Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How to finance stargate?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
    #1

    How to finance stargate?

    I read in another thread that the delays with the new movies was coming from MGM as they are in massive debt, I dunno if this is true or not, but I can definitely believe it.

    It got me thinking. I'd happily pay £20 ($30) now if it meant I got a DVD in a years time. They'd need just over half a million people to do this to completely finance a £10.5m ($7m) movie at this rate, which obviously wouldn't happen, but if they could get a couple of thousand pre-sales from stargate's millions of fans worldwide, and in today's economy, where securing finance is difficult, every little helps.

    As a motivation to get this finance from the fans, they could get a share of the profits made from the movies. Or even allow people to pay more than £20 if they want to get a bigger share of the profits, although I personally wouldn't be confidant that the return would be there.


    I don't know if anything like this has been tried before, I am sure someone out there who has worked in tellyland or studied media would be able to tell if it works or not.
    I don't mean to sound like a nerdy fan who talks about science-fiction like it is real, but the problem with 'clever' storylines is that they make the audience start to think, and if you put in bad science, they are more likely to notice it. It breaks the suspension of disbelief
    Tags: None
    #2
    I'm fairly sure MGM aren't in any sort of debt, what with having the money to finance a new series.

    Comment

      #3
      Originally posted by Sllimy View Post
      I'm fairly sure MGM aren't in any sort of debt, what with having the money to finance a new series.
      We live in a world in which the economy is fuelled by debt , and yet nobody actually knows how debt works! (well, i say 'works')


      Pretty much every company in the world is in debt, yet they spend millions everyday. They do this in order to generate more money to pay off the debt. For example, a shop needs to borrow money to buy stock, so it can sell it, and pay back the loan.

      Chances are, MGM paid for SGU by borrowing money from a bank, most assets are bought using debt. They would probably finance the movies through debt too, but since banks lent too much money to idiots who wanted to buy shoes they couldn't afford, banks are a little more relucatant to lend - as SGU was announced before the economy collapsed, and the movies have been delayed, they may now not be able to secure the finance from the banks.


      Spoiler:
      And this is why the economy is ****ed!
      I don't mean to sound like a nerdy fan who talks about science-fiction like it is real, but the problem with 'clever' storylines is that they make the audience start to think, and if you put in bad science, they are more likely to notice it. It breaks the suspension of disbelief

      Comment

        #4
        The best way to finance new SG-1 and SGA movies is to buy the new Children of the Gods DVD coming out tomorrow. It sends a message to MGM and its bankers that yes, we still like DVDs (even though sales across the board are down over 30%) and yes, we specifically like Stargate DVDs.

        Seriously, it's that simple. Renting doesn't bring money into MGM. Purchasing does. Support the franchise by buying the product.

        Comment

          #5
          Originally posted by digitalred93 View Post
          The best way to finance new SG-1 and SGA movies is to buy the new Children of the Gods DVD coming out tomorrow. It sends a message to MGM and its bankers that yes, we still like DVDs (even though sales across the board are down over 30%) and yes, we specifically like Stargate DVDs.

          Seriously, it's that simple. Renting doesn't bring money into MGM. Purchasing does. Support the franchise by buying the product.
          I want to agree with you, but CotG is far too expensive for what it is - it costs as much as AoT and Continuum did, and they were completly new stories.

          I agree that it sends a message that will help finance the new movies, but I think the message it also sends is - fans will buy any old crap with a stargate sticker on it.
          I don't mean to sound like a nerdy fan who talks about science-fiction like it is real, but the problem with 'clever' storylines is that they make the audience start to think, and if you put in bad science, they are more likely to notice it. It breaks the suspension of disbelief

          Comment

            #6
            Originally posted by Bareassedmunky View Post
            I want to agree with you, but CotG is far too expensive for what it is - it costs as much as AoT and Continuum did, and they were completly new stories.

            I agree that it sends a message that will help finance the new movies, but I think the message it also sends is - fans will buy any old crap with a stargate sticker on it.

            I totally agree!! I'm with helping to fiance a new SG movie.


            But fans should not be strong armed forced into buying anything that just has a Stargate name tag on it. CotG was a pet project that many did not want, as such the efforts could have been put forth into something more fruitful (quality story writing). As such I'm afraid that slow DVD sales of CotG will lead to push back of the SG-1 and SGA movies.

            Maybe the fans can pre-pre-order or something of the sort pertaining to the new movies. ??

            Comment

              #7
              As this article says, 'Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc., scrambling to refinance its $3.7-billion loan, said in a prepared statement today that an audit showed the struggling studio to be in "full compliance with all of its debt covenants."' So, if I understand it right, they are basically paying it off as agreed.

              So, if they ARE this much in debt and they DO need to save money why do they have money for SGU, for a 3rd SG-1 movie, for remastering of CotG - for everything but the SGA movie? It just feels weird, to have money for every part of the franchise but not this. Didn't they keep blowing up the fact that they canceled SGA to make movies, that they wanted to end it as long as it was profitable to make movies etc. etc. etc. and more of the same crap etc.? And now they keep filming/redoing everything BUT SGA.

              You know, MGM should say outright either yes or no. This feet-shuffling isn't fair to the cast/crew or to the fans. If yes, film the script. If no, let someone turn the script into a tie-in novel, the way they "fixed" the stupid ending of Star Trek: Enterpise. I just hate this limbo.

              Comment

                #8
                Originally posted by katikatnik View Post
                As this article says, 'Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc., scrambling to refinance its $3.7-billion loan, said in a prepared statement today that an audit showed the struggling studio to be in "full compliance with all of its debt covenants."' So, if I understand it right, they are basically paying it off as agreed.

                So, if they ARE this much in debt and they DO need to save money why do they have money for SGU, for a 3rd SG-1 movie, for remastering of CotG - for everything but the SGA movie? It just feels weird, to have money for every part of the franchise but not this. Didn't they keep blowing up the fact that they canceled SGA to make movies, that they wanted to end it as long as it was profitable to make movies etc. etc. etc. and more of the same crap etc.? And now they keep filming/redoing everything BUT SGA.

                You know, MGM should say outright either yes or no. This feet-shuffling isn't fair to the cast/crew or to the fans. If yes, film the script. If no, let someone turn the script into a tie-in novel, the way they "fixed" the stupid ending of Star Trek: Enterpise. I just hate this limbo.
                I'd say the biggest problem with the SGA movie is that the Sci-fi channel have a deal to show it on TV before the DVD release. That is going to hit sales hard, making it much less profitable. If you are in that much debt, you need to make every investment count.

                If you only have $7m to spend on a movie - and an SG-1 straight to DVD is predicted to make you $10m, and and SGA one that will be on TV first will only make $8.5m, which are you going to invest in?

                Also, stargate isn't MGM's only asset, other more profitable parts of the business may be getting the funds that stargate needs. As a stargate fan, it's hard to accpet that, but MGM has been good to stargate, and it could be a lot worse if they go under and someone else buys the rights to stargate and ruins it.
                I don't mean to sound like a nerdy fan who talks about science-fiction like it is real, but the problem with 'clever' storylines is that they make the audience start to think, and if you put in bad science, they are more likely to notice it. It breaks the suspension of disbelief

                Comment

                  #9
                  Originally posted by Bareassedmunky View Post
                  I'd say the biggest problem with the SGA movie is that the Sci-fi channel have a deal to show it on TV before the DVD release. That is going to hit sales hard, making it much less profitable. If you are in that much debt, you need to make every investment count.

                  If you only have $7m to spend on a movie - and an SG-1 straight to DVD is predicted to make you $10m, and and SGA one that will be on TV first will only make $8.5m, which are you going to invest in?

                  Also, stargate isn't MGM's only asset, other more profitable parts of the business may be getting the funds that stargate needs. As a stargate fan, it's hard to accpet that, but MGM has been good to stargate, and it could be a lot worse if they go under and someone else buys the rights to stargate and ruins it.
                  Oh, I have no doubt that SG isn't MGM's only franchise, I never argued that. What I found weird was the distribution of money within this franchise. I wondered why there was money for every part of the SG franchise BUT SGA, especially with TPTB's reasoning for cancellation of SGA. And about SyFy's rights - it was MGM who signed this agreement with SyFy, giving them the right to air it first, they must have known that it would lower the sales rate and they agreed to it anyway. But the fact is that SGA S5 box set sold over 106.000 copies within the first week, there's no doubt that the fans willing to pay are out there.

                  I just hate this feet-dragging. Either say yes or say no. The situation won't get any better in a week or a month, not with THAT amount of debt.

                  To be honest, my personal opinion is that they won't film it at all. They will keep dragging their feet with responding, then SGU will start and they will film the SG-1 movie and suddenly they'll be all "here you have your fix, it's popular, why go back to SGA? Fans don't care what Stargate it is, as long as it's Stargate."
                  Last edited by katikatnik; 20 July 2009, 10:05 AM.

                  Comment

                    #10
                    Originally posted by katikatnik View Post
                    And about SyFy's rights - it was MGM who signed this agreement with SyFy, giving them the right to air it first, they must have known that it would lower the sales rate and they agreed to it anyway.
                    I got the impression at the time that it was because SyFy (or whatever the **** they are calling themselves on your side of the pond), had a deal for season 6 of SGA, and MGM agreed to give them the movie to get out of contractual obligations. But I don't know any of this, I could be horribly wrong.


                    Anywhoo - my origional point was, would you be willing to pay well advance of a release if helped to get it made?
                    I don't mean to sound like a nerdy fan who talks about science-fiction like it is real, but the problem with 'clever' storylines is that they make the audience start to think, and if you put in bad science, they are more likely to notice it. It breaks the suspension of disbelief

                    Comment

                      #11
                      Originally posted by Bareassedmunky View Post
                      Anywhoo - my origional point was, would you be willing to pay well advance of a release if helped to get it made?
                      Of course I would, if I could be certain that they would actually really film it, that my money wouldn't disappear in some bottomless debt-pit.

                      I had SGA's S5 pre-ordered, I have all the SGA books pre-ordered, I'm buying the audiobooks on CD... And I would pre-order the movie too, that's for sure.

                      Comment

                        #12
                        Originally posted by katikatnik View Post
                        Of course I would, if I could be certain that they would actually really film it, that my money wouldn't disappear in some bottomless debt-pit.
                        The money could easily be put in a trust and repaid if the project comes to nothing
                        I don't mean to sound like a nerdy fan who talks about science-fiction like it is real, but the problem with 'clever' storylines is that they make the audience start to think, and if you put in bad science, they are more likely to notice it. It breaks the suspension of disbelief

                        Comment

                          #13
                          Originally posted by Bareassedmunky View Post
                          The money could easily be put in a trust and repaid if the project comes to nothing
                          My mate Bernard Madoff runs this trust thing. I am sure he would be happy to take your money and then repay it if it comes to nothing

                          Back to an earlier bit I think you said, why on Earth would they air the SGA movie on TV prior to a DVD release?? Thats insane.
                          sigpic

                          Comment

                            #14
                            Originally posted by Phenom View Post
                            My mate Bernard Madoff runs this trust thing. I am sure he would be happy to take your money and then repay it if it comes to nothing

                            Back to an earlier bit I think you said, why on Earth would they air the SGA movie on TV prior to a DVD release?? Thats insane.
                            It's alright, he'll take my £20, but I'll get two people to give me £15, and they'll each get two people to give them £10...and it'll all work out well for us all (except bernie, who just dropped the soap)


                            Like I said before, I presume it was becasue they already had a deal for season 6. But both movies were on TV over here before they were released on DVD, and I think they still did well - I saw AoT as number 1 in HMV, and I would assume it would do better in online stores than HMV.

                            So they will still probably make money from DVD sales, but not as much as from the SG-1 one, which won't be on TV until after the release.


                            I have to admit, I bought both SG-1 moives even though I had already saw them on TV, but I won't be buying the SGA one, but that is mostly becasue I prefer SG-1.
                            I don't mean to sound like a nerdy fan who talks about science-fiction like it is real, but the problem with 'clever' storylines is that they make the audience start to think, and if you put in bad science, they are more likely to notice it. It breaks the suspension of disbelief

                            Comment

                              #15
                              Originally posted by Bareassedmunky View Post
                              I'd say the biggest problem with the SGA movie is that the Sci-fi channel have a deal to show it on TV before the DVD release. That is going to hit sales hard, making it much less profitable. If you are in that much debt, you need to make every investment count.

                              If you only have $7m to spend on a movie - and an SG-1 straight to DVD is predicted to make you $10m, and and SGA one that will be on TV first will only make $8.5m, which are you going to invest in?

                              Also, stargate isn't MGM's only asset, other more profitable parts of the business may be getting the funds that stargate needs. As a stargate fan, it's hard to accpet that, but MGM has been good to stargate, and it could be a lot worse if they go under and someone else buys the rights to stargate and ruins it.
                              But it will also COST LESS TO MAKE for mgm because syfy is splitting the production bill. So yes mgm might make less individual sales (prolly not judging by sga season 5 dvd sales wich were run on tv a year before they were sold but still sold 10,000 copies in the first week) but it cost them half as much to make. Also remember syfy pays them a liscense fee. Theoretically with paying less to produce, and being paid a license fee from the network mgm could still pull the same sales as the previous movies.

                              If im right theyll probably make MORE money this way than the other.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X