21st Century Fox Studio Sold To Disney! Sale Finalized See Post #368 (1 Viewer)

[dpippel]

Miramax was Disney's boutique label. The more apt comparison is with Fox Searchlight, which Disney is also acquiring as part of this deal. The best thing they can do on that front is simply keep their hands off and let the money flow in.

Agreed, but I was referring to the fact that Disney used Miramax to distribute R-rated films, something it will never do under the Disney label. Fox didn't have that problem with R-rated movies, and simply used Fox Searchlight for more "independent" releases.

 

[JimmyO]

With respect to the logos: the smartest thing Disney could do would be to pull off the illusion that they don't own the FOX stuff at all.

Some brand names carry stigmas along with them for certain consumers. The more the consumers have the illusion of choice, the better off that company is financially.

I bet there are a huge boatload of people that don't know that Minute Maid orange juice is owned by Coca Cola.

 

[Edwin-S]

This is straight-up capitalism. The successful, or those with the money, will "gobble up" the smaller and weaker. More than a year in the making, a number of countries approving the transaction and a divestiture of some Fox assets.

Concentration of ownership is not Capitalism.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Concentration of ownership is not Capitalism.

We can argue that point as capitalism took hold in this country during a period in which concentration of ownership was at its highest. There is a reason why the Sherman Anti-Trust Act was enacted about 130 years ago. Lets not conflate the basic definitions of capitalism and monopolistic practices together.

 

[Jason_V]

Concentration of ownership is not Capitalism.

Sure it is. Same exact thing with different words. Capitalism is where trade or goods are controlled by private owners for profit. Logically speaking, the bigger, more successful companies will buy or acquire the smaller, less successful companies to either reduce competition or gain entrance into a new market space. Why do they do this? To make money for their stockholders. In other words, for profit.

Concentration of ownership refers to fewer individuals or companies owning media outlets.

If anyone were truly, honestly worried about concentration of ownership, they would be up in arms over the number of stations (broadcast and cable) each of the major media companies owns. Comcast owns Universal and all those subsidiary companies; they own the medium of broadcast (cable) and at least one producing studio. How many stations, then, do they own?

These people should also be worried about Procter and Gamble owning four different major dish soap brands (Dawn, Joy, Gain and Ivory). Why? The more brands they own, the more they concentrate their ownership in that market segment.

But I don't think this has anything do to with a legit worry over concentration of ownership. I think it has everything to do with who is doing the acquisition.

 

[Sam Favate]

From the Big 6, we're essentially down to four major movie studios:
Disney, Warner, Universal and Sony.

Once upon a time, I would have included Paramount, but they're barely a functioning studio these days. Lionsgate is a big player, but they're not in the same league as the ones above.

The fewer studios, the fewer choices for consumers. Does anyone think Disney will produce output equal to Disney and Fox combined? I don't.

 

[Jason_V]

The fewer studios, the fewer choices for consumers. Does anyone think Disney will produce output equal to Disney and Fox combined? I don't.

Do we need that much output?

 

[TravisR]

Do we need that much output?

I think so because I'd much rather many types of movies over Disney's focus on a never ending string of massive budgeted franchise movies.

 

[Todd Erwin]

Agreed, but I was referring to the fact that Disney used Miramax to distribute R-rated films, something it will never do under the Disney label. Fox didn't have that problem with R-rated movies, and simply used Fox Searchlight for more "independent" releases.

Miramax became a bit more mainstream when Disney closed down its Hollywood Pictures label, which was the bulk of Disney's R-rated fare (The Rock, Deep Rising, etc.).

 

[Bryan^H]

I think it's probably likely that we'll see less catalog releases carrying the actual Fox brand on the case, but it's been that way for a while. I think they'll still be happy to take the checks from companies like Kino, Twilight Time and Criterion when it comes to licensing.

I'm afraid everything will be streaming only on their service to end all other streaming services, and no more deals with smaller labels such as Twilight Time.
But again I hope I am wrong on this.

 

[Jeff Adkins]

Not off to a great start so far.......

https://deadline.com/2019/03/elizabeth-gabler-fox-2000-to-shutter-as-disney-takes-over-1202580356/

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Do we need that much output?

Output is already down significantly from twenty years ago, as studios make fewer, more expensive motion pictures.

Not off to a great start so far.......

https://deadline.com/2019/03/elizabeth-gabler-fox-2000-to-shutter-as-disney-takes-over-1202580356/

Fox 2000 was probably the low-hanging fruit to shutter in the wake of this merger, but it's still a shame because it was making the kind of mid-budget character-driven movies that the major studios just don't make any more. If you look at the two 2018 releases from Fox 2000, Love, Simon and The Hate U Give, I don't see anybody else making those movies. They're not big enough for the major studios, but they're too expensive to be made independently.

 

[jcroy]

Sounds like many Fox executives no longer had anybody higher-up protecting them anymore, after the merger was official and final.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Sounds like many Fox executives no longer had anybody higher-up protecting them anymore, after the merger was official and final.

It's also the situation that happens with most mergers, which is that there are bunch of positions within the company where you suddenly have two people who are doing the same job. And when that happens, the person in the company doing the acquiring is much better situated than the person in the company being acquired.

When you look at distribution and marketing, in particular, there's no question that the Disney team has a much better track record than the Fox team.

 

[jcroy]

Fox's head of the home entertainmet (ie. dvds, blurays, etc ....) also departed today.

https://www.mediaplaynews.com/longt...ong-first-wave-of-post-disney-merger-layoffs/

 

[Robert Crawford]

Fox's head of the home entertainmet (ie. dvds, blurays, etc ....) also departed today.

https://www.mediaplaynews.com/longt...ong-first-wave-of-post-disney-merger-layoffs/

Some of us met Dunn during some of our HTF Meets. He was there a long time.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

I'm honestly surprised at some of the layoffs on the TV side, since Twentieth Television has always seemed like a much stronger studio than ABC Studios to me, with a much better stable of shows.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

Didn't they already try this strategy with Miramax?

I doubt you will see "A Disney Company" or something to that effect at the bottom if the Fox logo. We have yet to see such wording on the Marvel and Lucasfilm logos.

Agreed, but I was referring to the fact that Disney used Miramax to distribute R-rated films, something it will never do under the Disney label. Fox didn't have that problem with R-rated movies, and simply used Fox Searchlight for more "independent" releases.

Remember that Disney had two labels to distribute R-rated fare besides Miramax: Touchstone and Hollywood. Hollywood was shuttered because it wasn't profitable, but Touchstone continued on well into this decade, releasing DreamWorks output for Spielberg following its de-merger with Paramount, and even releasing Lucasfilm's Strange Magic animated feature before being shuttered.

I think using 20th? 21st? Century-Fox to release more adult content is a wise idea. If they handle it like LFL or Marvel, where everybody fully knows that Disney owns it, but they don't have to plaster their branding on it, I think there will be little to worry about. WB still has the largest library.

 

[Worth]

Output is already down significantly from twenty years ago, as studios make fewer, more expensive motion pictures.

If you're only looking at the major studios, that's true. But the total number of theatrical releases has been growing steadily.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

If you're only looking at the major studios, that's true. But the total number of theatrical releases has been growing steadily.

But it's all ultra-high-budget and low-budget. The mid-budget films have been largely wiped out. And the demise of Fox 2000 is only going to exacerbate that further.