DIS Shareholders and Stock Info ONLY

[Suger Mag]

Or staying home on your own couch and watching on your 4K TV with everything at your fingertips for a fraction of the price is the reason. Especially for families.

I have no desire to ever go to a movie theater again, and my TV is only 54 inches.

 

[BrianL]

Part of the problem, not the entire problem. Make great content that is desirable and people will show up. See Mario Bros.

Ehh, Super Mario Bros. was hardly "great content." I mean, I enjoyed it fine, but it was a pretty basic, by-the-numbers adaptation. It was good, sure, but it succeeded based on the popularity of the games.

And for all your talk of "agendas" - which shouldn't matter and doesn't except to the outrage machine - SMB actually has more of that stuff than Wish did. I'm honestly surprised that you tout it as the "right" way to make movies. Of course it did well, which to you means it must be good.

 

[PolymerSkywalker]

People don’t trust Disney anymore. Yes SMB had a little agenda in it just like Barbie did. However, they knew exactly who their target audience was and made a movie for them. I agree SMB wasn’t some epic saga that will win academy awards, but it was perfectly made and
marketed to Nintendo fans. Who now have money and kids to take to the movie. Nintendo leaders were also involved and made sure they stayed completely true to the essence of the characters. If only Star Wars could care this much about its legacy characters!

This is actually a great comparison. SMB used Jack Black in a great casting that everyone loved. SW used Jack Black in a terrible casting that was widely mocked and panned.

One knew what their fans wanted and one didn’t.

 

[PsylockeSmythe]

Yes, but good movies (good storytelling) such as Tom Gun Maverick, Mario, Oppenheimer, etc. still make a lot of money. Movies today no longer appeal to the general audience. People are tired of what Hollywood is producing…it obvious what they are selling. So people are boycotting and waiting on word of mouth. If it is really good then they go to theater.

There is a shift in the way people see movies today but good storytelling will get them back. Unfortunately, Hollywood has to change their focus so that majority will go to theaters. Right now, they are killing theaters based on the product (which is garbage) they are releasing. The people have spoken.

I've not seen a movie in a theater since December of 2019. The closest I have come to seeing a movie in one since then was on our Disney Cruise in 2022. Otherwise, I have no desire to go see a movie in a theater and this is from someone who use to see 1 or 2 movies a month. It is not the storytelling or the subject matter for me. I just no longer see going to see a movie in a theater as a good value. I would now rather wait until it is released on disc or on one of the streaming services that we have.

So for me and my wife, there is no amount of good storytelling that will get us back to seeing a movie in a theater.

I 100% believe if you make great content, people will show up. Tell a great story, stop focusing on messages and agendas and tell a flipping great story. People want to be entertained and not lectured to, it’s really that simple.

100% guarantee you you make a movie right now where Luke Skywalker is back and the real Luke not the loser in TLJ and it will make a billion dollars.

Bring back the butt kicking Iron Man, Hulk, and Thor = Billion dollars guaranteed.

It’s not hard, you just can’t make cat lady movies like the Marvels and expect to make money. I told everyone on here months ago that The Marvels would flop, and guess what it did. That’s not what the marvel audience wants. Go rehire John Favreau and pay him to make you a Marvel Movie again. Stop hiring obscure directors who have done nothing on this level because of their race and gender. Hire the best people period. I don’t care male or female or what race……..hire the best period.

See my reply above, there are some people that no matter how good the storytelling is or if they treat the characters how they are in the comics or how they were back in the day that will make they go to a theater. Covid changed a lot of things and this is one of them. In 2019 there were over 1.2 billion tickets sold, with an average price around $9.16, in 2020, that number dropped to 211K, 2021 was 434K and an average price of $10.40, 2022 was 705K and $10.43 and so far in 2023, it is 874K and $10.53.

So far ticket sales are running around 70% of pre-covid levels. Pushing release dates up on when movies are going to be released on disc or streaming in my opinion is a big reason why people are not going to a theater. Why spend $30+ for the wife and I to go to a matinee and getting popcorn and drinks, when I can wait 3 to 4 months and watch it from the comfort of my home for less. I don't have to deal with people using their cell phones, taking our seats or just being rude during a movie and if I have to use the bathroom I can hit pause

People don’t trust Disney anymore. Yes SMB had a little agenda in it just like Barbie did. However, they knew exactly who their target audience was and made a movie for them. I agree SMB wasn’t some epic saga that will win academy awards, but it was perfectly made and
marketed to Nintendo fans. Who now have money and kids to take to the movie. Nintendo leaders were also involved and made sure they stayed completely true to the essence of the characters. If only Star Wars could care this much about its legacy characters!

This is actually a great comparison. SMB used Jack Black in a great casting that everyone loved. SW used Jack Black in a terrible casting that was widely mocked and panned.

One knew what their fans wanted and one didn’t.

Saying that people don't trust Disney is using an overly broad stroke. My wife and I haven't lost any trust in Disney and she has been liking the majority of the series that have been released on Disney+. She has never really been a marvel fan, so I think that the last Marvel movie she watched was the original Doctor Strange.

Could they do better with Star Wars, yes, but I've enjoyed most of the Star Wars series that have shown up on Disney+. I'm just someone that will wait until the whole series is out before I watch and don't watch them weekly.

