Disney buys Fox for $52 Billion

[Disney Irish]

Universal deal with AHS most likely will end with Cult in Orlando while Hollywood still has Asylum, Coven, and Cult as a maze.

I think you are looking at this short sighted by looking at this deal with only Universal's theme park offerings or the MCU in mind.

Comcast owns Universal and NBC. NBC doesn't get all its content from Universal Studios. For example the new NBC hit show This is Us is produced by 20th Century Fox Television, when the deal is completed, which will be under Disney.

So when talking about deal making Disney now has leverage over various content that Comcast/NBCUniversal wants to continue to broadcast. As well as other properties they want to continue to use in places such as their Theme Parks. This is how the deal to get Oswald back happened. Al Michaels who was on ABC wanted out of his contract, NBCUniversal wanted him and Universal had the rights to Oswald. So in a swap Al Michaels went to NBC and Oswald came home to Disney. So something similar can happen with any number of things that Disney wants to offer in trade that Comcast/NBCUniversal wants to get something that Disney would like, such as Hulk for a solo film in the MCU or even the Theme Park rights to Marvel.

 

[Travel Junkie]

The way I understood what Iger was saying is that it'll be like how you can bundle services with cable/phone/internet. You can pick one, two, or all three for a bundled price. And because they are competing with Netflix and Amazon, who undercut each other in price, Disney will price this competitively.

That would be a good call by Disney to bundle them. I'm sure they will start out as a competitive price, but long term I'm guessing the plan is to leverage their popular IP's and make it a premium. Want to see Star Wars? Better get a Disney owned streaming service.

Looking at how they really push the envelope on price with theme parks, the cut they take from theaters (see last Jedi demands they made and Marvel before that) and cable (see ESPN subscriber price.) Disney rarely tries to compete on price. They are great at leveraging popular IP and maximizing profit from it. I expect their entry into streaming to be no different.

 

[Twilight_Roxas]

I think you are looking at this short sighted by looking at this deal with only Universal's theme park offerings or the MCU in mind.

Comcast owns Universal and NBC. NBC doesn't get all its content from Universal Studios. For example the new NBC hit show This is Us is produced by 20th Century Fox Television, when the deal is completed, which will be under Disney.

So when talking about deal making Disney now has leverage over various content that Comcast/NBCUniversal wants to continue to broadcast. As well as other properties they want to continue to use in places such as their Theme Parks. This is how the deal to get Oswald back happened. Al Michaels who was on ABC wanted out of his contract, NBCUniversal wanted him and Universal had the rights to Oswald. So in a swap Al Michaels went to NBC and Oswald came home to Disney. So something similar can happen with any number of things that Disney wants to offer in trade that Comcast/NBCUniversal wants to get something that Disney would like, such as Hulk for a solo film in the MCU or even the Theme Park rights to Marvel.

Disney has the distribution rights to a few Dreamworks films that could be traded for the movie rights of Hulk.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Disney has the distribution rights to a few Dreamworks films that could be traded for the movie rights of Hulk.

What would Universal really want to distribute?

 

[Twilight_Roxas]

Can someone explain it please because I keep repeating the same answer that continues the same question.

 

[Darkbeer1]

What would Universal really want to distribute?

Formula 1
Prime Ticket
Fox Sports West

 

[Disney Irish]

Disney has the distribution rights to a few Dreamworks films that could be traded for the movie rights of Hulk.

Can someone explain it please because I keep repeating the same answer that continues the same question.

Yes, that is true, but again that is very short sighted and only concentrating on one potential deal. In reality there is not just one specific property or group of properties (in the case of Dreamworks) that can be part of a deal, that is the point. There is a LOT of deal making that can happen.

The other flip side of that with respect to Hulk, Disney can add Hulk to any MCU film they want (which is where he really belongs for now anyways). He just can't have a solo film without Universal being involved. If Disney is fine with no solo film, and it seems at the moment they are, then that is even more leverage on Disney's side.

So we'll see how it plays out. The next few years are going to be interesting.

 

[Disney Irish]

That would be a good call by Disney to bundle them. I'm sure they will start out as a competitive price, but long term I'm guessing the plan is to leverage their popular IP's and make it a premium. Want to see Star Wars? Better get a Disney owned streaming service.

Looking at how they really push the envelope on price with theme parks, the cut they take from theaters (see last Jedi demands they made and Marvel before that) and cable (see ESPN subscriber price.) Disney rarely tries to compete on price. They are great at leveraging popular IP and maximizing profit from it. I expect their entry into streaming to be no different.

Streaming and the subscription model is a whole different beast, and Iger knows it. This isn't the theme park business where Disney has ruled for generations. Its a competitive landscape, where Disney currently doesn't play, with lots of players willing to take a loss on revenue. Just look at Netflix and Amazon. Disney is already pulling its content from all current streaming services (such as Netflix) starting next year. So Iger knows they have to be competitive or subscribers will not be there.

We are moving into a new era of how consumers will get their content. Better be competitive (and stay competitive) or they will just move to the next service.

 

[Twilight_Roxas]

That's why Disney could trade the distribution rights of the Dreamworks animation films (The Croods to Captain Underpants) to Universal in exchange Universal gives the rights to Hulk back to Disney letting Disney make solo Hulk films even Planet Hulk.

 

[Disney Irish]

That's why Disney could trade the distribution rights of the Dreamworks animation films (The Croods to Captain Underpants) to Universal in exchange Universal gives the rights to Hulk back to Disney letting Disney make solo Hulk films even Planet Hulk.

Yep, you are right they could do that. But I really do think its much bigger than just getting the Hulk rights back for a solo film. But since that is what you want to focus on, you are absolutely right that is one move they can make.

 

[Darkbeer1]

http://www.themeparkinsider.com/flume/201712/5866/

>>
So what does this mean for theme park fans? Disney already owns way more IP than it can get into its parks. Disney's development plans for major theme park attractions around the world are pretty much set through 2021, with major Marvel development plans for Disney California Adventure on deck immediately after that. Anything coming to the table from Fox would slot in after those projects... assuming that there's anything from Fox that Disney wishes to pursue in its theme parks.

Disney can't use X-Men and Fantastic Four at the Walt Disney World or Tokyo Disney Resorts due to Universal's licensing deal with Marvel. The Simpsons are off the table in the United States due to a Universal licensing deal, as well. Disney already has an Avatar land in Florida. What's left? Planet of the Apes offers some great world-building opportunities for a next-generation, immersive theme park land. But where would it fit within Disney's theme park portfolio? I don't know that Planet of the Apes hits a beat different enough from Star Wars and Avatar to cover any market space that those franchises don't already deliver to Disney.

As for animation, Fox's line-up is relatively weak. There's Ice Age, but do we really want to tempt Disney Animation with a Scrat/Olaf cross-over featurette to slap in front of the next Pixar flick? (Okay, actually, that might approach some Tommy Wiseau-levels of awesomeness.)<<

Look, this deal has NOTHING to do with the Disney Parks division.

The Deal was made to strengthen the ESPN division, and for the new streaming platforms for movies and TV shows.

The company wanted/needed the catalogs to better market the new services, and to be LESS reliant on the Parks Division. Of course, Disney (the company) loves the profits the Parks Division makes, but wants to expand in other areas.

Which might be a good thing if Disney can find a good president for the Parks division, and leaves them alone to provide the type of product the Parks fans want.

 

[Disney Irish]

http://www.themeparkinsider.com/flume/201712/5866/

>>
So what does this mean for theme park fans? Disney already owns way more IP than it can get into its parks. Disney's development plans for major theme park attractions around the world are pretty much set through 2021, with major Marvel development plans for Disney California Adventure on deck immediately after that. Anything coming to the table from Fox would slot in after those projects... assuming that there's anything from Fox that Disney wishes to pursue in its theme parks.

Disney can't use X-Men and Fantastic Four at the Walt Disney World or Tokyo Disney Resorts due to Universal's licensing deal with Marvel. The Simpsons are off the table in the United States due to a Universal licensing deal, as well. Disney already has an Avatar land in Florida. What's left? Planet of the Apes offers some great world-building opportunities for a next-generation, immersive theme park land. But where would it fit within Disney's theme park portfolio? I don't know that Planet of the Apes hits a beat different enough from Star Wars and Avatar to cover any market space that those franchises don't already deliver to Disney.

As for animation, Fox's line-up is relatively weak. There's Ice Age, but do we really want to tempt Disney Animation with a Scrat/Olaf cross-over featurette to slap in front of the next Pixar flick? (Okay, actually, that might approach some Tommy Wiseau-levels of awesomeness.)<<

Look, this deal has NOTHING to do with the Disney Parks division.

The Deal was made to strengthen the ESPN division, and for the new streaming platforms for movies and TV shows.

The company wanted/needed the catalogs to better market the new services, and to be LESS reliant on the Parks Division. Of course, Disney (the company) loves the profits the Parks Division makes, but wants to expand in other areas.

Which might be a good thing if Disney can find a good president for the Parks division, and leaves them alone to provide the type of product the Parks fans want.

Yep, this merger itself is not about P&R, at least in the short term. But as we've been discussing there is potential deal making post-merger that could have an effect on P&R long term. It'll be interesting to see what happens in the next couple of years. I wouldn't be surprised if Iger/Chapek/Feige and group hasn't already started having discussions on post-merger moves. I know that Feige already has potential plans sitting on a shelf for movies if all Marvel film rights came back.

 

[Twilight_Roxas]

http://www.themeparkinsider.com/flume/201712/5866/

>>
So what does this mean for theme park fans? Disney already owns way more IP than it can get into its parks. Disney's development plans for major theme park attractions around the world are pretty much set through 2021, with major Marvel development plans for Disney California Adventure on deck immediately after that. Anything coming to the table from Fox would slot in after those projects... assuming that there's anything from Fox that Disney wishes to pursue in its theme parks.

