1905 film network special article In mid-October, as the annual hot film "Nezha: The Devil Boy" (hereinafter referred to as "Nezha") approached its release, news of a huge dividend went viral on the network. With an investment of 600,000 yuan and a return of nearly 18 million yuan, such an astonishing rate of return on investment made countless netizens stare at "Film Finance" for a while.
The originator of the rumors: "Accounting" SMS screenshot
Although this rumor was finally proved to be a rumor by the film, the recent resurgence of the topic of "film finance" has attracted widespread attention from the industry and even the society.
The movie financial products designed for personal customers are really profitable investment products, or are there any traps of foolishness? "Film Critic Today" has an in-depth exclusive dialogue with the founder of Entertainment Capital and a senior media person...
"Film Critic Today" has an exclusive dialogue with Zheng Dawson
Part.1
Part.1
Part.1
the process of. Even if the investment project is like "Nezha", the so-called "dividend" to investors is almost impossible to settle first during the film's release date.
"Nezha" dividend rumors seem to be self-defeating, but the amount of return involved is not without reason.
Zheng Daosen has calculated an account for "Film Critic Today": According to the current box office splitting rules, investors can get about one-third of the total box office revenue, so "Nezha" with a box office of over 4.9 billion can be used for the capital. Nearly 1.7 billion in revenue. Relative to the rumored investment cost of about 100 million yuan and the possible differentiated investment return conditions, the rumored 30 times return on investment is not impossible, although it is high. The temptation of super high returns like
naturally gives birth to many profit traps. Just as "Nezha" first exploded, its "Fengshen" series of animated film "Jiang Ziya", which was announced at the end of the movie, was used by lawbreakers to spread false investment information. After the producer of "Jiang Ziya" jointly issued an anti-false investment statement, film projects such as "Detective Chinatown 3" and "The Gathering at Southern Station" have also officially announced the fight against scams. The joint statement of
is even earlier than the official announcement of "Jiang Ziya"
These endless and unstoppable scams continue to appear, in Zheng Daosen's view, it is closely related to the asymmetry of information held by the public. Ordinary people do not understand the film accounting algorithm, nor can they confirm through clear channels whether those financial companies have obtained the rights to invest in films they claim. Once they encounter a project book with a glamorous package and full of stars, it is difficult to guarantee that they will not be hooked.
There are always hot film superstars in the PPT of similar projects
. With the frequent occurrence of telecommunication fraud, the elderly who have no idea about film investment are easily targeted by criminals. The scam plot that appeared in the movie "Huge Call" produced by the movie channel almost reappeared in reality.
An aunt in Shanghai was fooled by a so-called "big movie" project that promoted "must make money". 420,000 went into a scam without hesitation-fortunately, she was persuaded by the police at the last minute.
Part.2
film financial management, don't mix
film investment, what appears in front of the public is often such a brilliant phenomenon as "Nezha". But for the film and television investment industry, losing money is often a more common result.
The film and television industry does not believe in tears
Zheng Dawson bluntly said that out of 100 movies, only 10 of them may be profitable, and most movies may be at a loss.
The 10% probability of making money cannot be avoided by professional film investment institutions, and it will only be more difficult for "retail investors" who intend to invest in films. For movies defined by Zheng Daosen as "non-standard products", the key issues related to the pockets, such as the amount of investment, when it can be recovered, and the geometry of the investment income, cannot be quantified and accurately predicted. If there are unfinished projects that cannot be completed or screened, all investment will be no different.
This "water drift" may not even sound
Article 17 of my country's "Film Management Regulations" clearly states: The state encourages enterprises, institutions and other social organizations and individuals to participate in film production in the form of funding and investment. However, for the high-risk financial behavior of film investment, professional institutions cannot guarantee a complete retreat. It is only more difficult for ordinary individuals who lack professional judgment and industry experience to participate.
According to Zheng Daosen’s introduction to "Film Critic Today", "movie crowdfunding" in the form of "movie financing" is actually an old topic in the industry. As early as 2013, film projects raised funds through this channel, but it is also Earn less and lose more. In 2014, the crowdfunding product of the film "Golden Age", which was led and released at a certain time, failed miserably because of the film's box office failure.
2016 Lunar New Year champion "Mermaid" has issued special financial products including film investment shares through bank channels. However, with the extremely bad impact of the "Ip Man 3" investor victimization incident and the further regulation of the financial market in the past two years, "film financing" has almost disappeared from the market.
Zheng Daosen said sentimentally to "Film Critic Today" that financial products are only a business opportunity for making money in movies, and the money earned is not the movie itself, but once an adverse event similar to "Ip Man 3" occurs, But it will bring real harm to the film industry. Is there any value in the financial properties of
movies, and can they be explored? The journey of "Journey to the West: The Great Sage Returns" through crowdfunding to complete the project and create high-quality goods, Zheng Daosen's memory is still fresh. "Film Critic Today" also discussed the crowdfunding event of film derivatives, but he was still cautious in the face of the problem of combining film and finance.
"Film can of course be integrated with finance, but my point is that if film is to be better integrated with finance, it needs to introduce open, fair, just and independent third-party supervision, including government intervention."
benign The "Film Finance" program requires an officially designated or approved property rights trading platform similar to the Housing Authority and Stock Exchange. But up to now, no such official institution has appeared in our country. The lack of the filing system and third-party public supervision also prevents ordinary people from publicly knowing the authenticity of the investment shares of companies that belong to wealth management products, which undoubtedly increases barriers for the public to participate in movies.
"Under the market environment like 2019, for ordinary consumers, we recommend how far away, or far away from movie financial products."
