Wednesday: Minions 11.1, IO 2.6, JW 2.2

[Dementeleus]

Universal didn't spend that money, it s companies that paid Universal to use the Minions brand.

 

The amount mentioned is the money the companies spent on their own advertising for these branded products. They didn't pay Universal $593m -- in fact, we have no idea what sort of contract(s) exist between Uni and its partners. The figure is simply the combined marketing/promotional budget for all of Uni's Minion partners.

 

If we're gonna make any assumption about Universal's own spending, it's probably in the same 130-170m range as all major worldwide tentpoles.

[Dementeleus]

 

First post here... and a bit of a multi-part question and really directed at multiple people. Quoted you, gb0708, because your interest in the Terminator BO reminds me of my renewed on-and-off interest in (casually, relatively speaking) following BO receipts over the past 15+ years. For me, MM:FR brought me back to the numbers and the ensuing analysis/prediction of the movie and the rest of the BO. With that, over the past six weeks or so of reading threads, I'm still a bit dumbfounded about how this all works. That said...    

 

 

Gopher/RTH (or whomever), I assume you guys have access to regional market numbers (I've seen RTH list engagements)? Does that include per screening numbers (as well as showtimes) from any given individual theaters? I ask because so many numbers are given in large gross numbers and a lot of predictions/percentages seem to be predicated on percentage changes that can become distorted from breakouts/holidays/flukes. Success seems much more determined on opening big and staying big (thus holding onto locations) much more than movies traditionally did in the 80s, 90s, and even into the 2000s. Therefore, many slow-starting blockbusters from the past would never survive a lackluster reception in this era. I guess I'm wondering if distributors/exhibitors are too busy chasing immediate gratification that they quickly knee-cap what might have been a traditional "leggy" movie for front-loaded horror movies/big OW blockbusters with the big returns up front and unnecessarily cripple the more modest movies that would ultimately bring in a lot more money?

 

How much are location holds determined individually by exhibitor/distributor/local theater manager based on performance at particular locations versus analysis of these broader gross numbers? We, the public, can get per theater average through BOM and other sites, but that does not account for per screening average. I've just been really perplexed following two markets I'm most familiar with (Chicago and Houston) and the variation (or consistency) among particular chains or how one theater (even from the same chain) will split times or movies vastly different than a theater 10-15 miles away. 

 

For example, on June 13th (Saturday), my local AMC (twenty something screens) had 43 showings of JW, like 17 showings of Insidious: Chapter 3, 15 showings of PP2, 5 showings of Beyond the Mask, two showings of Home, a matinee of Paddington, and some other weird choices. Mad Max: Fury Road, on the other hand, had screenings at 7:40 PM and Midnight. Other theaters in the area had more balanced showings of the current releases or really bizarre selections themselves. But the question is, does the location average for PP2 lump in those 15 screenings for PP2 against the 2 screenings for MM:FR for the location average? Interestingly enough, Poltergeist had a longer hold there than MM:FR, and of this week, MM:FR (using that because I paid the most attention to it) is not playing in the Houston metro area but is still playing in Austin, Dallas, San Antonio, and Lufkin among others. Is it suggestive that Houston was a very weak market for the movie or was that self-fulfilling based on theater managers in many local theaters giving it few screenings anticipating low demand for sci-fi/action (plus R rating) and dragging down per location averages that in effect, made the Houston market appear underwhelming (seems Regal/Santikos were still bullish on Mad Max — Cinemark and [most] AMC much less so)? I know on weekends (at least until recently), AMC is still pushing out 50 Shades and Paul Blart 2 on Saturdays in both Chicago and Houston.

 

I found the MM:FR per location averages interesting over the many weeks because relative to the number of theaters, its averages have been far better than movies in similar circumstances which would make me think it would lose locations at a lesser clip than other movies. To take AOU, MM:FR performed better two weeks in a row but still lost more locations relative to AOU each of those weeks per location average. There were others as well that have now dropped off (and now San Andreas’ averages are falling steeply) which means  either MM:FR is/was underperforming at those locations, or it must be seriously over performing in others. The other explanation is that locations dropped MM:FR because of commitments to other movies anticipating MM:FR would decline much more steeply. Is this what happened when JW cut the legs out of the competition by taking audience from MM:FR and other action movies (MM:FR wasn’t able to capitalize on spillover as much by adults due to lack of screenings by that time)? Universal could then capitalize by propping up the numbers of PP2 that weekend leading to a massive hemorrhage for MM:FR as more locations assumed it was finished while PP2 would hold longer? Did Disney use IO as leverage to prop up AOU in this manner as well? I guess I’m just confused how exactly the decisions get made, and if they are getting made efficiently taking into account rebounds/drops on a local market basis or by looking at the broader percentage numbers?

