₦airaland Forum

Skseries:
errrm I didn't read all through o, but why will marketing budget be 3times the actual movie budget? by ur standard then a movie of actual budget of 300m at the end of the day will be a north of 900million total budget? Ah!

How will you understand if you didn't read all through

That marketing budget ($300M) is just assumption but in the case where the marketing budget is not known the standard way to determine the break even pount (BEP) of a film is to use the 3X multiplier of the film budget (production). At times, the marketing budget is also part of the production budget. So which means going with 3X multiplier The Batman has a BEP of $600M against a budget of $200M since we don't know it's marketing budget but if it's marketing budget is known, it won't be like that. Also the $200M could also include both the production and marketing budget.


#Xavier

WB please, abeg, mbok, biko nu, make Vandal Salvage the villain in Black Adam and if he's not make him the villain in the either the soon to produce JL or JSA movie. Na beg I dey beg

Hmmmmmmmmmm

First look at Brendan Frasier Firefly's suit on the set of Batgirl


#Xavier
#DCian

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm

SMUAG:
We all know what net profit is. You were making point of it's profit being $300m and that's why I contributed.

You claim to know net profit yet you quoted a post I made about gross profit to argue about net profit, that doesn't look like you know what net profit is, because if you do you won't have quoted me because you would have understood what I've been trying to say.

I've been shouting about gross profit which is simply revenue minus cost or revenue minus BEP. All the cinema cuts you've been talking about have to do with net profit, that's a different angle entirely, my emphasis was on gross profit. I even said that we can't determine the net profit because we aren't aware of the behind the scenes expenditures that goes on, we just have to wait for the studio to report it. Which part of that don't you understand.

Is it that you guys just argue for arguing sake?

GROSS PROFIT: Revenue minus cost or BEP

NET PROFIT: Revenue minus expenditures, tax , payments, investors and theatre cuts.

You guys will claim to have knowledge of a particular thing and yet your statements of that thing will depict ignorance. It's not everything you must contribute to, somethings are better left alone.

For the record $50m profit is a disappointing one. We just need to accept the fact...
I really want this movie to succeed cause of its realistic, dark and gritty take, and also never lean towards the fun and lighthearted thing we see everyday.

Minimum net profit, $50M. Maximum net profit $300M. The thing is the net profit will neither be $50M or $300M but rather in between mostly above $100M.

We're talking about net profit, the money that totally belongs to WB, they won't share it with anyone or firm all in the name of payments or tax or deductions or cuts

So with a budget of $200M and BO gross of $800M (by assumption) and estimated gross profit of $200M to $300M and an estimated net profit of $50 to $300M (mostly above $100M), how the fvck will The Batman be a DISAPPOINTMENT and a FAILURE?

Funny thing, The Batman will gross above $800M but the emphasis is on $800M

If you think it's going to be a failure, then it's just in your head because the analysis says otherwise

This is the last time I'm going to reply anyone on this issue. To be sincere I'm tired of running in circles repeating the same thing over and over to people that just choose not to understand but claim to know. It looks as if I'm teaching economics, what da fvck


#Xavier
#DCian

TonySpike:
It doesn't work that way. Only about 60% of the box office returns goes back to WB. It's even lower for international box office.

I'm talking about the general calculation of profit independent of revenue distribution, I'm not talking about the revenue distribution.

That's why I've been shouting about gross profit. Is it that you guys don't know the difference between net profit and gross profit anymore. Net profit deals with the deduction of all expenditures i.e payments, taxes, percentages or cuts to cinemas and investors but gross profit simply deals with revenue minus cost which is what I've been shouting about all this while. I even said we can't know the net profit unless the studio tells us because we aren't aware of all the behind the scenes expenditures, payments, taxes and revenue distribution going on.

60% of $800M is $480M, that's the money that comes to WB, theatres are out of the way leaving investors, tax, payments of cast and crew and other expenditures, by the time all those are deducted from the $480M, the amount remaining will be the net profit and that's the money that WB doesn't have to bother about deducting anything from anymore. The net profit of the Batman will be in the range of $50M to $300M but mostly above $100M.

So with a budget of $200M and BO gross of $800M (by assumption) and estimated gross profit of $200M to $300M and an estimated net profit of $50 to $300M (mostly above $100M), how will The Batman be a DISAPPOINTMENT and a FAILURE?

To be sincere, I'm tired of explaining the same thing over and over again, e come be like say I dey teach economics here, mbok. You guys should better go and know the difference between net and gross profit because the debate don tire me. We can't moving in circles repeating the same thing over and over again.


#Xavier
#DCian

SMUAG:
Your analysis would have been spot-on if you had taken cinema houses into your points.
Making $800m from $500m doesn't translate to $300m, cause, those filmhouse you see, especially the foreign markets will likely take away more than half of that profit if the movie gross or success mostly comes from its international market...
Film House (cinemas), for the first and likely second week tickets sales mostly go to the studio (WB) while from subsequent weeks a sharing pattern (ratio) is introduced and gradually that pattern will end up favouring the film house.
That's why in some cases movies with heavy front-loaded favours the studios more...

