Monday, October 02, 2006

Singerman et al Negatively Affecting WB's Stock Value

AOL Money & Finance's "Blogging Stocks" has an interesting look at the current situation over at Warner Bros. and just how exactly the sorry performance of their 2006 film slate, tent-poled by Singerman, is affecting the company's bottom line.

Doug McIntyre
, a partner at Wall Street firm "24/Wall St" explains how investors were hoping that Warner's film slate would do better this year. A recent downgrade of the TWX stock by JPMorgan was based, in part, on the projections that the financials of the company's film unit would get worse.
"Things are not looking up at the Time Warner film unit. It has had no hits this year, and even "Jackass" ($51.4 million so far), could ultimately pass "Superman Returns" ($198.5 million), which is Time Warner's biggest box office release in 2006. "Superman" cost so much to make that it almost did not matter how much money it brought in. It was going to lose money under even the best of circumstances."
Although we're very skeptical ourselves that an idiotic picture like Jackass 2 will pass even Singerman's domestic box office (unless of course he's talking about profitability?), McIntyre's sentiment is one that's been echoed around Wall Street about WB and their summer film slate. Tack onto this the implosions of Poseidon, Lady In The Water, and Ant Bully and the picture gets even more grim. All "fanboyism" aside, it's the opinion of "the Street" and in turn Time Warner shareholders and its board of directors that's going to determine where their film division goes from here. Singerman was expected to lead the way for the WB summer slate, and when it fell flat, there wasn't much else for the studio to fall back on to show it's stockholders. With Singerman struggling to get to $200 million domestic and $400 million worldwide, it wont see a profit until long after it hits the home video market. (Assuming WB gets about 55% of the worldwide B.O., and it cost about $300 million to produce and market.) McIntyre goes on to add:

"The film-making business is notoriously fickle. But the costs of running a studio are not. Disney decided to cut 450 people at its production unit earlier this year and cut the number of movies it would put out. At least if it had a dry spell its costs should be less.

For Time Warner and its stock to stage a full recovery, it will not suffice that its cable and network businesses do well. The film unit will have to pull its own weight. Right now, it isn't."

Pretty interesting stuff, especially considering Disney had what was largely considered the most successful summer of all studios with POTC2 and Cars. Personally I'd expect to see budgets for WB films scaled back considerably in the coming years. The real question then becomes, can superhero franchises survive under those restrictions? And if so, can they be done well?

32 comments:

Anonymous said...

That's an interesting article, there assessment of Jackass is insane though it has made 52 mil and just dropped 50% this weekend so that will be lucky to hit 100 and probably fall short of that. I don't know if i see huge changes at WB in terms of their budgets and what not. I mean they had a bad summer in what for the most part has been a hugely successful run as a studio. All studios have their little slumps at one time or another. WB had some unluck this summer along with the quality of their movies. I mean Ant Bully and Lady in the water were bad films. SR at least i thought and most reviewers thought was a good film but it's expectations were way too high going in and the public was more interested in Pirates coming off the success of the first film. All this negativity surrounding WB will pretty much dissapear if they bounce back strong this coming winter.

Anonymous said...

I agree one bad summer for WB is not the end of the world. Hell MGM has pretty much just the Bond movies still left that make money for them and they are still hanging on. I mean SR made money it was just not the blockbluster people thought it would be.

Anonymous said...

I think the point he was trying to make was that the board of WB may reassess how they do business, and scale back their investment in big budget films. I dont think he was saying this going to cripple the studio, however they did take a big hit in the pocketbook this summer and will likely try to avoid making those mistakes again.

Anonymous said...

Nor did i say that he inferred it would cripple the studio i am well aware of what he said. I just do not think one bad summer in the long scheme of a succesful studio will be cause for them to seriously cut back the budgets of future films. If WB has a couple of hits this winter all this will be forgotten. Some of these articles really like to play up the cost of SR. I mean it will make about 395 or so WW, the DVD sales will pull in probably another 200 mil or so and we are not counting one cent of the merchandise. All told WB is still going to make plenty of money from this movie.

Anonymous said...

Oh absolutely SR will still make WB a lot of money. There is a difference between a movie that is underperorming and one that is unprofitable. With studios only making roughly 55% of the total gross most big budget movies do not see a good profit until the DVD/Video sales kick in.

Anonymous said...

Singer is a FAG and Superman Returns was gay.

Anonymous said...

yeah your a tool

Totally Overloaded with Outrageous Lameness

Anonymous said...

You singer sycophants are full of an endless stream of excuses, but nobody seems to be able to admit that, creative differences aside, the film flopped financially. Breaking News: Barely breaking even does not equal profitability.

Anonymous said...

You know I have been coming to this site a while. It is my dirty secret to see that this move did poorly. Why? Because for months sites (bluetights, aintitcool, etc.) said this movie was the second coming. Imagine my disappointment when this movie just annoyed me. Given that, I gaurantee that even the people who loved this film may not watch their DVD once a year. It will collect dust on their shelves like the Star Wars prequels as they pass it up for real movies like Spidermand and lord of the rings.

Anonymous said...

The only good thing that you can take from Christopher Reeve's passing is at least he wasn't alive to see this piece of shit of a movie.

Anonymous said...

Boy interesting comment applegravy. My honest must have struck a cord, which is fine. Trust me long after this site is dead and a new superman movie has come and gone you wont even remember you bought the DVD when your grandkids unpack it from a box and ask you about it.

Anonymous said...

You singer sycophants are full of an endless stream of excuses, but nobody seems to be able to admit that, creative differences aside, the film flopped financially. Breaking News: Barely breaking even does not equal profitability.

Breaking News bust out your calculator and you will see that with studios only keeping roughly 55% of the total gross, very few big bidget films make a big profit on the BO alone. SR profit will be assessed fully after the DVD is out for about 6 months and all the merchandise is tallied up. SR will make about 395 mil WW, plus the DVD sales which by the numbers should eventually come in at about 200 mil but probably more, plus the merchandising. The merchandising is tough to figure but it will be plenty for a character like Superman, 100 mil is a fair guess on that. SR will probably all told combined with everything make about 700 mil gross.

Anonymous said...

Singer is a FUDGE-PACKING QUEER HOMO SISSY FAIRY PIPE-SMOKING FAGGOT, and Superman Returns was gay.

Anonymous said...

Wow, sounds like sage-advice from someone who's been there, 'eh applegravy? Good to know people who need to "come out of the closet" have you to guide them with your personal experiences.

And I see you added "hopefully" to the mother reference. I hope she has gotten over it, and has accepted your lifestyle for what it is.

Anonymous said...

"You're wasting your time pal. I'm not the bigoted homophobe.

I have no issue with anyones sexuality and very comfortable with mine (of which i'll leave you to work out, i don't really care what you think)."

And there it is. I call BULLSHIT all over those statements.

YOU used homosexuality as an INSULT against him. Which means to YOU, it is something "bad". That is EXACTLY what a "homophobe" does.

Idiots like you should learn when to keep your mouths shut, before you open it and make a jackass of yourselves.

Anonymous said...

Dude your guys need to veg. I thought this was a Superman Returns Sucks (which it did....Im going to destroy the world and have them buy my useless radioactive land with clams....bwhahahahahha...oh brother.) then i am a homo no your not fight. Though Reggie started it and it is entertaining.

Anonymous said...

Because the "Singer Apologists" just HAVE to put their 2-cents in. Instead of sucking each other, as well as BJ and BS, off verbally on Bluetights.net, they come here to "Defend" this turd of a flick.

It's sad, really.

Anonymous said...

well said

Anonymous said...

"well said"

Yeah well said if you are BIGOT with no real points to make it was well said.

Anonymous said...

Son, don't use words you OBVIOUSLY don't know the meaning to.

Does mommy know her retarded son Corkey is using the computer again? Someone isn't getting their pudding tonight....

Anonymous said...

Does mommy know her retarded son Corkey is using the computer again? Someone isn't getting their pudding tonight....

If this is your attempt at comedy don't quit your day job, if you even have one.

Anonymous said...

"If this is your attempt at comedy don't quit your day job, if you even have one."

Actually, it was an insult, aimed at fucktards like yourself. An EDUCATED PERSON would realize that.

Clearly you are none of the above.

Anonymous said...

A 3rd grade insult aimed at fucktards like myself that makes a lot of sense buddy. Checking the dictionary, no that word if not in there sorry PAL.

Anonymous said...

"A 3rd grade insult aimed at fucktards like myself that makes a lot of sense buddy. Checking the dictionary, no that word if not in there sorry PAL."

Does ANYONE know what exactly this says? I'm sure this fucktard things it makes sense, but with all the grammatical errors and lack of punctuation, it is just a blathering mess.

Jesus, way to prove how fucking stupid you are...

Anonymous said...

I don't understand his grammar anymore than i do your use of the word fucktard, you both are idiots if you ask me.

Anonymous said...

"I don't understand his grammar anymore than i do your use of the word fucktard, you both are idiots if you ask me."

Luckily, no one asked you.

Fucktard.

Anonymous said...

Luckily, no one asked you.

Fucktard.

Wow now there is an intelligent response. I'll make sure to buy you a dictionary for Christmas.

Anonymous said...

"Wow now there is an intelligent response. I'll make sure to buy you a dictionary for Christmas."

Wow, talk about LAME responses. And if you are going to attempt to insult one's intelligence, make sure you use proper punctuation.

Fucktard.

Anonymous said...

"Fucktard."

What the hell does that mean anyway, speak fucking english!!

Anonymous said...

That means exactly what it says, you fucktard. Go ask your Mommy what it means.

Anonymous said...

Fucktard doesn't mean anything..It's just an insult..No meaning except whatever the hurler wants it to mean.

Anonymous said...

He knows what it means. It's what his parents call him behind his back.