News Chapek FIRED, Iger New CEO

[Robbiem]

Wow you're right... I totally forgot about the Dr. Who deal, and Bake Off being on Netflix.

A lot of dramas on Netflix here in the UK were/are BBC shows - things like the fall, peaky blinders, killing eve etc. oddly some you can watch for free on the BBC streamer (iPlayer) while they are also on Netflix

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

So yeah... if they reach profitability by 2024 are you still going to consider it a failure?

If they don’t reach profitability will you?

 

[monothingie]

Sloganeering to avoid looking at facts and financials is not a cogent point of view.

Again, your only point of fact that D+ will turn a profit in 2024 is that Disney said that that is what they are forecasting it to do.

You would think that if that were the expectation on the street, the stock would be in a better place than it is right now.

 

[Model3 McQueen]

Is Disney even trying to chase profit at this point? They're taking L's left and right

 

[JoeCamel]

The hits keep coming, who's going to buy WB now?

Disney's ESPN streaming transition to be 'massive, extra disruptive event'

Analysts say Disney's plans to take ESPN fully over-the-top will be difficult amid shifting consumer viewing habits and a fragmented media landscape.

finance.yahoo.com

 

[Splash4eva]

Personally D+ is something that at some point they will have to make a real decision on. What i dont understand is why D+ is not in every one of their hotel rooms for free.

 

[WaltsTreasureChest]

It's important because so many users here are nostalgic for him over Iger and say Iger tanked everything. That's not true in the slightest.

All the following can be true:
-Eisner did an incredible turnaround of Disney in the first half of his CEO tenure and made it a colossus
-Eisner chose wrong in Michael Ovitz as his No. 2 (Iger being his No. 2 and becoming the new Frank Wells could've been done and arguably should've been done as a term in the ABC acquisition contract, meaning that Iger could've been announced as No. 2 on July 31, before Ovitz's announcement a week later) and then micromanaging and doing too many things on his own after Ovitz was gone.
-A lot of the "Disney in decline" stories early on from '96 onwards weren't true, but Eisner overreacted to them and made them true, and then his worst instincts overtook him
-Iger did phenomenal things in his tenure and not only recharged Disney but made it truly impressive via the Revival and the Pixar, Marvel, Lucasfilm and Fox acquisitions.
-The only real hiccups in that time being Alan Horn's execrable tenure as studio chair and his loathsome personal qualities, Chapek's "streaming is everything" strategy, and a ludicrous amplifying by the media of the butthurt Star Wars fanboys as reminiscent of the fanbase as a whole, even though they aren't, never have been and never will be
-Disney is still very much a thriving company, "brand fatigue" is not that real and has been heavily exaggerated, (Star Wars is still beloved and accepted by the vast majority of the public, the real fans, with open arms and Marvel is still on a hot streak) and a lot of the "decline" stories are the same old people from the Eisner era up to the same old tricks, conveniently moving the goalposts to call Iger a failure even though he's met or exceeded all the things they wanted him to do differently from Eisner. And short sellers and the likes are in cahoots to batter the company. Disney's stock price would still be at $115 without the shorts.

Eisner expanded the hell out of Disneyworld. Made Orlando a 2 park location to an expansive 4 parks, 2 water parks, much more fantastic resorts and more. Loved that about him. Say what you want but Michael took risks and really enjoyed the creative side of Disney, wether good idea or bad

 

[JD80]

Personally D+ is something that at some point they will have to make a real decision on. What i dont understand is why D+ is not in every one of their hotel rooms for free.

This will take time (year or two?) but with all the re-orgs and lay offs and consolidations on the media front ongoing and soon-to-happen there are too many competing business groups within the corp. Which is why you don't have D+ and the hotel unit working closely together. Which business unit takes on the cost for upgrading hardware and infrastructure and managing it?

 

[MisterPenguin]

The hits keep coming, who's going to buy WB now?

Disney's ESPN streaming transition to be 'massive, extra disruptive event'

Analysts say Disney's plans to take ESPN fully over-the-top will be difficult amid shifting consumer viewing habits and a fragmented media landscape.

finance.yahoo.com

The kinda garbage analysis from Yoohoo Finance. To wit...

