|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Nov 20, 2020 6:27:08 GMT 1
So Wonder Woman 84 beyond all predictive power, has now become a sales strategy for HBO MAX. And I mean that literally. By offering it without a premium charge the strategy is now clearly to get as many eyeballs on the service as possible, while the box office receipts may only end up as token revenue. This gives me two big questions. What % of people who watch this on a free trial will actually be convinced by the service to continue paying for it. And with Justice League already being used for a similar purpose, what % of those people weren’t already going to sign up. With a combined $270million budget before marketing costs, can this make financial sense long term? "As of the year ending December 2019, HBO had earned around 5.81 billion U.S. dollars from subscription revenue alone, up from 3.2 billion the previous year." ? What does that have to do with Wonder Woman 84? Are you just saying they can afford the loss?
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Nov 20, 2020 6:27:23 GMT 1
They have GoT, which can't be reasonably binged in 7 days. If they can get people in and hooked on some exclusives, they could get a solid three to six month addiction started. I believe they were taking a bath and needed their signups up before the vaccine drops. Guessing the other stuff they're saving wasn't as big of a market grab by whatever stats they were viewing. My personal theory is they don't want to let hype build to unachievable levels so they had to drop it as they needed a 4th quarter win and wanted to burn the fewest films in achieving it. Blue Monday may apply to this decision. "As of the year ending December 2019, HBO had earned around 5.81 billion U.S. dollars from subscription revenue alone, up from 3.2 billion the previous year." To further clarify: That last line is very telling. Like President Akbar, either HBO subscribers don't know they can access HBO Max, or they don't care because the two services are mostly redundant. Before WW84's free release, all HBO Max offered to the existing HBO subscriber was a convenient method for accessing the service outside the setup box's inflexable ecosystem. AT&T and WB have since moved to an "activations" model for more accurately tracking new engagement with the service.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Nov 20, 2020 6:28:08 GMT 1
The source for the quote was Variety.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2020 6:43:41 GMT 1
So Wonder Woman 84 beyond all predictive power, has now become a sales strategy for HBO MAX. And I mean that literally. By offering it without a premium charge the strategy is now clearly to get as many eyeballs on the service as possible, while the box office receipts may only end up as token revenue. This gives me two big questions. What % of people who watch this on a free trial will actually be convinced by the service to continue paying for it. And with Justice League already being used for a similar purpose, what % of those people weren’t already going to sign up. With a combined $270million budget before marketing costs, can this make financial sense long term? Disney did the same thing with Milan and Soul. What’s the difference? I subbed to D+ just to try Mando then I canceled it immediately. Also, HBO will probably continue to have a better stream of new high quality tv shows than Disney.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Nov 20, 2020 6:50:10 GMT 1
So Wonder Woman 84 beyond all predictive power, has now become a sales strategy for HBO MAX. And I mean that literally. By offering it without a premium charge the strategy is now clearly to get as many eyeballs on the service as possible, while the box office receipts may only end up as token revenue. This gives me two big questions. What % of people who watch this on a free trial will actually be convinced by the service to continue paying for it. And with Justice League already being used for a similar purpose, what % of those people weren’t already going to sign up. With a combined $270million budget before marketing costs, can this make financial sense long term? Disney did the same thing with Milan and Soul. What’s the difference? I subbed to D+ just to try Mando then I canceled it immediately. Also, HBO will probably continue to have a better stream of new high quality tv shows than Disney. well the prime difference with Mulan is that Disney was testing charging a premium to see if they could generate a profitable model. This isn’t a slight against WW84 or a comparison between HBO MAX and D+. It was just an observation that they seem to have turned this particular film into a marketing tool for the service more than utilizing it for its own profitability. The fact that you subbed to D+ and then cancelled is what I’m talking about. They’re looking for immediate short term clicks and $$$ to point to as success.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2020 6:51:40 GMT 1
Disney did the same thing with Milan and Soul. What’s the difference? I subbed to D+ just to try Mando then I canceled it immediately. Also, HBO will probably continue to have a better stream of new high quality tv shows than Disney. well the prime difference with Mulan is that Disney was testing charging a premium to see if they could generate a profitable model. This isn’t a slight against WW84 or a comparison between HBO MAX and D+. It was just an observation that they seem to have turned this particular film into a marketing tool for the service more than utilizing it for its own profitability. I don’t think that’s necessarily accurate either. WW was eying a theatrical only release until COVID made that impossible.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Nov 20, 2020 6:55:48 GMT 1
well the prime difference with Mulan is that Disney was testing charging a premium to see if they could generate a profitable model. This isn’t a slight against WW84 or a comparison between HBO MAX and D+. It was just an observation that they seem to have turned this particular film into a marketing tool for the service more than utilizing it for its own profitability. I don’t think that’s necessarily accurate either. WW was eying a theatrical only release until COVID made that impossible. i know. I feel like we’re having two different conversations here. Are you objecting to something I said?