 

Bringing it to this week, should we expect MMXXL to hold locations much better going forward with an interpretation that it has legs contrary to the first movie, or will industry people view MMXXL percentage drops as being more attributable to poor release scheduling with an expectation of returning to more anticipated declines? In the latter case, if MMXXL has legs, shedding a lot of locations will just be handicapping its legs and more-or-less wedging its ultimate numbers where they feel they belong? I just wonder if a movie like MMXXL is underperforming/overperforming in certain markets as well.

 

For Minions, JW, IO, I guess, as it is with this era, that people are often forced to see only what the theaters give us. As anecdotal as it is, I know so many people that want to see movies they “missed” in their opening weeks (and are too lazy/inconvenient to travel to theaters further away) that get funneled (or peer-pressured) into the longer-lasting blockbusters more because of a desire to go to the movies than a real desire to see that particular movie.

 

TL;DR Sorry, I didn’t intend to write so much. Gopher/RTH/BO people, how much do per screening averages factor into per location averages? Using MM:FR as a recent case study above, how do location averages and local markets factor into holds versus broad examination of the gross numbers/percentage changes? Is everything just more (at least at the major studios) about instant front-loading profit (necessary to recoup marketing/establishing instant franchises?) often times leading to premature/crippling runs for movies that would historically been more profitable on their current projections? Are there just too many situations now where decision-makers are forced into making commitments to movies based on skewed numbers/anticipated performance only to realize rather quickly how incorrect they were (like IMAX commitments for Tomorrowland and T:G) but in an intractable situation? Just really bewildered following BO receipts again after really not doing so much for several years. Thanks. 

 

 

Welcome! That's an epic first post. (I spoiled-tagged my reply just to keep my post less lengthy).

 

Rth is probably the one person who can really give broad insight into your questions. Boner Omega might be able to give some insight as to how his particular theater operates. At a guess, a theater is contractually bound to keep a movie for X amount of time (and perhaps even X amount of time on certain screens, or at a certain screen count), and it probably varies from movie to movie, depending on the distributor. Beyond that, a theater will essentially gauge interest and allocate screens on that basis, and then adjust as needed -- I know Boner has mentioned occasionally about his bosses booking X amount of screens for a movie he doesn't think will fill the demand.

[The Futurist]

The amount mentioned is the money the companies spent on their own advertising for these branded products. They didn't pay Universal $593m -- in fact, we have no idea what sort of contract(s) exist between Uni and its partners. The figure is simply the combined marketing/promotional budget for all of Uni's Minion partners.

 

If we're gonna make any assumption about Universal's own spending, it's probably in the same 130-170m range as all major worldwide tentpoles.

 

Well, Tic Tac paid Universal to have Yellow banana Tic Tacs.

 

Once Tic Tac has paid Universal, they don't have to spend any more money, they just release the product ( with or without minions, the company who owns tic tac will still spend money to sell, produce and ditribute tic tacs) with the minions on it.

Brands didn't spend money to promote the Minions outside of Universal's marketing campaign.

They just want the Minions brand on their product.

That s how I see it to but some details probably elude me.

Edited July 16, 2015 by The Futurist

[K1stpierre]

First post here... and a bit of a multi-part question and really directed at multiple people. Quoted you, gb0708, because your interest in the Terminator BO reminds me of my renewed on-and-off interest in (casually, relatively speaking) following BO receipts over the past 15+ years. For me, MM:FR brought me back to the numbers and the ensuing analysis/prediction of the movie and the rest of the BO. With that, over the past six weeks or so of reading threads, I'm still a bit dumbfounded about how this all works. That said...

Gopher/RTH (or whomever), I assume you guys have access to regional market numbers (I've seen RTH list engagements)? Does that include per screening numbers (as well as showtimes) from any given individual theaters? I ask because so many numbers are given in large gross numbers and a lot of predictions/percentages seem to be predicated on percentage changes that can become distorted from breakouts/holidays/flukes. Success seems much more determined on opening big and staying big (thus holding onto locations) much more than movies traditionally did in the 80s, 90s, and even into the 2000s. Therefore, many slow-starting blockbusters from the past would never survive a lackluster reception in this era. I guess I'm wondering if distributors/exhibitors are too busy chasing immediate gratification that they quickly knee-cap what might have been a traditional "leggy" movie for front-loaded horror movies/big OW blockbusters with the big returns up front and unnecessarily cripple the more modest movies that would ultimately bring in a lot more money?

How much are location holds determined individually by exhibitor/distributor/local theater manager based on performance at particular locations versus analysis of these broader gross numbers? We, the public, can get per theater average through BOM and other sites, but that does not account for per screening average. I've just been really perplexed following two markets I'm most familiar with (Chicago and Houston) and the variation (or consistency) among particular chains or how one theater (even from the same chain) will split times or movies vastly different than a theater 10-15 miles away.

For example, on June 13th (Saturday), my local AMC (twenty something screens) had 43 showings of JW, like 17 showings of Insidious: Chapter 3, 15 showings of PP2, 5 showings of Beyond the Mask, two showings of Home, a matinee of Paddington, and some other weird choices. Mad Max: Fury Road, on the other hand, had screenings at 7:40 PM and Midnight. Other theaters in the area had more balanced showings of the current releases or really bizarre selections themselves. But the question is, does the location average for PP2 lump in those 15 screenings for PP2 against the 2 screenings for MM:FR for the location average? Interestingly enough, Poltergeist had a longer hold there than MM:FR, and of this week, MM:FR (using that because I paid the most attention to it) is not playing in the Houston metro area but is still playing in Austin, Dallas, San Antonio, and Lufkin among others. Is it suggestive that Houston was a very weak market for the movie or was that self-fulfilling based on theater managers in many local theaters giving it few screenings anticipating low demand for sci-fi/action (plus R rating) and dragging down per location averages that in effect, made the Houston market appear underwhelming (seems Regal/Santikos were still bullish on Mad Max — Cinemark and [most] AMC much less so)? I know on weekends (at least until recently), AMC is still pushing out 50 Shades and Paul Blart 2 on Saturdays in both Chicago and Houston.

I found the MM:FR per location averages interesting over the many weeks because relative to the number of theaters, its averages have been far better than movies in similar circumstances which would make me think it would lose locations at a lesser clip than other movies. To take AOU, MM:FR performed better two weeks in a row but still lost more locations relative to AOU each of those weeks per location average. There were others as well that have now dropped off (and now San Andreas’ averages are falling steeply) which means either MM:FR is/was underperforming at those locations, or it must be seriously over performing in others. The other explanation is that locations dropped MM:FR because of commitments to other movies anticipating MM:FR would decline much more steeply. Is this what happened when JW cut the legs out of the competition by taking audience from MM:FR and other action movies (MM:FR wasn’t able to capitalize on spillover as much by adults due to lack of screenings by that time)? Universal could then capitalize by propping up the numbers of PP2 that weekend leading to a massive hemorrhage for MM:FR as more locations assumed it was finished while PP2 would hold longer? Did Disney use IO as leverage to prop up AOU in this manner as well? I guess I’m just confused how exactly the decisions get made, and if they are getting made efficiently taking into account rebounds/drops on a local market basis or by looking at the broader percentage numbers?

Bringing it to this week, should we expect MMXXL to hold locations much better going forward with an interpretation that it has legs contrary to the first movie, or will industry people view MMXXL percentage drops as being more attributable to poor release scheduling with an expectation of returning to more anticipated declines? In the latter case, if MMXXL has legs, shedding a lot of locations will just be handicapping its legs and more-or-less wedging its ultimate numbers where they feel they belong? I just wonder if a movie like MMXXL is underperforming/overperforming in certain markets as well.

For Minions, JW, IO, I guess, as it is with this era, that people are often forced to see only what the theaters give us. As anecdotal as it is, I know so many people that want to see movies they “missed” in their opening weeks (and are too lazy/inconvenient to travel to theaters further away) that get funneled (or peer-pressured) into the longer-lasting blockbusters more because of a desire to go to the movies than a real desire to see that particular movie.

