
EXCLUSIVE: The hard-fought Lionsgate purchase of Summit Entertainment now looks about to consummate with insiders telling me it’s a $700 million deal consisting of $400M in equity plus an assumption of $300 million of debt. Most of that debt will be in the form of a bank loan by JP Morgan to Lionsgate. Several estimates have valued Summit at between $350 million and $450 million so to those familiar with Summit’s finances who don’t think my numbers add up, here’s why: Although the gross debt on Summit’s balance sheet is $500M, part of it gets wiped out by cash, and part of the cash moves with the company. Bankers and attorneys have been hovering all week around Summit, best known for its billions-dollar success with its Twilight Saga series, as the merger talks between two of Hollywood’s largest independent movie studios morphed into takeover talks and went down to the wire, while media have been writing that the Lionsgate-Summit deal either was imminent or blew up.
But let me explain why this deal is very bad news for Hollywood: my insiders tell me it will mean the end of Summit as a buyer. First, behind the scenes, Lionsgate toppers Jon Feltheimer and Michael Burns have no interest in continuing to let Summit make movies. But also in recent days the negotiations between the two indie studios became so rough and tumble that insiders now feel there is no possible way that Summit chiefs Patrick Wachsberger and Rob Friedman and the Lionsgate pair could ever work together far beyond the obvious transition period. “It’s gotten very rough recently. Burns and Feltheimer rolled over these guys hard. The odds of Rob and Patrick staying on is nil. I don’t give them 30 days.” [UPDATE: Other sources claim the two Summit chiefs plan to work "within the Lionsgate structure".]
What a shame for Summit that’s had so much success. It’s hard to believe it ended up a takeover target since it was sitting on so much cash that it had hired an investment bank to help it expand by acquiring other companies and even getting into television. But none of that came to pass after some initial overtures. Wachsberger and Friedman owned 30% of privately owned Summit and investors owned the other share, including Rizvi Traverse Management which had a lions share, and everyone was eager to see a payday. The common belief is that Summit was struck by lightning with the success of the Twilight saga franchise but that”s now coming to an end with Breaking Dawn Part 2 debuting in November. So this was the right time for everyone connected with Summit to score a windfall. For publicly traded Lionsgate this deal for Summit gives it cash as a badly needed hedge against the forthcoming The Hunger Games movie releasing in 2012 based on the bestselling book. If Hunger Games doesn’t turn into the hoped-for Twilight-huge franchis, Lionsgate is going to be in even worse shape than it was in 2011 when its debt stood at roughly $590M at the end of September, according to the company’s filings, and Lionsgate’s box-office haul was $332M, down -64% from 2010. MORE
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.


This is pretty crazy news. I can only hope that Lionsgate sees that the reason they’re having such a bad time is 1) they’re backing the worst movies (obviously), and 2) they have the worst marketing team out there. You watch a Lionsgate trailer for a movie you think might be good, and 9 times out of 10, it will make you hate the movie.
Case in point: the Hunger Games trailer is horrible. From Burns on CNBC to their pitches to Harry Knowles to any press on this movie – they’re setting this up as the second coming of Twilight.
What they’re really doing is setting unrealistic expectations and setting themselves up to fail. Such franchises are once a decade at best. The way they’re counting on such a grand slam is naive at best and should be a warning to investors.
Burns and Felt know this is true.
Are you kidding?
Did you see THE DARKEST HOUR campaign? It was the worst marketing of the past year. Minus Twilight summit has had a tough time opening anything, and when you look at the materials its easy to figure out why.
“…It’s hard to believe it ended up a takeover target…”
Wasn’t that always the plan for Summit? Isn’t that what mini-majors exist to do, get acquired?
And when you look at how poorly they marketed the few good movies they’ve made…
Can someone explain why Lionsgate wants Summit… I mean even with the 5 twilight movie… is that all they are buying?
I don’t understand how Summit has anything worth selling, either. I also don’t understand why Lionsgate gets so much heat for marketing. Their Hunger Games trailer is amazing, and so is the trailer for the new Whedon/Goddard horror flick Cabin In The Woods. Everything I see from Summit looks plain and boring. How about that Darkest Hour campaign? Yikes. Even the majors have had a lot of marketing missteps recently. Bane’s voice on the TDKR prologue, the AWFUL Three Stooges trailer, and the John Carter campaign. Don’t even get me started on that Mirror Mirror trailer from Relativity.
Totally agree with you.
What about the ‘We Bought a Zoo’ stuff? Criminally bad. Not to mention six movies Fox just bombed in a row…
Or The Darkest Hour? “Survive the holidays” – really? Thats your holiday messaging?
“I also don’t understand why Lionsgate gets so much heat for marketing.”
Maybe it’s due to the fact that they thought there was money in Repo: The Genetic Opera should? Not to mention a second Punisher after the first one. Oh, and of course, Kick-Ass, which the were able to spin as a win, even though it was at least a disappointment. Really, what was the last non-Saw/Tyler Perry hit that company’s had? Hostel? Open Water?
As an aside, I have to say that marketing also includes a studio’s reputation. L.O.L., starring Miley Cyrus, is due to be released this spring, yet there is no website, no movie poster, and no marketing for a movie Miley fans have been looking forward to. I’ve been thinking of seeing Cabin in the Woods, Expendables 2, and One for the Money. But I am so pissed at Lionsgate over how L.O.L. has been handled, that I am seriously considering boycotting them. I am already planning on seeing L.O.L. in the U.K. on the June 1 weekend, because at least they already have a release date for it there, and I can see Miley at Rock in Rio/Madrid at the same time.
If Lionsgate screws up Miley’s movie, I will never forgive them. Look how Fox gave Selena Gomez more than a fair shot at being successful. I realize Lionsgate’s Modus Operandi is to put stars in it’s films, and rely on the stars to make the film successful, more than the marketing, but this is rediculous!
What about the butcher job they did on WARRIOR? Movie’s on all kinds of year-end Top 10s and is tied for 75th all time on IMDB’s user ratings. 93% audience on Rotten Tomatoes. Likely Oscar nom for Nolte. Palen and Company murdered this movie with their generic trailer. Worst marketing team in the town and everyone knows it.
Same could be said for 50/50 and Hurt Locker. Does that mean Summit has a terrible marketing team because those movies bombed also? No one wants to see an indie movie about a bomb squad in Iraq, no one wants to see a movie about a guy struggling with cancer, and no one wants to see a movie about two actors they don’t know fight in a sport they think is too brutal.
They also get the Summit film library which includes hits like Source Code, The Hurt Locker, 50/50, Red, and of course the Twilight Saga. Summit also has Highlander and Ender’s Game in production which have the potential to be hits (or massive bombs).
50/50 isn’t a hit, bro.
And Highlander isn’t in production.
They hired a director for Highlander in September.
50/50 was Mandate/Lionsgate
An $8 million film making almost $40 million along with being critically acclaimed. The film is a success.
Not when the marketing budget was $30 million domestic and you’ve only made $40 million worldwide. You gotta give them credit for trying to get the word out on the movie. Its definitely a quality film.
Did anyone think the Twilight saga would be THIS big? Even after the first film opened, nobody I know thought ANYONE would want to see it, or future films. And here it is, one of the biggest franchises ever. HUNGER GAMES seems as off to me as Twilight did. If it looks bad to me, that seems like a good sign that it will be big. Good time to buy Summit, so it would seem, looks like there’s gold in them there hills.
I have been a Twihard before the movies came out shortly after the release of the first book. The books are great. The movies suck and a huge disappointment compared to the books. No continuity to them at all. Summit was always changing something from the make up, to the hair and to the cast. Bryce was a terrible Victoria it was this change that lost a lot of fans’ faith and money. I also became a fan of the Hunger Games shortly after it was released. I am a little nervous about the movie even after seeing the trailer. It is being rushed just like Twilight. IMO Hunger Games is better than Twilight. Suzanne definitely writes better than Stephenie. Hunger Games was better relieved in the literary world. Twilight is unoriginal there have been many human/vampire romances.
I see Hunger Games, and it just makes me think of Gamer for tweens. I think it really depends on John Carter and 21 Jump Street’s WOM. Either way, though, there’s no chance it’ll hold up very long against Wrath of the Titans.
Hunger games is looking like a four quadrant film with an emphasis on women and girls who can drag their boyfriends/spouses/parents with them. I know guys planning on seeing this; I know eleven year old girls who are already planning to see this. I don’t know how big it will be, but’s it’s a guaranteed moneymaker.
Something that’s made to a marketing plan (“four quadrant film”) isn’t going to work. It doesn’t help that there are unexciting people in the lead roles. They aren’t as dull and dour as the group representing The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo lately, but they are fairly colorless. None will likely catch the public’s imagination the way that some Twilight and Harry Potter cast did.
That’s a very big bargain for Lionsgate. Just goes to show you that Summit really didn’t have that much of a library except for Twilight. Imagine how big Summit could become if they actually had smart people leading the charge over there?
Losing a buyer is never good, but expanding a library is. Kudos to Jon and Michael.
What I want to know is…What happens to Summit yet to be released movies and in production projects? Will this change the out come of Breaking Dawn part 2 for example? If it changes in what aspect will it change?? MARKETING? RELEASE?
Summit has the worst marketing team on EARTH. Period.
As evidenced by the massive success of TWILIGHT. Nancy Kirkpatrick is the best in the business but don’t let the facts get in the way of your conclusions.
I’m sorry to burst your bubble, but Twilight has a MASSIVE global built in audience. Not exactly an enormous challenge for the marketing team.
Summit does not have the worst marketing on earth and Nancy is not the best. All the marketing people bounce from studio to studio, doing what they do best, surviving and not making a decision without considering how it could get them fired (if the movie goes south). Thus, we get campaigns that look alike.
Blame the people above the marketing folks for keeping the training wheels on.
That is not true. The audience that exists for Twilight now had to be built, fan by fan. When they started casting the first one, they had 20,000 fans on a MySpace page that had largely begun to die off in terms of interest. To go from that to 27M on FB is quite a feat.
I agree with this, especially given the insipid quality of all of the TWILIGHT films. They’re truly awful piece of filmmaking, every single one of them, yet Nancy and her team have managed to market them perfectly to their intended audiences.
Is Nancy the best? No. Is she the worst? Far from it.
Summit does have the worst marketing team ever. Their International is so dysfunctional it’s like an Italian comedy routine. Didn’t Rob Friedman, who came out of the Paramount PR/Marketing trenches, have to publicly apologize for the the wrongful Marketing of Bandslam, or whatever that movie ended up being called? Summit is and has always been a one Twilight pony. Well, since Friedman came on board. Before that, Wachsberger and Hayward were rolling along as independent buyers. But don’t cry for these guys. Be sure they will all get a nice fat payday and then it’s on to the next thing. Question is what happens to the output deals Summit has with Sony? And what will become of IDC?
Losing a buyer is never good – but losing the people responsible for making the bad movies that aren’t preforming is.
Jon, Michael, Patrick and Rob will get even richer and 100 – 200 people will lose their jobs, yet this is a good thing? MBAs are killing this industry.
Sad to see Summit be consolidated with Lionsgate, although I’m happy for the payday Summit’s investors are getting. Wonder what this will mean for the Summit staffers, too.
Summit principals cash in after a lucky break that was unlikely to repeat itself… not too surprising.
They were going to go back to making lowbrow thrillers like P2 that they were doing before Twilight.
HAHA I had forgotten about P2!
A NEW LEVEL OF FEAR!
hunger games. from the director of ‘seabiscuit.’ i say push the Fail switch.
summit just never found it’s groove with other films. it’s unfortunate. but the success of the twilight films had everything to do with the brilliant set up they did for the first film and getting the cast out there to meet the fans. i don’t really know if lionsgate has the capacity to do this with ‘hunger games.’
When Summit was hot (twilight/hurt locker year), it was because they were lucking out with the movies they were picking. It was all content. Now that its gone cold, its no wonder that they want to sell. Should be good for both parties if its done right.
Bastard projects. Refer to the history of takeovers…
Darkest Hour marketing was the worst of the year.
Well this is great news. I wonder when we all get fired, while the fat cats get fatter. F U.
That’s ridiculous. The only thing Summit has left is Twilight 4. It will be absolutely worthless as a company after that. If LG’s got that kind of money to piss away, it should be making better movies.
This is a brilliant strategy for Lionsgate as Felt and Burns’ minds function solely to lose money. They ran out of their own so now they’re going to spend Summit’s.
Look at the bright side: this keeps Summit from fucking up the marketing of Ender’s Game.
Ya got that right.
rob friedman is the most experienced and the best film guy in the whole group between the 2 companies….lets think clearly
What a load of crap – Summit did fine until Friedman joined. Hayward, Garrett and Wachsberger made that company long before the studio geeks showed up
There are a lot of people there who worked their asses off, doing the work of 3 people and they are the ones who will lose their jobs.
One less independent voice in Hollywood is a sad thing. While this makes good business/MBA sense, it’s sad to hear.
50/50 nor Hurt Locker were financial success dude.
All the it means for Summit Staffers is that they will soon be looking for a new job – with crappy movies on their resumes!
I’m urious to see how this affects the forthcoming HBO/Summit output deal? If LG does indeed render Summit redundant and cuts off any Summit productions, or assimilates them (and thus make them part of the current spix deal), does that render the HBO deal null and void?