Twilight_Roxas
Well-Known Member
Sony has other film rights that Disney has via Lucasfilm, and Muppets other Spider-Man that needs to be reverted to.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Disney's Next Acquisition Speculation / Discussion
- Thread starter Darkprime
- Start date
Twilight_Roxas
Well-Known Member
Well the Trump Administration would be against it too. I’ll explain why via pm.
AnotherDayAnotherDollar
Well-Known Member
Link me to the fortune article. Your assumption that they had lawyers is highly unlikely to me. I do remember a forbes contributor (Scott Mendelson) making the claim you are making, but Mendelson is just a contributor. I would guess the same holds true for whatever article you are referring to. I have yet to see one where a professional IP lawyer takes a look at it and gives their saying.
I remember reading those rumors. 5-10B for SM movie rights is laughable. I doubt those rumors were true because Disney would have been dump to get it at that price and Sony would have made it clear they were not serious at that price. It would have been irresponsible to their stakeholders for Disney to even consider that offer. They surely want it, but at the right price point. You are going into speculation territory with this rumor though and then adding your own analysis on top of it by going with Disney execs knew about it and that the rights revert. Speculation on top of speculation is not helpful.
Regardless I will agree on the agree to disagree. I think the verbiage is clear that the rights are transferable. We may, or may never, find out because the contract is de facto in perpetuity as long as it's in good standing, much like the MCA - Marvel contract for theme park rights (which can revert if they are not kept in good standing or Universal takes down the area to make something else).
Disney Irish
Premium Member
I'd have to find the article, I believe its behind the Fortune pay wall now so not easily accessible.
However at this point its all moot since neither of us are IP lawyers. You believe things your way, and I'll believe it mine. And if SPE is ever sold, which is more than likely over the next couple years, and its not to Disney we'll find out really fast.
I just find it interesting that most of the reporting out there after the Sony leaks all pointed to the rights reverting back upon sale of SPE. I haven't seen much (or any really) reporting on the rights going to any buyer of SPE. Also one thing you may not be taking into account, its possible the contract as been updated since the 2011 amendments. Remember this is a contract that has been amended several times since the 1990s. So it is very possible it got amended again since 2011. Which in reality we actually know they have given the new financial terms for the production costs and revenue breakdown on the next couple films.
Also just an FYI, if the buyout of the rights was untrue both Disney and Sony would have flat out denied it, but they didn't. I mean Sony denied other reported aspects of the talks publicly as did Disney, but not that. So that is why I'm inclined to believe it was true, maybe not the price, but the overall buyout offer.
Anyways its just a fun discussion to have. Honestly I don't care if some (or even all) is speculation. Its fun to discuss. And I really don't take it seriously. If I'm wrong, so what.
Twilight_Roxas
Well-Known Member
There’s a few films that Sony has other than Spider-Man that Disney needs to regain.
Twilight_Roxas
Well-Known Member
Lucasfilm
——————-
Labyrinth
Muppets
—————————
Muppets in Space
Muppets Take Manhattan
Marvel
—————-
Spider-Man trilogy
Spectacular Spider-Man
The Amazing Spider-Man
MCU Spider-Man
Spider-Man: Into the Spiderverse
——————-
Labyrinth
Muppets
—————————
Muppets in Space
Muppets Take Manhattan
Marvel
—————-
Spider-Man trilogy
Spectacular Spider-Man
The Amazing Spider-Man
MCU Spider-Man
Spider-Man: Into the Spiderverse
AnotherDayAnotherDollar
Well-Known Member
Right, so - again - agree to disagree. The verbiage is crystal clear to me that the rights are transferrable. You say it is. That's fine, not gonna argue. You can believe whatever your heart desires.
Not sure why you care about reporting from 3rd parties when the source material is in front of you. I am taking a possible amendment to the contract in consideration hence why I mentioned as per the 2011 contract. It was said the 2015 deal only changed what Disney had to pay Sony on a per movie basis (i.e. it was lowered), but I don't deal with speculation. Until proven otherwise assuming status quo is the best course of action.
