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

[Disney Irish]

I’m gonna file a lawsuit for libel against variety…

It says that the little Mermaid “drastically fell short of expectations”

…how dare they?!?
Don’t they hang out around here?
Didn’t anyone at Disney proof read this before it was printed?

…I won’t stand for this

I think the article is actually telling us exactly what has been said here in many threads by almost everyone, budgets are still high and international is still down. Both of which is causing the films to not hit expectations, mind you expectations that were based on pre-pandemic times.

What is said in the article which is important, which gets glossed over by many here, is Disney still is king of the box office -

"Disney still far outranks the competition in terms of market share in 2023, commanding 37% of the industry’s revenues"

And on the budget front again the article points out what has been said here -

"The problem is that getting these costs under control will take time. Major movies take at least three to four years to develop, produce and distribute — a lifetime in a fast-changing industry. Even if Disney is serious about tightening its belt, it may not make a noticeable difference until 2026 or beyond."

They even brought up what I mentioned previously -

"Some of these bloated budgets on 2023 releases reflect the tens of millions that were racked up from pandemic delays and enhanced COVID testing."

And it goes on to mention how streaming has disrupted the box office -

"Now, there’s less of a need to make multiple trips to the multiplex. Moviegoers can wait a matter of months (or less) for a film to land on streaming and satisfy the need for a rewatch. “The theatrical movie business has been in decline for awhile and the pandemic accelerated that.”"

So I think the article is saying all the things we've talked about here in the different threads, and mostly agree on.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

It’s not necessarily a sign of trolling. Why not just stop responding?

Key part is below

Where does the article say TLM “will make money?”

I see nowhere in there where it says it will turn a profit. The only references I see to it’s box office earnings are how it is a loss leader. There’s no indication this film has moved enough merchandise to offset the box office losses.

this

This is the most curious thing ever really…

Apparently “failure is not a option”?

Not only that…it won’t even be acknowledged as possibility?


You know…I like good stuff. I really wanted the phantom movie to be the greatest 2 hours in history…and then I really wanted the farce awakens to correct the first…

I was pulling for you, Disney…

But they both blew. Just no way to shine that toilet deposit…


And it’s only cost me $50,000 in therapy…but i’m coping

 

[LittleBuford]

Where does the article say TLM “will make money?”

I see nowhere in there where it says it will turn a profit. The only references I see to it’s box office earnings are how it is a loss leader. There’s no indication this film has moved enough merchandise to offset the box office losses.

See the final two paragraphs.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

See the final two paragraphs.

So then Disney DID get to make changes to the article???

Nope…that is as disingenuous as it comes…product sales is NOT used to “offset” box office loses.

Not playing there…that’s an excuse

Star Wars made money at the box office (under old management)…but it’s financial empire was in product.

Or put it in these terms: successful movies make far more money off product…far more, made on more favorable deals, for alot longer.

So writedowns LOSE money for daddy earbucks there. Fun with words

What a world of intellectual dishonesty this summer has become?

 

[LittleBuford]

So then Disney DID get to make changes to the article???

Nope…that is as disingenuous as it comes…product sales is NOT used to “offset” box office loses.

Not playing there…that’s an excuse

Star Wars made money at the box office (under old management)…but it’s financial empire was in product.

What a world of intellectual dishonesty this summer has become?

I merely answered his question by telling him where in the article to look.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I merely answered his question by telling him where in the article to look.

Yeah…no foul on you. Agreed

 

[Casper Gutman]

So then Disney DID get to make changes to the article???

Nope…that is as disingenuous as it comes…product sales is NOT used to “offset” box office loses.

Not playing there…that’s an excuse

Star Wars made money at the box office (under old management)…but it’s financial empire was in product.

Or put it in these terms: successful movies make far more money off product…far more, made on more favorable deals, for alot longer.

So writedowns LOSE money for daddy earbucks there. Fun with words

What a world of intellectual dishonesty this summer has become?

This is how the entertainment industry has been organized since the 80s. Ancillary revenue streams are fundamental to the very structure of the studios and are ALWAYS included in planning projects. This is very, very basic stuff, and your ignorance of it doesn’t change facts.

But with TLM, we don’t even have to factor in merch and theme park sales. The Deadline article posted here repeatedly points out that the film will break even or better.

As far as I can see, no one on these boards is arguing that TLM didn’t underperform. If that’s all you want, you can declare victory. The argument is over specifics and context.

But let’s play your game. Let’s say Disney fires Iger tomorrow and hires someone new. How do you think that will be better for you? I ask this because I don’t actually think your motives are political and you don’t just want to see Disney suffer, but I also don’t think you’ve thought much past your anger at the current regime.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

This is how the entertainment industry has been organized since the 80s. Ancillary revenue streams are fundamental to the very structure of the studios and are ALWAYS included in planning projects. This is very, very basic stuff, and your ignorance of it doesn’t change facts.

But with TLM, we don’t even have to factor in merch and theme park sales. The Deadline article posted here repeatedly points out that the film will break even or better.

As far as I can see, no one on these boards is arguing that TLM didn’t underperform. If that’s all you want, you can declare victory. The argument is over specifics and context.

But let’s play your game. Let’s say Disney fires Iger tomorrow and hires someone new. How do you think that will be better for you? I ask this because I don’t actually think your motives are political and you don’t just want to see Disney suffer, but I also don’t think you’ve thought much past your anger at the current regime.

Thanks for the “history”…

But not a single human believes that merchandise sales are to “cover budgets” on large movie releases.

Product made in Chinese sweatshops and delivered by Amazon drones or Walmart.come are to make profit for the seller and the license grantor…in this case: Disney

it is what It is…

Here’s your Monday meeting in Hollywood:

“Well…we spent like $500 million on this…and came up short by $100…so no sequels…
…but we can break even this holiday season off dolls and commemorative cereal…we hope ”

Can’t wait for the next episode of this tale…it’s like scooby doo.

JINKIES!!!


And the “current regime” - all 1 of them left - is failing.

Not much of a Disney fan, huh? I shouldn’t need to explain that one.

 

[erasure fan1]

But let’s play your game. Let’s say Disney fires Iger tomorrow and hires someone new. How do you think that will be better for you? I ask this because I don’t actually think your motives are political and you don’t just want to see Disney suffer, but I also don’t think you’ve thought much past your anger at the current regime.

It might not be better, but from my perspective, I'm willing to take that chance. I've seen what he brings to the table. It's time for a change in my opinion. I won't shed a tear for him or Kennedy if they are out tomorrow. And if it's worse, I still won't regret them being gone.

 

[Tha Realest]

Thanks for the “history”…

But not a single human believes that merchandise sales are to “cover budgets” on large movie releases.

Product made in Chinese sweatshops and delivered by Amazon drones or Walmart.come are to make profit for the seller and the license grantor…in this case: Disney

it is what It is…

Here’s your Monday meeting in Hollywood:

“Well…we spent like $500 million on this…and came up short by $100…so no sequels…
…but we can break even this holiday season off dolls and commemorative cereal…we hope ”

Can’t wait for the next episode of this tale…it’s like scooby doo.

JINKIES!!!

If that is true, then shouldn’t TWDC restructure? Those are in two entirely different segments of the company. I’m not seeing anything in the recent earnings reports suggesting Disney’s moving to become a loss leader in content production to make up for revenue in merchandise.

But, if that is the case, then their D+ decisions and green lighting choices make a lot more sense now

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

If that is true, then shouldn’t TWDC restructure? Those are in two entirely different segments of the company. I’m not seeing anything in the recent earnings reports suggesting Disney’s moving to become a loss leader in content production to make up for revenue in merchandise.

But, if that is the case, then their D+ decisions and green lighting choices make a lot more sense now

You know what…indeed after a brief check it turns out movies and consumer products are NOT in the same business unit?

hmmmm…that must have been a mistake considering happy meal toys are meant to cover box office failures with “major cultural significance”, right?

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

But let’s play your game. Let’s say Disney fires Iger tomorrow and hires someone new. How do you think that will be better for you? I ask this because I don’t actually think your motives are political and you don’t just want to see Disney suffer, but I also don’t think you’ve thought much past your anger at the current regime.

I can refer you to about 75,000 posts that give ZERO indication i have any political motive for disney failing…

I’m not on that team and have many witnesses

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

It might not be better, but from my perspective, I'm willing to take that chance. I've seen what he brings to the table. It's time for a change in my opinion. I won't shed a tear for him or Kennedy if they are out tomorrow. And if it's worse, I still won't regret them being gone.

It’s like a football coach. They may be a legend” with past success…

But when it’s time it’s time. No ceo should be around 20 years. No ceo should control a public board.

That’s the circle of life. Move forward.

I have zero doubt many…cause I remember a lot of them…who did summersaults when evil Michael went…cause he was “killing the brand”…

Are the same ones being carried off on their shields for Iger now.

Under the impression that things were more dangerous then than now. That’s incorrect.

But Roy Disney was around to rile them up then.
And he would be screaming for Iger’s removal now. He’s doing everything he crusaded against and then some

 

[BrianLo]

If that is true, then shouldn’t TWDC restructure? Those are in two entirely different segments of the company. I’m not seeing anything in the recent earnings reports suggesting Disney’s moving to become a loss leader in content production to make up for revenue in merchandise.

But, if that is the case, then their D+ decisions and green lighting choices make a lot more sense now

The backend profit is not contingent on merchandise or park integration, but it's well known this is how the company fires all it is engines. The backend profit on TLM is due to DVD/Blu Ray, rentals and streaming. D+ will probably pay TLM/the studio out of their revenue on order of 150million. That is definitely purposely built in because they want content for their platform.

Of course they aways want another Frozen, but it's a rare Disney/child entertainment phenomenon that there is much money in merchandise.

The overarching profitability of their in house model versus historically licensing out to other platforms is of course under heavy Wall Street scrutiny.

Of course the other issue is some of our newly minted box office afficandos don’t really seem to grasp how some of these movies trend and that week 3 totals can be wildly below the finals in certain circumstances.

 

[Chi84]

You know what…indeed after a brief check it turns out movies and consumer products are NOT in the same business unit?

hmmmm…that must have been a mistake considering happy meal toys are meant to cover box office failures with “major cultural significance”, right?

Being culturally significant is a good thing, isn’t it? Should money be the sole measure of everything we do? Since our choices all affect one another, maybe it’s good to make those that benefit others. Or does that only apply to the park’s division?

 

[Casper Gutman]

I can refer you to about 75,000 posts that give ZERO indication i have any political motive for disney failing…

I’m not on that team and have many witnesses

I know. I said that clearly.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I know. I said that clearly.

I think that needs to be reaffirmed. Cause there was alot of unnecessary ugliness tossed very casually around because people just didn’t show up to watch a “live action Remake”

Again…a variety of reasons. But what got me is the not subtle inferences sent towards many that it was ONE thing.

I said if before: I’ll not live in that ugly kinda world…even if I’m wrong.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

The backend profit is not contingent on merchandise or park integration, but it's well known this is how the company fires all it is engines. The backend profit on TLM is due to DVD/Blu Ray, rentals and streaming. D+ will probably pay TLM/the studio out of their revenue on order of 150million. That is definitely purposely built in because they want content for their platform.

Of course they aways want another Frozen, but it's a rare Disney/child entertainment phenomenon that there is much money in merchandise.

The overarching profitability of their in house model versus historically licensing out to other platforms is of course under heavy Wall Street scrutiny.

Of course the other issue is some of our newly minted box office afficandos don’t really seem to grasp how some of these movies trend and that week 3 totals can be wildly below the finals in certain circumstances.

Wait you’re actually saying that Disney paying Disney for a Disney movie is “the plan”?

So like shell game?

We are WAY deep down the well here.

Being culturally significant is a good thing, isn’t it? Should money be the sole measure of everything we do? Since our choices all affect one another, maybe it’s good to make those that benefit others. Or does that only apply to the park’s division?

Sure it is.

however no movie released on may 24, 2023 is “culturally significant” on June 6, 2023 when it was clear it wasn’t gonna profit.

So that made that a pretty easily debunked excuse as well.

 

[Casper Gutman]

Thanks for the “history”…

But not a single human believes that merchandise sales are to “cover budgets” on large movie releases.

Product made in Chinese sweatshops and delivered by Amazon drones or Walmart.come are to make profit for the seller and the license grantor…in this case: Disney

it is what It is…

Here’s your Monday meeting in Hollywood:

“Well…we spent like $500 million on this…and came up short by $100…so no sequels…
…but we can break even this holiday season off dolls and commemorative cereal…we hope ”

Can’t wait for the next episode of this tale…it’s like scooby doo.

JINKIES!!!


And the “current regime” - all 1 of them left - is failing.

Not much of a Disney fan, huh? I shouldn’t need to explain that one.

Yes, people who work in the entertainment industry and those who study the entertainment industry understand that the basic truth of that industry is that a film is NEVER just a film, it’s content to generate revenue in multiple interlocking ways. This has been true for many, many decades, has guided mergers and acquisitions, has determined what content is created.

Now, just as I know you’re not politically motivated, you know I’m no fan of the direction of the parks. But a new CEO brought in right now, today, will make cuts to the park unlike anything you’ve ever seen. They would be an absolutely unthinking tool of a Wall Street that loathes the theme park model of heavy capital investment with no clear ROI. The only chance I -and I think you - have of getting anything like the investment we want in the parks is for Disney to be a generally healthy, stable business with one clear weakness - a flagging park sector. Even better if Uni is demonstrating the growth possible in the Florida tourist market. Under those conditions maybe - MAYBE- you have a slight chance of seeing the kind of park investment we’d hope for, and even THAT would be something of a miracle given the broader business culture. Right now, however, with a reeling entertainment industry, a nervous Wall Street, and uncertainty on all sides, a CEO change would very likely be disastrous.

 

[Tha Realest]

How much merchandise did Disney move for Strange World, Lightyear, Elemental, TLM, Indy 5?

Right now the new Ariel is the 47th best selling doll on Amazon.

While this “new math” may make the Greek chorus of pixie dusters feel confident about the current direction, there is absolutely no way TWDC greenlit these movies, with these budgets, so it could play accounting games and maybe juice a bit of merchandise out of the deal.