ElvisMickey
Well-Known Member
Appreciate your sense of humor…
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Ton Newton - Out
- Thread starter asianway
- Start date
ElvisMickey
Well-Known Member
When you could make bank by moving here from property taxes alone but you’re just disgusted because ”it’s Florida”…
Nubs70
Well-Known Member
Iger stayed on in an advisory capacity to the BoD he put in place. Chapek had to work for a BoD that was his predecessor 's while his predecessor was advising Chapek's bosses. Chapek never stood a chance. Former CEO's typically ride off into the sunset not hang around in the closet. Hanging around is not secession planning.
Heat index in the low 100s during the next week in CFL , those cast would be glad they are enjoying year round glorious temps in Southern CA some living even without central AC like some members of my family ( non Disney ) .
Whatever the case , $23M given to Chapek as a parting gift . I'd take the money and run.
Casper Gutman
Well-Known Member
OK, great. Mario is the result of a profit-sharing agreement between Nintendo and Universal. We can assume that films box office doesn’t count for Universal? No, that’s idiotic, as is excluding the third most successful film of all time from an evaluation of Disneys box office in a politically motivated dodge - that fun cherry-picking I mentioned.
As to the rest of the guys numbers, I’d have to go back to the sources because he’s not trustworthy. He doesn’t seem to provide specific cites for each number, just general hand-waving, and he then puts them in slides in a YouTube video and slices and dices them in a way convenient to his point, making it even harder to track them back to a source.
But hey, he cites Deadline, huh? Let’s take a look at what they say. Mermaid won’t lose money, or won’t lose much
‘Little Mermaid’ Swimming Against Strong Tides At Overseas Box Office, Leaving Break-Even In Question
In a rare situation for a Disney tentpole, particularly a live action title based on a treasured animated classic, 'The Little Mermaid' may lose money.
deadline.com
Wakanda made money
‘Black Panther: Wakanda Forever’ Claws Way To No. 5 In Deadline’s 2022 Most Valuable Blockbuster Tournament
Deadline’s Most Valuable Blockbuster tournament took a hiatus during the pandemic as movie theaters closed for the majority of 2020-2021 and theatrical day-and-date titles on both the big screen an…
deadline.com
Thor made money
‘Thor: Love And Thunder’, Despite Not Swinging As Big A Hammer As ‘Ragnarok’, Still Profits As No. 9 In Deadline’s 2022 Most Valuable Blockbuster Tournament
Deadline’s Most Valuable Blockbuster tournament took a hiatus during the pandemic as movie theaters closed for the majority of 2020-2021 and theatrical day-and-date titles on both the big screen an…
deadline.com
Guardians will make money.
So that leaves Lightyear (which came out more then a year before his video, so including that and not Strange is entirely arbitrary, but we know he’s cherry-picking), Elemental, Ant-Man, and Strange World. Without even considering the earnings of the other four films, the budgets of these four films add up to less then he claimed the whole eight lost.
He’s lying.
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
The Little Mermaid: In a break-even scenario off a $560M global box office (meaning a net profit of $71M before participations and residuals are accounted for), we’re told that Little Mermaid‘s global film revenues would amount to $547M against its combined production, global theatrical and home entertainment marketing expenses of $476M. The pic’s revenues broken down include $267M in global theatrical film rentals, $100M net in domestic pay/free TV and what Disney pays itself to put the movie on Disney+, $100M in global home entertainment (DVD, digital), and $80M in international TV and streaming.
The Little Mermaid breaks even if you count the hundreds of millions of dollars that Disney pays to ITSELF for streaming rights.
Hurr durr I just sold myself a glass of lemonade for $1 billion, I guess I run a billion-dollar lemonade business now.
The Little Mermaid breaks even if you count the hundreds of millions of dollars that Disney pays to ITSELF for streaming rights.
Hurr durr I just sold myself a glass of lemonade for $1 billion, I guess I run a billion-dollar lemonade business now.
Last edited by a moderator:
Casper Gutman
Well-Known Member
Wait, you’re unfamiliar with different divisions within a conglomerate charging one another? If a WB film decides to use a soundstage on the WB lot, whichever division oversees the soundstage (facilities or such) will charge the film. I can pretty much guarantee that this sort of thing is part of the stated budget for all of these films.
Vegas Disney Fan
Well-Known Member
Getting rid of the echo chamber would have helped but I don’t think the executives or creatives were going to move to Florida anyway so it probably wouldn’t have made a difference.
As long as Iger, the board, and the executives all parrot each others beliefs on the direction of the company the staff being in FL or CA won’t matter.
Last edited:
Dranth
Well-Known Member
Charging inner company is a standard practice and isn’t inflating the numbers in anyway. That money is still coming from customers. “Selling” a movie to streaming who is then going to make money off it through maintained or increased subscriptions enables the group who footed the cost of the movie to share in the profit from their work instead of streaming getting all the benefit when it is released there.
Now if you are talking about Disney’s internal valuation of those cross-department charges vs. the actual practice then I can see where you are coming from as that is much more subjective but the practice itself is sound and used almost universally in mid/large companies.
Nubs70
Well-Known Member
This practice is known as a transfer payment. It simply transfers funds from one division to another and can be used to "inflate" another divisions performance.
For example WDI in reference to the design and build of Shanghai. If the actual expense of WDI activities is $1MM, WDI HoldCo charges WDI Shanghai $2MM, then WDI HoldCo shows a $1MM profit. In the end, WDW show a net profit of $0. All funds remain internal since it is an internal transfer payment.
Simply a real life manifestation of rearranging the deck chairs.
Dranth
Well-Known Member
A more accurate statement would be it can be used to inflate another division. It is a standard accounting practice used worldwide that when used correctly more accurately depicts a divisions contribution to the overall company.
Inflating in this case would imply that streaming sees no benefit from putting out a movie and that just isn't true. So, how do you account for the continued revenue? The group that put all the time and effort into actually producing the product get nothing?
As long as companies continue to have divisions and sub divisions that are judged individually based on their own costs and revenue you need to use methods like this to get a more accurate picture of their actual performance.
ETA: Disney could very well be using this to inflate the numbers on the studio side, my point is that the practice itself is fine when used correctly. Disney's internal valuation of what each movie is "worth" to streaming is a whole other discussion.
Last edited:
If you are buying a older residence in FL, good luck trying to find an insurer that will even write you a policy .
That's normal business in companies that I worked for. When one division is failing and another is not, execs move the $$ around to make the other division look better.
Dranth
Well-Known Member
It all depends on how they do it.
If they just blatantly take money from one division and give it to another or sell something internally at an overvalued rate then yes, in those cases, they are absolutely trying to cover for the failure in one area. If they are legit "selling" something from one division to another to account for profit sharing amongst the divisions then all is good.
The question is which is being used in this case? I wouldn't be surprised to find out it is a little of both but it isn't just covering losses in one area.
flynnibus
Premium Member
But pointing it out as if it is a sign of fluff simply because it happens is garbage talk.
Pointing it out is real world not garbage talk.
It's also normal practice when there is no motivation to hide the losses of one division. Even if all divisions are making a great profit, you still charge service and goods between divisions.
Claiming that Disney's doing something very normal in a way that's deceptive... well, you're going to need proof of that rather than claim it as some conspiracy theory.
Re-Read my post. Its normal where I've worked.
flynnibus
Premium Member
Murder is real world too… but that reality doesn’t mean it’s happening right here just because it does happen.