Disney's Next Acquisition Speculation / Discussion

[Disney Republic]

CBS has the distribution rights to the 1987 animated series of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles so most likely they have the streaming rights making that series be able to go on Disney+.

Thanks for letting me know.

Although one or two Garfield specials be possible or impossible to be on Disney+ would be Garfield his 9 lives, and Garfield Babes & Bullets.

Is there any particular reason for this?

 

[Disney Irish]

My arguement is that it is in Disney's best interests to purchase ViacomCBS, an arguement that I have based on 6 main aspects:

1: The amount of IP/Content that ViacomCBS brings to the House of Mouse. Which in turn would help reduce the depenence Disney's film division has on Star Wars & Marvel.

2: The savings that can be made by intergrating ViacomCBS into Disney.

3: How said content IP/Content can improve the competitiveness of Hulu against the likes of HBO Max, Peacock, Amazon Prime, Netflix & Apple TV

4: It would avoid the possiblity that a company like NBCUniversal or WarnerMedia would end up buying ViacomCBS themselves & thus end up become a more serious competitor to the likes of Disney.

5: ViacomCBS's low stock price makes a takeover of said company become a lot cheaper that it would otherwise be the case (for a company of that size).

6: Buying ViacomCBS would make it harder for the likes of Apple to launch a takeover attempt of Disney (I personally don't think Apple will use the COVID-19 crisis to launch a takeover of Disney, however I could see one of the FAANG's making a serious move for Disney in the near future).



ViacomCBS would not cost anything like $70 Billion, especially when they share price is currently at $10 Billion for a start.



As much as Disney can get away with legally speaking. From the perspective of Disney of course.



I would agree that Disney needs to do more to monetize the Fox IP's they now own (although its still early days after said takeover, to be fair), but that on its own is not an arguement that Disney should not acqure more IP's going forward, rather it is arguement that Disney need to have more of a focus (film division wise) beyond Star Wars, Disney Animation/Live Action & Marvel.

As for why Disney would do a better job in capitalising on ViacomCBS's IPs than the Redstones themselves. Well all one would need to do is point out how Disney have sucessfully managed to capitalise on their own IP's (as well as the ones Pixar, Lucasfilm & Marvel have) under both Eisner & Iger and then compare it to how the Redstones have managed Viacom + CBS since they first began to build up their empire from the Mid-90s onward...



It doesn't mean it is an incorrect one.



Including myself, especially when there are several other reasons why Disney should purchase SPE besides the Spider-Man angle.



Even for $20-30 Billion?



I am not saying that UPN was a major player on the broadcast news front; my point was the rise of Television Station Duopoly's (and LMAs) has reduced competition on the news broadcasting front (even if it is at a local level alone), yet it was legally allowed to happen. In fact one could argue that the original Viacom/CBS merger (Which led to Viacom owning CBS & UPN) and Fox's takeover on Chris-Craft (Which owned a lot of the key UPN Stations) both played a big part in that trend becoming a reality.



The thing is though, Fox (via Fox News), Comcast (via MSNBC/NBC News) & AT&T (via CNN) are already the leading players in the news broadcasting sector compared to the likes of ABC News & CBS News*. So one could argue that a ABC News-CBS News merger would create a stronger 4th competitor to these so called "Big 3".





I am not saying that they will make a move for ViacomCBS, I am saying that it is in Disney's best interests to purchase said company.



You mean the same FCC that wants to relax the rules on broadcasting ownership (and thus pave the way for possible deals such as Disney or Comcast buying ViacomCBS) and the same DOJ that has ended up backing the FCC's appeal to the Surpeme Court.











The United States has 5 major broadcast news outlets at the moment, of those 3 of them are the dominant players in that market. An ABC News-CBS News Merger would not signficantly reduce the number of major broadcast news outlets in that market (from 5 to 4 basically), nor change the fact that CNN, Fox News & MSNBC/NBC News are the leading players in said market.
[/QUOTE]

Look I get that you want and believe this should happen. But you're making a lot of assumptions, especially about the future of the political nature of the FCC, DOJ, and the courts.

1. I don't see Disney making a play for another large company anytime soon especially in the current economic climate. Even if that company is only worth $10B. Which by the way isn't going to be the price. Redstone is going to want at least double that, so really when you say $10B it actually means $20-30B.

2. No other company is likely going to make a play for Disney, again especially in this current economic climate. Which negates the need for additional content to stave a takeover attempt by Apple or anyone else. In fact I would say that Apple would make a play for ViacomCBS before it makes a play for Disney, given price and all.

3. Not all US residents have the same access to news, some still get news via the 4 main broadcasters, ABC, CBS, NBC, and FOX. Remove one and you only have 3. And not all regions has affiliates for each, especially in rural regions where they may only have a couple local channels. So while I know you think that everyone gets cable and accesses cable news, thats just not the case. So again limiting access to only a few news sources is what the court has been trying to prevent.

4. I don't know how you can argue less competition would be better by merging ABC/CBS News. Isn't more news outlets with differing opinions better for competition in the long run. Again go back to my point 3 where some rural regions only have access to a couple local news stations, meaning less competition would limit the news those regions get.

5. Disney should be trying to capitalize on the content it already owns before trying to buy more. Notice the cycle, Disney buys a company. They incorporate it, monetize it, and then milk it. This takes time, typically 3-5 years based on previous acquisitions. So that means Disney won't be looking to buy another major company until 2023 at the earliest.

6. I don't think Disney is worried that someone else might buy ViacomCBS. Its not like there are many players lining up to buy it now anyways. By your own admission the only reason ViacomCBS wants to ease the rules is so they have more suitors to buy the company. So if it was such a hot commodity now they wouldn't need to do that. So again I don't think Disney is worried about someone else buying it.

 

[Twilight_Roxas]

Another Nickelodeon IP that would be difficult to put on Disney+ is KaBlam.

 

[Disney Irish]

Another Nickelodeon IP that would be difficult to put on Disney+ is KaBlam.

For various reason as has been discussed I think its just a no go all around. I know this is a speculation thread, and everyone is allowed their opinion, but sometimes folks just have to be realistic about situations.

 

[Twilight_Roxas]

That post was to Disney Republic. Plus it’s because of licensing issues with KaBlam.

 

[Disney Republic]

But you're making a lot of assumptions, especially about the future of the political nature of the FCC, DOJ, and the courts.

My views on how the FCC, DOJ & SC will respond to a Disney buyout of ViacomCBS are based on how the first two act in relation to media ownership regulations (with both of them clearly siding with corporate interests on this one) & how the SC has had a recent history of surrendering to corporate interests thanks to its Conservative Majority.

1. I don't see Disney making a play for another large company anytime soon especially in the current economic climate. Even if that company is only worth $10B. Which by the way isn't going to be the price. Redstone is going to want at least double that, so really when you say $10B it actually means $20-30B.

I have already said in both the post that you have just responded to & the original post on the matter that the cost of buying ViacomCBS would be between $20-30 Billion, which is only the case because the starting point (which is indeed $10 Billion per the market cap) is low for a company of that size. My point is that considering the assets that ViacomCBS holds, it represents pretty good value for money* Likewise since the Redstones would likely agree an all-share deal**, the deal would not make a big difference to Disney's debt levels.

Likewise while one could argue that a poor economic climate is a bad time to be making takeover bids, I would argue that this is the perfect time for the stronger companies (like Disney) to target the weaker companies (who would be doing particularly badly in times such as these), like ViacomCBS funny enough...

*Especially when you consider the fact that 21st Century Fox (Which at the time of the Disney takeover, had similar revenue & net income figures to what ViacomCBS currently does) ended up Disney costing $71.3 Billion to buy, even though Disney got back about $19.6 Billion from the sale of Fox Sports Networks/YES Network (I still think Disney was dumb not to try and appeal that forced sale, especially considering how ESPN has been faring of late) & the sales of Fox's stakes in both Sky & Endemol-Shine.

**Because they would pay less in tax from an all-share deal than they would from a cash & stock one

2. No other company is likely going to make a play for Disney, again especially in this current economic climate. Which negates the need for additional content to stave a takeover attempt by Apple or anyone else.

I have already said that none of the FAANGs are likely to be buying Disney during this COVID19 crisis, what this crisis has shown however is that Disney is not yet big enough to avoid being a viable takeover target for the likes of Apple, Google & Amazon going forward. Especially when those sorts of companies are likely to emerge out of this crisis in better shape than many others in the S&P 500.

In other words; despite what some people like to say about "Disney being too big", when you look at the bigger picture, one could argue that in the age of streaming, Disney is not big enough...

In fact I would say that Apple would make a play for ViacomCBS before it makes a play for Disney, given price and all.

Apple could easily make a play for ViacomCBS. Here is the thing though; unless they buy another media company alongside ViacomCBS, they will have the same problem as ViacomCBS currenty does, which is that they would not have enough scale to compete in the age of streaming. Something it would have less of a problem with if they bought Disney (either on its own or alongside ViacomCBS)

3. Not all US residents have the same access to news, some still get news via the 4 main broadcasters, ABC, CBS, NBC, and FOX. Remove one and you only have 3. And not all regions has affiliates for each, especially in rural regions where they may only have a couple local channels. So while I know you think that everyone gets cable and accesses cable news, thats just not the case. So again limiting access to only a few news sources is what the court has been trying to prevent.

Here is the thing, according to the FCC*, 94% of the US population can receive broadband while virtually 100% can receive Satellite TV. So in other words virtually all of the United States can receive any of MSNBC, CNN & Fox News alongside both ABC News & CBS News.**. thus what a Disney-ViacomCBS merger would change that overall number from 5 to 4***. Not exactly a massive reduction of news sources, especially when you consider the fact that only 3 of them (MSNBC, CNN, Fox News) actually dominate the broadcast news sector over everyone else, a figure that would not be affected by any ABC News-CBS News Merger, unless of course such a merger does enable the combined ABC/CBS News to break into the so called "Big 3" and thus turn it into a "Big 4"

And besides, even if one does find 4 seperate broadcast news sources far too few to comtemplate, one should remember that PBS is another option to factor in and if people want to see PBS do more on News/Current Affairs, there is nothing stopping said people electing people who want to invest more in PBS...

*https://www.fcc.gov/reports-researc...ress-reports/eighth-broadband-progress-report

**I know that the likes of CNN do cost extra, but that does not change the fact that they are actually available to them if they wish to access it.

***As I said before, the number is still higher than what was the case before CNN, which was only 3 (ABC, NBC & CBS).

4. I don't know how you can argue less competition would be better by merging ABC/CBS News.

A combined ABC/CBS News would be an a better position to compete with the likes of MSNBC/NBC News, CNN & Fox News. Likewise such a merger would also be the perfect opportunity for the American Government to obtain concessions from Disney over broadcast news (such as increasing their investment on this very area), concessions it would unlikely to obtain under normal circumstances.

Isn't more news outlets with differing opinions better for competition in the long run.

For me at least, what's important is not the number of news outlets that are out there, but rather how good they all actually are. I mean with modern technology we have more choices than ever before for when it comes to finding out the news, is the overall quality of journalism better than it was previously however?

Again go back to my point 3 where some rural regions only have access to a couple local news stations, meaning less competition would limit the news those regions get.

Speaking of local news, the United States is already living in an era where many media markets are down to 2 or 3 potential sources of local news broadcasts under current regulations. So the siutation you fear would happen with a ABC News-CBS News merger has already happened at a local level at least.

5. Disney should be trying to capitalize on the content it already owns before trying to buy more.

That's more of a problem with how Disney manages its assets rather than a reason to not buy more IP's at a price most would not refuse. I do agree however that Disney should be doing more with the Fox IP's however.

Notice the cycle, Disney buys a company. They incorporate it, monetize it, and then milk it. This takes time, typically 3-5 years based on previous acquisitions. So that means Disney won't be looking to buy another major company until 2023 at the earliest.

I am aware of the cycle & its one that I support; however considering that the original deal between Disney and 21st Century Fox was agreed in late 2017 (while the actual transaction took place in early 2019) and the fact it takes about a year for any major deal to get past the regulators, Disney should not be looking to buy another company in 2023, they should be looking to buy another company around about now (or at the very least in 2021).

6. I don't think Disney is worried that someone else might buy ViacomCBS. Its not like there are many players lining up to buy it now anyways. By your own admission the only reason ViacomCBS wants to ease the rules is so they have more suitors to buy the company. So if it was such a hot commodity now they wouldn't need to do that.

ViacomCBS is a "hot commodity" (although one that has been badly managed for far too long), its just that the FCC's current rules limit the number of potential buyers for said company (Hence why the FCC wants to change said rules).

To put it this way; its like owning prime real estate in Manhattan & having 30 people who want to buy it. Yet due to current goverment regulations, only 10 of them would be allowed to buy it. So you want to see the regulations changed so all 30 people would be able to buy it, thus getting a higher price for said real estate.

So again I don't think Disney is worried about someone else buying it.

*Because ultimately, the fate of ViacomCBS will be ultimately be decided by the SC''s decision on the FCC/DOJ appeal against the Third Circuit.

 

[Disney Republic]

Another Nickelodeon IP that would be difficult to put on Disney+ is KaBlam.

NickRewind has put some episodes of the series on its service. One would hope that the prospect of those episodes being on Disney+ (if such a takeover happened) would encourage more rightholders to cut deals with Disney to allow more episodes to appear on streaming.

 

[Disney Irish]

My views on how the FCC, DOJ & SC will respond to a Disney buyout of ViacomCBS are based on how the first two act in relation to media ownership regulations (with both of them clearly siding with corporate interests on this one) & how the SC has had a recent history of surrendering to corporate interests thanks to its Conservative Majority.





I have already said in both the post that you have just responded to & the original post on the matter that the cost of buying ViacomCBS would be between $20-30 Billion, which is only the case because the starting point (which is indeed $10 Billion per the market cap) is low for a company of that size. My point is that considering the assets that ViacomCBS holds, it represents pretty good value for money* Likewise since the Redstones would likely agree an all-share deal**, the deal would not make a big difference to Disney's debt levels.

Likewise while one could argue that a poor economic climate is a bad time to be making takeover bids, I would argue that this is the perfect time for the stronger companies (like Disney) to target the weaker companies (who would be doing particularly badly in times such as these), like ViacomCBS funny enough...

*Especially when you consider the fact that 21st Century Fox (Which at the time of the Disney takeover, had similar revenue & net income figures to what ViacomCBS currently does) ended up Disney costing $71.3 Billion to buy, even though Disney got back about $19.6 Billion from the sale of Fox Sports Networks/YES Network (I still think Disney was dumb not to try and appeal that forced sale, especially considering how ESPN has been faring of late) & the sales of Fox's stakes in both Sky & Endemol-Shine.

**Because they would pay less in tax from an all-share deal than they would from a cash & stock one



I have already said that none of the FAANGs are likely to be buying Disney during this COVID19 crisis, what this crisis has shown however is that Disney is not yet big enough to avoid being a viable takeover target for the likes of Apple, Google & Amazon going forward. Especially when those sorts of companies are likely to emerge out of this crisis in better shape than many others in the S&P 500.

In other words; despite what some people like to say about "Disney being too big", when you look at the bigger picture, one could argue that in the age of streaming, Disney is not big enough...



Apple could easily make a play for ViacomCBS. Here is the thing though; unless they buy another media company alongside ViacomCBS, they will have the same problem as ViacomCBS currenty does, which is that they would not have enough scale to compete in the age of streaming. Something it would have less of a problem with if they bought Disney (either on its own or alongside ViacomCBS)



Here is the thing, according to the FCC*, 94% of the US population can receive broadband while virtually 100% can receive Satellite TV. So in other words virtually all of the United States can receive any of MSNBC, CNN & Fox News alongside both ABC News & CBS News.**. thus what a Disney-ViacomCBS merger would change that overall number from 5 to 4***. Not exactly a massive reduction of news sources, especially when you consider the fact that only 3 of them (MSNBC, CNN, Fox News) actually dominate the broadcast news sector over everyone else, a figure that would not be affected by any ABC News-CBS News Merger, unless of course such a merger does enable the combined ABC/CBS News to break into the so called "Big 3" and thus turn it into a "Big 4"

And besides, even if one does find 4 seperate broadcast news sources far too few to comtemplate, one should remember that PBS is another option to factor in and if people want to see PBS do more on News/Current Affairs, there is nothing stopping said people electing people who want to invest more in PBS...

