Spider-Man forced out of the MCU due to failed Sony Deal

[jetengine]

Sony doesn’t need Disney. Sony revenue for 2019 is $78 billion, Disney is $65 billion

Your high.

Sony has maybe one more slam dunk and thats Jumanji 2 which may well sink (is Dwayne Johnson pretending to be Danny Deviyo enough of a draw?) meanwhile Disney have the monster thats Frozen 2 and Star Wars 9 as well as Malificent.

[BeastieRunner]

I'm only referring to Sony Pictures which has been highly profitable going on 5 years now. Ever since Tony Vinciquerra took over revenues are most certainly up by a big margin.


Yes, Spider-Man is Sony's biggest properties. They bought it in the 90s when Marvel was reeling into bankruptcy it was a smart deal at the time that looks even better now. The deal Disney proposed is something no sensible studio executive would accept it. Its a mutually beneficial deal. Sony still has Spider-Man without the deal. Disney is still Disney without the deal.

Sony Pictures lost 5 of the 6 billion in 2012.

Sony Pictures has yet to turn a profit since 2012 ...

Sony Pictures first positive yield since 2009 will be ... 2019 thanks to Spider-Man: Far From Home.

I think your insider is smoking the good stuff.

[BeastieRunner]

Sony doesn’t need Disney. Sony revenue for 2019 is $78 billion, Disney is $65 billion

Sony
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/c...E/sony/revenue
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/c...ony/net-income

Disney
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/c...disney/revenue
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/c...ney/net-income
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/c...-profit-margin

Neither of your numbers are true ...

Where's Super when you need him!?

[luprki]

Sony
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/c...E/sony/revenue
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/c...ony/net-income

Disney
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/c...disney/revenue
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/c...ney/net-income
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/c...-profit-margin

Neither of your numbers are true ...

Where's Super when you need him!?

Uh, you need to go back to these links and read it more carefully, it proves my statement.

[Vakanai]

Your high.

Sony has maybe one more slam dunk and thats Jumanji 2 which may well sink (is Dwayne Johnson pretending to be Danny Deviyo enough of a draw?) meanwhile Disney have the monster thats Frozen 2 and Star Wars 9 as well as Malificent.

Technically it's Jumanji 3. How can you forget the Robin Williams film?

[Jabare]

Sony Pictures lost 5 of the 6 billion in 2012.

Sony Pictures has yet to turn a profit since 2012 ...

Sony Pictures first positive yield since 2009 will be ... 2019 thanks to Spider-Man: Far From Home.

I think your insider is smoking the good stuff.

You realise Sony is a bigger company then just Sony Pictures right. They have different divisons. Again I'm jsut talking about Sony Pictures.

Secondly, the figures your spoiting aren't fully accurate. Even counting the damage done by the hacks and the debt they've incurred, Sony Pictures has been profitable for years

[BeastieRunner]

Uh, you need to go back to these links and read it more carefully, it proves my statement.

Net and revenue are two different things.

Sony brought in $77B in revenue, with a net profit of ... $7.4B.

Disney brought in a revenue of $64B, with a net profit of ... $12.3B.

If profits was your point, Disney is winning.

Also, Sony is forecasting a fall in overall profits of 45% to ￥500B, or currently $4.48B, for the year to March 2020.

Disney is forecasting a major gain in overall profits of nearly 55%, currently ~$20B.

You realise Sony is a bigger company then just Sony Pictures right. They have different divisons. Again I'm jsut talking about Sony Pictures.

Secondly, the figures your spoiting aren't fully accurate. Even counting the damage done by the hacks and the debt they've incurred, Sony Pictures has been profitable for years

I responded back with data from Sony Pictures.

And Sony Pictures has been the biggest loser for Sony for a decade. This last year was the first time in a decade it had a good ROIC. The film unit profit was up from $376 million in the previous year (and today it is sitting at ~$489M). Revenue at Sony Pictures Entertainment in the fiscal year through the end of March was down 2% this year. They could not match Spider-Man: Homecoming or Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle. Hotel Transylvania 3, Into the Spider-verse, and Venom did not perform to what they needed. The return on investment capital (ROIC) figures for the pictures division were up from ~3% the previous year to ~4%, but that still puts them well below other divisions. The pictures division invested more than $7.4B last year, more than the $6B put into semiconductors, which produced ROIC of 14.6%. So it was a big loss for them. Again.

If Disney increases their ROIC with Sony for Spider-Man going forward, you're looking at Disney taking $2-500M from the BO, with Sony taking $1-300M but negating nearly $100M in expanses for a net gain for Sony.

It's a rare corporate win/win.

[ComicJunkie21]

I'm kind of amazed on how some of the fanboys are acting over this split. Simply put this was a money disagreement where neither side could mutually benefit. If sony took the deal and did 50/50 each spiderman film would have to make almost 2 billion dollars for it to be worth it considering their lowest grossing film without Disney still made $700 million (ASM2). If disney stays at 5% it's not worth their time truly as the have the rest of the marvel catalog they could be working on and getting full profits. People need to grow up and realize that neither company is good nor bad it's simply business.

Fans should be happy that they got a few good movies with the partnership and look forward to the variety that we will get. With Disney, we're going to get what we're used to, however with sony we will get more experimental bodies of work that may be groundbreaking in quality storytelling. Sony made 7 spiderman films 8 if you count spider verse and only 2 were bad (SP3 & ASM2). Marvel films while decent to good aren't groundbreaking outside of the fact that they do not have a bad film out of 22 films but I bet most people will say that Sam Ramis spiderman films were better than most of Disney's. So relax everyone we will still get good films.

To another point, fans shouldn't want the same studio to own all the content, as it reduces competition and cinematic creativity. Imo Fox had some of the more groundbreaking Marvel films with Logan, X-Men, and Deadpool. Everyone knows if you give Disney something that works once they will beat the formula to death with sequel after sequel after sequel using the same storytelling components. I'll give it to Sony, Warner Bros, Paramount, etc, they try to make original content still or at least try something new with a story.

[luprki]

Net and revenue are two different things.

Sony brought in $77B in revenue, with a net profit of ... $7.4B.

Disney brought in a revenue of $64B, with a net profit of ... $12.3B.

If profits was your point, Disney is winning

Now you need to go back and read my post.
It’s amazing how some think Sony (a company worth $60 billion) is in trouble and it needs Disney to save them.

[XPac]

Now you need to go back and read my post

The point being though that it's meaningless to argue that Sony has higher revenue if they're not generating higher profits. WIthout the proper context, you're throwing out numbers that really don't mean anything.

[BeastieRunner]

Now you need to go back and read my post.
It’s amazing how some think Sony (a company worth $60 billion) is in trouble and it needs Disney to save them.

I edited my above post to add:

Also, Sony is forecasting a fall in overall profits of 45% to ￥500B, or currently $4.48B, for the year to March 2020.

Disney is forecasting a major gain in overall profits of nearly 55%, currently ~$20B.

Sony has said they are in trouble ... it was the major entertainment news for several years.

Sony is still hesitant to say their woes are over ... BUT ... they are going the right direction.

And if you think I am misreading or misunderstanding your post, please help me understand.

This deal helps both companies out.

[Farealmer]

To another point, fans shouldn't want the same studio to own all the content, as it reduces competition and cinematic creativity. Imo Fox had some of the more groundbreaking Marvel films with Logan, X-Men, and Deadpool. Everyone knows if you give Disney something that works once they will beat the formula to death with sequel after sequel after sequel using the same storytelling components. I'll give it to Sony, Warner Bros, Paramount, etc, they try to make original content still or at least try something new with a story.

How did Logan break ground?

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

I'm kind of amazed on how some of the fanboys are acting over this split. Simply put this was a money disagreement where neither side could mutually benefit. If sony took the deal and did 50/50 each spiderman film would have to make almost 2 billion dollars for it to be worth it considering their lowest grossing film without Disney still made $700 million (ASM2). If disney stays at 5% it's not worth their time truly as the have the rest of the marvel catalog they could be working on and getting full profits. People need to grow up and realize that neither company is good nor bad it's simply business.

Fans should be happy that they got a few good movies with the partnership and look forward to the variety that we will get. With Disney, we're going to get what we're used to, however with sony we will get more experimental bodies of work that may be groundbreaking in quality storytelling. Sony made 7 spiderman films 8 if you count spider verse and only 2 were bad (SP3 & ASM2). Marvel films while decent to good aren't groundbreaking outside of the fact that they do not have a bad film out of 22 films but I bet most people will say that Sam Ramis spiderman films were better than most of Disney's. So relax everyone we will still get good films.

To another point, fans shouldn't want the same studio to own all the content, as it reduces competition and cinematic creativity. Imo Fox had some of the more groundbreaking Marvel films with Logan, X-Men, and Deadpool. Everyone knows if you give Disney something that works once they will beat the formula to death with sequel after sequel after sequel using the same storytelling components. I'll give it to Sony, Warner Bros, Paramount, etc, they try to make original content still or at least try something new with a story.

Pretty much this. The only thing Marvel got out of the deal was that Spider-Man could appear in their films. The only thing Sony got out of their deal was help from Feige and the a moderately increased box office with the MCU connection. Once Disney/Marvel asked for a bigger cut, the value was lost for Sony because they weren't making more than they would have if they continued on the path they were on. Venom showed them how strong the propery was. Spiderverse gave them confidence that they could make an exceptional Spider-Man film without Feige's guiding hand.

At the end of the day, it was a deal that had small benefits for both parties and as soon as one party over extended it became worthless to the other side. The original agreement worked well. There wasn't much of a need to change it.

[XPac]

I'm kind of amazed on how some of the fanboys are acting over this split. Simply put this was a money disagreement where neither side could mutually benefit. If sony took the deal and did 50/50 each spiderman film would have to make almost 2 billion dollars for it to be worth it considering their lowest grossing film without Disney still made $700 million (ASM2). If disney stays at 5% it's not worth their time truly as the have the rest of the marvel catalog they could be working on and getting full profits. People need to grow up and realize that neither company is good nor bad it's simply business.

Fans should be happy that they got a few good movies with the partnership and look forward to the variety that we will get. With Disney, we're going to get what we're used to, however with sony we will get more experimental bodies of work that may be groundbreaking in quality storytelling. Sony made 7 spiderman films 8 if you count spider verse and only 2 were bad (SP3 & ASM2). Marvel films while decent to good aren't groundbreaking outside of the fact that they do not have a bad film out of 22 films but I bet most people will say that Sam Ramis spiderman films were better than most of Disney's. So relax everyone we will still get good films.

To another point, fans shouldn't want the same studio to own all the content, as it reduces competition and cinematic creativity. Imo Fox had some of the more groundbreaking Marvel films with Logan, X-Men, and Deadpool. Everyone knows if you give Disney something that works once they will beat the formula to death with sequel after sequel after sequel using the same storytelling components. I'll give it to Sony, Warner Bros, Paramount, etc, they try to make original content still or at least try something new with a story.

I'm honestly fine with marvel studios having all the MARVEL content. Other studios can generate competition and cinematic creativity by liscencing other comic book franchises out there. If anything I think other studios doing non-marvel stuff allows for GREATER cinematic creativity because they're not going to be have this built in expectation directly competing with or conforming with the MCU. Let marvel do marvels stuff... they do it better than anyone else. For them it's not just a money grab... these characters are legitimately near and dear to the company. Sony and Paramount can go off and use Image or Milestone or whatever else is out there.

[jetengine]

The other issue is that people are concerned that the Sony only Spiderman movies which be garbage since theur teack eecord is mixed at best.