Disney Possibly Buying Fox4754
 Captain Corrector
|
CaptainCanuck private msg quote post Address this user | |
| CNBC reported that Fox has been in talks with Disney. The deal would include The TV production business as well as the 20th Century Fox movie studio. Considering Disney owns Marvel and 20th Century Fox owns the film rights to many Marvel entities including the X-Men, the Fantastic Four, Deadpool and others, this deal could unite a big portion of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. |
||
| Post 1 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
Hcanes private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Would have been interesting. Apparently the deal is now dead. https://www.cbr.com/disney-fox-deal-reportedly-dead/ |
||
| Post 2 • IP flag post | ||
|
Captain Corrector
|
CaptainCanuck private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Depends on the source. This link is from one hour ago. https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2017/11/06/disney-fox-potential-merger-makes-it-tough-for-netflix.html |
||
| Post 3 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user | |
| That's pretty hilarious. "We can't get Fox to sell the X-Men? Fine. We'll just buy Fox. Problem solved."  |
||
| Post 4 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
comic_book_man private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @CaptainCanuck well the x-men movies have been hit or miss, and my god the fantastic four movies have been worse than garbage...Stan Lee was correct a year ago when he said eventually Marvel/Disney would re-obtain ownership of all of it's characters for movie production. We'll see how it plays out...if Disney could get Star Wars, X-Men/FF should be a piece of cake? |
||
| Post 5 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
Deadpoolica private msg quote post Address this user | |
| They had talks weeks ago, everyone is finding out today that's why all the articles...as mentioned above deal is dead & they aren't talking | ||
| Post 6 • IP flag post | ||
|
Captain Corrector
|
CaptainCanuck private msg quote post Address this user | |
| On and off talks are common for Hollywood acquisitions. From CBR.com "As a result, the deal is now effectively dead, though it should be noted that in Hollywood, deals do have a tendency to be resurrected after being officially announced as dead; the current deal between Sony and Marvel to share Spider-Man went through that very news cycle. The fact that Disney and Fox were in talks in the first place would indicate that there remains a chance, however slight, that the studios might yet come to an agreement." |
||
| Post 8 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
comic_book_man private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @kaptainmyke @CaptainCanuck The movie making rights return to Marvel no matter what after a certain time I believe, that's what happened to FOX with Dare Devil - they decided they couldn't make a good enough reboot movie in time so it went back to Marvel. I'm sure Disney has put the offer on the table, so now FOX needs to get to work to analyze the sustainability(profit) of continuing to produce FF & X-MEN movies... I think FF will return before X-MEN, since X-MEN for all it's bad movies has actually had some good ones. They are taking a new approach to X-MEN in their latest movies and it's been a winner overall. |
||
| Post 9 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
OrbitCityComics private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Disney owns ABC, so legally it can not include the public broadcast networks, but may include the cable stations, which is THE most lucrative part of Fox productions. It includes FX, FXX, FSN, Big Ten Network, Fox News, Fox Movie Channel NatGeoWild and National Geographic. There's reasons why Disney wants Fox, and why Fix wants to sell. Murdoch has been working a deal to buy the Sky Network in the UK, which may require more capital, and unlike US law which only looks at domestic ownership when figuring in regulations; UK law looks at world wide ownership. Disney would want Fox news since it doesn't currently own a cable news network. Fox would want to unload with all the currently scandal surrounding Ailes and O'Reilly. FX has used their own television production to create some amazing TV shows like SoA, the Shield and Rescue Me. Production also owns many Fox broadcast TV shows. Ironically, the weakest link is movie production. Movies are expensive to create and you can't cancel them after them three episodes. Netflix comes into play, too. Many Fox productions shows are on Netflix, and could be yanked in an effort by Disney to create their own streaming service to compete against Netflix. Buying the TV production allows Disney to fill in a ton of holes in more adult oriented programming to show on a possible streaming service. |
||
| Post 10 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
VillageIdiot private msg quote post Address this user | |
ANYTHING... to move my Disney stock shares  |
||
| Post 11 • IP flag post | ||
 COLLECTOR
|
JLS_Comics private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Deadpool doesn't like the idea: "If this is true, I wonder how the fudge it would affect Deadpool?" Ryan Reynolds Twitter Post |
||
| Post 12 • IP flag post | ||
 I bought a meat grinder on amazon for $60 and it's changed my life.