Companies denying things is all BS regardless. Disney never commented on the interest to buy out Fox until it was official. Or their interest on buying twitter until way later. Sony never commented on buying Insomniac Games until it was official. Sony or Disney are not going to talk about specifics in the contract and neither said has ever been asked point blank about this. When asked about SPE being sold Vinciquerra said nope we are not beign sold, next question (I'm paraphrasing). They don't owe us this kind of confirm or deny on rumors like you are implying. Why would you assume they would talk about that specific instance of the contract out of nowhere? That's kind of weird.
SPE being sold has been talked about for awhile. It's possible for the right amount, but we'll see.
Anyways this topic has been beaten to death. Again it's clear to me the rights transfer as the language says "free to assign any or all of its rights hereunder" including to "a financially responsible entity which is controlled by, under common control with, or controls SPE which assumes such obligations in writing". So if Apple buys Sony then they control SPE then Spider-Man movie rights is theirs.
One argument that I have seen that the rights would not transfer - and it made sense to me - would be if Apple buys SPE and renames SPE to "Apple Pictures Entertainment" then in essence SPE would cease to exist and the rights would revert. However others pointed out that there are loopholes for that where Apple would keep SPE for the sake of keeping the license and use another name ("APE" or whatever) for marketing purposes.
There is more than that if you are talking about WW distribution. Sony/Disney split distribution between domestic and international for a few movies like Bicentennial Man, Air Force One and Starship Troopers.
Last edited:
Disney Irish
Premium Member
Its important because if everyone in the main stream media is reporting one thing but yourself is saying something else, then either everyone in the mainstream media is wrong or you are. Since its been out in the public sphere now for years its more believable than some random person on a forum.
You're making assumptions based on a leaked document that we don't even know if its even in effect today. In addition we don't even know if this was the actual signed agreement. It could have been amended again, or another license agreement drawn up that makes this entire thing null and void. For example its been 100% confirm that the whole section about merchandising rights is now null and void because SPE sold those rights back to Marvel/Disney in 2015. Plus you're interpretation of the legalese might also be incorrect. You're making the assumption that section applies to actually "assign" the entire license of Spider-Man the character and family rather than the content produced under SPE.
So for someone that doesn't like to deal with speculation you sure are speculating on the veracity of this document when its not even confirm this is the real contract.
Except in this scenario SPE would still be the legal entity hence why the license would still be in place. This scenario is where your original argument of SPE assignment authority falls apart. Because if SPE has full rights to "assign" the entirety of the Spider-Man film rights to their new owner why would renaming SPE cause the rights to revert back? It shouldn't if your assumption of that section is true, meaning a loophole shouldn't be needed in the first place. Which if this scenario is true confirms what I've been saying, SPE has to maintain rights otherwise the rights revert.
AnotherDayAnotherDollar
Well-Known Member
I am quoting a legally binding contract. You can believe whatever your little heart desire and you are believing what you want to hear, not what's presented to you.
I am not making any assumptions. I said "Finally the Sony - Marvel contract is a bit ambiguous on whether or not an eventual SPE buyer would keep the Spider-man movie rights. I think they would based on the 2011 amended contract, but I'm not a lawyer." Maybe you need to learn some reading comprehension. You are also dead wrong about the merchandise. It was sold in 2011, not 2015. That's part of the 2011 amended contract that you obviously have not read even though you supposedly have it.
Not going to waste my time with you anymore. We have agreed to disagree, so feel free to keep doing mental gymnastics to fit your narrative.
Disney Irish
Premium Member
You're right I misstated the year of the merchandising rights sale, my apologies. But I wasn't wrong overall, obviously I knew about it about and am correct on the sale in the first place. The sale was part of a different agreement that outlined the actual financial breakdown including the $280M payment to "extinguish" the actual rights. So don't tell me I haven't read it.
My point was that the "loophole" you "saw" completely contradicts your interpretation of the SPE rights in the first place. You can use the "I'm not a lawyer" excuse if you'd like, doesn't matter to me.
And look I've already said I could be wrong, as could all the main stream reports on it. However given the "loophole" that "made sense to you" I don't believe I am. So there we are.
So at this point since you aren't wasting your time anymore no reason to respond to this. Good day to you, and may you and your family have a bless holiday.
WB just ruined the current movie theaters current operating methods. AMC now has a market cap of under 500 million with debts and lease obligations of approximately 6.2 billion. Now AMC lost 149.1 million in 2019 but that was after spending a fortune on their monthly subscription plan and finishing the remodeling of their theaters. They were about to become very profitable and then Covid19 hit. Now, they are at the bottom and most likely can't survive on their own. However, that makes them a bargin and worth the risk of a 6.7 billion dollar purchase. Their 2019 revenue was 15.47 billion with Disney taking a large percentage of that. The movie theater business needs a new model, one that not only depends on new blockbusters and more low budget movies but follows what independent theaters did in the past, showing cult movies and other old movies. The independent theaters got very upset when Disney stopped the independents from showing the old Fox movies after buying Fox. However, the independents were right and these old movies made both a profit for the theaters and a tiny bit for the studios.
So where do we go from here. Disney should buy AMC Theatres. The box office may never come back to 2019 numbers but Disney can show all their blockbuster movies at AMC, show cult movies at midnight on Friday's and Saturday's, show Disney Classics on Saturday and Sunday afternoons for families and make AMC profitable. No matter how nice a home theater I have, there is nothing like seeing a movie on the huge screen with great sound system. The Walt Disney Company should but AMC Theatres.
So where do we go from here. Disney should buy AMC Theatres. The box office may never come back to 2019 numbers but Disney can show all their blockbuster movies at AMC, show cult movies at midnight on Friday's and Saturday's, show Disney Classics on Saturday and Sunday afternoons for families and make AMC profitable. No matter how nice a home theater I have, there is nothing like seeing a movie on the huge screen with great sound system. The Walt Disney Company should but AMC Theatres.
Magic Crush Drop
Active Member
Where do you propose Disney get the money to buy AMC theaters. I mean the parks are losing money. The streaming service, while bringing revenue, still isn't making a profit. Even if Disney could get a loan to do that, why would DIS investors want AMC when it cost less run D+ (with repairs, maybe updates for COVID, staff, etc).
I would make it an all stock deal. including the bond holders, which I would also demand a hair cut from and a renegotiation of theater leases, which are included in the long term liabilities. Eliminating AMC's debt makes them profitable. I would also offer Seaworld an all stock merger provided their bondholders also agree to a hair cut. This could all be done with no cash and allowing the two companies to be profitable immediately.
AnotherDayAnotherDollar
Well-Known Member
I don't see Disney (or ATT, Comcast, et.al.) buying AMC at all. I think the way consumers view movies has been changed forever and the days of multiplexes are kinda done. Releasing all of their movies day and date on streaming and theaters the way WB is doing is the way forward IMO. It increases subscribers and retention, however price of subscription has to increase and/or Premier Access has to be an option for this model to be sustainable. It also limits the number of people that would go to the movie theaters.
With the Paramount Consent Decree being terminated I think movie studios will look to capitalize by having their own movie theaters in major metropolitan areas. Probably make it a spectacle and premier experience for their tentpole films (i.e. MCU, Avatar, Star Wars). It would also be more expensive, obviously. Between their tentpole films they would play some of their older films to generate revenue. Basically DisneyQuest 2.0. They don't need 1000 theaters in the US and 11,000 worldwide for it.
The interesting thing is that if movie theaters do indeed die or get significantly altered then that also affects the Marvel-Sony's Spider-Man contract. The contract states that
An argument can be made whether streaming would be analogous viewing and how they would quantify the equivalent requirement for Sony to keep the contract in good standing.
SEAS is a more interesting proposition since it would significantly lower the investment cost required for a new park and they have some parks in interesting strategically locations that would be attractive to TWDC. However it would still be an expensive acquisition and Disney needs to deleverage. The put/call for Hulu's 33% from Comcast is coming in 2024. At this time that is worth 8.1B. The NHL can require Disney to purchase its interest in Bamtech this year for $350MM. MLB can require Disney to purchase their interest in Bamtech starting September 25th, 2022. The current floor for their valuation is 710MM.
TWDC would be smart to avoid any big acquisitions (>1B) until they deleverage and such put/calls are finalized.
With the Paramount Consent Decree being terminated I think movie studios will look to capitalize by having their own movie theaters in major metropolitan areas. Probably make it a spectacle and premier experience for their tentpole films (i.e. MCU, Avatar, Star Wars). It would also be more expensive, obviously. Between their tentpole films they would play some of their older films to generate revenue. Basically DisneyQuest 2.0. They don't need 1000 theaters in the US and 11,000 worldwide for it.
The interesting thing is that if movie theaters do indeed die or get significantly altered then that also affects the Marvel-Sony's Spider-Man contract. The contract states that
An argument can be made whether streaming would be analogous viewing and how they would quantify the equivalent requirement for Sony to keep the contract in good standing.
SEAS is a more interesting proposition since it would significantly lower the investment cost required for a new park and they have some parks in interesting strategically locations that would be attractive to TWDC. However it would still be an expensive acquisition and Disney needs to deleverage. The put/call for Hulu's 33% from Comcast is coming in 2024. At this time that is worth 8.1B. The NHL can require Disney to purchase its interest in Bamtech this year for $350MM. MLB can require Disney to purchase their interest in Bamtech starting September 25th, 2022. The current floor for their valuation is 710MM.
TWDC would be smart to avoid any big acquisitions (>1B) until they deleverage and such put/calls are finalized.
I never thought about the Spiderman contract but unless thr contract spefically regures theaters in NY snd LA, 200 is an easy number to reach as there are lots more than that open today.
AnotherDayAnotherDollar
Well-Known Member
2000, not 200.
Slpy3270
Well-Known Member
So MGM is deciding to put itself up for sale (for, what, the fifth time?).
www.hollywoodreporter.com
Of course, the chances of Disney buying MGM are slim to none (Bob Iger did joke about wanting to own James Bond).
MGM Enlists Advisors to Explore Sale (Report)
<span style="font-weight: 400;">MGM appears to be getting closer to formally exploring a sale.</span>
www.hollywoodreporter.com
Of course, the chances of Disney buying MGM are slim to none (Bob Iger did joke about wanting to own James Bond).
Of course Disney should try and buy MGMSo MGM is deciding to put itself up for sale (for, what, the fifth time?).
MGM Enlists Advisors to Explore Sale (Report)
<span style="font-weight: 400;">MGM appears to be getting closer to formally exploring a sale.</span>
Of course, the chances of Disney buying MGM are slim to none (Bob Iger did joke about wanting to own James Bond).
Then they should trade James Bond to Sony for Spiderman.
AnotherDayAnotherDollar
Well-Known Member
1) Sony wouldn't go for that trade
2) MGM is not the sole owner of the Bond franchise, so whoever buys them will still have to deal with EON and Danjaq
3) Buying MGM is a worse acquisition target than SPE
Disney Irish
Premium Member
Well they could use it to refresh The Great Movie Ride, oops too late. (Too soon?)So MGM is deciding to put itself up for sale (for, what, the fifth time?).
MGM Enlists Advisors to Explore Sale (Report)
<span style="font-weight: 400;">MGM appears to be getting closer to formally exploring a sale.</span>
Of course, the chances of Disney buying MGM are slim to none (Bob Iger did joke about wanting to own James Bond).