The future of the much-debated Starz name becomes at least a little clearer this week, as we hear news that Lionsgate will be renaming its StarzPlay international streaming platform in 35 non-US markets to Lionsgate+. Blake & Wang P.A entertainment lawyer, Brandon Blake, has more.

Starz and Studio to Separate

This comes as part of a larger move to separate Starz from the studio side of the Lionsgate business model. There’s already been plenty of talk about it being spun off entirely. For now, however, it will operate as a separate, but aligned, entity with the larger Lionsgate Company. The shift to Lionsgate+ will happen as of the first week in October.

A Mismatched Puzzle Piece

Starz seems to be a thorny problem for Lionsgate, who don’t seem quite decided on what to do with the small, but respectable, streaming platform. There’s also some wider debate on their overall separation of their streaming and Pay-TV business. We can assume that this new move, which will create clear and separate entities, will also help them evaluate the studio and Starz assets more clearly for investors. While there’s nothing official, some also believe the tech giants moving into the Hollywood landscape may be eying the wider Lionsgate catalog as a valuable indie studio acquisition.

It’s certainly a unique one, with 17,000 titles which would be particularly difficult to replicate. So it’s understandable that it may look like a ‘just add water’ solution to any entity looking to add an indie studio to their assets simply. We are, after all, still deep in the wider mergers and acquisitions cycle the entertainment world has been going through overall. It could offer them better strategic benefits than trying to remarket Starz, but that will have to wait on more solid evidence.

Currently, the Starz brand will be retained for the US and Canada. StarzPlay and Lionsgate Play will remain as is.

Immersive theater technology has been an exciting idea (and little more) for several years- and now it could be becoming a reality. Cinemark, in partnership with CJ 4DPLex are looking to outfit select auditoriums with their ‘ScreenX’ immersive exhibition format. By the end of the year, it is hoped that the tech will be live in at least 6 cinemas. Blake & Wang P.A entertainment lawyer, Brandon Blake, walks us through these developments.

California and Texas Cinemas

While additional locations should receive the tech in time, the initial rollout will focus on 6 sites across California and Texas. The ScreenX technology gives a 270-degree field of view for some film sequences. CJ 4DPlex has its own visual effects studio in Korea, where it will partner with studios and filmmakers to introduce exclusive imagery to the screenings with the aim of increasing viewer engagement. The company is part of the CJ group, operating one of the largest circuits in Korea, and also responsible for bringing us Parasite, the little Oscar Best Picture that could.

Building on Existing Rollouts

This ScreenX technology is also live now in 38 countries, across 380 global locations. It has already been leveraged in some locations for releases of Thor: Love and Thunder, Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, Bullet Train, Elvis, and, of course, Top Gun: Maverick. 

Here its premium experience seeks to further differentiate theatrical viewings from what people can get in-home through streaming. Hopefully it will help continue the notable theatrical recovery we’ve seen from 2022. 

It’s an exciting new expansion in the wider theatrical concept, so while the rollout will be understandably limited for now, and a Cinemark exclusive domestically, it’s still exciting to see this kind of next-gen theater experience start its introduction to the wider cinematic world.

As the House of Mouse continues its aggressive campaign of digitizing and expanding its brand footprint, it seems they may want a clear resolution to the looming issue of Hulu’s split ownership earlier than the intended 2024 buy-out date. Brandon Blake, entertainment laywer with Blake & Wang P.A, reports on what we know.

Hulu’s Thorny Split

Despite something of a greater focus on building the reach of their Disney+ brand, Hulu has become something of a dark horse as well as a success story. Proving to have solid market traction, it’s a surprising little success story- and that success makes the awkward ⅓ stake owned by Comcast a problem Disney are going to have to focus on.

They are already, of course, bound to offer Comcast a buy out by the initial 2024 deadline. As CEO Bob Chapek points out, that’s not particularly far away, especially in entertainment industry terms. However, in real terms, Hulu is a Disney operated service. And, given its rising profile, they very likely want to see that happen officially.

The Fair Market Value Conundrum

The issue lies, however, in the terms of the original deal. Comcast must be offered ‘fair market value’ for the service, with a minimum total equity valuation of $27.5 billion. With Hulu proving to be both profitable and a key part of Disney’s wider services, they cannot easily fold it into their current bundling model without jettisoning Comcast’s stake.

Despite its profitability, it’s also not really a key focus for the company. Or Comcast, which favors Peacock. And when Disney takes the helm completely, how will the adult-leaning Comcast demographics fit into the wider vision for Disney+. Is there a benefit to them keeping two successful streaming services under one banner?

With these questions unresolved and no clear path forward, Hulu seems set to remain a juicy, but thorny, issue for both companies. There can be little surprise that Disney would be interested in resolving the matter quickly- but for now, we can only wait and see.

Paramount Films have announced their intent to head for 12-15 theatrical releases in 2024, as the group remains bullish on the wider theatrical recovery. With Top Gun: Maverick continuing to farm money for the studio, now the biggest film in Paramount Picutre’s history, it’s good news overall. Entertainment lawyer Brandon Blake, of Blake & Wang P.A, takes a closer look.

Announcement Made

The announcement was made at the Bank of America Securities 2022 Media, Communications & Entertainment Conference last week by CEO Brian Robbins. Surprisingly, despite their vast stable of platforms- including a streaming service, linear channels, free TV, and the movie studio- he still maintains that theatrical releases have the biggest impact on the success of their titles. Especially with the 45-day release period that’s now become an industry standard post-pandemic.

This does, of course, align with wider findings from the tight pandemic and post-pandemic period, where films with a solid theatrical release continue to outshine those that have been released on day-and-date models concurrent with streaming platforms.

Not Just One Genre

While Top Gun: Maverick has been a runaway success for the studio, still in theaters 15 weeks after its release, it’s not the be-all and end-all of Paramount’s massive rebound. Sonicthe Hedgehog 2, The Lost City, and Jackass Forever all delivering compelling performances for the studio this year. It’s also a very diverse slate of demographics to be represented, too. 

Paramount currently plans on 8 theatrical releases for 2022, and 10-12 for the 2023 period, rising to the projected 12-15 for 2024. Of course, there’s still some challenges in those lofty ideals- available talent, smooth shooting, and the absence of any further setbacks- but Robbins also suggests that talent are showing increasing interest in theatrical release projects over purely streaming, with the broader marketing campaigns available to theatrical releases keeping interest high.

Even this early in the month, we can say one thing for the September Box Office. It has to be better than August! It was a lackluster month for sure, but coming off the heels of a very hot summer, also to be expected. Blake & Wang P.A entertainment lawyer, Brandon Blake, digs into the September slate and what we can expect.

Lack of Product

It’s important to point out (again) that it’s not a lack of willing attendees causing the slump. It’s the lack of product to offer them. Historically, September has the lowest box-office gross of any month, too, which makes for glum reading. Sadly, we only have four titles from big name studios, and a handful of others- none of which are really seen as potential blockbusters. The relocation of two key pictures (Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret and Distant) to new release dates has not helped, either. It’s a little better than the dull August lineup, but that’s about all you can say for it, and it will sadly pull down some of the overall Box Office recovery we’ve seen this year. 

Back to the… Past?

Disney is bringing a new title to the table in Barbarian, and the horror film has built some anticipation with positive word of mouth. We also have Sony’s The Woman King which may help, but that will have to wait for its Toronto International Film Festival debut to know for certain. 

However, there is a return to the theater planned for the runaway hit, Spider-Man: No Way Home, despite it now being available on streaming. There’s also the remastered release of Avatar hitting the screens. Strange to think of old titles as new sources of hype, but anything will help this month. 

At least there was the $3 discounted ticket festival over the Labor Day weekend to help this month limp along until the festive season slate hits. Hopefully we’ll see some new blockbusters to pep the system up again at that point.

Despite a very rocky quarter 2, Netflix has managed to take the top spot in one thing- California Film Commission tax credits, that is. It’s always good to see the film industry thrive, however, and incentive plans have been a key part of deciding where to film. Brandon Blake, entertainment lawyer with Blake & Wang P.A, breaks down the details.

$37.1M in Incentives

With $37.1M in incentives issued to Netflix-backed productions, they beat out both MGM ($19.6M) and Warner Bros Pictures ($12.6M), for the top spot. While they unseat HBO from the last round, they’ve held this particular ‘title’ twice before in recent history. 

These credits were utilized for both the Zach Snyder production, Rebel Moon: Part 2, and a so-far untitled offering. Ironically, Part 1 of the same sci-fi adventure film series took tax credits last year. We also saw several indie films receive credits, including Sofia Coppola’s so-far untitled project with Peppermint Road.

A Different Incentive Scheme

Unlike other high-production states (particularly Georgia), California only allows for certain aspects of the movie’s budget to be claimed- with talent compensation notably missing. However, LA hardly lacks in resources for the film and entertainment industries, and maintains a high-profile status in filming locations. 

To date, there’s been $93.7M reserved in credits, across 18 movies. Annually, they designate $330M in credits for shooting in the state. The last two years have seen it raised by a further $90M, to offset concerns about productions moving to other areas with even juicier incentive programs. It’s estimated that this will generate about $915M in spending throughout the area this year. 

For the 18 films receiving the feature film tax credit, there were 57 total applications. The next application period will be from Jan. 30-Feb. 6, 2023 for films and Sept. 19-26 for TV series.

Is what the world needs right now yet another streaming service? For Alphabet Inc., it appears the answer is yes. And we can’t deny that, as a video content-focused social platform, YouTube has managed to pull massive market traction. Whether on-demand streaming needs to be part of that, however, is the key question. Blake & Wang P.A entertainment lawyer, Brandon Blake, discusses what we know.
Streaming from the World’s Second-Largest Search Engine
Last week we saw Alphabet Inc. announce that YouTube would move to a ‘channel store’ format, offering streaming video on demand. The change to the operational model could be live as early as the fall, and has been in the works over the last 18 months.

In fairness, Google is the only major tech company without a streaming platform of their own, and it’s easy to assume this move hopes to address that.
Capitalizing on Pay-Tv Losses
Despite the streaming squeeze currently underway, the decision to transition into the same space can probably be tied to the noted decline in cable and satellite subscriptions over the last year. Also, it’s undeniable that Roku, in particular, has seen some fantastic results from a similar easy-come, easy-access streaming model. Apple, Alphabet Inc.’s primary competitor in the wider tech market has also managed to gain itself some visible streaming traction and even some noted awards and accolades for its content in the last few years.

All in all, it’s an intriguing announcement. While it won’t reinvent YouTube to a ‘true’ streaming service, it’s certainly an attempt to muscle in on the same space from the last tech holdout in this particular arena. With most streamers producing lackluster (at best) earnings reports for this quarter, it seems odd timing at best. But, as they say, the proof lies in the results, and it will be interesting indeed to see if this experiment pays off for them.

Is what the world needs right now yet another streaming service? For Alphabet Inc., it appears the answer is yes. And we can’t deny that, as a video content-focused social platform, YouTube has managed to pull massive market traction. Whether on-demand streaming needs to be part of that, however, is the key question. Blake & Wang P.A entertainment lawyer, Brandon Blake, discusses what we know.
Streaming from the World’s Second-Largest Search Engine
Last week we saw Alphabet Inc. announce that YouTube would move to a ‘channel store’ format, offering streaming video on demand. The change to the operational model could be live as early as the fall, and has been in the works over the last 18 months.

In fairness, Google is the only major tech company without a streaming platform of their own, and it’s easy to assume this move hopes to address that.
Capitalizing on Pay-Tv Losses
Despite the streaming squeeze currently underway, the decision to transition into the same space can probably be tied to the noted decline in cable and satellite subscriptions over the last year. Also, it’s undeniable that Roku, in particular, has seen some fantastic results from a similar easy-come, easy-access streaming model. Apple, Alphabet Inc.’s primary competitor in the wider tech market has also managed to gain itself some visible streaming traction and even some noted awards and accolades for its content in the last few years.

All in all, it’s an intriguing announcement. While it won’t reinvent YouTube to a ‘true’ streaming service, it’s certainly an attempt to muscle in on the same space from the last tech holdout in this particular arena. With most streamers producing lackluster (at best) earnings reports for this quarter, it seems odd timing at best. But, as they say, the proof lies in the results, and it will be interesting indeed to see if this experiment pays off for them.

Not only has Disney managed to beat Wall Street analyst’s expectations for their new subscriber numbers, they’ve also managed to pass Netflix’s subscriber base for the first time. Blake & Wang P.A entertainment attorney, Brandon Blake, looks at this milestone in more detail.

Topping Netflix

We see them add 14.4M subscribers during this quarter, considerably higher than the estimated 10M, and bringing Disney+ itself to 152.1M. Across the Disney stable of streamers, which includes ESPN+ and Hulu as well, Disney now own 221.1M subscriptions, passing Netflix’s 220.7M subscriptions. Despite this milestone, we haven’t actually heard how many of these were bundled subscribers, which could mean they have been counted more than once.

Modest Domestic Growth

Despite the slow-down in domestic subscriber numbers, they did manage some modest growth in the North American market, rising about 100,000 subscribers. Disney+ added just under 1M subscribers internationally in the same period, too. Hulu managed about the same, while ESPN+ added half a million new subscriptions.

This comes despite them unveiling a coming price hike for all three streaming platforms. It seems that the Disney Company are looking to increase their revenue per user more directly, especially as it is already fairly low for their two anchor subscription platforms. They’ve also promised an ad-supported tier for Disney+ at some point in the 2023 cycle.

While the victory over Netflix is, as we mentioned, a little dubious given bundled subscribers, this again highlights the industry-wide reevaluation of how to present streaming services in a world which has seen even the Netflix brand name lose traction.

Overall, Disney is one of the few to beat expectations for Q2, and they display an overall strong balance sheet that continues to grow in raw dollar numbers as well as subscribers- a victory indeed for this particular quarter.

There’s no secret in the fact that the streaming market has floundered a little this year. Still, it was rather surprising to see Paramount forecast a rather harsh set of streaming losses for this year. Entertainment attorney Brandon Blake, of Blake & Wang P.A, dives deeper into the statement.

Sluggish Q2 Reports

With around 64M global streaming subscribers to its service, Paramount have reiterated their goal of spending $6B on content creation for the 2024 period. While only a small improvement on the 62M subs last quarter, it’s still progress. 2022 streaming losses are now estimated to fall into the $1.8B range, slightly higher than the original $1.5B predicted. It has also indicated that it expects these losses to peak in 2023, not this year. However, they continue to remain optimistic about their streaming efforts overall, pointing to rising streaming revenue and steady, if slow, subscriber growth. Their overall earnings for Q2 actually managed to exceed expectations, but the EBITDA is still more modest than expected. Cash flow for 2023 is expected to hit close to breakeven.

Wall Street Lacks Consensus

Wall Street seems a little torn on Paramount overall currently. While some have become more cautious, worried about its reliance on advertising revenue, others have chosen to take a more contrarian outlook.

It certainly seems likely that Q3 advertising spend will be flat, if not actively trending down, in the current economic environment. Hopes are still pinned on Q4 this year, when political advertising and other seasonal events are likely to drive it higher. Free cash flow remains a worry for investors. 

Overall, Paramount managed to deliver a more positive Q2 earnings call then many others, despite the valid points of worry around the larger economic outlook for the remainder of the year. Investors certainly reacted more favorably than they have to many others, with Paramount managing a small rise in stock price- one of the few entertainment entities to do so this quarter.