News Bob Iger is back! Chapek is out!!

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
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.
Netflix has to report their quarterly profit/loss, just like Disney. They were severely punished earlier this year by Wall Street for missing financial goals. This is what turned Wall Street against all the streamers. They're not looking at subs any more, but the streamers' profit/loss. And that's what hurt Disney this past quarter. Even though its streamers are growing with subs at a good rate, it had a huge loss in the quarter, which, theoretically, was supposed to be its peak loss anyway, but, the sheer quantity of the loss shocked Wall Street.
 

CaptainAmerica

Premium Member
Avatar 1 made $58M on its recent rerelease. That's a movie that people can easily rewatch in their homes.



Nobody cares about Avatar. @Kamikaze told me.
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
Lol are they selling ads to themselves to juice their Direct-to-Consumer P&L?
No. I watch recorded shows on Hulu, and you get to see the national commercials that aired with the broadcast (and fast forward thru them). And I saw quite a few ads for Strange World.

The anecdotal differences between those who've said they've seen ads and those who don't is likely due to the content they watch. It's unlikely that there will be a Strange Worlds ad on L&O:SVU but definitely on Rick & Morty.
 

AEfx

Well-Known Member
I feel like Avatar's ship has sailed. Avatar was exciting back in the day for the animation. Today, it looks like every other Disney movie. While I am sure Water will be good, I don't expect reviewers to be wowed or consumers to go back multiple times. I am of course, going to be wrong, but that's my opinion today.
It will clearly do well, but there is no where near the perfect storm the first film had. The biggest advantage they have is that it is now a Disney property - basically, they have cleared the slates of any other major titles it would have had been up against if Disney had not purchased Fox and it had some actual competition. If there were, say, a Marvel film opening up around that time, it would be facing a far different landscape.

You are correct, though - that this is not going to get repeat viewings like the last one, and it's not going to be this "wow you have to see this new technology!" cultural event that drew everyone and their grandmother into theaters specifically to see this new fangled digital 3D tech. When you add on the fact that beyond it's technical merits, the original film has very little character recognition or anything else today (almost no one has been waiting a decade just to see what the "next chapter" holds) it is difficult to see it following a similar trajectory of growing the audience versus the steep drop off it will likely have, like most films.
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
Disney keeps it's D+ numbers somewhat confidential. All streamers do.
No, they don't. They all report their streamer numbers in their quarterlies because Wall Street would get very nervous and punish them for hiding that.

Disney was always advertising their sub numbers, until last year when Chapek decided they'd stop. But that lasted one quarter. They went back to reporting their sub numbers.
 

CaptinEO

Well-Known Member
The series, which debuted three episodes when it was released on September 21st, clocked in at 624 million minutes....In its second week the series only brought in 485 million minutes.

624M minutes was for the first two episodes, so, about 312M minutes each.

The next week, for episode 3 was at 485M minutes.

The minutes watched per episode went up not down.

Someone can't do basic math.

After 6 episodes, Andor has 2.3B minutes watched.

Is it *the top*? No.

But when is consistently being in the top ten a sign that your franchise is dead?

Fandom Menace strikes again!
The creator said it hasnt found its audience and the article literally showed these numbers as being lower than expected. Not sure what more you want.

The creator of the show isn't a good source for you?
 

CaptainAmerica

Premium Member
The creator said it hasnt found its audience and the article literally showed these numbers as being lower than expected. Not sure what more you want.

The creator of the show isn't a good source for you?
I mean... no. There's no reason to believe that external content creators would be privy to Disney's internal viewership figures.
 

WondersOfLife

Blink, blink. Breathe, breathe. Day in, day out.
Avatar 1 made $58M on its recent rerelease. That's a movie that people can easily rewatch in their homes.



Ironically, I never hear or see anyone in public ever talk about this franchise. Lol
 

AEfx

Well-Known Member
What change made was conceived and executed entirely during Chapek’s tenure?
That's what I think some folks don't get. Pretty much everything we have gotten parks-wise would have been the same under Iger, it just would have been delivered with more finesse. To think that this stuff wasn't already in the pipeline is silly talk. I'm rather confident that even the pandemic changes were just accelerated - it has been Disney's dream to have park reservations/etc., they just finally had an excuse to roll it out.
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
The creator said it hasnt found its audience and the article literally showed these numbers as being lower than expected. Not sure what more you want.

The creator of the show isn't a good source for you?
He was demonstrably using the Nielsen numbers incorrectly. He didn't understand it. We've had such problems with several people in the Movies forum using them wrongly to prove that the thing they hate was awful.

Mind you, they're using numbers from a list showing that that product was in the top ten for that week, but somehow, that showed how much people weren't watching!!

I'm sorry for the creator that he's saddened that his product wasn't more popular than Rings of Power that week. But it was more popular than hundreds of other products that week. Not everyone can be #1.
 

fgmnt

Well-Known Member
You are correct, though - that this is not going to get repeat viewings like the last one, and it's not going to be this "wow you have to see this new technology!" cultural event that drew everyone and their grandmother into theaters specifically to see this new fangled digital 3D tech.
It had a successful release a month or two ago, over a decade after release. People still like the movie. It is a movie worth going to see in a theater. James Cameron knows more about how to get people in a theater than anyone who has ever walked the earth.
 

CaptinEO

Well-Known Member
He was demonstrably using the Nielsen numbers incorrectly. He didn't understand it. We've had such problems with several people in the Movies forum using them wrongly to prove that the thing they hate was awful.

Mind you, they're using numbers from a list showing that that product was in the top ten for that week, but somehow, that showed how much people weren't watching!!

I'm sorry for the creator that he's saddened that his product wasn't more popular than Rings of Power that week. But it was more popular than hundreds of other products that week. Not everyone can be #1.
Got it, that explains things. Thank you.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom