I never said $44B was the right price to pay or that it was properly valued. The fact he spent $44B after throwing it out there just shows 1 man can do a lot. I followed twtr for years because I follow a lot of companies and never thought it was worth even close to what it traded for, let alone the premium Elon ended up paying. It was emotional, which is why I threw out Disney as a possibility. He's crazy enough to do it.
Elon is not passionate about Disney’s business. He doesn’t care about Disney. He wants ad money and thought that threatening Twitter’s demise would bring it back. On the other hand, he is addicted to Twitter. According to his biographer, Elon asked hotel staff to unlock a safe so he could tweet at 3 am after a Tesla board member had locked Elon’s phone inside to keep him off Twitter.
I'm not "advocating" for Disney "run" Disney, but I pointed out his assets are literally more than the Disney company is worth. I get there are a lot of complexities in turning Tesla, SpaceX and Twitter assets into cash to make a real offer, but he could take a massive stab at have a lot of influence at Disney if he's really motivated. I don't think he is necessarily doing it.
I thought you said you would gladly turn your shares over to Elon with very little premium? Again, you want Disney to focus on the business and avoid controversy but you want Elon to have more control. Ummm…I’m not sure those ideas can successfully coexist…
I also think Elon does care about free speech and buying Twitter was something more deep than just surface stuff like SEC.
Yeah, he had no intention of actually buying Twitter until he was forced to.
If Elon actually cared about free speech he wouldn’t be banning words like “decolonization” in order to appease the ADL. And to be clear, my only intention here is to highlight the fact that Elon is not a free speech absolutist. He silences speech he doesn’t agree with.
I can easily say Disney's management (despite the change) is still among the worst if not the worst. It's obviously bit of a euphemism as I can't possibly know enough about all 500 companies, but $200B lost is pretty good evidence. So is their leader's constant political bickering, inability to return to any reasonable profitability, and garbage earnings performance quarter after quarter. I listen to every call and read the reports.
Again, most of the current leadership was not in charge when the stock sank. Iger’s “constant political bickering?” What are you talking about? Did you actually listen to what Iger said? Please quote him. Free cash flow is expected to return to around $8 billion in FY 2024. Seems reasonable to me. After their last “garbage earnings report” the stock went up by 10%. Such utter trash.
Personally, I think his biggest failure is allowing the death of storytelling and the creep of agendas in movies.
Disney still had 4 of the top 10 highest grossing films this year. Disney’s current storytelling is not at its best, I’ll grant you that. But it’s been much, much worse. And frankly, I’m very excited about the 2024 film slate.
You’re upset about agendas but can you give me one film studio that doesn’t have agendas in their films? Netflix‘s stock is kicking butt, but they’ve got agendas in their content, let me tell you.
You may think his biggest failure is the increase in agendas at the company, but if I were you, I’d be careful about what I wish for. Iger has a very close relationship with the creatives and for him to say he “doesn’t want to tolerate“ messages at the expense of entertainment in Disney’s content speaks volumes. If I were in your shoes, I’d be cheering him to stay. I’d say it’s unlikely someone will fill his shoes with the same perspective and relationship with creatives.
Disney+ is still poorly managed.
Costs for Disney+ despite garnering a lot of subscribers have been out of control - I still think it loses too much money.
Could be better, sure. But it’s certainly on the right track. Disney+ ad revenue is strong and with Hulu being merged, I expect average watch time will increase, further driving ad revenue and slightly reducing churn. The account sharing crackdown is coming soon too, which will increase subscriber counts and drive revenue.
They’re also reducing their content spend to focus on quality, which is a great decision. Wasting money on something nobody watches is one of the dumbest things Netflix does, and it was dumb to follow them. With that said, Disney+ is expected to become profitable next year, sooner than any streaming service that’s not Netflix. (WBD has characterized their streaming service as profitable, but it’s not as it includes their HBO cable subscriptions.)
The parks are doing quite well financially. They’re expanding the cruise business massively and increasing capex given the very high returns on invested capital.
After a decade of hit after hit, with several billion dollar movies per year, the studio has been going through a creative rough patch. I have no doubt it will get turned around, in fact I’m very excited about film slate next year.
AAPL has made me so much money that I'd never say anything bad about Steve Jobs, but Jobs and Musk are quite similar
No, they’re not. One could argue they are both visionaries, with a lot of drive, and could get extremely irate at their employees, but beyond that? They are quite different.
Steve’s impact on the world is felt every single day by billions of people. The number of people impacted by Musk is negligible by comparison.
I don't think calling people names is really productive or justified, but it's just free speech at the end of the day.
It wasn’t free speech. It was libel. And it was evil.
Also, while I don't agree with his approach, Iger is hypocritical to not pull content from platforms with demonstrable shortcomings. He's clearly doing it to X because of Elon and the political views at X today versus before.
This is nonsense. Again, the other platforms are not in the headlines every other day for some new crackpot thing their owner is saying. Twitter is not very valuable to advertisers anyway, so pausing was easy. It’s like investing in China vs Russia. Investing in China has a lot of risk but it brings a ton of reward to the business. Investing in Russia also has a lot of risk, but it brings little of value. Companies invest in China but they don’t invest in Russia. Risk vs reward. Capitalism.
Disney would be back on Twitter right now if Elon hadn’t shot his mouth off and told his advertisers to F off. Advertisers temporarily pause spending on various platforms all the time to distance themselves from ongoing controversy but then they come right back when the controversy is over. This time may be different though.
Twitter has always been a sewer and Disney advertised until Elon said one stupid thing on Twitter. I personally don't believe Elon is Anti-Semitic.
I guarantee Disney has paused ad spending on Twitter due to controversy before Elon took it over. I guarantee it. Furthermore, Disney didn’t even lead the advertiser exodus. They joined after many other companies had already left. And they stayed on the platform for much, much longer than other companies did. Right after Elon took over, a lot of companies jumped ship way back then. But Disney stayed through it all. They even stayed through blue check mark debacle when randos would impersonate businesses, even causing Eli Lilly’s stock to temporarily fall 6% after a fake account announced Eli Lilly would give away insulin for free.
Iger is trying to play politics and virtue signal, just like the movies he's allowing in theaters.
He’s just being a good businessman and weighing the risk of spending millions of advertising dollars on a highly controversial platform led by a crackpot that could say something even dumber in two minutes vs the reward of a fraction of the customers they would attain by spending those dollars on more lucrative platforms.
Also,
brand advertising is literally virtue signaling. It’s practically the definition.