So, because they don't invest in a super speculative, borderline meme stock, run by literally the most political CEO in modern US history who p-ed off more than half the country and much of the world, they don't invest in anything? That seems like a stretch or did I miss them saying they don't invest at all?
Also, you keep claiming that the stock price is a direct measurement of how good management is while ignoring that outside of Netflix, nearly all entertainment companies have under-performed the market and even Netflix has taken a step back of late. If all the companies in a sector are taking a hit, shouldn't your first thought be it is a sector problem and THEN see how they compare to each other to determine who is managing it better.
For example, the closest thing we have to a direct comparison to Disney is Comcast. They both have dying linear, they both have a streaming service, movie studios, sports licenses to deal with, and theme parks. Since Iger came back, Disney stock is out preforming Comcast so according to the presented logic that the market is the great indicator of CEO prowess, Iger > Roberts. Even if someone wanted to use the ever popular 10-year comparison that ignores a CEO change over where the stock ended up dropping over half its value in a little over a year, they BOTH still severely underperformed the overall market.
None of this is a defense of Iger. He has made a bunch of mistakes in my mind, and I am more than ready to see him go, but I bristle at this notion that stock price = CEO quality because it is a terrible measurement much of the time, especially from a fan point of view.
