Understanding your target market is a very important thing if you are trying to promote, or even just create a movie. The target market of The Pirates of the Carribean is a younger viewer, because it is generally appropriate for all ages and because the marketing and the sense of adventure conveyed in the marketing is in my opinion, directed to appeal to kids.

The movie captures a light-hearted comedic feel which pretty much appeals to everyone but it also has its fair share of action sequences which will keep older kids and young adults entertained.

Some people who will be looking for more of an intense and serious type of film that would probably be more violent will be disappointed, but this is generally not the target market of Disney, who are looking to create family-oriented films that appeal to people of all ages.

Pirates of the Caribbean also has several “spin-off” type products and lots of branded merchandise that will keep people wanting more of the franchise.  I know that if I saw a t-shirt or a video game relating to Pirates of the Caribbean in a store I’d be more likely to buy those than something else I hadn’t heard of before because I already know something to do with Pirates of the Caribbean is going to be cool because I know the backstory.

There is even a Pirates of the Caribbean theme park ride based on the movie (well actually, the movie was based on the ride, because the ride came first).  Every time a fan of the series is willing to buy one of these related products or visit an attraction based on the movie it strengthens and affirms a movie-goer’s likelihood to go see another movie in the series, if and when it comes out.

All of these promotional marketing efforts and related products based on the movie contribute to the stigma that surrounds Pirates of the Caribbean and keeps people coming back for more (and kids bugging their parents to see the latest film).

Many people wonder whether file sharing can actually increase revenue for music labels and artists because it helps both newer and older artists to be discovered or rediscovered. This question is frequently asked by fans and artists alike. I believe that BitTorrent is an excellent system and model for marketing and distributing media, such as music and movies, and should not be opposed the way it currently is by organizations such as the IFPI and the MPAA – it may even be making up a large figure of their sales!

Peer to peer technologies have been proven to be an effective marketing / promotion tools, For instance, in 2007, Radiohead made an interesting move in which their fans could make whatever payment that they wanted, including nothing; the site only advised, “it’s up to you” or free, or “Choose what you pay”, so that the fans could pay the amount they wanted for the album.
Of course, the band did not actually release their sales figures, yet the album became famous as the first one released in this method, and generated much publicity. New websites are now also following Radiohead’s model, as in “Choose what you pay”, such as the new public music tracker, Coda.FM.

BitTorrent is more effective as a marketing tool for artists that are not already established, yet for those already established as an artists, it may hinder them more than help, because since they are already popular, the viral nature of BitTorrent is not as useful, and many people will “leech” the music instead of buying it.

A report from the BI Norwegian School of Management has found that those who download music illegally are also 10 times more likely to pay for songs than those who don’t. This is because those who download music are generally music enthusiasts that agree that you should have the right to see exactly what you are buying before you buy it, and if it’s no good, then they won’t buy it. These enthusiasts see this as completely fair, yet the IFPI disagrees. Many people also say “I’d never buy it anyways!”, which is generally true, yet, they are obtaining the Intellectual Property for free – and thus comes the question – is IP even worth anything?

There is no doubt that the downloading of music for free will continue nevertheless, yet the question will remain in our minds, are we helping the artist (as in “increasing their revenue” or increasing exposure), or costing them? I believe that in the future, music will be either free, cost very little, or the consumer will choose the price – either way, the actual worth of something that can be copied, distributed, and reproduced countless times, all for free, will forever be disputed.