Unsure who to vote for regarding the Walt Disney Co. Board

[Laketravis]

Did Trian or Blackwells ever comment on Iger's proposal for $60B in parks spending? Were they committed to keeping that?

You mean the $60B proposed for parks AND cruise line? How much goes where?

"....over the next 10 years to enhance and expand domestic and international parks, as well as cruise line capacity."

$60B sure sounds like a lot until you break it down to $6B a year over such a vast spending platform. Yay! AK gets two new counter serve locations and a merch shop. DCL gets two new ships. (okay, I'm exaggerating but you get the point. It's meaningless until the "Where" is detailed).

 

[el_super]

You mean the $60B proposed for parks AND cruise line? How much goes where?

Oh that wasn't really the question.. I wanted to know if Trian (or Blackwells) has said they were committed to the same level of spending.

Did they?

 

[Laketravis]

Oh that wasn't really the question.. I wanted to know if Trian (or Blackwells) has said they were committed to the same level of spending.

Did they?

I don't know. Did they? I haven't paid much attention to either one of them, I just like the idea of Parks becoming it's own corporation whether public or private with it's own dedicated board and CEO that focuses exclusively on Parks. Currently, Parks is the last thing on leadership's minds, as illustrated in their shareholder letter.

 

[EricsBiscuit]

Huh? This doesn't make sense.

If ESPN and ABC were losing money why wouldn't Disney just shutter them?
If they were losing money and a potential buyer thought they could turn the business around, why couldn't Disney?
If ESPN and ABC were still making money, just not as much, why wouldn't Disney want that money?

They either still have value or they don't, and splitting them off from the rest of the company doesn't really change that.

Their revenue is pretty much going to be in decline from now on thanks to the death of cable. They are good for one last puff of the cigar. No more. A business is only worth as much as the present value of all future cash flows. Disney should with spin them off and offload their debt onto them (creating a company which would service the debt and pay a dividend) or sell them and pay down their debt. Whichever is more feasible. As it stands, those two pieces are dragging down Disney’s stock price significantly. ESPN has been a problem for a long time now.

 

[John park hopper]

Does it really matter who you vote for? I think not

 

[Laketravis]

Does it really matter who you vote for? I think not

Meet the new boss......same as the old boss.........

 

[el_super]

I don't know. Did they? I haven't paid much attention to either one of them, I just like the idea of Parks becoming it's own corporation whether public or private with it's own dedicated board and CEO that focuses exclusively on Parks.

I feel like that's a generally terrible idea. Why would it be any functionally different from what we have now? There is an entire parks division of CMs headed by D'Amaro that dictate direction within the parks. Why would any of the underlying math on how the parks make decisions change by having a different board of directors?

And then there is the legal untangling: Who would own the IP? Would the parks be on the hook to make payments back to the studio for all the studio content or would the parks have to start removing any Studio IP? Would the parks have access to any future studio content?

The success of the parks really comes from the strength of the brand as a whole, and splitting it up would either destroy that relationship with the parks, or put the parks in debt to the studio/IP owners forever.

 

[el_super]

Disney should with spin them off and offload their debt onto them

You want to set them up for failure and then assume someone will come in and just accept that failure?

If ESPN and ABC were so bad off, why wouldn't Disney just shutter them and start selling off the pieces now? Isn't that what any realistic buyer would end up having to do anyway?

Are they really losing that much money or just not making as much as they were before?

 

[lazyboy97o]

You mean the $60B proposed for parks AND cruise line? How much goes where?

"....over the next 10 years to enhance and expand domestic and international parks, as well as cruise line capacity."

$60B sure sounds like a lot until you break it down to $6B a year over such a vast spending platform. Yay! AK gets two new counter serve locations and a merch shop. DCL gets two new ships. (okay, I'm exaggerating but you get the point. It's meaningless until the "Where" is detailed).

The cruise line has always been part of the parks business. If you spin off the parks business like you want they’d still be spending money on the cruise line. No sane business person would jettison that revenue and, more importantly, profits.

 

[Laketravis]

I feel like that's a generally terrible idea. Why would it be any functionally different from what we have now? There is an entire parks division of CMs headed by D'Amaro that dictate direction within the parks. Why would any of the underlying math on how the parks make decisions change by having a different board of directors?

And then there is the legal untangling: Who would own the IP? Would the parks be on the hook to make payments back to the studio for all the studio content or would the parks have to start removing any Studio IP? Would the parks have access to any future studio content?

The success of the parks really comes from the strength of the brand as a whole, and splitting it up would either destroy that relationship with the parks, or put the parks in debt to the studio/IP owners forever.

I'll pass on explaining how the logistics of such a restructuring work, it's pretty much a textbook exercise. As far as it being a terrible idea or not, I and others here have already outlined why we think it would be beneficial for Parks to have it's own complete corporate structure that can focus independently on delivering what it's market demands from it without the distractions of other totally unrelated, highly competitive, capital intensive, cash flow devouring, dysfunctional business sectors.

If you disagree with that then consider that Parks is always the last sector mentioned when Disney discusses all things Disney.

 

[Laketravis]

The cruise line has always been part of the parks business. If you spin off the parks business like you want they’d still be spending money on the cruise line. No sane business person would jettison that revenue and, more importantly, profits.

Who said DCL would be part of the Parks spinoff?

 

[lazyboy97o]

Who said DCL would be part of the Parks spinoff?

Anyone who would actually want the business to continue to thrive.

 

[Laketravis]

Anyone who would actually want the business to continue to thrive.

Does "Anyone" have a name? If that business can't thrive on it's own without being part of Parks, then it should most certainly be cut loose. Likewise, if it can be successful on it's own, then it should be on it's own.

 

[el_super]

I'll pass on explaining how the logistics of such a restructuring work, it's pretty much a textbook exercise.

What does the textbook say about studios separating from theme parks? How many times has that successfully happened?

You want to believe that the parks would be better off not having to worry about entertainment and media as a whole, but the reality is, they would still have to. None of the market conditions change whether the sign on the office says "the Walt Disney Company," or "Walt Disney Parks and Experiences Inc."

 

[Squishy]

Just bring King Bob Chapek back to fix this mess

 

[Laketravis]

If ESPN and ABC were so bad off, why wouldn't Disney just shutter them and start selling off the pieces now? Isn't that what any realistic buyer would end up having to do anyway?

Amazon went over 20 years before it made a profit. A company doesn't necessarily start dissolving or selling off a money losing sector if they have convinced themselves (and shareholders) they can somehow make it profitable.

 

[Lilofan]

Does it really matter who you vote for? I think not

Wasn't there a slogan back in the day to get out the vote, non Disney - Choose or Lose?

 

[Laketravis]

What does the textbook say about studios separating from theme parks? How many times has that successfully happened?

You want to believe that the parks would be better off not having to worry about entertainment and media as a whole, but the reality is, they would still have to. None of the market conditions change whether the sign on the office says "the Walt Disney Company," or "Walt Disney Parks and Experiences Inc."

It sounds like you've boxed the contents of the package yourself and then claim it can't possibly work.

Package it differently.

But maybe wait until you have a chance to listen to this:

Disney’s Q1 FY24 Earnings Results Webcast - The Walt Disney Company

The Walt Disney Company will discuss fiscal first quarter 2024 financial results via a live audio webcast beginning at 4:30 p.m. ET / 1:30 …Read More

thewaltdisneycompany.com

 

[Lilofan]

Just bring King Bob Chapek back to fix this mess

He is probably enjoying the $23M bye bye gift when he got canned.

 

[mikejs78]

Who’s responsible for both Chapek and Peltz being problems?

Ike Perlmutter.