News Josh D’Amaro Named Next CEO of The Walt Disney Company

[HMF]

Eisner was in charge during the better times of WDW. Soft spot for that.

Listening to the whole interview, however, Eisner is basically a moron now too.

My issue with Josh is he's presided over some of the worst park decisions (IMO) in the last 15 years. He's part of the problem. I want someone different and not part of the broken establishment.

As long as you are looking internally, that is very unlikely.

 

[Chef Mickey]

As long as you are looking internally, that is very unlikely.

That’s another thing. I seriously doubt their “search” even included outside candidates. They should have started there but they had Josh in mind for years evidently.

I’m not saying he’ll be worse than Iger, but I see no way he improves things when he’s been a big contributor to the downfall. He didn’t have an inconsequential role prior to CEO.

 

[Stripes]

My issue with Josh is he's presided over some of the worst park decisions (IMO) in the last 15 years.

Such as?

That’s another thing. I seriously doubt their “search” even included outside candidates.

Disney is a massive company, a lot bigger than when Wells and Eisner took over. An outsider would have significant obstacles to overcome and I’m not sure that would be a wise decision. Nonetheless, I do believe James Gorman when he says the board considered and interviewed outsiders and about 100 candidates.

 

[Andrew C]

That’s another thing. I seriously doubt their “search” even included outside candidates.

They aren't going to look outside unless they think company is on the brink of collapse...in their eyes.

 

[HauntedPirate]

Ordering the Triton class also predates Chapek. But most of the design work occurred during his tenure, which is likely why that shipbuilder nod was made at Disneyland. Retrospectively Chapek had the good fortune of acquiring a good pipeline as opposed to creating one himself.

Bob was a "Master Ship Builder"! He even had a sign on Castaway Cay about it!! Can't wait to see how Josh upgrades his sign there.

Matt Ouimet's sign on CC is how those sorts of things should be done - On the side of a building you would likely not even see if you weren't looking and didn't know who "M. Ouimet" was. I wonder if any of the other execs with signs there even set foot on the island (honest question)?

 

[flynnibus]

They didn't go all in on streaming. The had a focus on it, but I wouldn't say all in at all.

It's been the top line news of the business for how many years now?
The billions in investment in build out
The billions in acquiring and consolidating Hulu and the other adjacent streaming services
The TENS of billions in acquiring content libraries likes Fox
The shift to DTC vs any 3rd party licensing..
The accelerating of the shrinking theatre window

What would you consider the company needs to do to be 'all in'? They've literally pushed all their chips into this pile and spent literally 100 billion dollars in their journey on this path.

 

[flynnibus]

Really? Why? Were you a parks fan during his tenure?

He was barely alive during any of Eisner's tenure.

 

[Disstevefan1]

They didn't go all in on streaming. The had a focus on it, but I wouldn't say all in at all.

You can split hairs on wording all you want, but TWDC spent way too much on D+ with very little to show in return.

The only reason D+ is "making money" is because of Hulu.

PS. Iger overpaid for Hulu too.

 

[MisterPenguin]

The only reason D+ is "making money" is because of Hulu.

D+ was originally going to be a boutique streamer serving mostly Disney family fare. Then it blew past its five year subscriber target in a year.

Then came The Great Pivot. The confluence of:

1. buying Fox (which gave D+ another third of Hulu)​

2. buying out the rest of Hulu from Comcast, and,​

3. the rapid increase in 'cord cutting"​

brought about the opportunity to make D+ merge together with Hulu to make a "four quadrant" streamer with "general audience content" (that is, adult fare, such as R rated content).

Disney's streaming went from "here's a repository of Disney family movies and TV shows" to "we're going to try to win the Great Streaming Wars."

So, in an alternate world without Hulu and Fox, D+ would have been a small, niche streamer and could probably make a small profit. Or it would have had to invent a walled-off "general audience" section of D+ for more adult content. But with Hulu falling into their lap, they didn't have to go that route.

Much of the current content that's popular on Hulu would have then been incorporated into D+ anyway. And then, Hulu wouldn't have been that popular with just Comcast content.

Just like Star Wars or Pixar "is Disney," so, too, "Hulu is Disney." The merger of D+ and Hulu was in process for the past 4 years. It's one streaming service with a bundle of brands.

 

[Stripes]

The “crap” like Animal Kingdom, Tokyo Disney Sea, Pooh’s Hunny Hunt, and Expedition Everest? Even the lower tier of Eisner era stuff like Test Track and the Magic Kingdom Pooh ride were leagues better than the cheap rethemes we get these days.

Animal Kingdom should’ve never been opened in the state it opened in with Asia still under construction and the cheap, cheap Dinoland embarrassment. The funds should’ve been increased or redirected to the other three parks. Lackluster. Eisner made the mistake of opening lackluster, even humiliating gates no less than 4 times in a row. He never learns from his mistakes. His stubbornness is astronomical and it nearly caused the downfall of Disney Animation forever. TDS was greenlit by OLC. Eisner gets zero credit, same for Pooh’s Honey Hunt. Everest was a quality addition, but one surrounded by mounds of disappointment and failures. Eisner’s cheap rethemes included DCA’s Mike and Sulley, Stitch, Journey into YOUR Imagination, etc.

 

[MK-fan]

D+ was originally going to be a boutique streamer serving mostly Disney family fare. Then it blew past its five year subscriber target in a month.

