|
Community Links |
Social Groups |
Pictures & Albums |
Members List |
Search Forums |
Advanced Search |
Go to Page... |
|
Thread Tools |
07-16-2014, 04:44 PM | #11 |
Crimson Guard
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: WV
Posts: 3,155
|
Quote:
No you wouldn't because Hasbro doesn't invest 1 cent into the movie and it provides them free advertising for the product they do make money on, the toys.
Even the $1 million they invest in the story ideas gets paid back to them if the movie is made. The movie studio takes the entire financial risk in making the movie, 5% is obviously a fair deal for the level of investment each party has if Hasbro has agreed to such a deal. The bigger issue fans should be picking up on is the fact that Hasbro, the brand owner and manager, develops that horrid story ideas. Please tell us how you would justify, if you were Hasbro, telling Paramount that you should get more money than the 5% deal when Paramount is spending up to $500 million on each Transformers movie and $200 million on each Joe movie to produce and market the films with zero risk to you and you have cashed out $150 million in royalty for the brand and received free advertising that will drive sales of the product you do invest in and is your actual business, the toys. I'm curious how you would justify that, and justify how that free $150 million and advertising that drives toy sales to annual sales of over $300 million plus (at least for Transformers) equates to not caring about money. For all they have to give up they should certainly get more money from the movies. |
07-16-2014, 07:50 PM | #12 |
Iron Grenadier
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 950
|
Quote:
It's easy to justify. Hasbro made the brand, the IP or whatever. It's from their creative team that made the story, the characters, the look of the characters, etc. It appears all they do is give up complete control of their product to Paramount, they go in change the story, change the look of the characters and then Hasbro has to adapt to those changes that are now outside of their control. They've lost control of their brand at that point and have to bend over backwards to appease Paramount with their movie tie in products. It's not zero risk for Hasbro they still have to make new molds, new toys and other products based on the movies. A prime example of that is the toys and other tie ins for Rise of Cobra. Hasbro lost a lot on that end of it.
For all they have to give up they should certainly get more money from the movies. You haven't quantified a single loss to Hasbro in regards to anything you claim they have given up. From a financial perspective they have profited extremely handsomely even though they have given up some control of the brand, and by giving up control of their brands thye have grown their major in house toy brand Transformers. G.I. Joe hasn't worked out so well but was already a dying brand by 2008, having declined to $30 million in revenue in 2008 from $88 million in 2003. ROC generated almost $100 million for them in 2009, so even though the brand died afterwards it was already dying in 2008 so they actually profited and benefited for one year more than they would have if they continued on the same course of the 25th line without a movie. Hasbro has to make toy molds anyways, that is there business. The risk on the toy end is a risk they face anyways regardless of whether there is a movie. They risk nothing from the expense it takes to get the movie to screen, which costs a lot more than making toys. That is the discussion. The article states it is a low risk strategy for Hasbro which is a claim made likely from discussions with Hasbro and Hasbro's perspective, not simply the journalists opinion. Battleship bombed at the box office and Hasbro didn't lose a penny from that film. Fact is, they sold a lot more Battleship branded product beyond board games that year as retailers ordered in anticipation of the movie but also got their 5% of the box office revenue. That is why Hasbro gets only 5%, because they have nothing to lose from the actual film. That is what the intellectual rights are worth to movie studios and Hasbro. Last edited by backhawkdown; 07-16-2014 at 07:56 PM.. |
07-16-2014, 10:20 PM | #13 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: chicago
Posts: 36
|
Inhumanoids, air raiders ,visionaries, and mask ( yes hasbro owns this now )... Make all of these they would all make great movies and hasbro could sell us all the great toys with updates ... Omg wouldnt this be awesome!!!!!
|
07-17-2014, 12:45 AM | #14 |
Retired Toy Hunter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Burbank, Ca.
Posts: 12,048
|
Hasbro is partnered with Discovery for the HUB Network.
Hasbro should start their own studios and make their own Movies. If Marvel, a comic book company can do it...
__________________
Jinx723's Feedback | Jinx723's BST He who dies with the most toys... is still dead |
07-17-2014, 01:18 AM | #15 |
Bill Cosplay
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Staying clear of knee-jerk nerds.
Posts: 5,914
|
Quote:
For most of its history, Marvel Studios (or Marvel Films) was a studio in name only. It was mostly just a licensing entity, optioning off rights to properties to other studios and contracting out animation work. Now, under Disney, it has an actual studio (Walt Disney Studios) at its disposal for distribution. So it can produce the films (meaning fund them) and distribute through WDSPD. In other words, Marvel Studios needed a huge influx of cash AND a partner with established distribution and marketing channels before it could become a viable concern as a producer in its own right. Hasbro is smart to license and let someone else fund the high dollar projects and take the risks. |
SmokeBellew |
View Public Profile |
Find More Posts by SmokeBellew |
07-17-2014, 07:36 AM | #16 |
Crimson Nerd
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Virginia
Posts: 12,579
|
Quote:
It's easy to justify. Hasbro made the brand, the IP or whatever. It's from their creative team that made the story, the characters, the look of the characters, etc. It appears all they do is give up complete control of their product to Paramount, they go in change the story, change the look of the characters and then Hasbro has to adapt to those changes that are now outside of their control. They've lost control of their brand at that point and have to bend over backwards to appease Paramount with their movie tie in products. It's not zero risk for Hasbro they still have to make new molds, new toys and other products based on the movies. A prime example of that is the toys and other tie ins for Rise of Cobra. Hasbro lost a lot on that end of it.
For all they have to give up they should certainly get more money from the movies. In case you weren't aware, if there's a product sitting on the shelf of your local retailer, Hasbro has already made its' money for that product when the retailer purchased it from them. So all that stuff that languished for a year+ on shelves? That didn't hurt Hasbro (except in souring retailers' taste for G.I. Joe, which had already been waning before the movie anyway). Hasbro reported taking in $100 million on the Joe Brand for Rise of Cobra (most successful Joe year for them in recent memory). I'm sure Hasbro would LOVE to "lose" like that with the Joe brand every year. |
07-17-2014, 07:46 AM | #17 |
Crimson Guard
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,617
|
That I'm fairly sure is 5% Gross, not Net.
No one takes net from a movie house. It's fairly well known that Hollywood uses 'creative accounting' to show virtually every movie lost money.
__________________
http://joeintelops.blogspot.com - Joe Scaled Vehicle Reviews and Commentary. Latest Review January 18, 2023 - GI Joe Retro: Hiss Tank Review http://joeintelops.blogspot.com/2023...nk-review.html trade feedback/Buy-Sell-Trade http://www.hisstank.com/forum/buy-se...ck-thread.html http://www.hisstank.com/forum/g-i-jo...ruins-bst.html |
07-17-2014, 08:53 AM | #18 |
Crimson Nerd
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Virginia
Posts: 12,579
|
Quote:
See: New Line Cinema vs. Peter Jackson. New Line basically spent years claiming the Lord of the Rings Trilogy didn't make them any money when Peter Jackson showed up wanting the cut of the profits he was owed by contract. Eddie Murphy had a similar lawsuit against a studio years ago. Hollywood can basically cook the books however they want, and often do: They'll tout a movie's success to shareholders and then claim it made no profit in court to avoid paying people. |
07-17-2014, 09:42 AM | #19 |
Crimson Guard
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,617
|
Quote:
__________________
http://joeintelops.blogspot.com - Joe Scaled Vehicle Reviews and Commentary. Latest Review January 18, 2023 - GI Joe Retro: Hiss Tank Review http://joeintelops.blogspot.com/2023...nk-review.html trade feedback/Buy-Sell-Trade http://www.hisstank.com/forum/buy-se...ck-thread.html http://www.hisstank.com/forum/g-i-jo...ruins-bst.html |
07-17-2014, 10:20 AM | #20 |
just a Marine
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: central PA
Posts: 1,681
|
Quote:
Yeah, no matter how great the movie concept, GI Joe or Easy Bake, or potential, bad scripting will ruin it. Seeing how things have gone, I bet the Easy Bake movie has the oven boiling instead of baking. |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Surprise turn around from Hasbro at the Con, feel free to discuss! | brock Samson | G.I. Joe General Discussion | 67 | 07-04-2012 11:18 PM |
Joe toys in movies and TV | Viper217 | G.I. Joe General Discussion | 19 | 05-17-2011 07:07 PM |
The Obscure Toys, Movies, and TV Shows Thread | Un-dead Soldier | Testing Grounds Spam-O-Rama | 0 | 10-07-2010 05:53 PM |
What movies need toys? | Prince of Fire & Thunder | Toys | 53 | 02-04-2009 02:26 PM |
Anybody collect toys from movies they hated? | Headman | General Discussion | 16 | 12-26-2008 02:07 AM |
|
|
Recent Off Topic Threads |
What song are you listening to? |
Streets of Rage 4? by Jakks Pacific |
JazWares 18th Halo |
Hisstank Late Night thread... |
DarkLordMordred... |