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

JoeCamel

JoeCamel

Well-Known Member
peng said:
Getting the NBA rights is good, it pays for itself (even though ESPN's NBA presentation is awful), losing the rights would cost Disney billions in revenue. It would be a big red flag if they didn't get the rights, as Zaslav failed to get it for WB Discovery and he's being dragged through the coals by the trades for it.
Click to expand...
Another property they have no idea how to maintain and grow, move over Marvel Wars
 
Sir_Cliff

Sir_Cliff

Well-Known Member
EricsBiscuit said:
Delivering on a positive guest experience and positive stock market returns are NOT mutually exclusive. The danger is when ownership becomes inactive and fails to keep management accountable.
Click to expand...
They're not mutually exclusive, but they're also not correlated. To the extent that investors are paying attention to the parks, they care that they are as profitable as possible. So, experimenting with finding the sweet spot where you can cut costs and raise revenues as much as possible in a way that keeps growing profits quarter over quarter will be rewarded. When that stops working, investors will move on; their concern is not that the parks are viable in 20 years time.

In general, however, Wall Street doesn't seem particularly interested in the parks and pays more attention to the things you all complain about Bob putting his time and money into. Just watch how they react when Disney announces billions of new spending on the parks.
 
P

peng

Well-Known Member
Sir_Cliff said:
They're not mutually exclusive, but they're also not correlated. To the extent that investors are paying attention to the parks, they care that they are as profitable as possible. So, experimenting with finding the sweet spot where you can cut costs and raise revenues as much as possible in a way that keeps growing profits quarter over quarter will be rewarded. When that stops working, investors will move on; their concern is not that the parks are viable in 20 years time.

In general, however, Wall Street doesn't seem particularly interested in the parks and pays more attention to the things you all complain about Bob putting his time and money into. Just watch how they react when Disney announces billions of new spending on the parks.
Click to expand...
I remember during the last investor's meeting there were a lot of questions in regards to how the $60 billion in upcoming parks spending wasn't happening, but you are right, the average wall street investor hates when businesses spend money. The film side of Disney is the creative wing they kind of care about aside from dividends, parks are looked at by most of them as a tertiary thing (like how the trades referred to Chapek as a glorified Churro stand vendor) and only kind of care as it had massive profits over the last year, I don't expect any questions about spending on the parks being at the quarterly meeting, mostly as Disney will probably focus on Inside Out 2 and DP&W's success instead, or about more dryer things, like stock price and how Disney will replace the board member that stepped down.
 
BrianLo

BrianLo

Well-Known Member
peng said:
I remember during the last investor's meeting there were a lot of questions in regards to how the $60 billion in upcoming parks spending wasn't happening, but you are right, the average wall street investor hates when businesses spend money. The film side of Disney is the creative wing they kind of care about aside from dividends, parks are looked at by most of them as a tertiary thing (like how the trades referred to Chapek as a glorified Churro stand vendor) and only kind of care as it had massive profits over the last year, I don't expect any questions about spending on the parks being at the quarterly meeting, mostly as Disney will probably focus on Inside Out 2 and DP&W's success instead, or about more dryer things, like stock price and how Disney will replace the board member that stepped down.
Click to expand...

It’s quite well timed. They’ll focus on the positivity in the quarterly report and very surface level experiences investing. All the actual experiences investments manifest on the weekend, sandwiched around positive studio news.

And we might get a ‘DCL is an incredibly popular and expanding business with fast investment to operability timelines, check out what we have to say on that this weekend’.


Experiences, unfortunately, have such a long and forward looking investment cycle that never meshes well with the quarterly driven Wall Street.
 
EricsBiscuit

EricsBiscuit

Well-Known Member
Sir_Cliff said:
They're not mutually exclusive, but they're also not correlated. To the extent that investors are paying attention to the parks, they care that they are as profitable as possible. So, experimenting with finding the sweet spot where you can cut costs and raise revenues as much as possible in a way that keeps growing profits quarter over quarter will be rewarded. When that stops working, investors will move on; their concern is not that the parks are viable in 20 years time.

In general, however, Wall Street doesn't seem particularly interested in the parks and pays more attention to the things you all complain about Bob putting his time and money into. Just watch how they react when Disney announces billions of new spending on the parks.
Click to expand...
You’re conflating all shareholders as the same. The shareholders who are investors interested long term in the company very much care about how the park experience is. The shareholders with a shorter time horizon don’t. That’s why the most successful companies are the ones with long term and active shareholders.
 
J

jpinkc

Well-Known Member
EricsBiscuit said:
You’re conflating all shareholders as the same. The shareholders who are investors interested long term in the company very much care about how the park experience is. The shareholders with a shorter time horizon don’t. That’s why the most successful companies are the ones with long term and active shareholders.
Click to expand...
Yes but that is what most of the "Institutional Investors" are. They dont/wont understand that all businesses have good years and bad years. Sometimes a company has to spend money. They just want you to make X amount of profit above what you did the previous year and if you dont...... Well the Street will not be happy...
 
L

Lilofan

Well-Known Member
BrianLo said:
It’s quite well timed. They’ll focus on the positivity in the quarterly report and very surface level experiences investing. All the actual experiences investments manifest on the weekend, sandwiched around positive studio news.

And we might get a ‘DCL is an incredibly popular and expanding business with fast investment to operability timelines, check out what we have to say on that this weekend’.


Experiences, unfortunately, have such a long and forward looking investment cycle that never meshes well with the quarterly driven Wall Street.
Click to expand...
Quarterly capitalism forces companies like Disney to produce results however they get it to try to prove to Wall Street that numbers are better than last quarter and or last year. If numbers don't gel then Wall Street is eager to see what action plans ( ie layoffs etc ) the companies will implement to improve current situation .
 
Sir_Cliff

Sir_Cliff

Well-Known Member
jpinkc said:
Yes but that is what most of the "Institutional Investors" are. They dont/wont understand that all businesses have good years and bad years. Sometimes a company has to spend money. They just want you to make X amount of profit above what you did the previous year and if you dont...... Well the Street will not be happy...
Click to expand...
The point is also to make money off buying and selling shares, not supporting the construction of a viable business in the longterm. If the shares crash at some point in the future doesn't really matter from that perspective. What matters is estimating the best time to sell or encouraging another scenario where you can earn a premium on your shares such as a takeover. The company chugging along making decent profits into the future isn't very attractive for the kinds of investors who drive share prices. It's why you see them being more responsive to new initiatives like Disney+ than to making sure the theme park business is healthy, even if there is a good chance Disney+ will never bring in as much profits as the parks.
 
EricsBiscuit

EricsBiscuit

Well-Known Member
jpinkc said:
Yes but that is what most of the "Institutional Investors" are. They dont/wont understand that all businesses have good years and bad years. Sometimes a company has to spend money. They just want you to make X amount of profit above what you did the previous year and if you dont...... Well the Street will not be happy...
Click to expand...
That’s true but I think it’s why we need to educate people more. Your average American is the owner of TWDC and every other stock in the S&P. We need to get more involved in the management of the companies we own.

Look at Berkshire Hathaway. They have a unique investor base between WB and all the investors who flock to his banner and religiously attend the annual meetings. That’s how it should be for every company.
 
JoeCamel

JoeCamel

Well-Known Member
EricsBiscuit said:
That’s true but I think it’s why we need to educate people more. Your average American is the owner of TWDC and every other stock in the S&P. We need to get more involved in the management of the companies we own.

Look at Berkshire Hathaway. They have a unique investor base between WB and all the investors who flock to his banner and religiously attend the annual meetings. That’s how it should be for every company.
Click to expand...
You ever see a BH annual meeting? Its an event of epic proportions with entertainment and food no other company ever matched.
 
TrainsOfDisney

TrainsOfDisney

Well-Known Member
jpinkc said:
I will only say that some companies are better left PRIVATE. If you value your business and to some degree your sanity, I understand this more than ever. I understand why our company stayed private for over 50 years.
Click to expand...
Absolutely - and it can pay off. Chik-fil-A and In-n-Out are 2 examples - fully private, don’t follow industry trends, and they both make more money per-store than any of their competitors.

Edit - In-n-out isn’t that high on the list, they are actually below McDonalds but above chipotle. #2, right below chik-fil-a is raising canes chicken - which is 90% owned by the founder so virtually privately owned.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom