The UK market is free - apart from one guy owning half of all the licensed outlets. But no one's forced to sell to him. I say don't let him dictate the price. But, some producers have. This leads to a downward spiral in the quality of the product (and hey, us Brits were never really at the cutting edge of quality porno to start with) a spiral that leads down to oblivion.
The big three players in the British porno market are all publishers - not producers. They're not really interested in the product, it's just a means to an end. As long as they can get cheap photo sets and videos from the UK, or The States they don't give a toss. So, just ignore them.
British producers should aim for the world market with a product that is high class, quintessentially British and desirable - much like an Aston Martin is. Astons maybe expensive, but there is always a long queue to buy one. Unfortunatley, the movies that are being produced now are akin to a clapped out Morris Marina - these movies utilise the cheapest sets, the cheapest birds and not much else. No wonder folks are not beating a path to the nearest sex shop to buy these masterpieces of erotica. But if the world market could be conquered with a quality product then distributors of all types would want to take them on - even those aloof money grabbing British publishers would have to sit up and take note.
Woodgnome: I reiterate that the the British sex market is free - you, or I, are as much at liberty to apply for a sex license as Sullivan and the rest. I respect your point of view that you find Private and Vivid movies boring ( I personally like a wide range of mainstream material) but you must agree that they are technically accomplished movies with a degree of entertainment value. And it is these kind of qualities that can take porno toward the mainstream and in doing so line the pockets of all content creators. Remember, the big three British player are users, not creators. At some point they have to buy content.
Dr No.
Economics
-
pasta
Re: Economics
Dr No. wrote:
>
> The UK market is free - apart from one guy owning half of all
> the licensed outlets. But no one's forced to sell to him. I
> say don't let him dictate the price.
So how do you propose that anyone distributes movies in sufficient quantities to make it viable, given that selling R18s by mail order is illegal? Either they sell to him or they don't sell any movies...unless they break the law...
[snip]
> The big three players in the British porno market are all
> publishers - not producers. They're not really interested in
> the product, it's just a means to an end. As long as they can
> get cheap photo sets and videos from the UK, or The States
> they don't give a toss. So, just ignore them.
Again, how do you propose that? How can you ignore them unless you have got the money to set up enough shops to compete?
(I presume you are talking about Sullivan and the Gold Brothers - who else? Paul Raymond???)
> British producers should aim for the world market with a
> product that is high class, quintessentially British and
> desirable - much like an Aston Martin is. Astons maybe
> expensive, but there is always a long queue to buy one.
> Unfortunatley, the movies that are being produced now are
> akin to a clapped out Morris Marina - these movies utilise
> the cheapest sets, the cheapest birds and not much else. No
> wonder folks are not beating a path to the nearest sex shop
> to buy these masterpieces of erotica. But if the world market
> could be conquered with a quality product then distributors
> of all types would want to take them on - even those aloof
> money grabbing British publishers would have to sit up and
> take note.
>
> Woodgnome: I reiterate that the the British sex market is
> free - you, or I, are as much at liberty to apply for a sex
> license as Sullivan and the rest.
If you were to apply for a sex shop licence you would find out how difficult it is. You will face opposition from all kinds of pressure groups and politicians. Do you know how much councils charge for licences, esp. in Soho? It is very very hard for people without *significant* capital behind them to break into the market. And I don't mean ONE shop, I mean enough shops to really compete with the existing monopoly holder.
>I respect your point of
> view that you find Private and Vivid movies boring ( I
> personally like a wide range of mainstream material) but you
> must agree that they are technically accomplished movies with
> a degree of entertainment value. And it is these kind of
> qualities that can take porno toward the mainstream and in
> doing so line the pockets of all content creators. Remember,
> the big three British player are users, not creators. At some
> point they have to buy content.
>
> Dr No.
By the way I TOTALLY agree that there should be an aim towards quality - but I don't necessarily think that this automatically tends towards the mainstream.
Talking of Private, it is also a real problem that Private have sold the UK licences for their videos to Sheptonhurst, who as we know have zero commitment to quality.
