I'm.hoping that eventually, non-cable services like Sling will be more like cable in terms of functionality. And content.
-
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
I'm.hoping that eventually, non-cable services like Sling will be more like cable in terms of functionality. And content.
flynnibus
Premium Member
But do people love Hulu the same if the content they want is not there? I don't think so.
Hulu isn't really known as a technology leader/innovator. They are known for their library and marketing... two things that are easily challenged/disrupted. IMHO paying 10 billion plus for Hulu when it's content future has question marks because of conflicts of interest.. seems like overpaying.
IMHO - you don't need to be paying for someone with a subscription base today if you are Disney... you can build the subscriber base.
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
Name one character from the movie represented in the land. The appeal of the movie had nothing to do with the characters and everything to do with the alien planet that Cameron created. Disney, thankfully, understood that when they built Pandora.
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
Aside from this overwhelming evidence to the contrary... what else you got?
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
I know there is a lot of concern about competition/monopoly amongst the industry. Primarily the loss of one big studio. But here's my hot take:
Dis owns a large share of the market, but they do not produce even remotely the same amount of content per year. The release calendar is flooded, if Fox output is brought back somewhat we aren't even in the same ballpark as most other studios.
BV released 7 films as of this moment, Fox 11 this year. Fox Searchlight 11. WB is at 18, Sony/Columbia 23, Lionsgate 19... The only other major players close to the scarcity are Universal at 13 and Paramount at 11. Several of which also have their indie equivalent. If BV pairs down Fox output (which they surely will), are they really monopolizing the other studios?
The other area that this actually helps and the one everyone ignores when talking about the big studios, is a newer industry. Direct to viewer is pretty much monopolized by Netflix, Amazon is making inroads. Isn't it healthy for the industry if another company (Dis/Fox) can actually compete with Netflix?
That's what this move is about, not shrinking the competition of the movie industry, but growing the competition of the streaming industry. For others who keep comparing Dis to Kodak, isn't this exactly the opposite of Kodak? Bob isn't content just sitting on the top of the box office figuring the good times will role in perpetuity, he sees the train coming.
Dis owns a large share of the market, but they do not produce even remotely the same amount of content per year. The release calendar is flooded, if Fox output is brought back somewhat we aren't even in the same ballpark as most other studios.
BV released 7 films as of this moment, Fox 11 this year. Fox Searchlight 11. WB is at 18, Sony/Columbia 23, Lionsgate 19... The only other major players close to the scarcity are Universal at 13 and Paramount at 11. Several of which also have their indie equivalent. If BV pairs down Fox output (which they surely will), are they really monopolizing the other studios?
The other area that this actually helps and the one everyone ignores when talking about the big studios, is a newer industry. Direct to viewer is pretty much monopolized by Netflix, Amazon is making inroads. Isn't it healthy for the industry if another company (Dis/Fox) can actually compete with Netflix?
That's what this move is about, not shrinking the competition of the movie industry, but growing the competition of the streaming industry. For others who keep comparing Dis to Kodak, isn't this exactly the opposite of Kodak? Bob isn't content just sitting on the top of the box office figuring the good times will role in perpetuity, he sees the train coming.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
That's a given...so you think they're gonna expand on that further with this new deal? Half a park for a movie nobody can remember with little out of park product ties?
What else ya got?...I appreciate sox fans but they typically can bring something insightful...
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
Want me to tell you what happens before you and I see it?
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
I'm
Sorta with you...
But the reality is he has no choice because 40% of the profit (the only thing his handlers care about) is from tv (espn) and only 10% is from film. The numbers are what they are.
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
Bring something insightful? You spouted off the "name a character" line that's been plaguing these forums since 2011. As Bill Belichick would say, "Give me a break."
The treatment of Avatar in Disney's Animal Kingdom was better than any other single IP treatment in any other park in the world. I challenge you to come up with one that's better than it. That doesn't mean the rides are the best or the land is the best, what it means is that it's the best fit for the park that it's in.
