The Sony Pictures Thread | Happy 100th anniversary to Columbia Pictures!

[Mango]

9 hours ago, MrPink said:

 

Sony does not have their own channels for the most part but they produce a ton of TV content that they own the rights to (Seinfeld, Breaking Bad to name a couple). They're a television giant in terms of production but I think Sony was probably smart to realize that too many streaming services would put them at a disadvantage and they certainly lack in the movie catalog to compete against someone like WB or Disney. Instead, they can play all sides and make a ton of money which is honestly what Viacom should have been doing too, probably.

 

You pretty much hit the nail on the head as far as I can tell. While every other big studio was scrambling to make their own streaming service, Sony did the smart thing and stood back and waited to be the ones to provide content. Now they have a crazy huge deal with Netflix and Disney to provide content that these streaming services need. On top of that they are in no rush to pull their films from theaters early like a lot of other studios, possibly providing longer and more fruitful runs for them in the future.

 

If you ask me, they came out of this extremely well. I agree Paramount really should have done the same thing.

[titanic2187]

On 5/27/2021 at 10:39 PM, MrPink said:

 

Sony does not have their own channels for the most part but they produce a ton of TV content that they own the rights to (Seinfeld, Breaking Bad to name a couple). They're a television giant in terms of production but I think Sony was probably smart to realize that too many streaming services would put them at a disadvantage and they certainly lack in the movie catalog to compete against someone like WB or Disney. Instead, they can play all sides and make a ton of money which is honestly what Viacom should have been doing too, probably.

Who know Sony and Paramount can be the new home for Nolan 

[Eric Prime]

 

[Eric Prime]

https://deadline.com/2021/09/summer-box-office-2021-covid-disney-hbo-max-streaming-black-widow-1234828431/

 

Quote

Top Studios at 2021 Summer Box Office

Studio                 Summer B.O. *   % change from summer 2019**        
Disney                 $483M       -72%

20th                  $103.1M             -33%

Disney/20^th combined   $586.1M             -69%

Universal/Focus $407.4M             -24%

Warner Bros      $249.4M             -37%

Paramount        $220.6M             +17%

Sony/Sony Classics         $105M             -85%

Lionsgate            $68.3M               -78%

United Artists Releasing $50.1M         -48%

*for period of May 7-September 6

**vs. first weekend in May through Labor Day 2019

***

Top Ten Movies of Summer 2021

1.) Black Widow (Dis) $182.6M

2.) F9 (Uni) $172.9M

3.) A Quiet Place Part II (Par)   $160M

4.) Jungle Cruise (Dis) $106.8M

5.) Shang-Chi (Dis) $94.6M

6.) Free Guy (Dis) $94.4M

7.) Cruella (Dis) $86.1M

8.) Space Jam: A New Legacy (WB) $67.1M

9.) The Conjuring: The Devil Made Me Do It (NL) $65.5M

10.) The Boss Baby: Family Business (Uni/DWA) $57M

 

[poweranimals]

Why doesn't Sony just sell off their movie division already? Spider-Man is the only thing they have going for it.

[Ronin46]

2 hours ago, poweranimals said:

Why doesn't Sony just sell off their movie division already? Spider-Man is the only thing they have going for it.

 

Bad Boys, Jumanji, Uncharted, Ghostbusters are a few others.

[AnotherDayAnotherDollar]

3 hours ago, Ronin46 said:

 

Bad Boys, Jumanji, Uncharted, Ghostbusters are a few others.

 

Bad Boys is okay. Last one did good numbers because we hadn't seen one in over a decade. Doubt they can make that an ongoing franchise. Reminds me of Lethal Weapon or Rush Hour. 

Jumanji put in the work for the last two movies. Obviously that Rock - Hart combo is lifting the product

Uncharted is unproven in the movie world. A game being a huge hit does not equal to a big movie hit. See WoW.

Ghostbusters remains to be seen. Last one bombed badly. This one seems to be a lot better, so let's see how it'll do at the BO. A week after it launches it'll have to fight with Encanto for those family $$$$.

 

SPE is also one of Sony's lowest ROI divisions, if not the lowest. There's a reason they wouldn't be able to launch their own streaming service. That money would be better spent doubling down on gaming where they dominate.

[Ronin46]

56 minutes ago, AnotherDayAnotherDollar said:

 

Bad Boys is okay. Last one did good numbers because we hadn't seen one in over a decade. Doubt they can make that an ongoing franchise. Reminds me of Lethal Weapon or Rush Hour. 

Jumanji put in the work for the last two movies. Obviously that Rock - Hart combo is lifting the product

Uncharted is unproven in the movie world. A game being a huge hit does not equal to a big movie hit. See WoW.

Ghostbusters remains to be seen. Last one bombed badly. This one seems to be a lot better, so let's see how it'll do at the BO. A week after it launches it'll have to fight with Encanto for those family $$$$.

 

SPE is also one of Sony's lowest ROI divisions, if not the lowest. There's a reason they wouldn't be able to launch their own streaming service. That money would be better spent doubling down on gaming where they dominate.

 

Its pointless debating about return on investment and strategic plans with someone who said "Sony should sell off there movie production because all they have is Spiderman" when

 

1) They have a few other things of value which I listed  

2) Jumanji is a mega profitable franchise

 

 

and most importantly

 

3) Why would they sell when there Spiderman franchise is worth so much and any tie ins they can do with that (Venom, Morbius etc) 

 

I mean Sony is about to release Venom, Ghostbusters, Spiderman, Morbius and Resident Evil in the next few months. 

 

Of course they did not make a lot of profit on there movies as they have been holding them. Lets wait and see how those go before we cherry pick the last financial year as to there future projections. 

[AnotherDayAnotherDollar]

56 minutes ago, Ronin46 said:

 

Its pointless debating about return on investment and strategic plans with someone who said "Sony should sell off there movie production because all they have is Spiderman" when

 

1) They have a few other things of value which I listed  

2) Jumanji is a mega profitable franchise

 

 

and most importantly

 

3) Why would they sell when there Spiderman franchise is worth so much and any tie ins they can do with that (Venom, Morbius etc) 

 

I mean Sony is about to release Venom, Ghostbusters, Spiderman, Morbius and Resident Evil in the next few months. 

 

Of course they did not make a lot of profit on there movies as they have been holding them. Lets wait and see how those go before we cherry pick the last financial year as to there future projections. 

 

Not everything you listed is highly profitable. The ROI is imperative for any division and that's why shareholders have called, more than once, for Sony to spin off SPE.

 

Jumanji has been extremely profitable at the BO the past couple of iterations. I'd assume a third would do extremely well also (if they can retain Johnson and Hart). Not sure about long term viability of the franchise, but I'll give you that it's a big and very profitable franchise for now.

 

The Spidey spin offs (i.e. characters Sony owns the film rights to) have questionable to limited BO appeal. Venom sure was a surprise. China's BO made the BO bigger than I thought it would be. Tencent did an amazing job marketing there. I'm expecting a drop at the BO take for Venom 2, even accounting for covid. Sony is testing the water of the reach of its characters with Morbius. They have also talked about a Madam Web and Aunt May movie, both of which no one wants to watch. I'm dubious on how Morbius will do, especially with no Blade or Midnight Sons connection. Venom has been an uber popular character for awhile. Morbius has not. We'll see how it does. A Jan release date with Jackass coming the week after may hurt its (already limited) potential.

 

RE has never been big at the BO, so that's a non starter. It's a horror movie and it's profitable, but nothing to be excited about. Ghostbuster's last entry bombed badly just a few years ago. We'll have to see how this next one will do with a big Disney movie releasing the week after it. Spider-man NWH will be profit sharing with Disney at 75/25 ratio. Going to be the biggest movie though thanks to the MCU.

 

I have been investing in Sony's ADR when it was still listed as SNE. Don't try to turn this into a last financial year. Sony Pictures has been the redheaded step child for Sony for years and its shortcomings have been hidden by other divisions picking up the slack. Sony has gotten rid of other low performing divisions and I hope they do the same with Pictures. The best thing about SPE is its TV side, not movies.

[Barnack]

2 hours ago, AnotherDayAnotherDollar said:

SPE is also one of Sony's lowest ROI divisions, if not the lowest. There's a reason they wouldn't be able to launch their own streaming service. That money would be better spent doubling down on gaming where they dominate.

