Jump to content

Beginning on August 1, 2017 all free accounts will have the same avatar size as all paid accounts. This means you will be able to upload larger avatars on that day if you have a free account and this will no longer be a paid perk.

Stutterng baumer Denbrough

Putting International BO Numbers in Perspective

Recommended Posts

Rudolf    709

Take France as an example in 2011 $2.0b and in 2012 $1.7b (15% down), mainly because of successful local movies in 2011 (Intouchables,Rien a Declarer) and less successful local movies in 2012 (Asterix, Marsupilami) so 2 Hollywoodmovies with the same BO in France 2011 and 2012 would produce very different compare-values with your method. The top 15 Hollywood-Blockbusters only fell 6% from 2011 (497.1m) to 2012 (466,7m). So compare-values produced with them vary less. Why should  the relative success of a HollywoodBlockbuster in France depend on break-outs of local movies?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tower    1,755

Take France as an example in 2011 $2.0b and in 2012 $1.7b (15% down), mainly because of successful local movies in 2011 (Intouchables,Rien a Declarer) and less successful local movies in 2012 (Asterix, Marsupilami) so 2 Hollywoodmovies with the same BO in France 2011 and 2012 would produce very different compare-values with your method. The top 15 Hollywood-Blockbusters only fell 6% from 2011 (497.1m) to 2012 (466,7m). So compare-values produced with them vary less. Why should  the relative success of a HollywoodBlockbuster in France depend on break-outs of local movies?

 

Because local films are just as much a part of the market as Hollywood films. What you think of as a negative, I think of as a positive.

Edited by Tower

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vc2002    6,431

China should be around 2:1 at this point.

 

TF4 $300m in China -> $600m in the US:  TF4 is supposed to be the highest grossing film of all time in China, so it shouldn't be equal to Avatar's 750m DOM which was a surprising breakout. $600m looks fair.

Xmen DOFP and Captain 2 both made $116m in China -> $232m , pretty close to their actual DOM takes.

TASM2 $96m in China ->  $192M very close to the DOM take

 

And now Ape II looks to be another $100m grosser in China -> $200m in the US. Even closer

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kraken    655

Ok, so, for Colombia I tried two methods:

 

1) BOM gives us a benchmark of 1.5 million dollars that gives a similar amount of films per year as 100 millions DOM. That would give you a multiplier of 66,6. Now, there's a lot of different prices depending on city, day of the week, time of the day, seat, 3D, 4D and a bunch of other stuff but the Ministry of Culture gives us an average price of 9000 pesos. With current ER that would give us a multiplier of 200 admissions to DOM equivalent dollars.

 

2) The benchmark of 1 million in admissions is usually surpassed by 10 to 15 films, the same ammount for 200 millions DOM. That lines up with method 1.

 

So, I'd say it would be 66,6 dollars to dollars and 200 admissions to dollars.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In India, the box office collection is very different. The highest grossing film till now is PK. It was released in 2014. Nowadays, there is a strong competition among all Bollywood films in reaching to that 100 Crore Rupees (~1 Billion USD) box office mark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jason    2,868

I've collected data for the total box office gross in 2015 for a number of territories. The list is by no means comprehensive, it was generally much easier to get information for other English-speaking and European territories. This isn't the only way to put international numbers in perspective, I know that some of you have directly compared the top blockbusters. However, I think this is a pretty good way to do it. It also helps to give a sense of where Hollywood blockbusters do comparatively poorly compared to local releases - India being the most extreme example.

 

Regional conglomerates are in bold. Total 2015 box office in US$ millions, converted from local currency using average exchange rate for 2015, where applicable. Ratio is US + Canada box office compared to territory in question, generally rounded to nearest whole number. Sources listed below table.

Quote
Territory Total B.O. Ratio Source
US + Canada $11,129 n/a (1)
Asia/Pacific $14,100 0.8 (2)
China $6,780 1.6 (3)
Japan $1,794 6 (4)
South Korea $1,440 8 (5)
India $1,225 9 (6)
Hong Kong $256 43 (6)
Taiwan $239 47 (7)
Australia $922 12 (8)
New Zealand $135 82 (9)
EMEA $9,700 1.1 (2)
United Kingdom $1,889 6 (10)
France $1,476 8 (6)
Germany $1,295 9 (6)
Italy $738 15 (6)
Russia $729 15 (11)
Spain $586 19 (6)
Netherlands $306 36 (6)
Turkey $250 45 (12)
Switzerland $233 48 (11)
Sweden $216 52 (6)
Poland $211 53 (11)
Denmark $179 62 (6)
Norway $153 73 (11)
Austria $152 73 (11)
Finland $102 109 (6)
Portugal $83 134 (11)
Greece  $70 158 (11)
Czech Republic $68 164 (11)
Hungary $63 177 (11)
Romania $52 215 (11)
Israel  $134 83 (6)
South Africa $79 141 (6)
Latin America $3,400 3 (2)
Mexico $892 12 (13)
Brazil $593 19 (13)
Argentina $228 49 (13)
Columbia $164 68 (13)
Chile $115 97 (13)

 

Sources:

  1. Box Office Mojo - Yearly Box Office
  2. MPAA Theatrical Market Statistics 2015
  3. Variety - China Box Office Growth
  4. Motion Pictures Producers Association of Japan - Statistics
  5. Variety - Korea Sets Box Office Records in 2015
  6. German Films - Market Studies
  7. Variety - Hong Kong Box Office
  8. Screen Australia - Box Office
  9. Motion Pictures Distributors' Association of New Zealand - Press Release
  10. BFI - The Box Office 2015
  11. Celluloid Junkie - EU Box Office
  12. Box Office Türkiye - Yearly
  13. The Hollywood Reporter - Latin America's Film Industry Paradox
Edited by Jason
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Purple Minion    2,836

From Screendaily:

 

Strong dollar slowed 2016 int'l box office despite local currency gains

 

Top international markets 2016


China led the way on $6.6bn, Japan on $2bn, India on $1.9bn, the UK on $1.7bn, France on $1.6bn, South Korea on $1.5bn, Germany on $1.1bn, Australia on $900m, Mexico on $800m, and Brazil, Italy, Russia and Spain on $700m each.


Rounding out the top 20 are Netherlands, Indonesia, Taiwan, Argentina and Hong Kong on $300m each, and Poland and Turkey on $200m apiece.

 

More details per region here: http://m.screendaily.com/5116128.article

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jiffy    21
On 3/22/2017 at 3:11 PM, Purple Minion said:

From Screendaily:

 

Strong dollar slowed 2016 int'l box office despite local currency gains

 

Top international markets 2016


China led the way on $6.6bn, Japan on $2bn, India on $1.9bn, the UK on $1.7bn, France on $1.6bn, South Korea on $1.5bn, Germany on $1.1bn, Australia on $900m, Mexico on $800m, and Brazil, Italy, Russia and Spain on $700m each.


Rounding out the top 20 are Netherlands, Indonesia, Taiwan, Argentina and Hong Kong on $300m each, and Poland and Turkey on $200m apiece.

 

More details per region here: http://m.screendaily.com/5116128.article

 

Why is Germany weaker on a per capita basis as compared to the other major European markets like UK and France?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jason    2,868
1 hour ago, Jiffy said:

Why is Germany weaker on a per capita basis as compared to the other major European markets like UK and France?

 

Not sure what you're asking here - if you're wondering whether it's because of lower average ticket prices or lower admissions per capita, it's the latter. Average ticket prices (in USD) are actually higher in Germany than in France, and probably about the same as the UK (UK used to be higher but probably not last year after the post-Brexit weakening of the GBP).

 

If you're asking why Germany has lower admissions per capita than other major European markets, I don't know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jiffy    21
17 minutes ago, Jason said:

 

Not sure what you're asking here - if you're wondering whether it's because of lower average ticket prices or lower admissions per capita, it's the latter. Average ticket prices (in USD) are actually higher in Germany than in France, and probably about the same as the UK (UK used to be higher but probably not last year after the post-Brexit weakening of the GBP).

 

If you're asking why Germany has lower admissions per capita than other major European markets, I don't know.

 

The latter (lower admissions per capita) was my question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jason    2,868
19 minutes ago, Jiffy said:

The latter (lower admissions per capita) was my question.

 

It actually may be the wrong way to put the question - I just took a quick look at admissions per capita for major European countries + Nordic countries in 2015, and it's not so much that Germany has unusually low admissions per capita, but that the UK and France have unusually high admissions per capita (by European standards). For perspective, admissions per capita in the domestic market is 3.8 - Canada only is 3.3.

 

France - 3.1

Germany - 1.7

Italy - 1.8

Spain - 2.0

United Kingdom - 2.7

Russia - 1.2

 

Denmark - 2.4

Finland - 1.6

Iceland - 4.3

Norway - 2.3

Sweden - 1.7

Edited by Jason
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tower    1,755

I actually made a table for admissions per capita in 2016 for the markets I could find a month or two ago:

 

Market Admissions(M) Population(M) Admissions per capita
Iceland 1.5 0.338 4.43
South Korea 217.026 50.801 4.27
USA+Canada 1,315.2 359.572 3.66
Ireland 15.782 4.758 3.32
France 212.72 66.984 3.18
Mexico 327 122.273 2.67
United Kingdom 168.26 65.382 2.57
Norway 13.125 5.252 2.50
Estonia 3.291 1.318 2.50
Denmark 13.5 5.749 2.35
Spain 103.3 46.812 2.21
Luxembourg 1.25 0.576 2.17
Netherlands 34.178 16.979 2.01
Italy 112.5 60.59 1.86
Sweden 17.8 9.982 1.78
Belgium 19.7 11.353 1.74
Austria 15.100 8.774 1.72
Switzeland 13.432 8.401 1.60
Finland 8.69 5.503 1.58
Hungary 14.593 9.83 1.48
Czech Republic 15.622 10.572 1.48
Germany 121.104 82.176 1.47
Portugal 14.891 10.341 1.44
Japan 180.189 126.86 1.42
Poland 52.071 38.439 1.35
Russia 191.117 146.839 1.30
Latvia 2.516 1.953 1.29
Lithuania 3.668 2.849 1.29
Slovenia 2.4 2.064 1.16
Argentina 48.9 43.85 1.12
Slovakia 5.694 5.426 1.05
Croatia 4.295 4.191 1.02
China 1,372 1,381.54 0.99
Greece 10.025 10.784 0.93
Brazil 185 206.441 0.90
Cyprus 0.737 0.848 0.87
Belarus 7.996 9.505 0.84
Bulgaria 5.532 7.154 0.77
Turkey 58.285 79.815 0.73
Romania 12 19.76 0.61
Montenegro 0.3 0.622 0.48
Serbia 3.249 7.076 0.46
Liechtenstein 0.016 0.038 0.42
Georgia 1.1 3.72 0.30
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jiffy    21
On 3/28/2017 at 0:48 AM, Jason said:

 

It actually may be the wrong way to put the question - I just took a quick look at admissions per capita for major European countries + Nordic countries in 2015, and it's not so much that Germany has unusually low admissions per capita, but that the UK and France have unusually high admissions per capita (by European standards). For perspective, admissions per capita in the domestic market is 3.8 - Canada only is 3.3.

 

France - 3.1

Germany - 1.7

Italy - 1.8

Spain - 2.0

United Kingdom - 2.7

Russia - 1.2

 

Denmark - 2.4

Finland - 1.6

Iceland - 4.3

Norway - 2.3

Sweden - 1.7

 

On 3/28/2017 at 5:17 PM, Tower said:

I actually made a table for admissions per capita in 2016 for the markets I could find a month or two ago:

 

Market Admissions(M) Population(M) Admissions per capita
Iceland 1.5 0.338 4.43
South Korea 217.026 50.801 4.27
USA+Canada 1,315.2 359.572 3.66
Ireland 15.782 4.758 3.32
France 212.72 66.984 3.18
Mexico 327 122.273 2.67
United Kingdom 168.26 65.382 2.57
Norway 13.125 5.252 2.50
Estonia 3.291 1.318 2.50
Denmark 13.5 5.749 2.35
Spain 103.3 46.812 2.21
Luxembourg 1.25 0.576 2.17
Netherlands 34.178 16.979 2.01
Italy 112.5 60.59 1.86
Sweden 17.8 9.982 1.78
Belgium 19.7 11.353 1.74
Austria 15.100 8.774 1.72
Switzeland 13.432 8.401 1.60
Finland 8.69 5.503 1.58
Hungary 14.593 9.83 1.48
Czech Republic 15.622 10.572 1.48
Germany 121.104 82.176 1.47
Portugal 14.891 10.341 1.44
Japan 180.189 126.86 1.42
Poland 52.071 38.439 1.35
Russia 191.117 146.839 1.30
Latvia 2.516 1.953 1.29
Lithuania 3.668 2.849 1.29
Slovenia 2.4 2.064 1.16
Argentina 48.9 43.85 1.12
Slovakia 5.694 5.426 1.05
Croatia 4.295 4.191 1.02
China 1,372 1,381.54 0.99
Greece 10.025 10.784 0.93
Brazil 185 206.441 0.90
Cyprus 0.737 0.848 0.87
Belarus 7.996 9.505 0.84
Bulgaria 5.532 7.154 0.77
Turkey 58.285 79.815 0.73
Romania 12 19.76 0.61
Montenegro 0.3 0.622 0.48
Serbia 3.249 7.076 0.46
Liechtenstein 0.016 0.038 0.42
Georgia 1.1 3.72 0.30

 

Cool info. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aabattery    17,185

Had a go at looking at NZ vs US in local currency:

 

P2f4ZOK.png

 

we57NtpHWMruwAAAABJRU5ErkJggg==

 

From this you can see that the US gross is usually about 37-64 times larger than the NZ box office. Which is a pretty fat range, but hey. There you go.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.