aabattery Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 On 12/15/2017 at 8:09 AM, Critically Acclaimed Panda said: A loose definition of monopoly needs 90% market share for one company. Disney + Fox isn't close. On 12/15/2017 at 9:17 AM, Critically Acclaimed Panda said: I know what you're saying. I'm simply saying you were wrong. And yes, things work by definition. I was already being generous by defining a monopoly by 90% market power, many industrial economists are even more stingy with their definition for a monopoly. I'm also saying the roughly 30-40% market share Disney-Fox will have (possibly less, as we shouldn't expect Disney to crank out as many movies with Fox as they were, and there's a good chance Sony, Paramount or WB start producing more) is not going to create an uncompetitive environment where the other major studios can't keep up and compete. Bumping these so people can remind themselves what a monopoly is. The deal is dumb and bad, but a monopoly it is not. 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronJimbo Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, That Ambitious Guy said: I dislike Disney. yeah I'm more of a film-makier type of guy rather than a film-studio type Edited April 13, 2018 by IronJimbo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walt Disney Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 3 minutes ago, AJG said: How do so many people not know what a monopoly is? In the United States, I blame the declining education system. I would like to hear the answer for the rest of the world. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
75Live Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 1 minute ago, aabattery said: Bumping these so people can remind themselves what a monopoly is. The deal is dumb and bad, but a monopoly it is not. you can tell the only Monopoly some people around here actually get is this one 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeCee Posted April 13, 2018 Author Share Posted April 13, 2018 3 hours ago, That Ambitious Guy said: Getting my ignore list ready for people supporting this deal, let’s roll This deal is fantastic. I love it. Your move. 2 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That One Girl Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 I really am confused by the people who are defending Disney in this. they're a billion dollar corporation, unless you support rich white executives getting richer off of what they see only as a product rather than art, it seems odd to be defending them like this. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ledmonkey96 Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 Just now, That Ambitious Guy said: I really am confused by the people who are defending Disney in this. they're a billion dollar corporation, unless you support rich white executives getting richer off of what they see only as a product rather than art, it seems odd to be defending them like this. I mean so is Fox, and generally Fox is seen as one of the worst companies around. I would think people would want them weaker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That One Girl Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 Just now, Ledmonkey96 said: I mean so is Fox, and generally Fox is seen as one of the worst companies around. I would think people would want them weaker. this isn't my point at all. if Fox were acquiring Paramount or something then yes I would very much be criticizing them for the same thing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewy Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 Just now, That Ambitious Guy said: I really am confused by the people who are defending Disney in this. they're a billion dollar corporation, unless you support rich white executives getting richer off of what they see only as a product rather than art, it seems odd to be defending them like this. Well, all of these studios are run by execs who couldn't give a fuck about what you might define as art. That will never change, no matter the size of a studio. It's more the effect this has on the industry and accompanying trades that's troubling 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
75Live Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 2 minutes ago, That Ambitious Guy said: I really am confused by the people who are defending Disney in this. they're a billion dollar corporation, unless you support rich white executives getting richer off of what they see only as a product rather than art, it seems odd to be defending them like this. Well you know someone with the name of the company would defend it 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manny1234 Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 At least Iger thankfully said R-rated Marvel movies Like Deadpool can stay. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walt Disney Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 6 minutes ago, Barnack said: Corporation that are not studio buying a movie studio does not change much if anything in term of competition. Not only Sky, fox star is a giant distributor of content but also movie distribution, if you look at about any movie distribution you will almost always see many studio being involved playing nice to each other, If you look at Moana: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=intl&id=disney1116.htm Universal/Paramount distributed in Turkey and many market were not Disney release, look at the list of distributor: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3521164/companycredits Look at Pacific rim 2: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=intl&id=pacificrim2.htm http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2557478/companycredits Universal did some of it, Universal/paramount (IPI) did a lot of it, but also Sony and they had many local guy getting involved also. if you reduce the number of distributor at one point it can change the kind of deal someone making movie has with them, specially if the distributor is own by a company that is actually making movies and will privilege them and has less and less the need to play nice with other to distribute their products in some market in exchange that one day they will do the same for theirs. Your argument actually supports the deal. It makes much more sense for a movie studio to distribute their own films worldwide. However, it has been difficult in certain countries to set up direct foreign distribution, which is why local distributors are used or studios work together. But, the most logical thing is to distribute your own films worldwide. Studios have been making progress in this area, but obviously are not there yet, as you show. If this deal helps Disney to do that, then that is a positive (not a negative) because they now have more control over their own content. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewy Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 Just now, manny1234 said: At least Iger thankfully said R-rated Marvel movies Like Deadpool can stay. Whew yea, I am really relieved 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That One Girl Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Chewy said: Well, all of these studios are run by execs who couldn't give a fuck about what you might define as art. That will never change, no matter the size of a studio. It's more the effect this has on the industry and accompanying trades that's troubling I'd more or less be criticizing other studios for the same thing if they were acquiring another major studio of this size. Pretty much all the higher-ups of the big six are rich as fuck and most of them probably don't give a shit about film as an artform, just as a product. but yeah the effect on the industry is worrying, and it's also pretty depressing to see one of the first major studios of Hollywood just become another subsidiary for a larger corporation to exploit. Edited April 13, 2018 by That Ambitious Guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Porthos Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 Just because something is legal does not in fact mean something is good. Something that needs reminding from time to time. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Porthos Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 As for this particular deal... Fox selling to anyone is A Bad Thing. If we're quibbling over which A Bad Thing is Least/Most Bad for us pleebs; or that selling to, say, Comcast would be A Worse Thing, count me out of that discussion. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walt Disney Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 I really don't mind discussing this deal because people's reactions are interesting. Some have been really illogical, but interesting. However, the deal is going to go through. The only issue is whether Disney will have to give up certain parts of Fox for the deal to go through. But, the movie studio will not be one of those parts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manny1234 Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 We have STX Entertainment Entertainment Studios Neon aviron and many other rising and the major studio era is ending. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewy Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 Press release idea: 1,300 Burbank area jobs disappear but Nightcrawler to appear in Doctor Strange 2 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Porthos Posted April 13, 2018 Share Posted April 13, 2018 Just now, Porthos said: As for this particular deal... Fox selling to anyone is A Bad Thing. If we're quibbling over which A Bad Thing is Least/Most Bad for us pleebs; or that selling to, say, Comcast would be A Worse Thing, count me out of that discussion. This isn't strictly true, I suppose. If the Murdochs were jettisoning/spinning off their entertainment industry to a nominal buyer completely unconnected to the entertainment/distribution/broadcast ecosystem and it would be independent of them and the rest of the entertainment biz... Well, then maybe. But any sort of merger/sell/whatever? Yeah, they're all bad, if for no other reason than the massive loss of jobs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
