Jump to content

hw64

Free Account+
  • Content Count

    391
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

368 Likes

About hw64

  • Rank
    Indie Sensation

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

1,287 profile views
  1. Look at you all, a big bunch of drama queens writing cinema's obituary prematurely. This thread will be embarrassing to look back at in a few years.
  2. I'm aware, yes. Disney's operating income from studio entertainment was $2.7b in 2019 and $3.0b in 2018, compared to Netflix's $2.6b in 2019 and $1.6b in 2018. I wasn't try to make any broader of a statement than pointing out the conflation of revenue and profit. Certainly not disagreeing with the fact that DTC could easily surpass studio entertainment in profitability some years down the line. Disney certainly seems to think it can.
  3. $18b a year in revenue, not in profit. Netflix brought in about $20b in streaming subscription revenue in 2019; of that, around $1.9b was net profit. Of course, Disney's exploitation of its content vaults will lower expenses compared to Netflix, but still, there's a very big difference between $18b in revenue and $18b in profit.
  4. Your figures are way too high. 30% for Mulan is ridiculous, and 50%, even for Marvel or Star Wars, is similarly insane.
  5. BOM's estimates of tickets sold shouldn't really be taken at face value for recent blockbusters. The methodology that BOM uses (dividing gross by yearly average ticket price) means that the admissions for pretty much all big blockbuster films after and including Avatar are overestimated by a chunky margin. Rather than 108m, I'd guess that TFA sold somewhere in the region of 95-97m tickets, which would put the ticket price average at ~$9.66-$9.86; for comparison, BOM, with its yearly ticket price averages, uses an average ticket price of ~$8.66. If you make the argument that pre-3D yearly averages are far closer to the actual average ticket price for a given blockbuster in that year (which I do), then a good estimate for TPM, which made $431,088,295 in its initial theatrical run with an average ticket price of $5.08 in 1999, would be ~84.86m tickets sold. So by any estimate, TFA was bigger than TPM and the biggest ticket seller since Titanic, but I wouldn't agree that it was leagues ahead of Episode I.
  6. They're very similar performance-wise - TFA certainly wasn't massively bigger than TPM. Accounting for the effects of ticket price inflation and market expansion from 1999 to 2015, I'd say that TFA was at most 15-20% bigger than TPM worldwide.
  7. Would agree with this. I'd expect a 48-49% final domestic share.
  8. It's still very unlikely, but not impossible. And yes, that kind of reasoning was extremely shortsighted to say the least.
  9. Overseas predictions in this thread from December 2017 onwards, prior to the film's release: $850m $950m $800m-$850m $900m $800m $850m $800m+ "Over $768m" "I think it clears $800m OS at least." $750m $750m max The majority of people had it at the $800-$900m mark. It's underperformed worse domestically than overseas, but to say most people projected $700-$750m is objectively wrong - pretty much nobody predicted an overseas gross as low as $710m. And a bomb in China wasn't expected, either. It was looking likely to do worse than Rogue One, but not as low as $40m.
  10. Completely impossible. Would have to drop 20% week on week every single week for the rest of its run to even equal The Last Jedi's total, without Japan that is. Without putting too much work into this, it's pretty clear that Jumanji's overseas total will be under $550m.
  11. $9.9m weekend, including about $0.9m in China, so $9m overseas minus China for the weekend. $17m week, including about $1.8m in China, so $15.2m overseas minus China for the week.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.