DIS Shareholders and Stock Info ONLY

[clarker99]

(Newest Quarter on the left. Sorry it is backwards but I am not re-doing my spreadsheet)

The one-two punch of the pandemic and a bad streaming strategy has crushed the DMED Division. The only segment making money is Linear Networks.

The narrative is that 'legacy' media is the problem but it is the only media making money for $DIS.

Linear Networks are still doing well and this is even with Disney removing Television Licensing revenue (TV/SVOD) from its ledger in FY2020 and moving all licensing under 'Content Sales & Licensing' (which is where Studios report).

The merger with Fox boosted networks profits, even with TV/SVOD being taken away.

TV/SVOD was a $3b-$4b boost to network revenue pre-merger.


In FY2020, Disney then immediately halved its licensing deals for the benefit of DIS+ subscription growth. They also removed $5billion in intrinsic revenue since 2019. This eliminated revenue had mostly benefited Networks and to a lesser extent Studios. These eliminations of cross segments revenue were all done as a way to force everything to DIS+ and pump streaming growth. Any downward trajectory in Linear Networks is a self-inflicted wound by purposely eliminating large amounts revenue from its ledger. In saying that, Linear is nowhere near as affected as the Studios side of the Division.

Content Sales and Licensing (Studios) takes on all TV/SVOD in FY2020 and up until the pandemic/streaming it was humming along. Enter streaming and its unintended consequences to the Studios.

Q2FY20/Q3FY20 the pandemic sinks its teeth in and the DIS+ pivot accelerates. Disney has started to cut out billions in Licensing deals and billions in intrinsic revenue to funnel all content DIS+. Theatre distributions disappear and everything you would ever want to watch from Disney is available for $5.99/mo over the pandemic while less are buying digital/blueray. Hence the losses on Content Sales & Licensing.

Now post-Covid, inflation has pushed costs super high and people are NOT returning to the cinema. Studios now have a real uphill battle on their hands as their business model has been blown up.

All the decisions made since Q4FY2019 have been made to funnel everything and everyone over to streaming and all at the expense of profit. They kept doubling down on removing revenue from other areas to force it to DIS+, meanwhile $DIS lights billions upon billions of dollars on fire chasing subscriber growth and takes massive losses.

The unintended consequences of DIS+ were all self inflicted to boost subscriber growth. A complete disaster of a strategy.

 

[Obi-J Kenobi]

View attachment 779424
(Newest Quarter on the left. Sorry it is backwards but I am not re-doing my spreadsheet)

The one-two punch of the pandemic and a bad streaming strategy has crushed the DMED Division. The only segment making money is Linear Networks.

The narrative is that 'legacy' media is the problem but it is the only media making money for $DIS.

Linear Networks are still doing well and this is even with Disney removing Television Licensing revenue (TV/SVOD) from its ledger in FY2020 and moving all licensing under 'Content Sales & Licensing' (which is where Studios report).

The merger with Fox boosted networks profits, even with TV/SVOD being taken away.

TV/SVOD was a $3b-$4b boost to network revenue pre-merger.
View attachment 779430

In FY2020, Disney then immediately halved its licensing deals for the benefit of DIS+ subscription growth. They also removed $5billion in intrinsic revenue since 2019. This eliminated revenue had mostly benefited Networks and to a lesser extent Studios. These eliminations of cross segments revenue were all done as a way to force everything to DIS+ and pump streaming growth. Any downward trajectory in Linear Networks is a self-inflicted wound by purposely eliminating large amounts revenue from its ledger. In saying that, Linear is nowhere near as affected as the Studios side of the Division.

Content Sales and Licensing (Studios) takes on all TV/SVOD in FY2020 and up until the pandemic/streaming it was humming along. Enter streaming and its unintended consequences to the Studios.

Q2FY20/Q3FY20 the pandemic sinks its teeth in and the DIS+ pivot accelerates. Disney has started to cut out billions in Licensing deals and billions in intrinsic revenue to funnel all content DIS+. Theatre distributions disappear and everything you would ever want to watch from Disney is available for $5.99/mo over the pandemic while less are buying digital/blueray. Hence the losses on Content Sales & Licensing.

Now post-Covid, inflation has pushed costs super high and people are NOT returning to the cinema. Studios now have a real uphill battle on their hands as their business model has been blown up.

All the decisions made since Q4FY2019 have been made to funnel everything and everyone over to streaming and all at the expense of profit. They kept doubling down on removing revenue from other areas to force it to DIS+, meanwhile $DIS lights billions upon billions of dollars on fire chasing subscriber growth and takes massive losses.

The unintended consequences of DIS+ were all self inflicted to boost subscriber growth. A complete disaster of a strategy.

When I signed up for DIS Boards, I was told there would be no math.

 

[clarker99]

Domestic Parks with Cruises removed (estimated, in millions)

2022 may just show what Disney's peak margin can be for DLR/WDW. Revenge travel along with Genie+/ILL sales and no discounts led to some impressive earnings.

 

[RivShore]

Some partners i would have never thought of. Not sure if the conflicts of interest could ever be overcome, though.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/21/espn-had-talks-with-nba-nfl-in-search-for-strategic-partner.html

ESPN held talks with NBA, NFL and MLB in search for strategic partner, sources say
Alex Sherman


As Disney considers a strategic partner for ESPN, Chief Executive Officer Bob Iger and ESPN head Jimmy Pitaro have held early talks about bringing professional sports leagues on as minority investors, including the National Football League, National Basketball Association and Major League Baseball, according to people familiar with the matter.

ESPN has held preliminary discussions with the NFL, NBA and MLB about a variety of new partnerships and investment structures, the people said. In a statement, an NBA spokesperson said, "We have a longstanding relationship with Disney and look forward to continuing the discussions around the future of our partnership."
related investing news

Hollywood strike may soon turn destructive for media stock investors, analysts say

CNBC Pro

Spokespeople for ESPN, the NFL and MLB declined to comment.

Talks with the NFL have occurred in conjunction with the league's own desire for a company to take a stake in its media assets, including the NFL Network, NFL.com and RedZone, said the people, who asked not to be named because the talks have been private.

The NBA and Disney have broached many potential structures around a renewal of media rights, the people said. Disney and Warner Bros. Discovery have exclusive negotiating rights with the NBA until next year.

Iger said last week in an interview with CNBC's David Faber that Disney is looking for a strategic partner for ESPN as it prepares to transition the sports network to streaming. He didn't elaborate on what exactly that meant beyond saying a partner could bring additional value with distribution or content. He acknowledged selling a stake in the business was possible.

Disney owns 80% of ESPN. Hearst owns the other 20%.

"Our position in sports is very unique and we want to stay in that business," Iger said to Faber. "We're going to be open minded about looking for strategic partners that could either help us with distribution or content. I'm not going to get too detailed about it, but we're bullish about sports as a media property."

Theoretically, a jointly owned subscription streaming service among multiple leagues could eventually give consumers new packages of games and other innovative ways to take in content.

The move would be a logical one for Disney as it tries to move past the traditional cable subscriber model and underscores how badly the company wants to find a solution for the sports network as its linear subscribers decline. Still, ESPN ratings have climbed in recent years on major sporting events. There's no better partner for sports content than the leagues, themselves.

Superficially, it may make less sense for the NBA, NFL and MLB which sign lucrative media rights deals with many media partners that fuel team revenue and player salaries with a range of media companies.

Professional sports leagues could face conflicts of interest if they take a minority stake in ESPN. Owning a stake in ESPN may irritate Disney's competitors, such as Comcast's NBCUniversal, Fox, Amazon, Paramount Global and Apple, who help make the leagues billions of dollars by participating in bidding wars for sports rights. Taking an ownership stake in ESPN could give leagues the incentive to boost the value of that entity rather than striking deals with competitors.

There would also be hurdles for Disney. ESPN also employs hundreds of journalists that cover the major sports leagues. Selling an ownership stake to the leagues could cloud the perception of objectivity for ESPN's reporting apparatus.

Still, the leagues are already business partners with ESPN. It's possible ESPN could put measures in place to ensure reporters can continue to cover the leagues while minimizing conflicts, but it adds another layer of complexity to any deal.
A streaming-first ESPN

ESPN is trying to forge a new path as a digital-first, streaming entity. Disney realizes ESPN won't be able to make money like it previously has in a traditional TV model.

Selling a minority stake in ESPN to the leagues could mitigate future rights payments, allowing Disney to better compete with the big balance sheets of Apple, Google and Amazon. It would also guarantee ESPN a steady flow of premium content from the leagues.

Until last quarter, Disney's bundle of linear TV networks still had revenue growth because affiliate fee increases to pay-TV providers — largely driven by ESPN — made up for the millions of Americans who cancel cable each year. That trend finally ended last quarter, according to people familiar with the matter. Accelerating cancellations have now overwhelmed fee increases, and linear TV revenue outside of advertising has begun to decline.

"A lot has been said about renting [sports right] versus owning," Iger said last week in his CNBC interview. "If you can rent it and continue to be profitable from renting, which we have been and we believe we will continue to be, then there's value in staying in it. We have great relationships with Major League Baseball, and the National Hockey League, and various college conferences, and of course the NFL and the NBA. It's not just about the live sports coverage of those leagues, those teams, it's also about all of the shoulder programming it throws off on ESPN and what you can do with it in a streaming world."

ESPN would like to morph itself into a streaming hub for all live sports. Management would like to launch a feature allowing ESPN.com or the ESPN app to funnel users to games no matter where they stream, CNBC reported earlier this year.

While striking a deal with professional sports leagues wouldn't be easy, Disney appears to be pushing the envelope on its thinking to prepare for a streaming-dominated world that includes its full portfolio of sports rights.

"If [a partner] comes to the table with value, whether it's content value, distribution value, whether it's capital, whether it just helps derisk the business — that wouldn't be the primary driver — but if they come to the table with value that enables ESPN to make a transition to a direct-to-consumer offering, we're going to be very open minded about that," Iger said.

 

[RivShore]

Domestic Parks with Cruises removed (estimated, in millions)
View attachment 779475
2022 may just show what Disney's peak margin can be for DLR/WDW. Revenge travel along with Genie+/ILL sales and no discounts led to some impressive earnings.

Thanks for this.

So if my math is right (Obi, please confirm. LOL), parks can have an OI decline of 30% and just be back at pre-covid numbers. Analysts hair will be on fire, but that is just back to normal. It is going to be an eventful few years for this company, on so many levels.

 

[Obi-J Kenobi]

Thanks for this.

So if my math is right (Obi, please confirm. LOL), parks can have an OI decline of 30% and just be back at pre-covid numbers. Analysts hair will be on fire, but that is just back to normal. It is going to be an eventful few years for this company, on so many levels.

Sure. Looks good to me.

 

[clarker99]

Thanks for this.

So if my math is right (Obi, please confirm. LOL), parks can have an OI decline of 30% and just be back at pre-covid numbers. Analysts hair will be on fire, but that is just back to normal. It is going to be an eventful few years for this company, on so many levels.

I think FY23 will out do FY22 in almost every metric on the parks side. Then comes the regression back more normality at least in Domestic Parks. I think we will see a nice sized correction down starting in Q4FY23 and into FY24.

 

[RivShore]

I think FY23 will out do FY22 in almost every metric on the parks side. Then comes the regression back more normality at least in Domestic Parks. I think we will see a nice sized correction down starting in Q4FY23 and into FY24.

That's a good point, international parks could pick some of the domestic declines for a while as they experience their version of revenge travel.

 

[RivShore]

Interesting thoughts from a former Hulu exec.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/46...ised-to-reshape-the-streaming-wars-once-again

Disney's Dilemma: Hulu Is Poised To Reshape The Streaming Wars Once Again​

Jul. 18, 2023 8:12 AM
https://seekingalpha.com/author/nic...artier|section_asset:author_brief|author_icon
Nick Cartier
42 Followers

Summary​

• The fate of Hulu appears to be another high stakes poker game between Disney and Comcast that is poised to alter the future landscape of the streaming wars.
• Shifting focus exclusively to Disney+ makes sense on paper, but the competitive dynamics of Hulu create a complex dilemma for Bob Iger.
• Competitors stand to benefit if the Hulu brand falls into their hands as the second tier of streaming platforms need a boost to survive.

Michael M. Santiago

Disclaimer: The author of this article, Nicholas Cartier, is the former head of corporate intel at Hulu and is not a current shareholder in Disney or Comcast. This article is intended to be speculative in nature based on his tenure as an executive in the streaming sector.

The Walt Disney Company (NYSE:DIS) created a stir last week when rumors of Bob Iger's interest in selling Disney's stake in Hulu spread across the market.

Hulu will certainly go down in TV history as one of its greatest experiments, as the rise of OTT streaming managed to bring together media's fiercest rivals - Disney, FOX, NBCU, and Time Warner - under one umbrella (which created a complicated Board dynamic that at times resembled HBO's Succession).

The Mouse House's rumored divestiture of Hulu's less than profitable business makes perfect sense on paper, given branding confusion with Disney+, Hulu's lack of international presence, and Iger's desire to have full control over its content distribution and maximize profits.

Marrying the techie Hulu brand with the family oriented Disney empire always felt like a stretch, even from the get-go when Disney acquired Fox's 30% stake in Hulu. However, the question of whether or not Disney should retain (or expand) its stake in Hulu continues to boil down to competitive dynamics.

Who is willing to take over the control of Hulu? ​

Comcast (NYSE:CMCSA) is the obvious buyer here given its current equity stake and its intimate knowledge of the asset through historical ties (don't forget NBCUniversal was the initial baker of Hulu ahead of Disney back in 2007). Thus, it's feasible to think Comcast would be willing to pay top dollar for the asset, ditch the "Peacock" brand, and transform Hulu into its direct-to-consumer powerhouse. All of which is great long term value for Comcast and merely a short term gain for Disney.

Next up is Paramount (NASDAQ:PARA), which was the lone major media conglomerate left out of the Hulu joint venture. There's no doubt Paramount+ could use a boost in its library of intellectual property and Hulu's audience demographic aligns with Viacom's properties (e.g., South Park was Hulu's crown jewel for nearly a decade). Again, I believe Paramount will be willing to pay top dollar for control of Hulu and there's a scenario where Peacock (Comcast) and Paramount+ could join forces under the Hulu brand to battle Disney+, Netflix (NFLX), and Amazon Prime Video (AMZN) in the streaming wars.

Again, both scenarios above would be fueling the fire of competitors that will need a boost to survive in the hyper competitive streaming distribution arena, which would be a strategic miscue that Bob Iger can't ignore.

Alternative options for Hulu that make sense for Disney​

Bundle: Stay the course! Disney has aggressively been pushing a bundle of its various SVOD properties (Hulu, Disney+, and ESPN+) for quite some time, which is working to a certain degree. However, I can't help but feel trying to market and build three separate distribution brands in conjunction places Disney at a disadvantage when compared to the streamlining of Netflix, Amazon, and now Max (WBD).

Spin off Hulu Live (virtual-MVPD): Hulu currently operates two primary business models 1) SVOD and 2) Virtual-MVPD and vastly different price points. The SVOD business is an on-demand subscription plan (priced $7.99+) that overlaps with the pricing and packaging model for Disney+. Hulu Live is a digital cable package (priced $69.99+) that aggregates pay-TV networks (think live sports and live news) and resembles the traditional cable package business model.