Then came The Great Pivot. The confluence of:

1. buying Fox (which gave D+ a third of Hulu)​

2. buying out the rest of Hulu from Comcast, and,​

3. the rapid increase in 'cord cutting"​

brought about the opportunity to make D+ merge together with Hulu to make a "four quadrant" streamer with "general audience content" (that is, adult fare, such as R rated content).

Disney's streaming went from "here's a repository of Disney family movies and TV shows" to "we're going to try to win the Great Streaming Wars."

So, in an alternate world without Hulu and Fox, D+ would have been a small, niche streamer and could probably make a small profit. Or it would have had to invent a walled-off "general audience" section of D+ for more adult content. But with Hulu falling into their lap, they didn't have to go that route.

Much of the current content that's popular on Hulu would have then been incorporated into D+ anyway. And then, Hulu wouldn't have been that popular with just Comcast content.

Just like Star Wars or Pixar "is Disney," so, too, "Hulu is Disney." The merger of D+ and Hulu was in process for the past 4 years. It's one streaming service with a bundle of brands.

I still hate that 50-60% of older Disney content is nowhere to be found

 

[JD80]

It's been the top line news of the business for how many years now?
The billions in investment in build out
The billions in acquiring and consolidating Hulu and the other adjacent streaming services
The TENS of billions in acquiring content libraries likes Fox
The shift to DTC vs any 3rd party licensing..
The accelerating of the shrinking theatre window

What would you consider the company needs to do to be 'all in'? They've literally pushed all their chips into this pile and spent literally 100 billion dollars in their journey on this path.

It's semantics but when I read all-in it means to me it is the company's sole focus. It wasn't. Just a very significant one.

TWDC is too big to have a sole focus.

 

[Andrew C]

I still hate that 50-60% of older Disney content is nowhere to be found

Is it really that high? Geez. That is the greater problem with depending on streaming to keep content. You never know when these channels will drop it and you cannot find it anywhere else. Hence why some things are worth keeping on hard copy when possible. There are no guarantees.

 

[_caleb]

It's semantics but when I read all-in it means to me it is the company's sole focus. It wasn't. Just a very significant one.

TWDC is too big to have a sole focus.

I don't think anyone suggested that Disney has made streaming it's SOLE focus. It might be better to think of "all-in" as "betting their movies and television business on."

And there is a sense in which Disney risked (and continues to risk) the entire company on streaming.

 

[TalkingHead]

I still hate that 50-60% of older Disney content is nowhere to be found

They’ve done a poor job curating older content, both film and tv. Always thought Maltin should’ve been brought in to play the part of Robert Osborne.

 

[JD80]

I don't think anyone suggested that Disney has made streaming it's SOLE focus. It might be better to think of "all-in" as "betting their movies and television business on."

And there is a sense in which Disney risked (and continues to risk) the entire company on streaming.

Ok sure.

 

[Tha Realest]

D+ was originally going to be a boutique streamer serving mostly Disney family fare. Then it blew past its five year subscriber target in a month.

Then came The Great Pivot. The confluence of:

1. buying Fox (which gave D+ a third of Hulu)​

2. buying out the rest of Hulu from Comcast, and,​

3. the rapid increase in 'cord cutting"​

brought about the opportunity to make D+ merge together with Hulu to make a "four quadrant" streamer with "general audience content" (that is, adult fare, such as R rated content).

Disney's streaming went from "here's a repository of Disney family movies and TV shows" to "we're going to try to win the Great Streaming Wars."

So, in an alternate world without Hulu and Fox, D+ would have been a small, niche streamer and could probably make a small profit. Or it would have had to invent a walled-off "general audience" section of D+ for more adult content. But with Hulu falling into their lap, they didn't have to go that route.

Much of the current content that's popular on Hulu would have then been incorporated into D+ anyway. And then, Hulu wouldn't have been that popular with just Comcast content.

Just like Star Wars or Pixar "is Disney," so, too, "Hulu is Disney." The merger of D+ and Hulu was in process for the past 4 years. It's one streaming service with a bundle of brands.

“boutique streamer”

Please show your work.

 

[Pizza Moon]

Josh is the man.

 

[_caleb]

“boutique streamer”

Please show your work.

Do you not remember what Disney+ was like when it was launched in November 2019?

According to Bob Iger's memoir, The Ride of a Lifetime, they were inspired by Disney's acquistion of BAMTech in 2022 to pull back their content from existing platforms and put their entire library of content online with subscription access:

This was the "boutique" approach– just putting Disney movies and series online for people to stream. In this 2019 press release, Disney described their streaming strategy like this:

Then, after they built it out amidst a streaming revolution propelled by lockdown content binging, they were faced with a major decision: stay niche or go all-in as a major streaming platform to rival Netflix. In October 2020, Disney reorganized the structure of the company to centralize all content distribution under one global unit to prioritize streaming above theatrical and linear TV.

We can see which one they chose, and how they've turned it into a profitable business through acquisition, production, and monetization.

The long-term viability of the business model has been debated endlessly here and elsewhere, but surely you can see the evolution @MisterPenguin is referring to, right? This isn't really opinion, it's just history.

 

[MisterPenguin]

“boutique streamer”

Please show your work.

The original sub goal was 60-90M subs... in five years.