• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

News Disney and Fox come to terms -- announcement soon; huge IP acquisition

Ike Perlmutter was the one who petulantly killed off the Inhumans, for now.
Originally Inhumans was going to be an MCU movie. Vin Diesel was lobbying hard to be Black Bolt. Ike could only destroy them because Feige passed.

Supposedly when Agents of Shield tv show started incorporating Inhumans as a race (not the royal family that the movie was going to be about), Studios wasn’t happy and the movie got pushed to the back burner.

When the Spider-Man deal happened everything got pushed back, and Inhumans taken off the schedule completely. Then the tv show happened. The only way we see any form of Inhumans on the big screen is if they don’t want to alter Ms. Marvel’s (Kamala Kahn) origin when she pops up in a Captain Marvel sequel.
 
Advertisement
Don't think that's right. Ike was the one who wanted inhumans (Because they didn't have xmen). He forced Feige to put it on the slate in exchange for green lighting black panther and captain marvel after Ike blocked them for years because he didn't think a movie with a female lead or person of colour would sell toys this is what caused marvel studios to split from marvel entertainment in 2015. Feige nearly quit over it And Iger had to step in he made it so that Feige reported directly to Horn and himself.

Bypassing ike however this pretty much destroyed the relationship the film division had with the tv side. Remember how the 1st 2 seasons of agents of shield had cameos from Nick Fury and lady sif? Notice how those stopped soon after and they dropped the whole it's all connected thing? This is why.
That makes sense. I know I’ve read the reason the TV and movie sides don’t link up is because Feige doesn’t like Ike. I was unaware Feige didn’t want Inhumans in general.

Wasn’t Ike the guy who wouldn’t let the villain be a female in Iron Man 3 because of toy sales?
 

Darkprime

Active Member
That makes sense. I know I’ve read the reason the TV and movie sides don’t link up is because Feige doesn’t like Ike. I was unaware Feige didn’t want Inhumans in general.

Wasn’t Ike the guy who wouldn’t let the villain be a female in Iron Man 3 because of toy sales?
Yep that's the one.

FYI you can read about it all here.

 

BrianLo

Well-Known Member
Don't think that's right. Ike was the one who wanted inhumans (Because they didn't have xmen). He forced Feige to put it on the slate in exchange for green lighting black panther and captain marvel after Ike blocked them for years because he didn't think a movie with a female lead or person of colour would sell toys this is what caused marvel studios to split from marvel entertainment in 2015. Feige nearly quit over it And Iger had to step in he made it so that Feige reported directly to Horn and himself.

Bypassing ike however this pretty much destroyed the relationship the film division had with the tv side. Remember how the 1st 2 seasons of agents of shield had cameos from Nick Fury and lady sif? Notice how those stopped soon after and they dropped the whole it's all connected thing? This is why.
Originally Inhumans was going to be an MCU movie. Vin Diesel was lobbying hard to be Black Bolt. Ike could only destroy them because Feige passed.

Supposedly when Agents of Shield tv show started incorporating Inhumans as a race (not the royal family that the movie was going to be about), Studios wasn’t happy and the movie got pushed to the back burner.

When the Spider-Man deal happened everything got pushed back, and Inhumans taken off the schedule completely. Then the tv show happened. The only way we see any form of Inhumans on the big screen is if they don’t want to alter Ms. Marvel’s (Kamala Kahn) origin when she pops up in a Captain Marvel sequel.
Sorry, I worded that incorrectly. I didn't mean Ike wanted to kill Inhumans. I meant his petulance was what ultimately lead to everything that has now indirectly killed inhumans. The stink from the TV show is way too strong for the moment.

I can't believe they let Scott Buck have a second franchise.
 

Rodan75

Well-Known Member
The breathless was the entertainment press is fauning over these separations is ridiculous. Those announced today are not surprises to those impacted. They have likely know for weeks/months, and may have been offered new positions that they rejected.

The entertainment press obviously has little understanding of how these integrations work and could use more ppl experienced in business journalism.
 

brodie999

Active Member
Yep that's the one.

FYI you can read about it all here.

If he broke free of Perlmutter much sooner and started the MCU without his interference, some films like The Dark World, Age of Ultron and Iron Man 2 would've been much more positively received and had plots, characterisations and storylines that made more sense than what we got now. Marvel Studios should've always been in charge in their own.
 
Apparently, according to a person at superherohype forum, they just filed for approval in Argentina and its explained below:
Oh btw should anyone be still tracking. DIS has just filed for approval in Argentina. It turns out that country still uses the process merger notification is filed after completion. It’s a strange world.
 
Last edited:

Darkprime

Active Member
Apparently, according to a person at superherohype forum, they just filed for approval in Argentina and its explained below:

The deals closed it doesn't matter.
 

The Moles Family

Well-Known Member
Eek, seems some major layoffs.

I'm sure Disney have spent a lot of time assessing what fat needs cutting from this merger over the last year. Hopefully Disney doesn't cut and close so much so there's not much left.

I also guess it's best to do it all ASAP rather than run bloated for several years and see what happens.

How many people were part of the merger if they are looking to lay off between 4000-10,000 people
 

bartholomr4

Well-Known Member
Eek, seems some major layoffs.

I'm sure Disney have spent a lot of time assessing what fat needs cutting from this merger over the last year. Hopefully Disney doesn't cut and close so much so there's not much left.

I also guess it's best to do it all ASAP rather than run bloated for several years and see what happens.

How many people were part of the merger if they are looking to lay off between 4000-10,000 people
At the end of 2018, 21CF had 22,400 employees per their 10K (www.sec.gov). There isn't a definative count in any of the merger documents I have seen, but there is a reference to 3,815 employees at 21CF Studios (Its not clear in that reference if that is the global studio or just the part of the studio which uses that brand... it could exclude fox light, fox 2000, etc). If 1/3rd of the employee's stayed with the new FOX, then you have about 14,750ish employees which transferred to Disney(my estimate).
 

seascape

Well-Known Member
Eek, seems some major layoffs.

I'm sure Disney have spent a lot of time assessing what fat needs cutting from this merger over the last year. Hopefully Disney doesn't cut and close so much so there's not much left.

I also guess it's best to do it all ASAP rather than run bloated for several years and see what happens.

How many people were part of the merger if they are looking to lay off between 4000-10,000 people
If Disney's goal is $2 billion in cost savings and synergies the layoffs will be closer to 4,000. Some of the synergies are from the couple percent increase in the Fox box office. That should be anywhere from $20million to $100million, based on a $1billion North America. Adding international would likely double that. Then there is office space, payroll taxes, medical insurance and other overhead. Many people have no idea how much it costs for each employee besides there salary.

The 10,000 number was only based on an average salary of $200,000. Layoffs of 4,000 are much more likely with a savings of $500,000 per employee. I wonder what the international travel cost, including first class airfare, hotels, food and entertainment, etc.. for the international distribution costs were for the 2 companies that can now be cut almost in half.

The more I think about all the costs that can be cut without layoffs and the extra money from the box office saving $2billion is easy without paying off 4,000. I also think that after the merger is complete the Fox employees will be very happy with their free admission to Disneyland. That is a huge benefit and major savings for them and their family.
 

bartholomr4

Well-Known Member
If Disney's goal is $2 billion in cost savings and synergies the layoffs will be closer to 4,000. Some of the synergies are from the couple percent increase in the Fox box office. That should be anywhere from $20million to $100million, based on a $1billion North America. Adding international would likely double that. Then there is office space, payroll taxes, medical insurance and other overhead. Many people have no idea how much it costs for each employee besides there salary.

The 10,000 number was only based on an average salary of $200,000. Layoffs of 4,000 are much more likely with a savings of $500,000 per employee. I wonder what the international travel cost, including first class airfare, hotels, food and entertainment, etc.. for the international distribution costs were for the 2 companies that can now be cut almost in half.

The more I think about all the costs that can be cut without layoffs and the extra money from the box office saving $2billion is easy without paying off 4,000. I also think that after the merger is complete the Fox employees will be very happy with their free admission to Disneyland. That is a huge benefit and major savings for them and their family.
I would agree with your hypothesis, with the exception of including any increase in the box office being part of their calculation. Based on the merger announcement, the synergies are cost savings only. Fully Loaded costs for the AVERAGE employee are probably closer to $100,000, with Salary being $80,000 and benefits $20,000. I think the larger savings are in the duplicate computer systems, real-estate, and support personnel. Professional Services (legal, consultants, support services) are also likely to consolidate down to one vendor instead of two. The Supply Chain Personnel are probably being charged with finding a huge chunk of the funds. Lastly, there will likely be some balance sheet management which will result based on applying Disney's superior credit costs (lower interest rates) to the 21CF Debt.
 

bartholomr4

Well-Known Member
If Disney's goal is $2 billion in cost savings and synergies the layoffs will be closer to 4,000. Some of the synergies are from the couple percent increase in the Fox box office. That should be anywhere from $20million to $100million, based on a $1billion North America. Adding international would likely double that. Then there is office space, payroll taxes, medical insurance and other overhead. Many people have no idea how much it costs for each employee besides there salary.

The 10,000 number was only based on an average salary of $200,000. Layoffs of 4,000 are much more likely with a savings of $500,000 per employee. I wonder what the international travel cost, including first class airfare, hotels, food and entertainment, etc.. for the international distribution costs were for the 2 companies that can now be cut almost in half.

The more I think about all the costs that can be cut without layoffs and the extra money from the box office saving $2billion is easy without paying off 4,000. I also think that after the merger is complete the Fox employees will be very happy with their free admission to Disneyland. That is a huge benefit and major savings for them and their family.
From the Hollywood Reporter: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/as-layoffs-arrive-disney-fox-staff-voice-frustrations-1196346

Part of the frustration, multiple employees tell The Hollywood Reporter, is that Disney has been less than forthcoming about who will be let go and when, and what their separation packages will look like, though some with more knowledge of the situation say that some employees will be getting up to 24 months of severance.

Says one Disney employee: "We feel like we're the ones who have been acquired because the people at Fox know what their severance packages are, if they are going to get let go, and nobody at Disney knows anything. People are panicking — and rightfully so — because nobody is telling them anything."

Indeed, Disney hasn't disclosed the number of jobs that would be lost — and that has yet to change. Analysts estimate 4,000-10,000, though several employees say the number being floated amongst people in the know is closer to 3,000.
 

capsshield

Active Member
Sorry but marvels movie slat is not locked in or even announced. I agree that all the projects you mention are highly likely, but they have known this move was coming for a long time. I don't think they are even filming anything yet.
You also fail to add in any of the slots fox had booked.
Let's wait until San Diego and D23 before we pretend to know what's coming.
Really great speculation though.
 

Ripken10

Well-Known Member
From the Hollywood Reporter: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/as-layoffs-arrive-disney-fox-staff-voice-frustrations-1196346

Part of the frustration, multiple employees tell The Hollywood Reporter, is that Disney has been less than forthcoming about who will be let go and when, and what their separation packages will look like, though some with more knowledge of the situation say that some employees will be getting up to 24 months of severance.

Says one Disney employee: "We feel like we're the ones who have been acquired because the people at Fox know what their severance packages are, if they are going to get let go, and nobody at Disney knows anything. People are panicking — and rightfully so — because nobody is telling them anything."

Indeed, Disney hasn't disclosed the number of jobs that would be lost — and that has yet to change. Analysts estimate 4,000-10,000, though several employees say the number being floated amongst people in the know is closer to 3,000.
I think you and seascape already touched on this (and factored it in if it is indeed the case), and I am more thinking out loud...but won't there be a significant number of higher positions cut (like the execs already announced) which (to me, the way I think of the numbers at least) will really throw off the averages some sites are using for how many will be cut. Like one of you two pointed out, one site used the avg salary to calculate the # of employees that will need to be cut, but I would think a higher # of execs cuts will lead to an inflated avg salary of those cut..moreover after you remove all the execs from the equation that number of cuts will be far less. Basically, if they had to save $1 billion (random number) in salaries, the execs might account for 50% of this (again random number), from a very select number of people...
 

bartholomr4

Well-Known Member
I think you and seascape already touched on this (and factored it in if it is indeed the case), and I am more thinking out loud...but won't there be a significant number of higher positions cut (like the execs already announced) which (to me, the way I think of the numbers at least) will really throw off the averages some sites are using for how many will be cut. Like one of you two pointed out, one site used the avg salary to calculate the # of employees that will need to be cut, but I would think a higher # of execs cuts will lead to an inflated avg salary of those cut..moreover after you remove all the execs from the equation that number of cuts will be far less. Basically, if they had to save $1 billion (random number) in salaries, the execs might account for 50% of this (again random number), from a very select number of people...
It could be.... I am just not sure there are that many executives which get paid salaries in that range. To add up to the $1 Billion, you would need to have 2,000 Executives which are paid $500K or more per year. I just don't think Fox was that bloated at the top. (i.e. 1 executive for every 5 worker-bee which is severed)

For grin's, lets say there is a 10 to 1 Ratio of Executive to Worker-bee..... That would suggest about 360 Executives and the rest as worker-bees.... Your cost reduction would be about $180 million for Executives and $364 million for the worker bees. The resulting savings equates to $544 Million cost reduction in my scenario for 4,000 employees. The rest of the savings then would have to come from the real-estate, systems elimination, redundancy eliminations, Supply Chain savings, and balance sheet management. Just my view and it's a model for discussion.....
 

Rodan75

Well-Known Member
It could be.... I am just not sure there are that many executives which get paid salaries in that range. To add up to the $1 Billion, you would need to have 2,000 Executives which are paid $500K or more per year. I just don't think Fox was that bloated at the top. (i.e. 1 executive for every 5 worker-bee which is severed)

For grin's, lets say there is a 10 to 1 Ratio of Executive to Worker-bee..... That would suggest about 360 Executives and the rest as worker-bees.... Your cost reduction would be about $180 million for Executives and $364 million for the worker bees. The resulting savings equates to $544 Million cost reduction in my scenario for 4,000 employees. The rest of the savings then would have to come from the real-estate, systems elimination, redundancy eliminations, Supply Chain savings, and balance sheet management. Just my view and it's a model for discussion.....
You are correct. Normally in these merger scenarios the big costs savings come down to real estate, duplicate systems and maintenance contracts. Only where people overlap in leadership positions do you really have major people savings.

I wonder how much was saved just by shutting down Fox 2000 as a label. Even if all of those people were reassigned to 20CF and Fox Searchlight.
 

bartholomr4

Well-Known Member
You are correct. Normally in these merger scenarios the big costs savings come down to real estate, duplicate systems and maintenance contracts. Only where people overlap in leadership positions do you really have major people savings.

I wonder how much was saved just by shutting down Fox 2000 as a label. Even if all of those people were reassigned to 20CF and Fox Searchlight.
And would the savings be Cost Reduction or Cost Avoidance..... i.e. assuming these projects produce revenue you are avoiding the cost, but also the offsetting revenue has to be made up elsewhere? I looked at BoxOfficeMojo, but the Fox 2000 was distributed by the Big 21CF Fox label, so it is hard to break out!
 
Top Bottom