<< <i>You are the one who, for whatever reason, declared movie receipts were an indication that entertainment spending is up and will continue to increase during economic down times.
Barry that is NOT what he said. Or at least it is NOT how I read it.
He simply stated that entertainment dollars are NOT the first things to go during tuff economic times.
IMO and it is only my opinion, is that in many cases people will still spend money to entertain themselves so they can get away from bumming about the economy. I am one of those people.
That is how I read into what he said.
Steve >>
I said that's how I was reading his argument. Rather than clarify, he continued to defend the flawed position of box office receipts.
The key phrase, as you said, is entertaining themselves. For example, having a dinner party with people bringing food and drinks to someone's place. While people are spending money, it's significantly less than going out and doing the same thing. That is spending money to entertain themselves.
Going to movies is not the same thing, regardless of how Hollywood wants to try and spin it. Believe me, I know, I'm invested in a couple of production companies.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
There are only two things that will never decrease during bad economic times...drinking and gambling! You can take that to the bank.
I want to add that I am mortified by all the name calling on this thread....calling people stupid has no place on this board
Stown, I agree with your stance on how the movies that come out can make a huge difference in such a comparisons, but I am scratching my head at a couple of those... mall cop & Monsters vs Aliens? I am a little surprised those two are considered blockbusters.
Winpitcher, why did you have Yankee season tickets?
<< <i>is that nobody here has enough information to determine whether they made a mistake or not.
Boo I agree in principle, however, I can say they made a mistake with me.
I wouldn't give them a red cent now.
The only way I'll go to a Yankee game is if someone gives me the tix.
I was a season ticket holder from 1996 through 2000.
Steve >>
Fair enough. And, in fact, my personal opinion is that they probably DID make a mistake. But, without access to additional information, I don't feel comfortable taking a firm stand on the issue. That was my original point; I wasn't saying 'yes' or 'no', only that 'we don't know, because we don't know enough'. I'm surprised by this simple admission has been interpreted.
<< <i> Not that it matters, but the very first dollars 'everyone' shuts down is not entertainment. Actually, in times of economic crisis, entertainment dollars actually rise. Look at movie theater/box office revenues, higher this year than last. People use entertainment to escape the rigors of poor economies, much the same way that alcohol consumption goes up in times of bad economies. >>
The movies? Do you care to do the math on how many movies with all the trimmings you can take your ENTIRE family to see on the price of ONE seat at ONE game without any trimmings in prime real estate in Yankee Stadium?
Holy crap! Please, Somebody tell me that I am out of whack here! >>
Boo is going to school for economics and I wish him well in that endeavor - however his posts here illustrate the old cliche that a little bit of knowledge is dangerous. >>
This is a great point-- when given the choice of listening to explanations on pricing structure from either someone who's graduated with a Master's in Economics with a 4.0 GPA, or a guy who works in a copy shop, we should always choose the latter. In fact, I don't think that's even debatable.
There are only two things that will never decrease during bad economic times...drinking and gambling! You can take that to the bank.
I want to add that I am mortified by all the name calling on this thread....calling people stupid has no place on this board
Skin,
Softparade makes you seem like a choir boy, LOL...
On a serious note, I'd like to think we can debate issues, even entirely disagree on them, without the namecalling...JMHO..
(Except when it comes to SteveK, who is always fair game, that is.)
Carry on..
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Even with yesterdays 50% slash in prime seats the Yankees are going to need a good bit of smoke and mirror ticket "dispersing" to fill those still way over priced seats.
<< <i> Not that it matters, but the very first dollars 'everyone' shuts down is not entertainment. Actually, in times of economic crisis, entertainment dollars actually rise. Look at movie theater/box office revenues, higher this year than last. People use entertainment to escape the rigors of poor economies, much the same way that alcohol consumption goes up in times of bad economies. >>
The movies? Do you care to do the math on how many movies with all the trimmings you can take your ENTIRE family to see on the price of ONE seat at ONE game without any trimmings in prime real estate in Yankee Stadium?
Holy crap! Please, Somebody tell me that I am out of whack here! >>
Boo is going to school for economics and I wish him well in that endeavor - however his posts here illustrate the old cliche that a little bit of knowledge is dangerous. >>
This is a great point-- when given the choice of listening to explanations on pricing structure from either someone who's graduated with a Master's in Economics with a 4.0 GPA, or a guy who works in a copy shop, we should always choose the latter. In fact, I don't think that's even debatable. >>
That's a good one, I have to admit, I enjoy a good zinger...and here's one back...I have to believe there's a lot of economics majors out there right now working for minimum wage type jobs such as a packer or delivery boy for a copy shop...and that's not debatable.
Sorry to say that having an economics degree in this economy may be equivalent to going all-in with a 2-7os in holdem, but hey sometimes those 2-7os hands win.
There are only two things that will never decrease during bad economic times...drinking and gambling! You can take that to the bank.
I want to add that I am mortified by all the name calling on this thread....calling people stupid has no place on this board
Stown, I agree with your stance on how the movies that come out can make a huge difference in such a comparisons, but I am scratching my head at a couple of those... mall cop & Monsters vs Aliens? I am a little surprised those two are considered blockbusters.
Winpitcher, why did you have Yankee season tickets? >>
<<< There are only two things that will never decrease during bad economic times...drinking and gambling! You can take that to the bank. >>>
You must not read the news...the Vegas and AC casinos and most casinos and gambling joints in the US and elsewhere have had record declines in revenue and profits, and many layoffs. Take a look at many of their stock prices in which a number have crashed worse than the DJIA.
<< <i>Stown, I agree with your stance on how the movies that come out can make a huge difference in such a comparisons, but I am scratching my head at a couple of those... mall cop & Monsters vs Aliens? I am a little surprised those two are considered blockbusters. >>
Compared to the movies that came out this time last year, they were.
Monsters v Aliens currently is this year's top box office at $174.814 and Mall Cop at $145.152
Most companies would have waited until Summer to release these movies. However, since last year was full of duds and this Summer is expected to do well, they rushed and put them out during spring break. It will be interesting to see how the summer releases do compared to last year, though. Wolverine, Star Trek, Angles and Demons, Terminator, and my personal fave Powder Blue (Jessica Biel shows her hoohoos ). Last year's top 5, pretty much all released in the Summer, generated about $1.6B.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
<< <i>You must not read the news...the Vegas and AC casinos and most casinos and gambling joints in the US and elsewhere have had record declines in revenue and profits, and many layoffs. Take a look at many of their stock prices in which a number have crashed worse than the DJIA. >>
I heard the Bellagio is close to going under.
Also heard you can stay at The Wynn for only $129/night. All things considered, that's freaking C-H-E-A-P.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
<< <i> Monsters v Aliens currently is this year's top box office at $174.814 and Mall Cop at $145.152 >>
'Mall Cop' was not projected to be a blockbuster. There's a reason this comedy was released in January (a time when comedies are never released), because it was super cheap to make (budget was about $25 million) and was expected to do about $50. Nobody expected this movie to hit nearly $150 million in revenue. Monsters vs. Aliens, however, was predicted to do well.
Why did Mall Cop blow up, despite such poor reviews and such an average (5.5) imdb rating? A lot of people have theorized that people are desperate for an escape, desperate for anything that gives them an escape from the incessant bad news that surrounds them. 'Staycations' are much more popular now, and people still want an escape. What's there to do? As was noted above, dining in with friends is popular, but the movies have been more popular than ever. I wouldn't call movies like 'Obsessed' or '17 again' quality films, but they are making big dollars.
Q1 2008 wasn't devoid of money makers. National Treasure 2 was just starting its run, I am Legend was still cranking out big money, Alvin and the Chipmunks was a month into its run, Cloverfield had a $46 million opening weekend, Juno was eclipsing $100 million, Hannah Montana (albeit it was a 1 week run) did $30+ million opening weekend, 27 dresses did big dollars, and so on and so on. There were a ton of big money making movies last year in the same period as 2009. To suggest that the only reason 2009 revenues are up 67% over 2008 is because there weren't any good movies, well, that is simply not the case.
