This is a good, up-to-date synopsis of what's going on between Disney and Sony:
In the initial deal between the two companies, Sony would allow Marvel’s creative team to integrate Spider-Man into their cinematic universe and [Sony] would put up 100% of the production costs. In exchange, Disney received 5% of “first-dollar gross,” or 5% of the ticket sales from the first day of the release, and retained the merchandising rights for the character. Sony, would reap the rest of the box office haul.
According to Deadline, Disney had recently proposed a 50/50 co-financing deal, meaning each company would put up half of the production costs and then split the profits. Sony reportedly refused.
What I'm trying to figure out is whether or not the deal in blue is really a bad deal compared to the deal in red.
For instance: Spiderman appeared in both
Avengers: Infinity War and
Avengers: Endgame. Those two films together cost about $750 million together to produce & market. Googling says production costs alone were just north of $650 million.
Just because Spiderman was used in those last two Avengers films ... that doesn't mean that Sony put up $650 million, right? Maybe the deal in red only applied for the two dedicated Spiderman films (
Homecoming and
Far from Home)? Some detail is missing, I think.