Sully

1.3K posts

Sully

Sully

@Sullyish

Founder basically Larry David but with semi-decent hair 7 figures ARR in the audiobook space Focus on entertainment and media entities

Katılım Nisan 2020
133 Takip Edilen214 Takipçiler
Sully
Sully@Sullyish·
I'd agree with '90s or early '00s maybe. It's easier to have a defining culture/aesthetic or a few at least in an era with less fragmentation. The internet slowly changed things over the last 30 years to create infinite niche cultures where nothing is the clear aesthetic of the time
English
0
0
0
9
Autism Capital 🧩
Autism Capital 🧩@AutismCapital·
What was the last decade that had a distinct aesthetic? 50s, aesthetic. 60s aesthetic, 70s aesthetic, 80s, aesthetic, 90s, aesthetic, 00s, aesthetic. Did it stop in the 2010s? Every decade you can pair with a music genre and an art style. What can you say about 2010+? It stopped.
Autism Capital 🧩 tweet media
English
117
17
263
24.5K
Sully
Sully@Sullyish·
I think this is probably accurate in the long-run, the old formats never really fully go away but they do become more niche. IMO it will be a lopsided barbell or long-tailed distribution, there will be some blockbuster style events that still capture mass attention (sports like NFL/soccer seem one of the few things still capable of doing this e.g. Super Bowl or World Cup) but everything else will get pushed into niches - basically monetised Reddit communities/platforms, personalised (1-to-1) options or small live events. It's kinda the logical conclusion of the internet where people can gather based on interests rather than proximity, so that exacerbated all of this. I think Crunchyroll (anime focus) was a sign of what's to come in film/movies. I remember Peter Chernin chatting on this a few years ago on @InvestLikeBest
English
0
0
0
29
Rambo Van Halen
Rambo Van Halen@RamboVanHalen·
Lots of comments about how to remake the film industry--and a lot of "build back better" type talk. Sorry you have to hear it from me, but film as a dominant cultural force is never coming back. But it's not going to go away either. It's going to stick around. Just like opera stuck around. At one time opera was mass entertainment. And then it faded and was replaced by other forms of mass entertainment--like movies. Today opera is a niche thing--reserved for the wealthy. But it still happens. Old operas are still being performed, and once in a while someone even writes a completely original opera. I think we can expect something similar from film. Niche film theaters will play old movies, and once in a while will play something new. But the days of everyone going to the movies on a Saturday night (or even streaming at home) is over. The new films won't be made for a mass audience--not like The Matrix or Starwars or Lord of the Rings or any of the other movies you love--because that mass audience is gone. And it's never coming back. Instead films will be made for a niche audience. And we're already there now. Marvel movies are made for a niche audience of beard neck fanboys, and Oscar bait movies are made for the NPR totebag and Volvo niche. What's going to take film's place? I have no idea. If I had to make a bet on the future of mass entertainment I'd go with anything live and in person. The faker (and gayer) the world gets, the more people will want authenticity. Stand up comedy is enjoying a resurgence--partly for this reason. As far as digital content goes, maybe it'll be gaming, or maybe vertical drama type shows. But who the fuck knows. It will probably be something that doesn't currently exist. But again, film will never go away entirely. Somewhere there are opera companies producing operas, Shakespeare festivals still happen, Greek plays still happen, and somewhere in the world somebody is putting on a Punch and Judy show. So film fans, don't despair. They'll be something for you. It might not be great, but it will be there. And I guess that's better than nothing🤷‍♂️ (Credit to my friend @DisgracedProp for the film/opera insight.)
Rambo Van Halen@RamboVanHalen

I put in 25 years. It would be 26 but I haven't worked yet this year and I'm not sure I'll ever work in entertainment again. The writing has been on the wall for quite some time. But it's a sad thing--especially since the collapse of Hollywood is (mostly) self inflicted. Outsiders like to blame the unions and burdensome regulations. That's not exactly wrong, but the big reason is that Hollywood stopped making a product that people wanted to consume. Film is a funny thing. On one hand it's art. But on the other it's a mass consumer product--like a car, or a soft drink. But unlike a typical consumer product, it was something we consumed together. We went to a special place, and sat with strangers, and watched stories. And those stories infected us. They entered our minds and our souls and they implanted things. Deep things. Ancient things. Timeless things. Things like heroism and beauty and love and fear and sex and death and adventure and tragedy and pain and injustice and all the things that make up our dreams. There's a thing we call "cinematic language". It's how we tell a story with images. (And BTW if you want to learn more about the language of visual media, read Scott McCloud's excellent book Understanding Comics.) An odd thing about cinematic language is that it's the same language as dreams. There's a scene in Christopher Nolan's Inception where Leonardo DiCaprio is explains to (the tragic) Ellen Page how dreams work. But what he's really describing is cinematic language. Inception is really a movie about movies BTW. While it's far from my favorite film, I think it's the perfect film. Because the suspension of disbelief is perfect. You believe the plot about dreams because you're familiar with how movies work--maybe not consciously--but you know. Everyone knows. Maybe not everyone has seen a movie, but everyone has dreams. Another odd thing about film: you don't "watch" a movie, you look into it. And you put yourself inside it. Now you're in the dream. And you're hypnotized. Because movies do that too. The motion--the moving images--they hack your brain. We're programed to pay attention to moving things. Even when the things aren't real. Even when they're just light reflected off a screen. So we'd go to these special places--these movie theaters--these temples--and we'd sit, and we'd "watch" and we'd enter the dream. And we did it together. And after the movie was over--and the lights came on, and we'd file out over the sound of popcorn crunching under our feet--we were different. We had become transformed. Sometimes we were changed in minor ways. But sometimes not. Sometimes we were changed in profound ways. And we did it together. Before the movie we were a room full of strangers. But after--on the way out the door--we all had something in common. Because we shared an experience. We'd shared the dream. And we'd all become transformed. And then tech got involved... Streaming turned movies from a communal experience to a personal experience. And that's an issue, but they did something else too. They started developing movies as if they were tech products. But you can't apply a KPI to a dream. At least, not successfully anyway. Because dreams don't work like that--nor does any sort of art. And that's a funny thing about making movies. You try to make the best film you can, but at the end of the day you have no idea if it's good or if it's going to be successful. You just have to hope the audience likes it. Now, you can design a movie that will appeal to a preexisting audience. Marvel movies are like this. There's a large group of fanboy nerds that will see every single one. You can count on them every time. Just like you can count on the Gay Oscar Bait crowd (for example). But those movies are slop. But Hollywood became specialists in slop. Because slop is safe. Because you could apply KPI style metrics to slop. As a result they lost the audience. And the audience is probably never coming back. I wrote a book in 2024 (that was published in 2025). While writing, I thought of it as my farewell to the industry. But looking back, what I was actually writing was a eulogy for Hollywood--the place where dreams were made. And so it goes...

English
91
73
795
125.2K
Sully
Sully@Sullyish·
Barbell - there will still be star directors and creators on these platforms who produce AI-gen movies and shows that capture more widespread attention and large audiences. But I think the era of personalisation and 1-to-1 (rather than 1 to many) is hard to ignore given the trajectory we're on
English
0
0
0
3
Sully
Sully@Sullyish·
It's easy to bemoan the trend but the long-term trajectory suggests box office and theatrical is re-arranging chairs on the Titanic. The value capture went to streamers and UGC enablers in the past 25 years. Hollywood stopped innovating so much and cashed in on sequels and proven IP to stem the bleed, but here we are 20 years later and their position is worse. And the legacy media pie and Hollywood value will increasingly go to (outside of YouTube) whoever creates the best platforms, creator/director tools and walls for AI-generated UGC. Anybody in their bedroom will soon get close to being able to generate an amazing short film, short TV show episode, and eventually full feature film. 1-to-1 personalisation will arrive and unprecedented levels of customisation. Why watch a film intended for millions of people when you can watch one specifically made for YOU? Whoever builds for that is likely to win in the next 10 years +.
Balaji@balajis

Hollywood is over. It's all Internet now.

English
1
0
0
20
Sully
Sully@Sullyish·
@aagave Love your Substack Andrew it's a solid read, might be the best one on the entertainment sector 👏
English
1
0
1
30
Andrew A. Rosen
Andrew A. Rosen@aagave·
Bob Iger leaves The Walt Disney Company $DIS with a giant database—or “monolith”, like the "Mad Men" episode from Season 7—at the center of its business. The newly announced reorg splits that database in two—one for streaming, one for theme parks. Nobody has explained how both drive the company’s famous flywheel. Bob Chapek tried to fix this and got fired. New CEO Josh D'Amaro has to solve the same problem without the “antibodies in the system” pushing him out, too. My bet is that D’Amaro will figure it out. He has to. But the past is precedent and it will not be pretty. open.substack.com/pub/parqor/p/a…
English
1
0
1
426
Sully
Sully@Sullyish·
I've heard a few people phrase the re-ordering of the cinema/box office and theatrical stuff as 'rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic' and I think that is probably right in the long run. Even Michael Eisner said similar thing on recent interview. It might still exist in some format but like vinyl or live action theatre or something, but it will be more niche in 10-20 years time. I think it's hard to argue against that. Streamers (e.g. Netflix) and UGC enablers (e.g. YouTube) have captured the value in the last 20-25 years. But it's likely the UGC/AI-gen enablers and whoever builds walls/infra around that who will capture most of the old Hollywood and legacy media value in the next 20 years. I think you will have the most pronounced era of 1-to-1 storytelling at scale ever. Personalised story options like crazy, it will look more like the format of gaming.
English
0
0
1
107
Sully
Sully@Sullyish·
Probably some combo of the ticket prices going up and the shift to focus on blockbusters, whatever will get to scale/mass attention? Still large % of pop who enjoy going to the cinema and getting out of the house and getting swept up in cultural phenomena e.g. Barbie/Oppenheimer 2023 moment
English
0
0
0
7
Brad Allen
Brad Allen@Ulmo_Space·
@balajis @elonmusk Sorry to nitpick, but it actually looks pretty even to me. There's just other stuff now. I'm very surprised it is so even and not going down dramatically.
English
1
0
4
57
Sully
Sully@Sullyish·
@Francine @michaelmiraflor Yep, people in charge would rather bet on proven IP than unproven. Boring and risk-averse and stultifies culture, but from their POV/economic assurance lens it makes sense
English
0
0
0
6
Sully
Sully@Sullyish·
Exactly, why compete with the AI-focused people, if it's not your lane, pick your lane and dominate there instead. AI not the be all and end all in the world, tons of other opportunities. If necessary these entities will just incorporate AI slowly anyway in their own workflows/outputs
English
0
0
0
2
Ryan Graff
Ryan Graff@rcgraff·
@thesamparr 1) Lots of investors — and there are tons out there — don't have any special insight into who will win in AI. 2) The winner take all AI companies are likely already past the angel stage. 3) If you are/believe the above, then Media and DTC seem like relatively AI-proof segments
English
1
0
1
86
Sam Parr
Sam Parr@thesamparr·
I’ve seen a few media companies and dtc brands raising funding right now. I’m not an active angel…but I can’t imagine doing a non-ai company seed investment at the moment. God bless those companies. What’s the market like for non-ai startups?
English
85
4
153
30.7K
Sully
Sully@Sullyish·
@benfritz Do you think the long-run trajectory for theatrical releases might be kinda baked-in at this point? I know Michael Eisner said on a recent podcast he doesn't see movie theatres surviving in their current state much beyond the next 20 years. Home/private consumption of entertainment has been on a steadily improving quality path for past 50+ years. With UGC/YouTube and all the competing interactive (gaming and AI) alternatives for younger demographic attention I don't see how a major turnaround happens here for theatrical. Outside of sports (e.g. Super Bowl) it seems so much harder to reach cultural scale and capture mass attention now vs. the Pixar heyday of the 2000s. Do you think it's a case of the industry finding the next comic book/superhero adaptation equivalents (probably biggest gaming franchises, anime and any sub-cultures with big enough appeal) and pursuing those as one of the few things that can drive people into seats? And AI driving the production costs down gradually?
English
0
0
0
22
Ben Fritz
Ben Fritz@benfritz·
At $46M, "Hoppers" had the biggest opening for an animated original since 2017. Reason to celebrate. Yet Pixar originals like Cars, Wall-E, Up, Incredibles, Inside Out all opened above $60M, when tickets were cheaper and production costs lower. The business is much tougher now.
English
5
6
43
3.2K
Sully
Sully@Sullyish·
@MattBelloni @Lucas_Shaw Great pod. It's been a smart few weeks from Netflix to know when to dip, get the ~$3 billion from WB deal and legacy IP play falling through, to then slowly open the Overton window on AI amongst their movie and TV partners w/ Affleck's name attached to it
English
0
0
1
75
Sully
Sully@Sullyish·
@HappyPunch I've seen enough, book him vs. Pereira
English
0
0
0
79
Happy Punch
Happy Punch@HappyPunch·
Mathieu Olivier is now 21-0 in fights over the last two NHL seasons 😳 Get Dana White on the phone
English
353
1.5K
35.7K
3M
Sully retweetledi
Brian Halligan
Brian Halligan@bhalligan·
The older I get, the more I think outstanding taste in people is the only real alpha.
English
48
137
1.8K
105K
Sully
Sully@Sullyish·
I know I'm a bit slow as this was a little while ago but the Disney x OpenAI deal is telling. As Chamath pointed out on All-In, the future is where the billion dollar deals are being forged (e.g. Google acquiring YouTube, Facebook acquiring Instagram) moreso than the $100bn+ ones (the Warner Bros deal) This deal hints at some of the future. The two mega trends are really... 1) Decentralisation (no longer oligopoly IP holders who dictate content), more UGC (acceleration of where we've been going with TikTok, YouTube, Roblox etc.) 2) Skill moves to taste (it's increasingly no longer about whether you're a directing or musical maestro but can you prompt something correctly and artfully) Note, I don't think it'll be entirely one way, Netflix is a massive business still despite TT/YT, not everyone wants to do the work to prompt something, be a storyteller, even with AI. It's a barbell. Still have power laws in this business, the top 1% will take the attention.
English
0
0
0
54
Sully
Sully@Sullyish·
@MaxGrant__ On the hunt for one too lol. Remote role but lower starting point, few mill ARR
English
1
0
0
18
MAX
MAX@MaxGrant__·
Anyone in SoCal area: One of my clients is looking to to hire an in-house Director of Growth to work at their office in Huntington Beach. Fast growing jewelry brand doing 8+ figures a year. DM me, retweet, ask around pls!
English
2
0
1
387
Sully
Sully@Sullyish·
Looking for a head of growth marketing style person for our brand. We're doing a few million ARR (USD), need someone experienced in taking that to 8 figures and beyond ideally. HMU if you know anyone!
English
0
0
0
80
Sully retweetledi
el.cine
el.cine@EHuanglu·
Andreessen said AI is gonna let creative people make insane movies without ever touching a studio budget We’re about to see a whole new kind of filmmaking, raw, personal, and from voices that never had access before
English
123
107
840
65K
Echo+Grain
Echo+Grain@Echo_Grain·
@APompliano Watched: The ‘How Netflix Designs for Scale’ talk. Every slide felt like a design philosophy masterclass disguised as a tech deck.
English
2
0
5
909
Anthony Pompliano 🌪
Anthony Pompliano 🌪@APompliano·
What was the best thing you read, watched, or listened to this week? Any topic is fair game.
English
264
13
250
80.2K
Sully
Sully@Sullyish·
@nickfloats 60% of the time it works every time
English
0
0
0
376