The company's parks business is slowing. Its linear TV business is declining, and so are subscribers to its flagship streaming service Disney+.​

Yes, subs declined. But revenue increased and the overall loss lessened. This "analysis" misses that almost all the subs lost were the sixty-cent ARPU Indian subs just because Disney didn't spend an exorbitant fee for Indian cricket. Some domestic subs did fall, but was made up for in European increases. The analysis is still based on counting subs and not on the bottom line. Wall Street stopped obsessing over subs almost a year ago.

But, the article just paints this as "subs fell"...

Additionally, if linear is decreasing and will die due to cord cutting, what are companies with linear channels supposed to do? Just close up shop and write it down as a loss?

No, they're going into streaming which will be the future of home entertainment. They have no choice for when linear is finally dead (well, more like a small niche market).

And the article spends its time not delineating how to do it profitably, but by constantly bring up the *risk* of doing it. The risk? Of course they risk it. They have no choice. It's going to happen. It's not like they can choose not to try.

People who watch linear sports, it is noted, are having that viewing habit subsidized by cable bundling. So, who's going to pay much more for streaming which isn't subsidized?

Well, what happens when linear networks are dead and the only way to watch sports is streaming? Something will be worked out.

The article never really follows through with it's initial statement: Linear is dying.

 

[JD80]

The kinda garbage analysis from Yoohoo Finance. To wit...

The company's parks business is slowing. Its linear TV business is declining, and so are subscribers to its flagship streaming service Disney+.​

Yes, subs declined. But revenue increased and the overall loss lessened. This "analysis" misses that almost all the subs lost were the sixty-cent ARPU Indian subs just because Disney didn't spend an exorbitant fee for Indian cricket. Some domestic subs did fall, but was made up for in European increases. The analysis is still based on counting subs and not on the bottom line. Wall Street stopped obsessing over subs almost a year ago.

But, the article just paints this as "subs fell"...

Additionally, if linear is decreasing and will die due to cord cutting, what are companies with linear channels supposed to do? Just close up shop and write it down as a loss?

No, they're going into streaming which will be the future of home entertainment. They have no choice for when linear is finally dead (well, more like a small niche market).

And the article spends its time not delineating how to do it profitably, but by constantly bring up the *risk* of doing it. The risk? Of course they risk it. They have no choice. It's going to happen. It's not like they can choose not to try.

People who watch linear sports, it is noted, are having that viewing habit subsidized by cable bundling. So, who's going to pay much more for streaming which isn't subsidized?

Well, what happens when linear networks are dead and the only way to watch sports is streaming? Something will be worked out.

The article never really follows through with it's initial statement: Linear is dying.

Good points. Also you signature countdown to the 50th ending needs something else to count down to.

 

[Splash4eva]

This will take time (year or two?) but with all the re-orgs and lay offs and consolidations on the media front ongoing and soon-to-happen there are too many competing business groups within the corp. Which is why you don't have D+ and the hotel unit working closely together. Which business unit takes on the cost for upgrading hardware and infrastructure and managing it?

Honestly D+ been around for how long now? This should have been figured out and when i said free i should have said “free” lol. But seriously. If you are looking for people to sign up and advertise what better place than Disney. Now with that being said. Maybe majority of guests already have it ordered so it would not be cost effective but you would think this should be a logical addition.

 

[JD80]

Honestly D+ been around for how long now? This should have been figured out and when i said free i should have said “free” lol. But seriously. If you are looking for people to sign up and advertise what better place than Disney. Now with that being said. Maybe majority of guests already have it ordered so it would not be cost effective but you would think this should be a logical addition.

Having it in the hotels is a nice to have but it's not going to be a significant driver to more subscriptions, but I agree in principle that it should be in every hotel room. That just makes sense.

 

[el_super]

If they don’t reach profitability will you?

Of course.

Again, your only point of fact that D+ will turn a profit in 2024 is that Disney said that that is what they are forecasting it to do.

It's literally their job to make sure it does. Admittedly outside conditions could impact their original plans for profitability, but to date, they haven't indicated that anything has been that disruptive.

You would think that if that were the expectation on the street, the stock would be in a better place than it is right now.

Most of what I have read lately has been focused on the declines in linear and some people not ready to give up on regular TV. TV and Cable were core to the Disney brand just a few years ago, and even know the street knew for YEARS that they were slowing dying, watching it happen has been traumatic.

