News The Walt Disney Company Board of Directors Extends Robert A. Iger’s Contract as CEO Through 2026

[el_super]

Ms Marvel season 2??

Oh I really hope so. It was an amazing show and a great breath of fresh air from the Marvel team. Iman Vellani's positivity is infectious.

2. Studios are loosing a ton of money. I agree with them saying that they may be relasesing too many movies but they're answer to just make more Sequels like Frozen comes across lazy and short term as usual. Look at your spiralling production costs, real them in and make better (and fewer) movies.

Sequels tend to do real well. Slowing down production means that movies can be made more cheaply (rather than having multiple teams producing multiple movies per year) without necessarily reducing quality. I don't think we will ever know the "real" value of the movies they are producing between box office and Disney+ views, but reigning in production cost seems like an obvious move.

 

[el_super]

Not sure why people think it's going to be this billion dollar profit machine right off the bat. This is a long term play at creating the next century of content distribution where they own the platform and control all the revenue centers. Who knows what the future holds, I think over time it will be massively profitable.

Yes. This. It took some 80 years, but the studios have finally found a way around US v Paramount.

 

[JD80]

Because the customers were completely screwed with no options in the linear model. They were stuck and that was that. What other alternatives for them and advertisers?

that’s right…radio…print…vhs cassettes

the internet wrecked that…just took awhile for the tech to break it down.

not just the customers…the advertisers were stuck too, had to buy em.

it’s not the case anymore. Why is google one of the richest countries on the planet?

because they Are the gateway to advertisers. It’s a better deal.


that streaming chart posted above looked “good” for Disney? Because of 5% when combined?

hell no…not when YouTube is more…and that share will rise as the younger generations come to power.


I get why they’re doing this.
and the reason is this: there aren’t any other options for “content generators”

because they don’t have other options…doesn’t make this one a “good” option. Far from it.

their other choice is to sell themselves.

There is one flaw in your thinking though because you're assuming people are only subscribed to one thing. How many households have multiple streaming platforms at once? The old model everyone had one cable subscription and that was it. The new market is people subscribe to multiple platforms. Some with ads, some without. Just because Disney had 5% of the streaming time doesn't mean that only 5% of the streaming population is subscribed to Disney +.

 

[JD80]

Clearly…there’s a few “kinks” in that thought chain

As I said 5 years ago…nobody wants a $29.99 monthly fee for Peter Pan.

They don’t have nearly enough product for an increasingly fickle audience. Not close.

I think you'd be surprised how many households with young children watch the cartoons and sitcom like shows on Disney+. I know my house and my neighbors and friends have that kind of content on more often than movies.

 

[JD80]

Yes. This. It took some 80 years, but the studios have finally found a way around US v Paramount.

There's a reason companies are chasing this space and are ok with losses right now.

 

[Trauma]

I think you'd be surprised how many households with young children watch the cartoons and sitcom like shows on Disney+. I know my house and my neighbors and friends have that kind of content on more often than movies.

At the current price.

How many people are still paying next to nothing or have it included for free in their phone plan ?

At the end of the day this is very very simple.

If Disney starts to once again make compelling must watch content, D+ will explode and be a profit machine.

The idea that people will continue to pay ever increasing prices for content decreasing in quality and quantity as we head into recession is beyond foolish.

 

[Jrb1979]

There is one flaw in your thinking though because you're assuming people are only subscribed to one thing. How many households have multiple streaming platforms at once? The old model everyone had one cable subscription and that was it. The new market is people subscribe to multiple platforms. Some with ads, some without. Just because Disney had 5% of the streaming time doesn't mean that only 5% of the streaming population is subscribed to Disney +.

Bolded is the biggest reason IMO why streaming will never replace the revenue cable did. With households having multiple streaming platforms, the cost is getting near what cable was. Wasn't that the reason many "cut the cord"? IMO they can't raise the price much more or they will start to cut some of them too.

P

 

[JD80]

It could be too many movies based on people going to movies less often due to cost, but they released less movies this year than they did 4-5 years ago. I think the #1 issue is they changed their customer viewing habits with D+ along with movies just costing a lot more. I mean, I'm pretty sure Universal released more movies this year and were a net positive (albeit spending a lot less to make theirs)

Top 20 Movies of each year, from Box Office Mojo

Worldwide totals:
2023 - $11.3B
2022 - $13.5B
2021 - $10.6B
2020 - $4.8B
2019 - $18.6B
2018 - $16.4B

Domestic:
2023 - $5B
2022 - $5B
021 - $2.9B
2020 - $1.5B
2019 - $5.9B
2018 - $5.7B

COVID changed a lot of content consumption habits and behavior and the movie industry has not recovered yet. In the US there is almost a billion dollars in less movie goer spending. The worldwide number is like 5-6 billion.

That's just not a Disney problem, that's an industry problem.

 

[monothingie]

Oh I really hope so. It was an amazing show and a great breath of fresh air from the Marvel team. Iman Vellani's positivity is infectious.

I'm sure she's a lovely person. But the show was a bust. It was amongst the lowest rated D+ shows ever. Bluey got more than 10X the eyeballs that Ms Marvel did. Spending another $200M for a second season is idiotic.

Sequels tend to do real well.

Indy 5 and Antman box office would like to disagree with you.

Slowing down production means that movies can be made more cheaply (rather than having multiple teams producing multiple movies per year) without necessarily reducing quality.

Disney is incapable at this point of reducing budgets. Not even accounting for marketing costs, they cannot seem to produce anything for less than $200M. The only possible way to improve this is to improve quality of writing. Indy 5 and The Marvels both had to be reshot and delayed because test audiences hated it. The next Captain America and Blade movie are all being delayed and reshot because the writing was garbage.

I don't think we will ever know the "real" value of the movies they are producing between box office and Disney+ views, but reigning in production cost seems like an obvious move.

Disney licensing its own movies for streaming rights to itself is basically taking money out of the left pocket and putting in the right pocket. That was never going to be the revenue driver for Disney. The desire was that by keeping all aspects of creation to distribution in house, segment synergy can be developed and unlock greater profitability than simply selling it off to other entities for an immediate payout. That has not happened and may never happen.

 

[Jrb1979]

Top 20 Movies of each year, from Box Office Mojo

Worldwide totals:
2023 - $11.3B
2022 - $13.5B
2021 - $10.6B
2020 - $4.8B
2019 - $18.6B
2018 - $16.4B

Domestic:
2023 - $5B
2022 - $5B
021 - $2.9B
2020 - $1.5B
2019 - $5.9B
2018 - $5.7B

COVID changed a lot of content consumption habits and behavior and the movie industry has not recovered yet. In the US there is almost a billion dollars in less movie goer spending. The worldwide number is like 5-6 billion.

That's just not a Disney problem, that's an industry problem.

Agreed. They did it to themselves with putting new movies so quick to their streaming platforms. The easiest solution is to not release it their streaming platforms for a year after.

 

[JD80]

At the current price.

How many people are still paying next to nothing or have it included for free in their phone plan ?

At the end of the day this is very very simple.

If Disney starts to once again make compelling must watch content, D+ will explode and be a profit machine.

The idea that people will continue to pay ever increasing prices for content decreasing in quality and quantity as we head into recession is beyond foolish.

We're not heading into a recession. The rest of your post are things you normally consider with business and marketing. The whole market is shifting with price increases and increasing options with ads and no-ad subscriptions. Everyone is trying to find a number the market will sustain. They'll always offer free subscriptions or deals to get people on the platform.

I know a lot of people that will go from a full sub to a ad-tier sub just to save $8 a month.

 

[el_super]

Bolded is the biggest reason IMO why streaming will never replace the revenue cable did. With households having multiple streaming platforms, the cost is getting near what cable was. Wasn't that the reason many "cut the cord"? IMO they can't raise the price much more or they will start to cut some of them too.

This is true to a degree. It's important to remember though that this transition is basically de-valuing entertainment everywhere all at once. Disney+ has been phenomenal in the sense that it is surviving and thriving when other streamers are struggling, but the end result of having so many streamers is that content is more widely available and for far cheaper than it was before. On top of streamers for all the big-budget content, YouTube and TikTok are still flooding the market with near-free-to-produce content that is competing for the same eye-time as everyone else. Add in twitch and the video game live play market, and you see a big squeeze in entertainment as a whole.

