Report: Disney dumping Weinsteins

[UpInArms]

http://money.cnn.com/2004/10/14/news/fortune500/disney_miramax/

Co-founders of Miramax reportedly have been told their contracts won't be extended beyond Sept. '05.

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Walt Disney Co. doesn't intend to renew the contracts of Bob and Harvey Weinstein, the co-founders and co-chairmen of its Miramax Films unit, according to a published report.

Daily Variety, the Internet edition of the entertainment industry trade publication, quoted sources as saying a notification of non-extension has been given, but that it has not been acknowledged by Miramax. The brothers' contracts run through Sept. 30, 2005.

The paper reports that the Weinsteins continue to lobby the Disney board, hoping its profit contribution will persuade the company to change course.

<snip>

Earlier this year, Disney refused to allow Miramax to release the controversial documentary "Fahrenheit 9/11," a film by liberal filmmaker Michael Moore that is very critical of President Bush. Disney executives said they did not want to become involved with such a movie during an election year.

...more...

[Tempest]

1. I predicted this months ago

I did some research and found that their contract was up next year and predicted Disney would dump them.

With the loss of Pixar, you'd think Eisner would have enough sense to keep two of the most successful producers in the business.

Apparently making money isn't important at Disney.

[joeybee12]

3. Another nail in the coffin--can't think of any successful Disney movies

that essentially weren't Pixar or Miramax--wanna predict how long it takes before another studio takes over Disney?

[mark0rama]

2. Disney still owns the Miramax name,

but it doesn't mean much to me without the Weinsteins behind it.

[Tempest]

7. I agree

The Weinsteins are responsible for a majority of Disney's profits in the film segment of the business.

Disney doesn't make much from the Pixar side because they are only the distributors of the movies.

I hope the Weinsteins sue Disney so they can take the name with them.

[AP]

10. Disney owns the catalog too, which means a lot.

[tom_paine]

4. Just more Totalitarian Blowback to Sovietized Amerika

We don't have beetle-browed KGB guys making sure the Bushevik...errr...Bolshevik Party Line is towed.

But what we have increasingly amounts to the same.

Welkom to Sovietized (in a Free Market sort of way) Bush-Occupied Amerika.

[Gothmog]

5. Weinsteins will do fine w/o Disney

This is really another bad move by Eisner. The Weinsteins will make out like bandits after their contract is up.

[Tripmann]

6. Plain and simple,

Boycott Disney products if you disagree with this. I have since they refused to distribute F9/11.

When their losses as a result of people voting with their feet overtakes the amount gained in tax breaks from Jeb Bush in florida, the shareholders will turn the decision around and renew the Weinsteins contract.

Tripmann

[ocean girl]

8. I am boycotting them and I let them know when I was at the hideous

Disney store at the mall. The salesgirl was speechless!

[trapper914]

9. The Shareholders should already be demanding Eisner's head...

...simply from the F911 decision. A hundred million dollar movie that cost next to nothing to make and market (thanks for the help, right wingers!), which sold 2 million home video copies in its first day of release. If I'm a shareholder, I'm pissed.

[fishwax]

11. Glad to see Miramax out from under Mickey's thumb n/t

[AP]

12. One thing Bob & Harvey could do is buy (into) Artisan and build that up.

Artisan is one of the few big independent distributors/producers which is still closely held. That are going to have an IPO sometime soon, and you can bet that getting Bob & Harvey in the fold would probably tripple their IPO value.

Or they could just buy the Yankees and call it a career.

[daleo]

13. Ideological purity comes before profit

Which is odd, considering how profit is central to the ideology. I guess Disney will chalk this up as a sacrifice to the greater Bushco cause.