Film Prioritization - Essay Example

Film Prioritization Since the main objective for film prioritization is to create shareholder value, the predicted ROI is a good place to begin in creating our rankings. Mathematical Analysis of Return on Investment: 80% prob. 50% prob. 20% prob. Predicted ROI Proposal 1 (Dalai Lama) 8% 18% 24% 20.2% Proposal 2 (Heidi) 2% 20% 30% 17.6% Proposal 3 (Echo) 12% 14% 18% 20.2% Proposal 4 (Escape) 15% 20% 24% 26.8% Proposal 5 (Nadia) 8% 15% 20% 17.9% Proposal 6 (Whale) 6% 18% 25% 18.8% Proposal 7 (Grand Island) 9% 15% 20% 18.7% This chart gives us our preliminary ranking of Proposal 4, 1, 3 (tied with 1), 6, 7, 5, and 2. Now we will look at the company “must” objectives and make the necessary changes to the rankings. The top proposal, #4 Escape from Rio Janupi, meets all the “must” objectives and will therefore remain ranked in first for now. Proposal #1, My Life With Dalai Lama meets the first two “must” objectives, but it fails on the third because its subject matter might insult the Chinese government, thereby fouling the negotiations to bring a new theme park to China, so Proposal #1 will move to the bottom of the rankings. Proposal #3 The Year of the Echo fails on the second “must” objective because its subject matter includes a heroin overdose and the underworld of sex, drugs and rock and roll, so it will be unable to get a PG advisory rating. Proposal #6 Keiko passes all the must objectives, although from a PR standpoint the treatment of Keiko in the movie might be an issue even though the footage was not filmed by the company. Proposal #7 Grand Island passes all the “must” objectives. Proposal #5 Nadia! and Proposal #2 Heidi also pass all the “must” objectives. This gives us a new set of rankings: #4 Escape #6 Whale #7 Grand Island #5 Nadia! #2 Heidi #1 Dalai Lama and #3 Echo (disqualified for not passing “must” objectives) Now we will examine the remaining films’ ability to fulfill the company’s “want” objectives. Proposal #4 has a chance to be nominated for an Academy Award because the Academy tends to select films that have a moral conscience and address environmental issues. It is unlikely that it will win best picture, since it is rare for an animated feature to get the nod, but if the film is well executed it may have a chance. Proposal #4 passes all the rest of the company’s “want” objectives easily. It could be especially effective in creating merchandise revenue, particularly because the goal-based plot of the movie would translate into a video game very well. Proposal #6 has a chance to be nominated for an Oscar, but it seems less likely to be nominated or to win than Proposal #4 because its plot is not as innovative (it’s just like Free Willy) and because it doesn’t address the political concerns of the Academy as directly. It passes the remaining objectives just about as well as #4, although the projected ROI is less. Proposal #7 Grand Island has a better chance at winning an Oscar than #6, and it probably has a slightly better chance than #4, since it is a live action feature and it also addresses the environmental concerns that the Academy holds dear. It has difficulty passing objective #2 because it is not animated, although it still may be possible to spin off an animated TV show. It passes objectives 3 through 5, but it fails on objective 6 because it is not animated. It passes objective 7, but the ride would not be as successful as that for proposals #4 or #6. Proposal #5 Nadia! probably has the best chance of all the remaining proposals at winning the Oscar for best picture since it is low budget and has an interesting story set in a foreign country. It also has difficulty passing “want” objective #2 since it is not animated, although a TV cartoon may still be successful. It fails on objectives #3 and #4 and it has less than a 50% chance of passing objective #5. It fails #6 because it is not animated, but it passes #7 because a gymnastics ride is an interesting concept and would probably be successful. Proposal #2 Heidi will probably not even be nominated for best picture since it is a remake and does not cover any important social issues. Again, it has difficulty with #2 since it is not animated, but it is still viable for a TV spin-off to work. It passes #3, but it probably wouldn’t generate as much merchandise revenue as most of the other proposals. It fails #4 and has less than a 50% chance of passing #5. It also fails #6 since it isn’t animated and barely passes #7 since a ride is possible but probably wouldn’t be very popular. Now that the “want” objective analysis is complete, we have a basis to create the final film prioritization rankings. #1: Proposal #4 Escape From Rio Japuni #2: Proposal #5 Nadia! #3: Proposal #6 Keiko—One Whale of a Story #4: Proposal #7 Grand Island #5: Proposal #2 Heidi Disqualified: #1 Dalai Lama and #3 Echo The analysis of the want objectives didn’t change the rankings very much; it only bumped Nadia! up two rankings above Grand Island and Keiko. Much in this analysis depends on the weighting of the “want” objectives. Even though Nadia! doesn’t pass as many of the objectives as Keiko or Grand Island, it has the best chance of any of the projects at winning the Oscar for best picture. This consideration explains why it was bumped up two whole spots. If the Oscar objective were weighted even more heavily, then Nadia! might even overtake Escape for number one, but since Escape is by far the most economically viable and it passes all the “want” objectives, including having a chance at an Oscar (and especially since Oscars can’t be accurately predicted), it remains in the #1 spot. If the Oscar objective were weighted less, then Nadia! might have stayed where it was at behind Keiko and Grand Island. It should also be noted that even though Dalai Lama and Echo were disqualified for failing the “must” objectives, they were the two most economically viable projects behind Escape. It might be possible to release Echo through a subsidiary company and Dalai Lama should be kept on the shelf pending the China theme park deal. Read More