drotto

Yeah there are the 3 Silver Mega Keys, which have fallen back but will always have strong value, and then things like X-Men which I kinda put as 1B titles. I bought a X-Men 1 4.5 about 5 years ago for $3600. It peaked about 18k in 2021, and is around 11k now on a good day. I think those titles are just going to sit about there for at least the next 2 or 3 years, then start to rebound.

Feels like some of the Silver Massive keys like Amazing Fantasy 15, Hulk 1, and Fantastic Four 1 have bottomed out and may be creeping up again.

Not sure it is true or accurate, but this YouTuber is claiming somebody at a screening leaked him the entire plot. Heavy spoilers if true, be warned do not click......

At least that and the fallout with parents and her younger fanbase would be interesting.

I know each has dedicated fans, but I doubt they are three distinct groups. Suspect there is heavy overlap, so no real help brining them together. Also, most of these fans are newer MCU fans that do not have the same track record for repeat viewing, buying merchandise, and is a small fraction of the size of the traditional Marvel fan.

But unlike Disney Plus, Hulu is actually profitable.

It's fake. The photos shown are taken from old Heritage auctions. The site is the redirect from the fake eBay listing we have been discussing. Also, if you watch the supposed people looking at notices. The numbers looking are way to high for a comic site especially an unknown one. Plus, they actually cycle through in a pre-programmed fashion after about 20 books. Not to mention, many of the listed prices are in the too good to be true catagory.

Not sure how eBay could justify leaving this up at all. It violates their policy of advertising for sals off of their platform. Plus, I am sure it was reported as fraudulent multiple times. Next, just to people that did bid on this. Yes, it was clearly fraud to members here, but did the people even read the description befor they offered up 11K? It clearly said this listing is not for sale here, but on our website. They even said read the description carefully. The clear reason to redirect is the Buyer's will ultimately be protected by eBay's buyer protection policy (I hope), and the lister is attempting to circumvent that by having you buy it on an unprotected site.

Does this movie still even have a chance given it is the last connected to the Snyderverse?

The profit is because shows picked up for syndication have a precieved continued demand and get ongoing views. Those views then result in the show generating revenue through continued syndication deals, ads, and the value of the IP in merchandising. Past initial release they continue to make money. Part of those continued revenue streams is then distributed back to creatives. Thus back to what feels like a circular argument at this point. Streaming shows do not have the same post revenue streams that traditional TV has offered. There is no syndication, and no reruns in the traditional sense. Therefor, gauging what that show is worth beyond initial viewership figures (which are admittingly hidden) is extremely difficult. So without those things, by what metric can we calculate residuals? That is the question they are struggling to answer. I am not the person to solve it. My best suggestion is streamers should see what percetage each show or property is related to the total views for the entire platform over a set period. Then establish residuals based on the percentage of views generated for each. Again, that would require viewship transparency. But that structure is something more solid you can understand and therfor negotiate on. So if a show continues to get views creatives get paid. If there is a sudden spike in demand like Suites is currently having, they get paid more. The increased viewer percentage proves the shows continued value, and they deserve a cut of that. The other side if that is if a show fall below a certain level residuals will drop. Now that stinks for those creators, but if a show is not generating interest, is has stopped making money. Congratulations to Mattereaterlad for getting those deals, and having an agent smart enough to realize this is a continued issue. It is a reminder also that talent needs to watch out for their own best interests and actually understand their contracts, and realize they can negotiate deals that work for them.

No, they were based on engagement. The more something is watched. The more it plays. The more the creatives will get. Which again gets back to the complete lack of transparency with streaming. So both sides have to be more transparent with views, but I think with streaming it will just exposure how few people are actually watching many of these shows. Therefor, the residuals will not be worth that much by any metric.

And that is the primary disconnect between the two sides. The studios are under pressure at this point from investors, who see that streaming is losing money. The actors look and the net revenue not the net profit, and say hey your brining in millions or even billions, we deserve a piece of that. The studio say, yes we bring in a lot, but we are not making anything (yes, studio math is notoriously sketchy), we can' pay you that much more. The actors just say, this looks like tons of money to us. The streamer may be losing money but the company as a whole is profitable, use that to make up for it. Yes, Disney plus and this point has lost between $12 to $14 billion.

Add promotion budget on top of the production budget, which people often forget, and the numbers get even worse.

Since it has also come up multiple times, yes the highest studio executives are overpaid in my oppinion, but that is not a valid argument when the top actors are also disproportionately compensated also. In fact people like Tom Cruise made more last year than most of the executives, and he is not alone. Also what they do is not directly comparable. Actors are paid to act. Most executives are overseeing conglomerates where movies and stows are just one component. For instance Iger also oversees them parks, sports, and cruise ships. Finally, as much as I do not always like it. It is what the market will bare. I can not fault any actor, executive, or athlete for negotiating for the most money, and if the company or organization is willing to pay. So be it.

I feel sorry for the movie theaters. There seems to be very little chance any of this gets out in 2024. Even if the films are ready, they are not going to release them on sub optimal dates. For example, if Deadpool is pushed again, they are not going to want an August release. They will push it to December or even summer 2025. This will snowball and push everything also back as the logjam of films build up.

