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

[Phroobar]

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

View attachment 879662

This made me chuckle but also reminded me there’s photos of me disbounding Mickey Mouse on Dapper Day, wearing ears at the parks, wearing a full Pirate Costume on pirates night on a DCL cruise… as I normie Tron fan this is pretty funny, as an extreme Disney fan it just reminds me I’ve got “fanatic” photos out in the world that I’m sure non Disney fans find just as humorous and odd.

 

[Phroobar]

This made me chuckle but also reminded me there’s photos of me disbounding Mickey Mouse on Dapper Day, wearing ears at the parks, wearing a full Pirate Costume on pirates night on a DCL cruise… as I normie Tron fan this is pretty funny, as an extreme Disney fan it just reminds me I’ve got “fanatic” photos out in the world that I’m sure non Disney fans find just as humorous and odd.

Post them.

 

[Disney Irish]

I hope I am wrong about Tron….as I am always rootting for Disney if nothing else to prove the Disney haters wrong…. And the trailers have looked great…. But Tron has always felt like a niche IP….I dislike the use of the term “ normies” but from that perspective I am not sure if they will care…. I know family and friends who did not even know there was a Tron movie in the 80’s

I know it’s only 1 person… but my Wife usually follows my lead about what to see… as I follow this a lot closer then her…. She has already told me she has no interest in Tron… so looks like I will be seeing this myself…. And she is someone who loves going to the theater and goes weekly…. On the flip side she is very interested in Predator: Badlands as she loved Prey

Your wife aside, I've seen chatter online about Tron especially since the full trailer dropped a month ago. So it has some buzz in my opinion. I think it'll do "well", the question that I still have in my mind is if that "well" is good enough.

 

[BlindChow]

I can wait for D+.

I wonder if Disney has quantified how much this has hurt their theatrical business.

I'm guessing a not insignificant number of people (myself included) has specifically let "I can wait for D+" influence what movies they see in the theater (despite the fact that literally every other movie will come to streaming eventually as well).

 

[DKampy]

Your wife aside, I've seen chatter online about Tron especially since the full trailer dropped a month ago. So it has some buzz in my opinion. I think it'll do "well", the question that I still have in my mind is if that "well" is good enough.

We will see…I hope you are right

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

It’s not like they spent $4 billion on a male dominated space fantasy franchise 12 years ago…

…and they put it in bed with the pooch

 

[Phroobar]

I wonder if Disney has quantified how much this has hurt their theatrical business.

I'm guessing a not insignificant number of people (myself included) has specifically let "I can wait for D+" influence what movies they see in the theater (despite the fact that literally every other movie will come to streaming eventually as well).

It's the same decision I made when things where released to cable, DVD or even VHS tape. "I'll wait to rent the tape from Blockbuster." The waiting for streaming decision isn't new.

People will still go see something in the theater if it fits their schedule, they want to see and if it gets decent reviews. Nothing has changed except the media.

 

[MisterPenguin]

I wonder if Disney has quantified how much this has hurt their theatrical business.

I'm guessing a not insignificant number of people (myself included) has specifically let "I can wait for D+" influence what movies they see in the theater (despite the fact that literally every other movie will come to streaming eventually as well).

Those "waiting for D+" are still paying Disney to see the movie thru their subscription.

All of Disney's streamers will come to a $1.3B *profit* for this fiscal year.

I'm sure that the subs are part of the calculus.

 

[Disney Irish]

Those "waiting for D+" are still paying Disney to see the movie thru their subscription.

All of Disney's streamers will come to a $1.3B *profit* for this fiscal year.

I'm sure that the subs are part of the calculus.

Which is funny, because they are only $1.8B behind Netflix. So make it make sense, Netflix is a viable business but Disney no in the same space?

 

[LSLS]

Those "waiting for D+" are still paying Disney to see the movie thru their subscription.

All of Disney's streamers will come to a $1.3B *profit* for this fiscal year.

I'm sure that the subs are part of the calculus.

That calculation would be incredibly interesting to me. How many people keep their D+ subscription JUST to watch those movies when they come out, vs. how many do it BECAUSE they already have the subscription.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

That calculation would be incredibly interesting to me. How many people keep their D+ subscription JUST to watch those movies when they come out, vs. how many do it BECAUSE they already have the subscription.

Few if any

People keep the subs like a gym membership…mostly out of habit.

The titles don’t mean much. Eventually they’ll overcharge it enough and the cables cutters will cut the wifi this time. It’s a circular firing squad for Hollywood

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

I wonder if Disney has quantified how much this has hurt their theatrical business.

I'm guessing a not insignificant number of people (myself included) has specifically let "I can wait for D+" influence what movies they see in the theater (despite the fact that literally every other movie will come to streaming eventually as well).

They've adjusted their release schedule a bit, to extend the time between theatrical, digital/physical purchase, and Disney+ releases.

