TOP GUN MAVERICK/MEMORIAL DAY WEEKEND THREAD | 126.7M 3-Day, 160.5M 4-Day. The biggest Memorial Day opening ever! | Doctor Strange 20.5M 4-Day, Bob's Burgers 14.8M

[EmpireCity]

2 hours ago, Napoleon said:

I'll drop my 2 cents about the exclusivity window discussion and leave. Netflix made $30 billion last year with only one product - subscriptions. ViacomCBS made $25 billion. That includes their new theatrical releases and their priceless catalogue generating revenue from all the windows possible. It also includes licensing products and their television business (Nickelodeon, MTV, etc.). We box office nerds worry that people will stop coming to theaters to see hit movies like Top Gun Maverick because they'd rather wait for them to be made available on Paramount+, but in reality Paramount is probably counting on it. They'll make more money from consumers who make that transition. 

 

Wrong.  Wrong.  

 

Netflix didn't make $30b and ViacomCBS didn't make $25b.

 

If I "make" $30b in revenue, but it costs me $45b, I haven't made $30b.  I've lost $15b.  Then when the first time I lose a few hundred thousand subscribers, I see $50b wiped from my valuation, then I absolutely didn't make a damn thing.  

 

Netflix, Paramount+, Disney+, Peacock and HBOMax are all losing an insane amount of money on the hope that one day down the road they might turn a profit.  A couple might end up turning a profit in the long run, but others will fail and be forced to close down or consoladate.  

[excel1]

Revenue isn't profit (obviously). Not only do none of the streaming services make any money, there is no real reason to think that is going to change any time so as long they continue with their current business model. It's the exact problem that the Ubers and DoorDash's of the world have.

Edited May 30, 2022 by excel1

[tonytr87]

3 minutes ago, EmpireCity said:

 

Wrong.  Wrong.  

 

Netflix didn't make $30b and ViacomCBS didn't make $25b.

 

If I "make" $30b in revenue, but it costs me $45b, I haven't made $30b.  I've lost $15b.  Then when the first time I lose a few hundred thousand subscribers, I see $50b wiped from my valuation, then I absolutely didn't make a damn thing.  

 

Netflix, Paramount+, Disney+, Peacock and HBOMax are all losing an insane amount of money on the hope that one day down the road they might turn a profit.  A couple might end up turning a profit in the long run, but others will fail and be forced to close down or consoladate.  

 

 

This. 

 

Netflix also has a crazy amount of debt. Add in the overspending and the lack of many new original series hits, outside of maybe 1 a year (Squid Game last year), and they're in a bit of trouble. 

[EmpireCity]

To be fair, I think Netflix has finally turned some profit, but overall compared to the cash they have burned to get there, it isn't close to what the output is.  

[excel1]

All of those companies just saw epic bumps during the Covid deal. There's no reason to think they will ever receive more attention than they have over the last 25 months. Netflix has taken a beating this year, not sure this is going to change.

[keysersoze123]

5 minutes ago, EmpireCity said:

 

Wrong.  Wrong.  

 

Netflix didn't make $30b and ViacomCBS didn't make $25b.

 

If I "make" $30b in revenue, but it costs me $45b, I haven't made $30b.  I've lost $15b.  Then when the first time I lose a few hundred thousand subscribers, I see $50b wiped from my valuation, then I absolutely didn't make a damn thing.  

 

Netflix, Paramount+, Disney+, Peacock and HBOMax are all losing an insane amount of money on the hope that one day down the road they might turn a profit.  A couple might end up turning a profit in the long run, but others will fail and be forced to close down or consoladate.  

Netflix has turned free cash flow positive as of last quarter. They have earnings per share as well. Rest I agree lose ginormous amount of money.

[EmpireCity]

58 minutes ago, ThomasNicole said:

Yeah, some people here seems to diminishing streaming platforms purely because of bias. 

 

It is a profitable business, it is way more accessible than a theater, and it is here to stay. 

 

Lots of people complain that people now wait to watch movies on streaming without noticing that going to a theater frequently is becoming an extremelly elitist program, it is too expensive, for many people wait to stream is the better option.

 

I do believe theatrical windows are very important but you can't complain about streaming without understand that is not just easy to watch things, but it's also more economically viable for millions, of course the industry will put some focus in these audience.

 

 

 

I am not diminishing streaming overall.  I love it and use it every single day.  

 

The problem is that desperately wanting to throw movies on their exclusively or day and date or on a shortened window is a gigantic money loser.  It's been proven over and over that the 3 revenue stream model is not only the best way to maximize your revenue, but it also builds relevancy and legacy to your films.  

 

People just flat out don't give a shit about movies that debut on streaming or day and date.  They come up on your forced algorithm, stay around for about a week and then basically disappear from existence and relevance as quickly as they were released.  

 

If something like The Adam Project would have released in theaters in March when there was a huge window for it to make money, it might have opened to $35m and gotten close to $100m domestic.  Then it could have hit PVOD for another infusion of cash and then finally debuted on Netflix later this summer and had people excited to watch it. 

 

Instead, it stuck around on their sham of a Top 10 list for a little bit, and you would be lucky if anyone even remembered it at this point only about 2 months since it came out. 

