First off, budgets are a big factor. If The Muppets budget was 100mil than yea, huge flop. We're talking about content that can be made for a fraction of what star wars and marvel... can be made for so you don't need those huge returns.
Budgets are only a small factor in terms of whether something gets greenlit or not. So lets not play like this is about the budgets being too high for Muppets, that is not at all the reason why its not greenlit for another film, series, or special.
You mean the business guy who thinks the video game industry is not worth it? He's done some good, but let's not pretend there isn't more bad than good. Most of his success came in the form of acquisition. And he's done a fairly mediocre job with those acquisitions the last 5 or so years. And his job with the parks is terrible to say it nicely.
I think he has done more good than many here are willing to admit because they are blinded by the "bad" of the Parks and other things they have grievances against. I'm not a fan of what he's done overall, but I also won't discount what he has done in business in general.
Again, why the pent up demand that would be gobbled up, and hundreds of millions? You are arguing for the sake of arguing. I'm not arguing for hundreds of millions in profits. I'm arguing there's a niche that can be filled. If you want to tell me that Disney doesn't care to fill a niche that isn't going to result in multiple hundreds of millions. Ok fine, I'll can buy that since that's most likely the answer anyway. I wouldn't agree that mindset, but I would believe that's what Disney is thinking.
Hundreds of Millions in terms of potential earnings from the brand overall, not just a single movie. Its a niche market, you seem to be willing to acknowledge that, and yes I don't think Disney is willing to fill a niche market at this point. They want IPs that will fill a broad market as much as possible, even if it doesn't always hit that with the properties they choose, but that is their goal is for the most part in my opinion.
It was stupid to not lock up bluey. Now they are going to pay a lot more and they've lost a ton in revenue by not having them. It's out done EVERY show on D+. But again I'm not saying it needs to be Bluey successful.
I'm not going to go back through that thing again, I was just using it as an example of a property that Disney is willing to put money behind even if they don't expect it to do Star Wars or Marvel numbers.
Again, enough with the top of the list nonsense. I have made it clear that isn't what I'm talking about. It shouldn't be an all or nothing situation. You have argued many times that it's not just about box office and dollars. That breaking even or just making a bit of profit Disney is happy with... But when I say it, not so much. Curious...
Its not all about the box office, that is the point that I've been trying to make when talking about break even is fine for the box office. The box office is a dying factor, even theater owners are starting to trumpet this by saying it has maybe 10-20 years left in it.
So if the box office isn't the factor what is? Engagement, clicks and views which turns into backend dollars through ad deals which leads to more revenue made from such properties and so on. If Muppets aren't producing in that manner than why should Disney invest in it beyond the minimal that they do? That is what I'm saying.
