ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
But at Disney the are and have been since Iger and his team took over
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Disney Posts Mixed Earnings $1.58/share on Rev of $14.24B
- Thread starter Chef Mickey
- Start date
But at Disney the are and have been since Iger and his team took over
peter11435
Well-Known Member
One of the many uninformed statements you've made on these forums.
ParentsOf4
Well-Known Member
Please just stop.
Disney is investing in its domestic theme parks at a level we haven't seen since 2001. The next 4 years are shaping up to be WDW's best since the 1990s. It's time to be happy about what's happening at WDW, not sound like a broken record.
FutureCEO
Well-Known Member
It's the quality that counts not the spending money.
peter11435
Well-Known Member
This was an earnings report aimed at investors not guests, fans, or potential visitors. Maybe you remember a little event a couple weeks ago called the D23 expo which is aimed at guests, fans, and potential visitors. They talked about several amazing new experiences and reasons to visit a Disney owned park at that event.
peter11435
Well-Known Member
Have you been to pandora?
HauntedMansionFLA
Well-Known Member
Hey, as long as I can finally see Song Of The South
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
I've given up on WDW and Disney in general I expect things to get much worse not better.
Just THINK about that statement, really THINK about it, The only concern shown was to increase margin at the park. Not increase top line revenues. Increase margin means cuts and price increases.
The other means INVESTMENT and I did not hear any guidance that they will be increasing investment.
Sorry everyone wants good news yet there is none to be had unless you are a institutional shareholder.
peter11435
Well-Known Member
Does it get lonely living in your own universe?
BlindChow
Well-Known Member
HBO's advantage is it shows other studios' movies. Unless Disney goes all out and opens their entire vault, it'll be hard to compete.
(On the other hand, if it includes Marvel and Lucasfilm, that would change some things...)
trainplane3
Well-Known Member
This picture is exactly how I feel about having a stupid number of streaming services that show only a select number of shows:
Streaming is the future but won't be if everyone has to subscribe to 20+ services at $10 a month to watch what they want. It'll be no better then cable TV. All it'll do is make people turn to pirating.
Streaming is the future but won't be if everyone has to subscribe to 20+ services at $10 a month to watch what they want. It'll be no better then cable TV. All it'll do is make people turn to pirating.
Laketravis
Well-Known Member
This is true, and it could potentially be worse than cable since cable provides heterogeneous content under a single billing. It quickly becomes a challenge having to subscribe and manage Netflix, Hulu, Vue, ESPN, NFL, Disney4Kids, DirecTV Now, YouTube and others because the content one desires becomes spread across multiple platforms.
Notes from Neverland
Well-Known Member
At some point, people are going to balk against having to individually buy several streaming services for the content they want. Ironically, it will make people want an option that has a bit of everything ... kind of like cable.
That's not to say Disney's option will fail (the back catalog will be really appealing for some), but it does make you wonder what the limit is. There's several big music options and most have about the same content. Here it's different and there's going to be more failures than winners.
That's not to say Disney's option will fail (the back catalog will be really appealing for some), but it does make you wonder what the limit is. There's several big music options and most have about the same content. Here it's different and there's going to be more failures than winners.
ParentsOf4
Well-Known Member
Just keep in mind the context of the earnings call. Disney had it's first drop in revenue and operating income in 8 years.
Disney CFO Christine McCarthy answered the question exactly as she should have.
Andrew C
You know what's funny?
Why do you have all those? You have some duplication there. Like Vue and Directv now.
Laketravis
Well-Known Member
I don't personally have all of them (just DirecTV Now, Amazon Prime, and Netflix) but yes - currently the big aggregators offer many of the same "channels". But if content providers start to determine they want to stream their own content directly rather than license it thru third parties then it could reach the point of having to subscribe to a ridiculous number of separate streamers to obtain what for the most part today is aggregate content.
In fact, many of them are already setup with their own direct streaming apps. Suppose they pulled out of shared licensing agreements with the aggregators and you had to go straight to their app for content. On one hand, true a la carte programming is born. On the other, you may need to subscribe to 20 different individual content providers.
Andrew C
You know what's funny?
Those are the exact three I have. Lol.
Laketravis
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I hardly watch Netflix or Amazon Prime and DirecTV Now got off to a rocky start but I got Go Big (100+ channels) and free HBO for $35 a month so I stuck with it. Now, it's a pretty solid platform on an Apple TV and the resolution is incredibly high - even better than HD cable was. They keep adding more channels, are working on adding all the local networks, a cloud DVR is in beta, and 4K video is planned. I have a feeling AT&T is going to be a force to reckon with over the next couple of years when it comes to streaming video and cord cutting.
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
This picture is exactly how I feel about having a stupid number of streaming services that show only a select number of shows:
Streaming is the future but won't be if everyone has to subscribe to 20+ services at $10 a month to watch what they want. It'll be no better then cable TV. All it'll do is make people turn to pirating.
- If there was a single streaming service, what Netflix wants to be, it would be much more than $10/month. Like $30+/month. Netflix's stock price has the expectation of considerable price increases baked in.
- Netflix doesn't share viewership data with producers like Disney. At what point do you want to be in business with a partner who won't tell you how many people watch your shows and films?
- The Disney Channel suite is one of the main reasons why a large subset of consumers still subscribe to cable. Why not price it like a premium cable channel like HBO and sell it directly to consumers.
In case anyone's curious, here are the services I use and how I use them.
Amazon Prime Instant Video (annual)
Netflix (monthly, considering cutting off when not using)
Hulu Plus (currently off, monthly)
FilmStruck (annual)
HBO (cable)
Laketravis
Well-Known Member
All the more reason I'm loving my Plex server more each day 