Episode IV:A NEW MOUSE | DISNEY | IT IS DONE

[Lordmandeep]

Cmasterclay and others sound like Coal power Supporters

 

 

Movies and shows cost too much to make for small studios and people are not going to spend 15-20 bucks to watch some random original movie in large enough numbers to support such films.

 

Makes more sense such films are made and streaming services pay for production where you can maintain the diversity and get a hold of more money. 

Edited December 14, 2017 by Lordmandeep

[somebody85]

1 minute ago, Cmasterclay said:

Fuck this shit and the stanning for a soulless corporate bully because people like their cartoons. I ain't holding back on that, sorry. This could have devastating long term ramifications for the film and media industry and eventually the entire economy as mergers and buyouts and liquidations become larger and more prevalent. Thousands of people are going to lose their jobs because of this. The quality of product we as a consumer receive will also likely drop. And the praise and gain for a massive corporation will only encourage more companies to do this. We're headed for an America where five or six large companies own virtually everything. That's not an overreaction in my view, thats what evidence suggests. This is bad bad bad news.  Unless that's the country you want.

But what else could have happened? How else do you want people to react? If Disney didn't buy them, some other big media company would have. The situation as far as jobs would have likely been the same. 

The media landscape has changed so much in recent years. What did you want Disney to do? Blockbuster was a giant and got destroyed by Netflix and Redbox. 

I'd rather be optimistic than fear monger but I totally understand the concerns. And those companies could already buy anything if they wanted to. Look at how much money Amazon has.

[franfar]

 

[somebody85]

4 minutes ago, Darth Suburious said:

But but but know we get X-men and Fantatic Four in the MCU. That is worth thousands of people loosing their jobs. 

But would they have kept their jobs if it was Verizon, Comcast, Apple, etc....no, it would have been the same.

[XO21]

Here's the original source

 

Disney chairman-CEO Bob Iger said during a media call on Thursday morning said the studio is expected to keep Fox Searchlight and Fox 2000 in the studio fold on the movie side. Iger said the Fox assets would allow Disney to expand its tentpole movie business. "But we also like being in the business of making quality movies. We're very impressed with what Fox Searchlight has accomplished from a quality perspective, and with Fox 2000, we fully intend to stay in those businesses," he told reporters. He also added there is a place for an R-rated Deadpool.

 

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/disney-fox-deal-marks-seismic-shift-hollywoods-studio-system-1067517

[filmlover]

5 minutes ago, Lordmandeep said:

Cmasterclay and others sound like Coal power Supporters

 

 

Movies and shows cost too much to make for small studios and people are not going to spend 15-20 bucks to watch some random original movie in large enough numbers to support such films.

 

Makes more sense such films are made and streaming services pay for production where you can maintain the diversity and get a hold of more money. 

As we've seen in recent weeks, people still go to the movies for the non-tentpoles when they appeal to them so...

 

[Cmasterclay]

4 minutes ago, somebody85 said:

But what else could have happened? How else do you want people to react? If Disney didn't buy them, some other big media company would have. The situation as far as jobs would have likely been the same. 

The media landscape has changed so much in recent years. What did you want Disney to do? Blockbuster was a giant and got destroyed by Netflix and Redbox. 

I'd rather be optimistic than fear monger but I totally understand the concerns. And those companies could already buy anything if they wanted to. Look at how much money Amazon has.

Their assets should have been broken down and sold off to smaller companies separately. Making this large a sale to one entity is my problem. Sales this size shouldn't exist.

Edited December 14, 2017 by Cmasterclay

[YM!]

I’m thinking anti trust laws will prevent this.

[Lordmandeep]

6 minutes ago, Darth Suburious said:

But but but know we get X-men and Fantatic Four in the MCU. That is worth thousands of people loosing their jobs. 

 

 

Like you guys give a crap when you support the globalist agenda that causes millions of jobs to be outsourced.

 

[Cmasterclay]

Lordmandeep yelling into the void at me again. Thanks for quoting him so I can see him calling for the literal end of all non franchise movies!!

