DIS Shareholders and Stock Info ONLY

[ChipnDale79]

Offended: resentful or annoyed, typically as a result of a perceived insult.

I think I used it corrected

Fair. What are they offended by?

I didn’t like the new lion king, it for sure wasn’t my favorite

 

[clarker99]

Fair. What are they offended by?

I didn’t like the new lion king, it for sure wasn’t my favorite

Can you guys please take this to DM's or another thread? This is not pertinent to shareholders or the stock.

Appreciate it.

 

[ChipnDale79]

Can you guys please take this to DM's or another thread? This is not pertinent to shareholders or the stock.

Appreciate it.

yeah you're right. my apologies

 

[Elijah Abrams]

https://www.fool.com/investing/2023/09/19/disney-just-slashed-its-streaming-subscriber-targe/

Disney Just Slashed Its Streaming Subscriber Target. Should You Be Worried?
By Jeremy Bowman–Sep 19, 2023 at 7:09AM

Key Points

According to Bloomberg, Disney no longer expects to reach 215 million-245 million Disney+ subscribers next year.

The wide miss on a target from last year is the latest strategic error at the company.

The news comes as the company has shifted its focus to streaming profitability.

The company could fall well short of an earlier subscriber goal.

Disney+, the flagship streaming service from Walt Disney Company (DIS -0.65%), dazzled Wall Street investors through its early stages. The company blew past the initial subscriber forecast of 10 million at its launch in November 2019, and sign-ups continued to soar through the pandemic.

However, more recently, subscriber growth has hit a wall and Disney has jacked up prices on its streaming services to make up for a large shortfall on the bottom line.
Now, according to Bloomberg, Disney says that it will fall short of earlier subscriber targets it had given for 2024. In August 2022, it was aiming for 215 million-245 million subscribers at Disney+ by the following year.

The revelation looks like the latest setback for the entertainment giant, which just resolved a contract dispute with Charter Communications. Disney agreed to allow its streaming services to be included in Charter's bundles, which looks like more of a win for the cable operator than for Disney. The agreement will add some subscribers for Disney, but it will make less money from them than it would have selling directly to the consumer.

The news that it will miss its subscriber target shouldn't come as a big surprise. The service it refers to as Disney+ Core, which doesn't include Disney+ Hotstar subscribers primarily in India, added just 800,000 subscribers in the second quarter to reach 105.7 million. Disney+ Hotstar subscribers, meanwhile, fell by 12.5 million in the quarter to 40.4 million as the company lost the rights to broadcast Disney's top cricket league, the Indian Premier League.

In other words, even adjusting for the loss of cricket, Disney+ is barely growing, so adding 70 million subscribers by next year seems virtually impossible. Disney+ Hotstar also costs a fraction of the regular Disney+ service, so it's not to the bottom line of the streaming business.

Priorities have shifted

Just as they have in the rest of the tech sector, streaming stock investors have moved their focus from top-line growth or subscriber growth over to the bottom line. Legacy media companies like Disney are still burning hundreds of millions of dollars a year on streaming, and Wall Street is demanding that they prove that these businesses can be viable.

Disney stock is now hovering near 52-week lows even as the broader market has surged this year. While Disney is losing money on streaming, its linear TV business is rapidly shrinking with operating income in the segment down 23% to $1.9 billion in its most recent quarter.

The biggest imperative for the company at this point is to stem the declining profits in its media and entertainment division. CEO Bob Iger seems squarely focused on that, with the company announcing another round of price hikes at its streaming service to drive profitability in its direct-to-consumer segment by 2024.

Correcting the record

Disney underpriced the Disney+ service launch, charging just $6.99/month at the time. And while it's built a considerable audience for the service, a money-losing streaming service was never the goal. Now, monetizing it is especially vital as it sees its profits dry up in linear TV.

Disney still has some other cards up its sleeve. The company is planning to launch an all-streaming version of its flagship sports network ESPN, though it's unclear when that might happen. Meanwhile, Iger has floated the idea of selling non-core media assets, including ABC, and Bloomberg also reported that the company was holding talks with Nexstar on a possible sale of ABC.

Such a move could help Disney pay down some of its $47 billion debt burden, a large chunk of which came from its Fox acquisition, which looks increasingly questionable as the company muddles through its transition to streaming.

Stepping back from the subscriber target isn't a problem in and of itself, but it's a reflection of larger strategic failure at Disney. This includes the mispricing of Disney+, the questionable Fox acquisition, handing the reins to former CEO Bob Chapek before taking them back, and kowtowing to cable providers in the Charter deal.

