins with one step. I explained to you a good reason not to step in that direction. You made a direct threat against my civil rights. I called it for exactly what it was. I do not apologize for that, and I will not.
[Link]
Zaer Deactivated User
249 Posts 10/07
Posted - Apr 18 2009 : 12:01AM
This is the only logical way this situation can be dealt with. Because you're not going to stop people from downloading content that they want by calling them thiefs, pirates, etc..The only reasonable way to deal with the situation is to adapt to the new reality that the internet has created and give the people what they want when they want it. That means on the day of a given DVD movies release it's available for download online for a lower price than a physical dvd would be. Furthermore, the movie should be divided so consumers can download the scenes they want for a fee. And what would be considered a fair price for the complete movie and individual scenes is to be decided by the market. Now your profit margins will likely be lower, but they're already dropping and if you continue to deliberately refuse to give consumers what they want then your profit margins will evaporate anyway. So there are really only two options at this point: Either adapt to the new technology and work with your customers (both actual and potential) or refuse to adapt and continue to watch your profit margins disappear.
@licker: if you want to say people are "sociopaths who believe that they should rule over us with brutal gangster tactics", then say that (or some shorter equivalent). Don't say or imply that they are, or have been at some point, members of the National Socialist Party. juha's right in saying that it trivializes what went on in the time before and during WWII in Germany and throughout much of Europe. And he likely knows that much better than you, because depending on his age, he either lived through the horrors of the Nazis, or his parents (or at most his grand-parents) did.
One does not trivialize something by opposing a resurgence of it.Members of my family were killed by the Nazis. Other members of my family had their homes destroyed. Tyranny is a real danger to real people - not something made from special effects in a movie studio. juha suggested he wanted us to live in a police state, for a trivial and useless reason. "Gestapo" is an accurate and descriptive word for such circumstances. Perhaps he did not mean it, but I found it extremely offensive. I know exactly what I said. I do not resile from it. My post that he complained about was relevant and on-topic. This subsequent discussion is not. As far as I am concerned, the subject is closed.
"Survive the droughts, I wish you well"........ Jay Z, American Dreamin 56 Posts 2/09
Posted - Apr 18 2009 : 12:27PM
I did take a look at several Zero Tolerance products and also the Cock Suckers series. While I do see some subtle difference between these products and your typical amateur scenes, I just dont see enough distinction to attract the consumer that the industry has lost. What I saw were sex scenes. They were were professionally made, some of the peformances were better, some were not so good. I just didnt see much that the couple down the street couldnt do. I saw a collection scenes, I didnt see a movie. What makes a movie worth while is the slice of life that it offers. That slice takes us out of own lives and gives us the chance to live vicariously through the experiences of others. You learn from those experiences. Movies like Deep throat, Behind the Green Door, and Pirates, aid in that process. These films take sex,put it within the context of life, and offer the consumer a chance to live the life of another, without hiding the sex(mainstream films). A full life is full of excitement, disappointment, love, sex, comedy, pain, joy, and many other experiences. For a slice of life to be worth 40 bucks to me, when I have hundreds of cable channels, satellite radio, and an infinite source of information available to me on the internet, it has to offer me a least 3 or 4 of these experiences. It cant just make me laugh. Eddie Murphys "Raw" and Chris Rock "Bigger and Blacker" make me laugh more than anything else I can think of, but neither, Murphy or Rock have released more than a couple few concerts during there entire careers. But they both have done many many features. There is limited market appetite for content that only appeals to one human experience. Digital Playground claims to have over 40% of the market share for dvd sales. I personally think thats a lie. But I do think they are the industry leader right now. I also think that they are leading the industry by showing the industry how to make movies that will people will want to buy in the information age. Pirates, made me laugh when Evan Stone wondered why Jules was able to keep the morale of his men so high as she was on a lower deck demonstrating how she kept that morale high by sucking a cock. It got my dick hard when Jesse Jane and Janine fucked. It made me think and laugh when Steven St Croix was reduced tears after his scene with Jesse jane. I related to the feeling of being in love as I watched Carmen Luvana and Kris Slater consumate their marriage during their honeymoon. It had plots, and sub plots and interesting characters. It was entertaining. So while I only rented the movie before, I'm going to buy it and Pirates 2 the next time I have some expendable monies. I could download both movies for free but then I'd have to figure out bit torents, then download it to dvd which I will have to go to store and buy, then figure out how to play it on my TV. Then I wont have the behind the scenes, or the cool case and I will probably have an inferior version of if. All this so that I can be able to pop a DVD in the player and enjoy the movie on a saturday afternoon, or when I have company, for the second, third, tenth, hundredth time. Much easier to just buy it. Moreover I want the company that entertained me to to benifit from having done so. I could have downloaded any of the dvds I have paid for over the years but I didnt want to cheat the producer/artist. I didnt feel cheated by them.
^ You've made your case for why YOU prefer feature porn. Someone else will make another case for why they prefer gonzo (and will fault feature porn for killing the industry). If anything, it is the variety of porn available that helps the industry more than any other single factor. The basic business reality is that, porn does not move enough units of individual titles to be able to absorb the effects of piracy (particularly today's technology-empowered piracy enabled by the Internet) on the business bottom line. Porn needs to come up with business models that can consistently make a return on investment in today's business environment -- which includes piracy on a massive scale previously not possible (or conceived of).
[Link]
Zaer Deactivated User
249 Posts 10/07
Posted - Apr 18 2009 : 2:18PM
It should come up with a new business model, but the industry like most content producing industries doesn't want to adapt to the new reality of the internet and make their movies available online for download for a fee on the day of their official release. They would rather continue making their content only available via DVD's and then complain when it ends up online for download. Not understanding that they could make money by simply giving the consumers what they want. Edited by - Zaer on 4/18/2009 2:21:07 PM
"Survive the droughts, I wish you well"........ Jay Z, American Dreamin 56 Posts 2/09
Posted - Apr 18 2009 : 2:56PM
The question I have is why isnt the industry selling more units. The fact that the largest selling films of the industrys history were features seems to suggest to me that that is the direction we probably should go in if we want to appeal to more of the mainstream. Now before you respond that gonzo is selling more now, realize that what Im talking about is expanding the total universe of porn consumers. Seems to me that the way to make the industry less vulnerable to piracy is to make more people want to buy our content. Seems to me that the films that have done that, and come close to doing that, were features. Moreover there seems to be a misconception here. People are blaming piracy for the decline in sales when amateur porn is at least as prominent a part of problem. As Ive said in other post, there's something wrong when amateurs can come along and steal significant market share from a mature industry.
I still think VideoBox and others like them have the right model to help revitalize the industry. Of course, they only currently offer "has-been" porn from the bargain bin currently. But take their engine (multiple digital formats, great User Interface, entire DVD's available by-the-scene, digitally 'edit-your-own' clip feature, fixed rate monthly pricing, etc) and apply it to CURRENT RELEASE porn and I'd buy it. I don't need mountains of DVD's any more. The DVD player is now obsolete in my house. Digital media is hitting mainstream as are digital media players. Take THAT model, couple it with current release/available-same-day-as-DVD, convert the middle-men into content converters and classification agents and you've got an industry that will finally catch back up with the times. Stay with the "this always worked before!" model and good riddance. Someone else will figure out a way to steal the industry away from the old fogies who won't adapt. Currently, that is the pirates. But if you meet the consumer at a different inflection vector, I think even the pirates won't matter as much. They matter now because porn has allowed itself to become commoditized rather than specialized.
People are watching more porn than ever -- they just aren't PAYING for it! The Internet has democratized evil. For an ever increasing number of people, if they can get it for free from the Internet, they are not going to pay for it (no matter what you do). BTW, I'm curious... Just who are the "amateurs," and please put a number to "steal significant market share from a mature industry."
[Link]
Clam Digger Deactivated User
Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good. 2268 Posts 1/05
Posted - Apr 18 2009 : 3:57PM
I think a thread about the porn industry lapsing into the discussion of art while at the same time talking of "units moved" or "profits", strikes me as a bit absurd. I think that someone can be creative when producing porn, but I hardly think that rises to the level of art. I don't think Rembrandt, for example, concerned himself with the number of units he was moving a month. The fact is porn has pretty much become a commodity that has far exceeded its demand. When that happens the price plummets. Its sounds like Jim Gunn is learning to adapt, and others, no matter how good their product is are not.
"Survive the droughts, I wish you well"........ Jay Z, American Dreamin 56 Posts 2/09
Posted - Apr 18 2009 : 4:42PM
I can do that but I want to clarify first of all. You are not certain that amateur porn is affecting dvd sales? Edited by - simmond on 4/18/2009 4:52:59 PM
DP never claimed that, they claim they have that for Bluray sales, which is well possible, since they have more titles available on Bluray than any other adult company. Jacco
Selling the most DVD's nowadays now means about as much as selling the most cd's does with iTunes around. It just demonstrates the industry still doesn't want to adapt to the new reality and give the consumers what they want. Edited by - Zaer on 4/18/2009 8:33:42 PM
In the first passage you talk about "fair price" and "market". In the second passage you tell the producers to give it away for cheap or it will be downloaded for free. This doesn't make any sense. The market has to decide the fair price. That's correct. But the market only works if the potential consumer has to decide if he wants to buy the product or if he wants to go without it. If he has the third option to download it for free the market can't work correctly anymore. Edited by - juha on 4/18/2009 8:36:36 PM
Man I'm pissed I went to a friend pad and another guy was watching Wolverine on his laptop. I was like don't show me that I want to see it on the big screen. But that's not what made me mad, what made me mad was that if people see movies for free their not going to make a Wolverine 2 or more X-men what's the point no ones going to put up the money for the artiest to make movies if they are not going to get good profit in return they will invest in something else that can not be pirated on the net. Porn companies should not put out movies on pay sites to download when their movies come out right away. It's to easy for people to buy it once and then link it or upload what they buy in a heartbeat. You won't get more sales just more thieves robbing you shit in your own home, which you now unlocked for them. The economy hurting porn or that porn sucks did nothing to the industry it was the internet. Porn companies would have survived that! It's the straight out cold steeling form one mans pocket via file sharing. Yea porn will survive what the consumer wants free shit and all that will be left is watching some guy jacking himself off from his point of view. That's all the art that's going to be left because that all anyone could afford to make for free. Sad times ahead we just don't want to see it. say good buy to hot girls! Sad times
[Link]
Zaer Deactivated User
249 Posts 10/07
Posted - Apr 18 2009 : 10:12PM
Well I didn't say the producers should give their content away for cheap I stated they should sell the movies online for a lower price. And the term "cheap" is highly subjective, a lower price on the other hand could represent a price that is a penny less than the original price. And it was suggested that they should sell their content for a lower price and make it available online on the day of a movies release primarily because their content is going to end up on the internet eventually anyway, so they might as well have a modicum of control over when it is released. And the market can work correctly, but there's a lot of inertia among content producers to changing their behavior to fit the new reality. Many would rather still sell DVD's and then complain when that content ends up online for download, rather than putting their content online on the day of a movies release available for download for a fee.