I would say it's inevitable there has been some impact, but to what degree is something we can generally only speculate on at this point.

 

[Disney Irish]

That calculation would be incredibly interesting to me. How many people keep their D+ subscription JUST to watch those movies when they come out, vs. how many do it BECAUSE they already have the subscription.

Other than for academic purposes the answer is irrelevant, they watched in the end and Disney got the money either way.

I’m sure somewhere someone though within Disney has the answer.

 

[Disney Irish]

Few if any

People keep the subs like a gym membership…mostly out of habit.

The titles don’t mean much. Eventually they’ll overcharge it enough and the cables cutters will cut the wifi this time. It’s a circular firing squad for Hollywood

Yeah sure the cord cutters will cut the WiFi next and go without internet forgoing any access to the modern world, rather than just access from some free access point to watch their shows and movies instead.

Keep telling yourself that. I’m sure we’ll soon be going back to horse and buggy too.

 

[LSLS]

Other than for academic purposes the answer is irrelevant, they watched in the end and Disney got the money either way.

I’m sure somewhere someone though within Disney has the answer.

It definitely would matter from a Disney perspective. The original question was about hurting your theatrical releases to help D+. If people will be subscribed no matter what, then hurting your box office is not made up by the D+ subscription, you are leaving money on the table. Of course, with the Ad revenue now, that is another factor, so that could also be making up some of that theatrical losses.

 

[Disney Irish]

It definitely would matter from a Disney perspective. The original question was about hurting your theatrical releases to help D+. If people will be subscribed no matter what, then hurting your box office is not made up by the D+ subscription, you are leaving money on the table. Of course, with the Ad revenue now, that is another factor, so that could also be making up some of that theatrical losses.

I mean I guess I see your point to an extent. But if the sub watches the movie either way on D+ why does Disney care all that much on the "whys"? They still get the revenue either way.

So ultimately why would they care if someone is continuing to sub to watch the new movies, or just watches the new movies because they sub, the money is still the same. Its 6 of one and half a dozen to the all, the end result is the same.

I really think this is trying to get into the weeds too much to try to prove something that in reality only matters if you only see theatrical as the "only money that matters" and everything else as "less than".

 

[LSLS]

I mean I guess I see your point to an extent. But if the sub watches the movie either way on D+ why does Disney care all that much on the "whys"? They still get the revenue either way.

So ultimately why would they care if someone is continuing to sub to watch the new movies, or just watches the new movies because they sub, the money is still the same. Its 6 of one and half a dozen to the all, the end result is the same.

I really think this is trying to get into the weeds too much to try to prove something that in reality only matters if you only see theatrical as the "only money that matters" and everything else as "less than".

But if they aren't subbing just to watch that movie, they aren't getting the revenue either way. If someone would go see a movie at the theater and still keep their D+ subscription, Disney would get $10 from the subscription and $5 from the movie watch. If that same person decides not to go to the movies anymore because "Eh, I can wait a few months", they went from collecting $15 off that person to just $10. That $10 was going to come in no matter what if they aren't subbing just to see new movies. Now, like I said, what that doesn't factor in how ad revenue is working, so take that as another large consideration, but it's not about they watch it either way because they don't make money off it either way if the person is not subscribing just to see the new movies coming out to streaming, and wouldn't be subscribed if they had to wait longer.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

But if they aren't subbing just to watch that movie, they aren't getting the revenue either way. If someone would go see a movie at the theater and still keep their D+ subscription, Disney would get $10 from the subscription and $5 from the movie watch. If that same person decides not to go to the movies anymore because "Eh, I can wait a few months", they went from collecting $15 off that person to just $10. That $10 was going to come in no matter what if they aren't subbing just to see new movies. Now, like I said, what that doesn't factor in how ad revenue is working, so take that as another large consideration, but it's not about they watch it either way because they don't make money off it either way if the person is not subscribing just to see the new movies coming out to streaming, and wouldn't be subscribed if they had to wait longer.

…this is a really hard concept for like 6 people to grasp…

And the “new math” to splain it away only popped up when the Disney studios started tanking movies left and right

 

[Disney Irish]

But if they aren't subbing just to watch that movie, they aren't getting the revenue either way. If someone would go see a movie at the theater and still keep their D+ subscription, Disney would get $10 from the subscription and $5 from the movie watch. If that same person decides not to go to the movies anymore because "Eh, I can wait a few months", they went from collecting $15 off that person to just $10. That $10 was going to come in no matter what if they aren't subbing just to see new movies. Now, like I said, what that doesn't factor in how ad revenue is working, so take that as another large consideration, but it's not about they watch it either way because they don't make money off it either way if the person is not subscribing just to see the new movies coming out to streaming, and wouldn't be subscribed if they had to wait longer.

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.