News Announced: Mary Poppins Attraction in UK Pavilion

[Rich Brownn]

Here's the recent Disney Studios batch...

View attachment 339170

The Studio gets roughly half of gross Box Office (the other half goes to the theaters).

Production costs is generally well-known. Marketing and other business overhead isn't. As a rough ballpark, that's an extra 50% of production cost.

So, for MPR, the Studio is pocketing about $130 million after spending the same amount on production. However, the marketing of about $65 million is still on the ledger. Since the Studio only gets half of B.O., then MPR needs to make another $130 million to break even.

There's no way theaters get 50% of the box-office until the film is well into its run. The best they can hope for is a 30/70 split, although for big films it can be as much as 90/10. And now you know why snacks cost so much.

 

[britain]

Here's the thing about all these reboots, live action remakes and sequels: Obviously Disney wants to make as much money off these things as possible. But these are also regarded as shots in the arms of the IPs.

If they didn't make MPR, then picture a world where Mary Poppins is simply considered a wonderful old classic. A very important one in Disney history to be sure, but one that becomes less and less relevant to audiences every decade.

Now, I show my kids old movies. And I'm sure YOU show your kids old movies. But the bulk of society will only watch something made within the past 10-20 years, if that. If they didn't make Mary Poppins Returns, things like the Jolly Holiday Bakery at DL or the Mary & Burt walk arounds would start to feel like the Harper Goff Nautilus: Something cool from an old movie that grandpa loved, but something that hasn't been in anything new for a long time. Almost more of an easter egg fans love than an attraction the masses will be drawn to.

And this is partially true for the live-action remakes as well, it's just that those are more fueled by more recent nostalgia. Honestly, I think they're quite lucky MPR is doing as well as it is. And probably justifies some addition to the UK. But not an expensive one.

 

[OG Runner]

130 million is just the production cost, marketing cost is in a different bucket that isnt released (it can run about half the production budget). Films usually want to make most of their money in the first few weeks of their domestic run, thats when the studio's share of the profits are the largest. As the weeks go on the theaters get a larger percentage of the box office, so a long steady stream of customers is not what Disney wanted, they want a huge front loaded number. International box office is a different beast altogether as a studios take depends on the country. For example a studio may only receive 25% of the take from China but keep 40% from Australia.

This movie needs somewhere around 390 million just to break even.

Where are you coming up with these figures? Do you actually have any evidence to back them up? You costs and percentages seem
very vague, right up until you say the movie would need to earn $390 million to break even.

 

[GlacierGlacier]

Here's the recent Disney Studios batch...

View attachment 339170

The Studio gets roughly half of gross Box Office (the other half goes to the theaters).

Production costs is generally well-known. Marketing and other business overhead isn't. As a rough ballpark, that's an extra 50% of production cost.

So, for MPR, the Studio is pocketing about $130 million after spending the same amount on production. However, the marketing of about $65 million is still on the ledger. Since the Studio only gets half of B.O., then MPR needs to make another $130 million to break even.

How many different Disney Excel sheets do you have

I appreciate every single one

 

[mikejs78]

130 million is just the production cost, marketing cost is in a different bucket that isnt released (it can run about half the production budget). Films usually want to make most of their money in the first few weeks of their domestic run, thats when the studio's share of the profits are the largest. As the weeks go on the theaters get a larger percentage of the box office, so a long steady stream of customers is not what Disney wanted, they want a huge front loaded number. International box office is a different beast altogether as a studios take depends on the country. For example a studio may only receive 25% of the take from China but keep 40% from Australia.

This movie needs somewhere around 390 million just to break even.

There's no way theaters get 50% of the box-office until the film is well into its run. The best they can hope for is a 30/70 split, although for big films it can be as much as 90/10. And now you know why snacks cost so much.

The sliding scale has kind of disappeared in the last decade or so... Now the split is pretty constant through the life of a movie's run...

 

[phillip9698]

Where are you coming up with these figures? Do you actually have any evidence to back them up? You costs and percentages seem
very vague, right up until you say the movie would need to earn $390 million to break even.

Years of following movie box office discussions. Cinema chains and movie distributors dont announce their takes so you have to piece things together from securities filings and leaks. You arent going to find a document that says "For film A, studios and distributors can only expect to share 30% of the box office as China will keep the other 70%."

As far as the required take is concerned......

Production - 130 million
Marketing - Usually 50% of production with movies this size - 65 million
So initially they are sitting on a 195 million total cost.

1st 3 week domestic box office - 138 million - Studio keeps roughly 55% - 75.9 million
1st 3 week foreign box office - 119 million - Studio keeps roughly 40% (this is being generous as it can fluctuate with currency and tariffs)- 47.6 million
Current Disney box office share - 123.5 million

So there is a gap of about 71.5 million in studio returns that Disney needs. Using the splits above they would need box office receipts of roughly an additional 143 million dollars. 143+138+119 = 400 million.

 

[peter11435]

There's no way theaters get 50% of the box-office until the film is well into its run. The best they can hope for is a 30/70 split, although for big films it can be as much as 90/10. And now you know why snacks cost

There’s no reason to speculate. Information about the split is fairly well documented.

 

[OG Runner]

Years of following movie box office discussions. Cinema chains and movie distributors dont announce their takes so you have to piece things together from securities filings and leaks. You arent going to find a document that says "For film A, studios and distributors can only expect to share 30% of the box office as China will keep the other 70%."

As far as the required take is concerned......

Production - 130 million
Marketing - Usually 50% of production with movies this size - 65 million
So initially they are sitting on a 195 million total cost.

1st 3 week domestic box office - 138 million - Studio keeps roughly 55% - 75.9 million
1st 3 week foreign box office - 119 million - Studio keeps roughly 40% (this is being generous as it can fluctuate with currency and tariffs)- 47.6 million
Current Disney box office share - 123.5 million

So there is a gap of about 71.5 million in studio returns that Disney needs. Using the splits above they would need box office receipts of roughly an additional 143 million dollars. 143+138+119 = 400 million.

Nice presentation!

 

[MisterPenguin]

There's no way theaters get 50% of the box-office until the film is well into its run. The best they can hope for is a 30/70 split, although for big films it can be as much as 90/10. And now you know why snacks cost so much.

Overseas, theaters keep a much larger percentage than domestically. A 50% split is just a ballpark, but from what I researched, is a fairly accepted one.

 

[MisterPenguin]

NatFR is closed to 173 than 170 now. It has had some legs over the holidays.

And only $200 million more to make in order to break even in it's theatrical run.

Wait, what's that...

<sad trombone>

 

[jt04]

And only $200 million more to make in order to break even in it's theatrical run.

Wait, what's that...

View attachment 339254

<sad trombone>

I would believe you if I believed the conventional wisdom on how box office gets divided up. If your formula was correct Hollywood would never get another loan. You do create a nice spread sheet though.

 

[MisterPenguin]

I would believe you if I believed the conventional wisdom on how box office gets divided up. If your formula was correct Hollywood would never get another loan. You do create a nice spread sheet though.

Believe what you want, because you do anyway facts be damned.

 

[jt04]

Believe what you want, because you do anyway facts be damned.

Hollywood accounting is as creative as any other Hollywood product. That's not my meme.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Hollywood accounting is as creative as any other Hollywood product. That's not my meme.

Your confusing what some studios do to secretly cook the books with industry standards which are well known and out in the open.

 

[jt04]

Your confusing what some studios do to secretly cook the books with industry standards which are well known and out in the open.

Disney has its own percentages it has negotiated. You use a one size fits all standard. It is nice for making ballpark assumptions. Nothing more. I am not ungrateful for your work.

 

[seascape]

Disney has its own percentages it has negotiated. You use a one size fits all standard. It is nice for making ballpark assumptions. Nothing more. I am not ungrateful for your work.

Disney does get more than the other studios. Disney is also the only studio to come out and say they agree with decent window for movie theaters. Others want a one week window and then a premium streaming price for several weeks. Any way the cost to make a movie use Hollywood accounting which gives the studios huge profits during filming and then distribution costs. Movies can lose a fortune and the studios can still be profitable. It's all how you count costs and expenses.

 

[Next Big Thing]

Mary Poppins also cost almost 50 million more to make. They have a lot of work to do to make a decent profit on this.

None of what I said was based on profits, just pure numbers.

 

[Rich Brownn]

Overseas, theaters keep a much larger percentage than domestically. A 50% split is just a ballpark, but from what I researched, is a fairly accepted one.

After the theater's expense is deducted, the remaining "profit" can be a split as high as 90/10 for the first 2 weeks. This may be a 50-50 split on net, but profit wise the lions share goes to the distributor.

 

[mikejs78]

After the theater's expense is deducted, the remaining "profit" can be a split as high as 90/10 for the first 2 weeks. This may be a 50-50 split on net, but profit wise the lions share goes to the distributor.

This isn't true anymore from what I gather.

 

[peter11435]

After the theater's expense is deducted, the remaining "profit" can be a split as high as 90/10 for the first 2 weeks. This may be a 50-50 split on net, but profit wise the lions share goes to the distributor.

Again. There’s no need to speculate.

Start here for example

https://www.bizjournals.com/losange...emands-draconian-terms-from-theaters-for.html