1. Welcome to the Inside Universal Forums! Make sure to sign up and join the community! It's fast, free, and easy! DO IT!

Disney and FOX Merging Thread (Update Dec 14)

Discussion in 'Games, Movies & Sports' started by AlexanderMBush, Nov 6, 2017.

  1. Ryan

    Ryan Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    May 23, 2013
    Messages:
    3,472
    Likes Received:
    4,134
    For what? The Chapek reign? The Murdoch reign? Disney ain't changing no matter the CEO at this point.
     
    Nick C. likes this.
  2. zg44

    zg44 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2017
    Messages:
    379
    Likes Received:
    518
    I do think there's one major benefit to a Disney-Fox Entertainment merger in terms of reducing Marvel's CBM output. Instead of having 3 MCU and 3 X-Men movies a year as planned for 2018 and future years, we're likely to see that number brought down to around 3-4 MCU (including X-Men) probably. I'd assume that the X-Men will disappear for a few years after 2019 and then be re-introduced into the MCU with a "Homecoming" setup as mutants are added to the MCU.

    That should benefit the other major studios (in particular WB and Sony with their DC and Spider-verse movies respectively) by opening up a few more release dates for other studios' blockbusters as well as reducing the upcoming oversaturation of CBMs as WB/Fox/Sony had all planned large numbers of solo outings for 2nd tier and 3rd tier heroes in their efforts to mimic Disney.

    I'd also expect Disney to sell off Blue Sky, since I can't imagine Disney wanting to try to manage 3 animated movie production studios and given that Blue Sky has really struggled to develop franchises outside of Ice Age (which had a severe flop in the last outing of the franchise) and faced several movie delays/production snags over the years. Blue Sky is likely to be sold to Sony or Paramount both of which could use it to mimic Comcast and Disney with their model of 2 animated movie production studios.

    Watch Ferdinand closely in the upcoming weeks, if that doesn't perform well, then I don't see how Blue Sky has a long run with Disney.
     
  3. Nick C.

    Nick C. Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2011
    Messages:
    9,957
    Likes Received:
    9,258
    Location:
    Orlando
    I don't think that FOX will become Disney-fied after a purchase as Marvel and LucasFilm have changed very little. I see Disney using FOX as their studio to put out more Adult leaning franchises. Disney doesn't care about putting out R-rated moved, they just don't want to do it on their Walt Disney Studios brand. If there's money to be made, you can bet that Disney will be taking advantage of the opportunity.

    My only hope is that they keep the X-Men separate from The Avengers and then crossover with a Secret Wars movie down the line. And I really don't want them to recast Deadpool.
     
  4. zg44

    zg44 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2017
    Messages:
    379
    Likes Received:
    518
    The next 4 X-Men movies are likely to be untouched given that any Disney-Fox Entertainment merger won't be completed until the end of 2018 at the earliest (and later if Trump administration intervenes).

    So you'd definitely get New Mutants, Deadpool 2, X-Men Dark Phoenix, and Gambit.

    After that? I think everything's up in the air. They might keep Deadpool and Cable (Brolin - to keep him happy, and it's an easy transition from Thanos to Cable).

    But Feige is definitely going to get X-Men and FF. There's no way they'd keep them out of his orbit, and so far, Feige has wanted to keep everything in the MCU.

    I really do think we see the X-Men disappear until around 2021 after that when we could see them beginning to be integrated into the MCU. I think these Disney-Fox talks are a big reason why Fox hasn't announced the next 5 X-Men movies for 2019-2020 after Gambit.
     
    Nick C. likes this.
  5. Nick C.

    Nick C. Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2011
    Messages:
    9,957
    Likes Received:
    9,258
    Location:
    Orlando
    I mean, I would want any X-men movies to be a part of the MCU definitely, but i'm talking i'd prefer if they sort of kept The Avengers doing their own thing and the X-Men doing theirs within the same universe and then ultimately meet up for a Secret Wars Movie.

    I know it's not likely as Marvel is gonna Marvel, and with Iron Man, Cap, Thor, etc all likely on their way out in a few years, this could be exactly what they need to give Phase 4 some star power.
     
    zg44 likes this.
  6. zg44

    zg44 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2017
    Messages:
    379
    Likes Received:
    518
    Yeah, after those 3 and likely the GotG (after Vol 3) walk away, you're basically left with a group of Bucky as next Captain America as well as Captain Marvel, Black Panther, Doctor Strange, Scarlet Witch, etc. to carry the Avengers, but it's going to be hard to see how that packs the same star power that Avengers 3-4 has. They'll roll out the X-Men slowly around 2020-2022 and integrate them into the Avengers to make it all seem way bigger again.
     
    Nick C. likes this.
  7. Nick C.

    Nick C. Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2011
    Messages:
    9,957
    Likes Received:
    9,258
    Location:
    Orlando
    Don't forget they have Spider-Man to lead the charge of the new Avenger team as long as Sony continues to let them.
     
    zg44 likes this.
  8. zg44

    zg44 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2017
    Messages:
    379
    Likes Received:
    518
    Yeah, as of now that deal only extends through Avengers 3-4 and Homecoming's sequel, but I'd guess that both sides will want to extend the deal. It makes it easier for Spiderman to continue without needing reboots every couple of years.
     
    Nick C. likes this.
  9. belloq87

    belloq87 Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,099
    Likes Received:
    1,827
    Location:
    The middle ground between light and shadow...
    I don't believe that's 100% the case. It is 100% the case as long as Iger remains.

    The company needs new, creative blood in a major way. You may think that's unlikely even if Iger leaves, but it's obviously more likely than if he stays.
     
  10. zg44

    zg44 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2017
    Messages:
    379
    Likes Received:
    518
    To be fair though, he's sort of setting up Disney for the long haul; it's like a battleship changing course at this point, except that it's now 3x as big as it was when he took over (4x larger if they get Fox's entertainment assets).

    Disney is what it is imo: a set of large content silos that create specifically designed/targeted content to maximize reach.

    Whoever takes it over will basically just need to not screw things up...
     
  11. Nick C.

    Nick C. Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2011
    Messages:
    9,957
    Likes Received:
    9,258
    Location:
    Orlando
    From a business standpoint, Iger has been an amazing CEO.

    And lol at the thought of a “creative” CEO in this day and age. It’s all about giving Wall Street the returns that they want and not screwing up.
     
    jtsalien likes this.
  12. belloq87

    belloq87 Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,099
    Likes Received:
    1,827
    Location:
    The middle ground between light and shadow...
    I don't think anybody would argue otherwise.

    Has he been an amazing CEO for the theme parks? No. We're seeing a spending spree now, yes, but that's after a decade of relative stagnation and extremely questionable decision-making in Florida.

    So, since I care about the theme parks, and am not a shareholder or member of the Board of Directors, my evaluation of Iger is that he has been a master of content acquisition, but has absolutely no passion for the parks.
     
  13. scott_walker

    scott_walker Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2014
    Messages:
    5,793
    Likes Received:
    10,462
    Location:
    Glasgow
    What did you think about Eisner?

    My opinion about al this has been changing daily but when it comes to theme parks, I think the merging would be bad as it will lock up a lot of IPs that Disney would have no interest in using and hey wouldn’t lease them out to others.
     
  14. Nick C.

    Nick C. Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2011
    Messages:
    9,957
    Likes Received:
    9,258
    Location:
    Orlando
    The only IPs Fox has that I could see being used for theme parks could be the Alien or Planet of the Apes franchises, but I’m not sure I see Disney using those anywhere.

    Ice Age is probably the only thing I can think of that would have a chance (that is if they hold on to Blue Sky). There’s enough with X-Men that they could easily have their own land in DLR if they wanted, though.
     
  15. zg44

    zg44 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2017
    Messages:
    379
    Likes Received:
    518
    Based on news that AT&T-TimeWarner trial will take place in March and judge will decide by April or May, I don't think Comcast will bid before then.

    Most likely, Disney and Fox will sign an agreement in the next 2 weeks.

    If Comcast decides to outbid Disney, their bid won't be released until May or June.

    Any Fox Entertainment-Disney merger will take a full year to complete, so there'd still be a reasonable window for Comcast to consider crashing the party after the judge decides AT&T-TimeWarner.

    If Comcast can see a profitable rationale to offering $5bn more in shares along with a good legal result from AT&T-TimeWarner, then don't be surprised if they crash the Disney-Fox party in May or June.
     
  16. belloq87

    belloq87 Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,099
    Likes Received:
    1,827
    Location:
    The middle ground between light and shadow...
    Taken on balance from the 30,000 foot view, I don't think anybody could make the case that Eisner wasn't very, very good for the Florida theme parks. His partnership with Frank Wells resulted in the most exciting period of growth that Walt Disney World has ever seen.

    Post-Wells, I think his ego started to really dominate his thinking and actions in detrimental ways, and the "corporate"-ness of Disney began to take hold. However, I truly believe he was always passionate about the theme parks and (mostly) wanted to deliver a great experience for people.
     
  17. Joe

    Joe aka TestTrack321 Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2012
    Messages:
    5,479
    Likes Received:
    8,008
    Location:
    Akron, OH
    Wells was the spark for the parks not Eisner. Remember that Eisners the one who installed Pressler over Burke.
     
    jtsalien likes this.
  18. Nick C.

    Nick C. Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2011
    Messages:
    9,957
    Likes Received:
    9,258
    Location:
    Orlando
    Exactly.

    Eisner is given far too much credit for the parks. Also, let’s remember Disney was a much smaller company back when Eisner was going build crazy on the parks. Now Disney is so bloated, Iger has just taken on the roll of deal maker and “guy that makes Wall Street happy”.
     
    jtsalien likes this.
  19. belloq87

    belloq87 Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,099
    Likes Received:
    1,827
    Location:
    The middle ground between light and shadow...
    I gave Wells fair credit, just as I pointed out Eisner's downturn after his death.

    But I completely stand by my belief that Eisner, in general, had more passion for the parks than Iger, who I believe only cares about them from the most "bottom line" viewpoint.

    And again, since I'm not a shareholder, Iger being the "guy that makes Wall Street happy" means nothing to me if that doesn't translate into better theme parks. By the end of Iger's tenure, WDW may be a better place, but we can't make that judgment now.
     
  20. zg44

    zg44 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2017
    Messages:
    379
    Likes Received:
    518
    The problem for Disney parks is similar to what Universal parks faced after the GE merger. After the NBC-Universal merger, the parks were just a small fraction of the business, while the cable networks and broadcast brought in the earnings and growth. Under GE, the cable nets were the focus until Harry Potter went to the parks and Comcast took over and realized that they could dramatically grow the parks division.

    The same happened to Disney in the late 90s, as paytv grew, ESPN (and Disney channel to a lesser extent) became the largest growth drivers.

    Iger expanded the movie studio with his undervalued purchases, and the parks were just an earnings generator funding the rest of the company (they throw off several billion a year in cash flow).

    It's worth noting that in Disney parks itself, the fastest growing division of late has been Disney cruises, and it should expand even faster when the next 3 ships are finished.

    Iger's grand play at Fox is to double down on content. Disney studios would produce somewhere around $15-20bn in content annually and be able to sustain 100+ million subscribers worldwide like Netflix. That's the grand plan.

    The reality is the next CEO will be tasked with overseeing that part of the next 10-20 years of Disney, their transition away from paytv and towards streaming. That's the main battlefield for the next CEO.
     

Share This Page