MarVista’s Fernando Szew on Evolving Nature of TV Biz

NEW YORK: Fernando Szew, the founding partner and CEO of MarVista Entertainment, discusses the challenges and opportunities in the marketplace and how that has changed over the last ten years.

When MarVista Entertainment was set up ten years ago, it was mainly a distribution company that represented programming produced by others. Szew quickly saw the value in forming strategic alliances with producers and getting involved early in the development process—the goal was to help shape the content he and his sales team were offering broadcasters. MarVista then started producing TV movies and placing them on major U.S cable outlets such as Lifetime, Hallmark Channel, ABC Family, Disney Channel and, more recently, Nickelodeon. Thanks to carefully gathered market information and reactions from international buyers, Szew has made MarVista a reliable source of quality TV movies, but given the constantly evolving nature of the television business, he is also seeing opportunities in numerous digital platforms.

WS: You seek a lot of feedback from buyers. How did that process start, and how does it inform your production and acquisition strategy?
SZEW: It started out of necessity when we made the transition from being a distributor of third-party content to a producer-distributor. Being able to meet with a great group of broadcasters and buyers and really listen to them about the type of programming they needed in their markets, as well as trends, helped us to deliver concepts and programs that worked for them. That is very much part of the DNA of MarVista, and as we’ve grown and hired a lot more people on both ends of the business—development and production as well as sales—our team knows that getting that feedback is of the utmost importance. So, if you are going to a pitch meeting or to a convention to sell the content that we already produced or that we are going to be producing or representing, it’s just as important to make sure that you really listen to the needs that broadcasters have because, obviously, they are closer to their local markets than we are.

WS: Has this feedback helped you focus on certain genres?
SZEW: Absolutely it has, as many overseas buyers are looking for TV movies that originate in the U.S. with certain networks like Syfy, Lifetime and Hallmark, among others. This is an area in which we have become very strong. We’ve also expanded into the world of tweens and teens with an ongoing great relationship with Disney Channel and a more recent, wonderful experience with Nickelodeon. After a successful run at this, we’re known for being able to tell stories within the confines of television movies. Those confines have to do with the way the story is told, the pacing and time on screen, and obviously the budget requirements as well.

WS: Spain, France and Italy have traditionally been strong markets for TV movies. Given their economic difficulties, are you still dealing with those markets, and how is business there?
SZEW: Yes, we are, and business is better than ever because the television movie is still a great value proposition for those broadcasters. There has been a tradition in those three markets—and others around the world—of major broadcasters having very secure slots for these movies that still garner amazing ratings and market share.

And, I can tell you that after many, many conversations with broadcasters, I am aware that successful TV movies provide among the highest P&L [profit and loss] propositions available.

WS: Are there other territories where you are seeing high demand or increased demand?
SZEW: Yes, though it depends on the genre. There have been some stable markets like the U.K., Australia and Canada—the English-speaking markets.

Latin America has been stronger in certain genres, too, much stronger than it used to be—not just for us but also for the industry as a whole. In the past five years or so, there has been much more maturity in the Eastern European countries, and as competition on the channel side has grown, we have seen an increase in demand as well.

WS: What trends are you seeing in the TV-movie business?
SZEW: Calling them all TV movies is a bit of a misnomer, as the market has changed. Sometimes movies are produced not necessarily with only a broadcaster in mind. And that is where there has been a bit of a change. It used to be that you would hear, especially at the AFM, of straight-to-video titles. That is really no longer the case because the DVD market has changed, but there are movies that are produced with VOD, premium VOD or theatrical releases in mind. So it’s not just looking at a straight broadcast model.

WS: Are you finding opportunities in VOD or other digital platforms?
SZEW: We are certainly exploring quite a lot. We’ve also had a number of movies that were done with partners in those areas that ended up on broadcast as one of the windows. There has been growth in licensing this type of content, and there is an active marketplace between the different platforms as to who controls what rights and when. We, as content providers, are sorting through all of that with its challenges and great opportunities as well.

WS: Are you seeing the sequence of windows changing?
SZEW: Not in every instance. There are certain projects that are commissioned, like an original movie by a U.S. network, and that will have a worldwide premiere on that network. But there are other types of content that still get distributed overseas that are not produced with a U.S. broadcaster covering most of the production costs; this is where the market has shifted, as the international component has increased and the various ancillary windows have expanded to include VOD, EST [electronic sell-through], streaming, etc.

WS: Even though the landscape is more complicated, are you still seeing TV movies as a good business?
SZEW: Absolutely. For us in particular it is a challenging but good business because we have developed the ability to play in different parts of the value chain of content creation and distribution. This has proven strategically important—we are able to get involved in projects very early because we have the capability to develop, produce, finance and distribute when called to do all those things, or play in any of those areas when the opportunity arises.

WS: Is the pool of buyers you see at the AFM very different from what you see at MIPCOM?
SZEW: That is what’s interesting about the AFM; it provides us with opportunities to take the know-how we have in the TV-movie space and really discuss the different windows and the different marketplaces. In other words, when we go to MIPCOM and then a few weeks later we go to the AFM, some of the meetings are the same, with broadcasters, and some are with platforms and/or aggregators that open and expand the possibilities of how the windowing will work and how our content is exhibited.