Hammer on DVD/BD Thread

[Demdike@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by Rob4

Apparently, it was the various companies that had been set up to deal with Network that have gone bankrupt.

Hammer Holdings who own the catalogue are still solvent

Has there been an official statement regarding the demise of Network then?

The last thing they said was please don't speculate we'll issue a full statement as soon as they are legally able to do so.

That was a couple of weeks ago.

[Rob4]

Originally Posted by Demdike@Cult Labs

Has there been an official statement regarding the demise of Network then?

The last thing they said was please don't speculate we'll issue a full statement as soon as they are legally able to do so.

That was a couple of weeks ago.

Yes, it's all done and dusted. Can't remember the name of the company who are now handling their stock and contracts but it's a big UK distribution company.

[Demdike@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by Rob4

Yes, it's all done and dusted. Can't remember the name of the company who are now handling their stock and contracts but it's a big UK distribution company.

That's not what i meant.

A statement regarding the hows and whys of exactly what happened is what i was referring to.

It's Spirit Entertainment who have their product now. I posted that weeks ago and you said you'd never heard of them.

They've just taken over from Sony in handling Criterion too.

[Michael Brooke]

As far as I can make out, the basic situation is that they had a hefty tax bill to pay, and HMRC wasn't prepared to cut them any more slack.

And if a limited liability company gets into a situation like that (i.e. where they can't afford to pay a compulsory bill), they're trading insolvently, and as soon as that becomes an unignorable and unresolvable fact the directors are then required to stop trading immediately on pain of the company losing its limited liability status. And since that would involve the directors becoming personally liable for Network's debts...

...well, they had no choice but to wind the company up.

That's why these collapses are often so sudden.

(I haven't quite been there myself, but thirty-odd years ago I was a company director at a time when we spent months holding formal meetings every Monday morning where the first item on the agenda was "Are we trading insolvently?". The answer was never a firm "yes", and we were eventually bailed out by a local businesswoman so we never got to the winding-up stage, but the sums involved were far less than Network's equivalent would have been.)

[Demdike@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by Michael Brooke

As far as I can make out, the basic situation is that they had a hefty tax bill to pay, and HMRC wasn't prepared to cut them any more slack.

And if a limited liability company gets into a situation like that (i.e. where they can't afford to pay a compulsory bill), they're trading insolvently, and as soon as that becomes an unignorable and unresolvable fact the directors are then required to stop trading immediately on pain of the company losing its limited liability status. And since that would involve the directors becoming personally liable for Network's debts...

...well, they had no choice but to wind the company up.

That's why these collapses are often so sudden.

(I haven't quite been there myself, but thirty-odd years ago I was a company director at a time when we spent months holding formal meetings every Monday morning where the first item on the agenda was "Are we trading insolvently?". The answer was never a firm "yes", and we were eventually bailed out by a local businesswoman so we never got to the winding-up stage, but the sums involved were far less than Network's equivalent would have been.)

Thanks for clarifying as far as you know, Michael.

Sounds like they'd been running at a loss for quite a while then even when founder Tim Beddows was in charge.

[Michael Brooke]

As for the "official statement soon" situation, what usually happens there is that the company is hoping to offer good news - for instance, a last-minute bail-out reprieve - as there's a short window of opportunity after the news breaks to sort something out. But that clearly didn't happen in this case.

The basic problem seems to be that Network had been running at a loss for some time, with only a small handful of genuine hits subsidising a far larger number of ultra-niche titles that only sold a few hundred copies apiece (and which, realistically, were only ever going to). Which was great for fans, but perhaps less so with regard to the company's ongoing survival, and founder Tim Beddows' death last year can't have helped either.

[Demdike@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by Michael Brooke

As for the "official statement soon" situation, what usually happens there is that the company is hoping to offer good news - for instance, a last-minute bail-out reprieve - as there's a short window of opportunity after the news breaks to sort something out. But that clearly didn't happen in this case.

The basic problem seems to be that Network had been running at a loss for some time, with only a small handful of genuine hits subsidising a far larger number of ultra-niche titles that only sold a few hundred copies apiece (and which, realistically, were only ever going to). Which was great for fans, but perhaps less so with regard to the company's ongoing survival, and founder Tim Beddows' death last year can't have helped either.

Have you any idea what will happen to their vast catalogue of tv and film?

Will it simply go out of print and disappear for good or can other companies (Powerhouse for example) acquire the rights to, say Countess Dracula, and release it anew.

[Michael Brooke]

I assume the rights will have reverted to the original rightsholders and will become available for licensing again.

And whether or not they're licensable by another label depends on who the original rightsholder is.

Sadly, Countess Dracula is almost certainly impossible, as it's currently owned by ITV (a legacy of it being distributed by Rank), which isn't interested in small-scale deals with boutique labels, as the relatively piddling returns simply aren't worth the contractual/materials hassle at their end.

[Demdike@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by Michael Brooke

I assume the rights will have reverted to the original rightsholders and will become available for licensing again.

And whether or not they're licensable by another label depends on who the original rightsholder is.

Sadly, Countess Dracula is almost certainly impossible, as it's currently owned by ITV (a legacy of it being distributed by Rank), which isn't interested in small-scale deals with boutique labels, as the relatively piddling returns simply aren't worth the contractual/materials hassle at their end.

Looking long term that sounds like it means films like Twins of Evil, Hands of the Ripper,The Shout, The Medusa Touch, The Monster, Assault and Hammer House of Horror are gone for good.

Unless of course ITV stick them out themselves via Strawberry Media as they did with Vampire Circus.

Others will revert back to StudioCanal such as Baby Love and Devil Ship Pirates.

[Rob4]

Originally Posted by Demdike@Cult Labs

That's not what i meant.

A statement regarding the hows and whys of exactly what happened is what i was referring to.

It's Spirit Entertainment who have their product now. I posted that weeks ago and you said you'd never heard of them.

They've just taken over from Sony in handling Criterion too.

That's right thanks for reminding me...