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

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Hulu is Disney now… no difference then studios of the past like Touchstone and Miramax…. So yes Hulu and ESPN should be included in the Disney subscriber base

Yeah…that doesn’t change the point at all…but yeah

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Just finished watching the Thunderbolts*. That movie was lack luster. The heroes did a lot of arguing and it got pretty dark literally and figuratively. The ending scene involving the F4 didn't make any sense after watching F4. I guess that all happens in the "next" movie. Sorry but Elaine with a superman knockoff name "Bob" that puts people into a phantom zone where they get to live out the darkest day of their life isn't big enough stakes. It's just disappointing. But at least I contributed $0.75 streaming cents to making this movie break even. Yeah.

It’s crap…people didn’t go and watch it.

Just a common sense world

But trailer clicks and metascores…it’s like the new Bitcoin

 

[LSLS]

This is circular logic and only matters if you only care about that $5 in the long term, which is short term revenue by the way.

Also I don't know how you can say that Disney doesn't get revenue if the user didn't sub specifically to see the movie but is still subbing anyways. That $10 is spent on the service, not the specific movie. Its not like the user says "only show me this movie and nothing else on the service". So if someone subs to see a particular movie and then unsubs they still get the $10 even if they didn't watch anything else, or vice-versa where they watch everything else but that movie. The only thing it affects is residuals paid out by Disney based on watch minutes and any additional ad revenue they would have made, which we don't care about in this context. But the fee was still paid in either scenario.

This was the same argument made about software subscription services years ago. How will a particular software get revenue if the user isn't subbing for that specific software. This is all internal stuff that gets figured out based on usage.

Again this only matters if all you see is box office as the "only money that matters". And so yes in the short term they may lose out on that $5 but in the long term they make more based on the continual sub. The economics show that its the long term revenue that matters, not the short term loss.

If people would have the service anyway, you aren't making money off a movie coming to the network. If someone is subscribed for the historic content and new shows, and they would subscribe whether they got the movies in 90 days or one year, you aren't gaining money because of that movie. Heck, it's the reason Disney likes to concentrate on putting E ticket rides in the parks. I also think it's why you've seen dates pushed back. For a while they were 90 days after opening at theaters. Now you are approaching 4 months instead of 3. If someone is subscribing for one month and then cancelling just to see that movie and check out some of the other stuff on there, I'd agree. But that was my entire initial statement, I'd love to see how often that is happening.

 

[Disney Irish]

If people would have the service anyway, you aren't making money off a movie coming to the network. If someone is subscribed for the historic content and new shows, and they would subscribe whether they got the movies in 90 days or one year, you aren't gaining money because of that movie. Heck, it's the reason Disney likes to concentrate on putting E ticket rides in the parks. I also think it's why you've seen dates pushed back. For a while they were 90 days after opening at theaters. Now you are approaching 4 months instead of 3. If someone is subscribing for one month and then cancelling just to see that movie and check out some of the other stuff on there, I'd agree. But that was my entire initial statement, I'd love to see how often that is happening.

This is how a subscription model works, you hook them for one thing and get them to stay for all the rest including new stuff that comes along. As long as there is enough to keep the subs without much churn (which Disney has one of the highest retention rates, something like ~95% second only to Netflix at ~97%) that is all that matters in the long run, as this is feed by all the Studios which would be producing the same content anyways.

I think what some are confused about is thinking it needs to be "new" money for every transaction, as in there mind its only "new" money that seems "real" because that feels tangible and real. Its an argument that was often seen back when D+ initially released as the reason why streaming wouldn't work and the service would fold, and yet we're here 5 years later and its working. That is the old model of thinking with theatrical, because you only care about the new money coming in for a specific movie in that model. But in a subscription model you care about the money coming for the entire service, as long as that money coming in makes more than the content spend for the service that is profit. Its a different way to get to the same end result, ie overall profit for The Walt Disney Company.

The only people really that should be caring about what specific content does on the service, ie how many views it gets, is those that care about their residuals, and maybe Disney for the ad dollars. As now with the new contracts after the strikes the actors and writers once again get residuals based on that content, and in many cases have written in performance bonuses based on how it does on the service.

Disney already had one of the longest release windows of all of Hollywood, averaging 90-120 days for their blockbusters, and at least 45 days for their smaller releases, so this strategy hasn't changed all that much other than during the early days of the pandemic, ie its not getting longer its remained the same for a few years now. While other studios have smaller release windows, and they do just fine, for example Uni's is 17 to 31 days on average.

Subscription models have been around for hundreds of years and used by many industries for a reason, because they work. Hollywood is just the latest to use it, and its clear its not going away.

 

[Disney Analyst]

This is how a subscription model works, you hook them for one thing and get them to stay for all the rest including new stuff that comes along. As long as there is enough to keep the subs without much churn (which Disney has one of the highest retention rates, something like ~95% second only to Netflix at ~97%) that is all that matters in the long run, as this is feed by all the Studios which would be producing the same content anyways.

I think what some are confused about is thinking it needs to be "new" money for every transaction, as in there mind its only "new" money that seems "real" because that feels tangible and real. Its an argument that was often seen back when D+ initially released as the reason why streaming wouldn't work and the service would fold, and yet we're here 5 years later and its working. That is the old model of thinking with theatrical, because you only care about the new money coming in for a specific movie in that model. But in a subscription model you care about the money coming for the entire service, as long as that money coming in makes more than the content spend for the service that is profit. Its a different way to get to the same end result, ie overall profit for The Walt Disney Company.

The only people really that should be caring about what specific content does on the service, ie how many views it gets, is those that care about their residuals, and maybe Disney for the ad dollars. As now with the new contracts after the strikes the actors and writers once again get residuals based on that content, and in many cases have written in performance bonuses based on how it does on the service.

Disney already had one of the longest release windows of all of Hollywood, averaging 90-120 days for their blockbusters, and at least 45 days for their smaller releases, so this strategy hasn't changed all that much other than during the early days of the pandemic, ie its not getting longer its remained the same for a few years now. While other studios have smaller release windows, and they do just fine, for example Uni's is 17 to 31 days on average.

Subscription models have been around for hundreds of years and used by many industries for a reason, because they work. Hollywood is just the latest to use it, and its clear its not going away.

I think people seem to have such a hangup because it's not as flashy. People want to say "Look at the #1 movie with 1 billion in box office". It's a tangible, easy, big number.

But as we keep hammering, the way the industry looks at success is changing.

And again, there are SOO many people that maybe went out to a new Disney produced film just now and again. I am sure some may have gone out to the theatres for Disney once a year, or every couple years, and they could now be giving them $$$ monthly or annually.

 

[Disney Irish]

I think people seem to have such a hangup because it's not as flashy. People want to say "Look at the #1 movie with 1 billion in box office". It's a tangible, easy, big number.

But as we keep hammering, the way the industry looks at success is changing.

And again, there are SOO many people that maybe went out to a new Disney produced film just now and again. I am sure some may have gone out to the theatres for Disney once a year, or every couple years, and they could now be giving them $$$ monthly or annually.

It also comes down to wanting to be the ref and call winners and losers. Hard to rant and call out Iger for being a "loser" when its just lumped together with the rest of DTC. And in the end we know that is all some people care about.

 

[easyrowrdw]

If people would have the service anyway, you aren't making money off a movie coming to the network. If someone is subscribed for the historic content and new shows, and they would subscribe whether they got the movies in 90 days or one year, you aren't gaining money because of that movie. Heck, it's the reason Disney likes to concentrate on putting E ticket rides in the parks. I also think it's why you've seen dates pushed back. For a while they were 90 days after opening at theaters. Now you are approaching 4 months instead of 3. If someone is subscribing for one month and then cancelling just to see that movie and check out some of the other stuff on there, I'd agree. But that was my entire initial statement, I'd love to see how often that is happening.

