News Disney’s Q3 FY25 Earnings Results Webcast

Kamikaze

Kamikaze

Well-Known Member
Mr. Sullivan said:
WWE fans are annoying but there are far, far worse demographics they could be appealing to. Especially when one of their industry peers is actively trying to cozy up to one of those far worse demographics.

Personally I don’t think Disney is necessarily the right company to hold WWE’s streaming. WWE is a massive money maker, but I feel Disney should focus more exclusively on sports that don’t have as much of a cultural wax and wane.

That said, I reiterate, they could be picking much more rotten fruit than this.
Click to expand...
Wait, what? Are you accusing AEW of something?

I'm a WWE guy, but they're definitely right-wing. Look at HHH being on the sports council, TKO's ownership is aligned one way, the previous roast featuring 'Puerto Rico is an island of garbage' Tony Hinchcliffe (even if they had to cancel last weeks because they sold zero tickets). And before a mod shows up to edit my post - stating facts about someone's political leanings isn't political in itself, its fact.

What I will say about the actual deal is I think ESPN is going to be sadly mistaken that WWE fans are going to shell out $30/month for this. They've been conditioned to paying $10/month or less since 2014 when the WWE Network launched. I currently pay $0 because I get Peacock for free with my Xfinity. I'll definitely just use a VPN to set my Netflix to Canada and watch the PLEs/PPVs through there. This ESPN DTC won't have anything else I want to watch that won't be available on normal ESPN.

As far as the 'cultural wax and wane' - they're still near the top of a peak currently, and this deal is ONLY for the PLE/PPVs and those 'select' events. The Netflix contract is another 4 1/2 (can be extended to 9 1/2 on Netflix's side) years, and theres about the same on the Smackdown/SNME deal.

It sounds like ESPN just wants additional exclusive content for the DTC service. High price to pay for sure, as I don't see them gaining 100,000 WWE fan customers that wouldn't have subscribed otherwise just to cover the costs.
 
Last edited:
Mr. Sullivan

Mr. Sullivan

Well-Known Member
Kamikaze said:
Wait, what? Are you accusing AEW of something?

I'm a WWE guy, but they're definitely right-wing. Look at HHH being on the sports council, TKO's ownership is aligned one way, the previous roast featuring 'Puerto Rico is an island of garbage' Tony Hinchcliffe (even if they had to cancel last weeks because they sold zero tickets).

What I will say about the actual deal is I think ESPN is going to be sadly mistaken that WWE fans are going to shell out $30/month for this. They've been conditioned to paying $10/month or less since 2014 when the WWE Network launched. I currently pay $0 because I get Peacock for free with my Xfinity. I'll definitely just use a VPN to set my Netflix to Canada and watch the PLEs/PPVs through there. This ESPN DTC won't have anything else I want to watch that won't be available on normal ESPN.

As far as the 'cultural wax and wane' - they're still near the top of a peak currently, and this deal is ONLY for the PLE/PPVs and those 'select' events. The Netflix contract is another 4 1/2 (can be extended to 9 1/2 on Netflix's side) years, and theres about the same on the Smackdown/SNME deal.

It sounds like ESPN just wants additional exclusive content for the DTC service. High price to pay for sure, as I don't see them gaining 100,000 WWE fan customers that wouldn't have subscribed otherwise just to cover the costs.
Click to expand...
No, I was not accusing AEW of something. "One of their industry peers" was in reference to one of Disney's industry peers, not WWE's.

And yes, believe me I know the way that WWE as an organization generally points. I've got plenty of folks on the side of my family I don't talk to who are big into it. That said, I don't see this move as Disney trying to cozy up to anyone in particular, rather they're looking to have a slice of a fruitful pie. They're not "appealing to the lowest common denominator". They're not promoting to them or trying to earn their favor. That's why I was saying it could in reality be a lot worse than just getting rights to some PPVs.

And while other major media corporations like I was referring to are actively seeking the good graces of certain demographics (if you think on recent events in the entertainment industry, it becomes clear what situation I'm discussing), I don't see this as something to complain about.
 
D

DCBaker

Premium Member
Original Poster
Some news about planned reporting changes:

Since we began reporting the number of paid subscribers and average monthly revenue per paid subscriber, our DTC strategy and the DTC marketplace have evolved. Given this evolution, we plan to implement changes to our Entertainment and Sports financial disclosures. Among our planned changes, because we believe quarterly updates on the number of paid subscribers and average monthly revenue per paid subscriber have become less meaningful to evaluating the performance of our businesses, we will no longer report these metrics starting the first quarter of fiscal 2026 for Disney+ and Hulu and the fourth quarter of fiscal 2025 for ESPN+. We will also consolidate the lines of business in our Entertainment reporting, though will provide information on Entertainment Direct-to-Consumer profitability.
 
Kamikaze

Kamikaze

Well-Known Member
Mr. Sullivan said:
No, I was not accusing AEW of something. "One of their industry peers" was in reference to one of Disney's industry peers, not WWE's.
Click to expand...
Gotcha.
Mr. Sullivan said:
And yes, believe me I know the way that WWE as an organization generally points. I've got plenty of folks on the side of my family I don't talk to who are big into it. That said, I don't see this move as Disney trying to cozy up to anyone in particular, rather they're looking to have a slice of a fruitful pie. They're not "appealing to the lowest common denominator". They're not promoting to them or trying to earn their favor. That's why I was saying it could in reality be a lot worse than just getting rights to some PPVs.
Click to expand...
Its my one thing that I've kept that has those leanings from the beforetimes. Old habits.
Mr. Sullivan said:
And while other major media corporations like I was referring to are actively seeking the good graces of certain demographics (if you think on recent events in the entertainment industry, it becomes clear what situation I'm discussing), I don't see this as something to complain about.
Click to expand...
There have been so many that I actually don't know which one you're referring to. The one that always jumps out to me is how Comcast gets a pass on using Potter knowing Joanne Rowling's outspokenness. That would not be the same way if Disney had the Potter rights.
 
Sirwalterraleigh

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
DCBaker said:
Some news about planned reporting changes:

Since we began reporting the number of paid subscribers and average monthly revenue per paid subscriber, our DTC strategy and the DTC marketplace have evolved. Given this evolution, we plan to implement changes to our Entertainment and Sports financial disclosures. Among our planned changes, because we believe quarterly updates on the number of paid subscribers and average monthly revenue per paid subscriber have become less meaningful to evaluating the performance of our businesses, we will no longer report these metrics starting the first quarter of fiscal 2026 for Disney+ and Hulu and the fourth quarter of fiscal 2025 for ESPN+. We will also consolidate the lines of business in our Entertainment reporting, though will provide information on Entertainment Direct-to-Consumer profitability.
Click to expand...
Wait…what?

Less data is always the way to go 🤔
 
Kamikaze

Kamikaze

Well-Known Member
Sirwalterraleigh said:
Wait…what?

Less data is always the way to go 🤔
Click to expand...
Its the same as not releasing attendance breakdowns. People and the market focus too much on those numbers, not the overall actual money metrics.

Plus theres a maximum to the number of subs they're going to get, and its going to stick around that number. So they'd basically just be saying the number was flat-ish every quarter.
 
Sirwalterraleigh

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
Kamikaze said:
You definitely suggested that the numbers from the previous report were not accurate. Don't try to change the narrative now.

I'll try again:

Are the numbers presented today accurate? 'Yes' or 'No' will do.
Click to expand...
Of course they’re accurate…”targets” are always hit to a certain degree. The issue I have is not hitting the numbers…it’s how

How does revenue increase 8%? Healthy business or deeper in a static number of pockets?

Revenue does not always mean “growth”

They say it every time but it’s usually buried in the leads.

Opinions vary on if that’s “good”…I’m on record.
 
N

Nevermore525

Well-Known Member
DCBaker said:
Some news about planned reporting changes:

Since we began reporting the number of paid subscribers and average monthly revenue per paid subscriber, our DTC strategy and the DTC marketplace have evolved. Given this evolution, we plan to implement changes to our Entertainment and Sports financial disclosures. Among our planned changes, because we believe quarterly updates on the number of paid subscribers and average monthly revenue per paid subscriber have become less meaningful to evaluating the performance of our businesses, we will no longer report these metrics starting the first quarter of fiscal 2026 for Disney+ and Hulu and the fourth quarter of fiscal 2025 for ESPN+. We will also consolidate the lines of business in our Entertainment reporting, though will provide information on Entertainment Direct-to-Consumer profitability.
Click to expand...
Following suit with Netflix
 
Sirwalterraleigh

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
Kamikaze said:
Its the same as not releasing attendance breakdowns. People and the market focus too much on those numbers, not the overall actual money metrics.

Plus theres a maximum to the number of subs they're going to get, and its going to stick around that number. So they'd basically just be saying the number was flat-ish every quarter.
Click to expand...
I know why they’re doing it…not wanting to bring attention to “churn”…which was talked about when Netflix reported extensively.

It’s less transparent…no doubt. But hey…nobody has to buy it

And they always should have posted real attendance numbers…but I know why they never did. It allows “sway” that doesn’t highlight specific problems. Park problems are not something they put a high priority on.
 
Last edited:
Kamikaze

Kamikaze

Well-Known Member
Sirwalterraleigh said:
Of course they’re accurate…”targets” are always hit to a certain degree. The issue I have is not hitting the numbers…it’s how

How does revenue increase 8%? Healthy business or deeper in a static number of pockets?

Revenue does not always mean “growth”

They say it every time but it’s usually buried in the leads.

Opinions vary on if that’s “good”…I’m on record.
Click to expand...
I told you last time. The revenue increase is mostly LLPP. Its extremely high margin and basically invented out of nowhere. They've got two more quarters of it being 'new'. Then you'll see how things actually are. I suspect the overall economy might become a larger problem before that happens, however.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom