Financial Analysis

Read Complete Research Material

Financial Analysis

[Name of the Institute]

Financial Analysis


The following paper reflects the case of 1987 about the animated movie between Peggy Lee and Disney. The following paper will briefly discusses about the breach of the contract, privacy of legacy, and various calculations are done in the following paper as per claim of Peggy Lee and evidence of Disney. It also discusses briefly the sales, net income, gross profit and overhead cost. The case is about the Lady and Tramp that was an animated movie and the case was claimed by Peggy Lee for breach of contract (1952).

According to Disney, he had right to distribute the file or any other related technology while on the other hand, the Lee had residual payment of 12.5% for the recording of phonographic videos that are sold to the public. The case was sued by Lee in the year 1988 when Lee claimed that the sale of the Lee had entitled for the residual payments for every songs and performance of voice and thus according to the Disney she would have only 381000 to be capped.

“Anything herein to the contrary notwithstanding, it is agreed that nothing in this agreement contained shall be construed as granting to us (Disney) the power to make phonograph recordings and/or transcriptions for sale to the public, wherein results or proceeds of your services hereunder are used.”

There were proof and evidence that participation in the performance were not for the performers of the animated movies while the policy was without the absolute ownership, and there were no attached strings. According to the voice Oliver and Company identified that there were no support of the delays according to the profit was there that could be testified, Disney had right to keep the profit while he was entitled to the 381000 (Lamb, 2013).

According to the Peggy Lee she claimed that she had 12.5% of the participation of the profit while initially she was 12.5% of the participation of revenue, on the other hand, Disney did not make a deal for that also he was not entitled to pay 12.5% of the participation of profit for his actors.


Question # 1


Disney claimed and shown the evidence, and it was also testified by the Oliver and Company that there was no deal to give their profit participation for the performance of the voice. Disney was right at his place as all the revenues from selling cassettes belonged to him, and he was entitled to pay Peggy Lee which was not authorized according to contract in the year 1952. However, Disney had to pay the amount of 381000 according to the contract and the evidences shown by him, but Lee was claiming for nine millions, which was about 12.5% of the sales revenue. According to the evidence testified by Oliver and Co, there was no percentage of sales revenue that Disney is entitled to pay Peggy Lee. Lee was however claiming for 12.5% of sales revenue according to the contract signed between Peggy Lee and Disney in the year ...
Related Ads