 

Not coincidentally, I can tell you for an absolute fact that Netflix working on a 45 day window deal with AMC and Regal (and essentially the whole industry) to give their films a wide release in theaters.  It's a lot closer than people think, and things like Knives Out 2 have a good shot of getting a 45 day theatrical window and then head to Netflix.  

[EmpireCity]

Netflix has  already laid off a ton of people.  They are already prepared to lay off something like 1,000 more in the next few months when it is expected they will report a loss of a couple million subscribers.  

 

It's not a sustainable business model.  It was when they were the only game in town, but they are bleeding due to other large corporations willing to burn billions to go after their market share.  

[Alex SciChannel]

2 minutes ago, EmpireCity said:

Not coincidentally, I can tell you for an absolute fact that Netflix working on a 45 day window deal with AMC and Regal (and essentially the whole industry) to give their films a wide release in theaters.  It's a lot closer than people think, and things like Knives Out 2 have a good shot of getting a 45 day theatrical window and then head to Netflix.  

Considering your defense of having longer Theatrical windows, would you say that this is a positive, streamers dipping their toes in releasing wide in theaters? Even if it is technically 45 day half assery?

[upriser7]

Its true that almost all the streaming platforms are currently operating at negative cash flows but I wouldn't lump Netflix with them. Infact Netflix is the only streaming platform I am aware of that is currently actually generating profits and positive cash flow. The reason Netflix stock tanked is mainly because they are not on track the see crazy growth which investors expected which was always unrealistic.

[mikeymichael]

Anybody think the next Mission Impossible movie might enjoy a bit of a post-TGM Cruise bounce? If reviews are as good as last time, could we see 300m?

[EmpireCity]

Just now, Alex SciChannel said:

Considering your defense of having longer Theatrical windows, would you say that this is a positive, streamers dipping their toes in releasing wide in theaters? Even if it is technically 45 day half assery?

 

Absolutely, at least in the next few years.  They have MASSIVELY overpaid talent for projects in the last 2 years that will be ready to release pretty much now and into 2023.  

 

Theaters getting a 45 day window on Knives Out 2, Killers of the Flower Moon and similar films would be a win given the release schedule that will remain light for maybe another year.  

 

After that it won't really matter.  The insane bidding war that went on for talent is pretty much over.  You won't ever see someone throw $300m or $400m at a guy like Rian Johnson or David Fincher.  Those guys will end up coming back to traditional studios for their next deals.  

 

The shareholders and board of Netflix and others are demanding a lot more financial accountability.  It is the reason a guy like David Zaslav is chopping down the bullshit at HBOMax / WB and moving back towards theatrical.  

[Alex SciChannel]

Just now, mikeymichael said:

Anybody think the next Mission Impossible movie might enjoy a bit of a post-TGM Cruise bounce? If reviews are as good as last time, could we see 300m?

Idk about 300M but the breakeven for Dead Reckoning Part I is much larger than the previous films with a 290M production budget. Last film Fallout I heard was around 550M-650M breakeven. This one could be above 750M+.

[Borobudur]

4 hours ago, fmpro said:

I see most SH movies that i like a minimum of 2-3 times in theaters. Or i used to.

I loved The Batman but only went once because i knew they would release it on stream just around the corner. So agree. It matters alot

Same. Batman is a movie worth 2nd viewing but with that 45 days window, that really demotivate me to watch it again on big screen. That is why 60 days is not long for a huge grosser. Can you imagine EG getting 45 days window?? I can guarantee all the EG vs Avatar drama won't happened if that was the arrangement. 

[EmpireCity]

It's also the reason Bob Chapek is going to get run the fuck out of town.  He's been a disaster for Disney and listened to the dipshit hedge fund guys instead of the longtime industry veterans.  

[EmpireCity]

The windows thing is just proven at this point.  NWH got a massive traditional window and it resulted in helping an insane late run and legs.  If that had gone to streaming after 45 days, it would have cost Sony hundreds of millions of dollars.  

 

TG2 is going to prove it again all while The Batman proved that short windows will cut millions out of your run with no actual significant return on the back end.  

[BruiseCruise]

How is going to the theaters an "elitist experience"? Its much cheaper to do that than say go to a sporting event or a concert. 

[EmpireCity]

2 minutes ago, BruiseCruise said:

How is going to the theaters an "elitist experience"? Its much cheaper to do that than say go to a sporting event or a concert. 

 

No shit.  It's essentially "live" entertainment for 3 hours at a cost of $15 per person.  

 

Name another entertainment option you can get that matches 3 hours of enjoyment for $15 per person.  Good luck with that.  

[EmpireCity]

17 minutes ago, mikeymichael said:

Anybody think the next Mission Impossible movie might enjoy a bit of a post-TGM Cruise bounce? If reviews are as good as last time, could we see 300m?

 

Yes.  I think it goes $100m+ on opening weekend.  

[Alex SciChannel]

2 minutes ago, EmpireCity said:

 

Yes.  I think it goes $100m+ on opening weekend.  

I don't think it will get 100M+ domestic OW. But I think it'll get a billie worldwide. We need that club.