DIS Shareholders and Stock Info ONLY

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/streamers-stack-revenue-subscribers-183000171.html

How the Streamers Stack Up in Revenue, Subscribers

by Lucas Manfredi - The Wrap
Tue, November 26, 2024 at 12:30 PM CST
So many questions about the statistics....adding ESPN+, Hulu, and Disney+ together tells a very attractive story, but not sure what the tale behind the numbers actually is...

and I think I would rather be Disney than anyone right now, with the possible exception of Netflix...
 
So many questions about the statistics....adding ESPN+, Hulu, and Disney+ together tells a very attractive story, but not sure what the tale behind the numbers actually is...

and I think I would rather be Disney than anyone right now, with the possible exception of Netflix...
IMO, within 3 or so years, almost ALL streaming will be advertiser supported. I had opined some time back that was the industry's plan from the start. Nothing that has happened since has changed my mind. There's simply too much money to be made in advertising for it to be ignored.

The original subscriptions without advertising were merely "loss leaders" to get everyone used to how streaming worked.
 

I'm not sure that is true of Netflix. They didn't come from an advertising-supported model, so they might not have been planning that too far in advance, and instead responded to others.

I also think HBO/Max might have been thinking "no ads" because that's been HBO's model all along.

But there is just too much money in ads to ignore them.
 
I also think HBO/Max might have been thinking "no ads" because that's been HBO's model all along.

That is true. And the model worked when there were "merely" 100-200 channels available, and first-run movies on TV were a new thing. I'm old enough to remember when HBO first came on the air. WOW! New movies on TV, without having to leave your lazyboy!

In the history of human communications (think Spaceship Earth), the invention of the printing press is given first order importance. To me, the availability of cheap paper was almost as important. Only then were books and periodicals cheap enough for the masses to buy.

Moving pictures and sound transmitted electronically was the printing press of its day. The world wide web is the cheap paper that now goes with it.
 
I'm not sure that is true of Netflix. They didn't come from an advertising-supported model, so they might not have been planning that too far in advance, and instead responded to others.

I also think HBO/Max might have been thinking "no ads" because that's been HBO's model all along.

But there is just too much money in ads to ignore them.
At least for my family, I can't justify paying for the ad tier cause of things like the Roku, Pluto TV and YouTube that are free with ads. If they raise the price on premium much more we will probably just unsubscribe to all of them.
 
At least for my family, I can't justify paying for the ad tier cause of things like the Roku, Pluto TV and YouTube that are free with ads. If they raise the price on premium much more we will probably just unsubscribe to all of them.
For me it depends on what the product is....

Hulu where I am mostly watching network series that were designed to air with commercials sure, the ad tier is fine with me.

Watching a Marvel movie and having to be interrupted with ads, I'll pay a little more to avoid that...

For us right now our services include:
Peacock (with ads) student rate 2.99
Hulu (with ads) student rate 1.99
Paramount+ No Ads (Walmart+ deal) FREE
HBO Max No Ads (included with AT&T Fiber) FREE*

Also, American Express reimburses me for the Peacock and Hulu rates...

So, sometimes we will do Peacock without ads - you pay an extra $5-6.... We watch very little tv, don't have a lot of time, so that is worth it.

On the other hand, Hulu without ads goes from $1.99 up to something like $18.99... doesn't seem worth it to me... so we endure the ads, which don't matter too much...

And as far as pivoting, we are at the point where we cannot ever imagine going back to a cable subscription... Not even a Hulu Live sort of thing....
 
So many questions about the statistics....adding ESPN+, Hulu, and Disney+ together tells a very attractive story, but not sure what the tale behind the numbers actually is...

and I think I would rather be Disney than anyone right now, with the possible exception of Netflix...
Those are 3 separate services. 100% should be added together.
 
I'm not sure that is true of Netflix. They didn't come from an advertising-supported model, so they might not have been planning that too far in advance, and instead responded to others.

I also think HBO/Max might have been thinking "no ads" because that's been HBO's model all along.

But there is just too much money in ads to ignore them.
Also, live TV. Netflix never seen the value in live sports or broadcasts. Since the CEO change they have pivoted to live events. The Roast of Tom Brady, WWE Raw starts up soon and an NFL game on Boxing Day. The Tyson v Paul fight was a debacle (both in terms of a fight and execution by Netflix) but showed the power of a live event.
 
Also, live TV. Netflix never seen the value in live sports or broadcasts. Since the CEO change they have pivoted to live events. The Roast of Tom Brady, WWE Raw starts up soon and an NFL game on Boxing Day. The Tyson v Paul fight was a debacle (both in terms of a fight and execution by Netflix) but showed the power of a live event.
Let’s hope they have it fixed before Christmas. It’s one thing to flub production for a boxing event, cannot have that with the NFL.

Stakes a little elevated for the second game that day with Beyoncé at halftime if they show that too.
 
Let’s hope they have it fixed before Christmas. It’s one thing to flub production for a boxing event, cannot have that with the NFL.

Stakes a little elevated for the second game that day with Beyoncé at halftime if they show that too.
I think I read that they flubbed some other live event (Love Island finale or some other reality show).

But yeah. You can’t keep screwing up.
 
Anyone seen any analysis that shows what each streamer has taken in losses to get to the point they currently are? It must be staggering since nearly every service has taken half billion dollar losses quarter after quarter.
 
Anyone seen any analysis that shows what each streamer has taken in losses to get to the point they currently are? It must be staggering since nearly every service has taken half billion dollar losses quarter after quarter.
I don’t know if one that’s solid enough would exist with how these companies report their data. Netflix and Disney might be the best options but even Netflix still had their disc delivery service as their streaming got off the ground.

Warner lumps the cable revenue for HBO and associated channels in with what they get for Max and I haven’t done any deep diving through their reporting, Comcast at least shares the revenue and costs which for the current year Peacock generated $3.6B in revenue and $5B in costs.
 
Let’s hope they have it fixed before Christmas. It’s one thing to flub production for a boxing event, cannot have that with the NFL.

Stakes a little elevated for the second game that day with Beyoncé at halftime if they show that too.
What has gone wrong with their live shows?
 














Save Up to 30% on Rooms at Walt Disney World!

Save up to 30% on rooms at select Disney Resorts Collection hotels when you stay 5 consecutive nights or longer in late summer and early fall. Plus, enjoy other savings for shorter stays.This offer is valid for stays most nights from August 1 to October 11, 2025.
CLICK HERE













DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest

Back
Top