9/1: Spider-Mouse

[craig]

Late books!!!! I pray that Disney comes in and kicks out every writer (I'm looking at you Kevin Smith-you douche) and artist who claims to be "growing roses" when not turning in work on schedule

[TheDude]

Just so everyone knows, here are some additional numbers made by the movies, like the DVD sales info. Not all information is available as they only started tracking this stuff in around 2004. (all figures from the-numbers.com)

• X-Men: too early, 2000

• X2: too early, 2003

• X-Men Last Stand:

US DVD Sales: $103,500,447
Video Game Sales (X-Men: The Official Game):$16,000,000

• Wolverine: on sale Sept 15

• Spider-Man:
  

US DVD revenue (to July, 2004):$338,800,000
US VHS revenue (to July, 2004):$89,200,000
US TV rights (Fox, TBS/TNT):$60,000,000
Related toy sales (gross sales):$109,000,000

• Spider-Man2:

US DVD Sales: $4,196,484(partially tracked)
US TV rights (Fox, FX):$50,000,000;
Tie-in marketing deal with Burger King:$40,000,000

• Spider-Man3:

US DVD Sales: $123,940,221
US TV Rights (FX):10% of US box office ($33.6M)

That means you can add at least $968 million to what they made on these movies. If Disney where to market some Marval movies as well as Sony/Fox, ect did... then 4 Billion is a bargain!

so lets see, Kevin has 4 Billion already in income, add the $968 M listed on the-numbers.com and we have almost 5 Billion in income for just these 7 movies. THAT'S NUTS!

I agree with Kevin, 4 Billion is almost stealing Marvel.

[KevinYee]

I wasn't trying to say that those movies alone are worth purchase price. As someone here noted, those figures include the cut given to theater operators. My only point in the article was that the movies make serious money.

And the DVDs and video games, as you point out, make even more. There's also ancillary revenue from TV showings and cable, too.

[jaxbistro]

Kevin, I agree with pretty-much everything you said. I often find myself wincing at my fellow MiceChatters' input regarding anything new Disney does and how awful it is... especially way before any of us has even seen the product (i.e. it's a small world ride). I think this is tremendous for the future of Disney AND Marvel. Why do most MiceChatter always assume that everything Disney does is for the theme parks? Disney is a enormous company, with theme parks just a part of it... albeit probably the most noticable, but, indeed, just a part of it. I happen to love what Disney has done in the parks with outside franchises. I think it gives a breath of fresh air with Indi Jones, Star Wars and Muppets. As you pointed out Kevin, we have not seen Indi and Minnie dancing in the parades or Miss Piggy courting Goofy around the parks. Disney seems to understand this would upset the fans and respects it by not getting too much into it.

I too hope another park is created somewhere in the states, (hopefully in So Cal) but all Marvel-themed and loaded with thrill rides to compete with Magic Mountain and Knott's (in So Cal).

Let's not jump to conclusions and throw the powers that be under the bus just yet. Howabout waiting until something is generated before you burn them at the stake?

[Melonballer]

For the people who don't like Joe Quesada, let's remember where Marvel was when he took over. Their stock was worth less than a $1. Sales were in the toilet. While I certainly agree that he has made some bad decisions (Spider-man/MJ), he has turned Marvel Comics around. It is very possible had he not stepped in there would be no Marvel comics today. I hope Disney keeps their hands out of the creative end of Marvel like they do with Pixar.

Last thing we want is a Punisher comic where he points and gun at the mafia and makes noises like "Bang, Bang!" because he cannot use real bullets.

[Werner Weiss]

Originally Posted by KevinYee

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer.

It seems to me that Disney could build Hulk and Spider-Man rides once they owned Marvel, if they felt like it, but they couldn't force Uni to close the existing rides. That's what implies to me that Disney will either wait until Uni re-themes, or will focus on alternate Marvel characters.

I'm not a lawyer either. However, I think it's highly unlikely that that Disney could build Hulk and Spider-Man rides at WDW. There's a licensing contract between Universal and Marvel for the use of Marvel characters at IOA.

I have no idea what the terms and conditions are for that contract, how long it runs, what happens at renewal time, or what Marvel characters are included. However, my experience with contracts between corporations is that they normally contain language protecting either party if the other party changes ownership.

It's almost certain that the contract gives Universal exclusivity within a geographic area. Numerous websites today are claiming that Universal has exclusive theme park rights to the Marvel characters east of the Mississippi River. I don't know know if that's official information published by one of the parties to the contract, or if websites and bloggers are just copying from each other. But it makes sense.

(Along the same lines, Universal's rights to Harry Potter for IOA undoubtedly prevent Warner Bros. from building a Harry Potter Land in Florida, even if Warner Bros. wanted to get back into the theme park business in the U.S.)

A bigger question is whether Universal's theme park rights apply to all Marvel characters—past, present, and future—or only to specific characters.

In addition to characters, Universal uses the Marvel name at IOA. So another question is if Disney can even use the Marvel name in conjunction with their Florida theme parks.

Originally Posted by KevinYee

But most of this deal is about movies, DVDs, and merchandising, not theme parks.

I agree.

Assuming Disney completes the purchase of Marvel, the main theme park involvement for Disney will be to collect the licensing fee from Universal.

Over time, theme parks will become a bigger part of the equation. Marvel characters and storylines will appear at Disney parks that are not within a geographic area where Universal owns the the theme park rights.

[downtownBLUE]

I think that very missing from this discussion is what is happening in the market. Disney created the tween-girl market with stars like Hannah Montana, and arguably High School Musical. However, they have not been able to successfully broaden to young boys. The first foray was with Disney XD but it lacks a depth of characters. Simply, boys want pirates and super heroes which translates into not just rides and movies but enormous, enormous merchandising (again, Hannah Montana and HSM). Disney created this genre and I think they see the Marvel characters as a way to reach these young shoppers.

[FrankieD]

Before anyone starts salivating over the idea of the Marvel characters in any Disney park, the probability of that will be slim unless the lawyers that Universal used to negotiate the original contract with Marvel were idiots. If the lawyers were worth they're weight in gold, Universal would have negotiated an exclusive contract with Marvel for a very long-*** period of time - the 99 year deal. Also, the contract would have been all encompassing including all current and any future characters regardless if the character was actually used. (Keeping the doors open...)

As I said, I haven't personally read the contract, but since lawyers are lawyers, I wouldn't be shocked to learn that those three provisions were clearly spelled out.

It should also be noted that any attractions based on the characters and the subsequent technology (i.e. Spider Man) is not neccessarily owned by Marvel and thus wouldn't come into play.

On a side note and closer to my own heart, it does raise the question as to the degree that Marvel will maintain a presence at ComicCon. While I don't see it going away anytime soon, I still hate to see it diminished even a tad.

[CaptainTeach]

So, what does this merger mean for Disney Comics? For a while, Gladstone lost the deal while Marvel produced the comics for Disney. Then they got it back for a year or so, before going belly up. Gemstone now has the comics franchise, and rumors are it isn't very healthy. Will Marvel start producing them?

[FrankieD]

Originally Posted by hockeyland

As usual, some good thoughts in Kevin's article, mixed in with a lot of errors:

• Box office numbers are the gross; the Studio takes in, at very best, 50% of those dollars.
• Fox Family was purchased because of the cable channel (distribution) and had very little to do with characters
• Iger specifically mentioned that certain parks could take more advantage of the Marvel characters; IOA will have a long-term lock-up on the characters they use (you don't spend hundreds of millions of dollars building rides you don't have the rights to though the full expected life of the attraction); that leaves WDW out; there is no immediate fit or room in Anaheim; so, think Hong Kong, Shanghai and maybe Paris to see Marvel attractions/characters (look at the Hong Kong Alien themed Halloween promotion in Hong Kong -- it's much edgier than Disney normally is, just as Marvel is)
• WDW is cutting overhead to the bone -- any 5th park will be small, exclusive and expensive. Not likely a fit.
• Marvel purchase a response to Harry Potter? When they can't use the characters in WDW. That makes no sense. Even if they did, Potter would be five years old before Disney could open anything meaningful.
• Disney didn't have $4B sitting around and decided they had to do something with it; they made a big investment based on their ability to leverage the Marvel characters through much of the Disney Empire; Return on Investment is the goal and a 5th park or major additions to WDW don't have those potential ROIs.

You have to think bigger than just WDW on issues like this.

Oh, you left out that the contract between Marvel and Universal would have been eyes-only. No one at Disney would have had access to it during negotiation and thus would be blind as to the degree to which the Marvel characters would be available for use in the theme parks. To presume that Disney's motivation in buying the Marvel was stricktly for their theme park potential means that Disney would have taken a massive gamble on something that they were completely blind to. It'd be like betting all your chips on the first card dealt from a newly shuffled deck.

When you consider the potential in term of a Pixar production, or exclusive broadcast and cable rights, even live-action television series, there is certainly enough value gained from the acquisition. Oh and I might add that the only sure thing in terms of theme parks would be the yearly royalties from Universal which is certain to include the merchandising.

[FrankieD]

Originally Posted by KevinYee

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer.

It seems to me that Disney could build Hulk and Spider-Man rides once they owned Marvel, if they felt like it, but they couldn't force Uni to close the existing rides. That's what implies to me that Disney will either wait until Uni re-themes, or will focus on alternate Marvel characters.

But most of this deal is about movies, DVDs, and merchandising, not theme parks.

You can bet your sweet little dogie that at minimum Universal has an exclusive on the characters actually used in IoA if not on any and all Marvel characters. They'd have been idiots to give up exclusivity for any character not used.

[rgrant999]

Originally Posted by KevinYee

I wasn't trying to say that those movies alone are worth purchase price. As someone here noted, those figures include the cut given to theater operators. My only point in the article was that the movies make serious money.

And the DVDs and video games, as you point out, make even more. There's also ancillary revenue from TV showings and cable, too.

Kevin, not to pile on, but you are a good columnist and don't want you to look silly. When looking at the return on films, you must take into account first the net studios take (use 50% as a general rule as the poster said earlier) and remember that is ONLY the hard production costs. That does not include the costs of marketing the film and producing the theatrical prints. In fact, even the "most successful" films barely generate a return from their theatrical release and depend on future DVD rentals/sales, TV sales, etc.

So to say, for example, a film that generates $300M and cost $200M makes a $100M is not even close. In that situation, the studio probably took in $150M from release and put in $100M in marketing and print costs (not to mention studio overhead that supports the film) so they are in the hole $150M at that point (before the future revenue streams).

Just don't want you to be called out on something so obvious...

[craig]

"Will Marvel start producing them? (comics)"
************
If they do, expect them at least 3-4 months later than solicited.



"When you consider the potential in term of a Pixar production,.."
****************
I doubt that Pixar would be used for a character/story that didn't originate from them. Disney has there own CGI production company that could be used for Marvel characters.

BTW, Pixar already made a Fantastic Four movie. It was called The Incredibles.

[ZeekSlider]

Originally Posted by craig

BTW, Pixar already made a Fantastic Four movie. It was called The Incredibles.

Can't wait for that cross over.

Mr. Fantastic fighting with Elasta-Girl, Mr. Incredible and Thing having super-strongmen competitions for kicks, Invisible Woman and Violet being the level-headed ones...

...And Human Torch, Dash, and Jak Jak being boys and tearing up stuff for thrills...

[FrankieD]

Originally Posted by ZeekSlider

Can't wait for that cross over.

Mr. Fantastic fighting with Elasta-Girl, Mr. Incredible and Thing having super-strongmen competitions for kicks, Invisible Woman and Violet being the level-headed ones...

...And Human Torch, Dash, and Jak Jak being boys and tearing up stuff for thrills...

But we have to appeal to EVERYONE...the two teams team up to do battle against a rather nefarious foe. As the story unfolds, it turns out that Violet is actually Sue Storms long lost twin sister that was extracted in utero and held in an incubator for several years before being implanted in Elasti-Girl. Meanwhile, Elasti-Girl and Mr. Fantastic, sharing the same super power start a torrid affair which they are able to carry out by stretching their feet over hundreds of miles to be together whilst they are simultaneously having dinner with their current spouses. Thing discovers this and confronts Mr. Incredible who refuses to belief it and they go at it nearly leveling all of New York, except for the New Amsterdam Theatre where all of the plot lines are suddenly resolved in 15 minutes.