To say it's a movie nobody remembers is a total fabrication. Having said that, you absolutely don't need to have seen the movie to appreciate the land. The same is true of the Harry Potter lands and Cars Land as well. Any good IP driven area or attraction needs to be able to exist above that IP. All the IP does is help with marketing and familiarity.
Rodan75
Well-Known Member
I hope that the only Fox theatrical output they scale back is Marvel related. I think Marvel (all output studios) shouldn't do more than 2-3 movies per year. Fox was trying to ramp up X-Men related production and that would have been bad for both Disney and Fox, let alone Sony and WB/DC. I think this extends the longevity of Superhero movies. Hopefully Dis/Fox can find a way to better monetize smaller adult movies (Fox Searchlight) via a combination of Theatrical/Linear/Streaming venues worldwide.
flynnibus
Premium Member
The problem with 'more competition' argument is since these are not independent distributors, what we end up with is fragmentation of the content people want. Instead of paying for Hulu and getting 80% of what you want.. and maybe Netflix to get 10% more... what if you end up with 3-4 players, each who alone, can not get the magic tipping point of 'enough' content to make the customer happy. Now customers face buying from more and more providers
The problem isn't 'reducing number of competitors' - its the lack of separation between distribution and content providers. Thus leading to fragmentation when people start playing hardball with who is allow to carry what.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
I think you are gonna seedifferent response this time...
What's "plenty"?
Marvel was puzzling to some...but kinda low cost with perks...
Pixar was lauded as the kind of move Eisner couldn't make and such a profit guarnatee
Even with the prequels...industry pundits were saying george sold it compared to what a bidding war would have brought...
We'll see here...I think the disparity in cost is gonna be looked at much more closely.
I get basic Hulu for free with my unlimied Sprint Cellular service. I am thinking of dropping my FIOS service at one house and Optimum service at my other and just keep high speed internet and my free Hulu, Amazon Prime video and Netflix. I will drop Netflix if they lose their Marvel Series which I really enjoy. The best part is Hulu should let me sign up for additional channels like YES. As a Yankee fan who dislikes the Mets being able to just subscribe to the Fox regional channels would be great.
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
I know what you are saying, but prior to this deal that was what we were looking at, more fragmentation. Dis was about to go off on their own, further fragmenting. Now they have all the Fox content along for the ride.
Albeit keep in mind we don't have Hulu in Canada, so I'm slightly unaware of what it actually even offers. We are very Netflix heavy with two major tele-carrier networks each offering a small streaming service. This actually gives us a viable second choice. I'm assuming it comes to Canada...
Next Big Thing
Well-Known Member
Why would you spoil yourself on the whole movie before seeing it? I'm a huge SW fan, but i've purposefully stayed away from spoilers and even trailers. The only thing Star Wars i've seen recently was re-watching TFA getting ready to see TLJ tonight.
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
I think it all gets concentrated down honestly. That's Alan Horne's/Bob's strategy, it has paid off for them. As you mention it is healthy for the Superhero genre, it was getting out of control.
Walt Disney Studio's releases 3-4
Pixar releases 1-2
WDAS releases 1-2
Lucasfilm releases 1 (2 if Indy becomes a brand)
Marvel releases 3-4 (as opposed to its current 2-3 with Fox's planned 3 per year)
21st Century Fox will then do 3-4 (loss of its 3 Marvel and further consolidation)
________________
They give themselves 3 weeks in between tentpole releases in effect.
Fox Searchlight does whatever, Blue Sky I honestly think is going to be sold to another studio.
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
I think he was being snarky that he is about to watch the empire strikes back, which by all accounts it is not.
T-minus 4 hours!
What makes you think I don't already know?
I just want to see how much of a scene by scene remake of Empire it may be...
1.5 for me.
flynnibus
Premium Member
This just means the 'pieces missing' from a provider get bigger. Instead of your favorite competing service missing one studio's content.. now it may be missing 2, 3, or more.
I think its going to get worse before it gets better... I mean, doesn't everyone remember the MP3 situation before Apple won the war?
That's what we are getting too...