This is why the industry is struggling as a whole, not just Disney.

 

[el_super]

That has not happened and may never happen.

Maybe it will?

 

[Jrb1979]

This is true to a degree. It's important to remember though that this transition is basically de-valuing entertainment everywhere all at once. Disney+ has been phenomenal in the sense that it is surviving and thriving when other streamers are struggling, but the end result of having so many streamers is that content is more widely available and for far cheaper than it was before. On top of streamers for all the big-budget content, YouTube and TikTok are still flooding the market with near-free-to-produce content that is competing for the same eye-time as everyone else. Add in twitch and the video game live play market, and you see a big squeeze in entertainment as a whole.

This is why the industry is struggling as a whole, not just Disney.

There is too many niche streaming platforms and outside of Netflix, they are all struggling. It's time they start merging together.

 

[JD80]

Bolded is the biggest reason IMO why streaming will never replace the revenue cable did. With households having multiple streaming platforms, the cost is getting near what cable was. Wasn't that the reason many "cut the cord"? IMO they can't raise the price much more or they will start to cut some of them too.

P

Cable revenue vs. streaming revenue is completely different because you have to remember there is no revenue sharing. I think consumer habits will come down to that most people will have 1 or 2 platforms that they pay for year round and 1 or 2 that they flip on and off on a whim.

So you're still paying less than cable.

The next major shift will be something like YoutubeTV or HuluLive. I pay way too much money for these services and will probably drop them in the next year or so. I would rather pay a subscription to something like CNN or HGTV than the whole package.

 

[JD80]

Agreed. They did it to themselves with putting new movies so quick to their streaming platforms. The easiest solution is to not release it their streaming platforms for a year after.

Yes, Chapek totally botched that.

 

[monothingie]

At the current price.

How many people are still paying next to nothing or have it included for free in their phone plan ?

Correct.

Retail vs. Wholesale subscribers are never fully broken out. There are likely a large chunk of subscribers that only are there because it is subsidized.

At the end of the day this is very very simple.

If Disney starts to once again make compelling must watch content, D+ will explode and be a profit machine.

The idea that people will continue to pay ever increasing prices for content decreasing in quality and quantity as we head into recession is beyond foolish.

Creating compelling content AND extricating itself from the culture war. By their own admission in their last 10K filing their position on socio-political issues has damaged their standing with customers.

 

[el_super]

There is too many niche streaming platforms and outside of Netflix, they are all struggling. It's time they start merging together.

Disney+ isn't struggling really. They planned for it to be profitable in 2024 and it looks like they are going to hit that goal. I'm hoping they hit it earlier than Q4.

 

[Trauma]

We're not heading into a recession. The rest of your post are things you normally consider with business and marketing. The whole market is shifting with price increases and increasing options with ads and no-ad subscriptions. Everyone is trying to find a number the market will sustain. They'll always offer free subscriptions or deals to get people on the platform.

I know a lot of people that will go from a full sub to a ad-tier sub just to save $8 a month.

You just wrote a whole bunch of nonsense without addressing the core issue.

You need content that people want to watch.

Oh and keep running up your CC’s like a good little consumer. CNN told ya everything is going to be just fine. Then you can cry about how you lost everything and it’s just not fair !

 

[Jrb1979]

Cable revenue vs. streaming revenue is completely different because you have to remember there is no revenue sharing. I think consumer habits will come down to that most people will have 1 or 2 platforms that they pay for year round and 1 or 2 that they flip on and off on a whim.

So you're still paying less than cable.

The next major shift will be something like YoutubeTV or HuluLive. I pay way too much money for these services and will probably drop them in the next year or so. I would rather pay a subscription to something like CNN or HGTV than the whole package.

For consumers that works great. I don't see how that is going to make streaming platforms profitable in the end.

Netflix will probably be the year round platform for most. Which is great for them. For the rest having a revolving subscription base each year is not going to work.