News Bob Iger is back! Chapek is out!!

[Cliff]

I'm watching and reading all the Wall Street and market experts discuss Disney's financial problems. Everybody seems to agree that what Disney is about to go through is going to be enormously painfull for everybody.

The D+ streaming model...the one that was "save" the company and launch it into the future...is just not working. Even worse, it's putting a massive weight on Disney's books. As the model exists today, its not going to break even in 2025...and might never break even. The entire thing might need to be scrapped or at least completely overhauled and re-invented.

You guys know that each "She Hulk" episode cost 20 million to make? (Average cost per episode) seriously? That is insanity! They blew THAT much money on THAT? How many episodes? 9 or 10?

How much return will that lost money bring them in 10 years? They could have used that money in the parks and gotten WAY more return for the company. They could have built 1 or 2 permanant attractions that would have delivered more parks revenue for 20 or 30 years!

Instead....they blew it in a show that did not rate well and will be forgotten at the bottom of the D+ playlist in 2 years.

Disney...your PARKS are what you do best. Dont sacrifice your BEST product to prop up junk or something that nobody wants.

I read that 40% of D+ "subcribers" are literally people that get it FREE through 3rd party companies like Verizon customers. A large portion of D+ "subscribers" literally dont even care enough to setup their login and have never logged in. Yes....get this...Disney still counts these non paying people "subscribers"..."customers".

This D+ model is a giant black hole that is swallowing everything. Now that the pandemic is over, It's 100% clear to everybody that D+ is NOT the "saviour" or even "future" of the company.

Now....get working on that "beyond Big Thunger Mountain" project....now.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

The D+ streaming model...the one that was "save" the company and launch it into the future...is just not working. Even worse, it's putting a massive weight on Disney's books. As the model exists today, its not going to break even in 2025...and might never break even. The entire thing might need to be scrapped or at least completely overhauled and re-invented.

This is extremely dramatic. They need to raise prices, which they already did, introduce the ad-supported tier, which is coming in a few weeks, and start spending significantly less.

I read that 40% of D+ "subcribers" are literally people that get it FREE through 3rd party companies like Verizon customers.

That is not correct.

 

[RSoxNo1]

Actually Dances With Wolves in Space with Aliens.

How about The Air Up There with Kevin Bacon

 

[MisterPenguin]

If Apple was to be concerned about boosting Apple+, they've had at least two years to buy out existing streamers and to do so more cheaply than buying out Disney just for its streaming benefits.

Apple's net worth is $2.4 Trillion.

Right now Starz/Lionsgate is actively looking for a buyer and Apple hasn't acquired them. Lionsgate net worth is $10B. The others:

Amazon: $943B
Disney: $167B
Comcast/NBC/Peacock: $148B
Netflix: $126B
WBD/HBOMax: $26B
Viacom/CBS/Paramount: $13B

Apple could buy them all. But their Apple+ strategy is not to have a deep library of legacy content, but just to produce new 'prestige' shows. It hasn't been working out for them in order to win The Streaming Wars (40M subs for Apple+ compared to over 200M subs for Disney and Netflix). Keeping to that strategy, they wouldn't want to buy out any other streamer company (although, they are starting to buy-to-own production studios rather then just buying independent studios' content). And with all that Net Worth, they aren't in any rush to make Apple+ profitable. They can take all the time in the world to see if their strategy succeeds.

And Apple has shown no signs of being in the Merger & Acquisition business (M&A). But if they did, there's a lot of low hanging fruit to buy before wanting to take on Disney and parks and cruise lines.

 

[el_super]

How much return will that lost money bring them in 10 years? They could have used that money in the parks and gotten WAY more return for the company. They could have built 1 or 2 permanant attractions that would have delivered more parks revenue for 20 or 30 years!

It seems off to suggest that a theme park attraction can take 20+ years to pay itself off, but somehow a show on Disney+ can't.

The truth is, and this thread is a perfect example of it, that no one really knows how to quantify the success of something like Disney+. People here have been going on about total subscribers and ARPU and minutes watched and critical reviews, but at the end of the day, no one, and maybe not even Disney, understand how to translate those numbers into "X show generated Y revenue." The way to measure the success of these shows hasn't really been cemented the way that Nielsen ratings had been for TV or box office receipts for movies.

Further, at this point, the parks are showing that they are drawing demand and profit without new additions, so asking for more money for the parks doesn't seem all that wise of an investment.

I don't think the coming years will be all that painful. Much like the jokes of EuroDisney bankrupting the company in the 1990s, they may have to adjust but they will make it through.

 

[flynnibus]

The D+ streaming model...the one that was "save" the company and launch it into the future...is just not working. Even worse, it's putting a massive weight on Disney's books. As the model exists today, its not going to break even in 2025...and might never break even. The entire thing might need to be scrapped or at least completely overhauled and re-invented.

You point out how they overspent on a single show... and then use that to show how the whole platform, strategy, and distribution needs to be overhauled and re-invented?

Why not... I dunno.. Just rethink how they spend on content and their pricing strategies? Why the doom and gloom that streaming is the biggest mistake ever?

Maybe it's just the idea that Splash Drops for streaming isn't the right plan.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Disney...your PARKS are what you do best.

Disney started as a content company. That's how they made the money to build parks.

And when parks were shuttered for the pandemic, the income from the content on the linear channels kept them from losing billions of dollars.

And all that linear channel income? It's doomed as cord cutting continues. The streamers are its replacement, once they price it accordingly and can get advertiser dollars out of it.

Disney isn't just a parks-focused company. If it was, it would have teetered on bankruptcy a year ago.

 

[RSoxNo1]

I think another option would be buying Hasbro. Certainly not as flashy and not digital media / brands, but it has recently taken a hit and it's an arena Disney has looked to get into.

 

[DCLcruiser]

I think another option would be buying Hasbro. Certainly not as flashy and not digital media / brands, but it has recently taken a hit and it's an arena Disney has looked to get into.

Yes, and then let Feige reboot Power Rangers and possibly, Transformers.

 

[Tha Realest]

Big yikes. He better get the animation side of the house fixed pronto.

 

[DCLcruiser]

Gender skew does not measure children properly. This chart is broken.

How are they analyzing gender of viewers? Is it based on which credit card has the subscription? Card is in my name, by my wife and I watching everything on D+ equally.

Or is it based on surveys? I could see a male skew because all of the major D+ original series are male oriented (SW, MCU).

 

[DCLcruiser]

Big yikes. He better get the animation side of the house fixed pronto.

The movie looks terrible. Balloon animals. I go to just about every Disney movie, already have Avatar tickets, and I will wait for this to be free.

 

[Disstevefan1]

I'm watching and reading all the Wall Street and market experts discuss Disney's financial problems. Everybody seems to agree that what Disney is about to go through is going to be enormously painfull for everybody.

The D+ streaming model...the one that was "save" the company and launch it into the future...is just not working. Even worse, it's putting a massive weight on Disney's books. As the model exists today, its not going to break even in 2025...and might never break even. The entire thing might need to be scrapped or at least completely overhauled and re-invented.

You guys know that each "She Hulk" episode cost 20 million to make? (Average cost per episode) seriously? That is insanity! They blew THAT much money on THAT? How many episodes? 9 or 10?

How much return will that lost money bring them in 10 years? They could have used that money in the parks and gotten WAY more return for the company. They could have built 1 or 2 permanant attractions that would have delivered more parks revenue for 20 or 30 years!

Instead....they blew it in a show that did not rate well and will be forgotten at the bottom of the D+ playlist in 2 years.

Disney...your PARKS are what you do best. Dont sacrifice your BEST product to prop up junk or something that nobody wants.

I read that 40% of D+ "subcribers" are literally people that get it FREE through 3rd party companies like Verizon customers. A large portion of D+ "subscribers" literally dont even care enough to setup their login and have never logged in. Yes....get this...Disney still counts these non paying people "subscribers"..."customers".

This D+ model is a giant black hole that is swallowing everything. Now that the pandemic is over, It's 100% clear to everybody that D+ is NOT the "saviour" or even "future" of the company.

Now....get working on that "beyond Big Thunger Mountain" project....now.

The internet says She Hulk was around $25 Million per episode.
Wow! what a waste! I did watch it; I already pay for D+ so it was "free" She Hulk was funny and silly but NOT worth $25 Million per episode!

YOU ARE TOTALLY CORRECT take that money and build attractions!

As much as you can trust the internet, here are some other costs per episode.

The Mandalorian = $15 Million
The Big Bang Theory (2019 dollars) = $9 Million
Westworld = $10 Million.
Fiends (2004 dollars) = $10 Million
ER (2009 dollars) = $13 Million

Blue Bloods = $1 million??? I had to check twice! One of my favorite shows!

 

[CaptainAmerica]

How are they analyzing gender of viewers? Is it based on which credit card has the subscription? Card is in my name, by my wife and I watching everything on D+ equally.

Or is it based on surveys? I could see a male skew because all of the major D+ original series are male oriented (SW, MCU).

Social media activity, which is the dumbest possible way to do it.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Big yikes. He better get the animation side of the house fixed pronto.

 

[Tha Realest]

Under the new math employed by some on here, compared to Turning Red this is a massive success!

 

[Indy_UK]

Big yikes. He better get the animation side of the house fixed pronto.

Never even knew this movie was coming out? Did they lay off the marketing department already?

 

[mightynine]

The way to measure the success of these shows hasn't really been cemented the way that Nielsen ratings had been for TV or box office receipts for movies.

Ol' Supe's got a point. Netflix never set a standard for success that others could copy by keeping their cards so close to the vest, so everyone just judged success by subscriber count.

That's changing now that subscriber count isn't enough, apparently - plus you're getting more ad-supported tiers - but again, what is success? Will it be a total number of watchers to a show, like the old TV ratings, with a breakdown by demo? Does that matter as much for an individual show if any ads served in it are targeted to the end user, unlike broadcast where everyone got the same ad and you could charge as such?

We're still very much in the early stages of streaming with plenty of unknowns.

As for Strange World - it really seems like the previous regime sent this one out to die. Feels like it's had very little publicity.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Does that matter as much for an individual show if any ads served in it are targeted to the end user, unlike broadcast where everyone got the same ad and you could charge as such?

Individually targeted ads are extremely expensive to implement and advertisers have shown an unwillingness to pony up and pay for them. I don't think they'll become the norm for SVOD any time soon. Instead, I think you'll see targeted advertising based on the content that people are watching. "I want 18-49 men, so I'm going to advertise on Mando," that sort of thing.

 

[nickys]

How are they analyzing gender of viewers? Is it based on which credit card has the subscription? Card is in my name, by my wife and I watching everything on D+ equally.

Or is it based on surveys? I could see a male skew because all of the major D+ original series are male oriented (SW, MCU).

Don’t you sign in when you watch?

DH has the subscription but when I go into D+ I choose my avatar and it keeps my choices and recommendations etc. So I assume they could analyse my viewing separate from his. Of course if not everyone has that kind of set-up then I guess it will go by the subscriber’s gender.