The High Cost of Wokeness. Disney's "Strange World" was a record-setting Flop (no pun intended), "Lightyear" was almost as bad

[Mushroom]

It will easily make close to a billion dollars within a year of opening.

No, it will not. Not even close.

The toys are already on markdown at most retail establishments, so this is not going to be the merchandising bonanza like many properties have been.

And there is no more "second market" to sell it to.

Traditionally, the path for a movie was pretty simple. Drag it back out of the vault every 10-15 years and show it again. Then eventually show it on TV. But by the early 1980s, two new ways came out. At almost the same time you have premium cable TV and the VCR come out. So a new path emerged.

Show it in the theater, then offer it for sale on videotape. Then to Cable TV, then finally to TV itself. And that was the pattern for years. And under that old model, such was indeed possible as the same movie could be sold multiple times.

But almost all of that is now dead. Forget physical media, that is less than half the industry it was even a decade ago. What was once over $25 billion a year is now under $8 billion and sinking fast. Nobody buys physical media, so no DVD sales.

Forget Premium Cable, Disney owns D+. So it is not going to be paid money by HBO or Showtime or anybody else to show it, they are going to show it themselves. So no money coming in from that potential source. Of course D+ is losing money also, but that is beside the point.

Of course, it will likely someday get shown on broadcast TV. But once again, if it does so Disney is not seeing any money from it. That is because when that happens it will be shown on ABC. And guess who owns ABC? Yep, that's right, Disney!

If this has been a few decades ago, it might have seen that over many years but not in a year. Because if you take a movie like Aladdin, it would have had the rights sold multiple times for various broadcasts. And that is still possible for companies like Sony, as they do not own any broadcast or major streaming services. So when their newest Spider-Man movie is done in the theaters, you will have streaming services (who have replaced video media sales) bidding to distribute it next. And almost nobody shows movies on TV anymore, but there will likely be a few traditional services that would pay for those rights.

But Disney in their desire to own all of those services themselves have essentially locked themselves out of those revenue sources. They are not going to sell it to NBC, or HBO because they are competition to their own services. And in pushing everything they have ever made onto their own streaming service, they have tanked their own physical media sales.

Your claim might have been true, 1-2 decades ago. It is not true in the current era.

 

[two_iron]

No, actually I am not. It is nowhere close to making a profit.

Here is the truth. The production budget for this movie is over $250 million. The marketing budget is a staggering $250-350 million. The House of Mouse has been amazingly silent on how much they actually spent to market it, so let's go with the smaller number of $250 million. That means it need to bring them over $500 million to make a profit.

Yes, as of this time it has made more than $300 million globally, but I will use the numbers from last weekend of $327 million. That is nowhere even close to what it needs to make to break even. And here is why.

When it comes to box office, the company does not get all of that. Domestically, they get only 60% of the box office, the rest goes to cover distribution costs and to the theaters. That means that of the $186 million it made domestically, Disney gets $111.6 million. But to be generous, I will round that up to $112 million.

Now overseas, it is worse. That is because they only on average get between 30-40% of that box office. But I will once again be generous and call it 35%. And with an overseas box of $141 million, that means that Disney will see $49.35 million. But I will once again round up, just to keep the numbers easy.

So that means as of last weekend, Disney has made $162 million dollars in money coming in, from a movie that cost them over $250 million to produce and another $250 million to market.

So no, that is not a profit, they are still hundreds of millions of dollars in the hole.

What, do you actually think that the studio gets all of the money that the theaters take in at the box office? Even if that were true, the movie would still be in the hole because of the huge amount of money they spent on marketing.

The fact is, Disney had not had a profitable movie in years. That is why the studio is in a state of panic at the moment because their next releases are already being panned, and they have nothing in the pipeline at the moment that anybody thinks will turn the trend around.

Did you see it corn pop?

Please lie to me.... I like it when you lie to me.

 

[Mushroom]

Please lie to me.... I like it when you lie to me.

The fact is, a lot of people have no real idea how the movie industry works. The money that comes in the box office is split many ways. 40% in this example goes to the theaters as well as the cost of making the copies they show. That is lower in the era of digital, but there is still an expense involved. And theaters are sure as hell not going to show the movies for free, they have overhead and need to make a profit also.

And in the old days, you had distribution companies that did that. Many of the older Disney movies (pre-1953) were actually distributed by RKO. That meant that they got a cut of that as well. However, in that year Disney created the "Buena Vista" distribution company, that handled that task for over 50 years. In fact, a few years after forming Buena Vista Disney bought the RKO Distribution company and merged them together. They even distributed non-Disney films (mostly foreign), such as the 1954 German film "The Story of Vickie" and the 1955 Japanese film "Princess Yang Kwei-fei". And in those deals took a portion of the box office for US distribution, like how the local companies overseas take a chunk of the money for distribution in their markets (hence the 30-40% money Disney sees from overseas box office, 30-40% is taken by the local distribution company).

But "box office" has never meant the money that the studio takes, that is only what the movie makes in total before it is split between all other other companies that get a portion of that. But Buena Vista is long gone, and I think the last "non-Disney" distributions they did were for Studio Ghibli in the early 2000's.

 

[candycorn]

No, actually I am not. It is nowhere close to making a profit.

Here is the truth. The production budget for this movie is over $250 million. The marketing budget is a staggering $250-350 million. The House of Mouse has been amazingly silent on how much they actually spent to market it, so let's go with the smaller number of $250 million. That means it need to bring them over $500 million to make a profit.

Yes, as of this time it has made more than $300 million globally, but I will use the numbers from last weekend of $327 million. That is nowhere even close to what it needs to make to break even. And here is why.

When it comes to box office, the company does not get all of that. Domestically, they get only 60% of the box office, the rest goes to cover distribution costs and to the theaters. That means that of the $186 million it made domestically, Disney gets $111.6 million. But to be generous, I will round that up to $112 million.

Now overseas, it is worse. That is because they only on average get between 30-40% of that box office. But I will once again be generous and call it 35%. And with an overseas box of $141 million, that means that Disney will see $49.35 million. But I will once again round up, just to keep the numbers easy.

So that means as of last weekend, Disney has made $162 million dollars in money coming in, from a movie that cost them over $250 million to produce and another $250 million to market.

So no, that is not a profit, they are still hundreds of millions of dollars in the hole.

What, do you actually think that the studio gets all of the money that the theaters take in at the box office? Even if that were true, the movie would still be in the hole because of the huge amount of money they spent on marketing.

The fact is, Disney had not had a profitable movie in years. That is why the studio is in a state of panic at the moment because their next releases are already being panned, and they have nothing in the pipeline at the moment that anybody thinks will turn the trend around.

Hilarious opinion you have there.

 

[Mushroom]

Hilarious opinion you have there.

Is a fact. Please find some proof that I am wrong. That studios keep 100% of the money the movies take in. That they do not only get a small percentage of the amount taken in overseas. That the movie has not cost them over $500 million to produce and market, and that they get to keep every single one of the $326 million it has taken in.

Which even if Disney got to keep every single dollar, would be almost $200 million in the hole.

However, the movie studio usually gets 60% of the proceeds from American box offices or anywhere from 20% – 40% overseas. This depends on the film distribution arrangements, agreements, and other costs associated with foreign distribution. Theaters receive the remaining 40%.

How Do Movie Theaters Make Money?

Ever wondered how do movie theaters make money? We take a look at costs that need to be managed effectively to ensure cinema is viable today.

www.musicgateway.com

A studio might make about 60% of a film's ticket sales in the United States, and around 20% to 40% of that on overseas ticket sales.

How Exactly Do Movies Make Money?

While there is a lot of money to be made in the movie business, ticket sales alone are not enough. Learn the economics of movie making.

www.investopedia.com

So, in the first week of a film that's not a sure thing, the company producing the film might get 60% of the box office. That means that on the shocking $100 million in tickets sold by Marvelous Man: The Movie at the domestic box office, the company that made the film gets paid $60 million... meaning it's still $90 million in the red.

Foreign box office is even more complicated but it's all based on the theaters getting a cut and the movie producers getting a cut. The math varies, but in a very broad sense movies haven't made any money until their box office roughly equals twice the money spent on production.

Why Box Office Results Don't Really Explain How Movies Make Money | The Motley Fool

Remember: Box office totals reflect how much people have paid theaters for tickets for a movie.

www.fool.com

See the above? Those are known as "references", which proves what I am stating are not "opinions", but facts.

So please, give us the references that state that somehow Disney is keeping every single dollar the movie brings in both inside the US and overseas, and how that $326 million is somehow more than the over $500 million it cost to produce and market.

*sits back and snickers*

 

[candycorn]

Is a fact. Please find some proof that I am wrong. That studios keep 100% of the money the movies take in. That they do not only get a small percentage of the amount taken in overseas. That the movie has not cost them over $500 million to produce and market, and that they get to keep every single one of the $326 million it has taken in.

Which even if Disney got to keep every single dollar, would be almost $200 million in the hole.

How Do Movie Theaters Make Money?

Ever wondered how do movie theaters make money? We take a look at costs that need to be managed effectively to ensure cinema is viable today.

www.musicgateway.com

How Exactly Do Movies Make Money?

While there is a lot of money to be made in the movie business, ticket sales alone are not enough. Learn the economics of movie making.

www.investopedia.com

Why Box Office Results Don't Really Explain How Movies Make Money | The Motley Fool

Remember: Box office totals reflect how much people have paid theaters for tickets for a movie.

www.fool.com

See the above? Those are known as "references", which proves what I am stating are not "opinions", but facts.

So please, give us the references that state that somehow Disney is keeping every single dollar the movie brings in both inside the US and overseas, and how that $326 million is somehow more than the over $500 million it cost to produce and market.

*sits back and snickers*

You're the one making the allegations with no references about Disney movies specifically....the onus is on you.

But I can save us both a lot of time. Your argument will come down to arguing that Disney is lying about how much this movie cost and how much this movie has made; am I right? All conservatives do these days is make such allegations.

 

[Mushroom]

You're the one making the allegations with no references about Disney movies specifically....the onus is on you.

Then show me the magical reference where Disney movies are different, and they get to keep all of the money brought in at the box office.

All I see is you acting like a child, denying anything, even when multiple references because you do not like them or the truth.

Sorry, I can't help willful ignorance.

Now, your references that movies released by Disney are magical and keep 100% of the box office, both domestically and internationally.

 

[candycorn]

Sorry, I can't help willful ignorance.

As you demonstrate with every post.

 

[candycorn]

The marketing budget is a staggering $250-350 million.

For one movie.... LOL

Meanwhile back in reality...

So in truth the entire industry spends about 1/2 a billion advertising movies for an entire year versus your looney claim that Disney spent 1/4 of a billion promoting one movie.

 

[Mushroom]

For one movie.... LOL

Meanwhile back in reality...

View attachment 794539

So in truth the entire industry spends about 1/2 a billion advertising movies for an entire year versus your looney claim that Disney spent 1/4 of a billion promoting one movie.

Wow, you pull out a questionable reference from years ago.

"Videotape production"? Holy crap, that alone tells me how worthless that reference is. Nobody has been doing production on videotape in a decade or more. And notice, that only states "ad expenditures". That is not even close to what "marketing" is. Oh, and just taking a snapshot of a google image is not a "reference". If you even bothered to look it states it is "advertising", in other words somebody paid for it to appear there. And it is on a site behind a paywall that is unsourced and unreferenced.

You might as well claim you got it from Twitter for as much validity as that has.

Once again, here are real references, that can be validated and not just cherry picked as you have done. Hell, you could not even reference this particular picture.

Not counting the costs for marketing, which are likely in the millions, Disney would need to make at least $500 million on this film for it to be considered a “success.” Some outlets have indicated it would need closer to $750 million, given the marketing budget!

How Much Money Must The Little Mermaid Make To Break Even?

The Little Mermaid is Disney's latest live-action film and the budget without marketing is high. How much does it need to be a success?

www.piratesandprincesses.net

Based on the $200 million estimate of The Little Mermaid’s budget, the Disney movie needs to make at least $500 million at the box office in order to be a success. The general rule of thumb is for a movie to earn back at least 2.5 times its budget, so if The Little Mermaid’s box office comes in between $500-625 million, then Disney’s latest live-action remake will have been victorious. Still, the studio is most likely eyeing a number closer to $1 billion dollars at the box office before The Little Mermaid starts streaming on Disney Plus.

How Much The Little Mermaid Cost To Make (& What Box Office It Needs To Succeed)

The Little Mermaid needs a big box office return.

screenrant.com

But notice, the $200 million estimate is not correct, as Disney themselves have corrected it to $250 million.

Given the substantial amount invested in the movie, a box office collection of less than $750 million would be deemed unacceptable and indicate a failure.

Disney's The Little Mermaid Budget Reportedly $250 Million, Not $200 Million - The Filmik

Disney's The Little Mermaid Budget: "The Little Mermaid" is a high-budget production, and The Walt Disney Company has reportedly spent a massive $250 million to produce the film, excluding marketing and advertising costs.

www.thefilmik.com

Now that figure I actually discount, as that would mean they spent $500 million in marketing, and that is not realistic. Unless one counts the huge amount they spent advertising it on ABC. If one counts that in, it possibly is realistic as they have been showing ads almost constantly. However, advertising on ABC is a questionable thing, as it is essentially "free advertising". That is because Disney owns ABC, so any money paid to them in advertising stays within the company and eventually costs nothing (other than revenue lost in selling it to actual paying customers). So that may indeed count if one recognizes "lost revenue" as "money spent".

And other sources to "recoup" money as I stated are not there. For example, they will likely pay themselves around $100 million to put it on streaming. But that is not real revenue, that is one part of the company paying another (Disney+ playing Disney Studios).

Oh, and their original marketing budget? $140 million. Of course, that was also when the movie was expected to break $120 million on opening weekend and they claimed it had only cost them $200 million. That has since climbed a lot, especially the ABC ads. Oh, and expect another $10-20 million to be spent next year around the time for the Oscars. That is typical for Oscar marketing for a movie like this.

 

[candycorn]

Now that figure I actually discount, as that would mean they spent $500 million in marketing, and that is not realistic.

Neither is the quarter of a billion you stated as well.

Its been fun reading your posts. According to you ...Little Mermaid is well on it's way to being the first movie to ever cost a trillion dollars

 

[Mushroom]

Neither is the quarter of a billion you stated as well.

And yet I still see no references to any of your claims.

Got it, a legend in your own mind. You reject anything out of hand that does not follow your beliefs, and provide nothing of substance.

Oh, and how much in 2021 was spend in advertising the "videotape production industry"? You are aware that was actually 5 years after the last VCR was even made, right?