Conno
Member
Like I said, Dolby 3D which uses colour filters as opposed to generic passive polarisation and are marginally more expensive at scale. Nothing special going on here. Just different commercially available 3D.
-
The new WDWMAGIC iOS app is here!
Stay up to date with the latest Disney news, photos, and discussions right from your iPhone. The app is free to download and gives you quick access to news articles, forums, photo galleries, park hours, weather and Lightning Lane pricing. Learn More -
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
EPCOT Remy's Ratatouille Adventure to transition to 2D with brief refurbishment in November 2025
- Thread starter DCBaker
- Start date
That whole guest feedback thing is more subjective than anything. I'm not saying that people didn't complain about 3D side effects, but it acts more of a foil to the cost cutting move by Disney. The more prevalent guest issue was likely the poor quality of the projections in the attraction. Doing the 2D conversion was about $ and could easily be covered up by saying it was to address guest accessibility.
Positive spin on a negative move. Just like Disney does with everything.
If the whole 3D accessibility issues were a major factor, you should expect to see demand for the attraction increase over the next year.
Disney's movie-making is NOT profitable. Disney's own SEC 1k filings show this. These are their own reported numbers. The problem get's even worse when you account for how one Disney division charges another Disney division to "try" to balance it's numbers and "cover" it's losses. This is Disney charging itself and moving money from one pocket to the other pocket to visually "balance" it's divisions. It's very clever of Disney to attempt that.
SEC documents must be financially and legally correct. You must not lie or "spin" a narrative in these documents to the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Technically speaking - Disney would bleed "less" money and profit,....if it stopped making movies completely.
Last edited:
We've been over this hundreds of time. This is a valid accounting process. One part of the company charges another for its services so that C-Suite can see what each segment is really contributing. If Disney didn't have DTC, its movies would go to the post-theatrical windows (PPV, DVD, cable, broadcast) and continue to make money. But instead, its own DTC pays for the film rights. And DTC takes in billions of dollars to show those movies in the post-theatrical window by "paying" the segment of the company -- the studios -- for that content.
You seem to regard this as a con. It's hard to have a good faith discussion with someone who has a belief that good faith accounting is a scam.
Also... lol...
I'm certain that you disagree with the opinions of this YouTube channel and their financial analyses. Fair enough.
I asked Gemini A.I. this:
Prompt: "Looking at Disney's latest 1k SEC filing, is Disney's movie making division considered profitable on it's own?
Response: "According to Disney's latest available financial reporting, its movie-making division is not reported as a standalone profitable segment, being instead part of the broader Content Sales/Licensing and Other and Entertainment segments which faced financial challenges in fiscal year 2025. During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2025, the theatrical division experienced a net operating loss of $52 million"
"For fiscal year 2025, Disney's Content Sales/Licensing and Other segment, which includes movie-making, contributed to an overall operating loss for that specific segment due to theatrical performance, although the broader Entertainment segment was profitable due to streaming growth. The Content Sales/Licensing and Other segment reported a significant decline in its fourth quarter results compared to the prior year, primarily attributed to theatrical performance."
It's funny to say that Disney is it's own best "customer" to itself. The right pocket is the best "customer" to the left pocket.
Could we also say that Parks and Experiences are the best "customer" to the entire company? That's like me making a product and my wife is my best buyer...but she buys my product with "our" checking account. LOL
Disney's studios are NOT a healthy business right now. That's a fact. Parks and Experiences (and other divisions) ARE subsidizing the bad numbers....just like I said.
I asked Gemini A.I. this:
Prompt: "Looking at Disney's latest 1k SEC filing, is Disney's movie making division considered profitable on it's own?
Response: "According to Disney's latest available financial reporting, its movie-making division is not reported as a standalone profitable segment, being instead part of the broader Content Sales/Licensing and Other and Entertainment segments which faced financial challenges in fiscal year 2025. During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2025, the theatrical division experienced a net operating loss of $52 million"
"For fiscal year 2025, Disney's Content Sales/Licensing and Other segment, which includes movie-making, contributed to an overall operating loss for that specific segment due to theatrical performance, although the broader Entertainment segment was profitable due to streaming growth. The Content Sales/Licensing and Other segment reported a significant decline in its fourth quarter results compared to the prior year, primarily attributed to theatrical performance."
It's funny to say that Disney is it's own best "customer" to itself. The right pocket is the best "customer" to the left pocket.
Could we also say that Parks and Experiences are the best "customer" to the entire company? That's like me making a product and my wife is my best buyer...but she buys my product with "our" checking account. LOL
Disney's studios are NOT a healthy business right now. That's a fact. Parks and Experiences (and other divisions) ARE subsidizing the bad numbers....just like I said.
AidenRodriguez731
Well-Known Member
Oh boy, we have a random YouTuber who makes obvious clickbait AND AI as proof. How did we get so blessed?
Dranth
Well-Known Member
Please explain how experiences, where the parks live, are subsidizing other divisions when no segment is underwater? Literally ZERO dollars was moved from experiences to entertainment.
