7 Things I Learned as CEO of a US Film Distributor
There’s a lot more to Distribution than Filmmakers think. Here are some things I learned at the helm of a US Distributor.
If you’re reading this, you might already know that I founded and lead a company called Mutiny Pictures. That company has since sold to Bayview Entertainment. Given I’ve been a producer’s rep for quite a while, I thought I was prepared to step up to leading a team to take films to market directly, I found that while I was up to the task there was still quite a lot of personal growth involved for myself and every level of the team. This is to be expected out of any new venture. Here are some of the biggest things that I personally learned throughout running a US Distribution company.
(Almost) Nobody pays on time.
Filmmakers often complain about Sales agents and Distributors not paying on time. While it goes without saying that there are a lot of shady, dishonest sales agents and distributors out there, I was surprised exactly how few reputable companies did not pay on time. Given that when it comes to film distribution and international sales all stakeholders are part of the same waterfall or pay chain, if one stakeholder is paid late that eventually means that the filmmaker is paid late. We can’t pay you money we don’t have.
So if you’re a filmmaker reading this, you should know that just because your sales agent is late on their reports doesn’t mean they’re not being honest with you. It also doesn’t mean that they’re the reason you’re being paid late. It’s entirely possible that possible their vendor, supplier, or other provider hasn’t paid them yet.
That said, they should still communicate with you about when this is happening, and if they’re paying late you should still be tracking it as much as you can.
Analytics and Reporting really, REALLY suck at every level of the distribution.
Given I do other forms of online and affiliate marketing and used to run marketing for a tech startup, I was utterly flabbergasted by the utter disgrace that is analytics around digital film marketing. In most industries related to digital marketing, the insights are nearly immediate. However, If you deal with a servicer or aggregator, they often won’t give you any level of real-time insight. The best most do is once a week, which is nearly meaningly when it comes to agile marketing practices.
I did find a workaround for my clients, so I’ll share it here. If you’re a filmmaker and want better insights, sign up for the Amazon affiliate program and use those links to your film to market it. This is less about the few extra cents you get from pushing your work and more about real-time sales insights. It can cause some issues around online postings and social media algorithms though, so it’s not a perfect system. I’d love better suggestions in the comments if anyone has any.
Insurance and legal paperwork are way more of the job than you realize.
This wasn’t exactly a surprise. At its core, film distribution and international sales are businesses based almost entirely around tracking rights and trading signatures on paper. is entirely about buying and selling intangible rights restricted by non-physical attributes like territory, right types, region, and other highly specific terms of art. It’s easy to mess this up, so it only makes sense to have solid insurance coverage. What I didn’t expect was how many hours in my standard week were around litigious paperwork around insurance, compliance, reporting, and proposals, as opposed to growing the business.
Additionally, you as a filmmaker will need to provide a lot of insurance paperwork.
You have to pitch earlier than you think.
If you want to have a film on all major TVOD platforms, you generally need to have them pitched/placed 5-6 months ahead of the date. You can do it in 3 months on a rush job. This was surprising given I submitted my first book for publishing less than 3 days before it was available on Amazon. If you sell to an SVOD outlet, they normally require delivery at least 3-6 months in advance as well, and they’ll either pay over the course of the license or a set period after the license begins.
Payouts take longer than you think.
Reporting is one thing, payment is another. Most platforms only pay quarterly, and they pay 30 days after the end of the quarter. There has recently been an additional 90-day delay that was initially for COVID, but that seems to be less of an issue than it used to be. Additionally, they won’t pay for partial quarters, meaning if you launched in February, you won’t get any data from a lot of platforms until August or even November. If there’s a service involved, you might get an additional 30-day delay.
This makes it really hard to run a business, and the only thing you can really do is use a different aggregator or servicer. You can supplement this with direct vendor payments from streamers and physical media outlets, but those are only getting more difficult to place. There are very few companies that are occupying the servicer or aggregator space in the market, and unfortunately, the ones with the greatest physical reach tend to also have the worst reporting timelines.
There’s a great amount of room for an aggregator with fast recording and greater ability for brick-and-mortar physical releases. However, given the rapid decline of physical media, there might not be time for such a company to access that window before it closes forever.
The industry still operates on a tentpole model.
The sad truth of the matter is that on the ultra-low budget scale, only about 2 or 3 in 10 movies make money. If your sales agency or distributor is made up of really good curators, you might be able to get that to 4 or even 5 out of 10. If you’re hitting that high, most industry people will be amazed. If you’re running a distribution company, this means you either need to be exceptionally picky and run a very lean company, or you need to take everything you can and see what sticks. I’ve written another piece on this going into more detail.
Producers get in their own way a lot.
I said earlier that it’s no secret that there are a lot of shady sales agents and distributors out there. That said, not all filmmakers are saints either. Some filmmakers are a complete joy to work with, but others will second guess everything you do and think that the only film that you should ever focus on is theirs.
I had a filmmaker say precisely that to my face. We got tons of press for this person, but nobody wanted to watch it and the film tanked. When this filmmaker wasn’t getting the returns they expected they started taking up a ton of time in angry calls and emails. This reduced A LOT of my available time to actually get their film out there, which further impacted the returns and became a vicious cycle.
