Yikes. Cross Forbes off my list. Certainly Mendelson.
What they write usually makes sense and they do have interesting things to say most of the time. When they get their facts right they usually give interesting information.
They're not all bad.
Their box office projections do lack in-depth analysis though. They usually pick movies from the same genre and just go from there, usually without saying much about which comparison is actually the most accurate one(and sometimes including some very bad comparisons). Now under completely standard circumstances that would usually give a general idea of where a movie is headed, but overlooking details can make some of those comparisons very bad.
For example, the way Scott compared Homecoming's trajectory to TASM2 and SM3. He just saw the 2nd weekend drop, which was similar to TASM2 and SM3, and drew the conclusion that this makes them a good comparison, and that Homecoming would have roughly the same multiplier as those movies.
What he missed was that, unlike TASM2 and SM3, Homecoming was released with pretty much schools out on summer break, which meant that Homecoming pulled a huge lead over TASM2 and SM3 in the legs department because it made much more on the weekdays. This made his projections completely inaccurate.
So, it's the lack of in-depth analysis that causes mistakes like this.
Scott seems to know what he's talking about most of the time, but I guess he's just too hasty...
I read his stuff from time to time just to see what he brings up, and he does give interesting factoids from time to time.
Like I said, he's not all bad. It's just that his projections lack attention to detail. But at times, those details can make a world of difference.