Question about Distribution and P&A?
- Thread starter FilmBoy77
- Start date
Martay
Veteran
Yes, typically the Distributor who buys theatrical rights will pay the P & A which will be paid back before any revenue gets split between you and the distributor.
However, there are also distributors who are selling access to theaters by asking the producers to pay a fee as well as raise a minumum amount of $ for P & A.
Theatrical is a tricky subject. You need to really analyze the financial impact before even thinking about a theatrical release. The amount of P&A expense vs. the realistic forcast of revenue may not add up for certain projects.
Everyone wants a theatrical release but it's definitely not worth it to some projects financially.
That said, some distributors hedge their bets and sign theatrical rights "in case" something dramatically changes with a project that they never intended to take theatrical.
-Martin
However, there are also distributors who are selling access to theaters by asking the producers to pay a fee as well as raise a minumum amount of $ for P & A.
Theatrical is a tricky subject. You need to really analyze the financial impact before even thinking about a theatrical release. The amount of P&A expense vs. the realistic forcast of revenue may not add up for certain projects.
Everyone wants a theatrical release but it's definitely not worth it to some projects financially.
That said, some distributors hedge their bets and sign theatrical rights "in case" something dramatically changes with a project that they never intended to take theatrical.
-Martin
yea thanks guys,
@ martay - thats exactly why i asked. i've heard it both ways in terms of the distributor paying for P&A as well as the producers/investors paying for the P&A and then using distributors just to get theaters. i agree all projects are not a great release for theatrical. do you know which would be the more lucrative approach for the producer/investor assuming you have a great indie movie with name talent attached?
@ martay - thats exactly why i asked. i've heard it both ways in terms of the distributor paying for P&A as well as the producers/investors paying for the P&A and then using distributors just to get theaters. i agree all projects are not a great release for theatrical. do you know which would be the more lucrative approach for the producer/investor assuming you have a great indie movie with name talent attached?
Martay
Veteran
It's all in the forcasting. I mean, here's a hint. If you've got a great indie movie with names attached...you should be getting offers from distributors that include Advance money. If that isn't happening, then I'd say you may not have a marketable enough film to take it theatrical.
If you're getting offers but feel you can do it on your own and can raise some P & A, then you may be able to do better on your own than with the distributor but again, that becomes a risk/reward scenario. Only if you feel the reward (meaning the amount in excess you'll see independently vs. with a distributor) outweighs the additional risk (the excess more $ that you'll need to invest in the process) then that is the situation that would be more lucrative.
You can do paid research with firms that will gauge these things for you...but that's more money spent in excess of the hard production costs
-Martin
Advance money is pretty much a thing of a past. Pre-sales might still work with a known producer/director and cast that can sell. Four walling can get quite expensive if you want to screen theatrically. While you might make a deal on the theater, the marketing alone is more than most budgets. Doing that in more than one city gets very expensive fast. There is a difference between a distributor and a releasing company as far as who pays for what along the way.
Michael
Michael