I get what you're saying. It's also been noted previously in the thread that Disney+ has to pay the studio side for the movies. If they're spending for movies that aren't attracting new subscribers, it's a negative. If those movies are raking it in at the box office, that matters less. But if they're not, then you're in a different position.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I get what you're saying. It's also been noted previously in the thread that Disney+ has to pay the studio side for the movies. If they're spending for movies that aren't attracting new subscribers, it's a negative. If those movies are raking it in at the box office, that matters less. But if they're not, then you're in a different position.

Bad is bad

Good is good

Not sure why Disneys struggles causes any discussion of these things being “different”?

 

[DKampy]

Bad is bad

Good is good

Not sure why Disneys struggles causes any discussion of these things being “different”?

How do you qualify which content is good…. As all film is subjective…. What is good for one is bad for another…. I find the Transformers franchise unwatchable…. But if someone finds enjoyment in it…. Good on them…. It is all just opinions

 

[BrianLo]

YouTube is the world’s largest media company now (guess who’s 2?)

Disney.

The way you are asking that question though makes me wonder if you had a different answer.

 

[Disney Irish]

How do you qualify which content is good…. As all film is subjective…. What is good for one is bad for another…. I find the Transformers franchise unwatchable…. But if someone finds enjoyment in it…. Good on them…. It is all just opinions

This doesn't matter to them, as they've said many times here they don't care about the "art" of it. Its only seen as "good" if it does well at the box office, and "bad" if it doesn't. And that is what its all about, someone doesn't want it to change because they won't be able to say what is a winner or loser and who is to blame as a result.

So lets at least be honest about it. This doesn't have anything to do with the financials. It all has to do with calling out Disney management.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Disney.

The way you are asking that question though makes me wonder if you had a different answer.

Correct…

But it’s ironic that the “media flea market” passed the “Cadillac of family values” earlier this year…is it not?

 

[Nevermore525]

Warner moved Mortal Kombat II from October 24 to next May.

‘Mortal Kombat II’ Will Now Rumble Next Summer

Warner Bros has moved 'Mortal Kombat II' from Oct. 24 this year to May 15, 2026 to get better play at the summer box office.

deadline.com

 

[Stripes]

 

[Serpico Jones]

Warner moved Mortal Kombat II from October 24 to next May.

‘Mortal Kombat II’ Will Now Rumble Next Summer

Warner Bros has moved 'Mortal Kombat II' from Oct. 24 this year to May 15, 2026 to get better play at the summer box office.

deadline.com

It’s going to get killed by The Mandalorian the following week. WB sent this one out to die.

 

[Phroobar]

It’s going to get killed by The Mandalorian the following week. WB sent this one out to die.

Probably. But it sure cost less to produce.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Weapons expected to be #1 with $12 million over the 4-day holiday weekend, but Jaws may be #2 with $9.7 million

 

[Disney Irish]

It’s going to get killed by The Mandalorian the following week. WB sent this one out to die.

They must have gotten some internal tracking that indicated it wasn’t going to do well against all the horror movies being released in October, like Black Phone 2.

Probably. But it sure cost less to produce.

You’d think they would have kept it there if it had a lower threshold to hit breakeven. As not much competition in October compared to next May.

Which shows again that studios are thinking less and less about the box office totals.

 

[Disney Irish]

Weapons expected to be #1 with $12 million over the 4-day holiday weekend, but Jaws may be #2 with $9.7 million

And Fantastic Four should cross $500M.

 

[DisneyWarrior27]

Officially announced at Destination D23…

The official title for Ice Age 6 has been revealed…

Ice Age: Boiling Point

And along with the new title, a new release date for the film was revealed as well now that Disney learned to move it away from Avengers: Doomsday, with the film now set to release in theaters on February 5th, 2027.