*https://www.fcc.gov/reports-researc...ress-reports/eighth-broadband-progress-report

**I know that the likes of CNN do cost extra, but that does not change the fact that they are actually available to them if they wish to access it.

***As I said before, the number is still higher than what was the case before CNN, which was only 3 (ABC, NBC & CBS).



A combined ABC/CBS News would be an a better position to compete with the likes of MSNBC/NBC News, CNN & Fox News. Likewise such a merger would also be the perfect opportunity for the American Government to obtain concessions from Disney over broadcast news (such as increasing their investment on this very area), concessions it would unlikely to obtain under normal circumstances.



For me at least, what's important is not the number of news outlets that are out there, but rather how good they all actually are. I mean with modern technology we have more choices than ever before for when it comes to finding out the news, is the overall quality of journalism better than it was previously however?



Speaking of local news, the United States is already living in an era where many media markets are down to 2 or 3 potential sources of local news broadcasts under current regulations. So the siutation you fear would happen with a ABC News-CBS News merger has already happened at a local level at least.



That's more of a problem with how Disney manages its assets rather than a reason to not buy more IP's at a price most would not refuse. I do agree however that Disney should be doing more with the Fox IP's however.



I am aware of the cycle & its one that I support; however considering that the original deal between Disney and 21st Century Fox was agreed in late 2017 (while the actual transaction took place in early 2019) and the fact it takes about a year for any major deal to get past the regulators, Disney should not be looking to buy another company in 2023, they should be looking to buy another company around about now (or at the very least in 2021).



ViacomCBS is a "hot commodity" (although one that has been badly managed for far too long), its just that the FCC's current rules limit the number of potential buyers for said company (Hence why the FCC wants to change said rules).

To put it this way; its like owning prime real estate in Manhattan & having 30 people who want to buy it. Yet due to current goverment regulations, only 10 of them would be allowed to buy it. So you want to see the regulations changed so all 30 people would be able to buy it, thus getting a higher price for said real estate.





*Because ultimately, the fate of ViacomCBS will be ultimately be decided by the SC''s decision on the FCC/DOJ appeal against the Third Circuit.

While I appreciate that you have thought long and hard about this, and I do appreciate your opinion, I just don't agree with you. And this is coming from a Disney shareholder. Disney shouldn't not be making a play right now for another large company, especially one that is basically the same as Disney. I personally would vote no if this came up for a shareholder vote, as I suspect many would in this current economic climate. Disney should focus on the assets it already owns prior to buying anymore.

Also I just don't agree with your sentiment toward the merging of the two major news divisions as being beneficial to the public, and I don't think the courts will either. But we'll all find out if it comes up to be heard in a case which side the court is on.

And while this situation with COVID has shown Disney is more vulnerable to an economic downturn than other media companies. Adding ViacomCBS to the company doesn't help prevent that, in fact it would make it worse with even more exposure. This is due to ViacomCBS and Disney being almost identical in business makeup. Its not like Comcast or AT&T where they have a telecom sitting behind its media division propping it up with revenue. If Disney were to buy a company I would want it to be something that can withstand an economic downturn like we are in now, ViacomCBS just doesn't do that.

So again I appreciate your opinion, I'm just not going to agree with you on this. But thank you for the debate.

 

[matt78]

There is a rumor going around that Disney might be trying to buy the WWE. If it happens it is supposed to be done by sometime in May. I have no idea how legit it is though. The rumor was started by a former WWE employee who claimed to hear it at WWE Headquarters.

 

[brodie999]

Toy Story 4 director Josh Cooley is doing an animated Transformers prequel movie.

 

[Disney Irish]

There is a rumor going around that Disney might be trying to buy the WWE. If it happens it is supposed to be done by sometime in May. I have no idea how legit it is though. The rumor was started by a former WWE employee who claimed to hear it at WWE Headquarters.

I honestly don't see Vince selling his families company to Disney. And the flip side I don't see Disney wanting to get into the wrestling business. The two just don't match up in my opinion. But hey stranger things in life happen.

 

[Disney Irish]

Toy Story 4 director Josh Cooley is doing an animated Transformers prequel movie.

What does this have to do with Disney or a potential acquisition?

 

[Disney Republic]

While I appreciate that you have thought long and hard about this, and I do appreciate your opinion, I just don't agree with you.

Thanks for that, what I was aiming to do is state why a Disney acquisition of ViacomCBS not only makes sense, but also show how it would also pass the relevant competition laws.

And this is coming from a Disney shareholder. Disney shouldn't not be making a play right now for another large company, especially one that is basically the same as Disney. I personally would vote no if this came up for a shareholder vote, as I suspect many would in this current economic climate. Disney should focus on the assets it already owns prior to buying anymore.

Here is one thing that I have yet to ask, let's say for argument sake the Redstone's agree an an all-stock deal with Disney over ViacomCBS (Remember that due to the fact they own 80% of the vote shares in said company, if they agree the other shareholders willhave to agree) & thus the only additional debt Disney would take on would be ViacomCBS's existing long term debts ($19 billion)*.

What would Disney have to lose from this deal from a financial perspective? Especially if Disney can get the deal done for $20-25 Billion.

*Which can can be reduced by a sale of Simon & Schuster.

Also I just don't agree with your sentiment toward the merging of the two major news divisions as being beneficial to the public

A merger of ABC News & CBS News on its own would not necessarily benefit the public, but it can be done in a way that would benefit the public (via the American Government forcing concessions off Disney* in return for allowing the ABC News-CBS News Merger) & it can be sold as a benefit to the public.**

*To invest more in journalism, concessions it would not otherwise get from Disney under normal circumstances.

**In that such a merger would create a more serious challenger to the Big 3 of CNN, MSNBC & Fox News.

And while this situation with COVID has shown Disney is more vulnerable to an economic downturn than other media companies.

While Disney is particularly affected from the shutting down of Theme Parks across the world, it has benefited from having a stronger presence in Streaming than most of its competitors (Other than Amazon & Netflix of course)*

So while it doesn't have the benefit of being owned like a telco like WarnerMedia & NBCUniversal do, it does have the benefit of being particularly strong in what is the really the only growth sector in the media at the moment.

If anything the company that is most vunerable to COVID-19 at the moment is funny enough ViacomCBS (Although SPE is not too far behind), mainly because its streaming stratagy is disastrous to say the least.**

*Mainly thanks to the fact they beat their own competition into getting their Streaming Services online earlier then they did & the fact the 21st Century Fox deal has given them a stronger content library than most of said rivals.

**Partly because "The Dumbest Demerger of All Time" prevented Viacom & CBS from collectively creating a streaming service that would have capitalised on their collective content libraries (until it was too late), party because they still keep licencing their own stuff to its rivals (One does wonder who authorised the HBO Max deal over South Park) rather than just put it on their own streaming services, party because they are not owned by a teleco (and thus can't fall back on their revenue) & party because their management over this last 20 years has been terrible.

Adding ViacomCBS to the company doesn't help prevent that, in fact it would make it worse with even more exposure. This is due to ViacomCBS and Disney being almost identical in business makeup.

Buying ViacomCBS would help Disney in the only part of the media industry that is still growing at the moment (as well as likely being the biggest growth sector in said industry going forward), which is of course Streaming. A sector whose winners & losers will ultimately be decided by who has the strongest content library out of the whole lot.

Hence why buying ViacomCBS would help Disney a lot in this area, because that would mean that Disney would have a stronger content library than the likes of WarnerMedia & NBCUniversal.

Its not like Comcast or AT&T where they have a telecom sitting behind its media division propping it up with revenue. If Disney were to buy a company I would want it to be something that can withstand an economic downturn like we are in now, ViacomCBS just doesn't do that.

Would you be in favour of Disney combining with the likes of Comcast or Charter from a financial perspective (Anti-Trust issues aside) rather than a deal with ViacomCBS?

So again I appreciate your opinion, I'm just not going to agree with you on this. But thank you for the debate.

Fair enough. Likewise I would like to thank you for the rather interesting discussions we have had over this matter.

 

[Disney Irish]

Thanks for that, what I was aiming to do is state why a Disney acquisition of ViacomCBS not only makes sense, but also show how it would also pass the relevant competition laws.



Here is one thing that I have yet to ask, let's say for argument sake the Redstone's agree an an all-stock deal with Disney over ViacomCBS (Remember that due to the fact they own 80% of the vote shares in said company, if they agree the other shareholders willhave to agree) & thus the only additional debt Disney would take on would be ViacomCBS's existing long term debts ($19 billion)*.

What would Disney have to lose from this deal from a financial perspective? Especially if Disney can get the deal done for $20-25 Billion.

*Which can can be reduced by a sale of Simon & Schuster.



A merger of ABC News & CBS News on its own would not necessarily benefit the public, but it can be done in a way that would benefit the public (via the American Government forcing concessions off Disney* in return for allowing the ABC News-CBS News Merger) & it can be sold as a benefit to the public.**

*To invest more in journalism, concessions it would not otherwise get from Disney under normal circumstances.

**In that such a merger would create a more serious challenger to the Big 3 of CNN, MSNBC & Fox News.



While Disney is particularly affected from the shutting down of Theme Parks across the world, it has benefited from having a stronger presence in Streaming than most of its competitors (Other than Amazon & Netflix of course)*

So while it doesn't have the benefit of being owned like a telco like WarnerMedia & NBCUniversal do, it does have the benefit of being particularly strong in what is the really the only growth sector in the media at the moment.

If anything the company that is most vunerable to COVID-19 at the moment is funny enough ViacomCBS (Although SPE is not too far behind), mainly because its streaming stratagy is disastrous to say the least.**

*Mainly thanks to the fact they beat their own competition into getting their Streaming Services online earlier then they did & the fact the 21st Century Fox deal has given them a stronger content library than most of said rivals.

**Partly because "The Dumbest Demerger of All Time" prevented Viacom & CBS from collectively creating a streaming service that would have capitalised on their collective content libraries (until it was too late), party because they still keep licencing their own stuff to its rivals (One does wonder who authorised the HBO Max deal over South Park) rather than just put it on their own streaming services, party because they are not owned by a teleco (and thus can't fall back on their revenue) & party because their management over this last 20 years has been terrible.



Buying ViacomCBS would help Disney in the only part of the media industry that is still growing at the moment (as well as likely being the biggest growth sector in said industry going forward), which is of course Streaming. A sector whose winners & losers will ultimately be decided by who has the strongest content library out of the whole lot.

Hence why buying ViacomCBS would help Disney a lot in this area, because that would mean that Disney would have a stronger content library than the likes of WarnerMedia & NBCUniversal.



Would you be in favour of Disney combining with the likes of Comcast or Charter from a financial perspective (Anti-Trust issues aside) rather than a deal with ViacomCBS?



Fair enough. Likewise I would like to thank you for the rather interesting discussions we have had over this matter.

So again I appreciate the thought you have put into this. However its a bit shortsighted. Your sole focus on this has primarily on the gain of IP that Disney would get for streaming. But the issue is Disney already has a backlog of content they don't already use, from the Disney Vault to the Fox library. And again its not like that helps Disney in times like this. They cannot create new content even on the IP they already own. So adding more to that doesn't help. But I get where you are coming from.

The better option would be for Disney to acquire a business that is resistant to economic downturns like we are in now.

Anyways again thank you for the debate.

 

[brodie999]

I mentioned UPN because technically speaking, The CW is a joint venture between WarnerMedia & ViacomCBS rather than wholly owned by the latter.



Lets not forget that that Disney would also obtain the Jack Ryan IP & the vast archive of current/previous shows that CBS Television Studios have.



Disney+ with Nickelodeon would definately have an edge over HBO Max when it comes to kids programming.



They would be wise to put it on Hulu, especially considering the content in question...