^ What good is modicum control of something that is going to be stolen right from you wallet? If its going to end up on the internet eventually why put money in making a product that you know is going to be stolen? That's crazy talk! What's the point of giving a lower cost if you can't beat free you can never go low enough. It's stolen then then given away. The person that gets it from a friend feels like he's not steeling it because his buddy gave it to him, even though it taking food out of someone's mouth. Na who would want to put up the money and time for a movie, if you can't make a paycheck for your work. Better to just hire a hooker and film her for your own private art. That way you can get to fuck the girl that you put the money up for instead of hiring some other talent guy that will be stolen over and over and over and over again [mod edit: removed quote] Edited by - killbillvol69 on 4/19/2009 1:19:57 AM
Wow, I totally agree. I review porn and as a female reviewer, I am very tuned in to the male performers. Most are not very good. I think the best guy out there is Derrick Pierce and I even helped make a website for him because he has precisely the kind of fire and life (plus handsome sexy looks) that bring him a lot of female fans. And yes, if the studios would put more effort into finding handsome, sexy, interesting male talent women consumers would flock to porn (or "adult" or whatever word you want to use). This is a very frustrating topic because I'm constantly told that most guys aren't capable of doing the job, thus the same batch of guys are used over and over. I think this is b.s. - the companies don't want to bother really seeking out hot guys. They'd rather recycle the same guys again and again because they're told "no one cares about the guys - they're lookin at the girls". Well, US GIRLS are lookin at the GUYS. Straight chicks are kinda tired of watching girl/girl scenes constantly just to get turned on. Anyway, that's my rant for what it's worth....
If porn were made to depict the way 95% of the male porn viewing audience would react in the presence of a naked hot woman, you'd be left with female masturbation vids only.
You're basically talking about a handful of heavily hyped movies. If you look at the sales charts on any given month there are much more often than not many more "gonzo" movies in the top 20 than features. I'm looking at the TOP 100 OVERALL sales chart right now and there's only 3 features in the top 20. The rest of the 20 is made up of DIGITAL PLAYGROUND, EVIL ANGEL, ELEGANT ANGEL and JULES JORDAN movies. The #1 movie is the VIVID release with that woman who appeared on the soap opera. I'd imagine the reason for the strong sales of that movie is the curiosity/hype factor of having a "mainstream" actress in a porn movie. Despite the fact that VIVID mostly puts out features they only have two more movies in the top 50 and one of them is a Jenna Jameson movie. Features in general aren't the biggest sellers. They may generate more money because the companies that make them have an easier time selling them to cable outlets and that's where the bulk of the profit is made for the companies that produce them. But typically the higher end "gonzo" companies dominate the charts. The heavily hyped big budget features do well but just doing a feature doesn't mean you'll have a big or strong seller. If you're talking about features selling better years ago...of course they did because there weren't as many options back then. Plus the gonzo stuff at one time was seen as "low grade" porn.
[Link]
Zaer Deactivated User
249 Posts 10/07
Posted - Apr 19 2009 : 3:50PM
Well it's either the content producers have a modicum of control over their content and make money off their content or have no real control at all and continue to lose profit. Furthermore all digitizable content ends up on the internet eventually anyway, that's not what matters, it's simply a known fact. What matters is whether or not a content producer can make money off the content that they know is going to end up on the internet eventually anyway. And the facts indicate that they can. And contrary to what some believe, you can actually beat free, namely by giving people more convenient and faster access to content than they would get through free means. And it can be done it's just a matter of thinking about the problem and figuring out the best way to do it. And they can make money off their movies they just have to be willing to give the consumers what they want.