Hulu Live provides value to Disney (the owner of ESPN and 20+ other pay-TV networks) because it's pulling young consumers back into the ultra lucrative traditional cable model, while helping Disney justify its monster affiliate rates across all MVPD distributors. It's worth noting that Hulu Live has little value to Comcast, given the company's massive investment in its own MVPD brand with Xfinity X1.

Perhaps, there's a scenario where Disney can merge Hulu's SVOD business (+ subscribers) into the "Disney+" brand and keep the Hulu brand alive exclusively as a virtual-MVPD built around live sports and news.

Shutter the Hulu brand: Call me crazy but buying out Comcast's equity stake and shuttering Hulu could make sense for Disney. There's a scenario where sunsetting the Hulu brand and taking a massive write-off in effort to prevent Hulu from falling into the hands of a competitor provides long term value for Disney's streaming operations. It's easy for the market to overemphasize the value of Hulu's brand on Wall Street because it's a household name domestically, but it's important to remember the Hulu brand shutters in comparison to Disney overseas.

Recommendations​

In the unlikely scenario where either Comcast, Paramount, or both take the reign of Hulu I'd recommend a strong buy for either controlling stakeholder. I believe an acquisition of Hulu for a "tier 2" direct-to-consumer streaming will immediately elevate its distribution to "tier 1" (alongside Disney, Netflix, and Amazon) and cement the company as a long term player in the streaming ecosystem. In conjunction, I believe a deal of this nature would create a short-term bump for Disney, while diminishing the company's long term value due to increased competitive pressure. I believe Disney made too big of a bet in its $70B+ acquisition of Fox to let Hulu slip into the hands of a rival streamer.

In the scenario where Disney keeps (and ultimately expands) its controlling interest in Hulu, I see a moderate bump in long-term value if the company. Acquiring NBCU's remaining 30% stake in Hulu will be a short term "tax" Disney will have to pay to maintain its position as a market leader but I see value in combining all SVOD (Disney+, ESPN Originals, and Hulu) into the Disney+ offering and keeping the Hulu brand in tact as a live TV service (or sunsetting the Hulu brand all together). All the scenarios above, combined with Bob Iger's strategic compass should provide long term equity value to investors.

This article was written by
https://seekingalpha.com/author/nic...cartier|section_asset:author_root|author_icon
Nick Cartier
42 Followers

Nicholas Cartier is an advisor and CEO of connected TV (CTV) focused media & advertising companies. Previously he served in a senior role on Hulu’s corporate strategy team where

 

[clarker99]

Interesting thoughts from a former Hulu exec.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/46...ised-to-reshape-the-streaming-wars-once-again

Disney's Dilemma: Hulu Is Poised To Reshape The Streaming Wars Once Again​

Jul. 18, 2023 8:12 AM
https://seekingalpha.com/author/nick-cartier?source=content_type:react|url_first_level:article|section:author_brief:nick-cartier|section_asset:author_brief|author_icon
Nick Cartier
42 Followers

Summary​

• The fate of Hulu appears to be another high stakes poker game between Disney and Comcast that is poised to alter the future landscape of the streaming wars.
• Shifting focus exclusively to Disney+ makes sense on paper, but the competitive dynamics of Hulu create a complex dilemma for Bob Iger.
• Competitors stand to benefit if the Hulu brand falls into their hands as the second tier of streaming platforms need a boost to survive.

Michael M. Santiago

Disclaimer: The author of this article, Nicholas Cartier, is the former head of corporate intel at Hulu and is not a current shareholder in Disney or Comcast. This article is intended to be speculative in nature based on his tenure as an executive in the streaming sector.

The Walt Disney Company (NYSE:DIS) created a stir last week when rumors of Bob Iger's interest in selling Disney's stake in Hulu spread across the market.