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Nov 20, 2020 6:57:25 GMT 1
So Wonder Woman 84 beyond all predictive power, has now become a sales strategy for HBO MAX. And I mean that literally. By offering it without a premium charge the strategy is now clearly to get as many eyeballs on the service as possible, while the box office receipts may only end up as token revenue. This gives me two big questions. What % of people who watch this on a free trial will actually be convinced by the service to continue paying for it. And with Justice League already being used for a similar purpose, what % of those people weren’t already going to sign up. With a combined $270million budget before marketing costs, can this make financial sense long term? Disney did the same thing with Milan and Soul. What’s the difference? I subbed to D+ just to try Mando then I canceled it immediately. To a certain extent, we all are asking the wrong questions. I don't think AT&T bought Warner Media just to produce and sell movies. They did it because they needed a large content library for the streaming service they knew they'd have to create inevitably (i.e., HBO Max). ArArArchStanton is absolutely spot on. Stankey has just put WW84 upon the altar as a sacrificial lamb to HBO Max. It's just one movie in the big scheme of things, and he has to play for all the chips; given HBO Max's moderate growth and hemorrhaging cable subscription base, he's made the right decision. Stanton also brings up a great point around retention, how many WW84 subscribers who sign up will stay? WB needs to start aggressively promoting announced DC shows like Peacemaker, Green Lantern, Gotham PD (or whatever it's called), etc. That's how Disney+ has managed so much growth while only actually releasing one new show. They keep hammering us with what's to come in flashy ads. Free WW84, from a business perspective, is a gimmick, and I'm sure as hell that if they had any other option, they take it. The gimmick's brilliance is Stankey's willingness to take a $300 million bath to piss off Disney and make new cash-paying friends.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2020 7:00:07 GMT 1
I don’t think that’s necessarily accurate either. WW was eying a theatrical only release until COVID made that impossible. i know. I feel like we’re having two different conversations here. Are you objecting to something I said? No. I’m just saying that WW on HBO Max is the same thing as Soul on Disney. They’re both huge theatrical tent poles that couldn’t be released in theaters that are now used to hype streaming services to make the best out of a bad situation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2020 7:01:44 GMT 1
Disney did the same thing with Milan and Soul. What’s the difference? I subbed to D+ just to try Mando then I canceled it immediately. To a certain extent, we all are asking the wrong questions. I don't think AT&T bought Warner Media just to produce and sell movies. They did it because they needed a large content library for the streaming service they knew they'd have to create inevitably (i.e., HBO Max). ArArArchStanton is absolutely spot on. Stankey has just put WW84 upon the altar as a sacrificial lamb to HBO Max. It's just one movie in the big scheme of things, and he has to play for all the chips; given HBO Max's moderate growth and hemorrhaging cable subscription base, he's made the right decision. Stanton also brings up a great point around retention, how many WW84 subscribers who sign up will stay? WB needs to start aggressively promoting announced DC shows like Peacemaker, Green Lantern, Gotham PD (or whatever it's called), etc. That's how Disney+ has managed so much growth while only actually releasing one new show. They keep hammering us with what's to come in flashy ads. Free WW84, from a business perspective, is a gimmick, and I'm sure as hell that if they had any other option, they take it. The gimmick's brilliance is Stankey's willingness to take a $300 million bath to piss off Disney and make new cash-paying friends. Well, you know my stance on streaming already. So I don’t really have a dog in the race. If any of these things fail it will be Netflix or Amazon. Disney and HBO will both be fine for now.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Nov 20, 2020 7:02:52 GMT 1
Disney did the same thing with Milan and Soul. What’s the difference? I subbed to D+ just to try Mando then I canceled it immediately. To a certain extent, we all are asking the wrong questions. I don't think AT&T bought Warner Media just to produce and sell movies. They did it because they needed a large content library for the streaming service they knew they'd have to create inevitably (i.e., HBO Max). ArArArchStanton is absolutely spot on. Stankey has just put WW84 upon the altar as a sacrificial lamb to HBO Max. It's just one movie in the big scheme of things, and he has to play for all the chips; given HBO Max's moderate growth and hemorrhaging cable subscription base, he's made the right decision. Stanton also brings up a great point around retention, how many WW84 subscribers who sign up will stay? WB needs to start aggressively promoting announced DC shows like Peacemaker, Green Lantern, Gotham PD (or whatever it's called), etc. That's how Disney+ has managed so much growth while only actually releasing one new show. They keep hammering us with what's to come in flashy ads. Free WW84, from a business perspective, is a gimmick, and I'm sure as hell that if they had any other option, they take it. The gimmick's brilliance is Stankey's willingness to take a $300 million bath to piss off Disney and make new cash-paying friends. Funny, I just used that phrase. They have indeed decided to take a bath on WW84, and what’s going on is theyve run enough calculations that they at least think the risk of shifting the $300 they spent making and promoting 84 to essentially advertising for MAX will net enough subscriptions to look like a worth while deal both short and long term. At least short term to get them to the next step That isn’t a slight on WW84 in any way. It’s just the nature of the situation and the decision that likely have been forced into making.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Nov 20, 2020 7:05:29 GMT 1
i know. I feel like we’re having two different conversations here. Are you objecting to something I said? No. I’m just saying that WW on HBO Max is the same thing as Soul on Disney. They’re both huge theatrical tent poles that couldn’t be released in theaters that are now used to hype streaming services to make the best out of a bad situation. I wouldn’t disagree with that. I just found it interesting to have come this far and use WW in such a way at this point. I’m curious how many discussions they had about charging even a modest $10 premium too to make something directly off it. But obviously their interest is in eyeballs on MAX and not profit from the film. Soul was early enough on it was a different mindset. This they were clearly planning on holding out for theaters.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Nov 20, 2020 7:10:00 GMT 1
To a certain extent, we all are asking the wrong questions. I don't think AT&T bought Warner Media just to produce and sell movies. They did it because they needed a large content library for the streaming service they knew they'd have to create inevitably (i.e., HBO Max). ArArArchStanton is absolutely spot on. Stankey has just put WW84 upon the altar as a sacrificial lamb to HBO Max. It's just one movie in the big scheme of things, and he has to play for all the chips; given HBO Max's moderate growth and hemorrhaging cable subscription base, he's made the right decision. Stanton also brings up a great point around retention, how many WW84 subscribers who sign up will stay? WB needs to start aggressively promoting announced DC shows like Peacemaker, Green Lantern, Gotham PD (or whatever it's called), etc. That's how Disney+ has managed so much growth while only actually releasing one new show. They keep hammering us with what's to come in flashy ads. Free WW84, from a business perspective, is a gimmick, and I'm sure as hell that if they had any other option, they take it. The gimmick's brilliance is Stankey's willingness to take a $300 million bath to piss off Disney and make new cash-paying friends. Well, you know my stance on streaming already. So I don’t really have a dog in the race. If any of these things fail it will be Netflix or Amazon. Disney and HBO will both be fine for now. Amazon is virtually foolproof in this area. I mean seriously?! They did better than their entire 2019 in the first half of 2020. The Amazon streaming implementation is hot garbage. And the Boys is good, but Bezos is obviously living in deal-with-the-devil country.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2020 7:15:16 GMT 1
Well, you know my stance on streaming already. So I don’t really have a dog in the race. If any of these things fail it will be Netflix or Amazon. Disney and HBO will both be fine for now. Amazon is virtually foolproof in this area. I mean seriously?! They did better than their entire 2019 in the first half of 2020. The Amazon streaming implementation is hot garbage. And the Boys is good, but Bezos is obviously living in deal-with-the-devil country. I don’t get it. What is even on that service besides The Boys? I despise that company anyway. They’ll never get my money! Unless there’s a product I can only find on their website... which happens a lot actually. The bastards. They’re so powerful that I can’t even maintain a proper boycott!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2020 7:19:02 GMT 1
No. I’m just saying that WW on HBO Max is the same thing as Soul on Disney. They’re both huge theatrical tent poles that couldn’t be released in theaters that are now used to hype streaming services to make the best out of a bad situation. I wouldn’t disagree with that. I just found it interesting to have come this far and use WW in such a way at this point. I’m curious how many discussions they had about charging even a modest $10 premium too to make something directly off it. But obviously their interest is in eyeballs on MAX and not profit from the film. Soul was early enough on it was a different mindset. This they were clearly planning on holding out for theaters. I can understand why you’d take a bit of enjoyment in WW’s failure. So I’ll let you have the moment. I just think it’s sad that this is happening. I wish they’d delayed it but they probably didn’t want to bump their 2021 schedule.
|
|
|
Post by maximura on Nov 20, 2020 7:21:07 GMT 1
Well, you know my stance on streaming already. So I don’t really have a dog in the race. If any of these things fail it will be Netflix or Amazon. Disney and HBO will both be fine for now. Amazon is virtually foolproof in this area. I mean seriously?! They did better than their entire 2019 in the first half of 2020. The Amazon streaming implementation is hot garbage. And the Boys is good, but Bezos is obviously living in deal-with-the-devil country. They also auto enroll in streaming anyone who gets Prime for the shipping advantages. Given everyone ordering from home during the pandemic, I wonder what percentage of those has no interest in the streaming aspect.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2020 7:24:03 GMT 1
Amazon is virtually foolproof in this area. I mean seriously?! They did better than their entire 2019 in the first half of 2020. The Amazon streaming implementation is hot garbage. And the Boys is good, but Bezos is obviously living in deal-with-the-devil country. They also auto enroll in streaming anyone who gets Prime for the shipping advantages. Given everyone ordering from home during the pandemic, I wonder what percentage of those has no interest in the streaming aspect. That’s a good point. I have to laugh at those Prime subscribers though because I never pay for that and my packages still arrive fairly quickly anyway. LOL
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Nov 20, 2020 7:30:16 GMT 1
Amazon is virtually foolproof in this area. I mean seriously?! They did better than their entire 2019 in the first half of 2020. The Amazon streaming implementation is hot garbage. And the Boys is good, but Bezos is obviously living in deal-with-the-devil country. They also auto enroll in streaming anyone who gets Prime for the shipping advantages. Given everyone ordering from home during the pandemic, I wonder what percentage of those has no interest in the streaming aspect. I'm guessing... literally everyone who subscribes... But Jeff doesn't care, he put his monopoly inside another monopoly so he could play monopoly as he monopolizes.
|
|
|
Post by maximura on Nov 20, 2020 7:38:06 GMT 1
They also auto enroll in streaming anyone who gets Prime for the shipping advantages. Given everyone ordering from home during the pandemic, I wonder what percentage of those has no interest in the streaming aspect. I'm guessing... literally everyone who subscribes... But Jeff doesn't care, he put his monopoly inside another monopoly so he could play monopoly as he monopolizes. Respect to them for getting Top Gear, doing Grand Tour, The Tick, The Boys, and a few other things, but the lack of stability on programming and the sparseness of quality film pickups would make it an easy drop were I in any way rated to override my wife.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Nov 20, 2020 7:49:24 GMT 1
I'm guessing... literally everyone who subscribes... But Jeff doesn't care, he put his monopoly inside another monopoly so he could play monopoly as he monopolizes. Respect to them for getting Top Gear, doing Grand Tour, The Tick, The Boys, and a few other things, but the lack of stability on programming and the sparseness of quality film pickups would make it an easy drop were I in any way rated to override my wife. LOL! Indeed. I say that Amazon is nearly foolproof in the streaming vertical because even if they didn't have a streaming service, they'd still be making money off of streaming. Go back and reread that last sentence. Netflix's entire streaming empire is built on top of AWS (Amazon Web Services). Amazon provides the infrastructure to most of the major providers. Netflix, and Disney+, I believe, are both clients. They're literally subsidizing Amazon's streaming business while being direct competitors to it. HBO Max is an interesting outlier here as I believe they use AT&T homebrew to host and serve their jams. Word on the street is their tech is janky as hell, and they're going to move to AWS by 2022.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Nov 20, 2020 10:12:41 GMT 1
I wouldn’t disagree with that. I just found it interesting to have come this far and use WW in such a way at this point. I’m curious how many discussions they had about charging even a modest $10 premium too to make something directly off it. But obviously their interest is in eyeballs on MAX and not profit from the film. Soul was early enough on it was a different mindset. This they were clearly planning on holding out for theaters. I can understand why you’d take a bit of enjoyment in WW’s failure. So I’ll let you have the moment. I just think it’s sad that this is happening. I wish they’d delayed it but they probably didn’t want to bump their 2021 schedule. lolol, wait I’m not doing that lol.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA JAR!™ on Nov 22, 2020 1:57:15 GMT 1
"As of the year ending December 2019, HBO had earned around 5.81 billion U.S. dollars from subscription revenue alone, up from 3.2 billion the previous year." ? What does that have to do with Wonder Woman 84? Are you just saying they can afford the loss? Basically, yes. Warner Media is a huge company, with almost 10 billion dollars in revenue last year. It makes sense that they would sacrifice a few dollars from their film division ( dollars they would not be able to fully collect anyway, due to COVID ) in order to put eyeballs on their new streaming project. It's actually a pretty brilliant example of "making lemonade out of lemons" I'm guessing Disney does not feel the need to fluff up their streamer, but "if they did" then using BLACK WIDOW in a similar fashion would be also be a smart move.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Nov 22, 2020 3:03:57 GMT 1
? What does that have to do with Wonder Woman 84? Are you just saying they can afford the loss? Basically, yes. Warner Media is a huge company, with almost 10 billion dollars in revenue last year. It makes sense that they would sacrifice a few dollars from their film division ( dollars they would not be able to fully collect anyway, due to COVID ) in order to put eyeballs on their new streaming project. It's actually a pretty brilliant example of "making lemonade out of lemons" I'm guessing Disney does not feel the need to fluff up their streamer, but "if they did" then using BLACK WIDOW in a similar fashion would be also be a smart move. Yeah that's more or less what I was getting at. That they've just decided to turn it into a marketing gimmick for their streaming service rather than pulling in it's own profit
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Nov 23, 2020 6:17:03 GMT 1
Basically, yes. Warner Media is a huge company, with almost 10 billion dollars in revenue last year. It makes sense that they would sacrifice a few dollars from their film division ( dollars they would not be able to fully collect anyway, due to COVID ) in order to put eyeballs on their new streaming project. It's actually a pretty brilliant example of "making lemonade out of lemons" I'm guessing Disney does not feel the need to fluff up their streamer, but "if they did" then using BLACK WIDOW in a similar fashion would be also be a smart move. Yeah that's more or less what I was getting at. That they've just decided to turn it into a marketing gimmick for their streaming service rather than pulling in it's own profit Wonder Woman 1984 will only be available on HBO Max for 30 days after its initial release. If we needed any further proof that deploying the film on streaming was meant to bolster subscriptions, there you have it. I'd be curious to know what the fall-off rates are like after the thirty days are over. Does anyone know if it will be available internationally during that period? I might have respected this gamble more if they planned to leave WW84 on the service indefinitely. As it is now, obvious bait is obvious bait. I sincerely hope Disney can toe the line with Black Widow and hold out until the pandemic subsides. Putting BW on streaming, even for free, would be a sucker's play at this point. They'd only look like they were copying WB's move. It would make Disney look weak, and it would disappoint fans who have been waiting for Nat to get her due on the big screen since literally the inception of the MCU.
|
|
|
Post by Grandmaster on Nov 23, 2020 7:38:58 GMT 1
Wonder Woman will have a theatrical release in my country a week before its debut in the US.
And its obvious Marvel is just waiting for the pandemic to be over so they can release Black Widow in the theaters. Otherwise there was no reason for them not to release it on Disney+ Premium Access last November.
