|
|
Subject:
What percentage of the cost of a movie is normaly used for publicity?
Category: Arts and Entertainment > Movies and Film Asked by: 00o00-ga List Price: $10.00 |
Posted:
01 Apr 2006 17:16 PST
Expires: 01 May 2006 18:16 PDT Question ID: 714452 |
I will like to know what percent of the cost of a movie is used for it's publicity, and what are those expences? Cable ads, internet baners, magazines..? Thanks!! |
|
Subject:
Re: What percentage of the cost of a movie is normaly used for publicity?
Answered By: easterangel-ga on 03 Apr 2006 01:13 PDT Rated: |
Hi! Thanks for the question. Here are the average movie average costs and percentages that you need. 2005: Overall Cost: $96.2 million Marketing Cost: $36.2 million Percentage of Marketing to Overall Cost: 37.6% 2004: Overall Cost (Estimates): $97.17 million Marketing Cost: $34.4 million Percentage of Marketing to Overall Cost: 35.4% ?But 2005's marketing costs rose 5.2 percent to $36.2 million, up from $34.4 million a year earlier. The combined cost to make and market a movie was $96.2 million, down less than 1 percent from 2004.? ?Hollywood ticket sales take a hit? http://money.cnn.com/2006/03/10/news/companies/movies.reut/index.htm The cost components meanwhile can be taken from these 2004 figures from an article at Hollywood Reporter. These are over-all figures and not average numbers. Overall Cost Estimate: $3,338.6 million National TV - $1,197.8 million (35.9% marketing cost) Regional TV - $482.5 million (14.5%) Cable TV - $688.9 million (20.6%) Syndication ? $133.5 million (4%) Spanish TV - $1.4 million (0.04%) Magazines - $24.7 million (0.7%) Radio - $50 million (1.5%) Outdoor Ads - $32.2 million (1%) Internet - $69.2 million (2.1%) Newspapers - $596.6 million (17.9%) Unaccounted by Source - (1.76%) (Based on percentage cost and not on overall cost figures) ?Money matters? http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/film/feature_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000913823 Search terms used: the average cost to market a film domestically in 2004 movie marketing expenses I hope these links would help you in your research. Before rating this answer, please ask for a clarification if you have a question or if you would need further information. Regards, Easterangel-ga Google Answers Researcher |
00o00-ga
rated this answer:
Great!! Just what I was looking for, if you find more data and feel like adding it, please do so. 5 Stars!! Thanks!! |
|
Subject:
Re: What percentage of the cost of a movie is normaly used for publicity?
From: tr1234-ga on 02 Apr 2006 09:47 PDT |
Perhaps of tangential interest is the Smoking Gun article "Hollywood By The Numbers) at http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0227061hollywood1.html Note that the movie budget analysis in this article does NOT include marketing costs. All the article says on the subject is "The records provide a line-by-line account of spending on each movie up to its completion, but do not reveal what the studio paid after that point for marketing and advertising (that secondary sum usually adds tens of millions to a movie's total cost)." All this might imply that (1) when a specific movie's budget is talked about (like "The blockbuster with a $200 million budget will be released this summer") that budget figure probably does *not* include marketing costs; and (2) getting a figure for movie marketing costs might be even more difficult than getting budget numbers--and that ain't easy... |
Subject:
Re: What percentage of the cost of a movie is normaly used for publicity?
From: geof-ga on 02 Apr 2006 14:51 PDT |
Looking at this matter strictly objectively and rationally, the costs of MAKING a movie do NOT include the costs of marketing and distributing it. After all, if the makers never intended to show it at all, it would still cost the same amount to actually make it as if they intended to give it world-wide distribution. That said, I don't see that the costs of marketing etc need ever represent a fixed proportion of the actual costs of making a film. Suppose you made movie on a shoe-string budget (say less than $50K like Blair Witch Project) and you thought it might make over $200M (like Blair Witch Project) wouldn't yuou think it worth investing $1M - 2000% of its production costs - to advertise it? |
Subject:
Re: What percentage of the cost of a movie is normaly used for publicity?
From: 00o00-ga on 02 Apr 2006 23:31 PDT |
"Looking at this matter strictly objectively and rationally, the costs of MAKING a movie do NOT include the costs of marketing and distributing it." Its funny, I could rephrase my question 100 ways and will always get a comment like this one. Would you like something like this: Based on the cost of a movie multiplied by X actor fame at the time of release how much will the film industry dicede to spend on publicty on any given movie. Average your answer on high and low season. :) When you get to a point of industrialisation of any kind of PRODUCT you have GUIDELINES on to everything you do, movies are products. And the Film industry is very predictible they don't just go -Man, this movie Rocks and let's throw 20million into publicty!! wohoo!!- Blair Witch is a case study, it's absured to bring it out. There are only a handfull of movies that have acomplished this, I bet you can't name more than five. Here's a list: http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/records/budgets.html I'm not looking for cold numbers. Thanks!! :) |
If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by emailing us at answers-support@google.com with the question ID listed above. Thank you. |
Search Google Answers for |
Google Home - Answers FAQ - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy |