-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Cuts coming to every area of parks and resorts - thanks to Shanghai and Paris
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
Brad Bishop
Well-Known Member
I think, long term, the MBs are going to be good for them. They are convenient. It's better that a customer not pay with cash because then they're not keeping track, generally, of what they're spending so you make more.
But, yeah, the project seemed like a complete cluster-f from everything I've read and $3B+ (I thought it was closer to $4B but I don't really know) seems just ludicrous.
Brad Bishop
Well-Known Member
The main thing there is that you properly size it and don't overpay for it, not that it hasn't been done (Rupert Murdoch and MySpace; AT&T buying cable companies a decade back and then selling them off at a huge loss).
Still, Pixar, Star Wars, and Marvel are pretty much known brands with knows assets and value. It's not quite the speculation as buying up a dot-com company or buying random companies that you have no business buying because you don't understand their business.
A risk with a 99% chance of succeeding. Such risk takers.
JustInTime
Well-Known Member
Why are you rolling your eyes? It wasn't a risk at all hardly. Disney knew they were buying gold with silver.Please stop. My eyes can't roll that far.
I ran out of eye-rolls.
You'll still find a way to make excuses for Disney/Iger. Buying Marvel and Star Wars being huge risk is laughable. Why not use them trying to keep the Muppets relevant , when the general public does not care for them anymore? Or them still making live action films when the majority of them flop? I know you'll bring up Marvel, Star Wars (lol) and POTC but I'm not taking about them.
PizzaPlanet
Well-Known Member
MagicHappens1971
Well-Known Member
Because they thought it would be something good, from Septembers 9 million people, it dropped to 2 million people by March. Shows how much people care about the Muppets.
PizzaPlanet
Well-Known Member
The fact that people wanted to check it out shows that they cared so...
xdan0920
Think for yourselfer
Ignore the films that are hugely successful. Only use the ones that aren't! That's how a majority works!
Seriously though. Which of Disney's 2015 releases were flops?
McFarland USA? Made 45m. Big success for that film.
Bridge of Spies? 164m on a 40m budget?
Cinderella? 542m on 95m budget?
Star Wars? Avengers? AntMan?
I'll grant you, Tomorrowland underperformed. 200m only. But that's 1 film out of 7 that underperformed.
mimitchi33
Well-Known Member
I see your Anger over this and give you my reaction to the budget cuts at the parks:
Mike S
Well-Known Member
Why should there be a "trade?" Let me remind you how a much smaller company, Walt Disney Productions, was able to build Walt Disney World without making cuts to Disneyland. Or when they built EPCOT Center.
ParentsOf4
Well-Known Member
Normally I agree with you but we have to part ways here. Iger hasn't taken a significant risk in his decade-plus as CEO, nor do his shareholders want him to.
Risk depends on proportional size of investment and probability of failure. Walt Disney Productions with total revenue of $175M in 1971 took a risk when it spent hundreds-of-millions to build the Magic Kingdom.
At least the Magic Kingdom was based on a proven concept. The company took an even bigger risk when it spent over $1B to build Epcot, which was unlike any amusement park before it. Failures of either would have ruined the company.
I was too young to know what Wall Street thought in 1971 but, in 1982, Disney was roundly criticized for Epcot. The conventional wisdom was that it was a mistake.
Iger became CEO in 2005.
In 2006, when Disney acquired the well-known brand Pixar for $7.4B, Disney revenue was $34.3B.
In 2009, when Disney acquired the well-known brand Pixar for $4.6B, Disney revenue was $36.1B.
In 2012, when Disney acquired the well-known brand LuscasFilms for $4.1B, Disney revenue was $42.3B.
Wall Street generally viewed all three acquisitions favorably.
Iger shouldn't be commended for these acquisitions because they were risky; he should be commended because, for Disney, they were low-cost with high probabilities of success.
Perhaps Iger's biggest risk to date is Shanghai Disneyland. Yet that could be a colossal failure and, for Disney, it would still represent less than one-third of last year's net income.
Iger may be many things but "risk taker" is not one of them.
Last edited:
Is Star Wars that same as that thing that came out before Christmas where all the spaceships whiz around and the soccer ball robot does cute stuff? I heard they lost money on that cuz all the scenes were actually filmed in space to give the film more gravitas.
networkpro
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- Yes
Umm 2nd Pixar should be Marvel