Disney’s Q1 FY23 Earnings Results Webcast - Wednesday, Feb 8, 2023

[CaptainAmerica]

Oh I’m not upset. It’s just shocking how little “change” (other than emotional quotient) we’re seeing.

Tangible change likely won't be evident for a couple of years because most of the changes are going to occur at the beginning of the content pipeline, long before anything ever makes it in front of a guest or audience.

I really liked everything he said about "accountability." The content departments are now directly accountable for the financial success of the stuff they make, so maybe they'll be a little more careful about pumping out schlock like Lightyear and Strange World. When Pixar and WDAS didn't have a P&L to worry about, they let their creators do whatever they wanted without actually thinking about whether it was what audiences wanted to see.

 

[BrianLo]

No. It isn't.

Disney+ lost subscribers because they lost cricket rights in India and raised prices domestically. Everyone knew it was going to happen and Disney said it was going to happen.

Even more relevant, Disney core did not lose subscribers. Both international and domestic were slightly up. It was strictly a hotstar loss partially canceled out by the other markets.

 

[BrianLo]

Eisner lost 40% and resigned…
The percentage doesn’t actually matter…it is taken like a vote of no confidence and investors run

Iger is done one way or another. That is set…it’s just timing and semantics now

I’m gonna Tell you two things that will be evident over time:
1. Iger stayed around too long
2. He was never that good in the first place…he did ok with really favorable conditions overall.

Watch it play

Ha, this aged well. Never doubt a cockroach fleeing when the dividend light was turned back on.

I’m not making fun of you, sometimes we all miss with our timing.

 

[Elijah Abrams]

Oh **** he's going to sell Hulu.

Well, if he’s gonna sell Hulu, then he can’t have 20th Century Fox anymore. That was one of the key assets for Disney’s streaming plan.

 

[CastAStone]

Well, if he’s gonna sell Hulu, then he can’t have 20th Century Fox anymore. That was one of the key assets for Disney’s streaming plan.

That’s one of the reasons I think he’s unlikely to sell Hulu. It makes the 20CF deal look even worse than it does. The next CEO? Yeah, they might sell Hulu.

 

[Elijah Abrams]

I am assuming Comcast and maybe Disney has a deal where content is shared then for 2-3 years?

I don’t see any reason for Disney to keep Hulu when you already have Disney+ with the subscribers it’s doing

But Comcast already has Peacock.

That’s one of the reasons I think he’s unlikely to sell Hulu. It makes the 20CF deal look even worse than it does. The next CEO? Yeah, they might sell Hulu.

But he said in his CNBC interview today that he is going to sell Hulu.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

That’s one of the reasons I think he’s unlikely to sell Hulu. It makes the 20CF deal look even worse than it does.

That depends entirely on what he's able to get for it.

If he sells the "shell" of Hulu but keeps the Fox content to make Disney+ Domestic look a lot like Disney+ international does, that's a perfectly reasonable landing point.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

But he said in his CNBC interview today that he is going to sell Hulu.

No he didn't.

 

[Elijah Abrams]

No he didn't.

I’m confused.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Ha, this aged well. Never doubt a cockroach fleeing when the dividend light was turned back on.

I’m not making fun of you, sometimes we all miss with our timing.

I still think he’s done…

Keeping him now will bleed investor confidence. Because he’s outta tricks.

But I think when Peltz said “our goal is not to remove Iger…” then unsaid part is the goal is to make sure he leaves on schedule and gets a successor.

That really is a good compromise. But it’s not what Iger will want because he’s a narcissist.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

I’m confused.

Bob was asked about selling Hulu.

Yesterday, when he was asked about selling or spinning off ESPN, he said (I'm paraphrasing), "no, that's a terrible idea, other Bob looked into doing that and even he wasn't dumb enough to do that, we're not doing that." It was very definitive.

Today, when asked about Hulu, he hemmed and hawed and said "everything is on the table." So then I speculated "holy crap he's selling Hulu."

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Bob, when asked about spinning off ESPN yesterday:

"We were fairly certain that when we created the structure and broke ESPN out on its own that it would lead to questions like this. We did not do it for that purpose, actually. ESPN is a differentiator for this company.

It's the best sports brand in television. It's one of the best sports brand in sports. It continues to create real value for us. It is going through some, obviously, challenging times because of what's happened in linear programming.

But the brand of ESPN is very healthy, and the programming of ESPN is very healthy. We just have to figure out how to monetize it in a disrupting and a continuing -- or disrupting world. That's it. But we're not engaged in any conversations right now or considering a spin-off of ESPN.

That had been done, by the way, in my absence. And I'm told the company concluded after exploring it very carefully that it wasn't something the company wanted to do."

 

[Andrew25]

You would think they would immediately bring back APs to WDW/DL to get some additional cash to make up for their losses.

I live 7 minutes away from WDW yet can only go during the weekdays after work. I would be spending a lot more on food if they would let me buy the higher-tier passes with weekend access.

 

[Elijah Abrams]

Bob was asked about selling Hulu.

Yesterday, when he was asked about selling or spinning off ESPN, he said (I'm paraphrasing), "no, that's a terrible idea, other Bob looked into doing that and even he wasn't dumb enough to do that, we're not doing that." It was very definitive.

Today, when asked about Hulu, he hemmed and hawed and said "everything is on the table." So then I speculated "holy crap he's selling Hulu."

Ok.

 

[kingdead]

No, the opposite of that.

The focus will be on reducing the volume of content. They were too focused on building up a huge library of stuff and they were spending a fortune on low-quality junk that nobody watches.

They want less content, but want the content they do produce to be high-quality.

A high-quality Disney program is different from a high-quality HBO program, though. If Bluey and Rapunzel's Tangled Adventures keep people resubscribing, then those are the quality shows. Do critics watch them? No. Will your kid start screaming and crying if they can't watch them because you cancelled Disney+? Yes. Can you sell merchandise off the IP? Oh yes!

Andor is a good example--critically acclaimed show, lots of the older fans loved it compared with the other Star Wars content Disney's been putting out, the kind of thing that you could put on AMC or HBO. However, you can't monetize it and you could probably get the same people subscribing for the cost of the Bad Batch. So for Disney, that's junk.

 

[Tha Realest]

A high-quality Disney program is different from a high-quality HBO program, though. If Bluey and Rapunzel's Tangled Adventures keep people resubscribing, then those are the quality shows. Do critics watch them? No. Will your kid start screaming and crying if they can't watch them because you cancelled Disney+? Yes. Can you sell merchandise off the IP? Oh yes!

Andor is a good example--critically acclaimed show, lots of the older fans loved it compared with the other Star Wars content Disney's been putting out, the kind of thing that you could put on AMC or HBO. However, you can't monetize it and you could probably get the same people subscribing for the cost of the Bad Batch. So for Disney, that's junk.

i agree with all of this.

Unfortunately the two successes you mention are 1) a legacy Disney Channel production, and 2) a licensed show. Not sure how well the original D+ animated fare are doing. Mandalorian seems to be the only one generating tangible merchandising sales.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

A high-quality Disney program is different from a high-quality HBO program, though. If Bluey and Rapunzel's Tangled Adventures keep people resubscribing, then those are the quality shows. Do critics watch them? No. Will your kid start screaming and crying if they can't watch them because you cancelled Disney+? Yes. Can you sell merchandise off the IP? Oh yes!

Andor is a good example--critically acclaimed show, lots of the older fans loved it compared with the other Star Wars content Disney's been putting out, the kind of thing that you could put on AMC or HBO. However, you can't monetize it and you could probably get the same people subscribing for the cost of the Bad Batch. So for Disney, that's junk.

I think Andor and Bluey would both still be "in" in the new paradigm.

 

[doctornick]

Even more relevant, Disney core did not lose subscribers. Both international and domestic were slightly up. It was strictly a hotstar loss partially canceled out by the other markets.

And that was with an increase in sub rate/intro of ad tier during the quarter

 

[doctornick]

I think Andor and Bluey would both still be "in" in the new paradigm.

So what wouldn’t be? Diary of a Future American President and the new Doogie series, I guess? (That type of show)

 

[CaptainAmerica]

So what wouldn’t be? Diary of a Future American President and the new Doogie series, I guess? (That type of show)

I think people are focusing too much on Disney+ and too much on Domestic.