About the Author

author photo

Da street guy...I was once banned from NG ... for calling Satyam ugly

See All Posts by This Author

NG Box office.. a species of its own..

March 1st, 2008Related|Filed Under

well.. was chatting on NG earlier.. and found one really interesting comment by one .. would like to share with you guys..

“Maathur: LOL we have NG BO team telling UTV the collections of their own film. Last time they told Adlabs that collections of Guru were higher than Adlabs declared and now UTV are being told they are over-reporting for Jodha Akbar. Does not get much funnier..”

There Are 10 Responses So Far. »

  1. Comment by Tango on 1 March 2008:

    :lol:

  2. Comment by jayshah on 1 March 2008:

    From the SB - pretty much sums up my thoughts too. Thanks to The Skeptic, and yes I am skeptic here too :-)

    TheSkeptic: “As has also been pointed out several times on NG, Tango himself overrode producers’ totals on VZ and Partner. Perhaps more that I cannot recall right now.”

    TheSkeptic: Tango, I’m not sure whether you are agreeing with me on this or disagreeing. However, I have invoked your name to buttress some of my points in my musing here. So please feel free to refute me if necessary.

    TheSkeptic: My own thinking is that we must stop focusing on concrete totals and think instead in terms of ratios and differences. So a JA would be somewhere between 1.5 and 1.75 times TZP, just as an example, and we would arrive at this based on the only center-level information that we consistently have, namely Taran’s numbers.

    TheSkeptic: Ultimately, if one is fair as well as vigilant, one can take producers’ totals as one more addition to the number-soup that we’re greeted with from an increasing number of sources on every film these days. Even on JA, the first week figure has varied from 23.something to 25.something.

    TheSkeptic: One cannot, if one has a shred of integrity, opportunistically exploit the lowest figures available for certain films, but use your own mysteriously derived figures for the rest. This is what is one objecting to when one overrides producers’ totals. As has also been pointed out several times on NG, Tango himself overrode producers’ totals on VZ and Partner. Perhaps more that I cannot recall right now.

    TheSkeptic: Maathur, as you giggle helplessly about the wisdom of NG “informing” producers how much their films made, I cannot believe that you are so naive as to trustingly accept everything announced by producers in India, a country where corruption and iniquity are the very air breathed by everyone. As Jay has repeated endlessly, the problem with Guru’s “official” figures was that these figures retroactively affect calculations for all the other movies such as Don or Fanaa where no official figures were ever provided. So trade “experts” who derived totals for these films used formulas that need to be recast in the light of Guru’s official initial. But no such recasting was ever forthcoming. Why on earth would we accept “incorrect”, flattering, formulas for earlier films, but embrace the so-called official estimate for Guru?

  3. Comment by jayshah on 1 March 2008:

    TS - hope you don’t mind, but you summed it up well.

    ‘Why on earth would we accept “incorrect”, flattering, formulas for earlier films, but embrace the so-called official estimate for Guru?’

    Exactly.

  4. Comment by Jesse on 1 March 2008:

    “One cannot, if one has a shred of integrity, opportunistically exploit the lowest figures available for certain films, but use your own mysteriously derived figures for the rest. This is what is one objecting to when one overrides producers’ totals.”

    “As Jay has repeated endlessly, the problem with Guru’s “official” figures was that these figures retroactively affect calculations for all the other movies such as Don or Fanaa where no official figures were ever provided. So trade “experts” who derived totals for these films used formulas that need to be recast in the light of Guru’s official initial. But no such recasting was ever forthcoming. Why on earth would we accept “incorrect”, flattering, formulas for earlier films, but embrace the so-called official estimate for Guru?”

    Bingo. I have always said that the Guru numbers may indeed be correct, but when you compare them to hidden “formula” calculated films like Don and Fanaa things don’t correlate at all.

  5. Comment by texas_swat on 1 March 2008:

    Jesse- you cant expect Guru to correlate with every film…. not at all with Don, Fanaa, D2, Partner etc. If there is one film that it has to correlate best…. it has to be CDI. and I am not surprised that you didnt mention it :-)

  6. Comment by Street Pharmacist on 2 March 2008:

    “As Jay has repeated endlessly, the problem with Guru’s “official” figures was that these figures retroactively affect calculations for all the other movies such as Don or Fanaa where no official figures were ever provided…”

    Dunno about Don and Fanaa.. but if we do accept Jay’s (and IBOS’) totals for Guru, then we gotta disagree with his total for CDI.. coz if Guru is a 20 cr first wek grosser, then jay’s own method , using Guru’s 20cr figure, yields a 24-25 cr first week CDI total. Don’t evenbpther asking about rest of the weeks… and the final total.

    As for skeptic.. he’s just talking outta his ass like satyam does.Though ofcourse… there’s not much of a difference between satyam’s writing style and that of skeptic.

  7. Comment by Street Pharmacist on 2 March 2008:

    Another point to be noted here is that Guru’s and JA’s producer totals have actually been quoted (and one can assume be confirmed) y Taran Adarsh, teh guy whose city-wise collections mr.jayshah uses to derive weekly totals, but teh same cann’t besaid about VZ’’s 4 week total on YRF website, that happened to stayed almost the same in week 6… cann’t beleive jayshah and satyam (skeptic) can stoop so low to use such a figure to prove his point)

  8. Comment by texas_swat on 2 March 2008:

    “Though ofcourse… there’s not much of a difference between satyam’s writing style and that of skeptic.”

    not just the writing style…. even the logic they both use is very similar.

  9. Comment by Street Pharmacist on 2 March 2008:

    totally agree with you texas_swat.. They do argue along the same lines.. and both are always wrong on the same issues… or make same false claims on almost every matter… and yes both happen to have the same bad choices… certainly not a goddamn co-incidence.

  10. Comment by Street Pharmacist on 3 March 2008:

    not to mention that fact that they do appear on the forum at teh same time.. one on the main blog and the other in the CB

Post a Response

You must be logged in to post a comment.