Hulu will certainly go down in TV history as one of its greatest experiments, as the rise of OTT streaming managed to bring together media's fiercest rivals - Disney, FOX, NBCU, and Time Warner - under one umbrella (which created a complicated Board dynamic that at times resembled HBO's Succession).

The Mouse House's rumored divestiture of Hulu's less than profitable business makes perfect sense on paper, given branding confusion with Disney+, Hulu's lack of international presence, and Iger's desire to have full control over its content distribution and maximize profits.

Marrying the techie Hulu brand with the family oriented Disney empire always felt like a stretch, even from the get-go when Disney acquired Fox's 30% stake in Hulu. However, the question of whether or not Disney should retain (or expand) its stake in Hulu continues to boil down to competitive dynamics.

Who is willing to take over the control of Hulu? ​

Comcast (NYSE:CMCSA) is the obvious buyer here given its current equity stake and its intimate knowledge of the asset through historical ties (don't forget NBCUniversal was the initial baker of Hulu ahead of Disney back in 2007). Thus, it's feasible to think Comcast would be willing to pay top dollar for the asset, ditch the "Peacock" brand, and transform Hulu into its direct-to-consumer powerhouse. All of which is great long term value for Comcast and merely a short term gain for Disney.

Next up is Paramount (NASDAQ:PARA), which was the lone major media conglomerate left out of the Hulu joint venture. There's no doubt Paramount+ could use a boost in its library of intellectual property and Hulu's audience demographic aligns with Viacom's properties (e.g., South Park was Hulu's crown jewel for nearly a decade). Again, I believe Paramount will be willing to pay top dollar for control of Hulu and there's a scenario where Peacock (Comcast) and Paramount+ could join forces under the Hulu brand to battle Disney+, Netflix (NFLX), and Amazon Prime Video (AMZN) in the streaming wars.

Again, both scenarios above would be fueling the fire of competitors that will need a boost to survive in the hyper competitive streaming distribution arena, which would be a strategic miscue that Bob Iger can't ignore.

Alternative options for Hulu that make sense for Disney​

Bundle: Stay the course! Disney has aggressively been pushing a bundle of its various SVOD properties (Hulu, Disney+, and ESPN+) for quite some time, which is working to a certain degree. However, I can't help but feel trying to market and build three separate distribution brands in conjunction places Disney at a disadvantage when compared to the streamlining of Netflix, Amazon, and now Max (WBD).

Spin off Hulu Live (virtual-MVPD): Hulu currently operates two primary business models 1) SVOD and 2) Virtual-MVPD and vastly different price points. The SVOD business is an on-demand subscription plan (priced $7.99+) that overlaps with the pricing and packaging model for Disney+. Hulu Live is a digital cable package (priced $69.99+) that aggregates pay-TV networks (think live sports and live news) and resembles the traditional cable package business model.

Hulu Live provides value to Disney (the owner of ESPN and 20+ other pay-TV networks) because it's pulling young consumers back into the ultra lucrative traditional cable model, while helping Disney justify its monster affiliate rates across all MVPD distributors. It's worth noting that Hulu Live has little value to Comcast, given the company's massive investment in its own MVPD brand with Xfinity X1.

Perhaps, there's a scenario where Disney can merge Hulu's SVOD business (+ subscribers) into the "Disney+" brand and keep the Hulu brand alive exclusively as a virtual-MVPD built around live sports and news.

Shutter the Hulu brand: Call me crazy but buying out Comcast's equity stake and shuttering Hulu could make sense for Disney. There's a scenario where sunsetting the Hulu brand and taking a massive write-off in effort to prevent Hulu from falling into the hands of a competitor provides long term value for Disney's streaming operations. It's easy for the market to overemphasize the value of Hulu's brand on Wall Street because it's a household name domestically, but it's important to remember the Hulu brand shutters in comparison to Disney overseas.

Recommendations​

In the unlikely scenario where either Comcast, Paramount, or both take the reign of Hulu I'd recommend a strong buy for either controlling stakeholder. I believe an acquisition of Hulu for a "tier 2" direct-to-consumer streaming will immediately elevate its distribution to "tier 1" (alongside Disney, Netflix, and Amazon) and cement the company as a long term player in the streaming ecosystem. In conjunction, I believe a deal of this nature would create a short-term bump for Disney, while diminishing the company's long term value due to increased competitive pressure. I believe Disney made too big of a bet in its $70B+ acquisition of Fox to let Hulu slip into the hands of a rival streamer.

In the scenario where Disney keeps (and ultimately expands) its controlling interest in Hulu, I see a moderate bump in long-term value if the company. Acquiring NBCU's remaining 30% stake in Hulu will be a short term "tax" Disney will have to pay to maintain its position as a market leader but I see value in combining all SVOD (Disney+, ESPN Originals, and Hulu) into the Disney+ offering and keeping the Hulu brand in tact as a live TV service (or sunsetting the Hulu brand all together). All the scenarios above, combined with Bob Iger's strategic compass should provide long term equity value to investors.

This article was written by
https://seekingalpha.com/author/nick-cartier?source=content_type:react|url_first_level:article|section:author_root:nick-cartier|section_asset:author_root|author_icon
Nick Cartier
42 Followers

Nicholas Cartier is an advisor and CEO of connected TV (CTV) focused media & advertising companies. Previously he served in a senior role on Hulu’s corporate strategy team where

I question whether Disney can get to streaming profitability without Hulu?

I have Hulu making an estimated operating profit of about $3b in FY22.

$3billion sounds great but the problem at Disney is the astronomical marketing and tech costs that their DTC division racks up and dwarf the revenues of Hulu and Dis+ (ESPN+ still loses money).

 

[clarker99]

Revenue/Costs/Operating Income (000)

Yikes.

Disney has the subs. Prices have since been raised but they will need to go up again.

A recurring theme across all Disney divisions are very high marketing expenses.

 

[Elijah Abrams]

I question whether Disney can get to streaming profitability without Hulu?

I have Hulu making an estimated operating profit of about $3b in FY22.

$3billion sounds great but the problem at Disney is the astronomical marketing and tech costs that their DTC division racks up and dwarf the revenues of Hulu and Dis+ (ESPN+ still loses money).

I believe Disney has a pretty big film and TV library, even without the acquired Fox properties, that they can expand Disney+ with. They've got content from ABC, Freeform, ESPN, Marvel, Pixar, Lucasfilm, Walt Disney Pictures, A+E Networks (since they have a stake in that), Disney Channel, Disney XD, Disney Junior, ABC Studios, ABC Signature, Walt Disney Television, Touchstone Pictures/Television, Buena Vista Television, and Hollywood Pictures.

 

[Jwaire]

A recurring theme across all Disney divisions are very high marketing expenses.

Who know's what they're cramming into "marketing" though. It's not all advertising, media events and commercials. On the linear side, the money they're paying to cable companies is considered marketing dollars.

I believe Disney has a pretty big film and TV library, even without the acquired Fox properties, that they can expand Disney+ with. They've got content from ABC, Freeform, ESPN, Marvel, Pixar, Lucasfilm, Walt Disney Pictures, A+E Networks (since they have a stake in that), Disney Channel, Disney XD, Disney Junior, ABC Studios, ABC Signature, Walt Disney Television, Touchstone Pictures/Television, Buena Vista Television, and Hollywood Pictures.

They tried that approach too and they're still doing it, although a bit slower to add. For example, I noticed today that "Home Improvement" is all of a sudden on Disney+.

I'm just not sure it translates into growth or the willingness of current subscribers to pay more.

If they want easy money, maybe they should consider licensing some big budget content back to Netflix again, but that hurts Disney+.

