Stan shoots - - he SCORES!!!

[Aman619]

in case you havent heard, Marvel settled with Stan Lee for a payout of 10 million dollars. Good news if youre a Stan fan (yay Stan) and I am sure a bitter pill if youre a Kirby fanatic... but, as you recall, Stan had a CONTRACT for this movie income profit participation that Avi et al were trying to sneak out of. So put things in perspective: if Stan is your big bad selfish meanie in comics, what does that make Avi and Ike?

 

interesting that Marvel chose to announce this "loss" simultaneously with their big Paramount deal. In it, Marvel will finance the movies and only "rent" marketing and distribution from the distributor, thereby finally gaining most of the upside, but also all of the downside risk. Many a film company has mishandled such awesome power. If these films fail badly (Cap and Nick Fury so far were mentioned) it will be MARVEL that must pay back the bankers who loaned the production money.

 

Too bad all the best heroes are already tied up elsewhere. Avi will have to hit home runs with the minor leaguers, (sorry Cap fans)

[bobel]

I thought Marvels risk was secured by movie rights on other charachters in their catalog?

[FFB]

interesting that Marvel chose to announce this "loss" simultaneously with their big Paramount deal. In it, Marvel will finance the movies and only "rent" marketing and distribution from the distributor, thereby finally gaining most of the upside, but also all of the downside risk. Many a film company has mishandled such awesome power. If these films fail badly (Cap and Nick Fury so far were mentioned) it will be MARVEL that must pay back the bankers who loaned the production money.

 

You clearly need to re-read the details of the credit facility because it doesn't work that way. The only risk to Marvel is the movie rights to the characters named in the facility itself because that (i.e., the movies rights to the ten characters involved in the facility) is the only security given for the facility. There is extremely limited downside. One of the analysts on the conference call yesterday couldn't believe the terms Marvel got and said "Wow, that is a bad deal for Merrill Lynch!"

[OldGuy]

http://boards.collectors-society.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=798840&an=0&page=1#798840

 

[FFB]

I thought Marvels risk was secured by movie rights on other charachters in their catalog?

 

No, it is a non-recourse bank facility secured by movie rights to just the characters named in the facility. Very limited downside, because those characters' movies have to fail before Marvel loses their movie rights.

 

Marvel is in talks to close a deal with Merrill Lynch to finance production

with a $525m revolver, backed solely by theatrical rights to the Marvel

characters covered by the agreement. In sum, Marvel has no financial capital

at risk. Marvel will consolidate results for the unit, including profits or

losses and debt, although the company intends to break out these results so

investors can separate studio performance from the "core" operation.

[skybolt]

If they play the Avengers #4 angle with Captain America, the movie should work well. I mean Cap would be battling Nazi's (the Red Skull) during WWII, where he's presumed dead. Then 50 years later he'd be revived to face challenges from Neo-Nazi's (to lesson the political implications by not using other hotbeds around the world). Plus, he'd be coping with all the technological and society changes over the past half century.

[bobel]

my understanding was it was the movie rights to 10 charactors as security? I thought it was a win win situation. They either get into the movie biz and succeed or get out with no real loss except partial control of an intellectual property in one medium and the lesson learned to stick to what they know. Even if they make a movie and it bombs there security( movie rights) is a built in promotion for their traditional core biz isn't it? The creditors have to make movies that promote marvels brand name to get there investment back in case of default. Is that the deal pretty much? I only hope if they succeed it doesn't harm there comic properties through divided attention.

[FFB]

my understanding was it was the movie rights to 10 charactors as security?

 

That's right. It's limited to the ten characters in the agreement with Merrill Lynch. I thought you were saying that it was secured by the rights to other characters in the Marvel catalog that were not covered by the Merrill Lynch facility.

[Aman619]

guess youre right. I read quickly and thought Marvel was going the route of so many others who felt cheated out of profits so they decided to own the films themselves, thereby owning the risks too.

Good deal for Marvel.

 

so which are the 10 characters?

[FFB]

guess youre right. I read quickly and thought Marvel was going the route of so many others who felt cheated out of profits so they decided to own the films themselves, thereby owning the risks too.

Good deal for Marvel.

