Jump to content

TalismanRing

Deadline's Most Valuable Blockbuster Tournament (2016)

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

 

They seem to have a blanket go to number for marketing costs according to genre and budget of the movie.  Disney spends less on ads and marketing than Illumination but they had Moana and Zootopia expenses the same WW as Sing.   Meledandri isn't a genius as to quality of film but as to keeping the budgets lower and spending considerably more on marketing to receive huge box office..  That's not reflected anywhere in these budget break downs.  Ispottv last recorded Sing at $56m+ in just US TV ads with Moana around $25m  (a bit higher than Civil War last recorded at $19m).  Similarly, Deadline had Civil War WW prints & marketing even a bit above SS and BvS when WB marketed both those films over a far longer period of time than Disney and their US TV ad spend was higher as is typical with WB.

 

Some of the marketing costs might be covered by promotional partners.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



There is more to a movie total P&A than TV ads, but I would tend to agree that a movie like Sing seem to have use more money, at least domestic were we can see, a movie like Dory used little if I remember correctly, riding on the name and franchise strength.

 

One possible difference for a movie like Civil war is how much it must cost to move that cast around.

 

Even thought releasing cost is pretty much Deadline more accurate number (they are more wrong about movie budget, participation bonus and so on, those being absolutely private with often no available clue of what they are) they can still be off quite a bit on releasing.

 

For example, Amazing spider man 2 release estimated cost by deadline

Domestic: 90

Foreign: 84

Total: 174

 

Sony leaked releasing cost:

Domestic: 84.61

Foreign: 107.18

Total: 191.79

 

For 22 jump street

Domestic: 47.5

Foreign: 46.9

Total: 94.4

 

Sony leaked releasing cost:

Domestic: 38.65

Foreign: 19.435 (MGM was paying for some of it, that movie was heavily co-financed almost 50/50 with MGM and Lone Star)

Total: 58

 

They are in the really good ballpark specially domestic were they seem to do better than just using a formula with the movie budget and number of weeks in theater, but estimating world cost must be a mess and they must simply rely on some rules of thumb formula, it would be too much work to go see tv spending by markets, adjust for the individual exchange rate of that time and so on.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Telerian said:

 

Some of the marketing costs might be covered by promotional partners.

 

They are but that would be the case for other films as well.   Not all films are created equal in that regard. 

 

I'd imagine Sing would be far closer in ability to have marketing partners offset costs to Moana and Zootopia  than say the pre existing juggernaut Minions with it's plethora of partners that helped to offset much of it's enormous $600m marketing spend - or even Civil War & BvS that are also huge brands that attract marketing partners.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites



10 hours ago, TalismanRing said:

 

They are but that would be the case for other films as well.   Not all films are created equal in that regard. 

 

I'd imagine Sing would be far closer in ability to have marketing partners offset costs to Moana and Zootopia  than say the pre existing juggernaut Minions with it's plethora of partners that helped to offset much of it's enormous $600m marketing spend - or even Civil War & BvS that are also huge brands that attract marketing partners.

 

Pets had promotional partners, things like Happy Meals and even Broadband etc Disney have a partnership with Subway for certain films for example and Bond has over a dozen promotional partners most if all are premium brands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think deadline "estimater" has a good grasp on those deal.

 

For example they were in the good ball park for Spectre:

http://deadline.com/2016/03/spectre-profit-box-office-2015-james-bond-1201723528/

 

Deadline estimate:

Domestic releasing cost: 56

Foreign releasing cost: 85

 

Sony target cost (movie was released after the leak after all, so cannot use the real numbers):

Domestic release cost:

Around 58 million to 65 million depending of the scenarios (50 million in advertising)

Foreign: 

Around 83.5 to 94 million (with around 60 million in advertising)

 

Deadline estimate are not bad at all 

 

And not many franchise get as good brands has Bond like Jonwo pointed, the smarthphone deal placement on the last Bond had a 55 million value, 50 million value in smarthphone ads that would feature Bond and 5 million cash (some of it going to Daniel Craig thought).

 

Possibly that those huge title use partner to just have a ridiculously big saturation marketing wise (with exec being fearful to not do it) more than doing a cheap release versus a non-ip movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





4. Finding Dory

 

Net Profit: $296m

Cash Return: 1.58

 

Quote

Its $200 million production cost is higher than many animated films, as is the $51 million outlay in Participations, Residuals and Off-the-Tops that was unavoidable in bringing back DeGeneres and Brooks, and adding a distinguished voice cast around them. But who cares? It allowed Disney to own several summer weekends, and put up eye-popping numbers in the ancillary waterfall. At the end of the day, Finding Dory generated $804 million in global revenues. It put up $507 million and generated $296 million, and the Cash on Cash Return is 1.58.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites





1 hour ago, cannastop said:

http://deadline.com/2017/03/finding-dory-box-office-profit-2016-1202055759/

 

Quite the surprise. Finding Dory only made an estimated $296m in profit, just $2m more than Zootopia.

 

Well, it had a bigger budget and starrier cast and director which meant bigger participation.  That helped offset the US v China receipts.  Deadline also tagged it with $165m for P&A....

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by TalismanRing
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



6 hours ago, Olive said:

RO is #3.

 

Those are extremelly weak revenue.

 

theatrical revenue: 486.5 million

World HE: 182 million

World TV: 167 million

 

Only 835.5 million revenue on a 486.5 million theatrical movie ? That is a 58% revenue from movie theater, I don't remember any movie being close to perform so poorly in the past, usually doing around 50% of your movies revenue from theater was flopping at home video and the worst blockbuster could do.

 

Sure merchandising are not there, so maybe it went to a billion in revenue, but still, 350 million after the theatrical windows without merchandising is less than what Hancock did and that was a 625 million movie at the box office movie, Rogue One did over 1 billion, not a lot from China and is a collector item.

 

The movie 2012 (770 million at the box office) for a comparison

World HE: 205.232 million

World TV: 155.73 million

 

If those deadline estimate are close to the reality the HE revenue decline was really steep last year.

Edited by Barnack
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



3. Rogue One

 

Net Profit: $319m

Cash Return: 1.62

 

Quote

It was the third Star Wars film to cross the billion-dollar mark. The film came in at a $200 million production cost, not surprising since the extra work put in to fix the ending. Our experts say the Participations and Off-the-Tops reached $62 million, which put total costs at $515 million, and revenues at $835 million. That left Disney with a a net profit of $319 million and a Cash on Cash Return of 1.62, pretty astounding bottom-line numbers for a spinoff that had its share of troubles during production. Bring on the next spinoff, Han Solo.

 

2. Deadpool

 

Net Profit: $322m

Cash Return: 1.99

 

Quote

Total revenues were $647 million, and costs were $324 million, a figure that included nearly $90 million in Participations, Residuals and Off-the-Tops that account for payouts after the film broke even. That left $322 million in net profit for Fox, and a Cash on Cash Return of 1.99. One of the greatest success stories in recent movie history.

 

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites



5 hours ago, Barnack said:

 

Those are extremelly weak revenue.

 

theatrical revenue: 486.5 million

World HE: 182 million

World TV: 167 million

Only 835.5 million revenue on a 486.5 million theatrical movie ? That is a 58% revenue from movie theater, I don't remember any movie being close to perform so poorly in the past, usually doing around 50% of your movies revenue from theater was flopping at home video and the worst blockbuster could do.

 

Sure merchandising are not there, so maybe it went to a billion in revenue, but still, 350 million after the theatrical windows without merchandising is less than what Hancock did and that was a 625 million movie at the box office movie, Rogue One did over 1 billion, not a lot from China and is a collector item.

 

The movie 2012 (770 million at the box office) for a compirason

World HE: 205.232 million

World TV: 155.73 million

 

If those deadline estimate are close to the reality the HE revenue decline has really steep last year.

 

 

Home video has no doubt left it's peak far behind but I'm not sure they have a handle yet on exactly how much Streaming Media is bringing to the table because studios are so secretive about it (the more they hide they less they have to share)

 

Then there are deals like Disney's with Netflix where they lease out their catalogue but with the new films being the big attraction/heavy hitters in that deal.


Zootopia, Finding Dory, Civil War and Jungle Book all hit Netflix last fall just weeks after their Home video release.  How would Deadline even calculate and apportion that $300m a year

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



1. The Secret Life Of Pets

 

Net Profit: $374m

Cash Return: 2.18

 

Quote

Its total revenues were $691 million, but its costs were $316 million. That included a reasonable $40 million in Participations and Residuals and Off-the-Tops. That leaves a net profit for Universal that is $374 million, for a Cash on Cash Return of 2.18. That made The Secret Life Of Pets the only film to cross beyond the 2 threshold in that all important figure that tells Revenue against Cost.

Edited by cannastop
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



On 3/29/2017 at 6:19 PM, Barnack said:

 

deadpool vs Rogue one will be an interesting one, one big advantage for Rogue One will be participation deal wise, Kennedy probably has a fat deal, but you probably do not need much for the actors (specially that you do not needed to lock them sequels wise), while Kinberg and Reynolds must have made a fortune on Deadpool....

The budget difference of 140 million is already pretty much gone just with the rental, should be close.

 

 

Rogue One: 

Net Profit: $319m


Deadpool:

Net Profit: $322m

 

Less than 1% difference, should probably just put them equal with a who knows...

 

Edited by Barnack
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.

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...

Important Information

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