It is easy to forget Sony is in the smarthphone business:

https://electronics.sony.com/c/mobile

 

That I imagine will tend to be year's in and out the lowest ROI, I imagine always negative.

 

5 hours ago, Ronin46 said:

Bad Boys, Jumanji, Uncharted, Ghostbusters are a few others.

Karate Kids has been really big for them on youtube than Netflix, Atypical, The Crown, Breaking Bad before, The Last of Us on HBO is coming up, Community is probably a nice seller on streamers.

 

Sony Picture television side and media network together is bigger than Motion picture in revenues, TV alone is smaller but not that much to be a different tier than the movie side (specially operating income with the higher margin).

 

I remember not so long ago talk that Sony should sell everything and become a bank, their financial service being so much better in every way than the rest in some quarter early pandemy they probably liked being diverse.

 

If they could get a good price could be a good move, but...... could they with Disney I presume out of the race (getting Fox than Sony being just too much) and I imagine At&t. Amazon, Apple, MIcrosoft, there is big money outthere for sure so maybe, but those unlike Disney do not have the expertise to do better with Sony Picture than Sony (nor that ability to fire has much redondant people than when a studio buy an other one), making their ability to overpay Sony for it (to give them more than what the studio is worth to them less obvious, except for the really deep pocket making it still possible).

Edited September 14, 2021 by Barnack

[Ronin46]

33 minutes ago, AnotherDayAnotherDollar said:

 

Not everything you listed is highly profitable. The ROI is imperative for any division and that's why shareholders have called, more than once, for Sony to spin off SPE.

 

Jumanji has been extremely profitable at the BO the past couple of iterations. I'd assume a third would do extremely well also (if they can retain Johnson and Hart). Not sure about long term viability of the franchise, but I'll give you that it's a big and very profitable franchise for now.

 

The Spidey spin offs (i.e. characters Sony owns the film rights to) have questionable to limited BO appeal. Venom sure was a surprise. China's BO made the BO bigger than I thought it would be. Tencent did an amazing job marketing there. I'm expecting a drop at the BO take for Venom 2, even accounting for covid. Sony is testing the water of the reach of its characters with Morbius. They have also talked about a Madam Web and Aunt May movie, both of which no one wants to watch. I'm dubious on how Morbius will do, especially with no Blade or Midnight Sons connection. Venom has been an uber popular character for awhile. Morbius has not. We'll see how it does. A Jan release date with Jackass coming the week after may hurt its (already limited) potential.

 

RE has never been big at the BO, so that's a non starter. It's a horror movie and it's profitable, but nothing to be excited about. Ghostbuster's last entry bombed badly just a few years ago. We'll have to see how this next one will do with a big Disney movie releasing the week after it. Spider-man NWH will be profit sharing with Disney at 75/25 ratio. Going to be the biggest movie though thanks to the MCU.

 

I have been investing in Sony's ADR when it was still listed as SNE. Don't try to turn this into a last financial year. Sony Pictures has been the redheaded step child for Sony for years and its shortcomings have been hidden by other divisions picking up the slack. Sony has gotten rid of other low performing divisions and I hope they do the same with Pictures. The best thing about SPE is its TV side, not movies.

 

As I originally said "they have some titles with some value". Some will do well and some will not. But stating that Spiderman is the only thing they have so they should just sell there movie division is not something I agree with at all.

 

For example

Resident Evil is a pretty profitable franchise. The last 1 made over 300 million on a 40m budget, before that it was 240m on a 65m budget and before that 295m on a 57m budget.

 

Jumanji  last one 800m box office on 125m budget, previous one 961m on a 90m budget.

 

Bad Boys 90m budget over 400m box office

Venom  116m Budget and 800m plus box office

 

I would imagine those 4 titles would interest some other studio if made available. I can imagine all the tie ins with Venom, Morbius, Spiderman would also have a lot of interest.

 

They also own a lot of other franchises that could be revived or turned into tv series. 

 

Anyway you think they should sell because thay have nothing other than Spiderman. I disagree on that. I could talk myself into Ghostbusters, Venom, Resident Evil, Morbius, Kraven all bombing. But some will do well and some wont. The titles as a whole will still hold value as does Jumanji, Bad Boys and some of there older franchises.  

