Disney (and others) at the Box Office - Current State of Affairs

[brideck]

Again, not isolated to time in theaters, but directly correlated.

You are confusing primary driver of success in revenue to "just counting how much it made in theaters"

I'm not confusing anything, other than assuming that you were one of the people who didn't understand that movies make a lot of money outside of the box office these days. [There are many of them around these parts.] I would guess that many people are guilty of reading you to be saying share of income as opposed to driver of income.

And that is great, but literally but a waste and bad business relatively to exist if it made ten million.

None of us would say an investor giving us five bucks after letting them borrow 200 bucks for two years was a solid deal.

And yet, that's what movie making looks like in general (albeit usually on a smaller scale). It's like playing the lottery for investors -- you're likely to lose, but there's a chance you'll make a mint.

I gave Steven Soderbergh $6 to make a spy thriller, but I only got 50¢ back. It seemed like a good idea at the time.

 

[easyrowrdw]

Ok, if you don't believe that, then please quote directly from the FY24 earnings where it says otherwise. Please include the page number so we can review it, because I have provided that and quoted directly from it.

What are you talking about?

Capitalistic goals is still the priority at Disney today, same as it was in Walt's day, but that doesn't mean its goals are primarily driven by the box office receipts anymore. We're in a new era of consumer consumption where the box office is now becoming secondary and used to drive primary consumption which is the secondary market.

As noted before, from Disney's own FY24 earnings report right at the top of page 6 -

"The Company incurs significant marketing and advertising costs before and throughout the theatrical release of a film in
an effort to generate public awareness of the film, to increase the public’s intent to view the film and to help generate consumer interest in the subsequent home entertainment and other ancillary markets. These costs are expensed as incurred, which may result in a loss on a film in the theatrical markets, including in periods prior to the theatrical release of the film"

https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/app/uploads/2025/01/2024-Annual-Report.pdf

I know its hard for some to wrap their head around, but theatrical is no longer the same as it was in the previous decades. Just a fact that some will have to get used to as I don't see this changing.

You quoted this and said all that stuff above. But it does not say the things you’re saying it does about post-theater being the primary driver of revenue (correction: profit). Your interpretation goes far beyond what is stated. You can feel free to support your position with numbers but it’s not in what you quoted.

 

[Disney Irish]

What are you talking about?

You quoted this and said all that stuff above. But it does not say the things you’re saying it does about post-theater being the primary driver of revenue. Your interpretation goes far beyond what is stated. You can feel free to support your position with numbers but it’s not in what you quoted.

Again I think people are getting confused in what I'm saying, so let me quote myself what I just posted -

I think you've missed again on this one. As its me you keep referencing with these "primary driver" things, let me try to clear it up since people seem to have gotten it confused.

What I've said is that the box office is no longer the primary driver of PROFITS for a movie, not that it wasn't the primary driver of revenue.

 

[celluloid]

I'm not confusing anything, other than assuming that you were one of the people who didn't understand that movies make a lot of money outside of the box office these days. [There are many of them around these parts.] I would guess that many people are guilty of reading you to be saying share of income as opposed to driver of income.



And yet, that's what movie making looks like in general (albeit usually on a smaller scale). It's like playing the lottery for investors -- you're likely to lose, but there's a chance you'll make a mint.

I gave Steven Soderbergh $6 to make a spy thriller, but I only got 50¢ back. It seemed like a good idea at the time.

Well at least you are honest. Assuming is more dangerous than confusing. I made no obvious incidentals. I said primary driver.


The rest is obvious and has been stated a lot.

Disney is more often only making 50 cents on the six dollars than not. And branding is not in a good place when that keeps happening.

 

[Disney Irish]

Common sense should tell you that they are explaining they also make money outside of the box office when reporting about bad box office results. Cushioning the blow.

It is no secret that there are ways for home viewing to make the loss less or reach an audience for profit.
It is hopeful and explainining how it works.

You are jumping to a conclusion that this is the new norm.

Common sense shows that if a movie's marketing budget so it can get to theaters is still near half the budget for the film or more, than they would save a ton if they did not feel box office is the primary driver for success.

So again, your stance has no basis.

