Disney Facing 'Resistance' From Turner in Effort to Get TV Rights of 'Star Wars' Films for Streaming Service

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
7,446
8,513



It's been nearly one year since Disney announced that it will pull all of its movies from Netflix and launch its own streaming service in late 2019, including both TV shows and movies from Marvel and Star Wars. This week, however, Bloomberg reports that the company is facing troubles with the TV rights to the Star Wars film franchise, dating back to a deal it made with Turner Broadcasting in 2016.


Under that agreement, Turner gained the linear basic cable and companion ad-supported on-demand rights to five of the six Star Wars films released between 1977 and 2005 (The Empire Strikes Back to Revenge of the Sith), as well as the new films that began releasing in 2015 (as of now including The Force Awakens, Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, The Last Jedi, and Solo: A Star Wars Story). With these rights, which also includes A New Hope rights inked in a deal with 20th Century Fox, Turner has been airing the Star Wars movies on networks like TNT and TBS, and its deal with Disney grants it the ability to keep doing so until 2024.

Now that Disney is planning its own dedicated streaming service, however, the company wants these rights back so it can be the sole location for users to find and stream the entire Star Wars canon. To do so, Disney has made a "preliminary inquiry" about regaining the rights, but has "met resistance" from Turner, according to people familiar with the matter.

Turner would reportedly want financial considerations and programming to replace the Star Wars films it would lose, but the talks have yet to advance. If Disney doesn't get the rights back, its streaming service would be missing one of the main franchises that many users would be signing up for, although new Star Wars content could appear, such as numerous Star Wars TV shows "specifically" created for the service.

As we get near the launch of Disney's direct-to-consumer app, more of its films have begun disappearing from Netflix, including titles like Finding Dory this month. In regards to Star Wars, Bloomberg reports that Disney's deal with Netflix for recent Star Wars films -- including the currently-streaming Star Wars: The Last Jedi -- will expire "at the end of this year."

Similar to Disney, Apple is on the hunt to fill its own upcoming streaming TV service with an instant catalog of existing shows and potentially even movies. Apple hasn't discussed its streaming service as much as Disney, however, so it's still unclear how it will launch, how much it will be (Disney says its own will be priced "substantially below" Netflix), and when exactly users will be able to watch the first TV shows beyond sometime after March 2019.

At the same time that Disney attempts to negotiate the TV rights to the Star Wars films back into its fold, the company is nearing completion on its $71.3 billion acquisition of 21st Century Fox's entertainment assets, which will provide another influx of content for its streaming service.

Article Link: Disney Facing 'Resistance' From Turner in Effort to Get TV Rights of 'Star Wars' Films for Streaming Service
 

rosalindavenue

macrumors 6502a
Dec 13, 2003
837
213
Virginia, USA
Turner has Disney over a barrel and rightfully so. Disney agreed in 2016 (!) to a long term deal. Everybody knew streaming was the future in 2016. Turner should hold out for big money and big programming.

Off topic... damn I hope the merger lets Disney issue original versions of the original trilogy... I’m not buying or streaming the “special editions” any more...
 

timber

macrumors 6502a
Aug 30, 2006
520
639
Lisbon
Turner belongs to Warner that belongs to AT&T.

I fear not even the Force could help Disney on this one. They will have to suck it up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jstuts5797

The_Grifter

macrumors newbie
Jul 7, 2015
10
53
Off topic... damn I hope the merger lets Disney issue original versions of the original trilogy... I’m not buying or streaming the “special editions” any more...
The "Special Editions" aren't the "Special Editions" anymore. They're the only editions. And Disney doesn't call the shots unless they feel like stepping in and overriding the desires of their subsidiaries. They don't do day-to-day micromanagement, it's not their style. Lucasfilm is still Lucasfilm. With George gone, Lucasfilm might decide on their own to release the original movies in whatever format you think you remember (they've been altered and tinkered with every time they were released in theaters and every time they were released on home video, so whatever you think you remember is probably not what everyone else remembers). But releasing those older versions - plural, for each film - to a very small but vocal subset of fans who keep insisting they want them would be expensive. Because it wouldn't be enough for them to give you the unaltered versions. No, you want cleaned-up visuals, 4K quality, color correction, and all the good stuff, but without the stupid "Jedi Rocks" song from Jabba's palace. And I know that because we already got the unaltered original movies on DVD and you guys still complained it wasn't good enough.

It's unlikely Lucasfilm will do it.

You'll have to settle for the fan edits on YouTube.

Back on topic...

Everyone has a price. Turner will set a price for the rights, and Disney will pay it. It's not complicated. Turner Broadcasting is a very, very small fish in a pond that's rapidly drying up. Cable networks? Seriously? Turner Broadcasting will be lucky if WarnerMedia doesn't cast them off in the next five years. Very few of their assets are profitable to begin with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Solomani

The_Grifter

macrumors newbie
Jul 7, 2015
10
53
Star Wars - the original from 1977 - was released theatrically five times before the Special Editions came out. 1977, 1978, 1979, 1981 and 1982. And every single time, Lucas changed things. Whether it was color correction, sound effects, even entire lines of dialogue, the movie was changed every time it was re-released. The Special Edition merely represented the largest set of changes all at once, with the aid of CGI.

And then it was changed again and again and again every time it was released on home video prior to 1997. VHS, Laserdisc, multiple times.

So tell me, which version of Star Wars do you want? The 1982 version? The 1978 version? The 1981 version? The 1977 version? Any of the home releases?

Which version is it that you think you remember as being the one true version?
 

MrTemple

macrumors regular
Jun 11, 2013
152
222
Canadian Pacific North Wilderness
Which version is it that you think you remember as being the one true version?
When people say "theatrical version" in film-speak, they do not mean theatrical re-release versions.

And MEDIUM tweaks (color correction, despeckling, repairs, etc) are parsecs different than CONTENT tweaks (character changes, robots slapsticking in poop, etc).
 

ArtOfWarfare

macrumors G3
Nov 26, 2007
8,559
3,966
I am not looking forward to this new world where you have to subscribe to 10 different streaming services to see the desired content. I think the best advice is just to avoid them all until they do sharing agreements.
You need access to every show every month? Just cycle through them. Only signup for whoever has content that you want to watch this month. When you exhaust content from one provider, move onto another.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MartyvH and slu

pipis2010

macrumors regular
Jan 7, 2015
193
131
Greece



It's been nearly one year since Disney announced that it will pull all of its movies from Netflix and launch its own streaming service in late 2019, including both TV shows and movies from Marvel and Star Wars. This week, however, Bloomberg reports that the company is facing troubles with the TV rights to the Star Wars film franchise, dating back to a deal it made with Turner Broadcasting in 2016.


Under that agreement, Turner gained the linear basic cable and companion ad-supported on-demand rights to five of the six Star Wars films released between 1977 and 2005 (The Empire Strikes Back to Revenge of the Sith), as well as the new films that began releasing in 2015 (as of now including The Force Awakens, Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, The Last Jedi, and Solo: A Star Wars Story). With these rights, which also includes A New Hope rights inked in a deal with 20th Century Fox, Turner has been airing the Star Wars movies on networks like TNT and TBS, and its deal with Disney grants it the ability to keep doing so until 2024.

Now that Disney is planning its own dedicated streaming service, however, the company wants these rights back so it can be the sole location for users to find and stream the entire Star Wars canon. To do so, Disney has made a "preliminary inquiry" about regaining the rights, but has "met resistance" from Turner, according to people familiar with the matter.

Turner would reportedly want financial considerations and programming to replace the Star Wars films it would lose, but the talks have yet to advance. If Disney doesn't get the rights back, its streaming service would be missing one of the main franchises that many users would be signing up for, although new Star Wars content could appear, such as numerous Star Wars TV shows "specifically" created for the service.

As we get near the launch of Disney's direct-to-consumer app, more of its films have begun disappearing from Netflix, including titles like Finding Dory this month. In regards to Star Wars, Bloomberg reports that Disney's deal with Netflix for recent Star Wars films -- including the currently-streaming Star Wars: The Last Jedi -- will expire "at the end of this year."

Similar to Disney, Apple is on the hunt to fill its own upcoming streaming TV service with an instant catalog of existing shows and potentially even movies. Apple hasn't discussed its streaming service as much as Disney, however, so it's still unclear how it will launch, how much it will be (Disney says its own will be priced "substantially below" Netflix), and when exactly users will be able to watch the first TV shows beyond sometime after March 2019.

At the same time that Disney attempts to negotiate the TV rights to the Star Wars films back into its fold, the company is nearing completion on its $71.3 billion acquisition of 21st Century Fox's entertainment assets, which will provide another influx of content for its streaming service.

Article Link: Disney Facing 'Resistance' From Turner in Effort to Get TV Rights of 'Star Wars' Films for Streaming Service
Here is an idea: make 1 single streaming service that provides all movies and all series, instead of tens smaller ones. Pay 20-30-50 bucks per month and that’s it.

But no, companies have to make things so hard for the end consumers, who end up paying much more than the “default” 9,99/ month, since they need to subscribe to several different such providers...
 

I am not looking forward to this new world where you have to subscribe to 10 different streaming services to see the desired content. I think the best advice is just to avoid them all until they do sharing agreements.
They had that. It was called cable or satt service: one fee for content from nearly all providers.

We the consumers then started wishing that away, deluded by some idea that we should be able to buy only the channels we want to watch for a huge discount off of the 200-500 channel bundled pricing. Of course, no other player in the chain wanted to do that... nor has to do that.

So now, we continue marching toward a point where we'll be spending MORE than we were before for less available content... or spending less but doing without ready access to stuff we actually would have historically enjoyed being able to watch and/or other compromises, especially to quality of programming (stuff like Dolby Digital sound, full-featured DVR functions, etc).

With this Disney move, it appears that maybe 2 or 3 companies will end up controlling almost all of the video content, much like 2 or 3 companies pretty much dominate the cellular service space. Elimination of healthy competition typically leads to consumers paying more... often for less (because where you going to go?). Example right here in this topic: Disney is wanting to become the lone source of Star Wars content. If you really want access to that via stream, you will HAVE to be a subscriber to Disney. Other players like Comcast and AT&T are very likely to be buying big libraries to basically do the same kind of thing: "If you want what we have, you HAVE to buy it from us." As Apple people well aware of exclusivity and "lock in" concepts, we know how that goes very well... and how relatively expensive that can be.

Cheaper options like Netflix will lose more desirable content to the big dogs that are rolling their own Netflix-like services (but NOT at a Netflix-like price). I expect the cheap options to die not because they can't function at current pricing but because access to the desirable content will be monetized accordingly... and only available from one source elsewhere.

Many of us celebrated Disney's purchase of Fox but that also gives Disney 60% ownership of Hulu. Care to guess where Hulu traditional cheaper pricing will go after the deal is fully done?

Disney is much like Apple in terms of wanting to be paid top dollar for their products, and flexing their muscles to create lock-in exclusivity so they can be the only source. Around here, many seem to wish away the Spotifys, the Samsungs, the PC vendors, the Microsofts, the Google's etc as if Apple gaining complete control over stuff that currently has competition would be great for us consumers. And if that happened? Apple would charge whatever it wants and we would whine about how expensive it is... just as we often do now when there are at least SOME competitors. This will go the same way.

I saw some information that said the typical US household spends about $73/month on television service (cable/satt). The cord cutter crowd has some delusion of getting what they want for much less than whatever they used to pay for cable or satt. However, the suppliers look at a number like $73/month/household and work hard every day on how to GROW that number. Their goal is to pull that up... just like Apple looking to pull up how much each iPhone buyer spends on new iPhones + increasingly near-necessary accessory items.

Disney is positioning to make streaming video much more profitable. As we know from Apple experiences, "much more profits" don't come from pockets other than our own. The squeeze is coming soon. I suspect we'll soon realize in full that our "savings" gets us much less than we used to get and that "the future" options to approximate the old, "antiquated", "rip off" options will prove more expensive on a per month, per household basis.

If so, the moral of the story is a very, very old one: Be careful what you wish for.
[doublepost=1533320495][/doublepost]
Here is an idea: make 1 single streaming service that provides all movies and all series, instead of tens smaller ones.
This part is possible. And Apple has largely already set up just such a service many years ago. The problem?

Pay 20-30-50 bucks per month and that’s it.
Nobody else in the supply channel is motivated to take the HUGE hit to deliver everything for cheaper. That's OUR delusion. We believe we can somehow get that.

We might as well extrapolate that out with expectations of new iPhones for- say- $100 and new MB Pros for- say- $100 too. It's basically the same. Apple as creators and owners of their products want to make a target revenue + profit from their creations. And creators and owners of video content want to do the exact same thing. Just as Apple won't arbitrarily decide to give us huge discounts so we can buy new iDevices and Macs at dirt-cheap prices, so it goes for owners of other kinds of products too.

The single service with everything is attainable if we are willing to pay up big for that. Apple has actually been pretty close to that for many years now.

However, if we demand a relatively large discount off of normal for cable/satt, we should expect significant compromises, lack of availability, fragmented sources, etc... pretty much exactly as this is unfolding. There is no magical player- Apple included- who can bring everything to us for nearly nothing in cost.
 
Last edited:

2010mini

macrumors 601
Jun 19, 2013
4,103
3,688
I am not looking forward to this new world where you have to subscribe to 10 different streaming services to see the desired content. I think the best advice is just to avoid them all until they do sharing agreements.

I laugh every time I read a comment similar to yours regarding subscription to multiple services.

It was not too long ago that a lot of members here and online elsewhere were yelling about a la carte content. Specifically buying “channels” separately. I and other got shouted down when we said that wouldn’t work out how they imagined. That it would be expensive.

Now what we have said is coming through.
 

Braderunner

macrumors 6502a
Oct 2, 2015
888
1,684
Tralfamadore
I don't understand why Disney is getting bent out of shape over one network's ability to show only 5 movies, of everything that Disney owns. The deal ends in 2024 (not that far away). Those 5 movies, even though they are Star Wars, aren't going to keep people away from Disney's streaming service. Anyone who wants to watch these movies that bad, already owns them.
I get that Disney wants to be able to say that it's 100% exclusive content, not available anywhere else. They can still claim to have exclusive content.
Instead, Disney needs to worry more about what they are doing to Star Wars.
 

Expobill

Suspended
May 30, 2018
1,424
919
I loved that bar scene when i saw that return of the Jedi in1984
She sang a good song, every spicies was joyous and jumping!
I had that version until recently were there is a crappier song and Jabba is wearing mickey mice ears.
Will this new service play the old or new vision of that scene?
And
Is finishing that latest farce “the lost jedi” worth seeing the last 2 hours?
I alway loose interest when laura dern opens her mouth and says some highly irrelevant.
[doublepost=1533323759][/doublepost]
Here is an idea: make 1 single streaming service that provides all movies and all series, instead of tens smaller ones. Pay 20-30-50 bucks per month and that’s it..
That was called cable tv before “teh internets” was somehow needed in every structure on this planet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eltoslightfoot

bbeagle

macrumors 68040
Oct 19, 2010
3,339
2,453
Buffalo, NY
Here is an idea: make 1 single streaming service that provides all movies and all series, instead of tens smaller ones. Pay 20-30-50 bucks per month and that’s it.

But no, companies have to make things so hard for the end consumers, who end up paying much more than the “default” 9,99/ month, since they need to subscribe to several different such providers...
Here's an idea: Have one company in the world that produces and sells everything.

Think about it and you'll understand why that doesn't work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HobeSoundDarryl

nt5672

macrumors 68000
Jun 30, 2007
1,901
3,949
They had that. It was called cable or satt service: one fee for content from nearly all providers.

We the consumers then started wishing that away, deluded by some idea that we should be able to buy only the channels we want to watch for a huge discount off of the 200-500 channel bundled pricing. Of course, no other player in the chain wanted to do that... nor has to do that.
This Disney approach is not a la carte tv at all. Disney is pulling all content into a separate provider, with a separate subscription.

What I find now, is that it is more satisfying to go outside, walk around, talk to the neighbors, etc. than watch TV with its Fake News, and movies that are more propaganda than entertaining. I know that has nothing to do with Disney's new subscription service, except that they, and other media providers, value their service much more than I do.
 
This Disney approach is not a la carte tv at all. Disney is pulling all content into a separate provider, with a separate subscription.

What I find now, is that it is more satisfying to go outside, walk around, talk to the neighbors, etc. than watch TV with its Fake News, and movies that are more propaganda than entertaining. I know that has nothing to do with Disney's new subscription service, except that they, and other media providers, value their service much more than I do.
If most of us would do the same, prices of that kind of stuff would come down.

And that's the same with stuff like college costs: if instead of paying just any price colleges want with debt, if we decided that the first lesson of college will be to go to one that can be afforded out of cash flow, college costs would come down... FAST.

And that's the same with stuff like Apple products. If we decide to NOT pay whatever Apple asks and/or not buy because Apple makes some decision that mostly delivers hassle for consumers, Apple will cut prices and/or backtrack on some decisions.

And so on.

The problem? Too many of us will not do without... too many of us will not teach junior or junette the most fundamental lesson of finance (instead, lining them up for a miserable nightmare hitting soon after they get that 4-7 year degree in old world studies or philosophy:rolleyes:)... too many of us HAVE, HAVE, HAVE to have that next Apple <any product> no matter what they want for it, etc. While enough of us opt to pay anything, sellers will be happy to charge anything.

Perhaps someday the masses will decide to flex their (actually) stronger end of the equation (generally, the seller desperately wants the MONEY much more than we HAVE to buy what they are selling... the bulk of us have just marginalized the pressure of their desperation).
[doublepost=1533331156][/doublepost]
Here's an idea: Have one company in the world that produces and sells everything.

Think about it and you'll understand why that doesn't work.
Hang around here much though and that seems to underpin a vast majority of posts... a desire for all competition to "Die, competitor die" and the favored company to rule all. Apparently, if that happens, we will magically & courageously win something.
 
Last edited:

Brien

macrumors 68030
Aug 11, 2008
2,814
468
They had that. It was called cable or satt service: one fee for content from nearly all providers.

We the consumers then started wishing that away, deluded by some idea that we should be able to buy only the channels we want to watch for a huge discount off of the 200-500 channel bundled pricing. Of course, no other player in the chain wanted to do that... nor has to do that.

So now, we continue marching toward a point where we'll be spending MORE than we were before for less available content... or spending less but doing without ready access to stuff we actually would have historically enjoyed being able to watch and/or other compromises, especially to quality of programming (stuff like Dolby Digital sound, full-featured DVR functions, etc).

With this Disney move, it appears that maybe 2 or 3 companies will end up controlling almost all of the video content, much like 2 or 3 companies pretty much dominate the cellular service space. Elimination of healthy competition typically leads to consumers paying more... often for less (because where you going to go?). Example right here in this topic: Disney is wanting to become the lone source of Star Wars content. If you really want access to that via stream, you will HAVE to be a subscriber to Disney.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Disney stops selling discs after their streaming service goes live, effectively forcing users to pay montly to see any of their content.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jstuts5797

aaronhead14

macrumors 6502a
Mar 9, 2009
920
3,932
I don't understand why Disney even needs broadcast rights when they're not trying to broadcast the movies. Streaming is different from cable broadcast.
 

lec0rsaire

macrumors 65816
Feb 23, 2017
1,494
1,402
Meh. Good riddance Disney. Many people will be pissed when they open Netflix and all of the Disney stuff is gone but except for some of the classics, it’s all rubbish. If their new stuff will be like the awful Last Jedi then it’s really not a big loss.
[doublepost=1533336265][/doublepost]
I wouldn’t be surprised if Disney stops selling discs after their streaming service goes live, effectively forcing users to pay montly to see any of their content.
They make a ton of revenue off of the physical media business. Their movies rarely go on sale and they always retail for full price. I rarely see Disney Blu-rays for less than $25-30. OK Dumbo is $10 at BestBuy right now but everything else is not really on sale. They also rotate availability of their catalog keeping prices high especially when they’re out of print. These things can fetch a premium on eBay and Amazon if your kid just has to have a particular movie that they aren’t currently selling.

I don’t have children yet but I’m definitely not looking forward to having to spend a fortune on all of these movies lol! I owned most of the great ones on VHS but I gave them all away to my younger cousins the kids of my relatives when I got older.
 
Last edited:

slu

macrumors 68000
Sep 15, 2004
1,636
106
Buffalo
I am not looking forward to this new world where you have to subscribe to 10 different streaming services to see the desired content. I think the best advice is just to avoid them all until they do sharing agreements.
So you want traditional cable then? We are getting the a la carte everyone asked for. And I love it. I only pay for the content that I want and I pay much less. I’m glad I don’t subsidize stuff on Bravo or NHL games anymore.

Edit: seems like I should have read all the comments before I replied. But I’m leaving this up anyway.