For Hollywood, the future is here. It’s just not evenly distributed

For Hollywood, the future is here. It’s just not evenly distributed | PandoDaily

Clay Christensen’s theory of disruptive innovation explains how incumbents are often trapped by their own success in a low innovation cycle. As they respond rationally to current incentives from their biggest customers to provide incremental improvements in their current products, smaller and lower margin market entrants can creep up the value chain with wholly new approaches.  For major movie studios, selling theater tickets to consumers that requires them to  transport themselves to a certain place at a certain time, often make them wear 3D (non-Google) glasses, and then months later sell many of those same customers hunks of laser etched plastic, is a lot more profitable than licensing the film to digital distributors for rental or as part of a subscription service like Netflix. Especially if you can send that same film overseas and do it all over again.  It’s probably more accurate to say that Hollywood is in the simultaneous, repeatable event business, not the film business. It’s a business model based on creating artificial scarcity and charging more for the least efficient distribution method, which infuriates  readers of PandoDaily and the other tech blogs.