Georgie56 3054 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 Regarding the deal, if it hits a snag..... [MEDIA=twitter]941295447116800000[/MEDIA] I've already...ah, forget it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CircleSeven 1944 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 I've already...ah, forget it. I didn't even lookup. My bad. And the breakup fee is $2.5B and not $5.2B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mre29 1335 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 If the deal is blocked by regulators, I hope Disney at least buys the film rights for the Fantastic Four and X-Men, as well as those Star Wars distribution rights Fox has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frog 392 Posted December 14, 2017 Author Share Posted December 14, 2017 The "New Fox" is interested in more stations: http://www.tvnewscheck.com/article/109669/murdoch-new-fox-interested-in-more-stations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damien6786 9 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 The weirest part of this deal is The Simpsons predicted this 10 or 9 years ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSSZNews 1046 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 The "New Fox" is interested in more stations: http://www.tvnewscheck.com/article/109669/murdoch-new-fox-interested-in-more-stations Mark my words: FOX is doing this to nab the NFL rights in totality when they’re up next. And with a $52B war chest, it will be impossible for anyone else to compete. When that happens, FOX will have an O&O in every NFL city, NFC and AFC. They can afford it now. This is the beginning of the Sinclair battle. There’s literally no other reason to give away your golden geese like this. And if FOX can’t get an NFL deal done...they’re probably done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgie56 3054 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 Mark my words: FOX is doing this to nab the NFL rights in totality when they’re up next. And with a $52B war chest, it will be impossible for anyone else to compete. When that happens, FOX will have an O&O in every NFL city, NFC and AFC. They can afford it now. This is the beginning of the Sinclair battle. There’s literally no other reason to give away your golden geese like this. And if FOX can’t get an NFL deal done...they’re probably done. Why does Fox want O&Os in AFC cities, though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TennTV1983 741 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 Why does Fox want O&Os in AFC cities, though? Anything to keep Sinclair in check once their merger with Tribune goes through. Though what would it take for Fox to get both WZTV and WUXP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frog 392 Posted December 14, 2017 Author Share Posted December 14, 2017 Mark my words: FOX is doing this to nab the NFL rights in totality when they’re up next. And with a $52B war chest, it will be impossible for anyone else to compete. I would love the irony of Fox using Disney's money to outbid them for Monday Night Football. Thursday nights are up for renewal soon, aren't they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jase 818 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 And for 20th Century Fox to cut ties with HBO. Maybe. Note that the current deal between FOX/HBO runs through 2022 The deal still has to go through Washington. I hope it does not go through because FNC, FBN, and the network + O&Os alone cannot sustain the ship. I agree. They are betting they can live off retransmission fees and the like forever. FNC can't sustain/make up for whatever loses that may happen at other FOX/News Corp-owned properties. If anything, TimeWarner ought to be worried about Disney pulling the entire Seth MacFarlane portfolio off of Adult Swim and TBS in favor of the FX nets. They could do that once the current deal(s) end, but TBS has a bigger reach than FXX. FX is all about dramas and putting this content on some streaming service rather than a traditional tv network would be foolish. At the end of the day, Disney will do whatever will make them the most money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Info Junkie 1285 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 The weirest part of this deal is The Simpsons predicted this 10 or 9 years ago They’ve predicted many things, even Trump’s presidency! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgie56 3054 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 [MEDIA=twitter]941358313236828160[/MEDIA] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mre29 1335 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 Mark my words: FOX is doing this to nab the NFL rights in totality when they’re up next. And with a $52B war chest, it will be impossible for anyone else to compete. When that happens, FOX will have an O&O in every NFL city, NFC and AFC. They can afford it now. This is the beginning of the Sinclair battle. There’s literally no other reason to give away your golden geese like this. And if FOX can’t get an NFL deal done...they’re probably done. So, what happens when football and the NFL fall out of favor with the general public? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldenShine9 1508 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 So, what happens when football and the NFL fall out of favor with the general public? Fox is screwed then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSSZNews 1046 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 So, what happens when football and the NFL fall out of favor with the general public? Barring a player dying on the field, I still think we're many years away from that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T.L. Hughes 742 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 Facts don't matter on Twitter. [MEDIA=twitter]941310624629485568[/MEDIA] FTR, that was an in jest critique. Richard Painter is a ethics lawyer and vice chair with Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, who has criticized Trump multiple times for failing to divest his business interests before being inaugurated president and retaining them since, among other ethics issues regarding Trump. The joke falls apart a little, since the DOJ's enforcement of Sinclair to divest stations to get the Tribune merger approved kinda weakened the speculation that the AT&T-Time Warner merger (the deal Painter made a TIC reference to) was blocked because of interference from the Trump administration due to Trump's beef with CNN. If a company that produces GOP/Trump-friendly opinion pieces that expected to keep all 42 stations gets a ultimatum to sell a dozen stations to get the deal approved, it becomes a bit doubtful that Trump or anyone in his administration is interfering with the DOJ's independence. Because of that, if Makan Delrahim is the one of the few Trump administration staffers who actually understands the role he's appointed to, I fully expect the DOJ to find problems with this deal anyway it goes. It gives Disney far too much market share with film distribution and television production, and adds more sports networks to the ESPN family -- which already charges a premium for carriage on cable/satellite/telco providers -- that could raise rates for pay TV providers. The DOJ cited the latter issue in part (when combining that with the combined company wanting to retain DirecTV) for suing to block AT&T-Time Warner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSSZNews 1046 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 Because of that, if Makan Delrahim is the one of the few Trump administration staffers who actually understands the role he's appointed to, I fully expect the DOJ to find problems with this deal anyway it goes. It gives Disney far too much market share with film distribution and television production, and adds more sports networks to the ESPN family -- which already charges a premium for carriage on cable/satellite/telco providers -- that could raise rates for pay TV providers. The DOJ cited the latter issue in part (when combining that with the combined company wanting to retain DirecTV) for suing to block AT&T-Time Warner. Disney/FOX's counterargument will be that creative IP is infinite, and therefore no single entity can have a monopoly on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oklahomanewsman 210 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 FTR, that was an in jest critique. Richard Painter is a ethics lawyer and vice chair with Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, who has criticized Trump multiple times for failing to divest his business interests before being inaugurated president and retaining them since, among other ethics issues regarding Trump. The joke falls apart a little, since the DOJ's enforcement of Sinclair to divest stations to get the Tribune merger approved kinda weakened the speculation that the AT&T-Time Warner merger (the deal Painter made a TIC reference to) was blocked because of interference from the Trump administration due to Trump's beef with CNN. If a company that produces GOP/Trump-friendly opinion pieces that expected to keep all 42 stations gets a ultimatum to sell a dozen stations to get the deal approved, it becomes a bit doubtful that Trump or anyone in his administration is interfering with the DOJ's independence. Because of that, if Makan Delrahim is the one of the few Trump administration staffers who actually understands the role he's appointed to, I fully expect the DOJ to find problems with this deal anyway it goes. It gives Disney far too much market share with film distribution and television production, and adds more sports networks to the ESPN family -- which already charges a premium for carriage on cable/satellite/telco providers -- that could raise rates for pay TV providers. The DOJ cited the latter issue in part (when combining that with the combined company wanting to retain DirecTV) for suing to block AT&T-Time Warner. I could see a divestiture of ABC Studios (I doubt if Disney divests Marvel, LucasFilm or 20th Century Fox) and a stipulation that ESPN cannot pull the RSNs from satellite or telco providers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowardSalwasser 28 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 Barring a player dying on the field, I still think we're many years away from that. There was a player who had a heart attack during a game in 1971. If the NFL survived that, they can survive another. Also, FOX cannot and will not make a play for the AFC rights unless CBS decided to walk away. So we can put that rumor to the deathbed where it belongs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
channel2 869 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 Disney just bought a veritable gold mine with the lucrative syndication deals from both The Simpsons and Family Guy franchises. Both shows should have ended long ago, but the demand still exists for new product. In that regard, this is a perfect union with the Marvel Cinematic Universe and Star Wars franchise. If anything, TimeWarner ought to be worried about Disney pulling the entire Seth MacFarlane portfolio off of Adult Swim and TBS in favor of the FX nets. It would be a bit weird to sever Seth's link to Turner (he got his start in the animation industry at Hanna-Barbera - the first season of Johnny Bravo smacks of his sense of humor in a lot of ways) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTVNews 1365 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 Here's the burning Q's that had to be answered. Will Disney, which already owns ABC, now own Fox, too? No. The deal does not include the Fox broadcasting network — home to The Simpsons, Family Guy, The X-Files, etc. — or Fox News. Also not included in the deal are Fox Sports 1 or Fox Sports 2. These remaining assets will be spun-off by 21st Century Fox to form a new company. Which networks did Disney acquire as part of the deal? Disney’s purchase includes FX Networks (FX, FXX, FXM) and National Geographic channels (NatGeo, NatGeo Wild). Will Disney’s purchase of 21st Century Fox impact its plans to launch an OTT streaming service to compete with the likes of Netflix and Hulu? As a matter of fact, Disney has been working on not one, but two distinct streaming services. The first, focused on sports, is expected to launch in 2018; the second entertainment-based streamer is on track for 2019. As part of the merger, Disney is acquiring a vast library of TV properties produced by 20th TV, including, but not limited to: This Is Us, American Horror Story, Empire, Modern Family, The Simpsons and Family Guy. Also part of the deal are shows produced by cable division Fox 21 Television Studios, such as Homeland and The Americans. While current streaming and syndication rights would need to be restructured, it’s not unfathomable that some of these properties (specifically, more family-friendly offerings like Modern Family) could wind up on Disney’s entertainment streaming service. This, of course, only entails back catalogs, and would not impact the home of new episodes. Doesn’t Disney already own a stake in Hulu? Yes, but the deal now gives Mickey majority control of the streamer, with a 60-percent stake in the company. Disney might attempt to buy out co-owners Comcast/NBC Universal and Time Warner, and consolidate all of their streaming efforts into expanding Hulu, but such a deal seems unlikely. In fact, Disney chief Bob Iger addressed this issue during a conference call on Thursday, indicating that Hulu would be used as the streaming home for acquisitions deemed as “adult-oriented product” from networks like FX. The Disney-Fox deal is expected to close in 12-18 months. http://tvline.com/2017/12/14/disney-fox-merger-deal-questions-answers/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rusty Muck 4139 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 There was a player who had a heart attack during a game in 1971. If the NFL survived that, they can survive another. Also, FOX cannot and will not make a play for the AFC rights unless CBS decided to walk away. So we can put that rumor to the deathbed where it belongs. For want of playing devil's advocate, let's consider a few things: ESPN has no choice but to restructure their current deal with the NFL when it runs out. It gives them a wealth of resources, but is slowly becoming financially impractical. Acquiring the Fox Look at the OTT streaming services that Disney is developing and taking control. Look at social media juggernauts like Facebook and Twitter. Look at any content provider willing to partner with the NFL on a proprietary OTT streaming service. Heck, we might be looking at a scenario where the NFL may eschew broadcast entirely. I'm not speaking in hyperbole but in what the NFL feels makes the most sense for them. Nothing is forever. We all thought that NBC would carry the AFC and CBS would carry the NFC til the end of time, not realizing Rupert Murdoch was well aware Laurence Tisch would low-ball the NFL as much as he did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samantha 2873 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 The NFL wants its games to be everywhere. The length of their current deals means the next round will look so very different. If there were major sports rights up for grabs in the near future, we would have an indication of where deals are going, but not for a few years will that be the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgie56 3054 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 Looks like Deadpool 2 will stay R-rated, despite the Disney purchase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NowBergen 482 Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 Watch for the FSNs to be renamed "ESPN (region/city)". And for 20th Century Fox to cut ties with HBO. Some of the RSNs do not use the FSN name (e.g. YES Network). The press release and interview with Iger indicates significant cost savings targets. I suspect the RSNs will all be run out of Bristol. This will be a sad day for YES, to be ESPNized. Hopefully Disney sells some off that they don't have 100% ownership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.