User blog comment:Rockman1216/The Fox Marvel dilemma/@comment-993964-20160105234835/@comment-993964-20160109195109

"Also what does this have to do with anything, he's not part of he Disney movie making process, he's a comic book publisher, I should also add that if Fox owns the rights Marvel doesn't have to finance, Marvel will be paid to make the movies for Fox, and gain a cut of the profits, so what does this have to do with anything, hell Marvel is very focus on making Spider-Man look good, even though the deal is strickly character, to Marvel doing deals like this posses no risk, because they don't have to spend anything, therefore making 100 percent profit with no loss."

I feel like I'm that lady from the car insurance commercial who has to say, "That's not how this works, that's not how any of this works." In order for a collaboration to occur and for Marvel to profit, Marvel has to invest some sort of finance in the making of the film to make a profit and have some form of monetary rights to profit from the film (i.e., film distribution and ticket sales which according to contract belongs to FOX). "X-Men" is a FOX property, it isn't a Marvel/Disney Property so its not as simple as Marvel telling Fox to pay for a movie and make us money. That's as ridiculous as Trump telling the Mexian president to build the U.S. a wall and pay for it. If Fox does an xmen movie, Fox profits only, not Disney. How's that a difficult concept to understand?

Marvel isn't investing in making the Spiderman films look good, Sony still has creative control over it and the stand alone films profit only Sony. Feige will advise, but whether the movie is any good is up to Sony. What Feige is profiting from is having Spirderman show up in Avengers and Captain America Civil War as Disney profits from those ticket sales and dvds. And of course most importantly, the merchandising. These two links may be illuminating.

http://bamsmackpow.com/2015/02/10/merchandising-rights-key-marvel-sony-spider-man-deal/

and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6FZc3QlXrQ

That guy maybe just a publisher but Feige also isn't the word of god on all things marvel movies. Feige answers to the Disney CEO. That guy isn't just a publisher, he's a representative of marvel's business model. Merchandise is a crucial part of the process of selling ip brands, merchandise is a major part of an ip's monetary success. Since X-men film and distribution rights are owned by Fox, it's their property. There's no such contract were a major corporation lik Fox is going to pay and do for everything and send profits little or otherwise to Marvel when they hold the right to make and sell films and gain all the reward. The best Marvel can do is sell the toys and stuff about that movie but that's advertising Fox's property when Disney can make more money on an inhuman movie and toys. Now you can say why don't Disney do both?, well because the inhumans and mutants both have similar concepts, "powered and persecuted people." Thus they suffer from competition, oversaturation of the concept, and eventually divided and concept fatigue from consumers. Investing in a mutant toy line means less money to invest in the inhuman toy line. Kids aren't going to buy both Wolvering and Black Bolt toys, especially if the toys are expensive. Their parents aren't made out of money so what does Disney do? Discontinue the X-men toys so the kids will buy the inhuman toy. And since the kids grow up with the inhuman toys they'll more likely buy inhuman tickets. So it's all connected. Marvel will still sell X-men merchandise but only to the rights that they own, i.e., the comic versions and not the movie version.