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

[BrianLo]

Did something significant happen in 2020?

Splash mountain.

The question is are the numbers real? Wall Street numbers are no longer required to be. It’s all speculative.

So what could be true:
1. Netflix value is inflated
2. Disney tangible assets are devalued
3. Both
4. Neither

It’s probable 3

I too think it’s 3. Just like I was dubious of the depths of the low, I am dubious if the stock starts running too hot, which is might be. I definitely think the company was massively over-valued in the pandemic. It was all streaming froth.

We already overcalled streaming once, Wall Street doesn’t need to do it again cyclically.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Disney doesn't have to provide the vote total. All they need to do is say something like:

The numbers cited by your source are erroneous, and not reflective of the actual voting tallies. We remain committed to ensuring competent board leadership, and avoiding the distraction that these baseless figures create.

And like that, Disney has clarified that the source is bunk WHILE avoiding giving specifics. But instead, Disney decided to attack the individual who leaked them. Not the substance of the leak, but the character of the leaker. Alternatively, if the lawyers are a little squeamish over that, Disney could follow a different strategy:

The Walt Disney Company refuses to comment on the validity of these specific figures, but we do encourage your readers to be skeptical of any unverified data. If our shareholder are interested about learning about this proxy fight, please visit thewaltdisneycompany.com and votedisney.com. The Walt Disney Company remains focused on ensuring that our qualified list of candidates are successful in our upcoming shareholder meeting.

This move is also effective, because Disney has not commented at all on the voting tally. But they still manage to put it under a cloud of suspicion. It's "unverified" and therefore suspect, whether or not it's true. They could also pull the following:

We are dismayed to see that supporters of Trian's nominees seem to be spreading rumors about the voting tallies. For official information on the proxy fight, please visit thewaltdisneycompany.com and votedisney.com. We are confident that our highly qualified board nominees will be victorious.

This is also a good one, because the rumors could be true or untrue. But after you have labelled something a "rumor" anyone will question it and take it as suspicious. Instead, they went with the following:



While we don't have the full quote, it seems like we didn't get a strong denial or even a hint of doubt being thrown over the figures. That suggests either the spokesman was shooting from the hip (a mistake), or they didn't want to actually cast doubt on the figures because they're real. Disney also could have updated their votedisney.com website if they felt their comment had been misconstrued by the WSJ.

But ultimately, each individual can make up their own determination.

Two possibilities:
1. They’re confident in the outcome
And feel any more push will be taken as a sign of weakness
2. They are confident they don’t like the outcome and are on to the next phase of messaging control.

 

[BrianLo]

In the case of Disney…the promise of buybacks increased the stock price by 25%

That’s it. Nothing their doing “product”
Wise today affects the price at all.

Yes I understand your position. How does a 1% buyback increase the stock price by 25%?

It’s not mathing Walter. This is not how dividends and buybacks work. Dividends devalue the company by their respective distribution percentage as a paid out gain. It’s why dividends are irrelevant really, but that’s another matter. Buybacks increase the price by their respective percentage as an unrealized capital gain in the share price. Are 72 billion in buybacks occurring in December that I didn’t hear about?

Moreover the buyback hasn’t even occurred yet…

 

[WoundedDreamer]

This. There's a good deal in the pipeline, but there's no telling that it will actually come to fruition. As you've pointed out, even if they announce something publicly doesn't mean it will actually be built.

If you don't think so, I've got a wonderful show at the Main Street Theater I'm sure you'd love.

I'll see your Main Street Theater and raise you a Spaceship Earth retheme, a Play Pavilion, a Festival Pavilion on stilts, and a Mary Poppins Ride.

I think I'll win this game as long as nobody has a Hyperion Wharf...

 

[Andrew C]

And yes, I hope the next regime will go back to the previous Disney standards, if Disney continues along this path of “less for more” I won’t care because I won’t be going there anymore.

At this point, I wish they could afford to spin off the parks. But they can't as it props up the rest of the company. So I don't see the "less for more" going away...

 

[Casper Gutman]

At this point, I wish they could afford to spin off the parks. But they can't as it props up the rest of the company. So I don't see the "less for more" going away...

There is no scenario in which “spinning off the parks” is not utterly disastrous for the parks - far, far worse than the status quo.

 

[Jrb1979]

No realistic successor will do what you hope for. Iger is not the problem. American corporate culture is the problem. Peltz represents the absolute worst of that culture.

If these are your terms, make peace with not visiting Disney parks and understand that Uni is not an alternative- it suffers from the exact same forces.

It's why the Cedar Fair and Herschend parks are better. They at least invest in their parks constantly

 

[Lilofan]

It's why the Cedar Fair and Herschend parks are better. They at least invest in their parks constantly

Cedar Fair and Hersch are not even remotely close to being better than WDW and DL parks.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Yes I understand your position. How does a 1% buyback increase the stock price by 25%?

It’s not mathing Walter. This is not how dividends and buybacks work. Dividends devalue the company by their respective distribution percentage as a paid out gain. It’s why dividends are irrelevant really, but that’s another matter. Buybacks increase the price by their respective percentage as an unrealized capital gain in the share price. Are 72 billion in buybacks occurring in December that I didn’t hear about?

Moreover the buyback hasn’t even occurred yet…

You know buybacks send a message to Wall Street: we’re open to continuing it. Companies have both enriched their investors and tanked their companies with buybacks in the past. They tend to concentrate on the former.

Nothing in the last quarterly gave any tangible performance gain over the figures from the prior 3 quarters…and the stock teetered between $78-$92

The only differences is the proxy fight…and the word “buyback”

Consider that the markets are also on a sugar rush…the trough is open and piggy is gonna eat.

Hopefully that doesn’t end up where it predictably always does.

 

[Nubs70]

In the case of Disney…the promise of buybacks increased the stock price by 25%

That’s it. Nothing their doing “product”
Wise today affects the price at all.

It is the promise of buybacks and whether Bob will execute his plan of building, expansion, and proper sucession with or without Nelson holding his feet to the fire.

Based on Bob's history, will he execute the plan without someone holding him accountable?

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

It's why the Cedar Fair and Herschend parks are better. They at least invest in their parks constantly

All parks need constant investment or their core audience bores. It’s been that way for 120 years. Parks know
That. Disney knows that.

Cedar Fair and Hersch are not even remotely close to being better than WDW and DL parks.

Due to the initial buildouts more than anything the last 20-25 years

 

[Disney Irish]

Disney doesn't have to provide the vote total. All they need to do is say something like:

The numbers cited by your source are erroneous, and not reflective of the actual voting tallies. We remain committed to ensuring competent board leadership, and avoiding the distraction that these baseless figures create.

And like that, Disney has clarified that the source is bunk WHILE avoiding giving specifics. But instead, Disney decided to attack the individual who leaked them. Not the substance of the leak, but the character of the leaker. Alternatively, if the lawyers are a little squeamish over that, Disney could follow a different strategy:

The Walt Disney Company refuses to comment on the validity of these specific figures, but we do encourage your readers to be skeptical of any unverified data. If our shareholders or the media are interested in learning about this proxy fight, please visit thewaltdisneycompany.com and votedisney.com. The Walt Disney Company remains focused on ensuring that our qualified list of candidates are successful in our upcoming shareholder meeting.

This move is also effective, because Disney has not commented at all on the voting tally. But they still manage to put it under a cloud of suspicion. It's "unverified" and therefore suspect, whether or not it's true. They could also pull the following:

We are dismayed to see that supporters of Trian's nominees seem to be spreading rumors about the voting tallies. For official information on the proxy fight, please visit thewaltdisneycompany.com and votedisney.com. We are confident that our highly qualified board nominees will be victorious.

This is also a good one, because the rumors could be true or untrue. But after you have labelled something a "rumor" anyone will question it and take it as suspicious. Instead, they went with the following:



While we don't have the full quote, it seems like we didn't get a strong denial or even a hint of doubt being thrown over the figures. That suggests either the spokesman was shooting from the hip (a mistake), or they didn't want to actually cast doubt on the figures because they're real. Disney also could have updated their votedisney.com website if they felt their comment had been misconstrued by the WSJ.

But ultimately, each individual can make up their own determination.

The idea here is that any commenting on voting totals while voting is still occurring in general (even commenting on leaked totals) can be seen as trying to sway the vote and is illegal. So what Disney said is appropriate for the situation, its akin to "No Comment".

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

It is the promise of buybacks and either Bob will execute his plan of building, expansion, and proper sucession with or without Nelson holding his feet to the fire.

Based on Bob's history, will he execute the plan without someone holding him accountable?

Nope.

And that’s an excellent point.
An ACTUAL POINT!!

it’s possible the mere specter of Peltz has snapped Bob out of his management malaise and put the spotlight on him.

Do I discount a big building program
For “legacy”? Not one bit. It’s
What he THOUGHT he was doing with Star
Wars…they just flubbed the material.

Even if Peltz fails…he’ll claim
He forced action and brought value. And he may not be too crazy to be right

 

[Jrb1979]

Cedar Fair and Hersch are not even remotely close to being better than WDW and DL parks.

Theming wise no they are better but where they are better is they understand parks need constant investment.

 

[Nubs70]

If Peltz gets on the board, without majority power, he would be at least one voice at the table to remind Bob of his promises.

 

[Jrb1979]

There is no scenario in which “spinning off the parks” is not utterly disastrous for the parks - far, far worse than the status quo.

It can't be any worse than they are now. The domestic parks have moved away from their original theme and no longer are unique.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

This. There's a good deal in the pipeline, but there's no telling that it will actually come to fruition. As you've pointed out, even if they announce something publicly doesn't mean it will actually be built.

If you don't think so, I've got a wonderful show at the Main Street Theater I'm sure you'd love.

There are boxes…unless they digitized…upon boxes of “pipeline”
Projects at WDI that got to various stages before the kill switch was hit.

The details vary…but the reason is always the same: it wasn’t worth it to spend and bring on the overhead.

We are looking at the “investment”
Debate backwards for Orlando. It’s tied to ROI…what should they do that they have the highest % of bringing in more? That seems like an easy question. But it’s not. The obvious answers are completely wrong.

That can be a Healthy debate. I look forward to it.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

If Peltz gets on the board, without majority power, he would be at least one voice at the table to remind Bob of his promises.

No!!!!

Complete and total DESTRUCTION!!!!

 

[Lilofan]

Theming wise no they are better but where they are better is they understand parks need constant investment.

I beg to differ but whatever their fans opinion on a park that's only open 6 months of the year. 6 months of closure annually is surely a lot of time to work on theming.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Spinning off the parks would be a bad play if they leased it to some type of entertainment company or capital investment fund…

…if they were spun and privatized with Disney having creative veto power…they’d be better off.