-187-
distributor’s sale of video units directly to retailers (e.g.,
Wal-Mart)).136
i. Income Projections
Mr. Medress prepared income projections for a 10-year period
from 1996 through 2006, on the basis of “reasonable assumptions
of demand” for the EBD film titles in 1996. Mr. Medress assumed
that most of the film titles in the EBD film library were
previously released in video in the United States, that demand
for the film titles was constrained by their age and their having
been previously exploited in video, and that the distribution of
many titles in the library was constrained by their sexual and
shock exploitation subject matter.137
In scenario 1, Mr. Medress projected 10 film titles in
rental and 55 film titles in sell-through. In scenario 2, Mr.
Medress projected 10 film titles in rental for each of the years
in the projection period, 47 sell-through film titles in 1997,
and 45 sell-through film titles for each of the years 1998
through 2006.138
136 Mr. Medress analyzed the possibility of distributing the
EBD film titles in DVD format; however, he concluded that
releasing those film titles in DVD format did not make economic
sense on the basis of the estimates in place in 1996.
137 According to Mr. Medress, certain video chains (e.g.,
Blockbuster) and retailers (e.g., Wal-Mart) would not stock film
titles of this nature.
138 Mr. Medress does not identify which 10 film titles from
(continued...)
Page: Previous 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011