Psy

 

[PolymerSkywalker]

I understand your position and do believe the box office is indeed down around 30% currently. However, when you thread the needle and give the fans what they want there are still hits to be had. Barbie, Oppenheimer, Super Mario, Guardians, and Avatar all prove this can still happen.

Disney is just struggling with three things mainly. Giving the fans great content that appeals to the broadest possible audience. Controlling their massive ballooning budgets. Getting the streaming window right.

 

[Brian Noble]

Ticket sales on pace to be 30% lower than 2019, folks aren’t racing to the theaters as much anymore. Ticket sales have been on a downward trend since the early 2000s.

It's interesting to think about why, because this isn't confined to theaters.

We've been season ticket holders at Michigan since I started teaching here in the late 90s. Somehow, they manage to fill that huge hole in the ground with 107K+ people, game-in and game-out. But Michigan and a very select subset of other universities are the exception. College football attendance has been on the decline for a long time now.

There are elements of a live game that you cannot translate through the screen. That moment when a bolt of joy runs through every single person in the stadium* is positively electric. It doesn't happen often--maybe only a handful of times each year--but I've never experienced anything like it anywhere else. The Powers That Be have done quite a bit to improve the in-stadium experience over the past several years. The a cappella ending to Mr. Brightside is a good recent example.

However, in many ways, the in-person experience is awful. My living room is warm and dry. If you wanted to sell a ticket on the secondary market, you were looking at $500 per person minimum after ticketmaster takes their cut, so we gave up $2000+ to go to the game. Parking at home is free, and it's much easier to get in and out--we live 10-15 minutes from the stadium, and it took us an hour and a half to get home from our seats. The camera angles are better, and you can see the game much more clearly. The concession stand in my kitchen is both infinitely better and significantly less expensive than the food in the stadium. And the commercials are bad enough at home, but in the stadium they are positively horrible: I think FOX managed at least three iterations of score->commercial break->kickoff->commercial break, with a few seconds of game time in the midst of about 6-7 minutes. I've gotten so conditioned to commercial breaks that I was surprised when we didn't get one after the first turnover.

I'm glad I went--our kids are both alumni, and they came home for the holiday weekend to join us for the game. It was intolerably nerve-wracking and glorious. But, I also understand why people are increasingly choosing to skip the in-person experience and watch from home.


----------
*: Well, not quite everyone.

 

[HokieRaven5]

It's interesting to think about why, because this isn't confined to theaters.

We've been season ticket holders at Michigan since I started teaching here in the late 90s. Somehow, they manage to fill that huge hole in the ground with 107K+ people, game-in and game-out. But Michigan and a very select subset of other universities are the exception. College football attendance has been on the decline for a long time now.

There are elements of a live game that you cannot translate through the screen. That moment when a bolt of joy runs through every single person in the stadium* is positively electric. It doesn't happen often--maybe only a handful of times each year--but I've never experienced anything like it anywhere else. The Powers That Be have done quite a bit to improve the in-stadium experience over the past several years. The a cappella ending to Mr. Brightside is a good recent example.

However, in many ways, the in-person experience is awful. My living room is warm and dry. If you wanted to sell a ticket on the secondary market, you were looking at $500 per person minimum after ticketmaster takes their cut, so we gave up $2000+ to go to the game. Parking at home is free, and it's much easier to get in and out--we live 10-15 minutes from the stadium, and it took us an hour and a half to get home from our seats. The camera angles are better, and you can see the game much more clearly. The concession stand in my kitchen is both infinitely better and significantly less expensive than the food in the stadium. And the commercials are bad enough at home, but during the game they are positively horrible: I think FOX managed at least three iterations of score->commercial break->kickoff->commercial break, with a few seconds of game time in the midst of about 6-7 minutes. I've gotten so conditioned to commercial breaks that I was surprised when we didn't get one after the first turnover.

I'm glad I went--our kids are both alumni, and they came home for the holiday weekend to join us for the game. It was intolerably nerve-wracking and glorious. But, I also understand why people are increasingly choosing to skip the in-person experience and watch from home.

View attachment 813834
----------
*: Well, not quite everyone.

High Definition experiences from the comfort of home have changed the landscape. Streaming to allow nearly everything at a point and click only expanded that.

As an NFL fan I can sit at home with RedZone on and watch multiple teams scoring with no commercial breaks.

I miss the days of being in Blacksburg and jumping to Enter Sandman and all of our traditions, but I’m not itching to make the journey there for a weekend when I can just catch the games and others at home.

Yes, there are moments of absolute electricity in a live event, but they aren’t as big of a motivator which is why we’ve seen stadiums try to add more in game experiences in general.

With the theater, unless there’s some fanatic group watching nobody really reacts that much to movies (at least in my area), so there’s not that whole audience active experience going on. I’m good just watching at home on the streaming services I do have (though sometimes I’ll still catch a Disney film if it sways my kids) but I’ll mostly go to the theater with my kids for services I don’t have (Mario, Transformers, Paw Patrol)

 

[PolymerSkywalker]

If you are in a stadium or arena when something incredible happens, there is simply no substitute for that. I am often tempted to stay home and not use my season tickets, but once or twice a season something amazing happens and there is no place on earth I would rather be than there.

Movies can still be that imho. Top Gun Maverick was a family event with like 20 people all attending together and getting a nice meal before. My niece set this up weeks in advance and she is 23 years old.

I love Ghostbusters, like I really love it. Played with the toys as a kid and everything. The next Ghostbusters will be a big deal to me with my whole extended family there opening night.

I just want Disney to win again and make movies that are appointment viewing by the families that made Disney the juggernaut it is / was. I also want the stock price to go up!

 

[wabbott]

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/b...hall-bob-iger-preview-wall-street-1235666300/

Disney Town Hall Preview: What Wall Street Wants From Bob Iger

At the annual event on Nov. 28 with Hulu and its theme parks empire in focus, the CEO could face questions about how to fend off activist investors, fix the studio, and decide on possible deals involving its linear TV and ESPN businesses.

by George Szalai
November 27, 2023 6:04am PST

Disney‘s decision to bring back long-time CEO Bob Iger to replace beleaguered Bob Chapek on Nov. 20, 2022 sent shock waves through Hollywood. The stock closed that week at $98.87 amid hopes he could right a struggling ship.

On Nov. 28 last year, Iger used a town hall meeting to outline first priorities and told staff that he did not expect the company to make any significant acquisitions during his second run as CEO. “We have a great set of assets here,” he said. “Nothing is forever, but I am very, very comfortable with each of the assets that we have.”

Fast-forward exactly a year, and some things have changed for the better for Disney, with Iger having focused on cost-cutting (putting Disney on track to achieve roughly $7.5 billion in cost reductions, up from the previously targeted $5.5. billion), streamlining and optimizing the company via restructuring moves.

But the conglomerate’s stock has remained under pressure, ending the pre-Thanksgiving session at $95.07, below its year-ago level, as investors and analysts are waiting for more clarity on Iger’s next steps for Disney.

MoffettNathanson analyst Michael Nathanson in a Nov. 9 report maintained his “buy” rating and $115 stock price target on Disney, noting the stock’s challenges over the past year. “On November 21, 2022, upon the news of former CEO Bob Iger’s return to The Walt Disney Company, we upgraded Disney to ‘buy’ with a $120 price target,” he wrote. “Despite Iger taking many of the quick and dramatic actions that we expected from him, Disney’s stock price is down 8 percent since our upgrade versus a 11 percent upward move in the S&P 500 over that time frame for a very disappointing 19 percent underperformance.”

In this environment, activist investor Nelson Peltz’s Trian Fund, one of the company’s largest shareholders, has boosted its stake in Disney further and signaled another potential push for board seats after abandoning a proxy battle in February in a big win for Iger. ValueAct Capital, another activist investor, has also built a notable stake in Disney and has been “in dialogue” with the conglomerate’s management, according to a recent CNBC report.

With that as a backdrop, Iger is getting ready to address another staff town hall Tuesday, Nov. 28, and observers will listen out for possible new hints or guidance for what the next phase of “building” will bring after the problem-solving phase.

After all, Iger said on a recent earnings call: “While we still have work to do to continue improving results, our progress has allowed us to move beyond this period of fixing and begin building our businesses again.” In line with that, an internal memo said that the town hall would focus on “future building opportunities” for the conglomerate. “Combined with our portfolio of valuable businesses, brands and assets — and the way we manage them together — Disney has a strong hand that differentiates us from others in our industry,” Iger argued.

The CEO also used the earnings update to share four strategic priorities: making Disney’s streaming business profitable, building ESPN for the digital future, “improving the output and economics of our film studios” and expanding the company’s live experiences business.

In September, Disney put a spotlight on that final priority, unveiling plans for a $60 billion expansion of its theme parks, cruise lines, and other products and experiences business.

But questions abound. “Disney is continuing on an ambitious cost-cutting strategy that likely is causing some uncertainty within the Magic Kingdom,” Third Bridge analyst Jamie Lumley warned in a recent report. “As the business looks to slash costs and make streaming profitable, there are sure to be concerns about cutting too deep and impacting the business going forward.”

With that in mind, Wall Street will listen out for possible color, body language or even outright updates on various topics during the town hall, at which Iger will be joined by film unit head Alan Bergman, Dana Walden, who leads the TV business, ESPN chair James Pitaro, and theme parks and experiences head Josh D’Amaro.

Here is a look at some of the key issues in observers’ focus.

Reenergizing the studios

Putting the studios back on a successful path is a particular priority for Iger. He has described his turnaround recipe as including a focus on core brands and franchises and “reducing output overall to enable us to concentrate on fewer projects and improve quality while continuing our efforts around the creation of fresh and compelling original IP.”

The CEO even acknowledged on the call “that our performance from a quality perspective wasn’t up to the standards we set for ourselves,” concluding: “We’re working to consolidate — make less, focus more on quality.” Only time will tell if the town hall will bring further updates on what this will mean for the studio slate.

However, financial evidence of improving trends is likely to take a while to materialize following the end of the Hollywood strikes and recent disappointments. “It will take multiple quarters in our view for the industry to get back to a normalized production cadence,” Morgan Stanley analyst Benjamin Swinburne wrote in a recent report. But with the SAG-AFRA strike resolved, “we should get more clarity over the fiscal year 2024 slate and the extent to which any films move into fiscal year 2025,” he added.

TD Cowen analyst Doug Creutz, who has a “market perform” rating and $94 price target on Disney shares, in a recent report expressed concern “that problems at the studio are more complex,” adding that “we markedly disagree with management’s prognosis.” Noting that the company indicated a heavy focus on core brands and franchises and reducing output overall “to concentrate on fewer projects and improve quality,” he wrote that management also said that “at the time the pandemic hit, we were leaning into a huge increase in how much we were making…quantity can be actually a negative when it comes to quality.”

Creutz’s take: “We don’t quibble with any of the broad strokes here; where we disagree is that too much film output is not actually what happened, at least when it comes to Disney’s key content engines.” The expert sees a different problem: “If the argument is that Disney spent too much money making non-branded films, largely as a result of the Fox acquisition (that Iger masterminded), fine, but even there we would say that overinvestment at the Fox studio shouldn’t have had any impact on what was going on creatively at Marvel and Lucas and the animation studios.”

Creutz’s conclusion: “Ultimately, Disney’s theatrical run during 2016-19 was unprecedented and is unlikely to be duplicated. However, performance can certainly be better than it has been over the last several years. However, we think improved performance is not just a case of quality over quantity; it’s going to take some difficult decisions about prioritization for film versus streaming, a better-curated mix of products in the pipeline, and probably a bit of new blood in the management ranks as well.”

Streaming progress

Disney has said that it plans to roll out a unified streaming experience domestically that effectively combines Disney+ and Hulu. Management’s hope is to increase engagement, create more advertising opportunities, lower user churn, reduce customer acquisition costs and increase overall profit margins. And the company’s target is still to turn profitable in its combined streaming businesses in the fiscal fourth quarter of 2024.

Disney is planning to launch a beta version of its new streaming bundle in December ahead of an official launch in early spring. Some have wondered if Iger could provide an update on this during the town hall. “The company also expects to continue actively exploring ways to address account sharing, but given the timing of planned rollouts, Disney doesn’t expect a meaningful impact from these actions until 2025,” Goldman Sachs analyst Brett Feldman wrote in a recent report.

PP Foresight analyst Paolo Pescatore said Disney’s recent quarterly earnings were “encouraging” for the streaming business and showed “Iger’s turnaround plan in full swing.” He particularly touted Iger’s focus on getting to streaming profitability, saying the firm seems to be benefiting from what he dubbed “the Netflix effect.” Explained Pescatore: “Integrating Disney+ along with Hulu…in the future will put the company in a strong position to drive subs, engagement and, importantly, revenue either through subscription or advertising.”

Overall, the analyst sees Iger using cost cuts to free up money for focused investment. “These latest results clearly underline a razor-sharp focus on efficiencies across the board while focusing on content,” he said. “This is in stark contrast to other traditional rivals who lack the same scale as Disney in this new streaming-driven world.”

But others remain more cautious. “We don’t doubt that Disney will attain streaming profitability; it’s just a question of how much,” TD Cowen’s Creutz warned in his recent report. “The amount of degradation they see in the rest of the entertainment business also matters, and ultimately how much growth they can get out of the combined total. While this may well work out OK on balance over the long run, we still view the outcome as extremely cloudy, and likely to remain so for the next few years.”

Dealmaking

While Iger signaled no big acquisition plans a year ago, talk about various deals and possible deals has since moved into focus. Early this month, Disney agreed to take full control of Hulu in a deal with Comcast, which has owned a third of the streamer ever since Disney’s acquisition of the 21st Century Fox entertainment assets. Disney expects to pay $8.61 billion by Dec. 1, meeting the floor valuation for Hulu agreed with Comcast, but will go through an appraisal process with the selling partner to determine if and how much more the company may need to pay.

Disney could use the town hall for an update on Hulu. Some analysts expect a deal for Disney’s India business, including streamer Disney+ Hotstar and Star India, could be next — whether an outright sale, the sale of a stake or a joint venture. After all, Disney’s footprint in India has come with a substantial cost.

Wall Street has also been waiting for more clarity on the potential sale of Disney’s linear TV assets and a stake in ESPN. While the conglomerate did not announce a partner for ESPN with its earnings update, “it reiterated that it has seen strong interest from parties that could assist with marketing, technology, distribution and new content,” highlighted Feldman.

Meanwhile, Swinburne doesn’t expect any near-term news on a possible deal for Disney’s linear TV assets. “The cord-cutting and advertising trends remain challenging heading into fiscal year 2024,” he wrote recently. “While Disney has discussed publicly the potential for asset sales in this group, it does not sound like a near-term priority to us. Rather, operating these businesses more efficiently appears to be the near-term goal.”

Whether or not he is right, any town hall commentary on the likelihood, possible focus or timing of any potential Disney deals would draw much interest from analysts, investors and company staff alike. “Disney is at a fork in the road and needs to choose what path to take,” Third Bridge analyst Lumley said in a recent report. “Although the company delivered improved streaming results in its most recent earnings, Disney’s linear business continues to come under pressure both in the U.S. and internationally. If Disney wants to divest businesses, it needs to make a decision before the declines become too severe.”

Even in the absence of tangible news or developments on that or other fronts, the town hall will give Iger and his team a chance to reiterate key strategic priorities and messages to boost staff and investor confidence — and to keep doubters and critics at bay.

Some on Wall Street came out of earnings season liking what Iger has done and predicting more upside ahead. Bank of America analyst Jessica Reif Ehrlich, for example, remains optimistic for Disney despite a rocky road to recovery. She reiterated her “buy” rating on Disney shares with a $110 price objective. “While several strategic questions remain, we remain confident in Bob Iger’s ability to navigate the company through this transition period,” she wrote. “Near-term catalysts include additional updates on strategic priorities for Disney, continued robust theme park demand.”

In his recent report, Nathanson summarized his take on Iger’s work and Disney’s stock this way: “Real change takes time.” His explanation for the stock’s struggles: “A combination of linear pressures (weaker global advertising revenues, accelerated U.S. cord-cutting, higher sports costs), poor global box office performance and slower DTC revenue growth have been the driving factors of the underperformance.”

The expert then shared a somewhat mixed review of Iger’s various initiatives so far. “On a brighter note, Iger quickly (like day one) returned the organization to its prior structure,” he highlighted. “Further, he has aggressively raised price on Disney+ and reduced regional content investment and non-core general entertainment spend to focus the product back to core consumer expectations. The impact from these two moves are not immediately measurable as content slates take a while to develop and existing amortization from over-investment stays on the (profit and loss statement) for a few years.”

Meanwhile, “on the negative side, Iger’s open and honest disclosure about his worries about the long-term health of the linear networks has frustrated the market because it wasn’t matched by an immediate action step. As such, we have been needlessly left wondering and postulating about assets that are no longer drivers of future company earnings.”

Overall, though, Nathanson sees a light at the end of the tunnel. “Disney appears to actually be on the precipice of improving financial returns in the non-parks divisions of the company,” he concluded. “The single most critical take-away from the fiscal fourth-quarter earnings call and press release is the focus on driving free cash flow back to pre-pandemic levels.”

Guggenheim analyst Michael Morris is also bullish on Disney’s outlook, recently maintaining his “buy” rating with a $115 stock price target. “We are bullish on intense content quality focus, moving past Hulu-ownership complications to maximize asset value, right-sizing spending, and giving more consumers more opportunity to pay for ESPN via a direct distribution tier,” he wrote, lauding Iger’s strategic initiatives. But he also mentioned an area of regret, saying: “We are lukewarm on the incremental value of more Hulu/Disney+ integration, we wish the company would get more aggressive with the Hulu virtual multichannel video programming distributor (vMVPD) and are bearish on potential substantive impact from ‘strategic partners’ from the tech and content (e.g., sports league) community.”

Lumley also sees challenges for the Disney CEO and his team in outlining his vision for a brighter future. “Bob Iger has talked about how he wants to move beyond fixing problems to building businesses,” he said. “This could be a hard message to sell as the studio segment limps through some recent disappointing box office results like The Marvels, even while there are ambitious future plans for the company, like launching ESPN as a fully-fledged streaming platform and integrating Hulu into Disney+.”

 

[Brian Noble]

which is why we’ve seen stadiums try to add more in game experiences in general.

Exactly. And, to re-connect this to the overall theme of the thread: Darth Vader is the voice of our football program, so we win.

 

[wabbott]

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/cable-satellite-providers-risk-fading-140000831.html

Cable, Satellite Providers Risk ‘Fading Into the Background Faster’ Than Expected | Charts
Lucas Manfredi
Mon, November 27, 2023 at 8:00 AM CST

It’s no secret that cable companies and other traditional TV services are bleeding subscribers as customers cut the cord and make the jump to streaming.

A J.D. Power survey of over 23,500 respondents conducted between October 2022 and August 2023 underscored the pace of that decline. The data and analytics company found that the likelihood of cable and satellite customers switching their service in the next year is 21%, compared to 12% for live TV streaming services. Among the reasons for the growing divide in satisfaction: the cost of the service, performance and reliability and customer care.

In the past, cable providers may have benefitted from a legacy status that made it difficult for customers to switch or outright cancel, J.D. Power wrote in its report released Nov. 17. Even though streamers have always been more affordable, “there was always a trade-off in reliability and customer care,” the company said. “Now, with streamers succeeding in all areas, cable and satellite providers have no choice [but] to step up their game and rise to the occasion. If they don’t, they run the very real risk of fading into the background faster than anyone anticipated.”

Just how bad have cable and satellite providers’ subscriber losses been in comparison to live TV streamers’ gains?
In the third quarter of 2023 alone, Comcast, Charter Communications, Altice USA collectively lost 896,400 pay TV subscribers, while Dish TV and Verizon Fios shed a total of 260,000 subscribers. In comparison, virtual multi-channel video programming distributors (vMVPDs) Hulu with Live TV, Sling TV and Fubo gained a total of 727,000 subscribers during the same three-month period.

This analysis includes Hulu with Live TV, Sling TV and Fubo because those streaming options bundle both linear and on-demand content – most closely resembling cable and satellite TV. It does not include DirecTV or Alphabet’s YouTube TV, which do not break out their quarterly figures. (As of June 2022, YouTube TV passed 5 million subscribers and trial users.)

Leichtman Research Group estimates that DirecTV, U-Verse and DirecTV Stream lost 500,000 subscribers in the third quarter of 2023 for a total of 11.85 million, while YouTube TV added 600,000 subscribers for a total of 6.5 million.

Check out TheWrap’s deep dive into the companies’ quarterly financials below.

Comcast

Comcast’s Connectivity & Platforms segment — its cable business — saw customer relationships grow by 40,000
, or 0.2% year over year, to 52.3 million. However, total domestic video customers fell by 490,000, or 12.5% year over year, to 14.5 million and total video revenue fell 3.7% year over year to $7.15 billion.

The segment’s adjusted EBITDA grew 3% to $8.2 billion and total revenue grew 1.1% year over year to $20.2 billion during its third quarter of 2023. Residential connectivity and platforms revenue grew 0.7% year over year to $17.95 billion, while business services connectivity revenue grew 4.7% year over year to $2.32 billion.

Comcast has launched Now TV in an effort to retain subscribers ditching the cable giant for streaming, a $20 per month offering that combines a live TV streaming service, free ad-supported streaming TV channels and a subscription video on-demand service. Xumo, its joint venture with Charter Communications, has also started rolling out its Xumo Stream Box devices nationwide. The service allows users to choose between Spectrum TV or Xfinity Stream and streaming apps such as Apple TV+, Disney+, Hulu, Max, Netflix, Peacock, Pluto, Prime Video, Tubi or Xumo Play.

Charter Communications

Charter Communications reported 14.4 million video customers during its third quarter of 2023, down 6% year over year. Residential customers fell 6% year over year to 13.75 million, while small and medium business customers fell 3% year over year to 628,000.

The company shed 327,000 pay TV subscribers during the quarter — 320,000 residential video customers and 7,000 small and medium business customers. About 100,000 of the residential video-customer disconnects were related to the temporary loss of Disney programming in early September.

While acknowledging the overall impact of the dispute on Charter’s customer relationships was less than expected, CFO Jessica Fischer noted the company’s billing and retention call centers were not fully back to normal until early October, resulting in a “lingering customer net add impact early in the fourth quarter.”

In September, Charter and Disney reached a first-of-its-kind carriage agreement that included streaming apps in its video packages, resolving an 11-day dispute that left millions of Spectrum customers in the dark. Under the new agreement, Spectrum TV Select package customers will receive ad-supported Disney+ basic in the coming months.

Disney will also provide ESPN+ to Spectrum TV Select Plus subscribers as will the sports network’s flagship direct-to-consumer service (DTC) when it launches. The entertainment giant expects to launch its ESPN DTC service in 2025.

Charter plans to remain flexible by offering a range of video packages at varying price points based upon customer viewing preferences and will use its distribution capabilities to offer Disney’s streaming apps to its customers, including its broadband-only subscribers.

Chris Winfrey, Charter’s president and CEO, said the new agreement showcased that “a new hybrid distribution model is good for consumers” and “better aligns” video content and DTC apps.

“We created a glide path to bridge from linear video to new growth,” he added.

While Spectrum will continue to carry ABC Owned Television Stations, Disney Channel, FX, the Nat Geo Channel and the full suite of ESPN networks, Baby TV, Disney Junior, Disney XD, Freeform, FXM, FXX, Nat Geo Wild and Nat Geo Mundo will no longer be included in Spectrum TV video packages.

Altice USA

Cable provider Altice USA reported a total of 4.77 million customer relationships, including 4.39 million residential customers and 381,100 small and medium business customers. The company shed 77,600 residential video customers for a total of 2.23 million, a 10.3% year over year decrease, and lost 1,800 small and medium business video customers, or 7.2%, for a total of 91,900.

Total revenue fell 3.2% year over year to $2.32 billion. Residential revenue fell 3.4% year over year to $1.83 billion, driven mostly due to the loss of higher average revenue per user video customers over the last year. Residential ARPU for the quarter came in at $138.42, down slightly from $139.24 in the year ago quarter.

Verizon Fios

Verizon shed a total of shed 79,000 Fios customers during its third quarter of 2023, with residential Fios losses narrowing 17.9% year over year to 78,000 and business Fios customer losses remaining flat year over year at 1 million. The telecommunications giant reported a total of 3.01 million residential Fios customers and 63,000 business Fios customers. Residential Fios revenue fell 0.2% year over year to $2.897 billion, while business Fios revenue grew 1.3% year over year to $308 million.

In March 2022, the telecommunications giant launched Verizon+ Play, which allows users to purchase and manage subscriptions across entertainment, audio, gaming, fitness music, lifestyle and more in one place. Streaming partners include Netflix, Disney+, Discovery+ and AMC+.

Dish TV and Sling TV

Dish Network shed a total of 64,000 pay TV subscribers during its third quarter for a total of 8.84 million. Dish TV subscribers fell by 181,000 to 6.72 million, while Sling TV subscribers increased by around 117,000 to 2.12 million.

“We continue to experience increased competition, including competition from other subscription video on-demand and live-linear OTT service providers, many of which are providers of our content and offer football and other seasonal sports programming direct to subscribers on an a la carte basis,” the company wrote in its 10-Q filing.

Dish Network’s pay-TV business generated $2.81 billion in revenue during the quarter and operating income of $589.47 million. Pay-TV average revenue per user grew 3.1% year over year to $105.25, primarily attributable to Dish TV and Sling TV programming price increases that took effect in the fourth quarter of 2022.

On Oct. 12, Dish raised the price of its satellite television packages by an additional $5 per month, citing rising programming costs. Earlier this month, the company resolved a carriage dispute with Hearst that resulted in the temporary loss of 37 channels, including local network affiliates, in September.

