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

[Lilofan]

I can’t imagine how exhausting this must be for you to be so emotionally invested in a catty fight between a bunch of billionaires over the fiscal stewardship of a decreasingly relevant entertainment conglomerate.

Its the #1 entertainment company in the world , and this is entertaining.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

If peltz can't do anything, why would he want to be on the board? He's made billions and he's 80. He chose disney specifically to try to get on the board of. What does he gain if he would have no impact at all? I don't pretend to have a large business knowledge, but common sense would tell me he's expecting to be able to do something to change the company to what he would like done.

…the most likely reason is: because he can

And of course this is Peltz and Perlmutter getting their jollies settling an old score. Peltz is the “face of it”

You think they give a crap about Jay Rasulo?

But what’s it gonna matter? There’ll be 81 and 82 and 6 feet soon. They want Iger to suffer and quit…then they lose interest

These are not people in a position to dismantle and raid Disney. It won’t happen.

Or maybe…crazy greedy bastards that they are…they want to be able to point to a post Iger Disney in five years and say: “see? Told you he wasn’t everything…now time for shuffleboard”

Crazier things have happened

 

[pdude81]

Peltz won't have the power to do much of anything on the board to change strategy. However, he's entitled to a lot more information and can use that for whatever purpose this fight is really about. If embarassing Iger and/or settling scores for Perlmutter and Rasulo are part of the goal (which I expect they are), then a board member slinging mud holds much more weight than "Old man yells at cloud".

 

[BrianLo]

2024 is lining up to be another disastrous parks and box office year…again…
And even the “profitable” stream…
Do you know why they say that will happen? $7.5 bil in cost cutting. So that’s how you take in streaming? - strip it down and hope people keep paying…
Right

This is a bit erroneous. The cost cutting initiative was across the broader company. It was not limited to streaming. In fact, streaming content costs have since gone up slightly. Hulu will be fully integrated into D+ in short order and Americans will actually see a stronger service the rest of the world has been experiencing for a few years now. It’s the calls to ditch FX and Searchlight (not from you) that are missing the point and the direction of the company.

The Parks division are not limited to WDW. A huge amount of leg work has been achieved by the international segment. In fact the parks division is the least disastrous it has ever been. There’s never been a time since Euro Disney they’ve been across the board working so well. Don’t let your WDW centrist views misguide you. It’s a huge achievement that laggards Hong Kong and Paris don’t need to be propped up so heavily anymore and Bob did to his credit launch the first out of the gate, actually successful resort, since Tokyo.

 

[HauntedPirate]

I love it when some try to claim not supporting the status quo is "essentially" a vote for Peltz. logic at its worst.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

This is a bit erroneous. The cost cutting initiative was across the broader company. It was not limited to streaming. In fact, streaming content costs have since gone up slightly. Hulu will be fully integrated into D+ in short order and Americans will actually see a stronger service the rest of the world has been experiencing for a few years now. It’s the calls to ditch FX and Searchlight (not from you) that are missing the point and the direction of the company.

The Parks division are not limited to WDW. A huge amount of leg work has been achieved by the international segment. In fact the parks division is the least disastrous it has ever been. There’s never been a time since Euro Disney they’ve been across the board working so well. Don’t let your WDW centrist views misguide you. It’s a huge achievement that laggards Hong Kong and Paris don’t need to be propped up so heavily anymore and Bob did to his credit launch the first out of the gate, actually successful resort, since Tokyo.

Steaming aside…because the narrative written by trades recently have tied “profitability” to cost cutting…

…you’re portraying the parks erroneously. Four parks are just licensing deals. Nice…but not the profit cow.

You know what is…always had been and always will be?

Which one serves the American eastern seaboard…the greatest concentration of wealth in human history.

And that is a much bigger problem rolling out.

Again…there has never been a reduction in wdw attendance and profitability in a non-recession before…that should scare the heebies out of everyone

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I love it when some try to claim not supporting the status quo is "essentially" a vote for Peltz. logic at its worst.

That always goes back to the same thing:

That last trip to port orleans was so great…that Disney is flawless

Whatever the nametag says

To say there’s room for improvement somehow tarnishes it?

Low rent groupthink from hell

 

[BrianLo]

Steaming aside…because the narrative written by trades recently have tied “profitability” to cost cutting…

…you’re portraying the parks erroneously. Four parks are just licensing deals. Nice…but not the profit cow.

You know what is…always had been and always will be?

Which one serves the American eastern seaboard…the greatest concentration of wealth in human history.

And that is a much bigger problem rolling out.

Again…there has never been a reduction in wdw attendance and profitability in a non-recession before…that should scare the heebies out of everyone

Only two parks are licensed? Which I didn’t mention anyways.

Two other parks are co-owned. Yes they make half money off them, but they were also previously half in the hole for Hong Kong. Then we’ve got to sprinkle in DCL… which is niche, but not completely immaterial.

As to your last point, I agree. Which is why it’s curious that profitability is up at WDW during this current quarter we are in (or so sayeth Bob). It takes the teeth out of the whole ship being a disaster this year, if profitability is actually up across the board.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Only two parks are licensed? Which I didn’t mention anyways.

Two other parks are co-owned. Yes they make half money off them, but they were also previously half in the hole for Hong Kong. Then we’ve got to sprinkle in DCL… which is niche, but not completely immaterial.

As to your last point, I agree. Which is why it’s curious that profitability is up at WDW during this current quarter we are in (or so sayeth Bob). It takes the teeth out of the whole ship being a disaster this year, if profitability is actually up across the board.

Yeah…they didn’t really say “profitability” was up…they skirt that term as much as possible.

Cruiseline is strong…I see it’s in the news on bobs “oooohs and ahhhs” tour today

we all know the deal with the Chinese…they like to look good to the west…but they honor deals like Darth Vader. They have every intention of turning on you at a dime.

The wdw parks portfolio is Disneyland, wdw and Paris out of necessity. The others are valuable deals…but not the same.

Things are bad in the swamp…and that should be their biggest problem.

I regret to inform everyone that it’s not gonna be “luxury” afterall…why did Bob lie to us?

Let’s see what they do…things should be moving like yesterday.

 

[MisterPenguin]

If peltz can't do anything, why would he want to be on the board? He's made billions and he's 80. He chose disney specifically to try to get on the board of. What does he gain if he would have no impact at all? I don't pretend to have a large business knowledge, but common sense would tell me he's expecting to be able to do something to change the company to what he would like done.

Wait... because we can't discern a rational decision why Peltz wants to be on the board, we should assume that his motivations, therefor, must be noble and altruistic?

Peltz may want people to think that. Peltz made his case publicly that he wants to "bring back the Magic." But all that language was from last year's attempt when he wanted the general public to be on his side.

But the general public doesn't vote for board members. This time around, it's all about making Disney profitable so that its stocks go up and it pays big dividends. He's talking to investors. Like himself.

Framing this as "why not Peltz" in place of "Peltz should be on the board" doesn't change the fact that advocates of Peltz, even when expressed as the mild "why not Peltz" still haven't laid out Peltz's plan.

For example...

"Make D+ profitable like Netflix!" -- Ok, how, Mr. Peltz? And to all proponents of 'why not Peltz', how?

What is Peltz going to do to bring back the magic, make all Disney movies profitable, and pay big dividends?

You know that with regard to the $60B park and experiences capex, Peltz's position is "Now wait a minute, let the bean counters first make sure it will be profitable in the end."

Is that why he wants to be on the board? To 'help' Disney make all decisions based on ROI?

 

[BrianLo]

Yeah…they didn’t really say “profitability” was up…they skirt that term as much as possible.

What would you define profitability as other than Operating Income?

And I'm pleased to say that the trends for the quarter that we're in right now look like our Domestic and our International Parks and Experiences business will probably deliver in the neighborhood of low‐to mid‐teens in terms of OI growth.

…

I talked earlier about the results. This quarter that we're in, when I talked about it growing low to mid‐teens in OI over the second quarter a year ago, that's with some pretty tough comps.4 In the second quarter a year ago, we had a 50th anniversary in Florida, and we've had continued increase in labor expenses there, and we're growing by double digits in this quarter. So I think it says a lot about – in terms of why we should be investing in that business long term.

we all know the deal with the Chinese…they like to look good to the west…but they honor deals like Darth Vader. They have every intention of turning on you at a dime.

Ya, I’ve been hearing about this boogeyman for the better part of a decade now. Meanwhile, do you know where the biggest political mediated opposition has subsequently occurred to seriously threaten Disney’s business? Anaheim and Florida. It’s ironic…

Wake me up when China seizes the parks, like I’ve been promised.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Wait... because we can't discern a rational decision why Peltz wants to be on the board, we should assume that his motivations, therefor, must be noble and altruistic?

Peltz may want people to think that. Peltz made his case publicly that he wants to "bring back the Magic." But all that language was from last year's attempt when he wanted the general public to be on his side.

But the general public doesn't vote for board members. This time around, it's all about making Disney profitable so that its stocks go up and it pays big dividends. He's talking to investors. Like himself.

Framing this as "why not Peltz" in place of "Peltz should be on the board" doesn't change the fact that advocates of Peltz, even when expressed as the mild "why not Peltz" still haven't laid out Peltz's plan.

For example...

"Make D+ profitable like Netflix!" -- Ok, how, Mr. Peltz? And to all proponents of 'why not Peltz', how?

What is Peltz going to do to bring back the magic, make all Disney movies profitable, and pay big dividends?

You know that with regard to the $60B park and experiences capex, Peltz's position is "Now wait a minute, let the bean counters first make sure it will be profitable in the end."

Is that why he wants to be on the board? To 'help' Disney make all decisions based on ROI?

Nobody said any of that…and yes…it’s likely money…which all the institutional investors want just as much as he does.

Hence the inappropriate panic buybacks.

 

[MisterPenguin]

I love it when some try to claim not supporting the status quo is "essentially" a vote for Peltz. logic at its worst.

It's because the thread has changed from extending Iger's contract to the proxy fight.

The proxy fight is for or against.

So, it's not unreasonable to assume, at this point, if someone is critical of Iger, that they're making a case for Peltz.

So, yes, maybe if someone posts an anti-Iger screed, we shouldn't assume they are pro-Peltz, but ask first before responding if they are indeed making a pro-Peltz case.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

What would you define profitability as other than Operating Income?

And I'm pleased to say that the trends for the quarter that we're in right now look like our Domestic and our International Parks and Experiences business will probably deliver in the neighborhood of low‐to mid‐teens in terms of OI growth.

…

I talked earlier about the results. This quarter that we're in, when I talked about it growing low to mid‐teens in OI over the second quarter a year ago, that's with some pretty tough comps.4 In the second quarter a year ago, we had a 50th anniversary in Florida, and we've had continued increase in labor expenses there, and we're growing by double digits in this quarter. So I think it says a lot about – in terms of why we should be investing in that business long term.

You know he’s desperate to keep his job and can say what he wants, right?
Let’s seen how it plays this time next month?

Ya, I’ve been hearing about this boogeyman for the better part of a decade now. Meanwhile, do you know where the biggest political mediated opposition has subsequently occurred to seriously threaten Disney’s business? Anaheim and Florida. It’s ironic…

Wake me up with China seizes the parks, like I’ve been promised.

The central committee is always a real boogeyman. Just a dormant one. Like a volcano. Nobody really owns anything in China.

And people have defected from Florida because of the prices and economic realities in their core audience. You will likely see the same thing in California once it penetrates that clientele.

It’s not about politics. You know better than that. It’s about money

No one is skipping I-4 because they made an awful little mermaid remake and some moron giving speeches at a rally full of drunkards.

That’s not how the consumer works. It’s the money.

 

[MisterPenguin]

The Lucas stuff is weird to me. Could be he was given something, could be his wife, or it could be there is a real fear that massive budget cuts could put his prized work at risk of being totally shut down. But it is really kind of left field.

If we're listing theories with no basis in actual data, perhaps its because Lucas knows that Peltz is far worse than Iger. Peltz's end game is to take complete control of the board.

And so, perhaps Lucas doesn't want to see LucasFilm sold off to a hedge fund or foreign investors. Because, Peltz doesn't care about Star Wars, so, why wouldn't he sell it off to someone else who doesn't care about Star Wars?

I know there are people who don't like the direction that Star Wars has taken. But Peltz isn't going to search out the person or corporation willing to spend a few billion on LucasFilm who have that same vision. Best offer gets it. Even if it's some billionaire who wants to retcon the Force as a manifestation of Thetans.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

It's because the thread has changed from extending Iger's contract to the proxy fight.

The proxy fight is for or against.

So, it's not unreasonable to assume, at this point, if someone is critical of Iger, that they're making a case for Peltz.

So, yes, maybe if someone posts an anti-Iger screed, we shouldn't assume they are pro-Peltz, but ask first before responding if they are indeed making a pro-Peltz case.

The only pro-Peltz posts on any threads have been laced with the typical “I’m
Done with Disney…” snits we all know.

They’ve been priced out. Pretty simple

Those doing “iger gotta go” are most decidedly not done with Disney. Sometimes fandom isn’t all rainbows, unicorns and cotton candy smelling farts…takes some work like anything else to endure.

 

[MisterPenguin]

I can’t imagine how exhausting this must be for you to be so emotionally invested in a catty fight between a bunch of billionaires over the fiscal stewardship of a decreasingly relevant entertainment conglomerate.

By how often you've been posting here... you tell us.

 

[denyuntilcaught]

This is actually a good thing. If a product is garbage, it's better to never let it see the light of day. It's better to take the financial loss than ever ship something mediocre. Disney, Lucasfilm, Marvel, and Pixar should represent excellence every single time. Period.

Stepping in here for two seconds amidst what otherwise was an incredible and thoughtful post - shelving projects in the manner it's been done by Warners is absolutely not a good thing. It's not being done for quality control purposes but for Wall Street-driven purposes, and that's a danger to the art form in ways I don't need to articulate for a forum that understands the intrinsic value of storytelling. I have no reason to believe that should this tactic continue to be adopted that Disney (under Iger or otherwise) would have more integrity in pulling the trigger than Warners.

 

[Disstevefan1]

Iger will cruise to an easy victory. Business will continue as usual in all areas of TWDC..

 

[LSLS]

If we're listing theories with no basis in actual data, perhaps its because Lucas knows that Peltz is far worse than Iger. Peltz's end game is to take complete control of the board.

And so, perhaps Lucas doesn't want to see LucasFilm sold off to a hedge fund or foreign investors. Because, Peltz doesn't care about Star Wars, so, why wouldn't he sell it off to someone else who doesn't care about Star Wars?

I know there are people who don't like the direction that Star Wars has taken. But Peltz isn't going to search out the person or corporation willing to spend a few billion on LucasFilm who have that same vision. Best offer gets it. Even if it's some billionaire who wants to retcon the Force as a manifestation of Thetans.

I mean, that's essentially what I said as one of my options too.