Ton Newton - Out

[CaptainAmerica]

What’s the source for the marketing budgets?

Varies by film. Deadline and Hollywood Reporter seem to be the most used.

 

[erasure fan1]

Also, seeing as Disney has the 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 6th highest grossing films of the year, every other studio must be in REAL trouble.

Maybe. But you can't always count on total box office. For instance, John Wick is 7th for the year in box office. But it made more profit than everything Disney accept Avatar. By all accounts it made about $150mil in profit. So really, volume doesn't matter if the profit isn't there. Universal missed big with fast X and cocaine bear was a wash but they are, at least looking at the top 20, still well above the profit line.

 

[TheIceBaron]

Regardless of the exact numbers we will find out more concrete figures on how their studios division is doing overall during their next earnings call.

Their biggest issue is shareholders really only care about future growth. Based on ballooning budgets and falling demand for Disney produced movies, expectations for future movies from Disney will be adjusted downward which negatively impacts their stock price.

There is also an opportunity cost of producing several lukewarm films in a row. That cost is spending time and money to produce something that only breaks even rather than spending on a project that facilitates future growth.

Her leaving may have simply been there are too many cooks in the kitchen interfering in projects and making it less efficient. Disney has already signaled a leaner operation so they may have ousted her and changed the character, scope and impact the position has on projects.

 

[flynnibus]

I would expect a lot of write offs of incomplete/canned projects to make ghe bottom line now look better. But outlook is impossible to bolster in media… they can only parade around themes and name dropping

 

[GhostHost1000]

Regardless of the exact numbers we will find out more concrete figures on how their studios division is doing overall during their next earnings call.

Their biggest issue is shareholders really only care about future growth. Based on ballooning budgets and falling demand for Disney produced movies, expectations for future movies from Disney will be adjusted downward which negatively impacts their stock price.

There is also an opportunity cost of producing several lukewarm films in a row. That cost is spending time and money to produce something that only breaks even rather than spending on a project that facilitates future growth.

Her leaving may have simply been there are too many cooks in the kitchen interfering in projects and making it less efficient. Disney has already signaled a leaner operation so they may have ousted her and changed the character, scope and impact the position has on projects.

The next earnings call is gonna be a doozy.

Get your figment popcorn bucket out and buckle up for the wildest ride in the wilderness Q&A

 

[Tha Realest]

The next earnings call is gonna be a doozy.

Get your figment popcorn bucket out and buckle up for the wildest ride in the wilderness Q&A

And it’s a new guy in that role

 

[GhostHost1000]

And it’s a new guy in that role

Ok so then 2 popcorn buckets needed. lol

 

[denyuntilcaught]

The take away from this is disney owns so much marketing airtime and paths to eyeballs and still spends a billion dollars on unsuccessful marketing… then maybe they are doing it horribly wrong.

150mill spending on a single film should be criminal

This. Spending $150-250MM on a film seems to be (one of) the biggest issues, especially with the wider entertainment landscape seemingly no longer being able to support a title of that magnitude regardless of channel, cinema, SVOD, or otherwise.

Advertising also needs to reevaluate its targeting techniques and be much more thoughtful in how to reach and resonate with the intended audiences, especially as inflation impacts costs. Cut this "broad reaching media" crap. Doesn't work the way it used to.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Iger said in the last call that advertising costs are getting extra scrutiny.

 

[Smiley/OCD]

The plot thickens

Maybe she got caught filling showcases at WoD with her jewelry…lol

 

[Nubs70]

Maybe. But you can't always count on total box office. For instance, John Wick is 7th for the year in box office. But it made more profit than everything Disney accept Avatar. By all accounts it made about $150mil in profit. So really, volume doesn't matter if the profit isn't there. Universal missed big with fast X and cocaine bear was a wash but they are, at least looking at the top 20, still well above the profit line.

When your margin is negative, you can't make up for it in volume

 

[Lilofan]

That's a lot of between the lines reading, but I get it.

Ironically, we're hiring a director of DEI, as ours was promoted recently to director of HR. And we've poached from Disney in the past.

Who knows.

Tik Tok got a crown jewel who retired from TWDC a few years ago. Former PR chief Zenia Mucha a trusted disciple of Eisner and later Iger came out of retirement . Her damage control experience is what TT needs to be in a better light. An offer to come out of retirement must have been painted in gold.

 

[Lilofan]

She has her own creative business (on the side) selling jewelry on Etsy. (I'm not making this up). And apparently she is being named to another unknown company's BOD.

She was involuntarily separated from TWDC, she likely had nothing lined up in terms of an actual position as she wasn't expected to be let go from TWDC.

Ton who is black left under circumstances. Lassiter who is white, was drunk on the job, couldn't keep his slimy hands off of women , had to have a cast accompany him to events so he could not get in more trouble but then goes in a sabbatical then eventually leaves the company.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

The “analyst” is YouTuber “Valiant Renegade” and the story is featured on Newsmax.

Come on.

…ridiculous…yet the numbers are solid

So are you saying has Disney NOT lost that on films in the last year?

…the racists are twisting the numbers…like a Christopher Nolan movie

Find a credible source if you want to make the argument. Penguin has posted a list of this guys videos in another thread - he’s a culture war outrage merchant.

…ridiculous…

…yet the numbers are solid.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Tik Tok got a crown jewel who retired from TWDC a few years ago. Former PR chief Zenia Mucha a trusted disciple of Eisner and later Iger came out of retirement . Her damage control experience is what TT needs to be in a better light. An offer to come out of retirement must have been painted in gold.

Funny how hired assassins gravitate to getting paid to assassinate, huh?

 

[Casper Gutman]

…ridiculous…yet the numbers are solid

…the racists are twisting the numbers…like a Christopher Nolan movie

…ridiculous…

…yet the numbers are solid.

You cannot say, “The source is garbage, but I’m going with it it because I like the numbers.”

People are taking a meme equation and pretending it’s irrefutably comprehensive. I’ve said this before, but I want to really, really emphasize it - the major studios are organized in such a way that the same content fills multiple interconnected pipelines and it is VERY rare for a movie to actually lose money in the final reckoning. Only the most obvious mega-bombs like Strange Worlds and The Flash actually do so.

I’m sure we’ve all heard of “Hollywood Economics.” Budget, marketing - these numbers are tremendously vague and often misleading. Studios arrange them to show what they want them to show. Remember, Peter Jackson had to take the studio to court to get them to stop pretending Lord of the Rings lost money. The equation this thread is obsessed with is a fun conversation piece, but it’s like using a Fisher-Price toy telescope to map the galaxy.

 

[erasure fan1]

The equation this thread is obsessed with is a fun conversation piece, but it’s like using a Fisher-Price toy telescope to map the galaxy.

Of course it's not the end all be all of analytics. But it does give a pretty good idea how a film did financially from it's box office run. And that's really what we are talking about. Like you said, and I've said, and so have many others here as well. They muddy the waters to make it hard to tell. Movies used to have multiple revenue streams that are no longer there. Is it really possible to give a dollars gained from D+ to a film? Not for our conversations. I personally still think it's a decent measuring stick of a films financial success. Because I really don't think the goal of Disney, or any other studio, is for their film to limp past profitability 5yrs down the road. At least not your 180/250mil budget films.

I think most here realize that at the end of the day, many factors go into if a movie actually made money. Nightmare before Christmas wasn't a smash hit by any means. Only 90mil at the box office, but it did squeak past profiting at the theater. But when you look at what that film has brought in through licencing and merch... it's not only profitable, it's insanely profitable.

 

[Casper Gutman]

Of course it's not the end all be all of analytics. But it does give a pretty good idea how a film did financially from it's box office run. And that's really what we are talking about. Like you said, and I've said, and so have many others here as well. They muddy the waters to make it hard to tell. Movies used to have multiple revenue streams that are no longer there. Is it really possible to give a dollars gained from D+ to a film? Not for our conversations. I personally still think it's a decent measuring stick of a films financial success. Because I really don't think the goal of Disney, or any other studio, is for their film to limp past profitability 5yrs down the road. At least not your 180/250mil budget films.

I think most here realize that at the end of the day, many factors go into if a movie actually made money. Nightmare before Christmas wasn't a smash hit by any means. Only 90mil at the box office, but it did squeak past profiting at the theater. But when you look at what that film has brought in through licencing and merch... it's not only profitable, it's insanely profitable.

Then all we’re doing is engaging in politically-motivated spin. Studios absolutely green light films with a view towards to long-term returns, to maintain an ip, or achieve some other goal. Once we get beyond vague, broad statements - Strange World was a huge bomb, etc - we’re largely making stuff up.

I’ll ask here what I’ve asked before and in the other thread - right now, which studio would you want to head? Which is positioned better then Disney?

 

[Nubs70]

Then all we’re doing is engaging in politically-motivated spin. Studios absolutely green light films with a view towards to long-term returns, to maintain an ip, or achieve some other goal. Once we get beyond vague, broad statements - Strange World was a huge bomb, etc - we’re largely making stuff up.

I’ll ask here what I’ve asked before and in the other thread - right now, which studio would you want to head? Which is positioned better then Disney?

None.

With the advent of youtube, the cost to produce and publish content is a mere fraction of the pre youtube days. The price commanded to consume content is also a mere fraction of pre youtube days.

I can consume 120 minutes of youtube for free. My family of 4 can consume multiple movies on D+ or other streaming platform for a fraction of a single outing to see a single movie at a theater. Yet production costs for theater delivery keeps increasing. Contribution Margins of all studios are not worth investing in.

Until COGS of studio production is slashed in respect to cost consume, studio productions will not be a profitable venture.

 

[erasure fan1]

I’ll ask here what I’ve asked before and in the other thread - right now, which studio would you want to head? Which is positioned better then Disney?

Of course it's Disney, but that's not really all that relevant to the film profitability formula discussion. Disney holds MANY of the top IPs and has name recognition like no other.

Studios absolutely green light films with a view towards to long-term returns, to maintain an ip, or achieve some other goal.

I agree, but like I said, not with a 250mil budget. You make that film, and you are expecting it to make you some cash in the theatrical window, not 5yrs later. You don't make nightmare before Christmas to make a billion at the box office. It cost like 25mil, you hope it goes green and it gains a life well beyond the theater.