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

CinematicFusion

Well-Known Member

Comcast, Disney move up deadline to decide Hulu future ownership​

  • Comcast and Disney have modified their agreement to officially begin the process of deciding Hulu's future ownership to late September, Comcast CEO Brian Roberts said Wednesday at an investor conference.
  • Comcast owns 33% of Hulu after reaching a deal with Disney five years ago that initially was set to run through January 2024.
  • The deal set the floor valuation for Hulu at $27.5 billion, which Roberts believes the platform has surpassed since then.
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
Comcast CEO Brian Roberts with some news on Disney buying Comcast's Hulu stake - the deadline has moved from January 2024 to September 30, 2023.


$27B was the floor. That means Disney pays $9B.

At $30B, Disney pays $10B.

Can Roberts make the case that Hulu is worth much more? Possibly. That does compliment Disney for adding so much value to Hulu that it's worth so much more.

How did Disney make it worth more? By putting a lot of new, good content on Hulu.

And what did Comcast do to make it more valuable? Nothing. Actually less than nothing. They withdrew NBC content from Hulu.

The contract sends a disputed figure to arbitration. I'm sure Disney will let the arbiter know how Comcast purposefully devalued Hulu in the past two years. That might influence their decision.
 

Surferboy567

Well-Known Member

Source: Discussing Film

Apologies if this was posted already, I know this has been discussed before. I just find it curious how this keeps sprouting up. Is there really any truth in this?

For the record, I don’t think this would happen. The regulatory bodies would have a field day with this one. I also don’t think it makes a ton of sense. Are they in a tough spot now? Yes, but not that tough to call it quits and sell.
 

Disstevefan1

Well-Known Member

Source: Discussing Film

Apologies if this was posted already, I know this has been discussed before. I just find it curious how this keeps sprouting up. Is there really any truth in this?

For the record, I don’t think this would happen. The regulatory bodies would have a field day with this one. I also don’t think it makes a ton of sense. Are they in a tough spot now? Yes, but not that tough to call it quits and sell.
Agreed, this won’t happen because the regulatory issues as you say.

Yesterday I watched a YouTube discussing splitting up Disney, having two Disney companies, one of them being parks,resorts,merch.

Could you imagine if parks,resorts, merch got to KEEP and REINVEST their money instead of burning through it on losing movies and losing D+ ?
 

Nubs70

Well-Known Member
Agreed, this won’t happen because the regulatory issues as you say.

Yesterday I watched a YouTube discussing splitting up Disney, having two Disney companies, one of them being parks,resorts,merch.

Could you imagine if parks,resorts, merch got to KEEP and REINVEST their money instead of burning through it on losing movies and losing D+ ?
You could potentially have a handsome dividend too.
 

Tha Realest

Well-Known Member
Agreed, this won’t happen because the regulatory issues as you say.

Yesterday I watched a YouTube discussing splitting up Disney, having two Disney companies, one of them being parks,resorts,merch.

Could you imagine if parks,resorts, merch got to KEEP and REINVEST their money instead of burning through it on losing movies and losing D+ ?
The regulatory issues could be done away with with a strategic decoupling of a service or two.
 

GhostHost1000

Premium Member
Dang the CNBC article today sounds just like what @Sirwalterraleigh and I have been saying. Iger was always to blame. Chapek was just the chosen puppet to take a fall during the hit knowing what was coming while Iger pulled the strings behind the scenes. It was all a setup basically to blame someone else.

Unfortunately for Bob, they are continuing the slide in the wrong direction and more fingers can point to him now
 

Tha Realest

Well-Known Member
The tea has been spilt.
The more I think of it the more I believe Chapek and/or Daniel (or both) were sources for this article. This is well-sourced and most of the bigger players mentioned (Mucha, Arnold, etc) were said to have not provided comment to the authors.* I didn’t see the same for Chapek or Daniel. There’s too many telephone calls or meetings with Chapek where multiple people are sourcing the content of those calls.



*That’s not to say they didn’t provide background comment, but not sure how ethical that is to rely on background quotes from someone who you make a point to say wouldn’t provide an official comment
 

hopemax

Well-Known Member
The more I think of it the more I believe Chapek and/or Daniel (or both) were sources for this article. This is well-sourced and most of the bigger players mentioned (Mucha, Arnold, etc) were said to have not provided comment to the authors.* I didn’t see the same for Chapek or Daniel. There’s too many telephone calls or meetings with Chapek where multiple people are sourcing the content of those calls.



*That’s not to say they didn’t provide background comment, but not sure how ethical that is to rely on background quotes from someone who you make a point to say wouldn’t provide an official comment
"But Daniel rankled many company leaders, who thought he lacked the industry experience or humility for the job. Daniel was known for his intelligence, but he was prone to harshly shooting down opinions with which he disagreed, according to colleagues who worked with him. Chapek tried, unsuccessfully, to coach him to be more “Disney nice.”

Daniel declined to comment for this story."
 

TalkingHead

Well-Known Member
Agreed, this won’t happen because the regulatory issues as you say.

Yesterday I watched a YouTube discussing splitting up Disney, having two Disney companies, one of them being parks,resorts,merch.

Could you imagine if parks,resorts, merch got to KEEP and REINVEST their money instead of burning through it on losing movies and losing D+ ?
One major hurdle to that would be cost and complexity of licensing deals with the media company for the “Disney” characters and IPs to appear in the parks and on merch.
 

kingdead

Well-Known Member
"But Daniel rankled many company leaders, who thought he lacked the industry experience or humility for the job. Daniel was known for his intelligence, but he was prone to harshly shooting down opinions with which he disagreed, according to colleagues who worked with him. Chapek tried, unsuccessfully, to coach him to be more “Disney nice.”

Daniel declined to comment for this story."
It was all Chapek, he was tired of all of us calling him names and making fun of his bald head. I don't feel that sorry, he probably has five houses, ten cars, and 50 else of whatever floats his boat 😄
 

HauntedPirate

Park nostalgist
Premium Member
Hulu's value isn't up to Iger or Roberts. It's up to the independent evaluators who will be brought in to determine it's worth. $27.5B is too low. My non-insider guess? Probably in the $35-40 billion range, and I'd likely guess on the lower end of that.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom