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

[bedir than]

Specifics then said data? Top 3 more popular than bottom 7 put together would br my expectation or close to it.

How 'bout actually in the top ten for 100+ days and not in the top ten except for a few weeks.

By the way, Flix Patrol has moved all of their top 10 by country data behind a paywall. I won't have further international updates

 

[Zardnaar]

How 'bout actually in the top ten for 100+ days and not in the top ten except for a few weeks.

By the way, Flix Patrol has moved all of their top 10 by country data behind a paywall. I won't have further international updates

Not exactly hard data in dollar terms though.

 

[bedir than]

Not exactly hard data in dollar terms though.

shifting those goalposts again

 

[Zardnaar]

shifting those goalposts again

Pretty much the entire point if the thread from the start?

 

[Ferrousbones]

shifting those goalposts again

No. As Zardnaar inelegantly stated, the financial state of HAT's release has been the point of this thread.

We know the box office, and the minimum of what HAT cost studios, and have a good idea of how much the studios got from the box office, but we have no idea how much they have got from streaming/VOD, since we have no objective values ($ or views/day), only subjective values (relative rank of popularity).

What we do know is that HAT flopped (I would say bombed) in theatrical release, and that Hasbro's CEO has stated a possible sequel would have a lower budget.

Also, while not data of VOD results itself, since that statement was made after months in VOD, it may indicate that the financial results of that rank are lower than we would think.

 

[bedir than]

Specifics then said data? Top 3 more popular than bottom 7 put together would br my expectation or close to it.

I exceeded this condition

Not exactly hard data in dollar terms though.

Then the condition changed

No. As Zardnaar inelegantly stated, the financial state of HAT's release has been the point of this thread.

We know the box office, and the minimum of what HAT cost studios, and have a good idea of how much the studios got from the box office, but we have no idea how much they have got from streaming/VOD, since we have no objective values ($ or views/day), only subjective values (relative rank of popularity).

What we do know is that HAT flopped (I would say bombed) in theatrical release, and that Hasbro's CEO has stated a possible sequel would have a lower budget.

Also, while not data of VOD results itself, since that statement was made after months in VOD, it may indicate that the financial results of that rank are lower than we would think.

That's classic moving of the goalposts. And not really defensible.

Hasbro CEO didn't make the statement you attribute to Hasbro.
The Paramount Global CEO did, but it was about every movie made during high pandemic restrictions - something that no longer exists

 

[Ferrousbones]

That's classic moving of the goalposts. And not really defensible.

Hasbro CEO didn't make the statement you attribute to Hasbro.
The Paramount Global CEO did, but it was about every movie made during high pandemic restrictions - something that no longer exists

1. I mixed up the CEOs of Hasbro and Paramount, thank you for correcting me.
2. The statement wasn't about movies in general during pandemic restrictions, it was directly about HAT and a possible sequel.
3. You keep accusing about goalposts being moved, but the word 'flop', by itself, is always connected to financial success or lack thereof. Your interpretation of that word doesn't change that.

Btw, the mention of a sequel: Robbins isn’t abandoning the idea of more “Dungeons & Dragons,” though if there’s a sequel, he says, “We’ve got to figure out a way to make it for less.”
The Variety article, quote towards bottom.

Notice that he said if there is a sequel. This was in July, months after HAT hit VOD, which paints a less than rosy picture about streaming success. Maybe it did better than his comment suggests, but we know it did poorly enough in box office that it had quite a hill to climb just to break even.

Also, I would expect a more civil tone in your comments given that you have been on this site longer than I.

 

[Zardnaar]

One can also compare it with other

I exceeded this condition

Then the condition changed

That's classic moving of the goalposts. And not really defensible.

Hasbro CEO didn't make the statement you attribute to Hasbro.
The Paramount Global CEO did, but it was about every movie made during high pandemic restrictions - something that no longer exists

You've made eine very big leaps pf logic vases on very incomplete information.

It's done well on streaming but how do you monetize that or give specific giggles? Hasbro wrote off their portion as a loss.

We also know Paramount is losing money so streaming wasn't going to save it.

Final clue 6 months later no sequel announced.

 

[Ferrousbones]

In an effort to be helpful and constructive, here are some numbers either confirmed or stated by industry members, and what they could mean for HAT streaming success (yes, some of these are repeats):

1. production cost was about $150 million
2. Paramount marketing was about $60 million
3. so total cost was at least $210 million
4. global box office was about $208 million
5. typical studio share is estimated at about 50%
6. one of the Star Wars sequels yielded the studios a what is considered radically high 65%
7. this gives a range of box office for the studios: $104 million to $135.2 million
8. total cost minus the above share gives a range of: $74.8 million to $106 million in deficit

So, streaming needs to net $74.8 million to $106 million to break even and start turning a profit, assuming there are no unmentioned costs. Using Amazon as a price source:

1. starting May 2nd, digital purchase was $25, digital rental was $20; prices remained stable for 21 days
2. prices then changed to $20 digital purchase, $6 digital rental
3. some time in the last 15-45 days (I don't check often so I don't know exactly when, and my google-fu isn't great) the digital purchase price dropped to $10

What we don't know:

1. what % of streaming is on Amazon as compared to Paramount+
2. what % of Amazon streaming revenue goes to the studios
3. what % of streaming is purchase or rental
4. how many views per day

For best case scenario, I am assuming 100% of revenue to the studios, and 100% of streaming is by rental (since each view would yield revenue).

Using the above assumptions at 100K views per day:

100K x $20 x 21 days = $42 million
100K x $6 x 126 days (current minus initial 3 weeks) = $75.6 million
$42 million + $75.6 million = $117.6 million
$117.6 million - $74.8 million = $42.8 million profit
$117.6 million - $106 million = $11.6 million profit

So, under the above assumptions, it would be likely for HAT to have turned a slight profit to-date. If the studios get less share of the revenue, or the streaming is much less, then the movie might not yet have reached profitable status. Similarly, if the streaming is much more, HAT may have turned a significant profit.

This also depends on revenue and profit margin from disc sales, which I am not comfortable estimating without a good idea of the profit margin.

If anyone can find streaming numbers for any top 10 movies, please share for better estimation.

 

[mamba]

So, under the above assumptions, it would be likely for HAT to have turned a slight profit to-date.

agreed, but those assumptions are overly optimistic, as you are probably aware of

For one we know that Hasbro had some marketing cost too I believe, we just do not know how much, and giving 100% of the rental price to the movie studio and 0% to the service is clearly nonsense. Best case is probably something like 70/30 in favor of the studio, the ratio that Steam, Apple etc. have a share when selling software / music / ...