Marketing a movie is best when it’s a partnership between the filmmakers and the distributor. In general, you should discuss when you’re making any level of announcement with your distributor so that it can make the biggest possible splash. It’s generally unwise to drop assets like posets and trailers without talking to your distributor, as you may ruin potential exclusive press drops. Worse, if you put your film up in various territories through self-distribution channels, it could cost you thousands or tens of thousands of dollars in lost revenue. Even if you can take a film down, most buyers won’t want it if it’s already been placed on any platforms in their region. I could go on about this for a while, so I’m going to leave it for another blog.
This is a collaborative process, so they’re definitely give and take, but keep in mind there’s probably a reason you didn’t self-distribute and instead decided to work with your distributor.
In the end, this is a relationship business. If your distributor likes you, they’re more likely to go the extra mile for you. That’s a reality of human nature. If you want your distributor to like you, you might want to grab my free IndieFilm business resource package as it’s got lots of goodies to help make marketing your movie easier for all involved. The resource pack got templates for contacting distributors, and tracking that contact so you don’t bug them, an e-book on the film business, and a whitepaper on the metrics of the film industry. Plus, you’ll get monthly content digests to help you better understand the industry in a manageable way and occasion updates on new releases, courses, workshops, and announcements from Guerrilla Rep Media. Check it out below.
Check the Tags below for more related Content
5 Takeaways from AFM 2018
A legacy port of my breakdown of the 2018 American Film Market.
I’ve been going to the American Film Market® for 9 years now, and I’ve been chronicling what’s going on with the market in many ways from podcasts to blogs and even a book or two. So given that AFM® 2018 wrapped up yesterday, I thought I would do something of a post-mortem. While I’ll outline my feelings on the whole thing in this blog, the long and short of it is that the state of the American Film Market is mixed
But before I dive into it too deeply, I’d like to say this. My vantage point on this is purely my own, and subject to the flaws that one would expect from experiences of someone only attending the market for a few days this year. I went on an industry badge because I simply needed to take a few meetings to check in on things I’ve already placed with Sales Agents, as well as shop a couple of my newer projects to the people I prefer to do business with.
I considered exhibiting this year but decided against it after hearing how slow Cannes was in May, as well as the massive drop in buyers AFM Experienced last year. We’ll see how that changes next year. One last note, I wrote this blog in traffic in LA, while my wife drove. I normally don't publish first drafts, but it's time-sensitive, so apologies for any typos.
So without Further Adieu, let’s get into the post-game.
1. Buyer numbers appear to be up, and they’re buying
Word in the corridors last year was that AFM went from around 1800 buyers in 2017 to around 1200 buyers in 2017. After talking to a few sales agents who shall remain nameless, it appears that the total buyer count at this year’s AFM is somewhere in the vicinity of 1325. While walking the corridors I definitely saw a lot more green badges than last year.
Not only were there more buyers there. It appears that they’re actually buying films. I heard several sales agents remarking that they had closed multiple sales at the market, and the buyers were sticking around much longer than they have in years previous. Overall, this is good for the market, especially given that for many years almost all of the business was done in follow-up not actually during the market, especially for smaller-budget films.
2. Exhibitor numbers appeared to be down
In previous years, both the second and third floors of AFM were packed with smaller sales agencies, This year, only the third floor was booked and even then it seemed as though fewer offices were booked. Also, it appeared that many of the offices on the 8th floor seemed to be vacant.
After talking with a few exhibitors, it appears likely that this trend is going to continue next year. Several I talked to were unsure of whether or not they would continue to exhibit at AFM. Although we’ll see if new names come up to take their places.
3. The Entirety of the Loews required a badge to access
This made a lot of headlines prior to the market. I was hesitant to believe that this would be a good thing for the market, particularly for the high priced film commission exhibitors on the 5th floor. I only showed up to the market on Saturday, but apparently it was extremely quiet for the days preceding it. The market seemed somewhat slow to me, but mildly busier than I expected it to be on Saturday, and, but began steadily dropping off on Sunday and Monday, and Tuesday was VERY slow, even by the generally slow standards of what is functionally the last day of the market.
Word on the street is that many of the regular exhibitors on the 5th floor were not too happy with it, especially for the first few days. Although I’ll keep my sources on that anonymous. One notably missing 5th-floor exhibitor was Cinando. It’s possible they moved, but the spot that they normally occupied was vacant. This could be due in part to the growing prominence of MyAFM.
In some ways, it was nice, though. It was never too hard to find a seat, and once you got into the building there were no additional security checks. Not sure if that makes up for the drawbacks though.
4. The Location Expo on the 5th floor was fantastically useful, but under-attended
AFM opened one of the Loews Hotel Ballrooms for use by film commissions and specialty service providers starting on Saturday. It was really useful to be able to talk to various commissions and compare incentives. However, there very few times I saw more than a handful of people there, and I dropped by at least 8 or 9 times because of various sorts of business I had to do with some of the vendors in the rooms. (More soon)
Overall I hope to see it again, but I can’t help but think it would be more useful to all involved if it were in an area that did not require a badge to check out.
5. Early Stage Money exists there (For the Right Projects
I was surprised to see how much traction my team got for an early stage project, despite the fact it has a first time feature director. Admittedly, we came in with a good amount of money already in place, and it’s a good genre for this sort of thing but the fact that there might be a decent amount to come out and report in blogs early next year.
Thanks so much for reading! If you haven’t already, check out the first book on film markets, written by yours truly. Also, join my mailing list for free film market resources so you’re ready for future film markets.
All opinions my own. AFM and the American Film Market are registered trademarks of the Independent Film and Television Alliance (IFTA) This article has not in any way beed endorsed by the IFTA, AFM, or any of its affiliates.