[Ronin46]

29 minutes ago, Barnack said:

Karate Kids has been really big for them on youtube than Netflix, Atypical, The Crown, Breaking Bad before, The Last of Us on HBO is coming up, Community is probably a nice seller on streamers.

 

Yeah they have some old titles that would interest others. In the current environment where IP is king and everyone wants to turn something into a tv show or a remake or a reboot then things like Zombieland, Underworld, Stuart Little, The Smurfs, Charlies Angels, Cloudy with the Chance of Meatballs etc.  

[Barnack]

1 minute ago, Ronin46 said:

For example

Resident Evil is a pretty profitable franchise. The last 1 made over 300 million on a 40m budget, before that it was 240m on a 65m budget and before that 295m on a 57m budget.

They did try to go mid budget after the success of Apocalypse but scaling down after.

 

From Sony point of view: 

Extinction: 44.45 million profit on 197.76 millions revenues

Afterlife: 62.28 million profit on 252 millions revenues

Retribution: 10 millions profit on 198.422 millions revenues (budget was 75 millions)

Apocalypse: 57 millions profit on 201.36 millions revenues

 

Screen gems title can tend to pre-sales some markets and like almost always have co-financier that shares the profits, what is really nice is that the profit is usually higher that the money put on the movie in advance during production.

[AnotherDayAnotherDollar]

4 minutes ago, Ronin46 said:

 

As I originally said "they have some titles with some value". Some will do well and some will not. But stating that Spiderman is the only thing they have so they should just sell there movie division is not something I agree with at all.

 

For example

Resident Evil is a pretty profitable franchise. The last 1 made over 300 million on a 40m budget, before that it was 240m on a 65m budget and before that 295m on a 57m budget.

 

Jumanji  last one 800m box office on 125m budget, previous one 961m on a 90m budget.

 

Bad Boys 90m budget over 400m box office

Venom  116m Budget and 800m plus box office

 

I would imagine those 4 titles would interest some other studio if made available. I can imagine all the tie ins with Venom, Morbius, Spiderman would also have a lot of interest.

 

They also own a lot of other franchises that could be revived or turned into tv series. 

 

Anyway you think they should sell because thay have nothing other than Spiderman. I disagree on that. I could talk myself into Ghostbusters, Venom, Resident Evil, Morbius, Kraven all bombing. But some will do well and some wont. The titles as a whole will still hold value as does Jumanji, Bad Boys and some of there older franchises.  

 

Having things of value is not enough if the ROI is in the single digits. Shareholders want good profit margins for their invested capital. I think SPE should sell because it's a poor performing division. I believe the capital spent there would bring better return if spent on GN&S division. I have no other reason to want to see the division divested other than seeing my bank account grow.

 

I don't even think SM is the most important asset SPE has because they can't mine the product in other areas. All merch royalties goes to a direct competitor. We'll see how those Spidey spin offs do. I'm not convinced they'll do as well as you think. Some fans are hyping themselves up because Venom did 850MM. 300MM of that thanks to Tencent who took most of the 25% gross. We'll see how it goes. Fox was unable to form a coherent and good shared universe with much more recognizable characters. DC has been unable to do the same so far. The BEST thing Sony has going for it is that a lot of the GA connects them with the MCU because they see the Marvel name.

 

I digress on talking about franchises. I think they are poor and not sustainable long term. You think otherwise. It's fine. The best thing SPE has is the TV division, but Sony cannot launch a streaming service since they lack scale, which is another reason to divest and double down on gaming that they are dominating. Disruptive services and products like Steam Deck, Gamepass and others can change things quickly as we saw with the Wii. Sony must be ahead of the game there. No pun intended.

 

I'm not the only shareholder who thinks that. Multiple people have called for Sony to spin off the Pictures division. This is nothing new.

[AnotherDayAnotherDollar]

2 minutes ago, Barnack said:

They did try to go mid budget after the success of Apocalypse but scaling down after.

 

From Sony point of view: 

Extinction: 44.45 million profit on 197.76 millions revenues

Afterlife: 62.28 million profit on 252 millions revenues

Retribution: 10 millions profit on 198.422 millions revenues (budget was 75 millions)

Apocalypse: 57 millions profit on 201.36 millions revenues

 

Screen gems title can tend to pre-sales some markets and like almost always have co-financier that shares the profits, what is really nice is that the profit is usually higher that the money put on the movie in advance during production.

 

That's pretty low profit for successful films. I know their numbers for Venom and the SM movies were good from the deadline numbers (not sure the profit of ITTS but I assume 9 figures for it). SIE has had bigger profits from their licensed Spider-Man games than these movies though, and of course, from a lot of first parties like GoW and TLOU since no royalty there. Much better ROI.

[Barnack]

38 minutes ago, AnotherDayAnotherDollar said:

but Sony cannot launch a streaming service since they lack scale,

I must admit that at one point the past I thought both Sony and Microsoft would have one by now, directly on the console has either a plus or in their Xbox pass or Sony PS now-ps plus, with their own show.

 

That said they were right and concentrating on game and streaming game was the way to go with them and it did not took long for the media part of console to be almost completely and utterly irrelevant part of them has either what come with a smartv or a $25 dongle took care of it for most customer now, now if you would release a console that do nothing else than game it would not be an issue, interest for them has a Blu-ray player or device able to stream movie on your network or usb drive, Netflix, etc... is irrelevant. When it was a giant part of the PS2 and PS3 success story the dvd than bluray part of them (The Xbox release that focused on that ended being an error, that hardware part became a cheap commodity).

 

Apple showing and even Netflix in some ways show that it is hard to make content, more to it than giving a lot of money to creator like it was fun to just repeat and say in the past.

 

 

Edited September 14, 2021 by Barnack

[Barnack]

4 minutes ago, AnotherDayAnotherDollar said:

 

That's pretty low profit for successful films. I know their numbers for Venom and the SM movies were good from the deadline numbers (not sure the profit of ITTS but I assume 9 figures for it). SIE has had bigger profits from their licensed Spider-Man games than these movies though, and of course, from a lot of first parties like GoW and TLOU since no royalty there. Much better ROI.

It is not I think it is really good, that not the movie profit, that the part of the profit going into Sony pocket, deadline and other do not tend to estimate the studio part of the profit and show total profit the movie made (outside the very publicized pre-sold affair like the liongates Hunger Games where that distinction is sometime made). They tend to be either co-financed or pre-sales some markets in advance to diminish risk, help cash flow, etc... but that reduce the return that goes to them when they work and investor will like to sign option on sequels when they invest on property or have option on total slate, making so that even if a franchise became riskless you either are obligated to let them invest in the new entry or just to keep it happy if it is not contractually forced can to do it, (sometime studio like Warner when they get partner with a slate deal will exclude Harry Potter from them in advance, which is a very rare non Disney big movies fully financed)

 

It is not an high profit industry that much, those 25% type of return are really in the upper side type, they are what they which for when they greenlight movies.

 

Spider man profits look like this (from Sony point of view, including merch when they had them or the 25 millions they get from Marvel after they sold them back to them)

 

Amazing Spider man 2:  14.5 millions on   603 millions in revenues

Amazing Spider man 1:  69.9 millions on   704 millions in revenues

Spider man 3........: 188.2 millions on 1,123 millions in revenues

Spider man 2........: 279.8 millions on 1,088 millions in revenues

 

That goes from 25% to 2%

[AnotherDayAnotherDollar]

8 minutes ago, Barnack said:

It is not I think it is really good, that not the movie profit, that the part of the profit going into Sony pocket, deadline and other do not tend to estimate the studio part of the profit and show total profit the movie made (outside the very publicized pre-sold affair like the liongates Hunger Games where that distinction is sometime made). They tend to be either co-financed or pre-sales some markets in advance to diminish risk, help cash flow, etc... but that reduce the return that goes to them when they work and investor will like to sign option on sequels when they invest on property or have option on total slate, making so that even if a franchise became riskless you either are obligated to let them invest in the new entry or just to keep it happy if it is not contractually forced can to do it, (sometime studio like Warner when they get partner with a slate deal will exclude Harry Potter from them in advance, which is a very rare non Disney big movies fully financed)

 

It is not an high profit industry that much, those 25% type of return are really in the upper side type, they are what they which for when they greenlight movies.

