Harshaw
Throbbing Member
- 24,775
- 127,405
Star Wars general purpose movie stuff
- Thread starter Royal
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Chukzombi
Millie's Staff Member
- 72,995
- 214,283
they said the Mando movie would be first and that its a Favreau film, i thought Filoni was doing it? i thought Favreau was not doing stuff for Disney anymore?
Harshaw
Throbbing Member
- 24,775
- 127,405
jayrebb
Naxxramas 1.0 Raider
- 14,601
- 14,448
Chukzombi
Millie's Staff Member
- 72,995
- 214,283
they still havent made a profit 10 years after they bought Lucasfilm. more book cooking.
www.forbes.com
Box office profits generated by Disney's Star Wars movies have fallen $2.8 billion short of covering the media giant's purchase of the sci-fi saga’s creator, Lucasfilm, according to analysis of recently-filed financial statements.
One of its key boasts was about the supposedly spellbinding return on investment generated by the franchises that Disney acquired under Iger.
The presentation gives the impression that Disney's Star Wars trilogy generated a 2.9 times return on the purchase of Lucasfilm as that figure is presented next to a timeline of key events in the production company's history. They include the release of the Disney movies and its acquisition of Lucasfilm which is the only milestone marked with a star. Adding to this impression is the fact that at the other end of the timeline is the Star Wars logo and a photo of the Mandalorian with his little green friend.
However, buried in the fine print is the revelation that the purchase price of Lucasfilm isn't even included in the ROI calculation. Instead, it is purely based on the box office performance of Disney's Star Wars trilogy, its two spinoff movies, merchandise, DVD and Blu Ray sales.
As revealed, the methodology is questionable as Disney based the ROI on the revenue generated by the movies, merchandise, DVDs and Blu Rays rather than the profit they made as it should have done. Using the revenue rather than the profit artificially inflates the result as it doesn't factor in the costs that Disney had to pay out.
Even this wasn't enough for the media giant so it also forecast the revenue that it expected the Star Wars movies, merchandise, DVDs and Blu Rays to generate over a ten-year period and based the calculation on that too. In other words, Disney hasn't actually received the revenue that it used to calculate the return on its investment.
In summary, despite seeming to do so, Disney's presentation doesn't actually reveal whether its Star Wars movies have covered the cost of its purchase of Lucasfilm. There may be good reason for this.
Disney ‘Star Wars’ Box-Office Profits Fail To Cover Cost Of Buying Lucasfilm
Box office profits generated by Disney's Star Wars movies have fallen $2.8 billion short of covering the media giant's purchase of the sci-fi saga’s creator, Lucasfilm.
www.forbes.com
One of its key boasts was about the supposedly spellbinding return on investment generated by the franchises that Disney acquired under Iger.
The presentation gives the impression that Disney's Star Wars trilogy generated a 2.9 times return on the purchase of Lucasfilm as that figure is presented next to a timeline of key events in the production company's history. They include the release of the Disney movies and its acquisition of Lucasfilm which is the only milestone marked with a star. Adding to this impression is the fact that at the other end of the timeline is the Star Wars logo and a photo of the Mandalorian with his little green friend.
However, buried in the fine print is the revelation that the purchase price of Lucasfilm isn't even included in the ROI calculation. Instead, it is purely based on the box office performance of Disney's Star Wars trilogy, its two spinoff movies, merchandise, DVD and Blu Ray sales.
As revealed, the methodology is questionable as Disney based the ROI on the revenue generated by the movies, merchandise, DVDs and Blu Rays rather than the profit they made as it should have done. Using the revenue rather than the profit artificially inflates the result as it doesn't factor in the costs that Disney had to pay out.
Even this wasn't enough for the media giant so it also forecast the revenue that it expected the Star Wars movies, merchandise, DVDs and Blu Rays to generate over a ten-year period and based the calculation on that too. In other words, Disney hasn't actually received the revenue that it used to calculate the return on its investment.
In summary, despite seeming to do so, Disney's presentation doesn't actually reveal whether its Star Wars movies have covered the cost of its purchase of Lucasfilm. There may be good reason for this.
- 3
Chris
Potato del Grande
- 19,436
- -10,732
Also need to factor in opportunity cost. Disney could have used the investment in money, time and people on something else.they still havent made a profit 10 years after they bought Lucasfilm. more book cooking.
Box office profits generated by Disney's Star Wars movies have fallen $2.8 billion short of covering the media giant's purchase of the sci-fi saga’s creator, Lucasfilm, according to analysis of recently-filed financial statements.Disney ‘Star Wars’ Box-Office Profits Fail To Cover Cost Of Buying Lucasfilm
Box office profits generated by Disney's Star Wars movies have fallen $2.8 billion short of covering the media giant's purchase of the sci-fi saga’s creator, Lucasfilm.
One of its key boasts was about the supposedly spellbinding return on investment generated by the franchises that Disney acquired under Iger.
The presentation gives the impression that Disney's Star Wars trilogy generated a 2.9 times return on the purchase of Lucasfilm as that figure is presented next to a timeline of key events in the production company's history. They include the release of the Disney movies and its acquisition of Lucasfilm which is the only milestone marked with a star. Adding to this impression is the fact that at the other end of the timeline is the Star Wars logo and a photo of the Mandalorian with his little green friend.
However, buried in the fine print is the revelation that the purchase price of Lucasfilm isn't even included in the ROI calculation. Instead, it is purely based on the box office performance of Disney's Star Wars trilogy, its two spinoff movies, merchandise, DVD and Blu Ray sales.
As revealed, the methodology is questionable as Disney based the ROI on the revenue generated by the movies, merchandise, DVDs and Blu Rays rather than the profit they made as it should have done. Using the revenue rather than the profit artificially inflates the result as it doesn't factor in the costs that Disney had to pay out.
Even this wasn't enough for the media giant so it also forecast the revenue that it expected the Star Wars movies, merchandise, DVDs and Blu Rays to generate over a ten-year period and based the calculation on that too. In other words, Disney hasn't actually received the revenue that it used to calculate the return on its investment.
In summary, despite seeming to do so, Disney's presentation doesn't actually reveal whether its Star Wars movies have covered the cost of its purchase of Lucasfilm. There may be good reason for this.
- 2
jooka
marco esquandolas
- 14,882
- 6,391
I thought it was kinda odd it was being reported so publicly Lucas was gonna back Igor in the latest board drama, maybe we know why now.
- 2
jayrebb
Naxxramas 1.0 Raider
- 14,601
- 14,448
Iger did give George Lucas an apology and went out of his way to make things right with him over the years.
Burns
Avatar of War Slayer
- 7,452
- 14,682
Did you know The Force is female? Well, in case you forgot, there is a new animated 6 part TV shorts "mini-series" called Tails of the Empire (15 min each). It's all about Morgan Elsbeth and Barriss Offee (3 episodes each). Morgan Elsbeth is the "Night Sister" from Mano and Ashoka. Barriss Offee is from Clone Wars and I would now guess that she is going to be in something live action.
While it has some Empire and General Grievous background stuff, they of course couldn't have them just doing straight Sith evilness, so they tried to make them have likeable stories. Which kinda throws what could have made this great, right into the trash.
Also, they couldn't leave out some Tranny representation. Some inquisitors fight a "simpathetic" Jedi, whom they don't even seem to know the name of, yet they know to call it a they/them...
Last edited:
- 1
- 1
Gavinmad
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 43,777
- 52,381
They're about a decade too goddamn late to have anything with Barriss be meaningful, if they were gonna use her she should have been the Seventh Sister but nepotism was stronger than the force.
Did you know The Force is female? Well, in case you forgot, there is a new animated 6 part TV shorts "mini-series" called Tails of the Empire (15 min each). It's all about Morgan Elsbeth and Barriss Offee (3 episodes each). Morgan Elsbeth is the "Night Sister" from Mano and Ashoka. Barriss Offee is from Clone Wars and I would now guess that she is going to be in something live action.
While it has some Empire and General Grievous background stuff, they of course couldn't have them just doing straight Sith evilness, so they tried to make them have likeable stories. Which kinda throws what could have made this great, right into the trash.
Also, they couldn't leave out some Tranny representation. Some inquisitors fight a "simpathetic" Jedi, whom they don't even seem to know the name of, yet they know to call it a they/them...
- 1
Seananigans
Honorary Shit-PhD
- 13,717
- 34,249
- 1