Discussion in 'Games, Movies & Sports' started by AlexanderMBush, Nov 6, 2017.
100% agree. WB is in a weak state plus it had Potter.
Which seems more and more likely.
AT&T, Justice Department Settlement Talks Fail | Deadline
I think AT&T refusing to sell any part probably means their lawyers are more confident of winning. You could say that's hubris, but this case is before the same judge that accepted Comcast-NBCUniversal merger.
Government's case is a long shot given how competitive both media and distribution are at the current moment.
Neither company has more than 35% market share in any market, and there's no overlap.
Disney-Fox is probably more likely to face a successful DoJ lawsuit because it's horizontal and some market shares of the combination will approach 40-45%.
Government is bringing up AT&Ts arguments against Comcast merging and then asked why they changed their mind as well as pointing out that AT&T distribution network of Pay TV would harm consumers. That's part of why they were saying that they would have to divest the Turner networks (Which are literally the most valuable part internationally).
I think the biggest issue is now wireless is now involved as a new medium as well as satellite.
That's true but the expanding market supports the argument that there's more paytv distributors than just satellite or linear cable now.
i.e. Playstation Vue or a pure wireless co. like T-Mobile getting into paytv this week or YouTube TV or Hulu Live or Amazon Channels.
That's a problem for the government in trying to say that DirecTV combined with Turner has the ability to raise prices on consumers with impunity. There's now virtual/internet distribution of networks, and AT&T can point to the low price of DirecTV Now as proof.
I do see one huge positive for Comcast-NBCUniversal though out of this. If AT&T wins clearly, then Comcast may be able to use that as an excuse to buy other media co's knowing that DoJ is less likely to challenge.
Universal is going downhill.
Lololololololololololololol this is a bad post.
Not sure how this applies to Disney and FOX merging...
Because you have a habit of derailing threads with trolling - consider this a final warning.
Someone brought up Avengers and X-Men having trouble existing in the same universe because of how one side is rejoiced and the other is hated. I think part of that may be because one side was given/acquired powers but the other was born with them.
If that is an issue though how about a new cross over.... X-Men meet the Incredibles.
Who said that? Just make an AvX movie in the MCU reset.
The X-Men are hated because they like to keep their identities a secret, which causes people not trust them.
The Avengers, on the other hand - every Joe Schmoe living in the MCU knows that Tony Stark is Iron Man, Steve Rodgers is Cap, Bruce Banner is The Hulk and Thor is... well Thor. They also are linked with the government because of The Sokovia Accords. People have a reason to trust The Avengers because people know who they are.
The Sokovia Accords are the thing that started Civil War, one of the key reasons was people had issue with revealing their secret identities.
Spiderman keeps his identity secret to protect his loved ones. Professor X keeps his identity out in the open and fights in legal battles for mutant rights. Each has their own reasons for divulging their identity or not.
I’m hearing on other threads that Disney right now is thriving as are marketing all these new attarctionc and concepts while Universal has Nintendo land. Also, Disney buying off fox means that they now have more marvel to use. At this point the name of a marvel attraction is associated with Disney. Marvel is associated with Disney. Universal is amazing but I feel that it’s being outshined.
Universal has a lot up their sleeve. With how huge Universal is going, it takes years to get all their ducks in a row.
Ryan Murphy (Glee, AHS, Nip/Tuck, American Crime Story, a good 65% of fox's successful live action series) is the first "casualty" of Disney-Fox merger, he was originally going to re-up his contract after it ended, however since the news of the merger, it seems he would leave to go to Netflix/Amazon.
Disney Risks Losing One of TV's Creative Geniuses in Fox Deal - Bloomberg
Disney paid $4B for MARVEL and have gotten a great return.
With paying $54B for FOX, I don't see a MARVEL kind of return for their $$$$.
I don’t see the return being as obvious as the Marvel and LucasFilm purchases.
However, I do think that if this move leads to a successful competitor to Netflix, THAT will be seen as the real return. Time will tell with this for Disney, imo.
Marvel's probably worth somewhere around $15-20 billion on a separate basis, so there's no way the Fox purchase will match a 300-400% return like the Marvel purchase has shown.
But, the real value of Fox's assets will be in the streaming services that are being launched. Here's the basics, an ESPN streaming service can probably get somewhere around 40-50 million US customers based on ESPN's current US properties and theoretical additions (i.e. MNF eventually being available on the service in the 2020s as cord cutting accelerates).
But if you add Fox's RSNs, Sky Sports (after Disney/Fox takes full control), and Star India Sports to that, all of a sudden you create a chance for a far more robust "global ESPN streaming service" with somewhere around 60+ million US customers and another tens of millions outside the US (let's just say 40-50 million non-US customers, mostly European in terms of value).
That's a much more powerful and "future proof" ESPN streaming service. As a sidenote, Facebook placed a $600 million bid recently for one of the major Indian cricket tournaments that was instead taken by Star India (which will go to Disney as a part of this). That just shows what Disney is up against in the future. Creating a much more robust global streaming service would probably be worth twice as much as a basic ESPN streaming service. If I had to project the value added there, it'd probably be somewhere around $30-40 billion.
As for the television/movie side of the business, the gains are less robust there (probably because we will see a reduction in X-Men output and some Fox franchises like Aliens or Apes), but there's still gains.
A Disney-only global streaming service probably gets somewhere like 60-80 million global subscribers after 5-7 years. If you add FX/National Geographic, Fox television studio shows, 20th Century Fox movies/Fox Searchlight, etc., you're probably looking at a service that can more capably aim at all ages and get over 100 million subscribers. If I had to project the value added there, it'd be somewhere around $15-20 billion.
That gets you a total value added of somewhere around $45-60 billion. That's basically a 100% gain over what they're paying for the assets. It's not the 300-400% of Marvel in percentage terms, but it's a much larger gain in dollar value if Disney has 2 robust streaming services with over 100 million subscribers and much broader reach in terms of customers (as well as stronger firepower for buying and keeping sports rights away from Facebook/Amazon/Verizon etc.).
Separate names with a comma.