You want to say its jumping to conclusions, fine, but you're also the one who said that the box office would be back to pre-pandemic levels. So let me take what you say with a grain of salt here.

I'm just looking at what Disney is presenting in their year-end results, adding that to the overall box office for all studios, and coming up with a result. Now some can disagree with me, but the numbers seem to add up. The box office is no longer the profit driver for most if not all studios like it was in the pre-pandemic days. That post-theatrical makes up for those losses at the box office as the majority profit driver now, again note I say profit driver, not revenue driver.

Disagree with that, fine, then please provide data to prove the counter, because several of us have now provided data that seems to confirm it.

 

[easyrowrdw]

Again I think people are getting confused in what I'm saying, so let me quote myself what I just posted -

I’m not confused. You quoted Disney and then interpreted it as saying something that it doesn’t. Supporting your position requires numerical breakdowns. You can feel free to provide them. But the statement you’re quoting doesn’t do it.

 

[Disney Irish]

I’m not confused. You quoted Disney and then interpreted it as saying something that it doesn’t. Supporting your position requires numerical breakdowns. You can feel free to provide them. But the statement you’re quoting doesn’t do it.

So you don't think that statement in their year end results is saying that the post-theatrical is making up for the losses at the theaters? I'm sorry, then what do you think it says?

As far as numerical breakdowns, @BrianLo and @brideck have provided the Deadline reports of the breakdowns that show many of Disney movies over the last couple years that were deemed box office losses were actually turning a profits due to post-theatrical revenue.

 

[Chi84]

Common sense should tell you that they are explaining they also make money outside of the box office when reporting about bad box office results. Cushioning the blow.

It is no secret that there are ways for home viewing to make the loss less or reach an audience for profit.
It is hopeful and explainining how it works.

You are jumping to a conclusion that this is the new norm.

Common sense shows that if a movie's marketing budget so it can get to theaters is still near half the budget for the film or more, than they would save a ton if they did not feel box office is the primary driver for success.

So again, your stance has no basis.

But didn’t Disney say it was incurring marketing costs not only to get people into theaters but also to get them to watch movies at home?

From what I’ve been reading, movie theater attendance is in a long-term decline. Common sense would dictate that people are choosing to wait a short time to see a movie at home on a streaming service.

Wouldn’t this make post-theatrical more important in coming years?

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

So you don't think that statement in their year end results is saying that the post-theatrical is making up for the losses at the theaters? I'm sorry, then what do you think it says?

As far as numerical breakdowns, @BrianLo and @brideck have provided the Deadline reports of the breakdowns that show many of Disney movies over the last couple years that were deemed box office losses were actually turning a profits due to post-theatrical revenue.

For about the 10 billionth time: box office flops lower the potential for additional revenue for the short, intermediate, and longterm.

Scraping out “coverage” at the box office…which has now been extended to “after the box office” - because they can’t do it there anymore more often than not - is missing what the goals are.

It’s to make easy money…flops hurt that potential revenue and profit.

This is just a ridiculous, untenable stance.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

But didn’t Disney say it was incurring marketing costs not only to get people into theaters but also to get them to watch movies at home?

From what I’ve been reading, movie theater attendance is in a long-term decline. Common sense would dictate that people are choosing to wait a short time to see a movie at home on a streaming service.

Wouldn’t this make post-theatrical more important in coming years?

What would you say if you started tanking losses at the BO?

There’s no “truth serum” that can detect a pivot. It’s relying on “predictions” and “assumptions”

But it is a pivot. They’ll say that Snow White will make money on D+…but common sense is still a thing…for now.

Well…everywhere but on this thread - at least.

We debate whether bombs are actually bombing? Daily. Like as if the debate is being moderated by bobs stock broker.

Just look for the mushroom cloud above an AMC and the truth can be gleaned

 

[Chi84]

For about the 10 billionth time: box office flops lower the potential for additional revenue for the short, intermediate, and longterm.

Scraping out “coverage” at the box office…which has now been extended to “after the box office” - because they can’t do it there anymore more often than not - is missing what the goals are.

It’s to make easy money…flops hurt that potential revenue and profit.

This is just a ridiculous, untenable stance.

What is the exact stance that you are calling untenable?

 

[Chi84]

What would you say if you started tanking losses at the BO?

There’s no “truth serum” that can detect a pivot. It’s relying on “predictions” and “assumptions”

But it is a pivot. They’ll say that Snow White will make money on D+…but common sense is still a thing…for now.

Well…everywhere but on this thread - at least.

We debate whether bombs are actually bombing? Daily. Like as if the debate is being moderated by bobs stock broker.

Just look for the mushroom cloud above an AMC and the truth can be gleaned

Who are you arguing with?

 

[easyrowrdw]

So you don't think that statement in their year end results is saying that the post-theatrical is making up for the losses at the theaters? I'm sorry, then what do you think it says?

As far as numerical breakdowns, @BrianLo and @brideck have provided the Deadline reports of the breakdowns that show many of Disney movies over the last couple years that were deemed box office losses were actually turning a profits due to post-theatrical revenue.

No, it does not. It says, “costs are expensed as incurred, which may result in a loss on a film in the theatrical markets, including in periods prior to the theatrical release of the film.” Meaning, they spend a lot of money upfront so the movies may not hit profitability for a while - both before they’re released and sometimes not even when the theater run ends. It absolutely does not say post-theater money primarily drives profitability.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

What is the exact stance that you are calling untenable?

There are 955 pages of posts on this thread…covering years of twist and turns…
The pattern is there…

This isn’t the “I don’t understand…” intentional obtuse bit, is it? We’ve addressed that before on many threads.

You know what’s being done here: explaining away failures as “not really failures”

There is no “upside” to box office losses. None. Period. Full stop.
It’s a loss of potential revenue and profit. Everytime. Not just at the ticket window and popcorn stand.

And you give a souless behemoth excuses they don’t even have to work for…as a “fan” …and the chance of anything turning is zero

 

[Disstevefan1]

Look on the bright side. If Snow White 2025 can make about 200 million in post-theatrical revenue it will break even

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Who are you arguing with?

There’s been a 3 page back forth all afternoon (same old stuff)…you jumped in for the lecture…and now Multiple “I don’t understands”?

Really that’s what you got? Just read it. No obligation to agree with anyone…as always.

 

[Disney Irish]

For about the 10 billionth time: box office flops lower the potential for additional revenue for the short, intermediate, and longterm.

Scraping out “coverage” at the box office…which has now been extended to “after the box office” - because they can’t do it there anymore more often than not - is missing what the goals are.

It’s to make easy money…flops hurt that potential revenue and profit.

This is just a ridiculous, untenable stance.

And for the 100 Billionth time, I'm not looking at just Disney, I'm looking at the overall landscape of the theatrical market which is depressed and doesn't look to be getting better anytime soon if ever. Disney just happens to be the focus of the discussion but the overall market is at play here. The market has changed, you even just admit that just a page ago. And with that change comes a focus on post-theatrical being a profit driver. Sure we can debate the impact of that but that doesn't change that it is indeed a profit driver, so say otherwise is just not being honest with that state of the theatrical market in this post-pandemic era. That is my stance, and its not untenable.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Look on the bright side. If Snow White 2025 can make about 200 million in post-theatrical revenue it will break even

It already did…
4 people are streaming one of those Chris hemsworth National Geographic docs and watching a commercial for 1-800-FLOWERS right now!!!

 

[Disney Irish]

No, it does not. It says, “costs are expensed as incurred, which may result in a loss on a film in the theatrical markets, including in periods prior to the theatrical release of the film.” Meaning, they spend a lot of money upfront so the movies may not hit profitability for a while - both before they’re released and sometimes not even when the theater run ends. It absolutely does not say post-theater money primarily drives profitability.

Ok, well we'll just agree to disagree there because others seem to believe it does and brought it up before I even did.

 

[DisneyWarrior27]

Well, looks like Disney’s all-new live-action #LiloAndStitch is faring much better with critics than a certain other Disney live-action remake that Honest Trailers just today aptly named “The Princess and the Slog,” w/ a Rotten Tomatoes score that’s nearly double what that film got.

Can’t wait to see how this will translate into its opening weekend box office and beyond…