OFFICIAL NEWS A Lasting Record Of Solo's Financial Performance.

The 2nd Harry Potter film made was the lowest box office. Awkward.

 

all those movies will make more than star wars post 2017...2019 if we are lucky

 

@ScumAndVillainy

You're definitely right about Fast and Furious--mostly, as the second and third films took dives--but generally that franchise has been a steady build. But Harry Potter and Pirates of the Caribbean, Star Wars, Dark Knight Trilogy, X-Men Trilogy, X Men First Class Trilogy, Transformers, and Jurassic Park/World are either all over the place, or have the second/middle entries taking declines, or have the final instalments taking declines. Other franchises have the classic diminishing returns like the original Jurassic Park trilogy, Expendables. The examples you listed of Austin Powers had the third film make less than the first, and the last Mission Impossible made less than the one before it.




Different franchises have different growth patterns in some cases. Austin Powers was a film that became a hit on video, so the sequel made the most out of all of them. But then it became a bit of a fad, so the third film fell off. A New Hope, Phantom Menace and The Force Awakens were all cultural landmarks, with the two sequels having over a decade of build-up, which is why even in 1999 George Lucas was saying that he knew Episode I would make the most money out of all of them. TLJ was never expected to make more than the cultural moment of TFA, which was why everyone was happy with Rogue One as well, despite the fact that it made far less than either of them.

And I don't know what any of this has to do with Solo. You started arguing that people didn't go to see Solo because you didn't like TLJ and are projecting that on everyone else. Solo had a toxic reputation in 2017, and in 2017 Disney was reportedly expecting it to bomb. After TLJ came out, this did not change. And in fact, the film turned out okay as a movie, which shows that Lucasfilm knows what they are doing more than you think.

 

A Kennedy Dive is 35-40%. 1st to 2nd film was a 10% drop and excepting the conclusion of the series, were within 100 million of each other in total gross(also, where is Azkaban? After lookup... its $796 million... so it was the lowest of the set, not the second.. awkward for you) and it ended on the high note of the final movie in 2011.

Either way, up until 6, the budgets were between $100-$150 million. All of them made money, and led to the creation of the Fantastic Beasts spinoff series, which gets another entry this year. I wonder if we'll see a Kennedy Dive there? Probably not. The wizard stuff from WB has been a pretty rock solid workhorse, which is why they continue to make more of them.

Also.. Sargon... thanks for proving my point with your chart there. It would have been better if you had ignored the baked numbers of 'Adjusting for Inflation', and included the global box office.. but hey... It still showed my points so w/e.

 

Solo is going to sit near the bottom for a domestic original unadjusted run SW movie in like 38 years, and will be the lowest adjusted for inflation. It's pretty crazy to think about it that way. I thought a scenario worse than RO was possible to happen but like how RO dropped from TFA, Solo would drop from TLJ. But it's far worse than that. At this point I just feel sorry for the character(s) that I love from the previous movies and the new actors.

 

With everything stacked against Solo, it would be a miracte if the it succeed. It's already a bit miraculous that the movie turned out as good as it did all things considering. Still, I do hope Alden Ehrenreich's career would go well, after doing so good with a part everybody expected him to fail it, he deserves. Everybody else are doing fine and will do fine in the future.

 

After it's all said and done the film is going to break even. I doubt we'll see Alden Ehrenreich as Han Solo again, but I don't think his career is gonna be broken by the film. The film is a disappointment for Lucasfilm, but it's not a disaster for the franchise like the Justice League films. Heck, Marvel gave the Hulk a couple of tries and it didn't work.

 

drop the OT era

--- Double Post Merged, Jun 4, 2018, Original Post Date: Jun 4, 2018 ---

fans has spoken...drop the awful nostalgia bait, undermine reys legacy(make it so that she isnt consequential in the saga and even episode 9), ditch the virtue signalling

 

Hi guys, haven't been around for a while but I thought I'd throw in my two cents worth, here. Only from the perspective of someone who's had to deal with budgets in highly diversified corporations like Disney (only much smaller). We don't really have the insider information as to how much this will affect Disney going forward, but I can shed a little light on a few things.

First, expectations are extremely important. This movie was not meant to break even- even if it does manage that, it's still a big problem for Disney. Their plans revolve around certain items making a profit. If profit is not realized where it should be, it jeopardizes plans for other projects all across the corporation. Movies are not made in isolation. They shelled out 4 billion for this franchise. Not making a profit where it was expected is a very bad thing.

http://www.paywallnews.com/business...Plummets-Further-at-Box-Office.SJdOAobxm.html

Money quote: "Hollywood was clearly expecting “Solo” to be a blockbuster; no rival studio scheduled a major release to compete against it this weekend."
​

So it's not acceptable that this movie (for which they paid dearly to acquire the rights) has bombed. What the effects will be on downstream revenue such as toy sales is anyone's guess. Even more of an unknown is the effects on fans, which is alluded to in the WSJ article. Keep in mind the WSJ only cares about money, they have no ideological dog in this hunt. If they see bad things from a money angle, then I believe its bad.

One final note- DIS has not enjoyed the huge run-up in stock prices over the past couple of years that most other large-cap stocks have, which is kind of shocking. They are, in fact, trading LOWER. Disney could not afford a miss on Solo, but they got one.

--- Double Post Merged, Jun 4, 2018, Original Post Date: Jun 4, 2018 ---

To illustrate:
The Dow, of which DIS is a part:


DIS:

:

The second big peak is when TFA came out- at that time DIS was one of my top 15 holdings.. But the stock did not continue to rise- and in fact this is pretty terrible performance in a market that otherwise has made massive gains.

And now when I look at my mutual fund holdings, I can't even FIND any DIS stock, meaning those fund managers dumped it sometime over the last 3 years.

The upshot is, Disney needs Solo to make big money, and it isn't. If I were Bob Iger I would make some big changes, or I might have start worrying about activist shareholders forcing me to.

 

You know, Infinity War was also made by Disney and is a gigantic success. Shouldn't that influence the stocks?

 

Yes, absolutely it should. It all depends on if it exceeds expectations. Budgets are made quite far ahead of time, and expectations are set. Making a ton of money is not that big of a deal if a ton of money is expected to be made. It is a very big deal if a movie doesn't earn what it's supposed to, or if a movie makes quite a bit more than what was forecast. We'll only know when we get the earnings call (well, not me and you but major shareholders).

The earnings call is an actual phone call where Disney tells its stockholders if it is going to meet its financial projections. No one really knows if Infinity War will make up for Solo until the second quarter calls go out. That's when we might expect to see a big drop or rise in the share price- if there are unexpected results. Of course, Disney has so many other revenue streams all that might get lost in the shuffle.

My main point is that the money Disney makes does not just go into a giant pot. A lot of it is already earmarked for other projects, payroll other overhead, etc. The rest goes to shareholders. It's all accounted for in one way or another, and if Solo underperforms, someone is NOT going to get the money they thought they were. Whether its shareholders, projects or whatever.

And this has been going on for a long time, as the stock prices show. Disney really needs some big wins, and Solo is not helping.

 

You missed the part about expectations... Infinity War was expected to do what it did, so in the world of Corporate America, when something does what it's expected to do, than no one blinks an eye. However, when something falls below expectations, well than it's going to hurt the stock of the company, even if there is still a profit involved.

It happens all the time! When a company releases it's earnings for a fiscal year, and the company earns a profit, but that profit is lower than what profit was expected, than usually that will result in a drop in the price of the stock. It has happened to Disney a few times in recent history.

Is one bad movie enough to tank a stock? I would say no, but, what we have is one movie, The Last Jedi, that (depending on who you talk too) under-performed by not meeting expectations (but was still a financially successful movie), another movie, SOLO, that has tanked, and mix that with a huge drop in merchandising sales for the entire IP surrounding those movies, mix that with Disney's continuing woes with ESPN, it might spook some into whether or not they want to take the chance on Disney stock.

 

It is kind of interesting that we got big spikes in stock price with both TFA and TLJ (bigger with the former). But then that effect petered out. It's like stockpickers were thinking "Wow- look at that cash" and then "Oh, yeah we knew that already." It's the long-term trend that is worrying, and as you have pointed out, there's trouble all across Disney Land.

 

Wouldn't the new ESPN contract deal with UFC make the stock go up since FOX don't have the rights to UFC anymore?

 

exactly... I was just reading an article the other day from back in 2015 as to why Disney stocks were dropping even though The Force Awakens was destroying the box office, and the gist was basically that the stock became over-inflated prior to TFA, and once TFA came out and it did exactly what everyone thought it would that the magic wore off, and the price was adjusting itself.

--- Double Post Merged, Jun 4, 2018, Original Post Date: Jun 4, 2018 ---

ESPN's problems are so big, it will take far more than landing UFC to correct it.

 

Second Weekend drops from Opening Weekend
-39.8% The Force Awakens (Dec. 25-27)
-58.7% Rogue One (Dec. 23-25)
-67.5% The Last Jedi (Dec. 22-24)
-65.2% Solo (Jun. 1-3)

 

I may be totally wrong... but, Disney wanted to use LF and SW for more that few movies.
SW was considered crucial to the launch of the new streaming service.
It was considered the leading, boosting force for it. Same for the new parks.
so it’s not only box office and what they’ve spent to buy LF.
But what they are spending now - while we’re talking - for those things and the money
they were supposed to gain in turn.
The problem is the value of the brand.

They are going to make - for instance - new deals for the merchandise.
The more strong the brand is, the more percentages they’re going to keep for themself and vice versa...

It’s a domino effect.

So I’m not calling for a disaster... I’m just saying it’s not as simple as box office.
That is just the starting point...

And sure Marvel is doing well. But when you think about all those things, even is
Marvel is doing better than they’ve hoped for (I don’t know if that’s the case, but let’s
pretend it is) in theory, that cannot be enough to reach the goals Disney shareholders
were looking for or expecting.

 

Black Panther performed well over projections. Solo/Wrinke in Time didn't. Incredibles 2 is going to be huge. A couple of films that under-performs isn't going to rock the boat that much.

 

one is a worse flop than john carter...disney will shake up lucasfilm and we will make episode 9 pay for kennedy's arrogance

 

Why is the movie with the lowest box office (but still the best one in the franchise ) not listed ?

the prisoner of azkaban