Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

PixelPervert t1_j7k5x7b wrote

Wouldn't Disney owning Marvel also put Marvel's money in Disney's pockets?

961

whereismymind86 t1_j7k84p2 wrote

Disney owns fox too

573

NomenNescio13 t1_j7ka219 wrote

This actually raises an interesting question, because while Marvel Studios have made the majority of their profits under Disney, Fox is a very recent acquisition. So should that count towards Disney's revenue?

167

nocommenting_ t1_j7kcf41 wrote

Disney “owns” that revenue as much as it “owns” the revenue that Toy Story made (Disney distributed, they didn’t produce), but eyeballing these numbers, the Disney total includes Pixar (Hell, the example picture is a Lucasfilm property…)

61

Nanooktoo t1_j7kh27r wrote

They count Lucasfilm under Disney, Fox and Marvel should be included.

127

kaidon t1_j7kqxf0 wrote

Wait… are all of these just Disney?!!

49

Cludista t1_j7ksv3i wrote

Disney has a near monopoly on entertainment. Also congress doesn't do its job anymore.

27

thatcockneythug t1_j7kyvkl wrote

If the feds were to get back into the practice of monopoly busting, the entertainment industry is like, the last thing I'd like them to focus on lol

10

BrisklyBrusque t1_j7kwj3i wrote

When Disney acquired Fox a few years ago, it became pretty clear Disney would be getting about 1/3 of all the revenue that goes to the box office. pretty insane.

7

Decumulate t1_j7kx21p wrote

To clarify for people not thinking through this comment - disney bought 20th century fox (the movie studio), not Fox News

11

Aggressive-Morning11 t1_j7khfdv wrote

The same Fox as Fox News? Or only the movie buisness, 21st century fox?

9

spargbotu t1_j7khujq wrote

The bought everything except the news part of the fox empire.

43

CantFindMyWallet t1_j7knxrp wrote

They didn't buy FOX Sports, either.

22

DaoFerret t1_j7kuj1p wrote

They couldn’t buy the FOX broadcast channels because they owned ABC. (Barred from owning two networks)

Murdoch wanted to keep FOX News (it was the part that wasn’t for sale)

They didn’t want/need FOX Sports because they already owned ESPN. (I don’t think they were barred from buying it, and I don’t think it was not for sale, they just weren’t interested?)

(Not disagreeing, just clarifying)

4

oddiseeus t1_j7kzbq9 wrote

>Murdoch wanted to keep FOX News (it was the part that wasn’t for sale)

“Nobody else is going to own one of my megaphones.”

2

TommyBaseball t1_j7kiim5 wrote

Not Fox broadcast channels or Fox News. The only US TV channels they picked up were FX and Nat Geo plus the 20th Century movie productions.

"Among other key assets, the acquisition included the 20th Century Fox film and television studios, U.S. cable/satellite channels such as FX, Fox Networks Group, a 73% stake in National Geographic Partners, Indian television broadcaster Star India, and a 30% stake in Hulu. Immediately preceding the acquisition. The remaining, not acquired, assets of 21st Century Fox, the Fox Broadcasting Company, Fox Television Stations, Fox News Channel, Fox Business, Fox Sports 1 and 2, Fox Deportes, and the Big Ten Network as well as the 67%-owned Credible Labs, spun off into the newly formed Fox Corporation. Other 21st Century Fox assets such as the Fox Sports Networks and Sky were divested and sold off to third parties such as Comcast, Sinclair Broadcast Group and Yankee Global Enterprises."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acquisition_of_21st_Century_Fox_by_Disney

25

NowAlexYT t1_j7kqsfl wrote

Wow i never made the connection between Fox News, FX, and 20th century Fox...

3

--Beaugardes-- t1_j7kv1j1 wrote

If I remember correctly, News Corp (Fox's parent company) spun off the entertainment division into its own company which is what Disney later purchased.

1

Chazzwazz t1_j7kgx0a wrote

Same goes for New Line Cinema, being Warner their Parent company

40

spidereater t1_j7kcwdx wrote

I was going to say that it’s interesting that the top 10 studios only vary by a factor of 3. Kind of argues against the idea that there is excessive media consolidation. But Disney owns fox and marvel so really it’s only 8 and the difference is over a factor of 6 and number 2 is less than half of Disney. So really consolidation is massive.

24

theod4re t1_j7kmlqk wrote

Also New Line and Legendary are subsidiaries of WB. This guide makes no sense.

19

JBarretta01 t1_j7kqi31 wrote

This graphic seems misleading to me

10

DaoFerret t1_j7kuret wrote

The Life of Pi seems thrown in there as subversive marketing for the new Life of Pi play coming out (/s?)

1

answeryboi t1_j7kcfp1 wrote

Why would it? This is a measure of how successful the studios are at making high earning films, not business acumen. Marvel studios is still a separate entity from Disney studios.

8

frostmatthew t1_j7kjk3r wrote

Then why does OP consider Star Wars under Disney instead of LucasFilm? Within Disney LucasFilm is as distinct as Marvel Studios so it doesn't make sense to separate one in the chart but not both.

43

answeryboi t1_j7kkq9g wrote

After clicking through to see more data, the star wars films and some marvel films are listed under Disney motion pictures. I retract all defenses, this is terrible data.

40

answeryboi t1_j7kjsee wrote

They're not actually combined. The source data lists them separately, OP just put a picture of star wars for Disney.

5

PixelPervert t1_j7ke6ne wrote

Disney still must profit off of owning them. There's no reason to have bought them otherwise.

2

answeryboi t1_j7kf59t wrote

That's not what I meant. What I mean is that this data should be separated out by studio as it is because, in a sense, it's a measurement of the studio's performance.

10

unimportantthing t1_j7kitwa wrote

Even if that’s what’s happening, OP’s graph is still disingenuous then. I mean, the representative picture for Disney is a Lucasfilm movie, a separate studio owned by Disney. It also appears that the Disney bar includes Pixar profits, which is also a separate studio owned by Disney.

So why include some under the parent but not others? What is the criteria? It’s a poor choice of data display.

10

answeryboi t1_j7kjq2h wrote

While the picture shows Star Wars, the source data lists Lucasfilms separately from Disney. I think it's just a poor choice in pictures.

4

answeryboi t1_j7kkqsj wrote

After clicking through to see more data, the star wars films and some marvel films are listed under Disney motion pictures. I retract all defenses, this is terrible data.

1

flakemasterflake t1_j7kqtn8 wrote

These are production companies. Disney is the distribution company that distributes for the production companies under their umbrella. Just as Sony distributes for Columbia Pictures

4

Wont_reply69 t1_j7kys3h wrote

Columbia has Bond for the picture but it doesn’t even own Bond and only distributed with MGM producing for the most recent four films. So either OP just really liked that picture of Daniel Craig or they’re confused about the difference between distributing and producing.

2

flakemasterflake t1_j7kz1o9 wrote

Yes, but Sony did use to distribute Bond and this list seems to be a historical/all time list

OP just took the info from the-numbers.com, doubt they understand it either

2

noonehasthisoneyet t1_j7kxfo7 wrote

Wb also owns new line. And legendary has distributed its movies through almost all of the bigger names.

I guess the difference is while Disney and wb own some of the others you don’t see the Disney logo for a marvel movie or for avatar so they can be seen as separate production companies but we know they are owned by one.

3

KnifeHappens t1_j7kuoy7 wrote

Cane here to say this. Disney is definitely at the top.

1

thatguywhosadick t1_j7kx5wu wrote

Yeah disney is at least 3 of the things off this list in terms of stuff that the general public knows they own. That alone is like 105 billion based off this graph.

1

MyReddittName t1_j7kx78q wrote

Conversely, the chart seems to exclude most of Sony Picture aside from its holdings of Columbia Pictures. It should also incorporate totals from Screen Gems and TriStar Pictures

And would Spider-Man: No Way Home be double counted as Sony and Marvel?

1

Bear_necessities96 t1_j7l2l7x wrote

There’s Disney studios, Marvel Studios and 20th Century fox three different studios the company that owns those studios is Walt Disney Company

1

Moaoziz t1_j7kghwj wrote

First I thought that Disney made less revenue than I expected. Then I saw that you split it up into Disney and Marvel.

Was there a reason for that? If Marvel is listed separately, then Lucasfilm should be listed separately, too.

263

AydonusG t1_j7kj4kt wrote

Disney, Marvel and 21CFox should be one, Warner Bros and New Line should be under Time Warner, Columbia should be under Sony. Then we have legendary and Ratpac, who collaborate on and fund a bunch of WB pictures. This chart is just inaccurate in total

164

-caniscanemedit- t1_j7kt20n wrote

Yeah average day on r/DataIsBeautiful is just a bunch of posts of poorly thought out charts. Nice graphic but if it’s nonsense, it’s nonsense.

38

UMPB t1_j7kuo6u wrote

But there are pictures of different movies in the bars on the chart and that's beautiful and also there are people watching it like a movie and a marquis so its beautiful truly the most beautiful of data

Data data on the wall who's the fairest of them all?

8

mavajo t1_j7klg2g wrote

Is it inaccurate, or is it just that given the dynamics it's hard to make a chart that everyone would be happy with, since everyone has their own preferences about how it should be displayed?

I'm sure if OP did it as you suggested, there would be just as many comments critiquing the fact that he merged them and saying they wish they could see them separately. This sub can be a bit hypercritical sometimes.

14

ConsequentialistCavy t1_j7kol3u wrote

They weren’t even consistent with their own methodology.

Star Wars is made by Lucasfilm, not Disney. But Disney owns lucasfilm. Like they own marvel.

19

mavajo t1_j7ku2iw wrote

I mean, is it inconsistent, or is it just a judgment call? I imagine dude was trying to thread the needle between a consistent methodology and interesting, digestible data. He could treat every subsidiary individually, but then you could have a highly fragmented list of players. He could have kept it top-level, but then you end up missing out on individual data for key entities. He probably split the difference to make it interesting to his audience while still providing relevant data.

This isn't a scientific study. It's a post on a sub about attractive presentations of data. I think OP succeeded.

−2

Inaksa t1_j7liwma wrote

True but this is about consistency, if marvel studios or 21st century fox are not counted as part of disney then lucasfilm movies shouldnt count. What is the criteria to split them?

1

Connect_Me_Now t1_j7kvj4u wrote

>Disney, Marvel and 21CFox

20 century fox should be different, as it was a different entity not too long ago.

0

rex_lauandi t1_j7ks1z9 wrote

The other thing is that Disney’s play isn’t even the box office. Last year Disney made over $28 b on parks alone. That’s a single year (these data are from multiple years, which is confusing me).

Licensing, products, and parks are the big deal for Disney.

The box office is just a big ad for us to want to consume those other things.

4

comicidiot t1_j7lagyr wrote

I guess it would come down to the production studio. Is Disney the production studio or Marvel Studios? But even that would be inconsistent with this graphic since Lucasfilm produced Star Wars, not Disney.

1

Male_strom t1_j8i43vr wrote

Lucasfilm would be 12.7b so interestingly, not on the list.
But should definitely be separate.

1

dadmda t1_j7kv4ho wrote

Why did you separate Disney, Marvel and Fox?

0

DickieGreenleaf84 t1_j7k41cp wrote

I'm confused...Columbia doesn't make Bond, Eon does...

99

PixelPervert t1_j7k64gx wrote

Columbia has been involved in the production of *some* James Bond movies

33

DickieGreenleaf84 t1_j7k67zm wrote

Ah...yeah....all of these seem kinda weird, really. Like Marvel Studios IS Disney? No?

18

PixelPervert t1_j7k6dv6 wrote

They're officially separate, but I'm sure some profits filter through, etc

−11

DickieGreenleaf84 t1_j7k6pn0 wrote

I had to look it up....no, Marvel Studios is a subsidiary of Disney. Wasn't to start with, but has been part of Walt Disney Studios since 2015...

17

PixelPervert t1_j7k6v1k wrote

I know it's a subsidiary, but Disney doesn't put its name on Marvel's movies, nor does it have creative influence (as far as I know)

−7

vwma t1_j7kcign wrote

Yeah but the graph isn't about names on screens. It's about revenue and that belongs to Disney.

11

Spectre_195 t1_j7ko4xs wrote

No you are wrong. Disney Studios and Marvel Studios are legally different production companies. Which is what the title of the graph says its charting. So technically the inaccuracy is Disney should be divided up further in its various independent production companies.

2

vwma t1_j7kr2fb wrote

Nope. Marvel studios is a wholly owned and fully consolidated subsidiary.

3

Skapis9999 t1_j7kramk wrote

So do Lucas Films and Disney but Disney has a Lucas Film movie. Or Pixar and Disney but I am sure they count Pixar as Disney

1

DickieGreenleaf84 t1_j7k6zpz wrote

What counts as creative influence? Because again, then, I return to Columbia and Bond. Broccoli rules Bond with an iron fist, just like the family always has.

5

JohnParcer t1_j7k8eyq wrote

Given that LOTR was in 2000 i wonder what rhis looks like with inflation correction

98

testreker t1_j7kqrtb wrote

This is a mess.

Randomly split categories that should be combined

If we go with splitting then categories are missing

The bars aren't anywhere near the right height.

46

BillyBuckets t1_j7ktkem wrote

1.1k upvotes and counting. Welcome to this shit sub.

9

AmishAvenger t1_j7kuln5 wrote

Welcome to the modern internet, where people will make blatant and intentional errors, just because you get more traction by people coming to correct you.

2

WonderNastyMan t1_j7kkwnj wrote

Over what timeframe? Also they're all actually like 3 companies, and soon all to be bought by Disney, aren't they.

24

tunacow t1_j7kannu wrote

Lucasfilm makes Star Wars, not Disney. (Though Disney owns Lucasfilm.)

17

Nanooktoo t1_j7kh03n wrote

Yeah if they count LF under Disney, they should add Marvel and Fox too, putting Disney far beyond WB.

14

darkstar1031 t1_j7kjaxv wrote

Okay, but Disney owns Fox and Marvel. So, this is just absolutely wrong.

9

Johanno1 t1_j7klxv5 wrote

Apparently worst date ever.

This ain't beautiful

8

tarkinn t1_j7kqoix wrote

This data is one of the worst I've seen on this sub. Not because of the design but because of the accuracy

8

realzequel t1_j7kj727 wrote

X-Men from 2000 is included in the Marvel Studios total which 20th Century Fox owned the movie rights too. It's also credited to 20th Century Fox so you have double counting in the totals.

7

your_mind_aches t1_j7ko8xi wrote

This is a terrible representation because it implies IP ownership by putting the characters in there. Sony doesn't own Bond. It also makes it seem like WB had nothing to do with Inception when it distributed the thing. By contrast, Disney didn't produce Star Wars, its subsidiary Lucasfilm did.

4

flakemasterflake t1_j7kqc2z wrote

What year is this supposed to be? This data is not beautiful

4

MarleyandtheWhalers t1_j7kfny5 wrote

Are the posters featured on each of the bars each production company's highest-grossing movie?

3

AtreusFamilyRecipe t1_j7kjxkc wrote

That's what I originally thought, but it can't be. Harry Potter, Aquaman, Joker, TDKR, and the Hobbit all grossed more than The Dark Kight.

4

NowAlexYT t1_j7kqkt8 wrote

Isnt it funny how 4-6 is all just disney?

3

Disgruntled__Goat t1_j7kte98 wrote

I definitely wouldn’t call this “beautiful”. The pictures on the bars make it look really messy.

3

Toxic_Nandalas t1_j7k6x3o wrote

Htf is the life of pienon that list... i only know the movies cuz of religion class

2

PixelPervert t1_j7k8pry wrote

Presuming you're trying to say Life of Pi, it was very well received by critics and was nominated for 11 and won 4 Oscars

7

SPZ_Ireland t1_j7kt9ti wrote

I understand why it was done but surely seperating Disney and Marvel kinda invalidates the data protrayed here.

2

kevlarbomb t1_j7ku0e2 wrote

Op doesn’t know the difference between distributor, production companies. Also why are random franchises being split out?

2

Quincy9000 t1_j7kukjc wrote

The marvel bar is higher than the Disney bar.

2

der_innkeeper t1_j7kc7ri wrote

Universal and WB are owned by ComCast.

Ignore me.

1

CptnStarkos t1_j7kj0uc wrote

I get thats a Batman movie, a Bond Movie, Star Wars and some sort of Avengers movie.

Would you mind including the names?

There are tons of marvel, SW, Bond movies...

1

AydonusG t1_j7kjkkw wrote

The Dark Knight, Skyfall, The Force Awakens, Avengers (Maybe end game?), Titanic, Avatar, LotR Fellowship of the Ring, Inception, Life of Pi.

But this is talking about the company total, not the movie total

​

Completely skipped Jurassic World

3

XolieInc t1_j7kqeoc wrote

Disney owns Marvel which would put them at like 80.1B

1

CMDR_omnicognate t1_j7kurur wrote

I don't really understand why Disney is split up like this... marvel and 20th century are also Disney now, you could argue its split by franchise but then the image in the Disney bar graph shows star wars, so why is Lucasfilm included in this? does that include Pixar too? their own animation studios? why not just have Disney, and everything they own, then also have marvel or 20th century separately to illustrate how large Disney is and how it's distribution is split amongst different IP's?

1

theotherkeith t1_j7lrztq wrote

The IP illustration is off but the chart is intended to be by studio, not Corporation.

Parallel: a chart of top soda brands that includes Coca Cola (1) Diet Coke (2), Sprite (6), and Fanta (9) even though all are owned by The Coca-Cola Company. (In this version think of Lucas Film and Pixar as Cherry and Caffeine-Free Coke)

1

lucky232323 t1_j7kvilf wrote

Now.. which ones are owned by Jewish people....

1

blackbeardrrr t1_j7kwida wrote

Oh. Those are /people/ at the bottom.

1

S2smtp t1_j7kwo8w wrote

Don't put batman on Warner Brothers as if ANY of the DC movies contributed to that total... Lol

1

Huge_Yak6380 t1_j7ky3xo wrote

Disney, Marvel and 20th Century are the same company and should be added together as one column

1

FattyESQ t1_j7ky4ao wrote

Warner Bros. and New Line are both subsidiaries of Warner Bros. Discovery, which is owned by Time Warner. So they are two different production companies albeit under the same umbrella.

Universal is owned by NBC.

Columbia is owned by Sony.

Disney is Disney. But it now owns Marvel Studios an 20th Century (and others like Lucas).

Paramount is CBS/Viacom (they were one then they split then they remerged under CBS).

Both Legendary and Ratpac are their own entities.

Part of the complication is that the chart has to count revenue when the companies were split, and sort of arbitrarily combines or separates pre- and post-acquisition numbers.

I would instead love to see a chart of the umbrella companies: Time Warner, Sony, CBS/Viacom, NBC, and Disney. And I'd love to see their movie/production wings compared to the other parts of their businesses.

1

DaHotFuzz t1_j7l002q wrote

All of those with the exception of one or two are garbage. Saaaad

1

Decumulate t1_j7l15uz wrote

All of these “but they own them” people - each of these studios are separate businesses, regardless of ownership. Ownership doesn’t necessarily imply direct oversight from the parent company. It’s simply the corporate vessel.

1

A-Chris t1_j7l5azc wrote

Soooo… Disney is basically destroying the competition at over $80Billion.

1

TheVentiLebowski t1_j7l605b wrote

Is this every movie each studio has ever made? Some of them have been around for close to a century, while others are relatively new companies. So it's not a good comparison. Unless I'm totally misreading this.

1

Exe0n t1_j7ljosl wrote

Don't think this takes inflation into account.

I don't think the box office for the LOTR franchise 20 years ago compares to what you get nowadays for a marvel movie

1

Wunjo26 t1_j7kvijb wrote

Titanic, Avatar, and Inception are the only original movies on this list. The rest are sequels, franchises, or reboots. Can’t wait for the marvel/superhero shit to die and we can get back to actual original stories without franchising the fuck out of everything

0

giteam OP t1_j7k2jt1 wrote

Source

Newsletter

Tools: Figma, Tableau

−9

PixelPervert t1_j7k5tkf wrote

According to that source, Marvel Studios has made 76 movies. What?!

5

whereismymind86 t1_j7k8coi wrote

Yeah…no, there are something like 30 marvel movies.

I imagine they are counting the little one shot shorts/specials and/or tv shows

5