Disney doesn't seem to know how to adequately value its content outside of the cable ecosystem, but the company needs to figure it out soon as cord-cutting will only continue to eat into its linear TV income stream. The streaming business should eventually be profitable, but things seem likely to get worse before they get better.

Jeremy Bowman has positions in Walt Disney. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Walt Disney. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Yeah, I think they’re gonna have to sell off 20th Century Studios. They don’t have to get rid of ABC, as it can be used for their streaming strategy.

 

[peder]

Was it mentioned anywhere how the new investment in parks+cruise division will be split? I wonder if there are any significant investments on the cruise side that haven't been announced?

 

[OKW Lover]

I think they’re gonna have to sell off 20th Century Studios.

Why would they have to sell it?

 

[RivShore]

Why would they have to sell it?

And why can't it be used for the Hulu part of the streaming strategy?

 

[HokieRaven5]

Why would they have to sell it?

They don’t have to.

Fox Content has been as big if not bigger contributor to streaming services than those from ABC.

As pointed out in that article streaming subscriber totals hasn’t been relevant to WS and to an extent Disney for a while now. It’s all about $/subscriber and ad revenue in the quest for profitability.

 

[Elijah Abrams]

And why can't it be used for the Hulu part of the streaming strategy?

They don’t have to.

Fox Content has been as big if not bigger contributor to streaming services than those from ABC.

As pointed out in that article streaming subscriber totals hasn’t been relevant to WS and to an extent Disney for a while now. It’s all about $/subscriber and ad revenue in the quest for profitability.

Why would they have to sell it?

They may never get Hulu in the end if they cut their target for streaming subscribers. They're in a mess right now, and it will get worse when the writers and actors succeed over the studios in their strike-related demands.

 

[HokieRaven5]

They may never get Hulu in the end if they cut their target for streaming subscribers.

Buying Hulu and Disney+ subscriber goals aren’t interconnected.

Disney+ has lost subscribers the last few quarters because of the losses in India due to HotStar who aren’t contributing much to the bottom line. Disney+ has gone from 164.2M subscribers at the end of last year to 146.1M as of the last earnings quarter.

Even with those losses at D+ of subscribers DTC overall has gone from $1.4B in a quarter (Q4 FY22) in operating losses to $500M in losses in a quarter (Q3 FY23).

And as mentioned before, Disney has enough Cash on hand, as well as about $10B less in debt from a few years ago to go through the Hulu acquisition and still be able to extend a dividend to investors.

 

[Elijah Abrams]

Buying Hulu and Disney+ subscriber goals aren’t interconnected.

Disney+ has lost subscribers the last few quarters because of the losses in India due to HotStar who aren’t contributing much to the bottom line. Disney+ has gone from 164.2M subscribers at the end of last year to 146.1M as of the last earnings quarter.

Even with those losses at D+ of subscribers DTC overall has gone from $1.4B in a quarter (Q4 FY22) in operating losses to $500M in losses in a quarter (Q3 FY23).

And as mentioned before, Disney has enough Cash on hand, as well as about $10B less in debt from a few years ago to go through the Hulu acquisition and still be able to extend a dividend to investors.

Still, as I said before, I believe the mess Disney is in now will get worse when the writers and actors succeed over the studios in their strike-related demands.

 

[HokieRaven5]

Still, as I said before, I believe the mess Disney is in now will get worse when the writers and actors succeed over the studios in their strike-related demands.

That’s fine to believe that. We’ll see once a deal is actually in place.

Just doesn’t immediately change Disney’s current financial situation and their ability to follow through with the Hulu purchase whether you like the acquisition or not.

 

[PolymerSkywalker]

Film	Budget	Marketing	Worldwide Gross
#4 Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 3	$250,000,000	$100,000,000+	$845,555,777
#7 The Little Mermaid	$250,000,000	$140,000,000	$569,541,460
#9 Elemental	$200,000,000	$100,000,000+	$484,356,927
#10 Ant-man Quantumania	$200,000,000	$100,000,000+	$476,071,180
#14 Indiana Jones Dial of Destiny	$294,700,000	$100,000,000+	$382,688,455
#28 Haunted Mansion	$157,000,000	$150,000,000+	$106,612,671

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/year/world/2023/

What does your green and red mean? You do realize Disney only gets approximately 50% of gross box office right?

 

[Elijah Abrams]

The reason Disney bought Fox was so they can turbocharge their foray into streaming with the ownership of FX, the Nat Geo networks, and Hulu, basically with Nat Geo content on Disney+ and FX content on Hulu. Their streaming plans would hit a roadblock if they sell off the Nat Geo nets and FX. Nexstar (or Byron Allen) and Disney would have to continuously pay each other money for FX and Nat Geo stuff if this sale happens.

Although, do you guys think news reports are actually talking about Nexstar (or Allen) wanting a stake in ABC, FX, and Nat Geo rather than all of Disney's ownership of said networks?

Another reason is that they would also end up selling Disney Channel, meaning that shows like Big City Greens, Kiff, and the upcoming Phineas & Ferb revival would get cancelled and there would be no more Disney Television Animation shows for Disney Channel, and I doubt Disney would make newer DTVA programs for third-parties. I even doubt they would make a lot more newer DTVA shows for Disney+, because the streamer is cutting back on newer original content.

In fact, I think Disney should cut back on their investment in streaming, because it is wasting them money that they can instead use toward their parks division (for expansions) and their film & TV division.

 

[HokieRaven5]

Disney’s Stock Falls After Company Announces Theme Park Investment

Walt Disney's shares fell after the company said it plans to spend $60 billion to expand its theme parks, cruise lines and similar ventures over the next decade.

The stock closed down 3.6% at $81.94 and was one of the worst performers in the blue-chip Dow.

 

[RivShore]

They may never get Hulu in the end if they cut their target for streaming subscribers. They're in a mess right now, and it will get worse when the writers and actors succeed over the studios in their strike-related demands.

So you propose selling Fox Studios before even knowing what's happening with Hulu? It is way premature for that. And there would be so many questions - does Disney retain the ownership of Avatar, X-Men, SW distribution rights, The Simpsons (very popular on D+), etc.

There are so many related properties that came over with Fox, it would be yet another complex transaction. One of the major things holding the stock back is the many pending complex transactions that are already on the table, why add yet another one?

It's been said for many years - Content is King - why would you get rid of a content creator? Even if it wasn't feeding Hulu, they could license to the highest bidder and there will be desperate bidders as new content will be in short supply with the strikes.

Disney has shown that the balance sheet is strong enough, no reason to fire sale every piece of the company.

 

[wabbott]

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/disney-charter-hulu-channels-1235594528/

In TV’s Wild West, Which Channels Will Be Dropped Next?

Disney’s standoff with Charter shows that the carriage fees for core channels (like ESPN) may keep rising, but the padding of the bundle (like Freeform) is now in the past.

By Georg Szalai, Alex Weprin
September 20, 2023 4:45am PDT

Walt Disney’s new carriage agreement with cable giant Charter Communications is widely seen as a game-changer for the pay TV and streaming sectors, creating a new blueprint for how such deals are structured. Analysts and industry sources point to two key pieces of the deal that will likely be felt: ad-supported streaming in the bundle, and a “resizing” of the linear TV business. It’s a deal that NBCUniversal (which owns Peacock), Paramount (which owns Paramount+) and Warner Bros. Discovery (which owns Max) are surely looking at closely given it is widely expected to impact their future carriage deals.
Mark Lazarus, the chairman of NBCUniversal Media group, acknowledged as much at the IMG Summit outside London on Sept. 14. In an interview with Endeavor president and COO Mark Shapiro, Lazarus noted that his company shuttered some channels over the past few years (Cloo and Esquire Network in 2017, NBCSN in 2021), and that the new deal could lead to changes. “We have spent time over the last few years culling the herd a bit — we’ve closed or merged a series of networks,” Lazarus told Shapiro, noting that NBCSN’s sports went to USA Network and Peacock. “We will continue to evaluate our portfolio. Some of what just happened with Disney and Charter in terms of some networks being prioritized and some de-prioritized, I think the whole industry has to continue to do that and we will continue to do that as well.”

It’s a recognition that this deal could mean a new paradigm for what will work as a cable channel. “While Charter and Disney are friends again, the industry feels different,” Wells Fargo analyst Steven Cahall argued in a Sept. 13 report. “Charter looks to have secured a lower total programming expense (illustratively around $350 million) while Disney has picked up direct-to-consumer distribution (illustratively about $500 million in Disney+ revenues).” But he expects the marginalization of smaller channels to become “a growing theme” across the industry.

Other Wall Street experts echoed the notion that the distributor’s decision not to carry eight smaller TV networks anymore, among them Freeform, Disney Junior, FXM, FXX and Nat Geo Wild, will likely be replicated in other carriage pacts because this seems to suit the age of streaming and cord-cutting. In what could be considered a sign of where Freeform ranks within Disney’s internal priorities, the network now no longer has one executive whose job is to focus entirely on the network. It remains profitable — the themed programming blocks remain a favorite for Freeform’s ad sales team — as Disney insiders are said not to be worried about losing Charter’s 15 million homes (it is still in tens of millions of homes, and its content remains on Hulu).

An industry source said that they believed the first channels to go would likely be “secondary” or “tertiary” channels, anchored to a core offering. Consider Disney Junior and Disney XD, which were offshoots of Disney Channel, or FXX and FXM, offshoots of FX. That could put channels like Paramount’s MTV2 or WBD’s Destination America at risk. But Freeform, with its long history and sizable distribution, suggests that some major channels could also be ripe for a culling, and that distributors will demand value from their programming partners. “Charter is dropping long-tail cable networks while still preserving the most popular linear programming and getting access to more attractive (streaming) content,” explained UBS analyst John Hodulik.

With Disney and Charter staying mum on financial details of their deal, as is common practice, analysts have taken a stab at assessing the financial impact of the dropped networks. Based on data from S&P Global Market Intelligence’s Kagan, Guggenheim analyst Michael Morris estimates that the eight networks combined represent around 11 percent of Disney’s affiliate revenue per subscriber. His conclusion: “We expect that Disney will reevaluate these networks and the amount spent to operate them as other distribution agreements come up.”

Could the likes of Paramount Global’s Logo, Warner Bros. Discovery’s Cooking Channel and NBCUniversal’s Oxygen follow? Cahall expects drops for channels that “generate low affiliate fees/viewership and where the content is available on streaming,” the expert wrote.

For Disney, he sees a $1.1 billion potential impact on operating income before depreciation and amortization (OIBDA), or 19 percent of his estimated fiscal year 2024 linear networks unit OIBDA and 6 percent of his total Disney OIBDA estimate. Cahall concludes: “Paramount is the worst positioned in a future skinny bundle era” and Warner Bros. Discovery has “sizable exposure,” while Comcast/NBCUniversal and Fox Corp. are “least at risk.”

Source: Wells Fargo estimates and analysis. *Operating income before depreciation and amortization (OIBDA)

 

[hildarumpole]

They may never get Hulu in the end if they cut their target for streaming subscribers. They're in a mess right now, and it will get worse when the writers and actors succeed over the studios in their strike-related demands.

Acquiring the full stake in Hulu is not in question. Comcast and Disney recently announced they're moving the deal up to get it done before the end of the fiscal year at the end of this month, so it's going to happen sooner than originally planned.

 

[clarker99]

Disney’s Stock Falls After Company Announces Theme Park Investment

Walt Disney's shares fell after the company said it plans to spend $60 billion to expand its theme parks, cruise lines and similar ventures over the next decade.

The stock closed down 3.6% at $81.94 and was one of the worst performers in the blue-chip Dow.

In terms of the stock moving upward? Nothing will move the needle up except Direct-to-consumer going black. DTC will likely report its first break-even quarter in Q1FY24. Will be interesting to see how much the current promos, Charter agreement and price increases affect total Sub growth.

 

[RivShore]

In terms of the stock moving upward? Nothing will move the needle up except Direct-to-consumer going black. DTC will likely report its first break-even quarter in Q1FY24. Will be interesting to see how much the current promos, Charter agreement and price increases affect total Sub growth.

Actually it will take more than just that to get the stock moving significantly and permantly (as opposed to the sub blip that temporarely drove it to $200). Tom Rogers (former NBC exec) was on CNBC this week saying that there are too many open issues, that Disney does not have full control over, and that is why the stock is stuck:

Hulu - all is still up in the air - do they take full control it and for how much?
ABC and the networks - what does a deal or sale look like and what is included?
ESPN - what does a partnership look like?
Carriage Fees - what kind of hits will they take? WS still doesn't know how to value the recent Charter deal. And what networks will cease to exist?
The strikes - how much of a bottom line hit will an agreement cause?
Did I miss any? Oh, how about succession?

No one remotely knows what the answers are to any of these. How does any significant new money flow into the stock before some of these issues are more clear?