|
kaptainmyke private msg quote post Address this user | |
| This deal might actually still happen. | ||
| Post 13 • IP flag post | ||
|
Captain Corrector
|
CaptainCanuck private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @kaptainmyke Quote: Originally Posted by kaptainmyke That's why I posted it. |
||
| Post 14 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
Lonestar private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by OrbitCityComics There is conflicting reports whether this deal is dead or still viable. I guess time will tell. As you state, Fox broadcast stations and network would not be part of the deal. But all the reports I have read state that Fox News and Fox Sports 1 would also NOT be part of the deal. Your last statement about streaming service is spot on. It is most likely what this is all about. Disney (and all networks) are trying to get streaming services up and running and attractive to the most people. They all know this is the future of TV and need to build a catalog to compete with Netflix. |
||
| Post 15 • IP flag post | ||
 COLLECTOR
|
shrewbeer private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Looks like the deal is done https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/05/disney-and-fox-are-closing-in-on-deal-could-be-announced-next-week--sources.html |
||
| Post 16 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
BabaLament private msg quote post Address this user | |
| From a comics perspective, how is this going to shake out? Dark Horse has been home to Aliens & Predator, and they even picked up Terminator from the second series (first series was NOW Comics I believe...) forward. The recent reboot of the Aliens comic line has been on-point; so is Dark Horse about to lose more comic lines (after Star Wars) to Disney/Marvel? I've always loved the art from Dark Horse; its always been far more visceral than anything put out by Marvel or DC (with the exception of Arkham Asylum). I don't see Disney as being willing to put such dark material under the Marvel brand, but I could be wrong. After all, the House of Mouse did finance Pulp Fiction. |
||
| Post 17 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
Scorpion private msg quote post Address this user | |
| At this point Disney will pay what it needs to get back what they need, am sure they will make back that 60 billion to buy fox. There's no way Disney can let the Marvel properties go to a new studio that will start churning out years worth of reboots and sequels to deny a homecoming for the X-Men, Fantastic Four, and their stable of heroes and stories. Letting those slip away could mean another decade or two before Disney has any chance at regaining them again. Likewise, they can't pass up this chance to obtain the lucrative Avatar franchise -- ignore anyone trying to pretend James Cameron's sequels won't do monster box office and home entertainment business, there's no sane argument to back up such ridiculous notions, and those sequels will bring in billions upon billions in box office and billions more on the home market. Pandora -- The World of Avatar is already part of Disney World, and they undoubtably want to increase the connection by bringing the series fully into the Disney fold. There's a lot of money involved, and many years of a company's future depend on making the right choices, the right compromises, and knowing when to stay at the table or walk away to let things settle down. Remember the Disney-Sony deal to "share" Spider-Man (which will eventually see the wall-crawler fully return to Marvel, whether or not Disney buys Sony entirely) took quite a while, and this is an immensely bigger deal than that one. So right now, the studios are on a break from negotiating, but they'll eventually come back together. Why? Because they have to, because it makes too much sense, and because the cost of not making the deal will be high for both parties. Fox has what Disney wants, and both sides know it. Disney is the partner with the most incentive to give Fox what they want, and both sides know that, too. So both Disney and Fox know that this deal, in whatever final form it takes, is the best one for both sides. It's how they each get the most of what they want and need, and for both of them there's a ticking clock creating strong incentive to come back to the negotiating table and make it happen. The rights to the first six Star Wars films are likewise a bigger deal than you might fully appreciate, too. Any rerelease in theaters, any Blu-ray box set, and any longterm ideas for maximizing merchandising with those films has to be put off for at least a few more years and probably much longer, if Disney can't make a deal with Fox for all six -- especially involving the first film. With Star Wars: The Last Jedi hitting theaters in a matter of weeks, and the final chapter of this new trilogy releasing in 2019, that leaves little room to plan a celebratory mass-merchandising boom and potential global rerelease of the original series. |
||
| Post 18 • IP flag post | ||
|
I bought a meat grinder on amazon for $60 and it's changed my life.
|
kaptainmyke private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by BabaLament Harvey Weinstein and Harvey Keitel. Not Disney. Or Miramax. Miramax was founded in 1979 by brothers Bob and Harvey Weinstein, and was a leading independent film motion picture distribution and production company before it was acquired by the Walt Disney Company on June 30, 1993. Shortly thereafter, Pulp Fiction was then released. |
||
| Post 19 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Disney won't be allowed to buy up all their competitors in the entertainment industry. At some point, the anti-trust laws will kick in. I wonder what Disney really wants in this deal. It isn't the X-Men, much as comics fans might wish that were the case. There's something...or several things...that Disney wants that are much more valuable. |
||
| Post 20 • IP flag post | ||
|
I bought a meat grinder on amazon for $60 and it's changed my life.
|
kaptainmyke private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by DocBrown 100% agreed. |
||
| Post 21 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
BabaLament private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Does anyone have any information as to how the comics side of this deal is going to play out? Is Dark Horse going to lose their licenses to Marvel (again) once Disney takes ownership of the Fox properties? | ||
| Post 22 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Lonestar private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by DocBrown More content for streaming service. Streaming is the future of TV viewing. Disney is set to launch its streaming service in 2019. All the networks and cable channels are scrambling to find a way to survive in what will be the new future that isn't far off. We already have Netflix, Hulu and Amazon Prime, not to mention the separate streaming services for HBO, etc. And even things like Acorn. Now you have others jumping into it like YouTube and the rumor of Apple launching its own streaming service. CBS put the new Star Trek on their own streaming. More will follow. So Disney needs more content to make their streaming service attractive enough to pull viewers away from the established services or to make people want to buy their service as well. |
||
| Post 23 • IP flag post | ||
 It was a one trick pony show but always hilarious.
|
GAC private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by BabaLament Without knowing the details of the deal it would be a pretty safe bet. Disney probably needs to honor the deal in place with Dark Horse. Once that expires they have no obligation to renew. And why would they? Of course they would bring their properties to their own publishing company. |
||
| Post 24 • IP flag post | ||
|
Captain Corrector
|
CaptainCanuck private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @DocBrown Quote: Originally Posted by DocBrown You don’t have to wonder. Disney wants Hulu so they can compete with Netflix. It’s not a secret. |
||
| Post 25 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by CaptainCanuck Yeah, that's what I suspected, going over the list of assets that was supposed to be included in the deal. From the link above: "The deal contemplates the sale of Fox's Nat Geo, Star, regional sports networks, movie studios and stakes in Sky and Hulu, among other properties. What would remain at Fox includes its news and business news divisions, broadcast network and Fox sports." So is there published confirmation of this? |
||
| Post 26 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by Lonestar I can't even pretend to understand the ins and outs of "streaming." I guess it's a big thing? Seems to be a return to what TV already was: instant and universal broadcasts of programming, only, instead of that broadcast being in the form of radio waves sent over the air, it's now in the form of digital bits and bytes sent digitally...which, since the digital switch in 2009, seems to mean there's no difference at all in the technology. Do I have that about right...? There was a certain social construct in the Western world revolving around the set time schedules of broadcast television, which seems now to have vanished, what with there being no more "schedule" (prime time is now a thing of the past...?), and content being "dumped" for entire "seasons" on one specific date. Whereas, in 1980, everyone in America gathered around their TV set to see who shot JR, now there are hundreds, if not thousands, of competing programs, available when the viewer demands it. Can anyone explain what "streaming" really is, as opposed to just "viewing"? My limited understanding is that the idea of "streaming" is "live TV", like the news or a sporting event, as opposed to a "show" that is taped and then released on various platforms. Is there more to it than that? |
||
| Post 27 • IP flag post | ||
|
COLLECTOR
|
shrewbeer private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by DocBrown Yes, you watch what you want, when you want it. No need to pay $100s of dollars to a cable company for "all" the channels, when you can pick up what you want when you want it instead. a la carte I don't have cable. I have 4 different streaming services to pick from on my TV, and I can pick up or drop any of them at any given time if they do or don't have something I want to watch. Best of all, all told I'm under $50/month. If Disney gets Hulu... That will be huge. Yuge. |
||
| Post 28 • IP flag post | ||
|
Collector
|
Scorpion private msg quote post Address this user | |
| first of all streaming is cheaper then cable, i had cable & internet and was paying almost $160 for this, now cable is $60 +Netflix 10.00 & play-station VUE live tv $30= $100 and not locked in to 2 year contract with the cable co. so now am saving $60.00 a month $720 year saving, that why streaming is big, no contract. |
||
| Post 29 • IP flag post | ||
 Collector
|
thelastbard private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @DocBrown Streaming is two things... 1. Content available to view any time you want using a certain platform. In this case, Disney has their own proprietary "channel" available on a device - Roku, Amazon Fire, web-based, PS4, X-Box One, etc... 2. Content available at certain times - New season is available all at once as of X time or new episodes available on X days at X time or X episodes (certain number of episodes at a time) available at a certain time... As @shewbeer is saying, a la carte television is the aim... I want disney, I want HBO, I want Fox, etc... Over time, a la carte WILL be the way to go and more and more places will offer live tv options, too, regionally, nationally, and internationally. Right now, streaming is more about general content - past tv and movies PLUS new, original content to STREAM (buffer and watch real time) as opposed to downloading to your PC. |
||
| Post 30 • IP flag post | ||
This topic is archived. Start new topic?