 

so which are the 10 characters?

 

All that has been revealed is Captain America, Sgt. Fury, and the Avengers. They can't use characters like the Hulk and others with movie deals in Avengers, but there are enough non-licensed characters remaining that they feel they can still put together an interesting cast of heroes.

[namisgr]

Now all Marvel needs to do to make this old fan happy is to strike a partnership with Pixar, and generate a stream of fantastic movies using the latest digital animation technologies.

 

And hire Gandolfini to do the voice of the Thing.

[skybolt]

guess youre right. I read quickly and thought Marvel was going the route of so many others who felt cheated out of profits so they decided to own the films themselves, thereby owning the risks too.

Good deal for Marvel.

 

so which are the 10 characters?

 

All that has been revealed is Captain America, Sgt. Fury, and the Avengers. They can't use characters like the Hulk and others with movie deals in Avengers, but there are enough non-licensed characters remaining that they feel they can still put together an interesting cast of heroes.

 

Let's hope it's not the West Coast Avengers lineup. (Hawkeye, Mockingbird, Tigra).

 

I wouldn't mind seeing the Scarlet Witch, Vision, Wasp, Cap, Wonder Man and Ms. Marvel as the Avengers team.

[FFB]

guess youre right. I read quickly and thought Marvel was going the route of so many others who felt cheated out of profits so they decided to own the films themselves, thereby owning the risks too.

Good deal for Marvel.

 

so which are the 10 characters?

 

All that has been revealed is Captain America, Sgt. Fury, and the Avengers. They can't use characters like the Hulk and others with movie deals in Avengers, but there are enough non-licensed characters remaining that they feel they can still put together an interesting cast of heroes.

 

Let's hope it's not the West Coast Avengers lineup. (Hawkeye, Mockingbird, Tigra).

 

I wouldn't mind seeing the Scarlet Witch, Vision, Wasp, Cap, Wonder Man and Ms. Marvel as the Avengers team.

 

Since Marvel is keeping the Captain America property in-house and the others aren't spoken for, there's a good chance that'll be the lineup. Although Avi also mentioned the Ant Man as a consideration for the Avengers lineup.

[Aman619]

hey, I just lov ehow Wall Street thinks! I noticed that Stans new company POW Entertainment is up 25% today!!! Probably as a result of Stan's (not POWs windfall. sheeesh.

 

unless Im wrong again and POW owns everything Stan himself earns?? But I doubt it. This was Stans employment contract paying off.

[garthgantu]

Now all Marvel needs to do to make this old fan happy is to strike a partnership with Pixar, and generate a stream of fantastic movies using the latest digital animation technologies.

 

And hire Gandolfini to do the voice of the Thing.

 

I like Gandolfini as the voice of the Thing, but I can't imagine Pixar doing anything with characters they didn't create and don't own completely. Licensing is for unimaginative losers and over-the-hill brand-builders like Disney, not creative geniuses like Pixar. Think about it: Pixar can create "The Incredibles" out of thin air without infringing on anyone else's copyrights, own the entire thing (except for their licensing deal w/Disney, which ends next year after "Cars"), and churn out hit after hit.

 

While I agree that Pixar would do a fabulous job with the FF or just about any other existing superhero or super-team worth mentioning, I just don't see them doing it. Now Dreamworks, on the other hand...

[bullseye]

pixar already did FF it was called the incredibles, if marvel had a brain in their head they would have sued.

[garthgantu]

Uh-hunh. And Reed Richards isn't Plastic Man in a blue suit, and Invisible Kid didn't join the Legion a year before Sue Storm showed up, and The Thing isn't The Heap with the hay. Oh, and The Human Torch wasn't created 20 years before the FF by Carl Burgos!

 

Those FF members, they're totally original, alright...

[bullseye]

but alas still owned by marvel last i checked.

[garthgantu]

Marvel is not litigation-shy...if they thought they could sue Pixar, they would have. Fact is, most of the FF characters weren't all that original in terms of their powers - it was their personalities and interactions with each other that set them apart.

[bullseye]

all i know if i hear it's clobbering time coming out of a pixar character that would probably make joey q [#@$%!!!] his pants