<< <i>Most companies would have waited until Summer to release these movies. However, since last year was full of duds and this Summer is expected to do well, they rushed and put them out during spring break. It will be interesting to see how the summer releases do compared to last year, though. Wolverine, Star Trek, Angles and Demons, Terminator, and my personal fave Powder Blue (Jessica Biel shows her hoohoos ). Last year's top 5, pretty much all released in the Summer, generated about $1.6B. >>
Last year was not full of duds. You can go to imdb.com and look week by week and see movie earnings, and you will see tons and tons of revenue. Last years top 5 generating 1.6 billion, may be correct, but remove the fantastic Dark Knight and you're left with 4 films that did $600 million. You're going to see more than the $1.6 billion this summer. In addition to the ones you listed, don't forget the incredibly popular Transformers sequel that's projected to do $350 million and GI Joe which is supposed to hit $200.
It is incredibly laughable that this thread is now talking about movies. It is unreal that anybody would gobble down a frankly DUMB analogy between movie box office sales and the sale of hyper inflated prices at the New Yankee Stadium. I shake my head knowing that anything above the intelligence level of a cricket thinks the two go hand in hand.
Can't wait for the responses that claim its all entertainment thus all relevant! Sure it is, just like a 10 foot bass boat carries a passenger the way the Titanic did.
Comments
<< <i>100 >>
Yea but edmundfitzgerald gets an assist.
<< <i>You are the one who, for whatever reason, declared movie receipts were an indication that entertainment spending is up and will continue to increase during economic down times.
Barry that is NOT what he said. Or at least it is NOT how I read it.
He simply stated that entertainment dollars are NOT the first things to go during tuff economic times.
IMO and it is only my opinion, is that in many cases people will still spend money to entertain themselves
so they can get away from bumming about the economy. I am one of those people.
That is how I read into what he said.
Steve >>
I said that's how I was reading his argument. Rather than clarify, he continued to defend the flawed position of box office receipts.
The key phrase, as you said, is entertaining themselves. For example, having a dinner party with people bringing food and drinks to someone's place. While people are spending money, it's significantly less than going out and doing the same thing. That is spending money to entertain themselves.
Going to movies is not the same thing, regardless of how Hollywood wants to try and spin it. Believe me, I know, I'm invested in a couple of production companies.
There are only two things that will never decrease during bad economic times...drinking and gambling! You can take that to the bank.
I want to add that I am mortified by all the name calling on this thread....calling people stupid has no place on this board
Stown, I agree with your stance on how the movies that come out can make a huge difference in such a comparisons, but I am scratching my head at a couple of those... mall cop & Monsters vs Aliens? I am a little surprised those two are considered blockbusters.
Winpitcher, why did you have Yankee season tickets?
<< <i>is that nobody here has enough information to determine whether they made a mistake or not.
Boo I agree in principle, however, I can say they made a mistake with me.
I wouldn't give them a red cent now.
The only way I'll go to a Yankee game is if someone gives me the tix.
I was a season ticket holder from 1996 through 2000.
Steve >>
Fair enough. And, in fact, my personal opinion is that they probably DID make a mistake. But, without access to additional information, I don't feel comfortable taking a firm stand on the issue. That was my original point; I wasn't saying 'yes' or 'no', only that 'we don't know, because we don't know enough'. I'm surprised by this simple admission has been interpreted.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
Not that it matters, but the very first dollars 'everyone' shuts down is not entertainment. Actually, in times of economic crisis, entertainment dollars actually rise. Look at movie theater/box office revenues, higher this year than last. People use entertainment to escape the rigors of poor economies, much the same way that alcohol consumption goes up in times of bad economies.
>>
The movies?
Do you care to do the math on how many movies with all the trimmings you can take your ENTIRE family to see on the price of ONE seat at ONE game without any trimmings in prime real estate in Yankee Stadium?
Holy crap! Please, Somebody tell me that I am out of whack here! >>
Boo is going to school for economics and I wish him well in that endeavor - however his posts here illustrate the old cliche that a little bit of knowledge is dangerous.
This is a great point-- when given the choice of listening to explanations on pricing structure from either someone who's graduated with a Master's in Economics with a 4.0 GPA, or a guy who works in a copy shop, we should always choose the latter. In fact, I don't think that's even debatable.
There are only two things that will never decrease during bad economic times...drinking and gambling! You can take that to the bank.
I want to add that I am mortified by all the name calling on this thread....calling people stupid has no place on this board
Skin,
Softparade makes you seem like a choir boy, LOL...
On a serious note, I'd like to think we can debate issues, even entirely disagree on them, without the namecalling...JMHO..
(Except when it comes to SteveK, who is always fair game, that is.)
Carry on..
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw 3, 100, 103, 302, 347, 376, 416, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 579, 580, 622, 642, 673, 724__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ISO 1978 O-Pee-Chee in NM-MT High Grade Raw12, 21, 29, 38, 49, 65, 69, 73, 74, 81, 95, 100, 104, 110, 115, 122, 132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160, 161, 167, 168, 172, 179, 181, 196, 200, 204, 210, 224, 231, 240
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
Not that it matters, but the very first dollars 'everyone' shuts down is not entertainment. Actually, in times of economic crisis, entertainment dollars actually rise. Look at movie theater/box office revenues, higher this year than last. People use entertainment to escape the rigors of poor economies, much the same way that alcohol consumption goes up in times of bad economies.
>>
The movies?
Do you care to do the math on how many movies with all the trimmings you can take your ENTIRE family to see on the price of ONE seat at ONE game without any trimmings in prime real estate in Yankee Stadium?
Holy crap! Please, Somebody tell me that I am out of whack here! >>
Boo is going to school for economics and I wish him well in that endeavor - however his posts here illustrate the old cliche that a little bit of knowledge is dangerous.
This is a great point-- when given the choice of listening to explanations on pricing structure from either someone who's graduated with a Master's in Economics with a 4.0 GPA, or a guy who works in a copy shop, we should always choose the latter. In fact, I don't think that's even debatable. >>
That's a good one, I have to admit, I enjoy a good zinger...and here's one back...I have to believe there's a lot of economics majors out there right now working for minimum wage type jobs such as a packer or delivery boy for a copy shop...and that's not debatable.
Sorry to say that having an economics degree in this economy may be equivalent to going all-in with a 2-7os in holdem, but hey sometimes those 2-7os hands win.
<< <i> Boy, lots of arguing here.
There are only two things that will never decrease during bad economic times...drinking and gambling! You can take that to the bank.
I want to add that I am mortified by all the name calling on this thread....calling people stupid has no place on this board
Skin,
Softparade makes you seem like a choir boy, LOL...
On a serious note, I'd like to think we can debate issues, even entirely disagree on them, without the namecalling...JMHO..
(Except when it comes to SteveK, who is always fair game, that is.)
Carry on.. >>
Call me any name ya want...just don't go insulting my Eagles or Phillies ya hear!
<< <i>Boy, lots of arguing here.
There are only two things that will never decrease during bad economic times...drinking and gambling! You can take that to the bank.
I want to add that I am mortified by all the name calling on this thread....calling people stupid has no place on this board
Stown, I agree with your stance on how the movies that come out can make a huge difference in such a comparisons, but I am scratching my head at a couple of those... mall cop & Monsters vs Aliens? I am a little surprised those two are considered blockbusters.
Winpitcher, why did you have Yankee season tickets? >>
<<< There are only two things that will never decrease during bad economic times...drinking and gambling! You can take that to the bank. >>>
You must not read the news...the Vegas and AC casinos and most casinos and gambling joints in the US and elsewhere have had record declines in revenue and profits, and many layoffs. Take a look at many of their stock prices in which a number have crashed worse than the DJIA.
You might be right about the drinking.
<< <i>Stown, I agree with your stance on how the movies that come out can make a huge difference in such a comparisons, but I am scratching my head at a couple of those... mall cop & Monsters vs Aliens? I am a little surprised those two are considered blockbusters. >>
Compared to the movies that came out this time last year, they were.
Monsters v Aliens currently is this year's top box office at $174.814 and Mall Cop at $145.152
Most companies would have waited until Summer to release these movies. However, since last year was full of duds and this Summer is expected to do well, they rushed and put them out during spring break. It will be interesting to see how the summer releases do compared to last year, though. Wolverine, Star Trek, Angles and Demons, Terminator, and my personal fave Powder Blue (Jessica Biel shows her hoohoos
<< <i>You must not read the news...the Vegas and AC casinos and most casinos and gambling joints in the US and elsewhere have had record declines in revenue and profits, and many layoffs. Take a look at many of their stock prices in which a number have crashed worse than the DJIA. >>
I heard the Bellagio is close to going under.
Also heard you can stay at The Wynn for only $129/night. All things considered, that's freaking C-H-E-A-P.
<< <i>
Monsters v Aliens currently is this year's top box office at $174.814 and Mall Cop at $145.152 >>
'Mall Cop' was not projected to be a blockbuster. There's a reason this comedy was released in January (a time when comedies are never released), because it was super cheap to make (budget was about $25 million) and was expected to do about $50. Nobody expected this movie to hit nearly $150 million in revenue. Monsters vs. Aliens, however, was predicted to do well.
Why did Mall Cop blow up, despite such poor reviews and such an average (5.5) imdb rating? A lot of people have theorized that people are desperate for an escape, desperate for anything that gives them an escape from the incessant bad news that surrounds them. 'Staycations' are much more popular now, and people still want an escape. What's there to do? As was noted above, dining in with friends is popular, but the movies have been more popular than ever. I wouldn't call movies like 'Obsessed' or '17 again' quality films, but they are making big dollars.
Q1 2008 wasn't devoid of money makers. National Treasure 2 was just starting its run, I am Legend was still cranking out big money, Alvin and the Chipmunks was a month into its run, Cloverfield had a $46 million opening weekend, Juno was eclipsing $100 million, Hannah Montana (albeit it was a 1 week run) did $30+ million opening weekend, 27 dresses did big dollars, and so on and so on. There were a ton of big money making movies last year in the same period as 2009. To suggest that the only reason 2009 revenues are up 67% over 2008 is because there weren't any good movies, well, that is simply not the case.
<< <i>Most companies would have waited until Summer to release these movies. However, since last year was full of duds and this Summer is expected to do well, they rushed and put them out during spring break. It will be interesting to see how the summer releases do compared to last year, though. Wolverine, Star Trek, Angles and Demons, Terminator, and my personal fave Powder Blue (Jessica Biel shows her hoohoos
Last year was not full of duds. You can go to imdb.com and look week by week and see movie earnings, and you will see tons and tons of revenue. Last years top 5 generating 1.6 billion, may be correct, but remove the fantastic Dark Knight and you're left with 4 films that did $600 million. You're going to see more than the $1.6 billion this summer. In addition to the ones you listed, don't forget the incredibly popular Transformers sequel that's projected to do $350 million and GI Joe which is supposed to hit $200.
Link for week by week 2008 box office revenues
Can't wait for the responses that claim its all entertainment thus all relevant!
Sure it is, just like a 10 foot bass boat carries a passenger the way the Titanic did.
ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw 3, 100, 103, 302, 347, 376, 416, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 579, 580, 622, 642, 673, 724__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ISO 1978 O-Pee-Chee in NM-MT High Grade Raw12, 21, 29, 38, 49, 65, 69, 73, 74, 81, 95, 100, 104, 110, 115, 122, 132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160, 161, 167, 168, 172, 179, 181, 196, 200, 204, 210, 224, 231, 240