 

Spider man profits look like this (from Sony point of view, including merch when they had them or the 25 millions they get from Marvel after they sold them back to them)

 

Amazing Spider man 2:  14.5 millions on   603 millions in revenues

Amazing Spider man 1:  69.9 millions on   704 millions in revenues

Spider man 3........: 188.2 millions on 1,123 millions in revenues

Spider man 2........: 279.8 millions on 1,088 millions in revenues

 

That goes from 25% to 2%

 

Very good point about deadline not accounting for the profit being split between the financiers. Venom, for example, was split with Tencent and probably others.

 

I had no idea Sony's take was sliding that bad for SM movies. Makes sense why the 2015 deal happened in the first place. Meanwhile Sony's take in SM 2018 was in the 9 figure using a 20% royalty rate and Sony's own 70% digital to physical media ratio. Same for MM, which will likely hit 10MM sold by the end of this calendar year.

 

Thank you for providing those numbers.

25 minutes ago, Barnack said:

I must admit that at one point the past I thought both Sony and Microsoft would have one by now, directly on the console has either a plus or in their Xbox pass or Sony PS now-ps plus, with their own show.

 

That said they were right and concentrating on game and streaming game was the way to go with them and it did not took long for the media part of console to be almost completely and utterly irrelevant part of them has either what come with a smartv or a $25 dongle took care of it for most customer now, now if you would release a console that do nothing else than game it would not be an issue, interest for them has a Blu-ray player or device able to stream movie on your network or usb drive, Netflix, etc... is irrelevant. When it was a giant part of the PS2 and PS3 success story the dvd than bluray part of them.

 

Apple showing and even Netflix in some ways show that it is hard to make content, more to it than giving a lot of money to creator like it was fun to just repeat and say in the past.

 

 

 

Worth noting that Sony killed their live TV service (called Playstation Vue) as well. You are 100% right and I agree with your take. 

[Barnack]

6 minutes ago, AnotherDayAnotherDollar said:

I had no idea Sony's take was sliding that bad for SM movies.

And those are non adjusted for inflation figure.

 

In grossly adjusted (using release date) for 2014 dollars it look like this:

Amazing Spider man 2:  14.5 millions on   603 millions in revenues on 708 millions WW box office

Amazing Spider man 1:  72.1 millions on   725.9 millions in revenues on 781 millions WW box office

Spider man 3........: 214.9 millions on 1,282.20 millions in revenues on 1,021 millions WW box office

Spider man 2........: 350.7 millions on 1,363.52 millions in revenues on 996 millions WW Box office

 

Actual revenues wise it was down to about making 44% from their biggest success Spider Man 2. Yes it explain I think the deal they made, their profit was lower than the check they got from Marvel to have made a spider man movies on the last one, it was a net negative one in reality. And their co-financier were loosing money ($5 million) on it, making the number above look better than reality.

[AnotherDayAnotherDollar]

36 minutes ago, Barnack said:

And those are non adjusted for inflation figure.

 

In grossly adjusted (using release date) for 2014 dollars it look like this:

Amazing Spider man 2:  14.5 millions on   603 millions in revenues on 708 millions WW box office

Amazing Spider man 1:  72.1 millions on   725.9 millions in revenues on 781 millions WW box office

Spider man 3........: 214.9 millions on 1,282.20 millions in revenues on 1,021 millions WW box office

Spider man 2........: 350.7 millions on 1,363.52 millions in revenues on 996 millions WW Box office

 

Actual revenues wise it was down to about making 44% from their biggest success Spider Man 2. Yes it explain I think the deal they made, their profit was lower than the check they got from Marvel to have made a spider man movies on the last one, it was a net negative one in reality. And their co-financier were loosing money ($5 million) on it, making the number above look better than reality.

 

Very interesting indeed, especially on losing money in Amazing 2. They do get up to 3.5% from the BO gross from Marvel because of the 2011 merch sale agreement, but even that wasn't enough. Goes to show you that Sony's take on Venom was likely much lower than the 247MM deadline reported.

 

That actually strengthens my position on Sony divesting the unit and doubling down on GN&S.