Jump to content

Chapek fired, Iger back at Disney


Pikachu

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

I think the better way to think about what Amazon is going to do moving forward: less LOTR mega blockbuster budget projects, more non-scripted and Blumhouse level budgeted product. The return just isn't there for these terrifically expensive projects without more traditional sell through. None of these companies are going to stop making content, but they certainly are going to move around to more profitable projects.

Oh yeah I think all of them are gonna scale back which is why i said earlier that the salad days are over... except for Apple. They seem to be moving full steam ahead with expensive assed projects. A friend of mine is up for a series that they've budgeted at 200 million plus and the concept is... niche to say the least. It could be very good if done right, but it would never recoup that cost given the subject matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I expect that we'll see Apple and Amazon continue to invest heavily in streaming. They probably won't go as crazy as they have been, but I expect them to keep putting money and effort into video.

 

If we envision where all this ends up, there has to be some point at which more and more of the money from linear television, cable or otherwise, ends up going to the streaming services. It's a very big pie, and everyone will want some piece of it.

 

It's one big reason why I've been surprised that it took so long for Netflix to launch an ad supported tier. So much of the money in traditional television has been ads, and that money doesn't necessarily translate to D2C payments. Just like no one wants to pay $100/year for Facebook, no one wants to pay sufficient amounts to justify all the content that gets made every year. It's the same reason Cable TV still has ads.

 

So I have to imagine that when we get to that point where streaming has devoured most of the money from linear, it'll be because ads are back as the primary revenue driver.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So about Amazon...

 

amazont-1.jpg?w=1024
DEADLINE.COM

Amazon Reported Commitment To 8-10 Theatrical Releases Annually: What This Means

 

These fuckers are about to get in to the exhibiton game as well mark my words. Even on a limited scale that would be huge... like I said they've already bought one theater in my neighborhood and it sounds like they maybe planning to buy more. You don't commit to 1 Billion dolars annually for theatrical films if you're planning on leaving the business anytime soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/22/2022 at 4:31 PM, TwinIon said:

It's one big reason why I've been surprised that it took so long for Netflix to launch an ad supported tier. So much of the money in traditional television has been ads, and that money doesn't necessarily translate to D2C payments. Just like no one wants to pay $100/year for Facebook, no one wants to pay sufficient amounts to justify all the content that gets made every year. It's the same reason Cable TV still has ads.

 

So I have to imagine that when we get to that point where streaming has devoured most of the money from linear, it'll be because ads are back as the primary revenue driver.


If you were to categorize ad sales as a business unit at Amazon, it is the most profitable by far, followed by AWS. Literally nothing else at Amazon really makes money.

 

Prime Video as a means of producing more ad sales is what makes most sense of the service.

 

 

29 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said:

You don't commit to 1 Billion dolars annually for theatrical films if you're planning on leaving the business anytime soon.

 

This actually goes to what I was saying earlier. Making massively budgeted projects to die on the vine of streaming makes no business sense. Nobody is making money doing it. The only profits in the industry are coming from theatrical and digital sell through, while all-you-can-stream is a money pit. I have no doubt Amazon Studios will make substantial changes to their operations moving forward because what they’ve done under Bezos is a recipe for bleeding cash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

This actually goes to what I was saying earlier. Making massively budgeted projects to die on the vine of streaming makes no business sense. Nobody is making money doing it. The only profits in the industry are coming from theatrical and digital sell through, while all-you-can-stream is a money pit. I have no doubt Amazon Studios will make substantial changes to their operations moving forward because what they’ve done under Bezos is a recipe for bleeding cash.

Yeah I think their gonna make a play for theatrical exhibition. Maybe merge with a big theater chain or just start their own thing. Only thing I was saying is that they aren't leaving the original content/streaming business anytime soon. Neither is Apple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's go a little nuts, shall we?

 

apple-1.jpg
WWW.THEWRAP.COM

"This is the pinnacle deal for the ultimate dealmaker," one studio insider says

 

Quote

 

Now that Disney CEO Bob Iger has regained the keys to the Magic Kingdom — less than three years after his chosen successor, Bob Chapek, took over — insiders suspect they know how the beloved executive will find a new way to go out on top during his final two-year stint.

 

“He’s going to sell the company,” one Disney insider who has worked for Iger predicted. “This is the pinnacle deal for the ultimate dealmaker.”

 

Landing a deal with Apple (or some other megabuyer) would also cement Iger’s legacy. “I think he’d welcome it — he’d be the last CEO of Disney,” a former top Disney executive told TheWrap, noting that the two companies have “similar brand identities” and could benefit from a merger.

 

 

  • Guillotine 1
  • Shocked 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, SuperSpreader said:

 

I feel like Disney IP is more valuable than Apple offerings. 

Ummm yeah, I mispoke. I meant Apple would want to buy Disney. That's why Apple would want their IP. 

 

032122-How-big-is-Big-Tech.jpeg
WWW.THEWRAP.COM

The Big Five tech companies have valuations way, way higher than the major oil and media conglomerates

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said:

Ummm yeah. That's why Apple would want their IP. Now if you think Disney is WORTH more than Apple? Ummm no.

 

032122-How-big-is-Big-Tech.jpeg
WWW.THEWRAP.COM

The Big Five tech companies have valuations way, way higher than the major oil and media conglomerates

 

 

I get that it's worth more and that Apple would love Disney IP but I feel like considering the IP that Disney DOES have and Apple makes stuff that expires, I think it's more valuable long term as a society than Apple. Like I can see Disney existing in 300 years, Apple, who knows and who cares. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SuperSpreader said:

 

I get that it's worth more and that Apple would love Disney IP but I feel like considering the IP that Disney DOES have and Apple makes stuff that expires, I think it's more valuable long term as a society than Apple. Like I can see Disney existing in 300 years, Apple, who knows and who cares. 

Yeah I don't know which one is more valuable to society... I just can see why Apple would want to own Disney.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...