**** tracking. I guess they have to come up with some kind of scale to figure out their position. And I'm guessing it mostly aligned with the word of mouth, rottentomatoes, etc of the past.

But reading through that article, it seemed pretty obvious to me, a bad film is a bad film.

Did i read, they thought by cutting out the early marketing, they would inherently stop the word of mouth? Isn't this fooling themselves? Also it's a double edge sword. A good film would not gain buzz.

This stuff kills me. Something similar happened at a company I worked at. The company projected a 22 million dollar profit for the year. It did not. It made 19 million, so it was classified as a dismal failure to the stockholders. They had massive layoffs to get better numbers. How do have something that makes a profit, just not the profit you expect , thus making it a failure? Give me a break.