HOLLYWOOD STOCK EXCHANGE
THE ENTERTAINMENT MARKET
THE ENTERTAINMENT MARKET
Since this is probably aimed at me, I'll give you a couple of good replies
1. Nostradamus effect - You people are great after the fact and with your analysis. How about posting on Friday and using say 80% to 100% as the range for your accuracy variable?
2. Not everyone uses Twitter. Twitter skews older. Twitter skews affluent. Twitter skews white. So if all movie goers are 26-45 with 75k+ earnings and are white, then I apologize.
3. If the medium doesn't directly take numbers from the various socio-economic demos above, there is no variable constant that can be used to properly calculate the behaviors of the non-Twitter age groups (elderly, kids), non-Twitter ethnic groups et all. In other words, there is no Pi equivalent value in the equation to with relation to African Americans/Kids/non-techie types who....OMG, they actually let those types of people into the movies.
4. Multiple twitter tracking sites said SPLICE was the only trending movie including previous and soon to be released movies using the 7 day tweet baseline on June 4. So how is it that in your "data" its only #3 among the openers?
5. 2 million tweets a day, so how could Splice trend on any tracking site with only 4 thousand tweets. (Implying your data is BS, just in case you're wondering).
6. 2 million tweets a day....16 thousand tweets about openers = 0.8% so that means say 1% of the 700 thousand users that arent direct representations of the movie going public are talking (not going to) about these movies......um, what is that supposed to tell people about the openers?
Your own data set is all over the place. Only 1 movie with over 20k in Tweets was within 90% accuracy. This I think is the most telling. Because when scientists/computer programs/anything to do with numbers gets MORE DATA, the accuracy is supposed to increase. Not decrease.
Is there value to information on Twitter? Besides the fact that BILL had a grilled cheese sandwich for lunch and Cindy had a huge zit on her forehead......sure, why not.
But you have to PROVE IT. And when people like me see it as just a social medium for attention seekers to say "OOOh, look at me", you gotta prove it over and over again before we would say you are 100% right.
And if 74% is good for you that's fine.....to me that's a D+ from a generous teacher.
So, the Twitter prediction 'myth' scored another win this weekend. Jun 06, 12:01
Not bad at all. Thanks for your time in compiling the info. {nm} Jun 06, 12:04
Impressive average but I still don't understand what it's counting. {nm} Jun 06, 12:43
Trade secrets, I bet :) {nm} Jun 06, 13:36
It's explained pretty well on the site. {nm} Jun 06, 15:51
Sure, here's a bit more info. Jun 06, 18:50
Helpful. You're certainly putting a lot of work into it. {nm} Jun 07, 04:10
Since this is probably aimed at me, I'll give you a couple of good replies Jun 06, 14:20
If 74% is a D+, there isn't a box office predictor who does better than a C- {nm} Jun 06, 14:37
And that's fine Jun 06, 15:07
Shaped and moulded? Jun 06, 18:33
Fine I'll bite Jun 06, 18:30
Not crying and actually holding back Jun 06, 20:12
Its called math... Jun 06, 20:37
Soooo wanted to let this go, but I really hate ignorance Jun 06, 23:56
Interesting Jun 07, 07:42
Insanely low number of tweets for Marmaduke.. Lowest of them all, from what I can see {nm} Jun 06, 15:43
But that was a movie not meant for people who would use Twitter. Jun 06, 15:54
Probably :-) {nm} Jun 06, 16:21
Some of the worst accuracy was for terrible movies. I assume that's from people warning others to stay away. {nm} Jun 07, 08:37