[boomboom234]

6 minutes ago, Lordmandeep said:

Cmasterclay and others sound like Coal power Supporters

 

 

Movies and shows cost too much to make for small studios and people are not going to spend 15-20 bucks to watch some random original movie in large enough numbers to support such films.

 

Makes more sense such films are made and streaming services pay for production where you can maintain the diversity and get a hold of more money. 

A non sequitur straw man argument  

[ecstasy]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Lordmandeep]

2 minutes ago, filmlover said:

As we've seen in recent weeks, people still go to the movies for the non-tentpoles when they appeal to them so...

 

 

 

and how many fail and dont make money?

 

It was fine before, but even a small film cost 30 million bucks. 

[Barnack]

1 hour ago, boomboom234 said:

It 100% is a merger with 21st century fox becoming part of Disney the only parts not are the news divisions which are being spun off to make a new company

Becoming part tend to be an acquisition not a merger, merger is an PR term to make it like something softer and easier to go throught (very often, there is some case of real merger).

 

 

A merger occurs when two separate entities combine forces to create a new, joint organization. An acquisition refers to the takeover of one entity by another. A new company does not emerge from an acquisition; rather, the smaller company is often consumed and ceases to exist, and its assets become part of the larger company. Acquisitions – sometimes called takeovers – generally carry a more negative connotation than mergers. For this reason, many acquiring companies refer to an acquisition as a merger even when it is clearly not.

 

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/021815/what-difference-between-merger-and-acquisition.asp

 

It is not Disney and Fox merging together creating a new partnership called Disney-Fox, it is Disney buying asset from Fox, from what i understand.

[somebody85]

Just now, Cmasterclay said:

Their assets should have been broken down and sold off to smaller companies separately. Making this large a sale to one entity is my problem. Sales this side shouldn't exist.

I understand. But they do and 20th Century Fox are the ones who took the offer. And it would have happened with one of those other huge companies if not Disney. That's capitalism, you can't stop it. 

I know how evil Disney can be as far as theme park stuff, theater chains, etc but I would rather hope for the best than be like this is the worst thing ever. At least this deal has perks as far the properties stuff and Iger staying on board. That might not have been the case with Comcast.

Entertainment is going to evolve whether we like it or not.

[Kvikk Lunsj]

6 minutes ago, somebody85 said:

But would they have kept their jobs if it was Verizon, Comcast, Apple, etc....no, it would have been the same.

More jobs would been kept most likely since they would still need a film division. I would still be against. 

[ecstasy]

3 minutes ago, Cmasterclay said:

Their assets should have been broken down and sold off to smaller companies separately. Making this large a sale to one entity is my problem. Sales this size shouldn't exist.

Broken down by who?  Fox isn't in Bankruptcy. They can sell their assets however they please. 

[filmlover]

Just now, Lordmandeep said:

 

 

and how many fail and dont make money?

 

It was fine before, but even a small film cost 30 million bucks. 

And how many pricey tentpoles do studios make and bomb spectacularly each year?

 

Once again, your "argument" falls on deaf ears.

[Lordmandeep]

Just now, ecstasy said:

Broken down by who?  Fox isn't in Bankruptcy. They can sell their assets however they please. 

 

Cmasterclay wants socialized Hollywood. 

[DAJK]

5 minutes ago, XO21 said:

Here's the original source

 

Disney chairman-CEO Bob Iger said during a media call on Thursday morning said the studio is expected to keep Fox Searchlight and Fox 2000 in the studio fold on the movie side. Iger said the Fox assets would allow Disney to expand its tentpole movie business. "But we also like being in the business of making quality movies. We're very impressed with what Fox Searchlight has accomplished from a quality perspective, and with Fox 2000, we fully intend to stay in those businesses," he told reporters. He also added there is a place for an R-rated Deadpool.

 

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/disney-fox-deal-marks-seismic-shift-hollywoods-studio-system-1067517

At least Bob Iger has got a good head on his shoulders. From this, it really does look like he cares about the quality of product his company puts out.

 

That being said, I agree with @Cmasterclay. This is bad, baaaaaaad for the industry and the economy. Monopolies shouldn't exist, and this is really starting to look like one.