>
> The UK market is free - apart from one guy owning half of all
> the licensed outlets. But no one's forced to sell to him. I
> say don't let him dictate the price.
So how do you propose that anyone distributes movies in sufficient quantities to make it viable, given that selling R18s by mail order is illegal? Either they sell to him or they don't sell any movies...unless they break the law...
[snip]
> The big three players in the British porno market are all
> publishers - not producers. They're not really interested in
> the product, it's just a means to an end. As long as they can
> get cheap photo sets and videos from the UK, or The States
> they don't give a toss. So, just ignore them.
Again, how do you propose that? How can you ignore them unless you have got the money to set up enough shops to compete?
(I presume you are talking about Sullivan and the Gold Brothers - who else? Paul Raymond???)
> British producers should aim for the world market with a
> product that is high class, quintessentially British and
> desirable - much like an Aston Martin is. Astons maybe
> expensive, but there is always a long queue to buy one.
> Unfortunatley, the movies that are being produced now are
> akin to a clapped out Morris Marina - these movies utilise
> the cheapest sets, the cheapest birds and not much else. No
> wonder folks are not beating a path to the nearest sex shop
> to buy these masterpieces of erotica. But if the world market
> could be conquered with a quality product then distributors
> of all types would want to take them on - even those aloof
> money grabbing British publishers would have to sit up and
> take note.
>
> Woodgnome: I reiterate that the the British sex market is
> free - you, or I, are as much at liberty to apply for a sex
> license as Sullivan and the rest.
If you were to apply for a sex shop licence you would find out how difficult it is. You will face opposition from all kinds of pressure groups and politicians. Do you know how much councils charge for licences, esp. in Soho? It is very very hard for people without *significant* capital behind them to break into the market. And I don't mean ONE shop, I mean enough shops to really compete with the existing monopoly holder.
>I respect your point of
> view that you find Private and Vivid movies boring ( I
> personally like a wide range of mainstream material) but you
> must agree that they are technically accomplished movies with
> a degree of entertainment value. And it is these kind of
> qualities that can take porno toward the mainstream and in
> doing so line the pockets of all content creators. Remember,
> the big three British player are users, not creators. At some
> point they have to buy content.
>
> Dr No.
By the way I TOTALLY agree that there should be an aim towards quality - but I don't necessarily think that this automatically tends towards the mainstream.
Talking of Private, it is also a real problem that Private have sold the UK licences for their videos to Sheptonhurst, who as we know have zero commitment to quality.
-
woodgnome
Re: Economics
fair exchange... you've saved me the effort on a couple of occasions, too!
-
woodgnome
Re: Economics
on a unifying note (we're all punters under the skin, after all) although there are differing analyses of the current state of the industry, the common viewpoint seems to be that, things as they are pretty much stink!
the issues holding back the industry in this country are a legacy of our repressive history with regards to sexuality, in all its manifestations. the good news is that that culture is now palpably changing (whatever darcus howes says on c4 tonight)!
the real problem, as is so often the case, is the inherent cowardice of the political class which is supposed to serve us. sadly, we're lumbered with democratic representatives largely devoid of commonsense, the ability to think in a principled fashion, or a willingness to stand out from the crowd, for whatever reason.
this means that, as ever, things will only change by a series of nods and winks - and almost certainly at the behest of some anonymous civil servant. to see this process thumbnailed, subscribe to one of the brit sat channels and note how they have been judiciously nudging the envelope of what's acceptable, whilst always being careful not to frighten the horses.
dildo penetration was unseen a few years ago. - it's now reached the stage where entry is virtually visible. the same goes for ever more lingering open leg shots and views of the anus. nothing has changed in any guidelines governing broadcasting standards, that i'm aware of but i bet no one's complained!
to sum up: when it comes to obtaining the right to do business freed from abnormal constraints, people in the porn industry are going to have to be patient and stand in the queue, like the rest of us! it's just how we do things, old boy!
the issues holding back the industry in this country are a legacy of our repressive history with regards to sexuality, in all its manifestations. the good news is that that culture is now palpably changing (whatever darcus howes says on c4 tonight)!
the real problem, as is so often the case, is the inherent cowardice of the political class which is supposed to serve us. sadly, we're lumbered with democratic representatives largely devoid of commonsense, the ability to think in a principled fashion, or a willingness to stand out from the crowd, for whatever reason.
this means that, as ever, things will only change by a series of nods and winks - and almost certainly at the behest of some anonymous civil servant. to see this process thumbnailed, subscribe to one of the brit sat channels and note how they have been judiciously nudging the envelope of what's acceptable, whilst always being careful not to frighten the horses.
dildo penetration was unseen a few years ago. - it's now reached the stage where entry is virtually visible. the same goes for ever more lingering open leg shots and views of the anus. nothing has changed in any guidelines governing broadcasting standards, that i'm aware of but i bet no one's complained!
to sum up: when it comes to obtaining the right to do business freed from abnormal constraints, people in the porn industry are going to have to be patient and stand in the queue, like the rest of us! it's just how we do things, old boy!
-
Marino
Re: Economics
I might be a great shag! Any of you business experts want to run my company I will happily share the millions they will make out of my products
marino
marino
-
pasta
Re: Economics
Dr No. wrote:
[snip]
>
> Also, contrary to what Pasta said. The totally inappropriate
> business model - pile it high, sell it cheap - that certain
> soon to be skint - producers have adopted may work fine for
> Sainsburys, but not for porno!
Where did I say that? I was recommending a quality approach as well as a freer market.
> Not unless, you can sell a
> copy of your vid to half the population inside a week! We are
> selling adult movies here, not tins of baked beans, or
> fuckin' Pot Noodles! The object of a business is to grow. If
> it does not it will stagnate and eventually die. Growing can
> only be achieved by churning PROFITS back into the business.
> But of course you must make those profits before that can be
> done.
That is what I was talking about. Many of the main players in the UK adult industry do not reinvest their profits. They merely create lowest common denominator
[snip]
Effectively you are recommending the maintenance of the status quo then.
[snip]
>
> Also, contrary to what Pasta said. The totally inappropriate
> business model - pile it high, sell it cheap - that certain
> soon to be skint - producers have adopted may work fine for
> Sainsburys, but not for porno!
Where did I say that? I was recommending a quality approach as well as a freer market.
> Not unless, you can sell a
> copy of your vid to half the population inside a week! We are
> selling adult movies here, not tins of baked beans, or
> fuckin' Pot Noodles! The object of a business is to grow. If
> it does not it will stagnate and eventually die. Growing can
> only be achieved by churning PROFITS back into the business.
> But of course you must make those profits before that can be
> done.
That is what I was talking about. Many of the main players in the UK adult industry do not reinvest their profits. They merely create lowest common denominator
[snip]
Effectively you are recommending the maintenance of the status quo then.
-
pasta
Re: Economics
woodgnome wrote:
[snip]
Excellent post, woodgnome, I just couldn't summon up the effort to go into such detail.
> on a personal note; vivid and private are as dull as
> ditchwater! if that's all we can aspire to, i'd rather take
> up watching the local over 80's bowling league. (been some
> close matches lately!)
I think that following the business acumen of these companies is a good idea, if not their content. That said, Private do actually produce some interesting videos, and are certainly not equitable with Vivid on that score.
[snip]
Excellent post, woodgnome, I just couldn't summon up the effort to go into such detail.
> on a personal note; vivid and private are as dull as
> ditchwater! if that's all we can aspire to, i'd rather take
> up watching the local over 80's bowling league. (been some
> close matches lately!)
I think that following the business acumen of these companies is a good idea, if not their content. That said, Private do actually produce some interesting videos, and are certainly not equitable with Vivid on that score.
-
Onan The Librarian
Re: Economics
woodgnome wrote:
>
> on a personal note; vivid and private are as dull as
> ditchwater! if that's all we can aspire to, i'd rather take
> up watching the local over 80's bowling league. (been some
> close matches lately!)
... and some of those chicks are HOT!
>
> on a personal note; vivid and private are as dull as
> ditchwater! if that's all we can aspire to, i'd rather take
> up watching the local over 80's bowling league. (been some
> close matches lately!)
... and some of those chicks are HOT!