Star India is the leading streaming service in India. Netflix has been unable to gain market share so there is no way Disney will sell anything else.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Disney and Fox come to terms -- announcement soon; huge IP acquisition
- Thread starter ohioguy
- Start date
AnotherDayAnotherDollar
Well-Known Member
I have already been over this with you specifically. NBCU has distribution rights to physical media, not to online distribution sans possibly streaming. Here is who is distributing Dreamwork animation movies on google play:
https://play.google.com/store/movie...lp=ChIKEAoKc3R1ZGlvX0ZPWBAHGAQ=:S:ANO1ljIZIKw
39% of Sky is worth significantly more than any theme park rights and/or movie rights. It's laughable that you'd save them for something better than just Sky lol. Disney/Comcast might do another Oswald and Comcast might get Jamelle Hill for Hulk movie rights. That's how much those are worth IMO. Let me remind you that Hulk distribution rights is just rights of first refusal to solo Hulk movies. Marvel and Disney can use Hulk however they want otherwise, hence the Planet Hulk adaptation in Thor Ragnarok. Solo Hulk movie rights is worth very little to Disney. Namor rights is worth even less to Disney. Theme park rights in Orlando are also minor as Disney is okay just getting added revenue every year from Comcast without investing any capital. Those rights would just be added incentives and they are minimal.
30% of Hulu is also worth significantly less than 39% of Sky. It's not even close. Numbers are there for any to see. Roberts and company would LOVE to have a one to one trade where they get 39% of Sky for their 30% of Hulu. That's obviously not gonna happen though.
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
Blue Sky seems like an asset DoJ should have required be divested.
Seems one of Fox Animation’s more promising projects was shown the door.
brb1006
Well-Known Member
If they weren't known as the Ice Age sequel factory. Then maybe they could had been taken seriously as an animation studio. Look how good The Peanuts Movie turned out!
Last edited:
Twilight_Roxas
Well-Known Member
Rio
Robots
Horton Hears a Who
Epic
The Peanuts Movie
Ferdinand
They were successful as well.
Robots
Horton Hears a Who
Epic
The Peanuts Movie
Ferdinand
They were successful as well.
brb1006
Well-Known Member
What's funnier about the list is that Disney actually made a cartoon adaptation of Ferdinand. And announced them planning on acquiring Fox days before the film premiered
Twilight_Roxas
Well-Known Member
Still Blue Sky could still be successful under the Disney banner even collaborating with WDA & Pixar.
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
They’re more valuable to a competitor than they are to Disney. If they want to increase their total output of animated features, they can staff up at WDAS and Pixar without the overhead of a third studio, buoyed by CT tax incentives.
TwilightZone
Well-Known Member
The first Ice Age movie was really good. It was one of my childhood favorites. The second one wasn't too bad either. But the third one was my first childhood disappointment. And then the last one came out on my birthday. Both a good and bad b-day gift. Good because the franchise is dead. Bad because the franchise had a lot of potential. I would have liked to see what happened to the kid they saved in the first movie, for example.
AnotherDayAnotherDollar
Well-Known Member
Blue Sky would be very valuable under Disney, specifically providing Direct to Streaming animation movies or limited theatrical releases under smaller budgets (i.e. < 100MM). They could also make high quality Marvel and SW (and Avatar?) cartoon movies and TV series. Marvel btw is way behind DC in the animated movie and TV department.
Twilight_Roxas
Well-Known Member
Well think of Disney creating a animated Marvel universe with WDA, Pixar, and Blue Sky Studios ever since BH6 was made.
Here is how Blue Sky has fared...
Their "success" comes from doing full length animated features cheaply -- and somehow convincing people to show up for Ice Age sequels.
Their budget for these movies averaged $90 million and pulled in, on average, $464 million.
- Pixar averaged $154 million to make and an average BO of $646.
- Disney Animation in the same period: $143 million to make; $415 at the BO
However, look at those critical scores. The average 'average of critics' for Blue Sky is 58 (out of 100). The 5th Ice Age bottomed at a 38!
- Pixar's average is 79, with Cars 2 hitting the rear at 56.
- DA's average for this same time period: 70 with the dark ages trio of Brother Bear, Home on the Range, and Chicken Little being in the mid-50s. If we count only from the Bolt/Frog re-Renaissance, it's 63.
Rodan75
Well-Known Member
Blue Sky really has been a wasted opportunity for Fox, they’ve been missing a strong creative voice for years.
If Disney put the studio up for sale, who would buy? Hasbro maybe, they bought a TV animation studio in Ireland? All the majors have animation studios.
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
Disney's goal from day one with this Fox acquisition is to further bolster their content. Lots of fun synergies exist for expansion of their core businesses. But I don't see how adding a telecommunications wing to the company was the goal.
Sky makes much more sense winding up in the Comcast portfolio. I frankly don't think telecommunication giants are on an endlessly upward trajectory, especially in light of cord cutting. It seems like Sky is the opposite strategy from what they want to achieve. They also produce very little of their own content for the 34 odd billion Disney would be shelling out to own them. Most of their content in fact is simply Fox content.
In contrast to Star, which already has huge inroads to digital streaming and has a ton of original content.
The RSN's I'm thankful to see divested. ESPN is a cash cow, but it's been a blight for years during investor meetings. RSN's unless they have a major shakeup into the digital landscape (which Disney has their hands in with BAMtech) are also not long for future gains in value.
I'm a parks fan first, a studios fan second, the ancillary business I start to care exceedingly less about. What I don't want to see in this race to the bottom leading to a slashing of park budgets. I'm an optimist, I choose to believe them when they say current projects won't be dramatically slashed...
However, I'm a realist that future projects will have a lot tougher time in a debt laden DIS. Stock buybacks may have been the first to be cut (which thankfully usually isn't the priority). We all know Parks and Resorts would have to be the next. With the shedding of RSN's and Sky it's not that I believe that returned ~40 billion is getting anywhere close to the Parks, but I do believe it makes future capital cost cutting much, much less guaranteed.
Sky makes much more sense winding up in the Comcast portfolio. I frankly don't think telecommunication giants are on an endlessly upward trajectory, especially in light of cord cutting. It seems like Sky is the opposite strategy from what they want to achieve. They also produce very little of their own content for the 34 odd billion Disney would be shelling out to own them. Most of their content in fact is simply Fox content.
In contrast to Star, which already has huge inroads to digital streaming and has a ton of original content.
The RSN's I'm thankful to see divested. ESPN is a cash cow, but it's been a blight for years during investor meetings. RSN's unless they have a major shakeup into the digital landscape (which Disney has their hands in with BAMtech) are also not long for future gains in value.
I'm a parks fan first, a studios fan second, the ancillary business I start to care exceedingly less about. What I don't want to see in this race to the bottom leading to a slashing of park budgets. I'm an optimist, I choose to believe them when they say current projects won't be dramatically slashed...
However, I'm a realist that future projects will have a lot tougher time in a debt laden DIS. Stock buybacks may have been the first to be cut (which thankfully usually isn't the priority). We all know Parks and Resorts would have to be the next. With the shedding of RSN's and Sky it's not that I believe that returned ~40 billion is getting anywhere close to the Parks, but I do believe it makes future capital cost cutting much, much less guaranteed.
Quinnmac000
Well-Known Member
You guys forget Blue Sky was started and ran by the guy who is now leading Illumination Entertainment so most likely if Disney sells it with Fox Animation...Universal will likely buy it to appease him. (Kinda like they are doing with Dreamworks for Spielberg and investing in things for Blumhouse)
Twilight_Roxas
Well-Known Member
There's two other Fox animated films both The Pagemaster & Titan A.E.
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
Not so fast.
Blue Sky was founded by ex-employees of MAGI Sythnivision (“Tron”).
Fox Animation was led for a period of time by Chris Meledandri, who acquired the studio.
Quinnmac000
Well-Known Member
During which all the films were made under Meledandri...before Meledandri they made no films whatsoever.
Yes, but they weren't by Blue Sky, the topic of recent conversation, they were by Fox Animation Studio.
And the Pagemaster wasn't by Fox, it was only distributed by Fox.
Other than Titan A.E., the two other animation films by Fox Studios was Anastasia and Bartok the Magificent a D2V prequel to Anastasia.