ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
Repurchased shares generally become Treasury shares which can be re-issued sometimes as compensation but generally used for stock based acquisitions.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
The Spirited 11th Hour ...
- Thread starter WDW1974
- Start date
Repurchased shares generally become Treasury shares which can be re-issued sometimes as compensation but generally used for stock based acquisitions.
orky8
Well-Known Member
I agree. The channels Disney owns, it would seem to me, are strong enough to drive direct revenue outside the bundled cable market model. ESPN could capture its own subscribers (sports fans) at a premium and without the middleman. As could the Disney Channel suite, I think (families). Even ABC could do good on its own as CBS has ventured out with. It would seem to me cord cutting is going to primarily impact the more fringe channels that people only watch because they are bundled. As well as the cable companies -- but they are compensating by jacking up their internet prices.
For years now, the companies have been too scared to jeopardize their bundled cable market revenue stream, but it seems we are finally reaching the tipping point where the companies need to embrace a new model instead of just watching falling subscriber counts.
CaptainAmerica
Well-Known Member
That's not what I'm saying at all. But even the greatest finance expert on this board has nowhere near the information available to Disney's senior executives and board of directors, even if they're just as smart.
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
Yeah ESPN is SO strong it's BEHIND the WEATHER CHANNEL in a survey of the top 20 channels people would buy on a ala carte basis according to Variety
http://variety.com/2015/digital/new...els-people-would-actually-pay-for-1201520900/
CaptainAmerica
Well-Known Member
That doesn't get to the heart of the issue for a few reason. First, true a la carte isn't going to happen. Comcast and the like have far more to lose from unbundling than Disney. Second, obviously ESPN would have fewer subscribers in an a la carte model, but those subscribers would probably be willing to pay more for the channel than the $6 they're paying in the bundle.
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
You don't need that information to make reliable predictions, in point of fact it may make your analysis less reliable because those numbers and reports are buffed up to look good to the executives.
What most people are probably doing is something called 'Mosaic Theory', Disney supposedly P&R supposedly just had their 'Best Quarter Ever' yet Disney is accelerating closures and cutting hours across all P&R properties. Disney needs to beat that number and they have just about wrung price increases dry, So now it's cuts in labor hours to boost the P&R numbers, One thing is not like the other.
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
You make a bad assumption about Comcast, Comcast would have GREAT business without cable subs because COMCAST SUPPLIES INTERNET which people are NOT cutting the cord for and the commodity product which they sell 'bandwidth' is getting cheaper all the time unlike cable channels and if they get the DV channels off the cable they can supply A LOT more internet service.
wogwog
Well-Known Member
So Sad.Meanwhile at Disneyland,
Photo credit: Dateline Disneyland
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
Read the article most ESPN subs would not be willing to pay 8 bucks, Sure the fantasy league people would buy (BTW ESPN and FanDuel have parted ways) a ESPN sub but not your average household.
CaptainAmerica
Well-Known Member
The 5G mobile data network is going to make traditional home broadband obsolete and break that model.
PhotoDave219
Well-Known Member
Saw Deadpool. Thank god for fan service as I enjoyed my servicing.
Its really, really funny and doesnt take itself seriously.
Stay thru the credits.
Edit: Thank god Disney had nothing to do with this film.
Edit 2: Stan Lee's Cameo is very appropriate.
Its really, really funny and doesnt take itself seriously.
Stay thru the credits.
Edit: Thank god Disney had nothing to do with this film.
Edit 2: Stan Lee's Cameo is very appropriate.
ParentsOf4
Well-Known Member
You mean the market wasn't overreacting when it ran up Disney stock by 39.5% during the 12 months preceding its August 4 peak (the date of Iger's now infamous "modest sub loses" comment)?
As I posted yesterday on this thread, it cuts both ways. The market overreacts on the way up and on the way down.
As for the "market is reacting like a bunch of Chicken Littles" (I prefer "whiny babies"
) , I believe I've been writing that for years.
Last edited:
PhotoDave219
Well-Known Member
No, thats just Chewbacca before the filming of Ep8 starts.
Hoth is starting to look like Nebraska
rael ramone
Well-Known Member
BTIG (which is a four letter word among the foamers who post in the Seeking Alpha comments sections in $DIS articles) did research that said only 44% are willing to pay $8 for ESPN & ESPN 2. And only 6% will pay $20 (which means most of the sports fans aren't willing to make up the difference). If true, that is big. The 38% who will pay $8 but not $20 are people who watch now but will STOP WATCHING IN THE FUTURE (which if happens will hit advertising big). It's not just less subs. It's less eyeballs as well. Your biggest piece of your biggest division is looking at a potential margin compression, and from it's most dependable revenue source, the subs (money that comes in just for merely existing, like a bond coupon). And this is from a company that still so many think that margins will continue to grow forever. Right now $DIS, even down as much as it is, equals froth. The BTIG research tells the absolute opposite story then the mantra that keeps being repeated over and over that 'People will pay any amount for live sports'.
If the contracts with current cable prevents true over the top ESPN mass delivery w/o blowing up the bundle for good, they are going to have to really thread the needle to find the *EXACT* time to the millisecond to switch over to minimize loss. All the while content costs will rise and your still competing with other outlets who have cheaper content costs. The college football on FoxSports1 or Big 10 network or over the air network TV may not be as good as the ESPN offerings, but many may settle if it's much cheaper. Outside of College Football, isn't the most desired content elsewhere? (In baseball isn't the most valuable content, by far, on the YES network for Yankee games?).
Star Wars will not erase this. Consumer Products will not erase this.
Rodan75
Well-Known Member
That won't happen for awhile. So many issues with wireless networks, you may get speed, but not consistency and interference issues are only going to get worse.
TalkingHead
Well-Known Member
This isn't about ESPN or the fiduciary metaphysics of stock buybacks, but I'll put this movie rant here anyway.
As frustrating as I find WDW management to be, I think I'm even more mystified by Disney's Home Entertainment decisions.
We're all familiar with the "Disney Vault" conceit (limited time releases, drive up demand, hype, etc.). What I don't understand is how specific decisions are made about these releases.
Take for example, the Sleeping Beauty Blu-ray -- first released in 2008 and then allowed to go out of print before being re-released in 2014.
Note that both releases have the same picture and audio quality: for English speakers, there's nothing new from 2008 and 2014 with the actual feature film.
What is missing from 2014's Blu-ray are some of the supplemental features from the 2008 version, namely some segments discussing and visualizing the Sleeping Beauty Castle walkthrough at DL and, more importantly, the (Academy Award-winning) short film Grand Canyon that was released in theaters with Sleeping Beauty during its initial run.
The only way to get the short film is to buy the older, out-of-print Blu-ray (which, incidentally, is often cheaper than the new release with lesser features).
The same thing has happened with the recent Blu-ray re-release of Snow White. Same picture and audio as the older release.
But -- absent from the newer release -- the original Blu-ray had an extensive feature on Hyperion Studios including HD versions of Steamboat Willie and several Silly Symphony cartoons like The Skeleton Dance, Flowers and Trees, Music Land, and The Old Mill. I'm fairly certain none of these is included on the recent release.
In fact, there aren't any HD titles devoted to the short films; add to this, the DVD releases of the short films have gone out of print in most cases. The treasure trove of True Life Adventures hasn't been released in HD (I believe some may be available to stream), and many of the better live action films have been passed over. (How has 20,000 Leagues not gotten a Blu-ray release while we're on round two of some animated movies?)
I realize that the market for some these releases is smaller than the market for some of the full-length animated titles. But why hasn't Disney adopted an approach like Warner Archive which makes lesser-known titles available for a premium price? I thought premium prices got Mickey all hot and bothered. What gives?
TL;DR: In the last several years, Disney's handling of its older films has actually gotten worse, if that's possible.
As frustrating as I find WDW management to be, I think I'm even more mystified by Disney's Home Entertainment decisions.
We're all familiar with the "Disney Vault" conceit (limited time releases, drive up demand, hype, etc.). What I don't understand is how specific decisions are made about these releases.
Take for example, the Sleeping Beauty Blu-ray -- first released in 2008 and then allowed to go out of print before being re-released in 2014.
Note that both releases have the same picture and audio quality: for English speakers, there's nothing new from 2008 and 2014 with the actual feature film.
What is missing from 2014's Blu-ray are some of the supplemental features from the 2008 version, namely some segments discussing and visualizing the Sleeping Beauty Castle walkthrough at DL and, more importantly, the (Academy Award-winning) short film Grand Canyon that was released in theaters with Sleeping Beauty during its initial run.
The only way to get the short film is to buy the older, out-of-print Blu-ray (which, incidentally, is often cheaper than the new release with lesser features).
The same thing has happened with the recent Blu-ray re-release of Snow White. Same picture and audio as the older release.
But -- absent from the newer release -- the original Blu-ray had an extensive feature on Hyperion Studios including HD versions of Steamboat Willie and several Silly Symphony cartoons like The Skeleton Dance, Flowers and Trees, Music Land, and The Old Mill. I'm fairly certain none of these is included on the recent release.
In fact, there aren't any HD titles devoted to the short films; add to this, the DVD releases of the short films have gone out of print in most cases. The treasure trove of True Life Adventures hasn't been released in HD (I believe some may be available to stream), and many of the better live action films have been passed over. (How has 20,000 Leagues not gotten a Blu-ray release while we're on round two of some animated movies?)
I realize that the market for some these releases is smaller than the market for some of the full-length animated titles. But why hasn't Disney adopted an approach like Warner Archive which makes lesser-known titles available for a premium price? I thought premium prices got Mickey all hot and bothered. What gives?
TL;DR: In the last several years, Disney's handling of its older films has actually gotten worse, if that's possible.
Rodan75
Well-Known Member
I suspect much of this is going to be loaded into some version of Disney Movies Anywhere or the future DisneyLife OTT subscription service. I don't personally agree with that approach, but I could see them loading this video content there and only doing bare bones blu-ray releases in the near future. I've become less of a fan of the Warner Archive collection since many (not all) of those releases are really poor quality transfers. I mean you can get better copies of old materials from a torrent than from their archives.
Crazydisneyfanluke
Well-Known Member
It has to be one of the better movies i have seen in the past year. The credits (and after) was the icing on top.
PhotoDave219
Well-Known Member
Highlight of my week. So much more refreshing that the MCU.