D&D Movie/TV D&D Movie Hit or Flop?

[bedir than]

You keep claiming streaming us worth millions.

Paramount says that streaming and VoD is worth over a billion, quarter before last alone

Paramount’s direct-to-consumer (DTC) unit posted strong fourth-quarter revenue growth of 30 percent to $1.4 billion as subscription revenue jumped 48 percent, which the company touted as proof that its investments are paying off and its content engine continues to function well, and advertising revenue rose 4 percent

They credit their movies added 9.9 million to their paid streaming platforms (month revenue of 4.99-19.99) in the quarter. Paramount keeps about 75% of that money. Quick back of napkin math is that their movies, which only included one blockbuster last quarter, contributed to future revenues of about 100 million a month.

Streaming is worth billions. And Paramount expects it to be profitable next year, based on their original content

 

[Mistwell]

You keep claiming streaming us worth millions.

I keep claiming that the studios, WGA and directors guild, and SAG, all agree that streaming is in fact worth millions, yes. Claiming it doesn't is, well, not a good look at this point.

Being profitable as an overall venture as a streaming service is a different issue than whether movie streaming makes millions in revenue. As the entire rest of your post goes off on that tangent, I cut it.

 

[Devilbass]

It is not controversial to say that Streaming on Paramount+ will not turn around D&DHat's fortunes because they will still be losing money.

If it's not controversial to say, it should be. HAT is not Paramount+, so the losses of that platform are not the losses of the movie.

It is, in the world of financial accounting, completely uncontroversial to say that one division, product, or project of a company is profitable while the firm, overall, is not (and vice versa).

As Mistwell said:

Wether Paramount overall is successful as a streaming platform, that's not really what we're discussing in terms of a particular properties share of revenue. If the D&D movie makes enough share revenue from streaming, it's not a ding on it if the platform itself isn't making enough money.

HAT and P+ each have their own, separate profit/loss to account for.

If P+ attributes enough of their new and renewing subscribers to HAT using some internal metric, then some portion of that revenue will be attributed to it as well. HAT likely accumulates additional expenses in the move to streaming, but it's not adding all of P+'s expenses to it's books, as that's just not how it works. If those revenues exceed the added expense... well.

Obviously we don't know those numbers, but make no mistake, an overall loss on P+ doesn't, by default, mean a loss on streaming for HAT.

 

[mamba]

Yes, many are. Do you want me to quote them?

go ahead, everyone was focused on the box office as far as I can tell. At most they say something like it was a flop at the box office and making the difference up with VoD, streaming, etc. will be hard to impossible.

You better do not quote me in that, because I definitely was

Whether Paramount overall is successful as a streaming platform, that's not really what we're discussing in terms of a particular properties share of revenue.

agreed, I doubt we get HAT broken out separately however

 

[mamba]

Paramount says that streaming and VoD is worth over a billion, quarter before last alone

revenue is not profit

 

[delericho]

If P+ attributes enough of their new and renewing subscribers to HAT using some internal metric, then some portion of that revenue will be attributed to it as well.

I think this is key: because the data is internal to Paramount, the reality is that HAT will make exactly as much on streaming as Paramount says it does.

So if they want HAT to be a success, so they can justify an entire D&D cinematic universe, they'll say it was a massive success and make it so. Alternately, if they want to blame HAT for all their larger woes, they'll do that. Either way, we'll never know the true data that went into that decision.

 

[mamba]

I think this is key: because the data is internal to Paramount, the reality is that HAT will make exactly as much on streaming as Paramount says it does.

yes, but I am not sure they have an interest in faking these numbers in either direction.

So if they want HAT to be a success, so they can justify an entire D&D cinematic universe, they'll say it was a massive success and make it so. Alternately, if they want to blame HAT for all their larger woes, they'll do that. Either way, we'll never know the true data that went into that decision.

At a minimum I doubt they have to blame it for larger failures, while they might want to get creative in propping it up to greenlight other shows (or justify the decision to make it)

 

[bedir than]

revenue is not profit

Correct. I never made that claim.

I countered the absurd idea that "there's no money in streaming"

Paramount streaming will likely hit two billion in Q2.

 

[mamba]

Correct. I never made that claim.

I countered the absurd idea that "there's no money in streaming"

Paramount streaming will likely hit two billion in Q2.

I assume ‘no money in streaming’ means ‘no profit’, not ‘no subscribers’

 

[CommodoreKong]

We have no idea. If you think you know how much it makes on VOD, I'd love to hear about that. I know it was noted as meaningful it hit #1 on differing platforms, which apparently was somewhat unusual. I also know it was selling for $19 and the studio was making $14 for each of those sales, which is large percentage.

I really doubt D&D hitting #1 on the VOD platforms is really all that "meaningful". It's a new, big budget blockbuster. I can't imagine any new big blockbuster not hitting #1 on release week on VOD platforms.

The vast majority of sales on those platforms on any given week are either going to be newly released movies/TV shows or movies/shows on sale.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Since the pandemic, the formula has dramatically changed. It unfortunately involves a large portion on stream, for which we do not have data. Literally the only data we have is indications from the studio. Which is inadequate but all we have. There is no more formula which you can apply to just the box office and determine if the movie itself was profitable or not. There is no "box office failure/success" given that's meaningless without the rest of it - movies are no longer made for just the box office metric and sometimes are not even released to theaters. The question is, and always was, total profit or loss and not just box office. Unfortunately, we not work with less data than we used to before the pandemic.

This is not some sort of magical new thing. Back when DVDs were big we sometimes saw movies get sequels or TV shows get renewed off the back of strong DVD sales. There's no guarantee that Honor Among Thieves is going to have any sort of strong sales on VOD or demand high streaming prices, enough to make up a loss at the box office.

Honestly I'm guessing a lot depends on Hasbro. Paramount might not be willing to front a bunch of money for a sequel to a film that at best may eventually break even or make a small profit. If sales of D&D merchandise and the RPG got a huge boost they may be willing to spend the money to continue to increase brand awareness. And honestly I hope they do because I really want to see a sequel but I feel it really depends on Hasbro at this point.