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

[TalkingHead]

Free for $25/month?

Yeah, seeing a movie in Dolby/IMAX runs about $20-21. AMC monthly subscription gives you three movies a week. So if you see more than two titles in a month, much less a week, AMC is paying. I never would’ve seen Wish if I’d had to buy a ticket out of pocket. Bottom line is the box office numbers are misleading.

 

[Nubs70]

I mean, in 2023, Disney's annual gross profit for 2023, was $29.697B, up 4.86% from 2022.
Their movies are failing to make money at the box office, for sure. Good thing they have another purpose for those movies, though.

DIS ROCE (Revenue On Capital Expendeture) is around 4% compared to 11% for companies in their cohort. DIS is performing at 1/3 of their competition.

If you had $100 to invest, would you invest with DIS or the competition?

 

[_caleb]

Source?

Seriously? Why do you think ExxonMobile has a Clean Energy commitment?

 

[_caleb]

Yeah, seeing a movie in Dolby/IMAX runs about $20-21. AMC monthly subscription gives you three movies a week. So if you see more than two titles in a month, much less a week, AMC is paying. I never would’ve seen Wish if I’d had to buy a ticket out of pocket. Bottom line is the box office numbers are misleading.

Oh, I see. Didn't get what you were referring to.
How much do you think it costs AMC to show a movie like Wish? As in, per showing? I'd be curious to know what their costs are. Seems like if you're watching more than two movies a month, AMC isn't really paying, so much as missing out on presumed revenue.

It's not like the monthly subscriber would go to more than two per month if they didn't have the movie pass, right?

I imagine the numbers show that 1) most subscribers won't go to enough movies to cost the company money and 2) most subscribers will buy overpriced concessions?

 

[JD80]

Oh, I see. Didn't get what you were referring to.
How much do you think it costs AMC to show a movie like Wish? As in, per showing? I'd be curious to know what their costs are. Seems like if you're watching more than two movies a month, AMC isn't really paying, so much as missing out on presumed revenue.

It's not like the monthly subscriber would go to more than two per month if they didn't have the movie pass, right?

I imagine the numbers show that 1) most subscribers won't go to enough movies to cost the company money and 2) most subscribers will buy overpriced concessions?

They're just hoping you buy popcorn.

 

[_caleb]

They're just hoping you buy popcorn.

They should sell subscriptions to popcorn.

Wait– is that a thing? PopcornPass?

 

[celluloid]

They should sell subscriptions to popcorn.

Wait– is that a thing? PopcornPass?

There have been a few promotional themed buckets...
They won't for the same reason Disney won't sell an unlimited refill day cup.

 

[_caleb]

DIS ROCE (Revenue On Capital Expendeture) is around 4% compared to 11% for companies in their cohort. DIS is performing at 1/3 of their competition.

If you had $100 to invest, would you invest with DIS or the competition?

I'm invested in DIS. I think the short run is going to be rough, but I believe they're building for long term in DTC. I'm betting (literally) that other studios (those doing 11% right now) are going to be scrambling to license their content to D+ before too long.

Near term, Disney needs to cut their costs. IF they break even by FY24, I think they'll be on the right track to implement some of the more innovative revenue streams that actually utilize the technology.

 

[_caleb]

I'm asking sincerely... why do you think Splash Mountain was closed and why do you think white men were kept off of the reimagining project?

I'll have follow up questions based on your answer.

They ripped out something people loved, they called it bad, and implied that anyone who had a problem with all of this was bad themselves.

I think it was a business decision.

Were white men kept off the reimagining project?

 

[Tom P.]

The company only "wants" to make money. They're chasing after the customers who will give them money. Not just the people who have been giving them money or those who give them money today, but those who will give them money in the future. Most major companies have a DEI department because the people who will be giving them money in the future say that's what they want.

I wholeheartedly disagree, at least where major entertainment companies are concerned. I firmly believe there are many in Disney leadership who believe their purpose is to drive an agenda and promote a message and profit is secondary to that. Iger is definitely not one of them, but they do exist throughout senior leadership of Disney. And they are responsible for a good part of the trouble Disney is in.

Now, I do believe that Iger is primarily interested in making money for the company and building a legacy for himself. While I think he personally agrees with the philosophy behind the DEI initiatives, I think he wants to implement DEI within the framework of successfully making money and building a legacy. And that's why I think he's being rather open about the company's missteps in this area and where their focus needs to be.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

Fresh baked did a video based on the theory that Disney has hit the threshold of the trust thermocline (trust slowly eroding until a company finally reaches the point people simply give up on them and then the company support falls off a cliff) and they may be on to something.

The article it’s limited to members but you can get the general idea before it’s cut off.



I’m not sure they’ve hit this point but it’s fascinating none the less and could explain why Wish and the Marvels failed so spectacularly despite reviews being ok.

 

[Nubs70]

I'm invested in DIS. I think the short run is going to be rough, but I believe they're building for long term in DTC. I'm betting (literally) that other studios (those doing 11% right now) are going to be scrambling to license their content to D+ before too long.

Near term, Disney needs to cut their costs. IF they break even by FY24, I think they'll be on the right track to implement some of the more innovative revenue streams that actually utilize the technology.

Individual investor not a financial advisor?

 

[_caleb]

I wholeheartedly disagree, at least where major entertainment companies are concerned. I firmly believe there are many in Disney leadership who believe their purpose is to drive an agenda and promote a message and profit is secondary to that. Iger is definitely not one of them, but they do exist throughout senior leadership of Disney. And they are responsible for a good part of the trouble Disney is in.

I mean, I can see how some creatives have been hired to do work that you might perceive as “promoting a message.” I don’t think this is the best way to understand what’s going on, but can’t you see that the reason they were hired to do this work was a business decision, not an ideological one?

If it’s deemed that any of these folks become a liability to the company (meaning hurting its reputation or ability to make money) don’t you think they would part ways with them (as they recently did with Chief Diversity Officer, Latondra Newton)?

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

The center loves diversity. The center made Coco and Black Panther and Moana huge successes.

It’s really hard to argue this

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Individual investor not a financial advisor?

Two hedge funds control enough stock to appoint the board and ceo

 

[denyuntilcaught]

They are looking at this "data" through DEI-tinged glasses then, though I wonder what data you actually mean. Clearly the approach isn't working—Iger literally just said so. The actual data that matters is whether their content is well-received—which it isn't.

Actually, what Caleb is saying is true. I mentioned this on another thread, but I work for another streamer and yes, all the data we get (focus groups, test screening responses, early responses on script reads, etc.) all point to the desire for more representation on screen from audiences. There's also a plethora of data available to us that indicates how Black and Latino audiences are the greatest growth opportunity in viewership as they're the last audience of value that can still be migrated from cable/broadcast to streaming. Despite the press, it's still an acquisition/SOV game we're playing here, and so the (data-supported) story here is in order to grow SOV, develop content that appeals to DEI targets.

The key here though - and something Disney overstepped on - is the content must still be broadly appealing to be successful. And the key to that success is simply telling a good story. Walden's note that the well-written script was thrown out simply because it relied on the supporting neighbor being Black trope I think is valid, but it makes me question what about the story made it necessary for the main character to be white and the supporting cast Black? Why did that have to be the case in the first place? Makes me question if "well-written" doesn't equate to good in this case, frankly.

I think to say the approach isn't working is disingenuous. Take Strange World. Had the political climate been not so polarized, had the word "woke" not been coded and weaponized to refer to anything non-White, had Hollywood and Disney not hung their hat on the main character's sexuality, would the movie have done well?

When DEI audiences say they want representation, they don't mean simply check a box.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

I think to say the approach isn't working is disingenuous. Take Strange World. Had the political climate been not so polarized, had the word "woke" not been coded and weaponized to refer to anything non-White, had Hollywood and Disney not hung their hat on the main character's sexuality, would the movie have done well?

When DEI audiences say they want representation, they don't mean simply check a box.

"Disney is committed to creating stories with inspirational and aspirational themes that reflect the rich diversity of the human experience around the globe."

I think a large problem with Disney's diversity efforts is that the company's idea of inclusion is just having PoC be in their key franchises (Star Wars, Marvel, Princesses). They don't actually have a diverse array of stories that "reflect...human experience around the globe".

Coco works because it's actually rooted in real culture and doesn't feel like a product that came off an assembly line.

For all of Strange World's faults, it was at least something different and added to the diversity of content that Disney under Iger has severely been lacking. If you had more types of movies and shows altogether, it wouldn't be so important for each project to be literally inclusive of every demographic marketing deems important.

By their very nature, Frozen 4 and Toy Story 5 can't reflect every human experience. If you bring in new ideas, new talent and new stories (and actually let them express themselves), it's much easier to do so.

 

[flynnibus]

I think a large problem with Disney's diversity efforts is that the company's idea of inclusion is just having PoC be in their key franchises (Star Wars, Marvel, Princesses). They don't actually have a diverse array of stories that "reflect...human experience around the globe".

Ms. Marvel?

Moonknight has subplots around persecution/ethic issues too

 

[Basil of Baker Street]

Anyone else surprised by Iger's comments today?

"(Our) creatives have lost sight of what their job should be: entertain first, not messages."

Seems like a surprisingly blunt way of saying their DEI mission has not been well received.

I'll go a different angle. I question the ability of the "creatives". I think the greats have retired or moved to other companies and they just don't have the talent at WDI.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Ms. Marvel?

Moonknight has subplots around persecution/ethic issues too

They're still Marvel branded products that have to adhere to certain expectations and standards (and tie into other stories).

Yes, they explore ideas not found in other MCU titles, but they're still a part of the MCU and that has limitations both in what can be shown and also what people expect going in or deciding whether or not to watch.