Disney Cuts Profit After Movie Flop (http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=businessNews&storyID=1846788) - Reuters, 12/3/02

QuikQuote: Walt Disney Co. on Tuesday lowered its reported earnings for 2002 due to the box office failure of animated feature "Treasure Planet" and said securities regulators were investigating whether its board had provided independent oversight.
At the same time the entertainment giant, which had disclosed previously that relatives of some independent directors worked for Disney, unveiled a widely anticipated set of measures to shore up corporate governance.

Here is a second article, that describes the reason why they had to take a loss (restated earnings) in the last quarter, that ended September 30th, 2002.

Disney Undercuts Critic Of Eisner, Revises Net Dn (http://sg.biz.yahoo.com/021204/72/35dlk.html#Scene_1) - Dow Jones, 12/4/02

QuikQuote: The changes came as Disney also said that the poor performance of its expensive animated movie, "Treasure Planet," prompted it to revise its results for the fiscal fourth quarter of 2002. Under current accounting rules, the company is obliged to take a $74 million pretax write-down in that quarter to reflect a lower book value of the film, resulting in net income that is lower by $47 million, or two cents a share. The change means that Disney's fourth-quarter net income was $175 million, or nine cents a share, rather than the $222 million, or 11 cents a share, that Disney reported in early November.
Disney, based in Burbank, Calif., also warned that the film will probably lower earnings expectations in the current fiscal first quarter by one cent a share. But it said it continues to believe that the company's earnings in fiscal 2003 will increase by 25% to 35% over the latest fiscal year. "Treasure Planet," which cost nearly $140 million to produce, bombed after opening over the five-day Thanksgiving weekend, selling just $16.6 million of tickets. Some in Hollywood think it will struggle to top $50 million in domestic box-office sales -- an unprecedented financial debacle for a major Disney animated release.

I hate to hear Treasure Planet called a flop. I've heard different news sources make it sound that way. I think the reality will end up being that it makes a modest profit. Of course, the company needs a mega hit right now, so I guess that's why it is being referred this way. Oh, well.

Originally posted by HTHBellcaptain
I think the reality will end up being that it makes a modest profit.

It is possible that the film might make a small profit if it does considerably better internationally and on video, but it pretty certainly will classify as a major flop in its domestic theatrical release.

-Jeff

Originally posted by JeffG
...it pretty certainly will classify as a major flop in its domestic theatrical release. :crying: That's so sad. I liked the movie (even though I don't really think crediting John Rzeznik as the "singing voice" of Jim is quite accurate).

What's particularly sad is to be hearing this from you, Jeff. You're usually so upbeat.

Originally posted by Lani
:crying: That's so sad. I liked the movie (even though I don't really think crediting John Rzeznik as the "singing voice" of Jim is quite accurate).

What's particularly sad is to be hearing this from you, Jeff. You're usually so upbeat.

The opening weekend really was pretty spectacularly weak, making it tough even for the most optimistic among us to spin it very positively. :) I suppose the best I can say is that box-office performance does not equate to quality. I've certainly seen a lot of positive reactions to it (both online and among some professional critics), so there obviously is an audience for the film. Hopefully the film will find its audience overseas or once it hits video.

As you might have seen in the review that I posted down in the Entertainment section, I personally didn't care much for the film. I did see a lot of artistry in it, though, and can see why some are connecting with it. I would have liked to have seen it do better than it is.

-Jeff

Originally posted by Lani
What's particularly sad is to be hearing this from you, Jeff. You're usually so upbeat.

I know you didn't mean it like this, Lani, but I'm always interested that there seems to be a disconnect between personally liking something and recognizing it as a success or failure. Someone can think Treasure Planet was the greatest movie since Citizen Kane and still see that its gonna be big box office flop.

I noticed this idea in DCA discussions on various boards. Some people seemed to have to claim that DCA was a success if they personally enjoyed it. They twisted themselves into logical pretzles just because they didn't want to say, "well, I like it, but it isn't doing so well." Others were told that they were too negative if they noted that DCA wasn't very successful, even if they personally liked the park and stated so in their comments.

A person could say "Spirited Away" (for instance) was the best movie released this year, but no one is gonna argue that it was box office success.

Originally posted by EandCDad
I noticed this idea in DCA discussions on various boards. Some people seemed to have to claim that DCA was a success if they personally enjoyed it. They twisted themselves into logical pretzles just because they didn't want to say, "well, I like it, but it isn't doing so well." Others were told that they were too negative if they noted that DCA wasn't very successful, even if they personally liked the park and stated so in their comments.


That is true, but keep in mind that the inverse is also true as well.

Someone that dislikes a project may have a tendency to overstate or find excessive glee in its underperformance. I've seen this happen quite a bit with DCA, where there isn't anything as clear-cut as box-office numbers that can be used to measure its success or failure. Attendance figures come the closest, but the official figures aren't publicly available.

The other serious danger is to try to use financial success or failure as an objective measure of quality. In truth, the two don't necessarily go hand-in-hand. Public acceptance or rejection of a project on the basis of quality/appeal is likely a factor in its financial success or failure, but it isn't always the only or even the largest one. If something we like is a hit or something we dislike is a failure, human nature is to immediately try and attribute most of that to a perception of widespread agreement with our own opinion. The reality may be that other factors (competition, marketing, economic conditions, etc.) may be equally or more significant.

-Jeff

Originally posted by JeffG
That is true, but keep in mind that the inverse is also true as well.

Someone that dislikes a project may have a tendency to overstate or find excessive glee in its underperformance. I've seen this happen quite a bit with DCA, where there isn't anything as clear-cut as box-office numbers that can be used to measure its success or failure. Attendance figures come the closest, but the official figures aren't publicly available.



I totally agree that the inverse can be true. People who don't like something may have to twist themselves into pretzels also to prove its not a success when common sense tells you it is. Speaking specifically to DCA, I think it was easier for people who hated it to support that it wasn't doing well (Disney execs were saying as much) than it was for people who liked it to support that it was doing well. My opinion was that it was a nice park that I enjoyed and it was doing pretty poor. I was fine arguing that it wasn't doing well with someone who thought it was and that it certainly wouldn't have been better as a parking lot with those who thought that.

Let's leave out DCA, as it will bring out the "DCA is good/DCA sucks" crowd. I agree, a person might be tempted to argue that a movie that did well, is a good movie. It's possible that Treasure Planet could have done well at the box office and still been kinda cruddy. Its also possible for a person to argue "I don't like the movie for these reasons." The response should not be (although it often is) "it made $300 million, of course its good."