What's
A Billion Among Friends ...
Last
year the Motion Picture Association of America decided days before the start of
the ShoWest convention to unveil its annual box office statistics in advance of
the event. The rationale was that everyone knew that both box office and admissions
had declined and getting that dirty detail out of the way would allow the industry
to concentrate of the future.
This
year the MPAA can't blame declining numbers for posting its box office stats early.
In the first week of January Variety, the Hollywood Reporter, MovieCityNews
and other trackers had all weighed in with improved revenues. At this outpost
the number was $9.23 billion and that was 3.7% better than 2005 with admissions
too statistically close to say definitively that ticket sales were up or down.
Two
months later, the "official" number announced is a generous $9.49 billion
and the MPAA reckon that a 5.5% improvement. On the face of it the difference
is a bit higher than the usual margin of error but there are considerably more
profound aspects to the separation.
The
numbers announced at the beginning of the year by the trades and tracking agencies
are domestic revenues that include the U.S., Canada, Puerto Rico, Guam and dribbles
from a couple of other American Protectorates. The Motion Picture Association
figure it claims is the United States only. It's an assertion it has yet to back
up with transparent figures.
Last
year the Canadian box office was $890 million CDN. The portion that includes films
from the Hollywood majors is reported to the trades on par with the U.S. dollar.
In April of 2006 I had lunch with the heads of the MPAA's research department
and brought a stack of papers that broke down the domestic box office by title
and distributor and a similar stack covering the Canadian box office.
The
question I posed to them was why, at least on the surface, do the figures that
come out in January coincide within statistical range of their number. Yet, while
the early numbers clearly embrace the domestic marketplace, the MPAA claims its
do not.
One of
the two actually blurted out: "yeah, I noticed that too." Her partner
quickly stepped in and said their methodology might be slightly different from
mine. I'm not sure but it sounded like a euphemism for something unkosher. Nonetheless,
he promised to invite me over to the Encino office and show me their operation.
That invitation is still technically pending.
The
night prior to the official opening of ShoWest I once again poured over more than
100 pages of text, charts and data that the MPAA generates annually in search
of the method of their madness.
It
might be informative to backtrack a bit. Just as the MPAA numbers have been suspicious
for decades, so too was the figure given out by the National Association of Theater
Owners of the average ticket price. In truth, that number was also compiled by
the MPAA. The irony was that counter to everyone's best interests it was too high.
In
truth I hadn't given it much thought. However, one day while tracking down a story
involving Cineplex Theaters I was rifling through the company's annual report
and stumbled across its average ticket price in the yearly report to stockholders.
Cineplex had one of the highest admission prices because almost all its screens
were in major urban areas. Yet its average was lower than the one announced at
ShoWest.
So, I
started to look at other annual reports of movie chains and sure enough every
one had a lower average ticket price than the "official" average. I
wrote about it and even had lunch with then NATO president Bill Kartozian
to complain. He was very diplomatic but the following year the average was still
way out of line - more than a dollar too high by my calculation.
About
five years of carping later, I arrived at the ShoWest press conference to hear
Jack Valenti and Kartozian unveil their numbers. Bill began with the announcement
that NATO had decided to take over compiling data on ticket pricing and had discovered
flaws in previous methodology. The average was too high and it unveiled not only
a new lower figure but had gone back and recalculated for the prior five years.
That
turn of events provided me with the false hope that the MPAA might also do one
of two things. It would either lower its U.S. only box office figure or concede
that its numbers also included Canadian box office.
As
I was paging through the ShoWest 2007 Program Journal I came across a listing
of the top 100 grossing movies of 2007 as compiled by Nielsen EDI. Initially I
totaled up the top 100 movies of last year according to my data base and came
up with the not very helpful figure of $7.54 billion. But then I went down the
list comparing box office of individual titles and noticed a number of films were
annotated with an asterix. Scrolling down it indicated that those titles included
box office through January 30, 2007.
It
should also be noted that the figures listed conformed with studio reported numbers
for the entire domestic marketplace that includes Canada. I'll also add that the
films that extended 30 days into the following year represented about $340 million
in non-2006 revenues. This triggered a Eureka moment.
It
seemed to me that somewhere in the tsunami of MPAA data there was a mention of
how many 2006 movies had grossed in excess of $100 million. Sifting through paper
what I found was a line that said 63 films grossed in excess of $50 million. I
went back to the list in the ShoWest program and looked for the list with the
top 100 grossers. Number 63 was Apocalypto with a gross of $50,222,634.
The
day after the official presentation I sat down with MPAA chairman Dan Glickman
and Dean Garfield of its research department. Mostly we talked about
matters unrelated to statistics but finally I asked him whether the Nielsen EDI
top 100 in the program was related or reflective of their data. He ceded to Garfield
who said that Nielsen had been involved in helping him prepare the report.
Then
I pointed out that those numbers included Canada and the point about the corresponding
63 films that grossed in excess of $50 million. Glickman - who's not really a
stats man - appeared slightly confused and Garfield said, "Len believes our
numbers include Canada."
I
asked Garfield if he stood behind the MPAA contention that 63 films grossed more
than $50 million and he waffled. At that point Glickman jumped in and said, "it's
a simple question that ought to have a yes or no answer." Only then did Garfield
say that 63 films did indeed gross more than $50 million though they weren't necessarily
the same ones listed in the ShoWest program. He added that he didn't have the
list but would get it to me when he returned to the Association's Encino offices.
However,
let's just for a moment consider that based upon those Nielsen figures that the
MPAA figures are overstated by roughly $340 million. Their figure now dips even
lower than any of those January numbers from the trades and other trackers. It
lowers the year-to-year increase to 1.8% and, applying the math, turns the 3.2%
improvement in admissions announced by NATO into a 0.8% decline. It's a thin line
between positive and negative and a bit premature to be using the MPAA claim that
"2006 Box Office Rebounds" as a mantra.
March
14, 2007
-
by Leonard Klady