Wow that image looks bad. Comes across as thrown together in an attempt to cover what had really been filmed. Look potential audience see they really are still little people, and resemble the original characters. Also, why would you ever think doing CGI dwarves is needed or a good idea. As we have seen their are a whole bunch of short stature people who would love to get these roles. Despite what one angry one has said. With the 1 year delay, it is clear most of this film is being reshot. This again is really expensive and will absolutely balloon the production budget. Who the heck is approving these budgets, and how do they ever expect to make money after they do?

That is not how I read the thing about the 0.57. Sorry, and apparently others a seeing and interpreting the information in a similar fashion. They had a performance based residual offer similar to WAG in place where if 20% of the subscriber base watched a show, the actor would get additional bonuses. This subscriber cut was in addition to that bonus structure. It was related to residuals, but a way to raise them even more, that was not tied to performance in the same fashion. It is clear we are seeing the same information and viewing it very differently. I think the studio did offer a strong deal, and SAG got greedy. Now, I am not saying they did not have a right to ask for more, they can ask for whatever they want, but you need to be willing to negotiate. If both the directors and writers got reportedly historically good deals, I do not see the studios suddenly trying to screw the actors with a similar deal. Finally, both sides use the media. You seem to think what SAG is saying is being reported accurately, while the studio are being allowed to lie, and being misrepresented. Usually, the media reports groups like SAG in a better light than corporations, what would make this situation different? As for the studios saying if this is not resolved soon 2024 is lost. Yes, it is a negotiation tool, but it is based in truth. Even if they go to work tomorrow, it would take several weeks fo get everything rolling again on the production side. Add to that, movies with heavy post production, and unless they were almost done, it is reasonable to think they would not be ready for the intended release window. So for a financial side it will save them money to write off the quarter.

Last thing I wanted. The new owner was really looking forward to getting it, and I had made the difficult decision after owning it for about 8 years to part with it. He had inquired about it over a several month period before I said ok. I had bought it from Mark at NYCC. I was told, at the time, it was one of his wife's favorites. Really not looking good right now. USPS, investigated the error. They did determin where it went, but said it was not there. I have no idea how that is even possible. I highly doubt the person who recieved it has any clue what they have.

My main problem is Loki is the God of Mischief, and there is not a whole bunch of that in this show. To me this show needs a big dose of British style humor, not current MCU humor. My wife said this shows feels more like Doctor Who, than Loki. Also, I am not sure the anti-hero thing is working given this characters history. They have also scaled WAY back on his power levels, this guy is a God that almost destroyed NYC, none of the fight sequences shown so far should even cause him to sweat, literally he could snap his fingers and be done with it. That is why I liked old comic Loki from season 1 so much, he felt like the 60's character, and he showed his power. But I digress, this thread is about the Marvels, but Loki is far more interesting.

The reports are that the studios offered the actors essentially the same contract that WAG excepted with the 5% percent raise in the first year for a total of 11% over the 3 years of the contract. As well as the same residual agreement and AI protections. Apparently SAG wanted 11% in the first year with more increase over the remainder 2 years. Then they tacked on the surcharge for each subscriber on top of the bonus residual structure that the writers had accepted. That is when the studios walked. Do the writers feel betrayed that the actors are now basically saying thanks for supporting us, but your deal sucks and we deserve a far better deal, when the WAG deal was historically good in the first place? Sorry, if the other deal was a big win, why is that not enough now? Why do the actors deserve even more? You even have big name stars starting to break ranks and offer to pay high dues and even subsidize the lower earners, because not working is costing them millions at this point, which they will not get back. Melissa Gilbert, former head of SAG, even came out and said some of the rule like the costume one, make them look incompetent and silly. But Ryan Reynold of course had the best comment, " I look forward to screaming “scab” at my 8 year old all night. She’s not in the union but she needs to learn."

will look into them thanks

No idea, they even knew where it was delivered incorrectly. They went back to the address, I guess were told by the resident that they did not have it, know nothing about it, and they listed it as unrecoverable. It was going to either a condo or apartment complex and was dropped off at the wrong building. So yes, the carrier did everything wrong even with the new systems which pinpoint delivery spots almost to the inch. Then, they denied the claim twice, after we had the local post office admitting to the error. We finally reached a real person, and they said we did not prove value. I said you have the PayPal transaction number and printout with the amount, and the message chain copies where we agreed on the price. At that point they finally agreed to the claim.

I have a weird reaction to Loki at this point. I like the show, but it does not feel like a Loki show at all. I almost think it would be better if it was built around a different character or even separate from the MCU. This Loki feels like a completely different character from the movie Loki. Yeah, interest is Disney + shows has tanked. Makes it very hard to build a movie where two of the main characters got a start there.

We were in contact every step of the way. He reported it first that the delivery was wrong, because from my end it said successfully delivered. They even accepted a signature from the wrong person.

Opening projections are not great. Predicting $50 to $75 million opening weekend domestic, with final box office in the $175 to $200M range domestic.