Disney can't use X-Men and Fantastic Four at the Walt Disney World or Tokyo Disney Resorts due to Universal's licensing deal with Marvel. The Simpsons are off the table in the United States due to a Universal licensing deal, as well. Disney already has an Avatar land in Florida. What's left? Planet of the Apes offers some great world-building opportunities for a next-generation, immersive theme park land. But where would it fit within Disney's theme park portfolio? I don't know that Planet of the Apes hits a beat different enough from Star Wars and Avatar to cover any market space that those franchises don't already deliver to Disney.

As for animation, Fox's line-up is relatively weak. There's Ice Age, but do we really want to tempt Disney Animation with a Scrat/Olaf cross-over featurette to slap in front of the next Pixar flick? (Okay, actually, that might approach some Tommy Wiseau-levels of awesomeness.)<<

Look, this deal has NOTHING to do with the Disney Parks division.

The Deal was made to strengthen the ESPN division, and for the new streaming platforms for movies and TV shows.

The company wanted/needed the catalogs to better market the new services, and to be LESS reliant on the Parks Division. Of course, Disney (the company) loves the profits the Parks Division makes, but wants to expand in other areas.

Which might be a good thing if Disney can find a good president for the Parks division, and leaves them alone to provide the type of product the Parks fans want.

Universal also has American Horror Story well only for Halloween Horror Nights till the rights expire of AHS in both parks. They could put The Simpsons in Tokyo, Paris, Hong Kong, and Shanghai.

 

[Darkbeer1]

Thinking about Mergers and IP's...

I think Disney Parks best option in the US now is to buy a competitor, SeaWorld is at a depressed price and small enough to convert, plus they could reunite the Sesame Street Characters with the Muppets.

It would give Disney two more properties in SoCal, a property in Texas, A park in Virginia which could be converted to the Disney America idea. and three more parks in Florida. And there are a lot of ties to Disney Animal Kingdom to allow more of a separate franchise.

So a Disney Seas in San Diego, and a new park in Chula Vista. Discovery Cove could have a major 4-Star built next to it, and treat it like Aulani.

Lots of great options, plus a new park in the middle of America.

 

[Antaundra]

Thinking about Mergers and IP's...

I think Disney Parks best option in the US now is to buy a competitor, SeaWorld is at a depressed price and small enough to convert, plus they could reunite the Sesame Street Characters with the Muppets.

It would give Disney two more properties in SoCal, a property in Texas, A park in Virginia which could be converted to the Disney America idea. and three more parks in Florida. And there are a lot of ties to Disney Animal Kingdom to allow more of a separate franchise.

So a Disney Seas in San Diego, and a new park in Chula Vista. Discovery Cove could have a major 4-Star built next to it, and treat it like Aulani.

Lots of great options, plus a new park in the middle of America.

This sounds like a great idea.

 

[Rich T]

Remember when the Muppets aquisition talks were a huge deal?

 

[Rich T]

Remember when Disney announced Black Hole would be rated PG (a first for them)and some people freaked out and exclaimed that the company had turned its back on family values?

 

[Darkbeer1]

Another option for Disney if it Bought SeaWorld Entertainment, use the Fox World license in the USA for some of the parks, and market to a different audience.

 

[Disney Analyst]

Thinking about Mergers and IP's...

I think Disney Parks best option in the US now is to buy a competitor, SeaWorld is at a depressed price and small enough to convert, plus they could reunite the Sesame Street Characters with the Muppets.

It would give Disney two more properties in SoCal, a property in Texas, A park in Virginia which could be converted to the Disney America idea. and three more parks in Florida. And there are a lot of ties to Disney Animal Kingdom to allow more of a separate franchise.

So a Disney Seas in San Diego, and a new park in Chula Vista. Discovery Cove could have a major 4-Star built next to it, and treat it like Aulani.

Lots of great options, plus a new park in the middle of America.

I just can’t see Disney getting involved in the controversy that is Seaworld.

 

[Darkbeer1]

Disney could be the hero and save the Killer Whales, even though the entire thing is a crock. As a kid, I had access to the first Killer Whale placed in capacity at SeaWorld San Diego and the original Shamu Stadium. It was a major scientific effort first, and the shows helped pay for the research. It was the original mission of SeaWorld, who opened up the Hubbs research center a year before the park opened. Every marine scientist was for it, and said the SeaWorld's approach was far better than any other aquarium doing it at the time. It also was the first to make major improvements in building new and better facilities for the program.

But while "SeaWorld" has a responsibility under the law to care for every captive mammal under its care until they die, Disney could rebrand, and even move all the animals to a single location, opening up the land to be converted into a non-marine park.

Look at how Six Flags has converted Marineland to Discovery Kingdom in the Bay Area. It can be done.