Disney buys Marvel
Walt Disney became the parent company of Marvel Entertainment after purchasing it for $4
billion, which became their subsidiary company. There has been talk of Mickey Mouse
appearing with famous characters from Marvel such as Spider-man, Hulk and X-Men. Walt
Disney is a parent company to many different small companies in the same area such as
Pixar, this shows how Disney has become a conglomerate company by purchasing in parts of
smaller companies from around the world and including the companies within its own
organization that Disney provides. In addition to this, the marvel comics also have its own
parent company, Marvel Entertainment. Eventually, this changed as Walt Disney wants the
ownership over the company Marvel entertainment.
Disney are well known for their long term and ongoing shows with
their popular characters such as Mickey Mouse and Goofy.
Disney is well known across the world for the variety of
animations and characters they keep consistent and humorous.
There was a period of time where Disney Princesses were the
main thing about Disney, they were well known for Cinderella
and Snow White. This eventually led to a younger female
audience as well as the unsex section (Mickey Mouse).
Marvel are popular for their consistent range of products such as
comics, cartoons, movies etc including characters like Hulk and
Captain America. Marvel are advantageous as they are known
from a wider audience due to their high grossing box office
movies such as Iron Man. The Avengers are a massive part of
Marvel as it’s the presumed best characters from the group
fighting together. The best and most popular heroes fighting
together increased popularity for Marvel. The way this movie
also became highly grossed for Marvel is due to the use of A
list stars, Marvel included these in the movie. This encourages
the audience to watch the movie even more as people will
have the opportunity to see their favourite and childhood
heroes that they follow with passion.
When and Why the deal took place
The buyout of the deal between Marvel
and Disney was assumed to be
completed later on that year in 2009.
As for Marvel, the link between the two
companies has been a turnaround for
Marvel, the reason being is that Marvel
was field for bankruptcy in 1996 as they
where under massive debts as comic
books alternated in a recession which
caused problems for the Marvel. As this
whole incident occurred, it leaded
Marvel into selling there company to
another parent company; Walt Disney.
How the deal increased the power or
influence of the company within the
The monopoly between the two companies would be that Disney is a parent
company to many smaller companies, one of which is Marvel. The deal has
increased the power of Disney massively, the reason for this is that the
film industry has strongly developed which has caused Disney to become
very controlling. Disney didn’t have a wide range of audience which looked
negative on their image. For example, Disney created a huge range of
Disney princess films and shows as well as the TV program Hannah
Montana, both of these examples were aimed at young females. In
addition to this, Marvel aims at a male audience with its masculine and
superheroes that they can look up to with increasing interest. By
combining both companies together, it can increase the power of how
they influence us in a variety of ways. For example, gaining more power in
the film industry would allow the audience range to become broader.
Therefore, this means it would appeal to a wider range of people rather
than keeping it very limited.
The impact will be on other major
The most significant impact on other major film
companies would be the competition
becoming more intense. Two big mainstream
companies are combining into
one, therefore, there is a larger target
audience now it’s aimed at Disney's audience
and Marvel’s audience collaboratively. For
example, they would have a wider range
through age group as well as gender. This can
have a negative affect for other major film
companies as it could prevent them from
appealing to the same target audience due to
Marvel and Disney being more popular, it
would therefore grab the majorities
attention. This would lead to having the
audience be more interested in a film made
by this merged company rather than another
major film company.
Key issues with the ownership deal
One of the issues that needs to be resolved with the
buying of Disney and Marvel is the movie dilemma.
Disney has full ownership over Iron Man, this has
become and issue because before Marvel was
brought by Disney, they planned to make many films
that would occur in the future, which would consist of
various more Marvel characters such as Spiderman
and Wolverine. By Disney not buying the rights to
ownership over all Marvel characters, the movies that
would have been created in the future might not
appear into a movie as the company would not have
the rights, they wont be able to make movies, this
could lead to a decrease in the audience as they will
be disappointed to hear how they wont be able to
watch the Marvel film they were looking forward too
as it is non-existent. In addition to this, Disney are not
as experienced with creating comics in the manor
Marvel do, it would be harder for them to keep a
consistent and sustainable suitable script for a Marvel
film and future comics that would suit the audience
for Marvel. Marvel fans enjoyed the reliability of
opening a comic book and reading the same style of
the comic they previously read.
What I’ve learned overall
I have learnt a lot about how companies
merge and become one, it has some
pros and cons but overall can be
successful which will eventually bring in
a highly increased income and
popularity. I have also learnt that the
specific companies a parent company;
this means that they make more money
in comparison with smaller, inferior
companies. Also, companies can benefit
from gaining more income if a popular
character is featured in a film they
create, this is beneficial as the audience
would want to see more films with the
characters they enjoy watching.
Funding the film industry
The latest trend in advertising is to make
it less advertorial. The tendency is to
move away from in-your-face
ads, where the product is the main
attraction, to mini-movies that
feature "real-life scenarios" with the
product(s) hovering in the
background. This can sometimes be
subliminal and have subtext which
the audience can acknowledge
without realising it. Some would
argue it's "art imitating art imitating
life" scenario, where ads are imitating
the practice of product placement.
Sponsorships are accessible to a broad range of
individuals, from artists to athletes. While it may
seem simple enough, you allow yourself to be
associated with the company in exchange for free
clothes, equipment or other goods or
services, it’s a highly competitive market.
Along with the validation that comes from being
sponsored, a host of opportunities are available.
Depending on the sponsor and the
agreement, you can get straight cash; products
such as clothes, shoes, sporting
equipment, nutritional supplements, computers
or software; they can cover travel and hotel costs
or pay for a health club membership, health
insurance, auto insurance or even a cell phone
and monthly call.
Funding the film industry
Due to the nature of these investment
companies, their member investors
generally have significant personal wealth
and are considered sophisticated enough
to not require the same level of regulatory
protection accorded to small investors by
law. This designation provides added
flexibility for private investment funds.
There's a growing trend for angel investors
to come together and invest as a fund.
Typically, these funds make investments
ranging from $100,000 to $500,000 at one
time and occasionally are supplemented
with private investments from individual
angels. These funds tend to be small in
size, which makes it difficult to afford fulltime investment professionals to manage
the fund. Nevertheless, a significant
amount of time is spent on meeting
organization, decision coordination and
due diligence required to manage these
bands of angels and fulfil the promise of
the angel fund model.
During times of austerity, funding
international development programmes has
become a difficult business. Donor
institutions, foundations and funding
organisations alike receive countless
applications each year, and have to be
selective about which ones to fund and how
they are funded. There are many boxes
development groups need to tick to make it
to the shortlists and successfully secure
funding. Meanwhile, funding organisations
themselves have to be clear on how they
monitor and evaluate (M&E) programmes
they fund, which can be difficult when they
happen in hard to reach locations.
Increased focus on M&E is changing the way
both institutions and foundations fund
development programmes and charities. This
shift has come in response partly to
allegations that institutional funding bodies
had, under political pressure to meet aid
targets, been providing money to ineffective
groups and projects, with little attention paid
to the end result.
An advertising technique used by companies to subtly
promote their products through a non-traditional
advertising technique, usually through
appearances in film, television, or other media.
Product placements are often initiated through an
agreement between a product manufacturer and
the media company in which the media company
receives economic benefit. A company will often
pay a fee to have their product used, displayed, or
significantly featured in a movie or show. For
example, Coca-Cola could pay a given fee to have
the title character drinking a Coke, instead of a
Pepsi beverage. Another example is Toyota might
pay to have one of the characters drive their
newest automobile. Through product
placement, companies hope that film-fanatics will
take note of the products used by the
characters, and therefore think more strongly
about using the products themselves. In the
sequel, brand names were especially
prominent, particularly in updated versions
created for the world of 2015. Hill Valley was
awash with products from such brands as
Pepsi, Nike, Mattel, Pizza Hut, Black and
Decker, The Weather Channel, Texaco, 7Eleven, AT&T, and others.
4) How has the deal increased the power or influence of the company within the film industry – is there any evidence of a monopoly or oligopoly – if
so please explain?
5) What do you think the impact will be on the other major film companies?
6) What are the key issues with this ownership deal find at least 3 issues- this will require you to research.
7) summarise what you have learnt about how ownership practices work within the film industry.
Please choose a deal that you would like to explore – this will help you answer the questions above.:
Disney acquires Lucas films. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20146942
DISNEY BUYS MARVEL http://www.theguardian.com/business/2009/aug/31/disney-marvel-buy-out
Warner brothers buys rotten tomatoes and flixter http://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/may/04/warner-bros-rotten-tomatoes-flixster
Warner brothers buys Turbine – makers of Lord of the rings http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2010/04/warner-brosacquires-turbine.html
FUNDING AND THE FILM INDUSTRY.
8) What are the different ways in which the FILM industry makes money from audiences – create a mind map – include the words below – for a
distinction try to find some of your own.
9) What is meant by product placement – what famous examples are there of films that have used product placement.
10) How does product placement help films to make money (explore a big blockbuster film)?
11) Where do Independent film companies get their funding – explore development funds, film funding schemes etc. Explain how development
funds and film funding schemes work. (Look at examples like Film four, BBC films, Revolver)
12)Explain how sponsorship deals work within the film industry – provide an example of a sponsorship deal for a recent film. (think of a big
blockbuster film, you can try Man of Steel, The Avengers Assemble, The Hobbit – and see what you can find).