Comparison of Star Wars film grosses for the PT and ST adjusted to November 2017 dollars from their years of release, using Box Office Mojo and the CPI Inflation Calculator:
>TPM: $1,524,000,000
>TFA: $2,156,000,000
>AOTC: $890,800,000
>TLJ: ~$1,300,000,000
OMG THEY'RE ONLY HALF AGAIN HIGHER THAN THE PREQUEL TRILOGY WHICH WERE OF COURSE CONSIDERED HORRIBLE BOX OFFICE FAILURES. HOW WILL STAR WARS EVER RECOVER? DISNEY BTFO!
Other urls found in this thread:
westegg.com
anyforums.com
twitter.com
but we didn't do shit
Doesn't matter, they still made a huge profit from it.
>hehe! Disney always wins! *snort*
*adjusts mouse hat*
sequels are suppose to surpass their first movies. Failure.
Did you remember to include the $1,000,000,000 profit from porg merch?
Nope. There are no rules about that.
Where the hell do these figures come from? The Phantom Menace grossed $1,027,044,677. How do you figure that that’s equal to $1,524,000,000 today?
...
>What is currency inflation?
Literally no Star Wars movie has done that. AOTC and ESB both made around 60% of TPM and ROTS respectively.
>The Phantom Menace grossed $1,027,044,677. How do you figure that that’s equal to $1,524,000,000 today?
>m-muh movie isn't a FLOP!
>reading comprehension.
It's obviously not a flop you fucks. It just could've performed way better. Disney will still make a ton off of money off of merchandising. Have fun having everyone you know talk about shit wars for the next decade.
>this movie made enough money because this other movie made less!
Brilliant.
I know what currency inflation is, I mean what methodology did he use to calculate this. I just plugged the grosses into an online converter and got very different numbers
westegg.com
>Disney will still make a ton off of money off of merchandising.
From what, the toys that aren't even selling?
>they paid 4 billion
>they've sank millions into marketing
>Rogue One and Soylo have significant reshoots
>they've commissioned toys that aren't selling
>they've alienated the neckbeards who obsessively buy merchandise
>they've pissed off every cinema branch they've come into contact with
>They've ruined any remaining good will they had
>they might not recoup their investment until well after the final movie in the trilogy
>mfw
>Disney will still make a ton off of money off of merchandising.
Lol
>MERCHANDISE IS ONLY ACTION FIGURES
Buttfront 2 sells are terrible too.
using the exact same west inflation calculator the result I acquired was.
>What cost $1,027,044,677 in 1999 would cost $1,538,666,249.23 in 2017.
Which is only a difference of about 14.5 million to the OP's calculation.
>return on investment in under 10 years for 4bn
>they own the franchise forever and will continue to make money off it
>stocks bouncing up overall
DISNEY BTFO HOW WILL THEY RECOVER
WE DID IT LADS, DISNEY IS NOW BANKRUPT PRAISE KEK
>a 10 year return on an investment for a product that prints money even under incompetent leadership
>good
Nice filename, by the way.
>Buttfront 2 sells are terrible
Literally a Reddit meme. EA has consistently made shitloads of money off of microtransactions.
>>return on investment in under 10 years for 4bn
Except that's wrong. They haven't recouped the 4Bn they payed, let alone the extra money they need to make for investors due to opportunity cost
Nope
With a 300M budget, at least 200M in marketing, that's 500M in expenses.
Now, they take 65% of domestic sales, so 574M*.65=373.1M.
Overseas they get much less, around 1/3 of the gross on average. That's 640M*(1/3)=213.3
So 213.3+373.1=586.4M. That's about how much disney has gotten of the BO.
so 586.4M-500M=86.4 M.
That's not bank for a major studio, that's pitiful.
And that's on the low end of budget estimates. Some estimates put marketing at nearly 400M, which if true, means disney is still in the red for more than 100M
>what is inflation
>what is population growth
Are you retarded, underage, or both?
>With a 300M budget, at least 200M in marketing
Its budget was $200m, marketing probably $135 million.
>That's not bank for a major studio, that's pitiful.
Why do retards always forget to account for home video and TV revenues. Without those the vast majority of films lose money.
>Its budget was $200m, marketing probably $135 million.
Nigger, you really believe this film had a smaller budget than both TFA AND RO? And a marketing budget more than 70M LESS than a normal blockbuster? Get the fuck out of here
>Why do retards always forget to account for home video and TV revenues.
This isn't 2002 gramps, Home video sales are down the shitter. The top selling in home video sales sold less than 30M in gross, and TFA made a mere 32M gross off of home video sales. TV revenue+home video sales will be lucky to add another 100M
Shoot, meant to say DVD sales. TFA sold a ludicrous 174M in total home video sales, but that's the exception, not the rule.
Expecting TLJ to preform nearly as well as TFA did in home video is a sign of mental retardation, especially given how much it's dropped off so quickly
Actually it's the opposite. The mid movie in a trilogy is always expected to perform the worst.
>Its budget was $200m
>Actually believing this
Oh sweet summer child
Except that's wrong.
LotR films grossed more than each previous installment
Same with all the marvel films except Avengers to AoU, but that lone exception pissed off Disney royally
>disney stock completely flat since the movies started coming out
>the rest of the dow is up 47%
Sup Forums BTFO DISNEY'S DOING GREAT