There is no going back here. TV and Cable are dying and there is no option to just go back to the way things were before Disney+. If Disney+ can't become profitable, the only other option then is to sell off the company to Netflix.

 

[el_super]

Having it in the hotels is a nice to have but it's not going to be a significant driver to more subscriptions, but I agree in principle that it should be in every hotel room. That just makes sense.

For some reason there seems to be a pretty big technical hurdle to this. Hotels tried to implement something similar with Netflix and their option was to have you log into your account... putting your sensitive account info on a stranger's TV. Not great.

I'd suspect they probably don't want to setup thousands of free accounts and give out passwords to most of the hotel staff. And or maybe some bandwidth issues. It might be easier to just setup a "Disney+ lite" that could be hosted on property.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Personally D+ is something that at some point they will have to make a real decision on. What i dont understand is why D+ is not in every one of their hotel rooms for free.

That’s something Walt Disney World would have to buy. They’d also have to pay to build out a version that works with a hotel setting and isn’t just 30,000+ subscriptions individually signed into each room TV. And none of that would be spun as financial shenanigans to prop up the service?

And before even that, they’d have to make sure the hotel rooms have the equipment to utilize streaming in the room. That’s millions of dollars to be paid by the parks to maybe grab a few extra subscribers for Disney+.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

That’s something Walt Disney World would have to buy. They’d also have to pay to build out a version that works with a hotel setting and isn’t just 30,000+ subscriptions individually signed into each room TV. And none of that would be spun as financial shenanigans to prop up the service?

And before even that, they’d have to make sure the hotel rooms have the equipment to utilize streaming in the room. That’s millions of dollars to be paid by the parks to maybe grab a few extra subscribers for Disney+.

“It’s kind of fun to do the impossible” - Walt Disney.

For some crazy reason…. I believe the company could make this happen. I have faith in the magic. Lol

 

[Serpico Jones]

Personally D+ is something that at some point they will have to make a real decision on. What i dont understand is why D+ is not in every one of their hotel rooms for free.

They either have to go all in like Netflix or abandon it completely. Half measures aren’t going to work.

 

[JoeCamel]

The kinda garbage analysis from Yoohoo Finance. To wit...

The company's parks business is slowing. Its linear TV business is declining, and so are subscribers to its flagship streaming service Disney+.​

Yes, subs declined. But revenue increased and the overall loss lessened. This "analysis" misses that almost all the subs lost were the sixty-cent ARPU Indian subs just because Disney didn't spend an exorbitant fee for Indian cricket. Some domestic subs did fall, but was made up for in European increases. The analysis is still based on counting subs and not on the bottom line. Wall Street stopped obsessing over subs almost a year ago.

But, the article just paints this as "subs fell"...

Additionally, if linear is decreasing and will die due to cord cutting, what are companies with linear channels supposed to do? Just close up shop and write it down as a loss?

No, they're going into streaming which will be the future of home entertainment. They have no choice for when linear is finally dead (well, more like a small niche market).

And the article spends its time not delineating how to do it profitably, but by constantly bring up the *risk* of doing it. The risk? Of course they risk it. They have no choice. It's going to happen. It's not like they can choose not to try.

People who watch linear sports, it is noted, are having that viewing habit subsidized by cable bundling. So, who's going to pay much more for streaming which isn't subsidized?

Well, what happens when linear networks are dead and the only way to watch sports is streaming? Something will be worked out.

The article never really follows through with it's initial statement: Linear is dying.

So a negative YF article is good or is it the start of the Kevin and Tom show?

 

[pdude81]

So a negative YF article is good or is it the start of the Kevin and Tom show?

View attachment 734440

Perhaps it's the Barron's article yesterday telling people it's time to buy DIS stock.

 

[Slpy3270]

Bringing in Staggs and Mayer as "advisors" is going to be as meaningful as Zaslav bringing in Alan Horn as an advisor, in that it won't mean jack.

And it still doesn't mean Disney is going to sell the linear networks.

Perhaps it's the Barron's article yesterday telling people it's time to buy DIS stock.

Bingo. Not only that, but all the other media stocks are soaring today, some comparable or larger than Disney. Earnings season is here.