News Bob Iger is back! Chapek is out!!

[Jrb1979]

Maybe because I know I’ll use Disney+ for sure every month, but we’ve always paid annual. It’s cheaper in the long run.

People like ones on these boards aren't your average person. I would wager your average person subscribes for a month or two to binge the show they want then unsubscribe. They most likely do that for all the streaming services.

 

[MrPromey]

...
Are they right? I think the market will be very volatile as long as everyone allows a cheap month-to-month option. I think providers will have to start moving towards trying to lock people in for longer periods to make this all work. (Imagine annual contracts that give decent per/mon costs and monthly offers becoming harder to get).

This is basically how they got me for another year after my first three were up.

I was able to renew the annual at a cheap rate and also "lock-in" another year right before the price increase and by doing that, they've locked me in for another year whether they put anything out in that twelve months I care about or not.

I have a kid so of course it'll get used whether I'm interested or not but as another example HBO Max is about to lose me because I'm only a few months off a half price promotion, they've been canceling stuff I like ever since the Discovery merger, they've actually been taking old stuff I like off the service to sell out elsewhere and they've just announced a price increase.

I mean, we talk about Disney but it looks like Warner's setting their business on fire from my perspective.

... while I might have kept it going before for a few months between things that interest me, with all of this that they've done in one swoop to cut cost and raise prices, I see no reason to pay for HBO Max until the next season of House of the Dragon is out during which, I can also watch whatever else has come out while I've been away and after that three month window, what's my reason to stay?

The question I have is that after everyone has been desperate for growth and willing to offer it cheap with no commitments, what percentage of customers are going to be cool with it looking more and more like the cords they decided to cut?

What percentage of younger audiences who they're already in danger of losing to Youtube and Tiktok are going to sign up for those annual contracts that allow these companies to start cutting back on content and charging more the way they want to?

 

[James Alucobond]

People like ones on these boards aren't your average person. I would wager your average person subscribes for a month or two to binge the show they want then unsubscribe. They most likely do that for all the streaming services.

The average person may not think about the service itself in the same way as someone here, but it's also true that the average person is not tracking their subscriptions all that diligently. They might neglect to renew if they don't have automatic renewal set up, but I don't think the segment of consumers who optimize their spending in the way you describe are all that large compared to the complacent majority.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Maybe because I know I’ll use Disney+ for sure every month, but we’ve always paid annual. It’s cheaper in the long run.

Wait a minute…you’re “all in”?!?

…we never knew this about you

 

[Disney Analyst]

Wait a minute…you’re “all in”?!?

…we never knew this about you

Shoo you

 

[DKampy]

People like ones on these boards aren't your average person. I would wager your average person subscribes for a month or two to binge the show they want then unsubscribe. They most likely do that for all the streaming services.

I disagree…I am sure some do, but most don’t… I don’t know anyone in real life that does this with any streaming service… and they not like the people on this board.

Most people forget or are too lazy to go back and unsubscribe… It is why some offered free for a year or whatever with a phone purchase…they know more people then not will stay subscribed even once the year runs out

 

[Joel]

The average person may not think about the service itself in the same way as someone here, but it's also true that the average person is not tracking their subscriptions all that diligently. They might neglect to renew if they don't have automatic renewal set up, but I don't think the segment of consumers who optimize their spending in the way you describe are all that large compared to the complacent majority.

I don't think so either, but I think it'll become a lot more common of a practice as prices rise to the extent necessary for all these services to become profitable.

 

[MrPromey]

I disagree…I am sure some do, but most don’t… I don’t know anyone in real life that does this with any streaming service… and they not like the people on this board.

Most people forget or are too lazy to go back and unsubscribe… It is why some offered free for a year or whatever with a phone purchase…they know more people then not will stay subscribed even once the year runs out

That only works if you as the provider don't rock the boat too much.

You can get away with lame or missing content which people who have kind of forgotten and aren't watching won't notice but once you start playing with the price, that incentivizes these people sitting on it to take action.

