Actually, I think the production budget was "only" $80 million.

Even still - thats a 110m loss.

I am going to keep it at 10m for three reasons.

1. BOM says so.
2. The director seems like one to go over budget.
3. WB is likely trying to cover up the size of their loss by saying the budget is lower.

I wouldn't be suprised if it was was more than 100m

The "budget" may have been $80 million, but over-runs, production delays etc. could easily have pushed it to $100 million +

Yup.

$80,000,000 Production budget,

and as we've found out, BOM overestimates marketing costs....so im guessing they wont be as big as $35M.

Example: PRINCESS DIARIES 2 : $30M marketing, yet seemed to have alot more than CATWOMAN.

STARSKY AND HUTCH had WELL more marketing than CATWOMAN, yet, it's advertising is $25M.

So yeah, the BOM prediciton will be overestimated.


Also, no one has mentioned RENTALS in america, and worldwide.
Also, dvd sales in america, and worldwide.

Budget: $80,000,000
Marketing: Probably more like $20,000,000
Worldwide Gross: $85,000,000.

Rentals USA: $22,000,000 EST. (Gigli done $10m, c'mon)
Rentals INTL: LEAST $22,000,000 (INTL'y grossed more than DOM)

DVD SALES WORLDWIDE: ?

So it's made like nearly $130,000,000 and thats from the worst case scenario, and NOT including DVD SALES.

So by the end of the day, CATWOMAN is going to make over $150,000,000 with dvd sales.

Studios don't generally get money off of individual rentals. Instead Blockbuster/Netflix etc. pay a fee for the rental item, and then they keep the money from each individual rental.

And you can't judge the P&A budget based on what you saw. I would estimate the The Princess Diaries 2: Royal Engagement had about the same P&A as Catwoman or even less. It depends on individual markets and which manner they advertised it in.

You are very wrong on many levels. All of your proof against my arguement is based on pure speculation only. I got my numbers from a very well respected source, while you just said that Catwoman must be less, because I saw less advertising! Well, gee, do you watch EVERY channel at every waking momment? Do you know that Ad-rates differ on each channel?

2. You can guess on the rentals all you want. Thats fine. But I doubt many will rent it, not that many. People aren't THAT stupid. And Rental income does not equal profit, FYI. Actually, a rental fee is paid by the renters to rent the film. So, the profit is much, much less. But, still, for the sake of optimism, we shall leave it at your number.

3. It has made 82.08 million so far. Not 85m.

4. According to you, thats 85,000,000 plus 44,000,000 from rentals (ya, right), so thats roughly 129,000,000. Fair enough. But, yet again, your arguement is flawed. They don't get all of the 85,000,000. More like 45 percent, (thats about the average, it could be less, could be slightly more, but I would speculate less). So, lets take away half of 85,000,000. And we have roughly 42.5m from Box Office. Fine. I am not an expert in the rental market, but I highly dobut WB gets all of that 44m from rentals that you say will happen. Even if it does, we are actually looking at about 85m in profit.

5. DVD sales. According to you, Catwoman will do roughly 20 million in sales. I doubt it, if anything the idiots interested in it will rent it, not waste 20 dollars. But fine. We will say 20 million. Factor out DVD marketing and other costs.

6. At this point, we are left with, according to you, 102.5m in profits for WB. Lets compare that to the costs: Atleast 80m in costs (but very, very likely to be in an upwards of 100m) plus 35 million is adveritising costs. So, thats 115m in costs.

7. 115m - 102.5m = ATLEAST 12.5m in red ink, no matter how you factor it.

I specualte total losses could be over 25m dollars.

Whats this source then?

Movie websites, including IMDB have the costs UNDER $100M, as did BOP and YAHOO movies when the reported about the box office.

Anyways, i rekon it will end up in the profit.

And the fact you think it will make less than $20M in US rentals...and then less than $20M in INTERNATIONAL rentals is Wild.

In regards to rentals,

No, I am referring to profit. It won't make 44 million in rental profits, thats the simple fact.

Even with the lower budget, (budget and costs are ultimately different when filming most pictures, VERY often do they go over, but that is still pure speculation), it will end up in red ink, or about two dollars in profit.

As I stated though, rental revenue is not important, as the studio does not see that. Instead, the figures reported as "total DVD sales" include those sold to rental companies. We have estimated the studio receives about $10 per DVD sold, but then DVD marketing/production has to be removed.

No more biased speculation, please.

On average, studios get 55% of the domestic run, and 25% of the international run. This applies to video sales as well.

US theatrical "profit": $22,108,740.5
Internation run "profit": $10,475,000

And let's just say it makes $20 million on US video and $20 million on international video (this is very optimistic, but for mansonmyers' sake). That still only results in an extra $16 million in Warner's coffers. Overall they get $48,583,740.5. That is a deficit of $86,416,259.5, and I'm not including video marketing and international marketing.

Ok, let's take myers' aimlessly deflated numbers for budget and marketing, which, sorry, are not trustworthy (you don't even live in the US, I have problems seeing you competently projecting US marketing of the movie). That's still a deficit of $51,416,259.5, and not including international or video marketing.

Sorry, this is a bomb, any way you slice it.

Look what you started...this isnt even a thread dedicated to "Profit or Loss" of Catwoman, its meant to be for how much it MADE!

*dissapointed*