Disney’s Q3 FY23 Earnings Results Webcast

TP2000

Well-Known Member
The streaming model is unsustainable. Unlimited hours of entertainment can't cost $20 per month.

I'm so glad I'm not the only person that sees that.

I just can't get streaming to pencil out in my brain. Especially for legacy studios like Disney that built their entire financial and operational infrastructure (swanky studio lots in high-tax California full of highly paid and well coddled white collar employees) off of the assumption that their movies will make a profit at the box office.

The earnings call tomorrow won't reflect the summer box office in totality, but it should provide some solid info on what Disney+ has been doing, or not doing, and how Disney's legacy studios are adding any value to that.

But still, my tiny pea-sized brain just can't get this current streaming strategy of theirs to pencil out long term. :(
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member

 

celluloid

Well-Known Member
Unless you want Netflix to be $50, you should be rooting for Iger.

What is funny is the actual money I saw reported, don't know if it is true was that the writer's collective ask resulted in about 425 million dollars.

Now that is between thousands of writers.

in the big picture of it all. Its really not that much to ask.

And in the result would be likely better writing for movies and shows, which better entertainment, gets people subscribing to your service.
 

celluloid

Well-Known Member
I'm sure they will find some way to spin the dual strikes as a positive thing with regards to freeing up cash flow, the same way that Warner Bros Discovery did the other day when they bragged on their earnings calls about the strikes saving them over $100 million in Q2.

Considering Iger's recent comments about the actors and writers being unrealistic about their demands, I would expect him to brush off any talk about the strike with something like " This is not the situation we wanted and we hope this will be resolved soon" - completely playing down the fact that the very organization that represents his company (the AMPTP) are the ones who are prolonging the strikes by refusing to negotiate with the both WGA and SAG-AFTRA.

And it is funny, they can ride on that, but only for so long. It catches up fast.

WB wants to start discussing the idea of a Barbie 2 so bad it probably gives the CEO migraines.
 

celluloid

Well-Known Member
Is it that much to ask for another couple of bucks per month for Disney+?

Nope, and it will get there eventually anyway.

But it also can be in the form of another ad or two for those who watch it cheaper.

To paint how desperate Disney Plus is, they give 5 percent cash back on Disney Plus purchases with the Disney Visa Credit card. They never budget on the 2 percent max on any purchases, not even in park purchases have anymore than the 2 percent rewards.

Its not worth much, but the fact that, they got that to budge is funny.

Peacock just raised another buck for all tiers this month and I happily kept mine.
 

CaptainAmerica

Premium Member
To paint how desperate Disney Plus is, they give 5 percent cash back on Disney Plus purchases with the Disney Visa Credit card. They never budget on the 2 percent max on any purchases, not even in park purchases have anymore than the 2 percent rewards.
Disney has absolutely nothing to do with operating the Disney Visa. Chase makes those decisions.
 

el_super

Well-Known Member
YouTube is ad-supported. Twitch streamers work for free.

Yes but it's generally still free entertainment that Disney has to compete with now. There are Internet streaming services that are generating hours of content for pennies compared to the millions Disney is spending.

Supposedly the avg for YouTube is about 40 minutes a day. That's 40 minutes that someone isn't watching Disney+ (or any other streamer).

I don't know what that means for Disney long term. Whether that means leaning hard toward ad supported streaming where eventually Disney+ is indistinguishable from ABC or Freeform or whether they can double down on paid content and try to convince an increasingly cynical audience to pay more for quality.
 

doctornick

Well-Known Member
The streaming model is unsustainable. Unlimited hours of entertainment can't cost $20 per month.

Exactly, the only way it makes sense is (1) locking people in/contracts and/or (2) higher subscription rates. I suppose a robust ad tier with enough subs could also generate the revenue for #2.

But anyone who things that the current sub rates (especially for no ads!) and ability to constantly churn services is sustainable is naïve. Streaming is eventually going to evolve into basically the same thing as cable/satellite but delivered via the internet.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom