Can you explain how you came up to this conclusion?
Are you saying that distribution costs are proportional to production costs of a movie? Are you saying that (distribution costs)=1.22x(production costs)?
Not every dollar in ticket prices go to the producer of the movie. A lot of the money goes to the cost of building the movie theaters, the electricity bill, the ushers, the ticket sellers, the advertising, the cost of the film copies. (The last one is less for this movie as the 3D copies are shipped out in reusable hard drives)
The studios have a nasty habit of signing multi-movie deals with the theaters covering the whole year. The distribution costs are calculated as a percentage of all the movies of the year. While a $500M movie has the same actual distribution costs as a $50M movie its percentage distribution costs are 10X the cheaper movie. One way the studios use the money from money making movies to pay for money losing movies through creative accounting.
A little movie called My Big Fat Greek Wedding was filmed in Toronto with no name actors, zero special effects. Probably cost $10M to make. After $500M in ticket and DVD sales, it still showed a loss.
A year or so ago I saw the 55% distribution 45% production number. A movie money analyst I saw on a news website said Avatar needs about 3X production costs to make money. Don't know which production cost he used. If the $260M number then its $780M. If $500M then its $1.5B.
Avatar is well on its way to top the $1B mark in ticket sales. Add the video game and DVD sales and there is no problem going over the $1.5B mark.