Having been involved through a separate business with one of the big ISPs during the dial-up days, I can confirm that those free CDs and similar promotions worked. Eventually, there were a ton of people passively paying their $19.99 a month for dial-up to a service they'd either forgotten about or replaced with braodband and they'd been doing it for years.

This could easily be tracked by the number of accounts that had zero log-in activity. They knew fully well that they were taking money from a lot of people who weren't actually using their service.

They're biggest mistake was raising the price by $2 a month and causing all these folks to notice.

Suddenly, there were people looking for 12+ months of refunds left and right (their internal policy was to allow for up to 6 months) and they eventually started providing those considerably larger returns because all the chargbacks as a result of disputes with banks were becoming both damaging and even more costly.*

Thing is, they were a major ISP but internet access was a tiny part of their overall business and as TV stations started running reports on people's "struggle" this all snowballed into something that began to hurt their brand and got the attention of the government, too, which, if you happen to already be a dominant player in multiple sectors, isn't something you want.

It's like Tyson said "Everybody has a plan until..."

*I learned from this that at the time at least, credit card banks weren't retaining more than 12 months of records on transactions and some were only keeping 6 because that would often be the most they could get in an actual dispute but both the cost of that process and the damage all that chargeback activity started to do to the fees they had to pay to accept credit cards along with the damage to their main brand became more expensive than just giving people what they asked for.

 

[flynnibus]

The question I have is that after everyone has been desperate for growth and willing to offer it cheap with no commitments, what percentage of customers are going to be cool with it looking more and more like the cords they decided to cut?

Consolidation and higher prices.. looking a lot like cable packages

 

[MrPromey]

View attachment 693187

Consolidation and higher prices.. looking a lot like cable packages

Meh... I don't think it's going to end the way they're all hoping.

You know what the difference between MrBeast and House of the Dragon is?

People spend more time watching MrBeast's youtube channels.*

While I don't expect a 20-something to take down Warner, I will say that he, along with the Youtube algorithm feeding people other suggestions, Tik-Tok, gaming, and a ton of other distractions are competing for younger generations attention in ways that cable companies never had to worry about.

And I don't see them wooing these folks back with well scripted expensive CGI programing which... I'm not sure how they'll pivot from because yeah, they can try to emulate the viral popularity of these considerably cheaper productions but we all know how much everyone loves the results when big corporations try to follow the trends of viral sensations.

*and yes, a big part of that is the sheer amount of content he has they can spend time watching in comparison but that's also part of the point. No big company can afford to compete with that kind of output when their content is expected to be higher quality and thoughtfully produced.

 

[flynnibus]

Meh... I don't think it's going to end the way they're all hoping.

You know what the difference between MrBeast and House of the Dragon is?

People spend more time watching MrBeast's youtube channels.*

While I don't expect a 20-something to take down Warner, I will say that he, along with the Youtube algorithm feeding people other suggestions, Tik-Tok, gaming, and a ton of other distractions are competing for younger generations attention in ways that cable companies never had to worry about.

And I don't see them wooing these folks back with well scripted expensive CGI programing which... I'm not sure how they'll pivot from because yeah, they can try to emulate the viral popularity of these considerably cheaper productions but we all know how much everyone loves the results when big corporations try to follow the trends of viral sensations.

*and yes, a big part of that is the sheer amount of content he has they can spend time watching in comparison but that's also part of the point. No big company can afford to compete with that kind of output when their content is expected to be higher quality and thoughtfully produced.

I think the problem is more DTC over DTC . When your Network built stars goto youtube directly. Fast N Loud, Diesel Bros, as examples. Self-publishing in video is viable with YT revenues being as high as they are.

Today we think of Youtube/web vs cable/streamers. That will move to simply platform vs platform. Are they a website or a streaming company won't even be a thing in the future as everyone simply is consumed via an app.

And FWIW... I have no idea who MrBeast is

 

[MrPromey]

...

And FWIW... I have no idea who MrBeast is

Man, you just showed your age!

NEVER admit you don't know who MrBeast is!

If you want to edit that out of your post I'll delete this reply.

Anyway, this should help get you in the know:

https://www.youtube.com/user/mrbeast6000/videos?app=desktop

Some notables from it are:




(this one was actually the start of his MrBeast burger chain)







along with some background info since you need to get up to speed quickly if you want to keep your cred:

https://www.fastcompany.com/90834461/mrbeast-youtube-president-marc-hustvedt-feastables-creator-economy

Could MrBeast Be The First YouTuber Billionaire?

Why would anyone spend 50 hours buried alive just to make a YouTube video? Jimmy Donaldson—a.k.a. “MrBeast”—had 54 million reasons last year. And the world’s top-earning creator is now looking to sell a stake in his studio that could elevate him into the three-comma club.

www.forbes.com

MrBeast described his 'grind mode,' saying he can work up to 8 days non-stop on YouTube content: 'Normal people, they don't want that life'

YouTube star Jimmy Donaldson, aka MrBeast, described often working "non-stop" for up to eight days in a row in an episode of the Lex Fridman podcast.

www.insider.com

MrBeast - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Seriously, look at that goofy mug on a guy who is admits to being socially awkward. He is the poster child for the biggest current threat to traditional media and the Kardashians, if you can believe it.

_

 

[Nubs70]

Okay where do I sign up? At that pay Disney fans can crucify me online all they want.

If this guy can negotiate this package, why the hell cannot negotiate similarly beneficial agreements for Disney?

 

[flynnibus]

Man, you just showed your age!

NEVER admit you don't know who MrBeast is!

If you want to edit that out of your post I'll delete this reply.

meh... a few points about these types of people

1) Their lifespan is short - They are not an industry upon themselves
2) They rely on placement and promotion models THEY DON'T CONTROL - hence they are always chasing the mechanical rabbit and their formats will change as they do so
3) Most of these types burnout or simply get surpassed. I would look at each of them like a TV Show.. they can have their moment, but very few transcend their own show and time
4) A lot of this build up is from people who simply aspire to also have a YT's lifestyle of 'no real job'. The aspirational element is a big draw to the platform. This is generational and will take time for people to struggle and adapt.

I totally get the idea of YT as another content platform... I watch a ton each day myself (mostly Car stuff).. so for me, it's a huge competitor to say MotorTrend... but so many of these 'personalities' and channels will come and go as fads change.. people age out.. etc.

And after reading a few of those stories.. I have no interest in pulling up his channel. Just like I have no interest in pulling up the Golf network either. And that's fine for both them and me.

 

[_caleb]

People like ones on these boards aren't your average person. I would wager your average person subscribes for a month or two to binge the show they want then unsubscribe. They most likely do that for all the streaming services.

This statistic, known as churn rate, is measured. In the middle of 2022, estimated churn rates were estimated to be:

• Amazon Prime Video 4% (steady)
• Netflix 4% (steady)
• Hulu 5% (down from 7%)
• HBO Max 5% (down from 7%)
• Disney+ 6% (down from 11%)
• Apple TV+ 9% (down from 15%)

Overall churn rate for the top U.S. SVODs fell from 8% in the first quarter of 2022 to 6% in the second. So the trend is moving away from binge-and-jump to subscribe-and-stay.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Overall churn rate for the top U.S. SVODs fell from 8% in the first quarter of 2022 to 6% in the second. So the trend is moving away from binge-and-jump to subscribe-and-stay.

My guess is that reflects people cutting cords and going all in on streaming (and diverting their previous cable costs to the streamers).

 

[MrPromey]

meh... a few points about these types of people

1) Their lifespan is short - They are not an industry upon themselves
2) They rely on placement and promotion models THEY DON'T CONTROL - hence they are always chasing the mechanical rabbit and their formats will change as they do so
3) Most of these types burnout or simply get surpassed. I would look at each of them like a TV Show.. they can have their moment, but very few transcend their own show and time
4) A lot of this build up is from people who simply aspire to also have a YT's lifestyle of 'no real job'. The aspirational element is a big draw to the platform. This is generational and will take time for people to struggle and adapt.

I totally get the idea of YT as another content platform... I watch a ton each day myself (mostly Car stuff).. so for me, it's a huge competitor to say MotorTrend... but so many of these 'personalities' and channels will come and go as fads change.. people age out.. etc.

And after reading a few of those stories.. I have no interest in pulling up his channel. Just like I have no interest in pulling up the Golf network either. And that's fine for both them and me.

I think you're missing my point.

It isn't just about this guy but consider that he's been at this for a decade. This may be his moment but he didn't just fall into sudden popularity.

He's already outlived the lifespan of most tv shows.

The fact that you've never heard of him before doesn't negate that millions of people have been following him for years now and that he continues to pick up major sponsors and use his "brand" to spin out other non-media businesses. (which may or may not last over time)

I get where you're coming from. I remember when the maker of Angry Birds said they were going to be bigger than Mario and I scoffed.

They're not bigger, obviously, but that brand certainly didn't go the way I anticipated when it was just a mobile phone game.

Everything and everyone has their time so to say someone like this has a limited shelf life is like saying everything on earth will one day be dead - you're right, of course but so what?

That said, I'm not trying to argue that he alone is the problem for a company like Disney, just like your car youtube channels aren't but when this guy us picking up the 8-20 something demographic and you're watching car videos, neither is watching Strange World and the accumulative, along with countless 30 second tik-tok videos watched one after the other after the other after the other ad nauseam, Twitch streaming, and GAMING, all become a problem when someone thinks they're going to put the band back together and resurrect Ma Bell.

I get that you may not recognize these as major threats but you've already outed yourself in this conversation as being part of the old guard (I'm still pretending, somewhat).

Under the cable model, that didn't matter so much because you were still paying for the Disney channel whether you liked it or not, just like you were also paying for the Golf Network you never watched but things have started to emerge that are going to be difficult or impossible to consolidate like that.

The genie hasn't popped out of the bottle, he's been slowly oozing out for over a decade. Maybe in 10-20 years big media companies will be able to stuff him back in but do you really think so when most seem to be making major decisions that focus more on the next three months than the next twelve?

I like quality scripted well produced stuff, personally. Given choice, that's what I'll spend most of my time with but my kind appear to be a dying breed.

I don't actually like "reality tv" at-all, despite what my knowledge of MrBeast may suggest - I've just been reluctantly pulled along by younger folks in my life and can credibly pose as someone in the know.

I feel like smaller players used to not be able to compete with big media companies because they didn't have the resources and today, big media companies are finding it harder to compete with smaller players and the platforms they reside on since all these individual smaller players don't need to pay to maintain a giant machine and in the case of someone like this guy, if Youtube starts to not be where it's at, he and everyone like him can jump to whatever platform is.

And if he doesn't pan out, there are no shortage of others to step in.

It isn't about winning anymore which seems to be the game Disney is playing.

Now, I feel like it's just about not losing. Going back to MrBeast, Disney can't really try to squash that the way they might have tried to with an early Dreamworks. The barrier to entry is so low that even if they somehow succeeded, there are already a hundred people ready to fill that void - probably with more marketable personalities, at that and every day, a new platform or creator on an existing platform is splintering people's attention even more.

I just don't see how they're ever going to undo that unless my kind of entertainment becomes "vintage" and people start getting drawn back to quality programming* the way they have to vinyl.

*subjective, of course but as far as I'm concerned, everone can get the hell off my lawn any day now

 

[_caleb]

Meh... I don't think it's going to end the way they're all hoping.

You know what the difference between MrBeast and House of the Dragon is?

Even though he didn’t know who Mr. Beast is, I think @flynnibus is right about the differences. Disney is competing with YouTube, not YouTube content creators. As many hours as people spend mindlessly scrolling YT/TikTok, it’t still an ad-service model. And when I watch YouTube, I see TONS of ads from Disney (naturally).

And, just like with bloggers and social media, Disney knows that its content is the fodder for TONS of content in that ecosystem. I expect them to explore integration, like “if you loved Black Panther 7, click here to watch the New Rockstars breakdown of all the easter eggs you may have missed!” Oh, and Disney will own New Rockstars.

It’s the same model AMC has used for years with The Walking Dead’s fan companion show, Talking Dead. This sort of content goes deeper with fans, is much cheaper to produce, and generates tons of revenue through targeted ads and merch sales. But it doesn’t happen without the big-budget Disney machine churning out Marvel, Star Wars, and The Haunted Mansion w/Eddie Murphy films/series.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

This statistic, known as churn rate, is measured. In the middle of 2022, estimated churn rates were estimated to be:

• Amazon Prime Video 4% (steady)
• Netflix 4% (steady)
• Hulu 5% (down from 7%)
• HBO Max 5% (down from 7%)
• Disney+ 6% (down from 11%)
• Apple TV+ 9% (down from 15%)

Overall churn rate for the top U.S. SVODs fell from 8% in the first quarter of 2022 to 6% in the second. So the trend is moving away from binge-and-jump to subscribe-and-stay.

That doesn’t make much of case that we’re all gonna retire rich off dividends for Disney +

 

[MrPromey]

Even though he didn’t know who Mr. Beast is, I think @flynnibus is right about the differences. Disney is competing with YouTube, not YouTube content creators. As many hours as people spend mindlessly scrolling YT/TikTok, it’t still an ad-service model. And when I watch YouTube, I see TONS of ads from Disney (naturally).

And, just like with bloggers and social media, Disney knows that its content is the fodder for TONS of content in that ecosystem. I expect them to explore integration, like “if you loved Black Panther 7, click here to watch the New Rockstars breakdown of all the easter eggs you may have missed!” Oh, and Disney will own New Rockstars.

It’s the same model AMC has used for years with The Walking Dead’s fan companion show, Talking Dead. This sort of content goes deeper with fans, is much cheaper to produce, and generates tons of revenue through targeted ads and merch sales. But it doesn’t happen without the big-budget Disney machine churning out Marvel, Star Wars, and The Haunted Mansion w/Eddie Murphy films/series.

I get what you guys are saying but you can't compare YouTube to Disney+ for multiple reasons:

Youtube is not paying up-front content costs. When a dude like this gives away a million dollars or 40 cars or whatever, it isn't Youtube paying for any of that. When he decides to take a few buds to Antarctica for a survival challenge, Youtube has zero liability if anyone gets seriously hurt or killed.

For a company like Youtube, zero production costs on content is an infinitely scalable business model. They don't have to start canceling stuff and raising subscriptions fees to become profitable like HBO Max apparently, does.

On the flip side, aside from a few specially produced things I'm not sure they're even involved in anymore, Youtube holds no copyrights or long-term binding contracts with creators, which means their content or at the very lest, the creators and their respective brands are free to jump onto the next publicly accessible platform they want to if Youtube ever starts to let them down.

Let's see Keven Feige walk and say he's going to try to take the MCU with him - it's all apples to oranges.

But enough about Youtube, you guys are talking like it's all about the platforms.

Disney certainly needs it to be.

My point is that Disney is an old media business that now has to compete in a world where the rules have all changed.

It isn't just them against Comcast and Paramount and other giant media companies.

You now have the likes of Amazon and Apple who don't need to turn a profit on their content if it servers their higher goals and who arn't trying to dominate the media landscape. They don't have to "win" to be a problem for Disney.

Just like MrBeast doesn't have to win and your automotive youtube show doesn't and Youtube as a platform doesn't have to win, and neither does Twitch, or Tik-Tok or Forntine, or Roblox or... audible.

These guys can all comfortably survive for a long time with their little pieces.

Some will stick around. Some will come and go, to be replaced by others and most people won't even notice.

But Disney is... Okay, Disney is like Avatar: Way of the Water. They've gotten so big now that they have to win to continue to survive in the media landscape.

At the same time, they're bound by popular opinions, institutional shareholders, liberal employees and conservative governors (who may end up becoming conservative presidents). This is stuff that their old competition had to deal with, too to some degree or another but most of what now competes for consumers attention have no such entanglements.

I'm not sure that kind of size is the asset it once would have been considered.

I'm not saying it's all doom and gloom but I think their long-term media prospects are a lot more challenging than they appear to be on the surface and that applies to all of the traditional media companies out there - not just Disney.