News Bob Iger is back! Chapek is out!!

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Seriously though…each day it goes down when nobody expects it to…it’s a direct assault on iger’s ego…

I do love that.

 

[HauntedPirate]

Seriously though…each day it goes down when nobody expects it to…it’s a direct assault on iger’s ego…

I do love that.

I have a feeling that he honestly believed that his return would cause a $20-30/share rebound.

 

[Slpy3270]

Seriously though…each day it goes down when nobody expects it to…it’s a direct assault on iger’s ego…

I do love that.

I have the same thought i.e. Zaslav when WBD craters.

Interesting that Peltz isn't going after that dumpster fire, which is in worse shape than Disney in every conceivable metric. Or worse, he thinks that they have the "right" strategy (lol).

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I have the same thought i.e. Zaslav when WBD craters.

Interesting that Peltz isn't going after that dumpster fire, which is in worse shape than Disney in every conceivable metric. Or worse, he thinks that they have the "right" strategy (lol).

They tried to trip him up with that comp yesterday and he didn’t bother to do a good job lying his way around it

The “unsaid” part about Disney is it’s got a hell of a lot more potential. Always has and will.

There are few brands like it. Which makes this scenario all the more intriguing.

It’s a credit to Disney..:as in Walter, Roy and ultimately Roy…that it has that kinda weight. A little bit Michael and a sprinkle of Bob…
But Bob has not protected the house very well now…which is EXACTlY what Roy instructed him to do when he slithered in after Eisner.

It’s a creative company…takes more than giving a poop ton of stock to Steve jobs and buying off Lucas. Gotta do something with it.

It’s very indicting that the one IP trader Bob bought that has progressed the most is the one his people have left alone

 

[Slpy3270]

Seems some major Disney investors aren't buying Peltz's agenda

Disney activist Nelson Peltz faces questions over Trian’s record

The veteran investor has to convince other shareholders that he deserves a seat on the board

www.ft.com

Some Disney shareholders also think Peltz is not the right person to join the board. “In our view should someone with half a per cent position who has held the shares for three months, should they get a board seat?” said Dev Chakrabarti, chief investment officer for concentrated global growth at AllianceBernstein, a top-20 investor.

“His record in the consumer space is overall good,” Chakrabarti said, “but we don’t view him as a media operator.”

Some more juicy stuff here:

At the start of this week, Nelson Peltz attended the birthday of his daughter Nicola Peltz Beckham in Los Angeles, a star-studded affair in which the activist investor was pictured rubbing shoulders with the former Disney actress Selena Gomez.

Jerry Lawler vibes activated.

Trian’s biggest failure has been at General Electric, which one investor described as a “disaster”.

Trian amassed a $2.5bn stake in the industrials group in October 2015 when its shares were trading at about $25. It predicted that GE’s stock price would almost double by the end of 2017 as it pushed for cost reductions and share buybacks. Three years later, however, Trian’s stake was worth about a quarter of its original value and dragged heavily on returns.

And now it's going to be broken up, which I imagine was what Peltz wanted in the first place, and what he wants to do to Disney no matter what he says.

 

[Jrb1979]

Seems some Disney investors aren't buying Peltz's agenda

Disney activist Nelson Peltz faces questions over Trian’s record

The veteran investor has to convince other shareholders that he deserves a seat on the board

www.ft.com

Some more juicy stuff here:



Jerry Lawler vibes activated.



And now it's going to be broken up, which I imagine was what Peltz wanted in the first place, and what he wants to do to Disney no matter what he says.

Disney is falling apart right before our eyes.

 

[Slpy3270]

Disney is falling apart right before our eyes.

Nah.

Is it struggling? Yes, like every other media conglomerate currently.

But if you really want to see a company that's collapsing in real time, look at their next door neighbor in Burbank.

 

[Jrb1979]

Nah.

Is it struggling? Yes, like every other media conglomerate currently.

But if you really want to see a company that's collapsing in real time, look at their next door neighbor in Burbank.

It's all cause none of them can figure out how to successfully move from cable into streaming without spending a fortune.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Seems some major Disney investors aren't buying Peltz's agenda

Disney activist Nelson Peltz faces questions over Trian’s record

The veteran investor has to convince other shareholders that he deserves a seat on the board

www.ft.com

Some more juicy stuff here:



Jerry Lawler vibes activated.



And now it's going to be broken up, which I imagine was what Peltz wanted in the first place, and what he wants to do to Disney no matter what he says.

This is all standard sub Rosa responses coming from Iger and the board…to be expected

…but I gotta give you props for the Jerry Lawler reference

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Nah.

Is it struggling? Yes, like every other media conglomerate currently.

But if you really want to see a company that's collapsing in real time, look at their next door neighbor in Burbank.

I think you’re missing the concept that Disney is a better raid/drain target no matter how wrecked Warner is?

…cause both things are true

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

It's all cause none of them can figure out how to successfully move from cable into streaming without spending a fortune.

Well that is kinda the dumbest thing ever, isn’t it?

People bitched for 30 years about not wanting to pay for cable bundles…so along comes a method to reduce the cost to the consumer and eliminate the frustration of commercials.

They love it…get the scissors. But they don’t want to end paying the same or more directly to the networks!!! That wasn’t the desire and that’s what the “content” creators have promised. It’s patently stupid …with the advent of smart devices and high speed connectivity…people are already paying 3x what they used to complain just for cable…
And all the other bills didn’t go away either. They went up.

As as far as content cost goes…how stupid are these people? Did they think actors were gonna work cheap? Like 26 episodes a year at $15,000 a pop?
Or that cg designers were gonna work for $11.50 an hour because the show was gonna go to stream instead of to AMC?

There’s a major logic failure here. None of it makes sense. Bob Iger is at the head of this army of dunces

Gonna have to find another way

 

[Jrb1979]

Well that is kinda the dumbest thing ever, isn’t it?

People bitched for 30 years about not wanting to pay for cable bundles…so along comes a method to reduce the cost to the consumer and eliminate the frustration of commercials.

They love it…get the scissors. But they don’t want to end paying the same or more directly to the networks!!! That wasn’t the desire and that’s what the “content” creators have promised. It’s patently stupid …with the advent of smart devices and high speed connectivity…people are already paying 3x what they used to complain just for cable…
And all the other bills didn’t go away either. They went up.

As as far as content cost goes…how stupid are these people? Did they think actors were gonna work cheap? Like 26 episodes a year at $15,000 a pop?
Or that cg designers were gonna work for $11.50 an hour because the show was gonna go to stream instead of to AMC?

There’s a major logic failure here. None of it makes sense. Bob Iger is at the head of this army of dunces

Gonna have to find another way

It's not just the ads that people don't want, they want to binge watch new shows as well. IMO they priced these streaming services too low and didn't factor in the costs of new content. I still don't get the whole streaming thing.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

It's not just the ads that people don't want, they want to binge watch new shows as well. IMO they priced these streaming services too low and didn't factor in the costs of new content. I still don't get the whole streaming thing.

They priced it so low to hook people and once you do that…you can’t ramp it up to $200 a month at the snap of the fingers

Guess what Bob was promising?

 

[Nubs70]

It's not just the ads that people don't want, they want to binge watch new shows as well. IMO they priced these streaming services too low and didn't factor in the costs of new content. I still don't get the whole streaming thing.

Streaming cannot demand the price per eyeball as can theaters.

Customers do not want to pay the cost per viewable channel that bundles commanded.

The COGS of streaming needs to drop significantly if margin is to remain desireable.

 

[Jrb1979]

Streaming cannot demand the price per eyeball as can theaters.

Customers do not want to pay the cost per viewable channel that bundles commanded.

The COGS of streaming needs to drop significantly if margin is to remain desireable.

Good luck with that. People don't want cheap content

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Streaming cannot demand the price per eyeball as can theaters.

Customers do not want to pay the cost per viewable channel that bundles commanded.

The COGS of streaming needs to drop significantly if margin is to remain desireable.

And that is why they all struggle

How does it cost less…when you’re required to provide so much more to keep people engaged/subscribing?

The cable model actually worked so well for the suppliers. Providers have large, guaranteed proceeds to the networks. And then they sold add space for a fortune. And they had the customers over a barrel. Only game in town.

And you know what else greatly helped the stations? Channel surfing.
I’m serious…espn got $9 a month per in 2000 no matter if you watched 23 minutes a day or 23 hours a day.

With streaming…it’s “go time” all the time.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Good luck with that. People don't want cheap content

No…they want movie grade quality in 20 hours annual installments

 

[Jrb1979]

No…they want movie grade quality in 20 hours annual installments

That still costs money. $12.99 a month isn't going to cut it. It needs to be closer to $20 to $25 maybe more.

 

[_caleb]

They're sorting out streaming costs. The development and use of new production techniques, the shift from 24-episode "seasons" to 8-12-episode "series," and multilayer production (making Cosmic Rewind video, Christmas Special, behind-the-scenes docs, commercials, video game footage all while shooting Guardians 3).

 

[Jrb1979]

They're sorting out streaming costs. The development and use of new production techniques, the shift from 24-episode "seasons" to 8-12-episode "series," and multilayer production (making Cosmic Rewind video, Christmas Special, behind-the-scenes docs, commercials, video game footage all while shooting Guardians 3).

Maybe but in the end most people will end up basically paying the same as they did for cable when you add up the multiple streaming services most will have.