Hulu and Live TV

Hulu with Live TV added 300,000 subscribers during the quarter for a total of 4.6 million. Hulu with Live TV average monthly revenue-per-paid subscriber decreased from $91.80 to $90.08 primarily due to lower advertising revenue.

When combined with Hulu’s 43.9 million SVOD-only subscribers, the service boasts a total of 48.5 million subscribers.

Disney, which said it will pay at least $8.61 billion for Comcast’s minority stake in Hulu, is set to complete an appraisal process in 2024 to determine the asset’s full value. The company plans to launch a beta version of a combined Disney+ and Hulu app offering in December, before an official rollout in early spring 2024.

Fubo

Paid Fubo subscribers in North America grew 20% year over year to a record 1.48 million during its third quarter of 2023. The company’s total revenue in North America grew 43% year over year to $313 million, with ad revenue in the region climbing 34% year over year to $30.3 million. Average revenue per user in the region grew 17% year over year to $83.51.

Meanwhile, Fubo’s Rest of World segment saw paid subscribers grow 15% year over year to 411,000 and revenue grow 45% to $8.4 million total revenue. (ROW includes the results of Molotov, a French live TV streaming service acquired in December 2021.)

Looking to full year 2023, Fubo raised its revenue and paid subscriber guidance in North America, with the streamer now expecting between $1.319 billion and $1.324 billion revenue for the year, a 34% year-over-year growth at the midpoint, and paid subscribers in the range of 1.58 million and 1.60 million, representing 10% year-over-year growth at the midpoint. The company previously stated full-year revenue guidance of $1.26 billion to $1.28 billion and paid subscribers between 1.57 million and 1.59 million.

 

[bryaalre]

I understand your position and do believe the box office is indeed down around 30% currently. However, when you thread the needle and give the fans what they want there are still hits to be had. Barbie, Oppenheimer, Super Mario, Guardians, and Avatar all prove this can still happen.

Disney is just struggling with three things mainly. Giving the fans great content that appeals to the broadest possible audience. Controlling their massive ballooning budgets. Getting the streaming window right.

There are plenty of movies that did terrible even though they were quality movies or gave fans what they want. This idea of cherry picking the top movies and putting an umbrella statement of it gave the fans what they want feels disingenuous to the overall health of the movie theater market.

Movies like Mission Impossible, TMNT, Dungeons and Dragons are all movies that were very well received by critics and gave the fans what they want but all either underperformed or bombed.

I disagree that Disney is not giving fans great content or content that appeals to a wide audience. Marvel has certainly slipped in quality and writing but I would argue that their animation department and Pixar are still releasing quality content these last few years. Raya, Encanto, Elemental, Turning Red, Soul, Luca are all quality films.

I agree that the streaming window needs tweaking and budgets for a lot of these live action movies are $50-$100M to high.

 

[HokieRaven5]

I agree that the streaming window needs tweaking and budgets for a lot of these live action movies are $50-$100M to high.

This part is what is hopefully to come, just takes time with where their practice was to where it needs to be. Get the budgets back down to $100-$150M and whatever they make at the box office covers P&A costs and is profit after that. I’ve seen estimates of revenue sharing from D+ streaming have been around $150-160M per film to the studios.

 

[Upatnoon]

Paramount+ had a global subscriber base of 43M when Maverick was in theaters. It’s now close to 80M. Can see the hit taken by movies released this year.

Peacock had a subscriber base of 24M when Mario released and 28M when Oppenheimer released. Easy way to see why streaming hasn’t drastically impacted Universal/Illumination/Dreamworks films.

Paramount+ has the Star Trek franchise and has been pumping out new Star Trek shows, which helps for sure.

All the streamers have been pushing out sci-fi stuff, as it must drive a lot of subscriptions.

 

[HokieRaven5]

Paramount+ has the Star Trek franchise and has been pumping out new Star Trek shows, which helps for sure.

All the streamers have been pushing out sci-fi stuff, as it must drive a lot of subscriptions.

Yep and for a time it was the main streaming home to a popular show like Yellowstone if you didn’t have cable. Before they started to license it out to Peacock to boost revenue.

 

[wabbott]

https://finance.yahoo.com/video/story-behind-holiday-box-office-165110520.html

The story behind holiday box office disappointments
Nicholas Jacobino and Diane King Hall
Mon, November 27, 2023 at 10:51 AM CST

After the pandemic, Thanksgiving weekend box office numbers have been disappointing, compared to previous years where the holiday weekend was a sure bet for studios. Disney (DIS) is among one of the studios that is having problems at the box office with its recent, surprising disappointment with Wish. The animated, family-friendly feature was beat out by Ridley Scott's historic biopic Napolean, released jointly through Columbia Pictures (SONY) and AppleTV+ (AAPL).
Box Office Guru Founder and Editor Gitesh Pandya joins Yahoo Finance to discuss lackluster holiday box office performances as moviegoers are still adjusting to the post-pandemic era.

"Well, I think we will eventually get back to those pre-pandemic levels. The good news is that this is the first time that the top ten over Thanksgiving weekend broke $100 million since 2019," Pandya states. "The way that studios usually operate is that the first weekend of November is the start of the holiday season. Huge movie gets programmed there."

For more expert insight and the latest market action, click here to watch this full episode of Yahoo Finance Live.

 

[wabbott]

https://www.barrons.com/articles/amc-stock-price-disney-wish-box-office-flop-0de6f242?siteid=yhoof2

AMC Stock Falls After Disney’s Box Office Flop. Shares Are on Track for Their Worst Year Ever.
Story by Emily Dattilo
Updated Nov 27, 2023, 12:32 pm EST / Original Nov 27, 2023, 12:08 pm EST

Shares of AMC Entertainment were slipping after an unspectacular holiday weekend at the box office.

Part of the reason for that performance? Wish, the latest film from Walt Disney (ticker: DIS) fell short of expectations and landed third in the three-day box office rankings according to Comscore, behind The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes and Napoleon, respectively.

Overall, however, the movie industry looks brighter than it did a year ago. During the five-day holiday weekend, which ran Wednesday through Sunday, domestic box office sales totaled an estimated $172 million, according to Comscore, stronger than the $122.8 million recorded last year, but far from the record $315.6 million notched in 2018, Barron’s previously reported.

AMC (AMC) shares still fell 0.9% to $6.84 on Monday, while the S&P 500 was down less than 0.1%. The movie theater chain has absorbed multiple punches over the past few years stretching from the pandemic to the writers and actors strikes, and its meme-stock status has only made it more volatile.

Success from Taylor Swift: The Eras Tour, the concert movie that upended the traditional cinema experience, certainly offered investors a positive, but that won’t be enough. AMC stock is down 81% this year, on track for its worst year on record, based on available data back to December 2013, according to Dow Jones Market Data.

Write to Emily Dattilo at emily.dattilo@dowjones.com

 

[fatmanatee]

I 100% believe if you make great content, people will show up. Tell a great story, stop focusing on messages and agendas and tell a flipping great story. People want to be entertained and not lectured to, it’s really that simple.

100% guarantee you you make a movie right now where Luke Skywalker is back and the real Luke not the loser in TLJ and it will make a billion dollars.

Bring back the butt kicking Iron Man, Hulk, and Thor = Billion dollars guaranteed.

It’s not hard, you just can’t make cat lady movies like the Marvels and expect to make money. I told everyone on here months ago that The Marvels would flop, and guess what it did. That’s not what the marvel audience wants. Go rehire John Favreau and pay him to make you a Marvel Movie again. Stop hiring obscure directors who have done nothing on this level because of their race and gender. Hire the best people period. I don’t care male or female or what race……..hire the best period.

Feige is notorious for selecting younger directors with less experience because 1. they’re cheaper 2. they’re easier to mold into the MCU/Feige formula. That includes Favreau, who didn’t have experience with blockbusters and wasn’t seen as an obvious pick when he was selected to work on Iron Man, but is particularly true for the others. The guy they chose for Spiderman had two feature directing credits to his name prior to that and the one he made right before Homecoming made 150k.

 

[greeneyedchick]

The thing those movies have in common, when they released there were next to no people who had their streaming services so the way to see it was in theaters. Masses aren’t tying Universal/Illumination to Peacock, and Paramount+ didn’t have a ton of subs but that grew after Maverick and subsequently led to Mission Impossible Dead Reckoning falling flat.

I'm not sure it's all because of streaming. Before streaming, we had DVDs. Lots of people used to wait and rent/ buy the movie when it came out. Yet, people still went to the theater, too. I honestly think it has more to do with people having larger TVs and surround sound in their homes. It seems like the cost for a home theater has come down in price. Lots of people invested in them during the pandemic. I think that since people have larger screens at home, not as many people feel the need to see the movie in the theater. Whether they're watching it on a streaming service or DVD doesn't matter as much.

Regardless of whether it's streaming and/or home theater setups, Disney can't blame all of their problems on that. They oversaturated the market with Marvel/ Star Wars. They messed up both franchises by rushing movies, switching directors, overcomplicating storylines, and losing the essence of what made the characters/films great. And they do seem to have lost their way in terms of storytelling, songwriting, and animating. They need to let the creative people lead and management needs to stop meddling.

 

[HokieRaven5]

I'm not sure it's all because of streaming. Before streaming, we had DVDs. Lots of people used to wait and rent/ buy the movie when it came out. Yet, people still went to the theater, too. I honestly think it has more to do with people having larger TVs and surround sound in their homes. It seems like the cost for a home theater has come down in price. Lots of people invested in them during the pandemic. I think that since people have larger screens at home, not as many people feel the need to see the movie in the theater. Whether they're watching it on a streaming service or DVD doesn't matter as much.

I never said it was all because of streaming. I listed the subscriber totals as one of the differentiating factors between the studios, the home theater set ups are equivalent for all studios and also a factor into why ticket sales are down 30% from pre-Covid.

It’s still true that there are more domestic D+ subscribers than any of the other studio direct based streaming services. That has an impact on how those movies can perform at the box office regardless of how it’s received critically. Marvel for the most part had avoided some of that because there were enough folks who didn’t want elements of movies spoiled still.

Of the studios, Universal has had the smallest drop off in ticket sales and also has one of the lowest subscriber bases for their streaming service.

It’s easier to stay home and watch movies than ever before and for going out to see a movie, see one for a streaming service that you don’t pay for at home.

Thanksgiving weekend 2018 had nearly 35M people go to the movies domestically, 2023 it’s around 16M. In 2018 that was led by Ralph Breaks the Internet