TL;DR Sorry, I didn’t intend to write so much. Gopher/RTH/BO people, how much do per screening averages factor into per location averages? Using MM:FR as a recent case study above, how do location averages and local markets factor into holds versus broad examination of the gross numbers/percentage changes? Is everything just more (at least at the major studios) about instant front-loading profit (necessary to recoup marketing/establishing instant franchises?) often times leading to premature/crippling runs for movies that would historically been more profitable on their current projections? Are there just too many situations now where decision-makers are forced into making commitments to movies based on skewed numbers/anticipated performance only to realize rather quickly how incorrect they were (like IMAX commitments for Tomorrowland and T:G) but in an intractable situation? Just really bewildered following BO receipts again after really not doing so much for several years. Thanks.

That's quite a post...... a new way of saying hi

Edited July 16, 2015 by K1stpierre

[a2k]

Another decent # for IO, Minions will struggle to get legs like these from w3 when the family crowd is burnt off. 350m is still likely but IO is heading to 370m.

 

Below, average refers to the average of the fourth Mon + Tue + Wed for each movie. (Because one day can be an anomaly, I used the average of 3 days)

 

TS3 averaged 3.07m and made 66.5m more. 21.66x

DM2 averaged 2.38m and made 53.05m more. 22.28x

Using Wed's 2.6m, IO averages 2.76m and will be on 292.5m on Wed. I don't think it can add 77.5m (28x) more.

 

DM2's multiplier, 22.28x will give it 61.4m more. ~354m.

24x gives it 66.24m. 358.74m.

25x leads to 361.5m.

So I think ~360m is the ceiling for IO. I would bet on 355m.

 

(I know IO had started tracking ahead of TS3 and fell back because of Minions. But different movies face competition at different stages and the tracking changes.)

Edited July 16, 2015 by a2k

[kowan]

Yeah all the IMAX are gone. It's still playing in 3D at some theaters though. I can see both Terminator and Jurassic World done to 2,500 screens this weekend.

I don't see JW losing that much. Terminator will definitely lose so much more since it's losing IMAX and is the less watched. 

Edited July 16, 2015 by kowan

[Gautske]

Welcome! That's an epic first post. (I spoiled-tagged my reply just to keep my post less lengthy).

 

Rth is probably the one person who can really give broad insight into your questions. Boner Omega might be able to give some insight as to how his particular theater operates. At a guess, a theater is contractually bound to keep a movie for X amount of time (and perhaps even X amount of time on certain screens, or at a certain screen count), and it probably varies from movie to movie, depending on the distributor. Beyond that, a theater will essentially gauge interest and allocate screens on that basis, and then adjust as needed -- I know Boner has mentioned occasionally about his bosses booking X amount of screens for a movie he doesn't think will fill the demand.

 

Thanks for the welcome, Tele. I've agreed with several of your posts in the past, but finally decided to weigh in — and subsequently, let out some of these pent in curiosities in a much longer than intended post.

 

I've asked these questions elsewhere and gotten some conflicting answers and a lot of shrugs. A couple of friends I know that worked in theaters for a long time told me that the managers often don't know what they're doing when lining up screenings and were poorly paid leading to high turn-over in their opinion. I guess I just hope that it looks like people know more about what they're doing than it often seems, but I think that might be a big ask in this industry.

 

I was hoping one of the knowledgable people here would know the specifics because I'm still confused how locations/screens are counted. I know several people that skipped MM:FR and/or other movies because of limited showings that are often at very strange times. Sometimes when I'm at the theater, I'll hop into screenings of newer movies just to gauge the audience, and many times, many of those screenings are fairly empty.

 

I guess I just pine for the days when the local theaters with 6-8 screens had 6-8 movies. Now many theaters have 24 screens and not many more movies. 

[Dementeleus]

Once Tic Tac has paid Universal, they don't have to spend any more money, they just release the product ( with or without minions, the company who owns tic tac will still spend money to sell, produce and ditribute tic tacs) with the minions on it.

