4 ms·

> Yes, that's the entire point of accounting. They use ASC 920 and 926 accounting standards, so that anyone familiar with GAAP can understand what they're looki

> Yes, that's the entire point of accounting. They use ASC 920 and 926 accounting standards, so that anyone familiar with GAAP can understand what they're looking at. Things like depreciation curves are not standardized. It may all be GAAP, but there's a huge difference in how Disney's Coco was depreciated vs how Netflix's Bright depreciated in their respective accounting books. The question is whether the 18-month schedule for Coco makes more sense than the 5-year schedule of Netflix's Bright.

tomnipotent 4y ago
> Things like depreciation curves are not standardized Nothing was depreciated, because we're dealing with intangible assets. And yes, depreciation and amortization schedules are absolutely standardized. I literally included TWO standards in my last response that Netflix & Disney+ use. > huge difference in how Disney's Coco was depreciated vs how Netflix's Bright Yes, because Coco was part of Disney and not Disney+. > The question is whether the 18-month schedule for Coco makes more sense Yes, it makes sense for a theatrical release. "Bright" and "Turning Red" were created for streaming, and it makes sense that their amortization schedules cover the years that this IP will be helping the companies generate revenues as those titles continue to be viewed by subscribers. If you were to take all the views for "Bright" and aggregate it by year, I imagine the distribution from year 1 to 5 looks very similar to Netflix's amortization schedule. Funny that, almost like the SEC approved it or something.