• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Crash and Burn Insurance

STARTREK11

Lieutenant Commander
Red Shirt
Nasa and others insures their satellites in case they crash and burn and Micheal Flatley,the dancer,has insured his legs for $10 million.A pianist has insured his hands for $3 million,Jordan has insured her breasts for $5 million and so on and on.

I understand you can get insurance for anything today.

The question is can we insure Star Trek 11 against flopping by taking out an insurance policy so that if the film is a flop Paramount can get it's money back for Star Trek 12 to be made.

How much would such insurance cost?

The insurance could be like if ST11 breaks even it would pay out all the money wasted in marketing.If it makes less it would pay the difference,if it makes a profit then if the profit is too small it would pay 6 times the profit it did not make minus the cost of the film thus turning a loss into a brakeven in every case. A special equation could be used to determine the compensation level.

A film must gross 3 times to break even.
So 3 times $150 million = $450 million minus $150 million minus $30 million marketing minus loss of revenue due to flop of film - cost of insurance = net break even point.

You can submit your own formula to determine the level of compensation Pramount would get if it flops.

The best and most realistic formula will receive a non-corporeal gold star.
 
I'm sure they could, but considering that only a fraction of Hollywood films ever make a profit (so I have heard, anyway) the premium payment would very likely cost at least as much as the movie itself.

TGT
 
STARTREK11 said:
The question is can we insure Star Trek 11 against flopping by taking out an insurance policy so that if the film is a flop Paramount can get it's money back for Star Trek 12 to be made.

I doubt that any underwriting company would be able to run any type of tables on that to even determine what the premium would need to be.
 
The God Thing said:
I'm sure they could, but considering that only a fraction of Hollywood films ever make a profit (so I have heard, anyway) the premium payment would very likely cost at least as much as the movie itself.

TGT

Are you sure that's the case? I'm sure it used to be, but these days, thanks to DVD sales, virtually all movies at least break even. I know the summer blockbuster is the bread and butter of all movie studios, but comedies and so forth make decent bank, too, as they're cheap and don't have to make a lot of money to be successful.

On the other hand, I've heard the "more losers than winners" statement with regard to the music industry, and I believe it.
 
Robert Maxwell said:
Are you sure that's the case?

Not in the slightest. :) My apologies if I gave anybody the impression that I was typing from a position of authority on the subject. I was merely recounting something I read on TrekBBS.com on more than one occasion, so any corrections by those who actually know something about Hollywood accounting practices would be very welcome.

TGT
 
I can't claim to be an authority, but Hollywood is notorious for reporting net losses on wildly popular films, or underreporting profits. Hollywood accounting is part of why we don't have a Roger Rabbit 2, Forrest Gump 2, or Peter Jackson Hobbit. JMS has also said that B5 is a victim of Hollywood accounting. (Uwe Boll accounting is a different, and far more terrifying, phenomenon.)
 
I can definitely believe that. It does mean that the films themselves aren't really money-losers, though. They just like to pretend. ;)
 
Given that investment in a movie is simply that, an investment I doubt you can insure it beyond a certain point. Remember investments can go down as well as up :)

In any case with all the creative accounting in Hollywood, remember as Freakazoid said "Kids, always ask for a part of the gross, not the net. The net is fiction."

I'd just be happy if Trek XI is a decent product and that should be the overriding concern of the studio if they want the closest thing to insurance :)
 
The only "insurance" that needs to be taken is the casting of Hayden Panettiere as Janice Rand. Once that is done there is physically no way the movie can fail to make profit.
 
apostle83 said:
STARTREK11 said:
The question is can we insure Star Trek 11 against flopping by taking out an insurance policy so that if the film is a flop Paramount can get it's money back for Star Trek 12 to be made.

I doubt that any underwriting company would be able to run any type of tables on that to even determine what the premium would need to be.


The mod closed the wrong duplicate post as the post was not as short as had been seen by some.I have amended this post to be more extensive.

Insurance companies use advanced statistical computation tools on the premium payable.They have amassed a vast pile of data.That is how they knew what to charge for insurance.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top