 

But they don't just release it -- they buy billboards for their product; stand-ups, placards, they make TV commercials, they advertise in newspapers, TV, radio... etc etc etc. That's what this combined total is... not the amount that the companies paid Universal (which, in fact, could be a huge range from actual payments to Uni licensing Minions for a percentage of net or gross profits, etc).

[grim22]

But they don't just release it -- they buy billboards for their product; stand-ups, placards, they make TV commercials, they advertise in newspapers, TV, radio... etc etc etc. That's what this combined total is... not the amount that the companies paid Universal (which, in fact, could be a huge range from actual payments to Uni licensing Minions for a percentage of net or gross profits, etc).

And they will surely have something in the contract which says something like "Each packet or billboard should have the release date in big font clearly visible" or such.

[goldenstate5]

Not too surprising, Disney didn't have faith in Frozen merchandise either. Remember how the supply could not meet the demand at Christmas?

I do suppose there will be an upswing in IO merchandise due to its popularity (though not on Frozen's scale, of course).

Wasn't there a similar "demand > supply" situation with the original Toy Story, that was actually referenced in-universe in Toy Story 2?

 

Yup, Buzz Lightyear toys were gone from the shelves for three straight months due to a lack of faith on merch. 

 

I know that there's already a faux Triple Dent Gum that Disney has yet to release... for some reason. It's literally the cheapest merch ever that people will probably buy in droves: make an agreement with a gum company, stick a new label on it.

 

Hopefully that and other forms of merch (like a Bing Bong-styled mug that sold out VERY quickly at WDW and has yet to return) will be brought in by Christmastime.

[Finnick]

Edited September 29, 2019 by Finnick

[grim22]

It is official Minions:11.5 Jurassic World:2.2

Exact same drop as Inside Out from Monday to Wednesday.

[a2k]

It is official Minions:11.5 Jurassic World:2.2

 

Edited using 11.5m instead of 11.1m

 

1st Mon to 1st Wed drop for IO and Minions.

 

IO

Mon 10.48m

Wed 9.37m

-10.6%

 

Minions

Mon 12.94m

Wed 11.5m

-11.1%

Edited July 16, 2015 by a2k

[MinaTakla]

Very good for Minions, so it's not a 34% drop after all, more like maybe 31%? 

 

MINIONS is still holding the record for highest ever 6 day haul for an animated film:

MINIONS - 157

TS3 - 154

Shrek 2 - 140

Shrek 3 - 144

Edited July 16, 2015 by MinaTakla

[superduperm]

It is official Minions:11.5 Jurassic World:2.2

So JW's Wednesday actually increased from Monday?

 

That's pretty significant...

[superduperm]

Very good for Minions, so it's not a 34% drop after all, more like maybe 31%? 

 

MINIONS is still holding the record for highest ever 6 day haul for an animated film:

MINIONS - 157

TS3 - 154

Shrek 2 - 140

Shrek 3 - 144

TS3 will still (hopefully) hold on to record for highest opening week, right?

[The Dark Alfred]

Below, average refers to the average of the fourth Mon + Tue + Wed for each movie. (Because one day can be an anomaly, I used the average of 3 days)

TS3 averaged 3.07m and made 66.5m more. 21.66x

DM2 averaged 2.38m and made 53.05m more. 22.28x

Using Wed's 2.6m, IO averages 2.76m and will be on 292.5m on Wed. I don't think it can add 77.5m (28x) more.

DM2's multiplier, 22.28x will give it 61.4m more. ~354m.

24x gives it 66.24m. 358.74m.

25x leads to 361.5m.

So I think ~360m is the ceiling for IO. I would bet on 355m.

(I know IO had started tracking ahead of TS3 and fell back because of Minions. But different movies face competition at different stages and the tracking changes.)

I don't see why IO can't have better late legs than TS3. It held well against Minions and literally have no competition the whole of August.

[MrFanaticGuy34]

Um..Pixels? Fantastic Four? They say hi.

[Finnick]

 

IO:2.58

Edited May 25, 2019 by Finnick

[MinaTakla]

TS3 will still (hopefully) hold on to record for highest opening week, right?

Minions might get the crown for highest opening week ever if it crosses 10 million tomorrow which it probably will, and in this case it will be the highest ever week 1 opener for an animated film. Pretty significant and not sure if it will be reported on news sites (they tend to care about OWs more than full weeks though).

TS3's week 1 haul is 167.