Disstevefan1
Well-Known Member
Wall St. has got it all wrong! All divisions of TWDC are doing fantastic! And with the rise of AI animation the sky is the limit!
Last edited:
Angel Ariel
Well-Known Member
We've had accessibility concerns with 3D attractions for years. I've emailed guest services in previous years asking them to use/make glasses that actually worked to fit over regular glasses (much like fit over sunglasses), because our child just can't use the 3D glasses as they are now. DH and I wear glasses as well, and so often they're still so blurry to see through over our glasses - not at all the intended view (esp on FOP). Heck, if I could find how to get a pair of the appropriate lenses, I'd find a way to 3D print fit over glasses to make it work if we needed to.
In the absence of glasses that actually fit and function, this year DD just rode those attractions without the 3D glasses at all. Not exactly a great experience for her, but better than her fighting the glasses mid-ride and risking her losing her actual glasses as she tries to take the 3D ones off.
I never brought it up here because it's just a fact of life we deal with and move on
Dranth
Well-Known Member
How does that have anything to do with the claim that Disney is moving money from the parks to cover movies?Wall St. has got it all wrong! All divisions of TWDC are doing fantastic! And with the rise of AI animation the sky is the limit!
View attachment 893183
Disstevefan1
Well-Known Member
There is no money moving since all divisions of the company are doing fantastic and Wall St. just has it wrong.
Dranth
Well-Known Member
Who said there is no money moving? It is just primarily moving within Entertainment and that doesn't include parks. Here is the operating Income direct from their filings for Entertainment last week:There is no money moving since all divisions of the company are doing fantastic and Wall St. just has it wrong.
- Linear Networks made 391 million.
- Direct-to-Consumer (where streaming lives) made 352 million.
- Content Sales/Licensing (Theatrical is in here) had a 52 million loss.
Making up numbers here and oversimplifying things but let's say Content Sales charged Direct-to-Consumer $200 million last quarter to license movies. If Disney did not charge intracompany the numbers would have looked like this:
- Linear Networks made 391 million.
- Direct-to-Consumer (where streaming lives) made 552 million.
- Content Sales/Licensing (Theatrical is in here) had a 252 million loss.
god i hate that so much media is like this nowadays. Just rage baiting, meant to antagonize so people will click it.... garbage
Disstevefan1
Well-Known Member
Well its good to know the parks are not financing other divisions.
AidenRodriguez731
Well-Known Member
Honestly, I feel like it’s not necessarily a bad thing for them to help fund. The movies should never be dependent on the parks but I feel like augmenting some of the risk of a movie for the more reliable cash pile that the parks give out is a pretty sound and fair concept when the movies wrap back in and also give new potential for rides/attractions. It’s all one company anyway
Casper Gutman
Well-Known Member
I wear very strong glasses and have never had the least difficulty with the 3D glasses at either Uni or Disney. I’m curious as to what the difference might be.
Angel Ariel
Well-Known Member
As an adult I don't either. The glasses are too big for my child's head. They don't sit the way they should, which bothers her sensory-wise, so she won't keep them on.
When she was younger she also needed sensory headphones and the 3D glasses would not sit correctly under OR over the sensory headphones, which made them too uncomfortable for her to keep on. She has no issues with her regular glasses or designed fit over sunglasses on top of her glasses as they fit correctly, so it's an issue that's been limited specifically to 3-D glasses
As mentioned before, the "other divisions" kept the parks from going bankrupt during the pandemic shut-downs and distancing rules. Parks was a 'taker' not a 'giver' back then.
While DTC was throwing billion dollar net losses, the profits from parks and studios and sports were going to shore up streaming until it could stand on its own.
Parks (and cruises), for now, have the best ROI. Their huge profits are going both into park capex and softening the blow of a theatrical year that, despite selling $4B in tickets, had even greater expenses. Next year, maybe studios will have the bigger profit.
That's why it's a good idea to have a diverse business portfolio. Each segment is accounted for separately to determine how profitable each segment it. This includes assets and services traded between segments (otherwise it would have been lining the pockets of 3rd party companies).
BUT... in the end, all the profit generated goes into one big bucket. And if any of the segments needs to, it has access to the bucket. Parks needed it during the pandemic. Streaming needed it to get up and running. Content creation divisions needed it to bolster their libraries and content output by buying up 20th C.F. Sports and TV needed it to transition to streaming from cord cutting.
That big bucket enabled investment in Epic Games for access to Unreal and to be a gaming competitor a la Fortnite. And for other projects.
Disney, as in the whole company, made $12.5B in *profit* this past fiscal year.
Those looking to score points against Disney are trying to make a thing out of a bad theatrical year (which is a historic bad theatrical year for everyone).
The bad theatrical year didn't stop the company making $12.5B.
PizzaPlanet
Well-Known Member
So is there any idea yet when the new props will be added? I’m curious how impactful they’ll be to the ride experience