To be fair, people have been predicting the death of cinema since Television Broadcasting became mainstream. So while I could very much see a major decline in cinema attendences over the next few years, I do hope Cinemas will continue to exist in some form or another.

Hey, I just want you to know I agree with you on all this. Disney and CBS both have a business relationship together already. So why shouldn’t Disney buy ViacomCBS too? They’d own a 25% stake in WarnerMedia’s The CW too.

 

[matt78]

I honestly don't see Vince selling his families company to Disney. And the flip side I don't see Disney wanting to get into the wrestling business. The two just don't match up in my opinion. But hey stranger things in life happen.

I don't see Vince wanting to sell either. I could see Steph deciding to sell after he dies even though I think Comcast would be the likely buyer in that scenario. I could see Disney and WWE partnering though to show PPV's on ESPN+ or even making some of the other WWE Network programming available there.

 

[Disney Irish]

I don't see Vince wanting to sell either. I could see Steph deciding to sell after he dies even though I think Comcast would be the likely buyer in that scenario. I could see Disney and WWE partnering though to show PPV's on ESPN+ or even making some of the other WWE Network programming available there.

I don't follow it that closely, but I believe it wouldn't be Stephanie that would take over. Based on previous reports it would be Paul (TripleH) that would take over as CEO. And Paul is purebred old school wrestling. There would be no way he'd sell either.

There was recent rumors of Shane taking over too, but I find that less believable than Stephanie.

BTW, this rumors have been around for almost a decade that WWE would acquired by another company, and yet every year they are still here.

Always I just don't see Disney wanting to take over WWE.

 

[Twilight_Roxas]

I just realized that if Disney acquires Sony Spider-Man isn’t the only ip they would regain.

 

[matt78]

I just realized that if Disney acquires Sony Spider-Man isn’t the only ip they would regain.

I hope Disney stays away from Sony. At most they should be able to buy Spider-Man and maybe MIB and let Sony stay independent. I would rather see Disney branch out and buy a gaming company or maybe Hasbro.

 

[bartholomr4]

I just realized that if Disney acquires Sony Spider-Man isn’t the only ip they would regain.

Long conversation held in these forums many times. The sale of Sony or Sony Pictures to someone other than Disney could trigger a reversion of the rights back to Disney for no money:

• Disney already owns Spider-man and the Spiderverse. Sony licenses the Spiderverse which has somewhere near 900 characters.
• The 900 Characters boil down to somewhere near 250-300 characters when you deduplicate them (i.e. Peter Parker, Spidey, Spiderman, etc.)
• Disney owns the merchandising rights to these characters with the exception of a window before and after a movie window (something like 60 days before and 120 days after release). Even during this time, the merchandising rights are split between Disney and Sony.
• They types and duration (in minutes) of movies and television (live action and cartoon) which Disney controls vs Sony Controls
• There are contractual obligations which Sony must follow to maintain their license (i.e. a movie release roughly every 3 years).
• There is also a great deal of "speculation" that the rights to the Spiderverse would revert back to Marvel/Disney under a change in control of Sony or Sony pictures.
• Disney controls use in the parks west of the Mississippi, and Universal controls park rights for Spiderman (and some other characters) east of the Mississippi (also another long discussion in these forums).

Point being, purchasing Sony to regain control of Spiderman (or the spiderverse) doesn't yield Disney/Marvel as much as purchasing other assets (i.e. what others have theorized here of a purchase of the CBS assets).

I also believe the purchase of 21CF has been painful, and the effort to right size and transition resources hasn't yielded what Disney originally proposed (The original deal price doubled due to Universal bid, Sky went to Universal, the regional sports networks had to be sold, and at a loss, international networks have to be divested, the film library and slate of new movies at Fox have been a box office bomb).

If I were Disney's CEO, I would limit any acquisition to specific IP and not the related operations. With Disney's current inventory of IP (which it hasn't gotten around to using) and the studios ability to gain access to key tallent, the cost of that IP would have to be pretty cheap. Why would you acquire someone else's IP when you have an inventory on the shelf you can't get to?

I think you will see Disney/Marvel to continue to work the current "partnership" opportunity with Sony.