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Nov 23, 2020 8:05:06 GMT 1
Wonder Woman will have a theatrical release in my country a week before its debut in the US. Hopefully it'll be released in theatres where I am too. I've been waiting three years to see it, after all.
|
|
|
Post by Grandmaster on Nov 23, 2020 8:15:12 GMT 1
Wonder Woman will have a theatrical release in my country a week before its debut in the US. Hopefully it'll be released in theatres where I am too. I've been waiting three years to see it, after all. Im not overly excited for it. I thought the first one was mediocre and is only consisdered good by a lot of people because its one of the better DCEU movies. However I will go see it. I miss going to theaters.
|
|
|
Post by maximura on Nov 23, 2020 9:16:59 GMT 1
Hopefully it'll be released in theatres where I am too. I've been waiting three years to see it, after all. Im not overly excited for it. I thought the first one was mediocre and is only consisdered good by a lot of people because its one of the better DCEU movies. However I will go see it. I miss going to theaters. I was incredibly put off by the lightning lasso scene from the trailers. I let a lot of physics slide in super hero films, but in order to lasso lightning, she has to be precognitive, possess cosmic awareness, or be faster than the speed of light by a rate that is impossible to achieve given that the lightning is gone by the time the visual spectrum reaches you and she still has to extend the rope at that point. Lassoing energy doesn't bother me, as powers have to be given some leeway, but the physics behind the lightning lasso utterly wreck any concern I have for the character. I'm sure it's pretty, but that emptiness is what separates the MCU from the DCEU for me. Thor and Captain Marvel are both godly powerful, but I've never seen them do something so obviously ridiculous to showcase what an awesome hero they were.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Nov 23, 2020 11:00:26 GMT 1
Yeah that's more or less what I was getting at. That they've just decided to turn it into a marketing gimmick for their streaming service rather than pulling in it's own profit Wonder Woman 1984 will only be available on HBO Max for 30 days after its initial release. If we needed any further proof that deploying the film on streaming was meant to bolster subscriptions, there you have it. I'd be curious to know what the fall-off rates are like after the thirty days are over. Does any know if it will be available internationally during that period? I might have respected this gamble more if they planned to leave WW84 on the service indefinitely. As it is now, obvious bait is obvious bait. I sincerely hope Disney can toe the line with Black Widow and hold out until the pandemic subsides. Putting BW on streaming, even for free, would be a sucker's play at this point. They'd only look like they were copying WB's move. It would make Disney look weak, and it would disappoint fans who have been waiting for Nat to get her due on the big screen since literally the inception of the MCU. I’m wondering how close to 100% the people watching it on a free trial will be, and how many are convinced to stay on the service after. There’s also the little thing that Justice League was already meant to accomplish this same thing, so with an obvious sizable overlap in audience, how much are they cannibalizing that same new subscription base?
|
|
|
Post by maximura on Nov 23, 2020 11:24:25 GMT 1
Wonder Woman 1984 will only be available on HBO Max for 30 days after its initial release. If we needed any further proof that deploying the film on streaming was meant to bolster subscriptions, there you have it. I'd be curious to know what the fall-off rates are like after the thirty days are over. Does any know if it will be available internationally during that period? I might have respected this gamble more if they planned to leave WW84 on the service indefinitely. As it is now, obvious bait is obvious bait. I sincerely hope Disney can toe the line with Black Widow and hold out until the pandemic subsides. Putting BW on streaming, even for free, would be a sucker's play at this point. They'd only look like they were copying WB's move. It would make Disney look weak, and it would disappoint fans who have been waiting for Nat to get her due on the big screen since literally the inception of the MCU. I’m wondering how close to 100% the people watching it on a free trial will be, and how many are convinced to stay on the service after. There’s also the little thing that Justice League was already meant to accomplish this same thing, so with an obvious sizable overlap in audience, how much are they cannibalizing that same new subscription base? I'm still convinced it's a 4th quarter enrollments maneuver to try to save face with their shareholders and look better in their market position, even if it's only a temporary illusion. A certain percentage forgets to cancel, and a certain percentage enjoys the product and stays. I think they recognized that the Snyder Cut wasn't going to be the draw they had hoped, and cannibalized in advance to have a built in excuse. They will have the theater market to themselves, but under the increased lockdowns, that won't mean as much as they would like. This seems more desperate than brilliant. Investors can be pretty fickle, so maybe it will work for them, but it's pretty clear this salvage operation is more for face than profit. I'm not sure they found anywhere near the optimal recovery method with this. It's A strategy, but that hardly ensures it's a good strategy. Regardless of total profits seeming large, they made promises for the quarter that they had to try to meet or lose investor confidence. It will be interesting to see how this choice plays for them in the short and long term with both investors and fans.
|
|