User blog comment:Spartian300/future marvel films./@comment-2198188-20121209180445/@comment-1895174-20121212225744

The problem is they can count the money. Because Sony has the license to put the character on film, Marvel would, ironically, have to pay Sony to put their own character in the movie. But how much money would they get? And on top of that, what percentage of the box office gross would be given over to Sony?

If Spider-Man is the only character added to the roster for an Avengers film, that would make him the seventh member of the team. So, Marvel might claim that Sony should get 1/7th the box office, or perhaps 1/5th since he's one of five characters that has his own franchise. Sony, however, will call bull**** to all these offers. Raimi's three Spider-Man films have grossed more than any other Marvel comics film other than The Avengers, and only the two Iron Man films are ahead of The Amazing Spider-Man. In fact, Spider-Man on average grosses about twice as much as everyone in the film except for Iron Man have, and that's mostly without the help of an inflated 3D ticket. Because Spider-Man is so much more bankable than most of the characters in the film, Sony would ask for a bigger cut of the film's profits than Marvel would want to give.

And why would Marvel or Disney even bother doing this? The Avengers broke a few box office records without the wall-crawler around. And why would they want to fork over a disproportionate amount of the film's gross just to get one character who doesn't need to be in the film? And why would Sony do this either? The profits they'll get off of allowing Marvel to use Spider-Man in a movie would be a fraction of what they could get by making their own film. If anything, letting Marvel use the character would just lay the groundwork for them to reacquire the license.