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

[Mistwell]

Just about every article, including in the main industry magazines use 50% as the normal approximation.

No, most don't. And if they do they're wrong.

So, again you dismiss standard numbers with zero proof of what is the right one.

They're not standard at all.

How ouch of the total did the movie make in week one? So places, like China, the take for the producers is smaller.

Yes which is what I said, it depends on the WEEK and it depends on the LOCATION.

So 50% is a perfectly fair estimate and your hand waving does not change that.

It's really not a perfectly fair estimate. I didn't hand waive, YOU DID. I said it's way more complicated and you're again trying to hand waive any level of precision.

 

[Mistwell]

no, the production cost was 150M, let’s be generous and have a low marketing budget of 75M. That makes a total cost of 225M.

I had estimated total of $250M.

When do they make those costs back? When the movie made 225M at the theatres?

They sure made a chunk of that back in the theaters, with portions depending on the week and the location. Next chunk came from being the number one movie on VOD across all platforms (beating out bigger movies on VOD like the latest Scream movie). The next chunk will come from streaming, and the final chunk on DVD/Blu-Ray + all others.

No, the do not get the full ticket price, they get roughly half that, hence the factor of 2. So they break even around 450M

It's well more than half these days for a lot of markets. They often get 80% of week one domestic for example. 50% was never a real figure. You'd have to go through each nation and calculate the percentage based on the deal with that location. 50% is a very inaccurate way to do it.

I know what you said, but you are completely wrong. I did not overshoot, see above

You did, and I am not wrong. I'd pit my knowledge on this topic against yours any day. Why someone entirely outside the industry is so certain they are an expert based on a couple Google searches I will never know.

no, because they get about half of the ticket sale, the other half goes to the theatre. They do not show movies for free…

LOL you think Theaters get half ticket sales these days?

 

[Mistwell]

no, it never starts at 80%, it starts at around 60% and goes down from there. And that is domestic, international frequently starts below 50%

I assure you it absolutely does sometimes start at 80% at week one for domestic. International ENTIRELY depends on the nation these days and there is no nice round figure you can throw around for any movie about international.

 

[Myrdin Potter]

No, most don't. And if they do they're wrong.

They're not standard at all.

Yes which is what I said, it depends on the WEEK and it depends on the LOCATION.


It's really not a perfectly fair estimate. I didn't hand waive, YOU DID. I said it's way more complicated and you're again trying to hand waive any level of precision.

I guess you are not used to the effects of a sliding scale? Nor have you read the many links in this thread from the press all using 50%?

I am constantly forecasting larger numbers as paert of my daily job, and 50% is pretty good as a top level estimate for box office revenue. Once you get close to breakeven, then 53% weighted or 47% weighted (you know the foreign/domestic split and week 1 vs. further weeks by then) starts to make more sense, but for the quick, rule of thumb estimate of box office success, 50% works fine.

It gets silly, you state that 50% is not right. The box office is around $200M and you estimate that the cost is $250M and yet it is still not a box office failure. So the take is 125%?

 

[Mistwell]

I guess you are not used to the effects of a sliding scale?

Now you're being rude. If you want to end the conversation because it's irritating you, please just say so.

It gets silly, you state that 50% is not right. The box office is around $200M and you estimate that the cost is $250M and yet it is still not a box office failure. So the take is 125%?

I didn't say it was or was not a box office failure. That is a big strawman. I said the box office, combined with VOD, combined with streaming and remaining revenue, seems to have pushed this movie into the black in the eyes of the studio, which is the only opinion any of this really matters for. I've engaged with precision and emphasis on al those points many times in this thread so I assume you intentionally misconstrued my position as a strawman. Which is, again, rude.

I'll ask you to stop with that. Please.

 

[Stalker0]

I think I can summarize this debate into 2 camps:

1) Using the traditional metrics of box office assessment, HAT is a flop.

2) The traditional metrics of box office assessment no longer work, and it needs to account for several other factors that will take a while to collect. As such, any hit/flop assessment cannot be determined for a year or more after a movie is released.

 

[bedir than]

As such, any hit/flop assessment cannot be determined for a year or more after a movie is released.

I'd shorten that to six months after release.

 

[Jaeger]

If you read past the headline you would know that P+ is going to spend more money on more original content, not less.

I did.

Spending more money on streaming content =/= D&D Movie Profitability.

The quotes from the President of Paramount Global directly contradict your assumptions. As does today's news from their dinners-rather-than-upfront that they have 90 million households in the US P+/Showtime/Pluto umbrella. Which means they have as many eyeballs available as all of cable did a decade ago during peak cable.

That is untrue.

I said:

They won't make up the difference in Streaming views, because the streaming platform it is heading to; Paramount+, is hemorrhaging cash hand over fist.

Which is Empirically True, because the President of Paramount Global Said:

Paramount Streaming Loss Widens to $511M as Paramount+ Hits 60M Subs

The company takes $1.67 billion in programming charges and cuts its dividend as quarterly results miss Wall Street expectations and TV advertising drops 11 percent.

www.hollywoodreporter.com

“Yes, this takes investment,” Bakish conceded as Wall Street concerns rise over the studio getting to streaming profitability as TV ad revenues slump and costs rise while Paramount+ combines with Showtime.

He reiterated that 2023 will be a peak investment year for streaming. “But there is no question that our investment is producing results. And as we scale, we are very much on a related path to streaming profitability,” Bakish argued, without putting a timeline on breaking even."

Yes, they are throwing money at Paramount+, and they think that it will pay off in the end.

That doesn't change the fact that as of now, and by their own admission, probably for most of 2023 - They will be Losing Money.

"...higher streaming investments were again a drag on the entertainment company’s bottom line, as the quarterly adjusted operating loss before depreciation and amortization in its streaming unit widened to $511 million, compared with $456 million in the first quarter of 2022. "

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.

The losses D&DHat incurred by the time Paramount stops losing money on its streaming platforms will be used as a tax write-off long before they are profitable.

Now if you want to say that Paramount will use D&D as a loss-leader to attract people to its streaming platforms, OK. I got no problem with that.

You just can't say that it will function as a loss-leader for Paramount+, and make money at the same time...

I think I can summarize this debate into 2 camps:

1) Using the traditional metrics of box office assessment, HAT is a flop.

2) The traditional metrics of box office assessment no longer work, and it needs to account for several other factors that will take a while to collect. As such, any hit/flop assessment cannot be determined for a year or more after a movie is released.

Correct.

The problem with argument #2 is that the Industry still uses argument #1 to determine whether or not a film is a hit or flop.

As has been amply demonstrated with links to industry articles. Quoting directors and filmmakers.

 

[Zardnaar]

I think I can summarize this debate into 2 camps:

1) Using the traditional metrics of box office assessment, HAT is a flop.

2) The traditional metrics of box office assessment no longer work, and it needs to account for several other factors that will take a while to collect. As such, any hit/flop assessment cannot be determined for a year or more after a movie is released.

I think the main point is its a flop at the box office it might be able to claw back a profit on the back end.

None of us have access to that information.

 

[Zardnaar]

I had estimated total of $250M.




They sure made a chunk of that back in the theaters, with portions depending on the week and the location. Next chunk came from being the number one movie on VOD across all platforms (beating out bigger movies on VOD like the latest Scream movie). The next chunk will come from streaming, and the final chunk on DVD/Blu-Ray + all others.


It's well more than half these days for a lot of markets. They often get 80% of week one domestic for example. 50% was never a real figure. You'd have to go through each nation and calculate the percentage based on the deal with that location. 50% is a very inaccurate way to do it.



You did, and I am not wrong. I'd pit my knowledge on this topic against yours any day. Why someone entirely outside the industry is so certain they are an expert based on a couple Google searches I will never know.



LOL you think Theaters get half ticket sales these days?

Scream wasn't the bigger movie. It's box office take was modest. Made more money than D&D though as it's budget was very small.

It's number 1 vs very limited completion.

People get excited seeing it's number 1 on release but there was no other blockbuster movie to compete with or anything with a budget close to HAT.