Batgirl movie cancelled


log in or register to remove this ad



Mirtek

Hero
Canning a movie as a write-off only makes sense if the company sincerely believes it's returns will be less than the the total write off multiplied by the companies tax-rate. The money saved by the write off is always only a mere fraction of the value that is being written off.

WB's tax rate in the last two years was on average 21.2%, so canning a $100 million movie saves them $21.2 million in taxes, that's still -$78.8 million.

Now the $100 million are already spend and gone and the $21.2 million tax saving is a future gain, but that will still only save them money if they fully expect that releasing the movie will earn them less than $25.7 million profit (minus taxes that'd be the break even vs. the write off)
 

Canning a movie as a write-off only makes sense if the company sincerely believes it's returns will be less than the the total write off multiplied by the companies tax-rate. The money saved by the write off is always only a mere fraction of the value that is being written off.

WB's tax rate in the last two years was on average 21.2%, so canning a $100 million movie saves them $21.2 million in taxes, that's still -$78.8 million.

Now the $100 million are already spend and gone and the $21.2 million tax saving is a future gain, but that will still only save them money if they fully expect that releasing the movie will earn them less than $25.7 million profit (minus taxes that'd be the break even vs. the write off)

Great summary of what the "write off" really means.

I'll throw one other piece into the mix. They're also considering brand value and future movies in the projections. I think there's fear that if they release a stinker now, the next time they want to release a big budget movie (Batman, Batgirl, Justice League, whatever) it will earn less money. How much less? I dunno. But I'm sure it plays into their brand management plans.
 

Ryujin

Legend
Great summary of what the "write off" really means.

I'll throw one other piece into the mix. They're also considering brand value and future movies in the projections. I think there's fear that if they release a stinker now, the next time they want to release a big budget movie (Batman, Batgirl, Justice League, whatever) it will earn less money. How much less? I dunno. But I'm sure it plays into their brand management plans.
Hasn't stopped them up until this point, so why worry now?
 

billd91

Not your screen monkey (he/him)
Canning a movie as a write-off only makes sense if the company sincerely believes it's returns will be less than the the total write off multiplied by the companies tax-rate. The money saved by the write off is always only a mere fraction of the value that is being written off.

WB's tax rate in the last two years was on average 21.2%, so canning a $100 million movie saves them $21.2 million in taxes, that's still -$78.8 million.

Now the $100 million are already spend and gone and the $21.2 million tax saving is a future gain, but that will still only save them money if they fully expect that releasing the movie will earn them less than $25.7 million profit (minus taxes that'd be the break even vs. the write off)
Wouldn't we have to also figure in the marketing budget had they gone ahead with the release? Wouldn't their calculus be based on the expected returns being less than the (total write off x tax rate) + marketing?
 

Mirtek

Hero
Wouldn't we have to also figure in the marketing budget had they gone ahead with the release? Wouldn't their calculus be based on the expected returns being less than the (total write off x tax rate) + marketing?
Absolutely. Strictly speaking about this movie they must figure that after any required future spendings and incomes are counted, the net result after taxes must be less than 21 million dollars to be worth it.

If we're looking at the broader picture than Ryujin makes an excellent point about potential damage to the brand as a whole. Even if enough people were to fall for Batgirl so that a release may earn them 30 million at the end, the resulting badwill toward future DCU movies could cost them more.

The $100 million are already spend anyway and not coming back either way. The only question is whether a release would result in

WB share of revenue from release
./. additional marketing expenses
./. taxes
./. badwill on future releases (very hard to quantify)
$21 million or < $21 million
 


Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist

On the one hand- this is great news for DC.

On the second hand- this is probably the only move they could have made. While I am sure that there are some grimdark Snyder fanboys still out there, sad that we will not get to see Superman put all the other heroes in their place with extreme prejudice (and in extreme slow motion), Gunn and Snyder have credibility with both the fans and (more importantly) with Hollywood creatives.

On the third hand (don't ask)- I predict the following headline in 15 months:

James Gunn Era Ends at Warner Bros. Discovery With Acrimonious Departure; What Went Wrong?
 

Remove ads

Top