I'm not sure they're ready to accept Disney+ being a tier 2 streaming service. However, there might be some middle ground there. Maybe Netflix gets back the MCU and Star Wars content, but not the new shows like The Mandalorian?

 

[clarker99]

I'm just not sure it translates into growth or the willingness of current subscribers to pay more.

What is the threshold? based on the 2022 data Netflix made like $12/month per paid user in revenue worldwide. DIS+ is making like $4-$4.50/mo per user worldwide. Granted the Hotstar mess is driving that number lower.

Disney really undervalued its brand to chase subs.

 

[Jwaire]

What is the threshold? based on the 2022 data Netflix made like $12/month per paid user in revenue worldwide. DIS+ is making like $4-$4.50/mo per user worldwide. Granted the Hotstar mess is driving that number lower.

Disney really undervalued its brand to chase subs.

Absolutely.

They could raise the price today from $10.99/per month (ad free) to $12.99 and people wouldn't bat an eye. It needs to be higher, more a kin to $14.99/per month IMO.

They could tier it off based on streams and quality like Netflix and Max, offering multiple 4k streams for $16.99/per month.

They need to learn to leverage their customer base. Offer discounts for affinity groups like Hulu/ESPN bundle subscribers, D23, DVC, Annual Passholders, etc.

And cut off the people that are sharing accounts, like Netflix.

 

[RivShore]

What is the threshold? based on the 2022 data Netflix made like $12/month per paid user in revenue worldwide. DIS+ is making like $4-$4.50/mo per user worldwide. Granted the Hotstar mess is driving that number lower.

Disney really undervalued its brand to chase subs.

If you have it handy - what is arpu excluding Hotstar and what is total subs and revenue without Hotstar?

 

[HokieRaven5]

If you have it handy - what is arpu excluding Hotstar and what is total subs and revenue without Hotstar?

As of Q2 2023

Disney+

Domestic (US and Canada): $7.14/mo per subscriber $330.58M/month 46.3M subs

International (No Hotstar): $5.93/mo per subscriber $347.8M/month 58.6M subs

Total Subs sans Hotstar: 104.9M


ESPN+: $5.64/mo $142.7M/month 25.3M subs

Hulu SVOD: $11.73/mo 512.6M/mo 43.7M Subs
Hulu Live: $92.32/mo 406.2M/mo 4.4M subs

 

[RivShore]

As of Q2 2023

Disney+

Domestic (US and Canada): $7.14/mo per subscriber $330.58M/month 46.3M subs

International (No Hotstar): $5.93/mo per subscriber $347.8M/month 58.6M subs

Total Subs sans Hotstar: 104.9M


ESPN+: $5.64/mo $142.7M/month 25.3M subs

Hulu SVOD: $11.73/mo 512.6M/mo 43.7M Subs
Hulu Live: $92.32/mo 406.2M/mo 4.4M subs

Thanks!!

So D+ still has a ways to go on per sub basis to match Hulu & Netflix. And these would have included the last price increase, I think.

Still very impressive total sub numbers, even without Hotstar.

 

[bryaalre]

Disney absolutely came in too low to market in order to attract subs. They are trying to make up the price but you can’t just raise prices by $5 all at once.

Their domestic arpu is way below Netflix but they also need to combine Hulu and Disney plus in order to have real full service. While they would “lose” subs as many 43.7M Hulu and 46.3M Disney plus subs are already part of the bundle, their arpu would be much higher. Plus they could lower marketing and tech costs as they wouldn’t need to advertise and run 2 separate services.

 

[wabbott]

Thanks for this.

So if my math is right (Obi, please confirm. LOL), parks can have an OI decline of 30% and just be back at pre-covid numbers. Analysts hair will be on fire, but that is just back to normal. It is going to be an eventful few years for this company, on so many levels.

IIRC, it was in the 2020 year that Paycheck started the nickel and dime increases in the parks - Genie, ticket hikes, food, rooms, etc.