Disney Makes Deal for 21st Century Fox, Reshaping Entertainment Landscape (nytimes.com) 171
Disney is going all in for its upcoming fight with Netflix and other streaming giants. The Walt Disney Company said Thursday that it had reached a deal to buy most of the assets of 21st Century Fox, the conglomerate controlled by Rupert Murdoch, in an all-stock transaction valued at roughly $52.4 billion. From a report: To complete the integration, a legacy-defining task, Robert A. Iger, Disney's chief executive, agreed to renew his contract for a fourth time, delaying retirement from July 2019 to the end of 2021. While the merger still requires approval by antitrust regulators -- and the Justice Department recently moved to block a big media company from becoming even bigger -- the once unthinkable acquisition promises to reshape Hollywood and Silicon Valley. It is the biggest counterattack from a traditional media company against the tech giants that have aggressively moved into the entertainment business. Disney now has enough muscle to become a true competitor to Netflix, Apple, Amazon, Google and Facebook in the fast-growing realm of online video. Alternative source: Variety.
Does that include (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I can't help but think the internet will improve dramatically as soon as there's a downside to being wrong in public again
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
There is some real differences. If false information gets put out from these sources, which will tend to happen due to the financial pressure to be first to push out the news, they will retract the information publicly, and if it was fake then the journalist behind it, (many who were considered big names) can get fired.
You mean like the what was it? 10+ hours of the media fawning all over the wikileaks email with a date of the 4th(leaked), when the actual date was the 14th? Remember how wapo didn't retract the power grid hacking stuff for several days until after people pointed out the problems? It's not really any different then fox, if you've watched it as you say then you already know that they do broadcast retractions when they get things wrong too.
If you check Fox News website legal link, and compared to the other sites legal link. They are an "Entertainment Company" Not a news organization. They use this to push false and misleading information, or whatever they think they can get away with.
You mean this section?
FOX News Channel (FNC) is a 24-hour all-encompassing news service dedicated to delivering breaking news as well as political and business news. The number one network in cable, FNC has been the most-watched television news channel for 15 years and according to a Suffolk University/USA Today poll, is the most-trusted television news source in the country. Owned by 21st Century Fox, FNC is available in 90 million homes and dominates the cable news landscape, routinely notching the top ten programs in the genre.
Doesn't say entertainment company, it states t
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Uh no, actually, the current era began with an incident on
Well I didn't really want to go that far back, but if we really want to we can start with 60 minutes back in the 1970's. I'm sure you already know that one.
Man, that is a crazy conspiracy Mashiki, and you don't even have a reason to blame the... You know, you wouldn't sound so crazy if you didn't make up such hysterical bullshit, but stuck to facts. Actual provable events.
Not your foaming at the mouth hyperbole.
Guess that's why some schools in the UK have seen a 2800% increase in kids suddenly claiming to be trans right? Not been paying attention at all? [dailycaller.com] I guess not. [npr.org]
Nope, I'm a citizen of the United States, and you may not understand this, but I want healthcare EVERYWHERE in my country, and more to the point, there are some practical considerations that necessitate my ability to cross state lines to get healthcare, as the boundaries of states were not set according to population or economics
How do you think it works in Canada? You know the single payer system that the left loves in droves? Each province is responsible for the level of healthcare. The federal government has no in
Re: (Score:2)
What's the difference between Canada and the US again? Right. You can't pay for your own healthcare in Canada at all, everyone get's in line and you just might die from waiting. Where as if you have money in most cases you can get that care.
Why should those with money go to the front of the line?
Re: (Score:2)
They still can at least in Canada, the poster you quoted is wrong. But then he tends to be...
Re: (Score:2)
They still can at least in Canada, the poster you quoted is wrong. But then he tends to be...
Only if you go to the US, or another country that allows you to. There's one system of healthcare in Canada, just one. You're not going to be paying money out of pocket for healthcare to "jump the queue." There are no private hospital care options in Canada. I guess that's wrong though, gee or something.
Sometimes, sometimes if you're lucky a province may have private hospice care where patients can pay 50% of "day-in" surgery, Ontario had that for hernia care. It doesn't anymore, it was ruled in violatio
Re: (Score:2)
Why should those with money go to the front of the line?
You misunderstand. I'd be happier if I had the option of being able to pay a private hospital for care if I had the money. I don't have that choice, everyone gets the same level of shit care unless you goto another country.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd be happier if I had the option of being able to pay a private hospital for care if I had the money.
If there's a private hospital it sucks resources from the public ones. The better doctors want to work there. Patients who pay for care at that hospital are now removing income from the public one. It's very similar to the effect of private schools in large cities. There are great schools that are very expensive and then public schools close by which are absolute shitholes. I'm not exactly advocating that we do away with private schools (or maybe I am, I don't know), but my point is that injecting capitalis
Re: (Score:2)
You don't think the increased acceptance of homosexuals and intersex people have something to do with your increase? That the Internet allows people to learn that one actually can live as one feels like? That one doesn't need to hide anything and still have a worthy life?
Nah. False news and SJW propaganda forcing people to do things against their will is of course the sole reason.
What's _your_ name BTW?
Re: (Score:2)
You don't think the increased acceptance of homosexuals and intersex people have something to do with your increase? That the Internet allows people to learn that one actually can live as one feels like? That one doesn't need to hide anything and still have a worthy life?
You mean the part where people are applying this to kids who have trouble tying their shoes? But absolutely know that they're *insert gender* because reasons. Sure. Do you or don't you remember the "autism" garbage a few years ago? I'm guessing not, otherwise you'd be seeing the same push in turns of trendiness.
Re: (Score:2)
No wonder you're unable to admit it though, you're committed to the lie. Ferociously so. It's like your inability to admit that the Iraq War was started by Bush the First, who wanted a reason to make the Middle Eastern Oil States beg for American help.
Says the person who can't even read? Sure glad you can't read at all [globalnews.ca]. Much like the rest of your post, which can't be coherent let alone respond in context.
Re: (Score:3)
Um... no.
To get to media sources that are slanted to the left as far as fox lists to the right you need to leave broadcast and mainstream print behind entirely, and sink to the levels of websites like Indymedia and DailyKos. And even then, those sites have the modicum of integrity to wear their bias in their sleeves and refrain from claiming to be either "news" or "fair and balanced".
Re: (Score:2)
Which is why they all colluded with the DNC right? CNN [dailywire.com] politico [businessinsider.com] washington post [dailycaller.com] donna brazille handing debate questions to the clinton camp before a debate [politico.com] and on, and on and on and on. [wikileaks.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Fox news = GOP news network!
So.....
ABC, NBC, CBS, NPR, WAPO, USAToday, Boston Globe, and several dozen others = DNC news network!
Right?
It is surprising how effective it is to ignore the truth enough that nearly every news network spends significant air time pointing out your lies, so that you can then claim nearly every news network is biased against you. I wouldn't have believed it without seeing it, but actually works on people really well.
Re: (Score:2)
It is surprising how effective it is to ignore the truth enough that nearly every news network spends significant air time pointing out your lies, so that you can then claim nearly every news network is biased against you. I wouldn't have believed it without seeing it, but actually works on people really well.
Isn't it funny that when you live in an ideological echo chamber, and don't see the media from an outsiders point of view that you fail to understand exactly how slanted the media is in particular directions. You know, kinda like how 95% of reporters in the beltway are registered democrats and vote democrat.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Call me back when any of those networks gets caught colluding with the DNC
CNN [dailywire.com] politico [businessinsider.com] Washington Post [dailycaller.com]. That's all from the 2016 election cycle, they all colluded. So did all those other networks I listed, you can find them all right in the DNC email leaks. There's dozens on top of dozens of stories on major networks getting caught sending stories to the DNC to make sure the narrative was correct, directly publishing articles from the DNC. Hell Donna Brazille was caught giving the Clinton camp debate questions before the debate from CNN. [politico.com] You get that? They all colluded.
Or better yet, don't call me at all you nazi.
And
Re: (Score:2)
It's interesting you mention that specific example. Clinton did get debate questions in advance but in the debate in question she wasn't debating against Trump -
4ac's and you've still managed to get it wrong. I find it odd, but funny just how far people are willing to defend handing off debate questions in any case at all. But "it was against sanders" you screech, as if that somehow makes it better.
Re: (Score:2)
That's why the DNC email leaks showed that there were multiple reporters from those organizations who leaked/wrote stories/directly published DNC material right? So what does that mean? You have a single media organization "fox" which has GOP support. And everyone else with DNC support...gee...who can't realize their shit doesn't stink.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh Mashiki, you know there's more than Fox chasing after the GOP tail. There's a whole host of AM radio providers, good ole Sinclair Broadcasting, and the websites you check with fanatical devotion even as they lie to you.
So you're saying I'm right, that the DNC email leaks happened. That multiple organizations were working and/or handing things off to media or back to the DNC for prior publication. Otherwise, you'd actually be able to dispute something rather then cry about some nonsense.
Re: (Score:2)
21st Century Fox != Fox News
At least Fox News isn't getting sold off (Score:4, Funny)
We wouldn't want that bastion of fair and balanced quality journalism to be tainted by Disney.
Re:At least Fox News isn't getting sold off (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
And Goofy!
Fox News (Score:2, Informative)
It's like the media in the SOVIET UNION.
Re: (Score:2)
Like CNN, MSNBCS, OANN, Twiiter, Facebook, ect. ?
Boycott Disney (Score:4, Insightful)
That's it. I'm Boycotting all Disney products. I hope people wake up and start doing this before they completely destroy the entertainment industry. I was feeling uneasy about them for a while, but this is the last straw. They need to be made to divest of a large part of their recent acquisitions. This kind of monopoly is good for no one.
Re: (Score:2)
In this case, doesn't it at least mean that some media IP is no longer split between rivals, so we can see all our favourite characters from the same universe in the same movies?
We want movies that pander to us (though we have different ideas as to how that pandering should be done). This will allow more committee-based movies to check more boxes for focus groups and give us what we want.
It won't destroy quality thought-provoking movies... there's always another generation of talented people trying to brea
Disney will have to much NFL now! (Score:2)
Disney will have to much NFL now!
Re: (Score:2)
As far as the Fantastic Four goes, apparently FOX leases that from a smaller company that acquired the rights long ago. So they won't be in Avengers 4 or anything.
Re: (Score:3)
As far as the Fantastic Four goes, apparently FOX leases that from a smaller company that acquired the rights long ago. So they won't be in Avengers 4 or anything.
Any confusion over whether or not Fantastic Four would be part of this deal was put to rest today by Disney. Read the actual press release [thewaltdisneycompany.com] and you will see Fantastic Four was included in this deal.
Re:Boycott Disney (Score:4, Insightful)
Used DVDs/Blu-rays are a good deal and the media corps get NOTHING from the resales...
Re: (Score:2)
Or they'll just D/L it. Garage sales can be great for DVDs too, especially from families where the kids have all grown up and moved away :)
Harder to find valuable collectibles there anymore, but sometimes you get lucky. AMazing how much you can turn around an old box of Pokemon Cards if the "right ones" are in there....
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
To what end? (Score:2)
Ok, so you think Disney has too much of a monopolistic influence in entertainment. I disagree that it is a significant problem, provided that the contracts of the key content creators they have under their control are not unreasonably coercive. Being a bigger content provider does not worry me. I would be worried if they started buying and operating movie theaters or broadband networks (ie, buying Comcast).
Disney is fundamentally a creator of content. They own ABC and want to have their own streaming se
Re: (Score:2)
Clearly you see a problem, but what is an ideal situation for you, and how does it change things from how they are now for a typical consumer?
The fact that with more money than God it will now be even easier for them to buy more laws that serve their ends (see theft of the Public Domain for one prime example).
Re: (Score:2)
Competitor? (Score:2)
As things stand, you can't get Disney films on Netflix (I believe there's one star wars film on there right now, possibly as a test or something). If Disney buys 21st Century, then there'll be even less on Netflix as those titles get removed as well.
One wonders if this can be seen as Disney becoming a 'better competitor' or just muscling out the opposition. Netflix offers something Disney seem incapable of - that is, what the customer actually wants, rather than what a big media company says they can have.
Re: (Score:2)
>As things stand, you can't get Disney films on Netflix (I believe there's one star wars film on there right now, possibly as a test or something).
I suspect that would be, "A New Hope", because Disney doesn't own that until this deal goes through. Once it does, they'll pull it from Netflix to support their own streaming offerings instead.
Re: (Score:2)
As things stand, you can't get Disney films on Netflix
That's not true. I remember seeing Moana on there recently. They have a bunch of Marvel films. The Marvel TV shows are produced jointly by Netflix and Disney. Rogue One is on Netflix. I think there may be a Pixar film or two.
I'm not arguing with your larger point, which is that Disney has gotten awfully big, and we should be on the lookout for anticompetitive practices. However, it's not true that there's no Disney content on Netflix.
Re: (Score:2)
I replied to someone else below you with the results of a search for "disney" on the netflix phone app. With a couple of notable exceptions, almost no disney on (my) Netflix. Some are on Amazon, but you have to pay for them there.
I'll also say I'm not too sad about that - we've inherited lots of DVDs from the family/friends, so with only a couple of exceptions, we're not giving Disney any actual money for films, either directly through sales or indirectly through streaming services.
Re: (Score:2)
If you are looking for Disney content on Netflix you should look in the children and family section. Netflix has a deal with Disney and a lot of Disney content though if that deal ends then yes it going to hurt Netflix it will almost wipe out their children's sections.
Re: (Score:2)
Nope - still not there. A Force Awakens, and a couple of others, but that's it from Disney. See below for a full list.
It seems it varies by region. Should have known really.
Re: (Score:2)
As things stand, you can't get Disney films on Netflix.
That's not true at all. They cut a deal that runs through 2019 for most new Disney titles to go to Netflix like 3 months after home media release. Plus a ton of back catalog. Just go there and login and search for Disney. TONS of Disney movies on Netflix.
Re: (Score:2)
I have to disagree - maybe it's by location. I just tried the search you suggested, and I got:
James and the giant peach
strange magic
tomorrow lands
star wars force awakens
avengers
thor
antman
ghost patrol
air buddies
kate and mim mim
Air bud
Wild Ride
Air Bud
Jake's buccaneer blast
Yo Kai Watch
Harry Bunnie
Air Bud
Fangbone
Walt before Mickey
Air Bud
So apart from a couple of exceptions, almost none of that list is actually Disney.
Re: (Score:2)
Also we should discuss what you consider "a couple" because in my part of the world 20 isn't even close.
Oh really? (Score:2)
On Netflix as of right now:
Lilo & Stitch
Lilo & Stich 2
Leroy & Stitch
Moana
Mulan
Hercules
Zootopia
Finding Dory
Atlantis
Tarzan II
Kronk's New Groove
An Extremely Goofy Movie
Phineas & Ferb
A bunch of the Tinkerbell movies
Fox & Hound
Mickey's Christmas Carol
Pete's Dragon
The BFG
That's all I'm going to bother to list, but there are dozens more.
Re: (Score:2)
Lucky you - see above for my list - just a couple here.
Enjoy renting (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They currently still sell physical media. For the older movies, 1080p is enough to pass down for a few generations, until playing physical media is completely impossible. DMCA will hopefully relax on AACS when DVD/Blu-Ray players come off the market (not that my Blu-Rays aren't already ripped).
Online video? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well...they did promise to have a streaming service soon. Didn't know they'd try brute force buying out an existing one. Though that might be one of the few ways they even get subscribers.
Re: (Score:2)
Now however, they can presumably arrange it so that Hulu, or a new online service of their own, has all the Disney and Pixar movies, the Star Wars movies, the Simpsons, Futurama, X-Files, Buffy, Firefly, Orville, Family Guy, How I Met Your Mother, Glee, MASH, Arrested Development, American Horror Story,
Yay, More Monopolies! (Score:5, Insightful)
I believe in low regulation, but think the government needs to step in when the market becomes uncommunicative, whether that be the desktop OS market, the internet service provider market, the search engine market or the movie industry. Unfortunately, both parties are now bought and paid for by industry, and are completely unwilling to intervene in uncompetitive markets.
An increasing number of markets are tending towards monopolies, and in all cases the company in charge is abusing that monopoly. Rather than intervene, the government actively encourages them, banning community run ISPs, allowing mergers and removing barriers to abuse.
What we have is not capitalism and the free market, it's more like a corrupt soviet system run by a small number of elites. We desperately need to restore a competitive market place by splitting up monopoly companies.
Re: (Score:2)
I believe in low regulation,
except for when you are inconvenienced by businesses.
Potential major power shift (Score:2)
Rupert Murdoch is probably the most politically powerful person on Earth. If he's giving up his news channels and newspapers, he could fall a few places and leave an opening for the current #2, Mark Zuckerberg.
Your local FSN $5-6/mo + must be in basic level (Score:2)
Your local FSN $5-6/mo + must be in basic level
Re: (Score:2)
Now only south park can bash the mouse Simpsons (Score:2)
Now only south park can bash the mouse the Simpsons will be banned from doing it!
Re: (Score:2)
The Simpsons? Is that still a thing?
Re: (Score:2)
http://ftw.usatoday.com/2017/1... [usatoday.com]
Re: (Score:2)
... they didn't happen to predict Bitcoin at one million dollars by any chance?
Re: (Score:3)
Right around the time they moved to HD, they actually had a bit of a resurgence. I'll admit I hadn't watched it for nearly a decade when I picked up again, but I've been watching ever since. It's been hit and miss, but that's always been the case. A different dynamic, but a good one.
Concentration of Intellectual Property? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
other studios such as Sony and Paramount are reporting losses
I do not think that means what you think it means.
Re: (Score:2)
No it's pretty much exactly as he said. Sony Pictures reported a Net Loss of over $900mil last year. Now admittedly that was due in part to close to a $1bn writedown in its movie business (which is itself a reflection of profitability) but a movie studio making less than $50m is virtually unheard of. Of course Sony's 4 big movies that year were a huge flop grossing some $350m. For comparison Spectre alone grossed over $1bn the year before.
Sony spent the best part of this year justifying to shareholders and
Re: (Score:2)
They don't care about entertainment value, only money. But art and business, especially risk averse suits, do not mix. The masses will smell the stench of stale, watered down pandering sooner or later.
So the obvious question is (Score:2)
Does that include Firefly? And will Disney let it rot, or rape the corpse?
Re: (Score:2)
They will rape the corpse AND then let it rot.
So both.
Re: (Score:2)
They will rape the corpse AND then let it rot.
So both.
So like Reavers, then?
Re: (Score:2)
It's going to be Firefly reboot, with Tinker Bell as "the firefly".
This has to due with the marvel stuff. (Score:4, Insightful)
21st century fox has the licenses for spiderman and x-men. Disney has said they want all marvel properties under one roof...
Re: (Score:2)
Sony has Spider-Man, and they've made a deal with Disney.
Fox has X-Men and Fantastic Four.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Actually Fox doesn't have Fantastic Four, they just have a deal with Constantin Film to produce films under their license. Constantin Film owns the license.
