Dark Horse Comics Reacts to Disney's "Star Wars" Purchase

[Angilas-Man]

Hellboy is returning in December.

Yeah, what does he mean 'run its course' ?

With BPRD and Lobster Johnson, Hellboy restarting in Dec., and new Witchfinder and Abe Sapien in the pipeline (...and Baltimore) there has been an explosion of Hellboy universe books. I've been waiting for them to stretch themselves too thin, but it hasn't happened. I've been a fan for years and not only are there more books out than ever, but the overall quality is the strongest it's ever been.

[dupersuper]

I don't recall it having that short of a run in the theaters. But a movie with a $7mil budget making more than double the cost ($16,624,456) is not exactly bad compared to movies with bigger budgets that didn't do so well back then.

http://boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?yr=1992&p=.htm

That makes more sense.

(I knew "Encino Man" made money, but I had no idea that it did that well.....)

That makes no sense.

[Phaedrusnyc]

Actually, not at all. Disney didn't buy Marvel for its comics publishing division, it bought it for its characters for use in merchanding and future TV & movie properties (such as The Avengers). Lucasfilms has made most of its money through the licensing of its properties (namely Star Wars) to other companies. They may indeed keep that business model in place--Lucasfilms as a licensor--if it isn't broken.

You just made an excellent point. Lucasfilm as a licensor is a huge part of its revenue base (maybe the largest, though I suspect ILM still brings in a good bit of money). For one thing, that means that there are numerous preexisting contracts that legally will have to run their course (including Dark Horse's, and it's interesting that nobody is stating how long that contract is). For another, it means that Disney is going to have to continue with that model to a large extent, because Disney simply doesn't own companies that fill all of the niches SW products are exploited in. In Disney's investor statements they mention "moving beyond toys" which is odd, because SW moved well beyond toys years ago. But again, that speaks to licensing. And yes, that could include licensing to "competitor" companies like DH. Disney knows that Marvel can only afford to print a certain number of titles a month with their current structure. If Disney sees that DH is spending enough on the license and using enough of its own resources to generate product, DH may retain the license. If not, then I suspect it will be a situation where there simply Is a lot less SW comic material in the future. I may be in the minority when I say that isn't necessarily a bad thing, since EU material is very diluted at this point and not very "special."

I can't bother to check the name of the know-it-all who is insisting that Disney will never license to another company because he apparently learned the word "synergy," but he is clearly unfamiliar with Disney's practices over the years. Disney has had record labels from the beginning and still licenses to other record labels. Disney still produces television for non-ABC networks abd continued to syndicate animation long after the Disney Channel was established. Disney owns numerous hotels and yet still partners with others for park concessions when it is economically sensible. And Disney still licenses to comics companies around the world. What ever provides more reward for less risk is what Disney will do for its shareholders, Marvel or no Marvel.

What no one is mentioning is that all of this may be moot, since the new trilogy is based on new (or at least original, depending on how long Lucas has sat on his treatments) material and will probably invalidate huge swaths of the preexisting EU material, just like the prequels and Clone Wars shows have.

[Kid Montana]

You just made an excellent point. Lucasfilm as a licensor is a huge part of its revenue base (maybe the largest, though I suspect ILM still brings in a good bit of money). For one thing, that means that there are numerous preexisting contracts that legally will have to run their course (including Dark Horse's, and it's interesting that nobody is stating how long that contract is). For another, it means that Disney is going to have to continue with that model to a large extent, because Disney simply doesn't own companies that fill all of the niches SW products are exploited in. In Disney's investor statements they mention "moving beyond toys" which is odd, because SW moved well beyond toys years ago. But again, that speaks to licensing. And yes, that could include licensing to "competitor" companies like DH. Disney knows that Marvel can only afford to print a certain number of titles a month with their current structure. If Disney sees that DH is spending enough on the license and using enough of its own resources to generate product, DH may retain the license. If not, then I suspect it will be a situation where there simply Is a lot less SW comic material in the future. I may be in the minority when I say that isn't necessarily a bad thing, since EU material is very diluted at this point and not very "special."

I can't bother to check the name of the know-it-all who is insisting that Disney will never license to another company because he apparently learned the word "synergy," but he is clearly unfamiliar with Disney's practices over the years. Disney has had record labels from the beginning and still licenses to other record labels. Disney still produces television for non-ABC networks abd continued to syndicate animation long after the Disney Channel was established. Disney owns numerous hotels and yet still partners with others for park concessions when it is economically sensible. And Disney still licenses to comics companies around the world. What ever provides more reward for less risk is what Disney will do for its shareholders, Marvel or no Marvel.

What no one is mentioning is that all of this may be moot, since the new trilogy is based on new (or at least original, depending on how long Lucas has sat on his treatments) material and will probably invalidate huge swaths of the preexisting EU material, just like the prequels and Clone Wars shows have.

What you fail to grasp in all this is that they are not going to compete with themselves. As such, they will not license this to DH because no matter what they get in return, it would potentially harm one of their divisions.

You make a point regarding how they run their parks, however that is not a good comparison. They are not on equal footing. None of those partner hotels can offer Magic Express airport pick-up/drop off, none of them can take part in Extra Magic Hours, none of them enjoy Disney resort transportation, none of them can offer the same package deals, none of them can offer the Disney Dining plan, none of them can offer Free Dining, None of them can offer payment plans for the entirety of the trip.

Regarding licensing food operations, they do so in areas where it is cost effective and/or they cannot meet supply and demand. They would prefer to get out of this area altogether as being a landlord is a much better deal than the razor thin profit margins food operations run at, even at resort level prices. (See closing Pleasure Island and their failed attempts to do just that).

Bottom line, when DH contracts expire, the only comic company that will have access to publish Star Wars related material is Marvel.

[C. Earl]

What you fail to grasp in all this is that they are not going to compete with themselves. As such, they will not license this to DH because no matter what they get in return, it would potentially harm one of their divisions.

That's actually a false assumption. Aside from Dark Horse not being in any position to remotely harm Marvel if they keep Star Wars, it ultimately comes down to a license being a license. Lucasfilms is one of the biggest licensing companies out there and it's definitely plausible that they'll continue to license Star Wars comics through Dark Horse if they feel they're doing a good job with the property and that it's still a good deal. Disney will get paid through Lucasfilms regardless.

[Blastermaster]

That's actually a false assumption. Aside from Dark Horse not being in any position to remotely harm Marvel if they keep Star Wars, it ultimately comes down to a license being a license. Lucasfilms is one of the biggest licensing companies out there and it's definitely plausible that they'll continue to license Star Wars comics through Dark Horse if they feel they're doing a good job with the property and that it's still a good deal. Disney will get paid through Lucasfilms regardless.

So the solution is that we all go buy Star Wars by Brian Wood and Star Wars: Agent Of the Empire by John Ostrander

[C. Earl]

So the solution is that we all go buy Star Wars by Brian Wood and Star Wars: Agent Of the Empire by John Ostrander

Pretty much. I definitely intend on getting Wood's new series and adding it to my monthly pull list.

[gloryhound]

I am also concerned about the comic books. Star Wars is a huge money-maker for Dark Horse so they pull out all stops to publish the best possible stories. Under Marvel, any Star Wars book they publish will not make nearly as much money as their top titles so it will be shelved. I can see an occasional mini-series and definitely a special or two when the movies come out, but I don't see Marvel publishing nearly as many stories as Dark Horse is currently doing.

[fawfulmk-II]

the thing that bugs me about Marvel is that they have yet to do really anything with the Disney line- hopefully they do better with Star Wars when it comes to that

I believe they did a Comic book version of Epic Mickey awhile back, but yeah outside that they haven't really done much yet.

[Kid Montana]

That's actually a false assumption. Aside from Dark Horse not being in any position to remotely harm Marvel if they keep Star Wars, it ultimately comes down to a license being a license. Lucasfilms is one of the biggest licensing companies out there and it's definitely plausible that they'll continue to license Star Wars comics through Dark Horse if they feel they're doing a good job with the property and that it's still a good deal. Disney will get paid through Lucasfilms regardless.

How is it a false assumption? Because you say so? Big Fish do not tolerate little fish. If a distributor for Coke or Pepsi gets caught distributing Ne-hi, Coke or Pepsi pull them. They refuse to compete with the little guy because they don't have too.

Disney Corp. has a comic book manufacturing wing in house. There is no way it benefits a company under any scenario to have their properties competing in the market for either shelf space or consumers.

Really how good or bad a job DH does with the property is fairly irrelevant.

Also, on one hand people are arguing that DH is so small this is of no concern to Disney, but at the same time stating how this is DH bread and butter. Why would Disney tolerate such a one sided arrangement?

[C. Earl]

How is it a false assumption? Because you say so?

Nope. Simply because it is. Dark Horse is in no position to remotely harm Marvel both in market share and overall sales.

As I said earlier, Lucasfilms' bread & butter is really in the licensing of its various properties. That's very unlikely to change. The only real difference is that Disney will also benefit from things being licensed from Lucasfilms. If the Star Wars comic book license stays with Dark Horse--Disney gets paid. If the license goes to Marvel--Disney gets paid. If the license goes to someone else entirely--guess what, Disney still gets paid. That's what licensing is. The real deciding factor regarding where the Star Wars comic book license goes is who will provide the bigger deal or more bang for the buck, and an in-house division does not automatically ensure that.

[The Batman]

How is it a false assumption? Because you say so? Big Fish do not tolerate little fish. If a distributor for Coke or Pepsi gets caught distributing Ne-hi, Coke or Pepsi pull them. They refuse to compete with the little guy because they don't have too.

Disney Corp. has a comic book manufacturing wing in house. There is no way it benefits a company under any scenario to have their properties competing in the market for either shelf space or consumers.

If licensing Star Wars comics out to Dark Horse is more profitable than making them "in-house" at Marvel, then having the license at Dark Horse absolutely benefits Disney. And it is possible that might be the case given that Disney would see income from the arrangement regardless of how well or poorly the books sell while Dark Horse has to pay Disney regardless and assumes all the risk.

Also, on one hand people are arguing that DH is so small this is of no concern to Disney, but at the same time stating how this is DH bread and butter. Why would Disney tolerate such a one sided arrangement?

Probably because it isn't one-sided in the least. Dark Horse gives Lucasfilm money for the privilege to publish Star Wars comics. The question isn't, "why are we letting these other guys make money with our stuff?" but rather "do we make more money letting these guys pay us or by making and selling these things ourselves?"