News Disney’s Q2 FY25 Earnings Results Webcast

[BrianLo]

Yes, it's under-performing because of its stock price, profit, and execution.

They had 1 decent quarter. They still have only made $8.9B in the last 12 months and made over $13B 5 years ago. What would under-performing look like to you? Or are you someone that just doesn't follow stocks/markets and thinks $3B sounds like a lot of money so everything is fine?

I’m confused what figures you are quoting here. Segment operating was 14.9B in fiscal 2019, 15.7B in 2018… 12.8B in fiscal 2023 and 15.6B in 2024.

I agree they have only just started to actually grow, but what metric are you saying that they’ve halved their business? Certainly revenue would be disingenuous (to their favour), but I think OI is fine? Glowing even compared to most peers.

Edit - WBD, Paramount, Comcast, cruise brands are their various peers. Not tech companies and Comcast is only half a peer, definitely not Verizon.

 

[LSLS]

UAE isn't the Saudis, lets be clear.

Is it a 'bad look' for all the other companies doing business in the UAE?

Was it a 'bad look' when Universal wanted to build there but later canceled it?

Or is it only a 'bad look' because Disney bad?

I think it depends. FIFA was absolutely roasted with the Qatar World Cup. There were active counts of the number of deaths related to building those stadiums. I think there is a huge risk having the Disney name associated, because you know it's going to be just as scrutinized (if not more).

 

[Nevermore525]

I think it depends. FIFA was absolutely roasted with the Qatar World Cup. There were active counts of the number of deaths related to building those stadiums. I think there is a huge risk having the Disney name associated, because you know it's going to be just as scrutinized (if not more).

Anybody still taking Warner Brothers Discovery to task over their licensed park in UAE?

 

[LSLS]

Anybody still taking Warner Brothers Discovery to task over their licensed park in UAE?

They were not as far as I know. But times are different, and with how public everything was with FIFA, I could see more scrutiny now. Honestly, it may not be an issue at all with Miral having done parks before (and in the quick search I did, I find nothing about worker issues). But right now, outside of some people around here, I'm not sure Disney is getting a ton of criticism anyways (heck, I find more articles about how it might be cheaper to go there than to Disney World). I just think there could be more attention paid on workers for this than there were in the past, so there is some risk as even though Disney is not involved in the construction or anything over there as best I can tell, their name will still be on it from a PR perspective. I will say, I shouldn't have said huge risk in my original statement, that was probably putting too much on it.

 

[MisterPenguin]

So the stock isn't disconnected from reality. In fact, investors understand reality better than any person in the peanut gallery. They have determined the company is under-performing.

That's hilarious.

Disney stock has had huge leaps going up and then down and up and down. All the while the business was doing what the business does. The company itself didn't suddenly become worth twice as much and then half as much. Which shows that the stocks are indeed unmoored from the success of the company.

Day traders chasing every dip and bump is not indicative of corporate wisdom.

 

[Kamikaze]

I think it depends. FIFA was absolutely roasted with the Qatar World Cup. There were active counts of the number of deaths related to building those stadiums. I think there is a huge risk having the Disney name associated, because you know it's going to be just as scrutinized (if not more).

Abu Dhabi is a lot more liberal than the other Emirate nations. There are also Warner Bros and SeaWorld parks already existing on the same island as this park, and there have been no controversies or allegations of wrongdoing like the World Cup.

Don't take this to mean that its a great place to visit if you're in a group that might be targeted by its government, but its definitely a bit more open than other UAE countries.

 

[Nevermore525]

They were not as far as I know. But times are different, and with how public everything was with FIFA, I could see more scrutiny now. Honestly, it may not be an issue at all with Miral having done parks before (and in the quick search I did, I find nothing about worker issues). But right now, outside of some people around here, I'm not sure Disney is getting a ton of criticism anyways (heck, I find more articles about how it might be cheaper to go there than to Disney World). I just think there could be more attention paid on workers for this than there were in the past, so there is some risk as even though Disney is not involved in the construction or anything over there as best I can tell, their name will still be on it from a PR perspective. I will say, I shouldn't have said huge risk in my original statement, that was probably putting too much on it.

The initial shock value will bring some ire for sure and is understandable. But 5-6 years from now if/when this park is up and running, I’d imagine the reaction will be much more subdued. The general masses won’t care that Disney has a park in Abu Dhabi, much like they don’t really care that Warner has one now.

 

[HauntedPirate]

First of all you said you’re latter statement would leave out financials yet you mention how much money they’re supposedly not making several times. Second of all funny. The New York Times would seem to disagree with your claim that the parks aren’t doing well.View attachment 857785they also gained 1.4 million Disney+ subscribers this past quarter so obviously your claim that Disney+ has slowed isn’t true.

Respectfully, you need to sit this one out. The figure they dropped was domestic parks and experiences. If you'd have read the actual report and not a puff piece from a newspaper:

"Operating results at our domestic parks and experiences increased compared to the prior-year quarter primarily due to growth at our domestic parks and resorts and, to a lesser extent, Disney Vacation Club and Disney Cruise Line reflecting:
• Higher volumes attributable to increases in passenger cruise days, theme park attendance, occupied room nights and Disney Vacation Club unit sales. Additional passenger cruise days reflected the launch of the Disney Treasure in the first quarter of the current year
• An increase in guest spending due to higher spending at our theme parks" (which has been mentioned in every single non-COVID-closure-impacted quarterly report since God knows when)

Any attendance growth is likely low single-digits, as revenue growth continues to come from squeezing more out of those visiting the parks. This has been happening since 2018, when attendance at least in Orlando peaked, and LL has been the main revenue driver in recent years. DCL is likely the biggest contributor to that revenue number increasing.

"Thus endeth the lesson" - Jimmy Malone

And quoting the NYT, of all places? You lost before you even started. You may as well have quoted Rick Munarriz when it comes to Disney.

 

[Chef Mickey]

First of all you said you’re latter statement would leave out financials yet you mention how much money they’re supposedly not making several times. Second of all funny. The New York Times would seem to disagree with your claim that the parks aren’t doing well.View attachment 857785they also gained 1.4 million Disney+ subscribers this past quarter so obviously your claim that Disney+ has slowed isn’t true.

And they lost 700k subs just last quarter and park attendance also declined. They had a decent quarter, which I acknowledged. It doesn't wipe away the last 10 years of abysmal performance due to all the shortcomings you ignored. The stock is all the proof I need because people with real money invested have determined it's garbage.

One good quarter doesn't mean the company is fixed. We'll see.

You also missed my point about Parks being worse. Just go there and you'll know. That's what I meant by financials aside. Objectively, the company has performed terribly, as indicated by its stock price.

BTW, this is how investors actually look at the company. Parks growing revenue bc of price increases doesn't impress investors. They want high margin, quality earnings that are repeatable (think subscription services). Park revenues from price increases aren't viewed as sustainable and parks are capital intensive, so whatever earnings they produce are valued under 10X their earnings. Subscription profits (think Netflix) are valued at 40-50X earnings.

Disney+ overall has been a cash burner and any investors knows it's been a disaster financially. Ready for pesky facts?

Disney+ Operating Income By Year

First Year: $2.5B Loss
Second Year: $1.7B Loss
Third Year: $4.5B Loss
Fourth Year: $2.6B loss
Fifth year: $600M Profit

So Disney+ has lost the company over $10.5B so far. So yeah, they need some profitable quarters to impress anyone with actual money invested.

 

[Chef Mickey]

That's hilarious.

Disney stock has had huge leaps going up and then down and up and down. All the while the business was doing what the business does. The company itself didn't suddenly become worth twice as much and then half as much. Which shows that the stocks are indeed unmoored from the success of the company.

Day traders chasing every dip and bump is not indicative of corporate wisdom.

You are delusional if you think a 10 year history of no stock appreciation is based on the whims of day traders. In the short term, sure. It's been a 10 year bull market.

The business is like half as profitable as it used to be.

Disney Net Income By Year

• Fiscal 2015: $8.4
• Fiscal 2016: $9.4
• Fiscal 2017: $8.9
• Fiscal 2018: $12.6
• Fiscal 2019: $10.4
• Fiscal 2020: -$2.9 (loss)
• Fiscal 2021: $2.0
• Fiscal 2022: $3.1
• Fiscal 2023: $2.4
• Fiscal 2024: $5.0

 

[Chef Mickey]

I’m confused what figures you are quoting here. Segment operating was 14.9B in fiscal 2019, 15.7B in 2018… 12.8B in fiscal 2023 and 15.6B in 2024.

I agree they have only just started to actually grow, but what metric are you saying that they’ve halved their business? Certainly revenue would be disingenuous (to their favour), but I think OI is fine? Glowing even compared to most peers.

Edit - WBD, Paramount, Comcast, cruise brands are their various peers. Not tech companies and Comcast is only half a peer, definitely not Verizon.

TTM net income, not operating income. Your numbers also don't look right. Opearting income in Fiscal 2024 was $12.1B. It was $14.8B in 2018 for perspective. That's not good.

 

[BrianLo]

TTM net income, not operating income. Your numbers also don't look right. Opearting income in Fiscal 2024 was $12.1B. It was $14.8B in 2018 for perspective. That's not good.

It seems your criticisms are one of impairment charges, divestments and acquisitions to me. Rather than the health of its units. Which is valid, but buries a bit the underlying fundamentals.

Not saying the company has grown on many metrics, but it’s disingenuous to pick figures that make it seem like it has halved. 2024 in most respects was a final return to 2018 levels.

 

[BrianLo]

Disney+ overall has been a cash burner and any investors knows it's been a disaster financially. Ready for pesky facts?

Disney+ Operating Income By Year

First Year: $2.5B Loss
Second Year: $1.7B Loss
Third Year: $4.5B Loss
Fourth Year: $2.6B loss
Fifth year: $600M Profit

So Disney+ has lost the company over $10.5B so far. So yeah, they need some profitable quarters to impress anyone with actual money invested.

I’m just going to fundamentally disagree here and state this is actually excellent and highly misunderstood by the street. The street, which for the better part of the early 2020’s completely ignored the financial underpinnings of streaming service and affixed value towards customer counts as opposed to financials. The stock price peaking in 2021 makes… no sense.

They built the third largest streaming service with a now sizable back catalogue and have turned it profitable within five years. The question is - is Disney Plus worth at least 10 billion dollars? That’s a pretty obvious answer, we have valuations on Hulu. The next question is: what peer did it better on that timeframe?

 

[SamusAranX]

I love the gaslighting that somehow a stock that approached 200 per share and attendance at 21 million, is not underperforming when significantly below those numbers.

Doesn’t mean Disney Parks will never recover to those numbers or that the sky is falling, but by any objective measure, yes, they still are underperforming. A nudge in the right direction, and no, there’s no grand conspiracy to cook the books. But don’t paint something green and tell me it’s purple.

 

[Nubs70]

S&P 500 10 year - 167%

DIS 10 year - (-10.75%) ** as of May 1

 

[MisterPenguin]

You are delusional if you think a 10 year history of no stock appreciation is based on the whims of day traders. In the short term, sure. It's been a 10 year bull market.

The business is like half as profitable as it used to be.

Disney Net Income By Year

• Fiscal 2015: $8.4
• Fiscal 2016: $9.4
• Fiscal 2017: $8.9
• Fiscal 2018: $12.6
• Fiscal 2019: $10.4
• Fiscal 2020: -$2.9 (loss)
• Fiscal 2021: $2.0
• Fiscal 2022: $3.1
• Fiscal 2023: $2.4
• Fiscal 2024: $5.0

And how did the stock price reflect those profit totals? This is interesting...

• Fiscal 2018: $12.6 == DIS $136.00
• Fiscal 2019: $10.4 == DIS $114.00
• Fiscal 2020: -$2.9 (loss) == DIS $187.00
• Fiscal 2021: $2.0 == DIS $130.00

Un. Moored.

 

[MisterPenguin]

S&P 500 10 year - 167%

DIS 10 year - (-10.75%) ** as of May 1

And DIS for 15 years?... +400%

Pretty much same as Comcast.

 

[doctornick]

I find it hilarious when the criticism is "Disney doesn't make as much money as it did pre-pandemic" as though somehow consistently making a profit every year is a bad thing. I mean, the pandemic explicitly had a detrimental effect on all of Disney's core businesses so of course they aren't doing as well as they were 5 years ago. Is there any similar company that is? This isn't a great period to be a legacy media company.

Paramount and Warner Bros Discovery would kill to "be mismanaged" like Disney.

 

[Chef Mickey]

View attachment 857831

View attachment 857832

It seems your criticisms are one of impairment charges, divestments and acquisitions to me. Rather than the health of its units. Which is valid, but buries a bit the underlying fundamentals.

Not saying the company has grown on many metrics, but it’s disingenuous to pick figures that make it seem like it has halved. 2024 in most respects was a final return to 2018 levels.

Yeah, because net income is all that matters in the end and they’ve had 5 years of “yeah buts” so their actually profitability has been crap.

I was too lazy to pull their actual reports, but the note clearly says that figure is non GAAP, which is probably where the disagreement comes from because of interpretations of the numbers. In any case, even the number you used shows they had less Operating Income in 2024 than in 2018. Not good.

 

[Chef Mickey]

And how did the stock price reflect those profit totals? This is interesting...

• Fiscal 2018: $12.6 == DIS $136.00
• Fiscal 2019: $10.4 == DIS $114.00
• Fiscal 2020: -$2.9 (loss) == DIS $187.00
• Fiscal 2021: $2.0 == DIS $130.00

Un. Moored.

Again, those are points in time.

The average stock price of Disney over 10 years is far lower because most of the time, investors are not excited about the results. For about 6 months, markets anticipated Disney + actually being profitable (see NFLX analogy) and quickly realized it was not.

If you’re just one of these guys who thinks stocks are independent of fundamentals, we are done here. Disney has traded in a tight range for 10 years besides the pandemic and excitement for streaming I mentioned. The stock has returned nothing because the company is poor. Companies that produce growth and quality earnings don’t behave this way.

But sure, you understand it better than the markets.