Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

What Disney's Acquisition of Fox Means For the Future of Film and TV (qz.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the rich-get-richer-and-the-poor-get-poorer dept.

Disney announced on Thursday it had reached a $52 billion deal to buy most of the assets of 21st Century Fox. It is "the biggest and most consequential media merger in an era of big and consequential media consolidation deals," reports Quartz. "The deal will have a lasting effect on film, television, and the internet." From the report: If the merger is approved, Disney will own: All of Fox's film studios (20th Century Fox, Fox Searchlight, and Fox 2000); Fox's television studio; FX Networks; National Geographic; Fox's stake in European broadcaster Sky; Fox's stake in North American streamer Hulu. Staying with the hollowed out 21st Century Fox is the Fox broadcast network, Fox News, Fox Sports, and Fox Business. With Fox's film and TV studios and its cable networks, Disney will acquire the rights to literally hundreds of popular television series and movies. (Some of which include Avatar, X-Men, Deadpool, Modern Family and The Simpsons.)

Imagine all of the properties mentioned above, plus all of Disney's existing franchises (Star Wars, Marvel, Pixar, etc.) combined into one internet streaming service. You won't have to imagine for long, because that's pretty much exactly why Disney CEO Bob Iger was so keen on buying all of Fox's biggest assets. Disney plans to release a streaming entertainment service in 2019. It would have been quite formidable on its own, even without Fox's help, but now it will likely be the first true rival to Netflix in the streaming space. Before today, Disney, Fox, and Comcast (NBCUniversal) all shared equal 30% stakes in Hulu (Time Warner owns 10%). But when Disney takes over Fox's share of the streaming service, it will own 60%, becoming a controlling majority owner, relegating Comcast to minority owner in the process.

20th Century Fox, we hardly knew ye. Okay, that may be a bit premature, but it's clear that Fox's film business won't be the same if the merger is approved. The deal marks the first time in modern history that one major film studio has purchased another, eliminating one of the "big six," and essentially giving Disney control of two-thirds of Hollywood. (The other four major movie studios are Universal, Warner Bros., Paramount, and Sony.)

7 of 139 comments (clear)

  1. Like Star Wars by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Does that mean we can expect X-men: The Rip-off, Avatar: the Rip-off, etc?

    --
    Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
    1. Re:Like Star Wars by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Additionally Princess Sophia the First, was not born by a queen, she was simply an acquisition when her mom married King Roland II. The lore here is pretty convolution and basically boils down to "Can we sell your daughter a doll and/or a dress? Yes? Princess."

      So I dub Xenomorph XX121 Princess Sophia the Second, because my opinion is that King Roland II likes to play around and eventually Xenomorph's will get in his sights.

  2. Will Disney become the new Netflix? by JonnyCalcutta · · Score: 5, Insightful

    DisneyFlix will only become a 'rival to Netflix' because Netflix is being forced to become less of an aggregator and more of a distributor of its own content. So Netflix will become worse and Disney will only fill the void for content owned by Disney. I'm not saying anything new here - but welcome to the world of paying for multiple streaming providers (or piracy).

    Perhaps its time to think about some form of compulsory copyright licenses (as per music on the radio, or cable retransmissions).

    1. Re:Will Disney become the new Netflix? by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Which isn't to say Netflix isn't in big trouble. It is. It should have taken a loan long ago, brought HBO for original programming long ago, and built on that with acquisitions of libraries rather than trying to build the library one by one. Now all content is in a bubble getting more and more expensive.

      It's not clear that HBO was ever available for sale to Netflix. Instead of buying HBO, Netflix is simply copying them, and developing their own original content. It seems to me like they are doing exactly what they should be doing. New original content is worth more than old original content.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Will Disney become the new Netflix? by Notabadguy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It was best to think about these things well before government allowed massive monopolies like this to even exist. Today, it's far too late. The cable cutters who felt they were getting ripped off with 50 channels of what they want bundled with 500 channels of shit they don't will now pay a dozen streaming providers for the 50 streaming channels of what they want bundled with 50,000 streaming channels of shit they don't. The only difference is your internet service and streaming costs will likely make cable seem like a bargain in the end.

      Speak for yourself.

      II'm doing more reading and playing more video games than in recent years. I've converted my library of DVDs into H.265 digital files, and we have plenty of entertainment content without having to subscribe to a procession of streaming services. I'm lazy. I'm too lazy to subscribe to multiple streaming services, follow up with which one has a show I might want to watch, pay multiple subscriptions...so I have a library of digital movies that have replaced my VHS and DVD physical copies, an occasional trip to the theater, an occasional pirate bay foray if my wife is desperate to see something - but other than that, alternative entertainment.

      How many other people are that kind of lazy? Not willing to deal with the hassle? Switching to a different mode of entertainment?

      Cable cutting isn't about cutting a cable subscription, then filling in X hours per week with alternate television programming found elsewhere. It's a viable option. Its more about cable as a failing entertainment medium - both in content and medium delivery (mounting costs and ads).

      I should think a lot of people are watching less TV. Polls say the younger generations certainly are.

  3. It will suck, like all other monopolies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They'll think they have you by the balls and not put any effort into making their streaming service customer friendly, i.e. support many devices, work reliably on a wide range of internet connections, etc. They'll make you pay for stuff you don't want to see by bundling it with stuff that you do want to see. The list goes on and on. Monopoly tactics.

  4. What this means is... by Pollux · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The deal marks the first time in modern history that one major film studio has purchased another, eliminating one of the "big six," and essentially giving Disney control of two-thirds of Hollywood. (The other four major movie studios are Universal, Warner Bros., Paramount, and Sony.)

    This means that, within the next two years, I guarantee you'll see another merger between the four other players.

    And all in the name of "competition", of course.