If you read my article very well you will notice that I was talking about gross profit which is revenue minus cost and not net profit, net profit is due to the behind the scenes expenditures which will never know, so you can't predict it. But the thing is this with an $800M BO gross, Batman's net profit will still be good one, that's it.

Net profit deals with the money remaining after all expenditure is out, it doesn't go with the revenue minus cost model rather revenue minus all expenditures, tax and percentages. So with an $800M BO gross, The Batman will be making a net profit of $50M to $300M, it's gonna fall within that range, which is still good.

NOTE: percentages includes cinema and investor's cut.


#Xavier
#DCian

Okay ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Good, it should be solely Batman. They can then create a Superman Universe with the Val Zod Superman (Micheal .B. Jordan)

#Xavier
#DCian

RayMcBlue:
Your wall of text is unnecessary, mate.

I'm not very fond of technicalities because they're boring. apologist/shills use these tools to make excuses for their favorite IPs.

The Batman is an expensively assembled, expensively made and expensively marketed flagship superhero movie. It goes without saying it's a billion dollar movie.

Let's just leave it at that.

And exactly, so we can all go to bed with the agreement that whatever disappointment you have for the Batman is in your head, nothing but an emotional one cos the standard Hollywood analysis defies it.

Funny, people think they can just sit down in the comfort of their beds, concieve ideals and expect the whole world to accept it as truth.

Sweetheart, between your emotionally concieved ideal and the Hollywood standard system, which one should people accept.

Bro, whether you like it or not, in line with the standard system of Hollywood, The Batman with an $800M BO gross is a success. Have that at the back of your mind, never forget. It doesn't matter what you think, your opinion is useless here because the system calls the shot not you. The system decides why and how a movie should be successful, not you. Tick Tock.

Xavier Out

#Xavier
#DCian

RayMcBlue:
with a production budget of 200m plus another 200+ in aggressive marketing, anything less than a billion is a failure.

I've seen several people compare it to Se7en, which is a high praise but won't do it any favours in the BO. Se7en is a masterpiece but a slow burn.

AnfieldFan:
No...It's budget alone is conservatively 200M and it's Marketing has been north of 100M...
So the profits you're reeling out don't match...

But that's besides the point, the point is, 800 mill for this movie would be considered a disappointment irrespective of profit...

Bro, I don't even understand how you guys do your own analysis, and from the looks of things it seems you don't even understand how the industry works as regards financial analysis of Box office.

Batman has a budget of $200M, let's assume the marketing budget is $300M, that will bring the total to $500M, which means the Break Even Point (BEP) is $500M. The BEP is the amount a movie has to gross before it can be considered a profit or before it can be said to be out of the danger zone, at that point the movie is neutral, it's neither profitable except it goes beyond it or a loss except it gross beneath it. The BEP is always the budget amount which in this case is the sum of the marketing and production budget.

So if the BEP of The Batman is $500M (by assumption of a $300M marketing budget which will be the highest), a $800M BO gross will mean $300M gross profit, how's that a FAILURE?

But since we don't know the Marketing budget, the standard model to calculate the BEP is to go with the 3X multiplier of the production budget which will be $600M, a $800M BO gross will mean $200M gross profit. So how is that a FAILURE?

Note, I'm not talking about net profit, rather gross profit because for net profit, a lot of behind the scenes expenditures are going on which we will never know about, so we have to wait for the studio to tell us.

So which makes me ponder on how The Batman with an $800M gross is actually going to be a failure?

Now look at this, The Batman with such gross won't be a disappointment, not one bit, because

1.) The movie is a standalone film on it's own, it's not part of the DCEU where you will say it's a big movie of the franchise. It's just a movie on it's own so the whole "must gross a billion shit" doesn't affect it neither does it have it on it's shoulders.

2.) $800M gross in standard Hollywood rating is a high grosser, as a matter of fact, in Hollywood, from $700M upward is regarded as a high grosser in standard Hollywood rating. So any movie that grosses that level is seen as a high grosser, so yes The Batman with a $800M BO gross is a high grosser, even with a $700M gross, it's still a high grosser

3.) The movie is the first movie in a trilogy, it's not even the climax but just the launcher of the trilogy. So why will it or should it shoulder such responsibility of being a billion dollar grosser to be termed a success. Nobody in his right senses will even heap such responsibility on the movie except the person just want to be unnecessarily bias. Right now, the expectation especially from the studio is for the movie to be a high grosser (from $700M and above) and to be profitable.

So there's no way an $800M dollar The Batman will be termed a failure, if you think otherwise, then it's just in your head. The standard Hollywood analysis says otherwise. It's just something you sat in your house and conceived, it doesn't exist which means your statement is purely based on emotions not the FACTS.


#Xavier
#DCian

#TheBatmanReview

WB self, make una no dey give HBO MAX subscribers ideas


#Xavier
#DCian

.

#TheBatmanReview

Once upon a time, everyone thought the creature digging up to the surface in Superman and Lois was Doomsday.

Once upon a time. Time time, there was a series who everyone thought was going with the reign of Supermen storyline.

Talk about WB/DC taking DC fans for a ride


#Xavier
#DCian

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm