TalkingHead
Well-Known Member
Shocking news in this thread: Podcaster likes Twitter guy. Where are the smelling salts?
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News The Walt Disney Company Board of Directors Extends Robert A. Iger’s Contract as CEO Through 2026
- Thread starter DCBaker
- Start date
Wall Street wants dividends.
Disney can't give dividends if a major segment, DTC, is throwing huge deficits (even tho the rest of TWDC is pretty profitable).
Last Q showed the deficits from DTC are decreasing and it will hit its 2024 goal of profitability, which will unleash the dividends.
Disney's current price is a steal if you believe they can make DTC be profitable. That's why this new activist investor is going in big time with TWDC.
Additionally, TWDC has shown it has the cash to buy out Comcast with no effort. And having all of Hulu's profits (and not just 66%) will also help to bring DTC to profitability.
And it's clear Iger has a plan to deal with cable cutting, and moving from linear to DTC. Losing linear is a big hit to revenue, but, there's a good hope that DTC can make up for it (especially with the ad-tier).
Also, this investor and Peltz, as they buy up stocks, have the effect of raising the stock price.
JoeCamel
Well-Known Member
I will give you the last but those guys want the money losing DTC to go away they are not betting it will be a cash cow.
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
I genuinely love Genie+.
It's a price increase, and I don't like paying more money of course. But I absolutely love the product.
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
Nobody wants DTC to go away.
JoeCamel
Well-Known Member
The vultures do, they have a track record
Last edited:
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
It’s a terrible product that highlights the flaws of underinvested parks…
Do you actually go to orlalndo?
Pretty much all investors do…it’s a money pit
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
The “slowing losses” of DTC had me snarf…
Anyone want to think about what was going on the last quarter?
Don’t think too hard
Anyone want to think about what was going on the last quarter?
Don’t think too hard
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Wall Street would much rather Disney sell off their linear assets so they can focus MORE on DTC, not less. Peltz wanted Disney to get their content costs under control. He was right, and they did. He didn't want them to shut it down entirely. Linear is dying. Streaming isn't optional, it's mandatory.
_caleb
Well-Known Member
People are still acting like streaming (Direct To Consumer) is a short-term fad that Disney should have ignored in favor of box office and the Disney Channel.
Yes, they need to figure out how to monetize, but the game has changed and it’s not going back. Iger knows this, and that’s why they went all in—literally bet the entire company on Disney+.
Investors are pressuring Disney though, and I’m afraid that in a panic for profitability, they’re reaching for the old tools (price hikes, linear ads, licensing content, channels as add-ons) instead of developing some of the new ones they were hinting at.
Yes, they need to figure out how to monetize, but the game has changed and it’s not going back. Iger knows this, and that’s why they went all in—literally bet the entire company on Disney+.
Investors are pressuring Disney though, and I’m afraid that in a panic for profitability, they’re reaching for the old tools (price hikes, linear ads, licensing content, channels as add-ons) instead of developing some of the new ones they were hinting at.
Last edited:
Nubs70
Well-Known Member
So watching Hulu on daughters ad supported account.
Just like old broadcast but with selectable content for $8.95/mo.
There's your monetization. Circling back to a "Broadcast +" model.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
The problem is I’m not sure if will EVER work? See below
The problem is $9 is NOTHING. People were paying $100 a month for bad cable 25 years ago…
But the bigger problem is advertisers. Espn could name it’s price back then…because it was the only way to get to the eyes of the consumer public.
Now it’s not at all. Why do you think everyone there was fired?
The problem is that the Hollywood execs have no way to “fix” that…and investors don’t want “less”. Period.
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
DISNEY didn't get that $100. The MVPDs did, and then Disney got $7 for ESPN and a couple bucks for everything else.
A lot of people here have cause and effect backwards. Disney and everyone else in this ecosystem would love to go back to 2010 when there were 100 million American pay TV subscribers. They didn't CHOOSE to abandon that model in favor of streaming. That model collapsed on its own and they were forced to switch to streaming. Yes, a booming cable business is better than the streaming business, but the streaming business is better than the dying cable business.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
They got $9 a month for Espn circa 2005…and beyond that they could sell hundreds of millions of “watchers” to Madison Avenue…whether they ever turned it on or not.
Streaming eliminates the “fog of war”…and a company like Disney loses.
Here’s what the stream excusers are missing: in todays tech world - how do you get it to work?
And why can’t anyone figure it out?
Just too dumb to make money?
That’d be a first
JD80
Well-Known Member
Price increases were always in the works. The low costs were entry points to grow the service. It was always going to balance around the industry norm which will collectively be set by all the streamers. D+ big play will be combining Hulu and ESPN as a bundle.
This played out similarly in the early cable days as they start bundling more and more channels. Except now you don't have infinite streaming services.
Ads were always going to be a thing too. Silly to think otherwise. Ads make the world go round when it comes to content creation.
TWDC is going to take all the stuff that used to work with linear and apply it to DTC. Old shows/movies not getting any views? License it for X-years to other platforms for $$.
There aren't many tools to be developed here for making money. TWDC makes content. You can either make money providing it (movie tickets/D+ subs), you can make money while people watch it (ads) or you can sell it to other people (license it).
The only difference here is that D+ owns the platform so they can also make money renting space on it (probably on their ESPN/Hulu platform).
JD80
Well-Known Member
Especially when you have to maintain the platform and monitor distribution (or pay someone else to) as well as worry about billing, advertising, marketing the platform etc. etc.
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
Netflix and Hulu are already profitable and Disney+ will be profitable in a year.
Amazon and Apple don't care to be profitable, they use video as a way to pimp their other services.
Paramount+ and Peacock shouldn't exist.
And MGM+ bringing up the rear. They should all merge under the Discovery, Warner, HBO Max banner.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
Not much…which is the whole problem
Why?
Cause a yutz said it?
Did you notice they still lost money in this “great quarterly” (which based on the economy was awful) with no content cost?
Still running those fiber optic lines through the Australian outback, aye mate?
Not much…which is the whole problem
Why?
Cause a PUTZ said it?
Did you notice they still lost money in this “great quarterly” (which based on the economy was awful) with no content cost?
Still running those fiber optic lines through the Australian outback, aye mate?
FTFY.