Spiderman is [no longer] out of the MCU

[Chiefspants]

Originally Posted by Sure-Oz

This feels over.

@Borys_Kit: EXCLUSIVE: SPIDER-MAN divorce goes up a level as Sony responds, says it's Disney's decision to end partnership. "We are disappointed." https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/he...r_breakingnews

I think they're just pulling an Eric Berry and bringing the public into the negotiating table. After Far From Home and the plan for Spidey to be Iron Man's heir apparent Sony has more leverage than they've had for a long time... especially if Disney wants half of the profits.

[WhawhaWhat]

Originally Posted by Chiefspants

I think they're just pulling an Eric Berry and bringing the public into the negotiating table. After Far From Home and the plan for Spidey to be Iron Man's heir apparent Sony has more leverage than they've had for a long time... especially if Disney wants half of the profits.

and not just half of Spider-man, they alledgedly wanted half of Venom, Kraven, Morbius and any other movie that involves Spider-man characters as well.

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by WhawhaWhat

and not just half of Spider-man, they alledgedly wanted half of Venom, Kraven, Morbius and any other movie that involves Spider-man characters as well.

Yea but didn't they also offer to put money in thus taking a risk as well? Where as with the last 2 they were Sony funded so Marvel had no risk.

[Jamie]

Originally Posted by Mecca

Yea but didn't they also offer to put money in thus taking a risk as well? Where as with the last 2 they were Sony funded so Marvel had no risk.

Yeah, I was about to point this out. They want a 50/50 co-production, so they'd be paying half the budget as well.

[WhawhaWhat]

Originally Posted by Mecca

Yea but didn't they also offer to put money in thus taking a risk as well? Where as with the last 2 they were Sony funded so Marvel had no risk.

Disney had no risk but also only got 5%. Now Disney wants 50% of the risk for 50% of the profit. If you take a movie like Venom and put the Disney deal in place, then Sony loses hundreds of millions.

[Buehler445]

Originally Posted by WhawhaWhat

Disney had no risk but also only got 5%. Now Disney wants 50% of the risk for 50% of the profit. If you take a movie like Venom and put the Disney deal in place, then Sony loses hundreds of millions.

What am I missing?

If Disney has half the risk, I’d take that to mean half the expense. If they have half the expense and get half of the revenue, the margin would be better than giving away 5% of the net.

Meaning that if it made money Sony would get less. If it lost money Sony would lose less. It wouldn’t take a profitable movie and make it unprofitable.

50% income - 50% expense = net

Vs

100% income - 100% expense = net -5%

So what am I missing?

[Setsuna]

Originally Posted by Buehler445

What am I missing?

If Disney has half the risk, I’d take that to mean half the expense. If they have half the expense and get half of the revenue, the margin would be better than giving away 5% of the net.

Meaning that if it made money Sony would get less. If it lost money Sony would lose less. It wouldn’t take a profitable movie and make it unprofitable.

50% income - 50% expense = net

Vs

100% income - 100% expense = net -5%

So what am I missing?

Bear in mind Disney is still making 100% of profits off of merchandising. So this is about Disney being greedy.

[WhawhaWhat]

Originally Posted by Buehler445

What am I missing?

If Disney has half the risk, I’d take that to mean half the expense. If they have half the expense and get half of the revenue, the margin would be better than giving away 5% of the net.

Meaning that if it made money Sony would get less. If it lost money Sony would lose less. It wouldn’t take a profitable movie and make it unprofitable.

50% income - 50% expense = net

Vs

100% income - 100% expense = net -5%

So what am I missing?

Venom grossed $856 million with a budget of $100 million. Would you rather have 100% of that or 50%?
Spider-Man: FFH grossed $1.1 billion with a budget of $160 million. Would you rather have 100% of that or 50%?

Spider-Man is a 1000 ft tent pole and now it looks like Venom may be as well. Even if the other movies are money losers, Sony will still have a profitable franchise by far.