Read the actual press release [thewaltdisneycompany.com] and you will see Fantastic Four was included in this deal.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, Fox does have the Fantastic Four film rights. They were explicitly stated to be included in this deal, so it's likely that one of the renegotiations over the rights throughout the years (e.g. in 1994 when Marvel bought out the low-budget Fantastic Four film to spike its release, or around 2000 when Fox and Constantin negotiated an extension to the rights) resulted in Fox buying out Constantin's rights, perhaps in exchange for some other obligation, such as being required to attach Constantin to ea
Why stop there? Buy DC as well.... (Score:2)
Time Warner as well? (Score:3)
DC is part of Warner Bros. Buying Warner would bring Daffy Duck and Donald Duck under the same umbrella, which I imagine would raise antitrust suspicion even in a Republican administration.
Re: (Score:2)
It worked pretty well in Who Framed Roger Rabbit.
Re: (Score:2)
They could easily buy the right to DC as well if the price was right.
I thought Disney already had a controlling stake in DC: the Copyright Office, the trademark part of USPTO, and a couple hundred legislators.
Re: (Score:2)
21st century fox has the licenses for spiderman and x-men. Disney has said they want all marvel properties under one roof...
The only thing I like about this is that Fox won't be able to make any more shitty movies with the Marvel IP. Fan4stick was atrocious.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No. Why would a private corporation want a blockchain currency whose security would depend on maintaining more processing power on the network than the rest of the world combined?
They could (if they haven't already via a partnership with Visa or other major entity) issue a DisneyCard and require it for transactions with their empire.
Marvel and Star Wars (Score:3)
So this would bring Deadpool, the Xmen, Wolverine, The Fantastic Four, Star Wars: A New Hope, and a large catalog of other content under the Disney brand. I think the only major Marvel property they wouldn't own would be Spiderman which Sony has the rights to and Sony is playing nice.
Of course there is a lot of other content and assets owned by Fox [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
And after the acquisition, they have a deal with Disney to produce the films for them.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Now try to imagine Kingdom Hearts 4...
Re: (Score:2)
I wanna see Hulk smash the Death Star. There's probably some other universe mashups that would be awesome too.
Are you kidding me? (Score:2)
Netflix: movies and TV shows including exclusives.
Apple: for now, simply a reseller/renting service, nothing else.
Amazon: movies and TV shows including exclusives, but AFAIK a lot smaller than Netflix - at least in Canada.
Google: YouTube is for short videos, not full movies.
Facebook: Are you kidding me? FUCK FACEBOOK.
They did not mention Crackle, Sony's ad-ridden
Disney 60% of Hulu (Score:2)
After this deal, Disney will own 60% of Hulu.
Hulu > Owners
Comcast/NBC: 30%
21st Century Fox: 30%
Walt Disney: 30%
Time Warner: 10%
With CBS still going at it alone.
This is bad news for all of us (Score:2)
I'm sure we've all felt a disturbance...
No, NOT Fox News (Score:2)
Apple has more cash than Disney is worth (Score:4, Interesting)
Apple cash: >200B
Disney Market Cap: ~166B
That doesn't seem like a contest.
Re: (Score:2)
That's because Disney actually spends their money. They bought Lucasfilm and Marvel. They constantly upgrade their theme parks. They have a lot of R&D behind *every* attraction at their parks.
Apple sells their wares for 4x cost of materials then hides behind Ireland.
Almost right (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
hopefully this is the real motivation. Fox has the rights to it still and has no interest in releasing it... Lucas doesn't want it out there... but if Disney owns the 1977 film rights and the Star Wars franchise rights, Lucas can no longer stop them.
Remember kids, it's not episode IV: A New Hope... just "Star Wars" where Jabba is not to be seen and Hahn definitely shoots first.
While they are at it... theatrical cuts of Empire and Jedi as well... the original emperor was freaking creepy.
I have the DVD set where they include a letter boxed, un-remastered original cut along with the new version.
Re: (Score:2)
There are still copies of the original out there [facebook.com] if you take the time to look.
Re: (Score:2)
On that subject, this is a seriously long way to go to get the rights to release the original, unaltered trilogy a few years early (the rights revert in 2020).
Re: (Score:2)
According to Lucas they can't release the original unaltered trilogy. The negatives were somehow damaged around the time he was working on the "Special Editions" and it would be too expensive to fix them.