DIS Shareholders and Stock Info ONLY

[New Mouse]

I'm not seeing anything in the article that even remotely hints at "ambitious plans" to fix the perceived pricing problem. Here's the section that directly addresses Disney's response:

From what I saw this week, their major pricing plans include creating an elite class of people who purchase lighting lane, at the expense of those who can't afford it.

 

[HokieRaven5]

Not a bad start for the $80M budget:

‘Alien: Romulus’ Bursting Out Globally, Now Poised For $100M WW Opening – International Box Office

 

[BrianL]

Not a bad start for the $80M budget:

‘Alien: Romulus’ Bursting Out Globally, Now Poised For $100M WW Opening – International Box Office

I jsut got back from seeing it. It's really good - best Alien sequel since Aliens for sure.

 

[wabbott]

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/stre...t-solve-all-of-medias-problems-153116985.html

Streaming turns a corner as Disney, Paramount report profits — but that doesn't solve all of media's problems
by Alexandra Canal · Senior Reporter
Sat, Aug 17, 2024, 4:31 PM GMT

 

[HokieRaven5]

I jsut got back from seeing it. It's really good - best Alien sequel since Aliens for sure.

It’s performing pretty well in China which surprised me considering they had the Xenomorph removed from Covenant. Guess they let more of the movie show this time.

 

[Brian Noble]

Venu Sports is a pro-competitive option that aims to enhance consumer choice by reaching a segment of viewers who currently are not served by existing subscription options.”

Of course, one of the reasons they are not served by existing subscription options is that the rights-holders (in this case, Disney) won't negotiate rights to only the sports channels, and insists that carriers take others as well.

I'm not sure Fubo ultimately wins on this, but they do have a point. They started out as a sports-focused OTT streamer, and have sort of devolved into Yet Another Mega-Bundle. And that might be inevitable, as Venu would not have included e.g. NFL games on CBS/NBC.

Even for college football, not having CBS/NBC means not having two of the top three Big Eighteen Ten games each week. So even though it is less than half what I'm paying for Fubo, I would not have switched. (Plus this allows me to keep random soccer matches on BeIN.)

 

[wabbott]

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/18/business/media/alien-romulus-disney-box-office.html

‘Alien: Romulus’ Solidifies Disney’s Box Office Rebound

After struggling in recent years, Hollywood’s biggest movie company has now delivered four hits in a row, dominating the summer with a 42 percent market share.

By Brooks Barnes - Reporting from Los Angeles

Aug. 18, 2024, 5:04 a.m. EDT

“Alien: Romulus” was on pace to collect at least $40 million at theaters in the United States and Canada over the weekend, a strong total that solidified a turnaround at Disney’s movie division.

Disney’s seven movie factories — Marvel, Lucasfilm, Pixar, 20th Century, Searchlight Pictures, Disney Animation and Walt Disney Pictures — began to break down in 2021. They had been pushed too hard to make content for Disney’s streaming service. The pandemic added difficulties, resulting in a string of failures like “Jungle Cruise,” “Strange World,” “Lightyear,” “Haunted Mansion,” “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny,” “Nightmare Alley,” “The Marvels” and “Wish.”

Investors grew increasingly agitated, putting Robert A. Iger, Disney’s chief executive, and Alan Bergman, Disney’s top movie executive, under extreme pressure to deliver improved results. Movies carry unusual weight at the Walt Disney Company, which relies on them for much more than ticket revenue. At Disney, movies also power a vast consumer products division and underpin theme park attractions.

It certainly appears that Disney has regained its box office footing. So far this summer (from May 1 to Sunday), Disney films have accounted for 42 percent of total ticket sales in the United States and Canada, according to Box Office Mojo, a film database. Last summer, Disney had about a 27 percent market share.

With the successful release of “Alien: Romulus” (20th Century), the company has now delivered four consecutive hits. In May, Disney rolled out “Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes,” a 20th Century movie that cost about $160 million to make and collected nearly $400 million worldwide. “Inside Out 2” (Pixar) arrived in June and has taken in $1.6 billion worldwide. In July, “Deadpool & Wolverine” (Marvel) set a record for the largest R-rated opening in Hollywood history, and has gone on to sell $1.1 billion in tickets.
“Moana 2” (Disney Animation) is expected to expand Disney’s run of hits to five when it arrives this fall. Analysts say that “Mufasa: The Lion King” (Walt Disney Pictures), scheduled for release in December, could be a sixth, followed by “Captain America: Brave New World” (Marvel) in February.

“Though it remains to be seen whether this summer’s successes mark a true and lasting return to form, looking ahead to the rest of this year and beyond sees a theatrical slate filled with highly dependable intellectual property,” Robert Fishman, an analyst at MoffettNathanson, a research firm, wrote in a report on Aug. 5.

The R-rated “Alien: Romulus,” which received mostly positive reviews, cost an estimated $80 million to make. An expansive ad campaign added tens of millions to the price. Overseas, “Romulus” was on pace to collect an additional $35 million, according to box office analysts. The movie focuses on a group of young space colonists who discover a derelict space station infested with a carnivorous, mucus-dripping life form.

To squeeze more dollars from the 45-year-old “Alien” franchise — “Romulus” was the seventh entry — producers turned to a new generation of talent. Fede Álvarez (“Don’t Breathe”) directed “Romulus” from a script he wrote with Rodo Sayagues. The cast was led by Cailee Spaeny (“Civil War”).

Brooks Barnes covers all things Hollywood. He joined The New York Times in 2007 and previously worked at The Wall Street Journal

 

[Grifdog22]

I think the fundamental disagreement here is that I don't care that it's everywhere and I think the story will be back to buried next week. The only person who gains from this staying in the news is the plaintiff's attorney, which might be why it's here in the first place. As I mentioned before, I don't think Disney benefits by drawing it out and their statement was appropriate.


I think they were fine with it. Looks like it was an attempt to get the case dismissed without moving forward, not sure if it worked or not but probably not.


Yes, it can be done when they hired an external legal firm that blamed a child for being recorded by an AA employee in the bathroom, they're extremely likely to lose and they're just managing the damages, which probably *increased* as a result of the stupid mistake the external firm made. That isn't exactly the same type of situation that Disney finds themselves in though, in a case they are far more likely to win though and would like to have dismissed as quickly as possible given the fact that they don't own the restaurant where this may have happened.

Throughout my 63 years, Disney as a company commanded respect and was a "trusted" brand not just in the USA but worldwide. Some 20 years ago a neighbor was at Disneyworld and lost his favorite ball cap while riding on the runaway mine train. He asked at the end of the day, before heading back to Virginia, if it had been found, and it had not. The cast member asked for his name and address. Three days later that hat was at his house. The neighbor always thought that Disney would "do the right thing" for its guests.

When they started Adventures by Disney, they were known for their attention and concierge services. No need to worry about the water at the hotel, the safety of the foods in the kitchen in this third-world county - it was all checked out by disney. We trusted them. Now they make you sign an agreement to hold them harmless and indemnify them if something goes wrong. Even as a longstanding stockholder, I don't trust them anymore. We still plan to travel 2 more times with them (no one else does Disneyland very well) but as a family we have moved to a different travel company. The focus of Disney has changed from taking care of their guests to have a magical experience to we are not responsible for anything and by the way, pay me more.

Disney has too many lawyers with no oversight. This is a continuing saga of overreaching where people do not trust, or now even like, the Disney brand. It's all self-imposed by very very very poor management in my opinion. In my view, the mass of layoffs missed the correct target - it should have been lawoffs. I retain the stock to try and bring back common sense to the company. But as we've seen, the hedge funds almost got their fingers onto the board, and they would be worse, in my opinion.

 

[RivShore]

I think the fundamental disagreement here is that I don't care that it's everywhere and I think the story will be back to buried next week

agreed, it probably will be out of sight out of mind in a week or two but there is also a chance, if successful, that it forever gets enshrined in law books as the Disney ToS precedent. You don't think every company will jump on the bandwagon to take away your right to a jury trial because you used an unrelated app, once in the past? And the fact that so many seem to not care that a company is trying to take away your right to a jury trial is more disturbing than Disney lawyers being Disney lawyers. lol.

 

[HokieRaven5]

agreed, it probably will be out of sight out of mind in a week or two but there is also a chance, if successful, that it forever gets enshrined in law books as the Disney ToS precedent. You don't think every company will jump on the bandwagon to take away your right to a jury trial because you used an unrelated app, once in the past? And the fact that so many seem to not care that a company is trying to take away your right to a jury trial is more disturbing than Disney lawyers being Disney lawyers. lol.

Thing is, the filing was made in May/June and has been publicly available since then. Took almost 3 months for it to hit mainstream?

Not defending the lawyers and their tactics they’ll just also try anything to get a case dismissed.

 

[New Mouse]

agreed, it probably will be out of sight out of mind in a week or two but there is also a chance, if successful, that it forever gets enshrined in law books as the Disney ToS precedent. You don't think every company will jump on the bandwagon to take away your right to a jury trial because you used an unrelated app, once in the past? And the fact that so many seem to not care that a company is trying to take away your right to a jury trial is more disturbing than Disney lawyers being Disney lawyers. lol.

This isn't new. It's been happening for years in all those TOS you never read.

Doesn't mean it's legal though and that's what the courts decide. Disney has lost many cases before.

 

[wabbott]

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/why-battle-between-disney-universal-130000242.html

The Wrap
Why the Battle Between Disney and Universal for Orlando Theme Park Dominance Rages On: ‘It’s Just Getting Started’

A decades-long war between the two companies is heating up again, as parks attendance softens for Disney

by Drew Taylor
Mon, August 19, 2024 at 2:00 PM GMT+1

 

[fatmanatee]

agreed, it probably will be out of sight out of mind in a week or two but there is also a chance, if successful, that it forever gets enshrined in law books as the Disney ToS precedent. You don't think every company will jump on the bandwagon to take away your right to a jury trial because you used an unrelated app, once in the past? And the fact that so many seem to not care that a company is trying to take away your right to a jury trial is more disturbing than Disney lawyers being Disney lawyers. lol.

I wasn't that disturbed about it in part because it didn't seem to work (as mentioned above this was filed in *May*), it didn't really seem likely to work when I first heard about it, and I need to repeat that this is a case that Disney doesn't think they should be involved in the first place because they don't own the restaurant. That's the basis I'm operating from. I'd be more disturbed if this happened in a situation where Disney clearly holds more responsibility for preventing what happened (wrongful death on a ride, an allergic reaction at a Disney-owned restaurant, etc). In this case it just felt like a hail mary to avoid going to trial and incur more expenses on a deeply unfortunate situation that they don't think they have responsibility for.

 

[RivShore]

I wasn't that disturbed about it in part because it didn't seem to work (as mentioned above this was filed in *May*), it didn't really seem likely to work when I first heard about it, and I need to repeat that this is a case that Disney doesn't think they should be involved in the first place because they don't own the restaurant. That's the basis I'm operating from. I'd be more disturbed if this happened in a situation where Disney clearly holds more responsibility for preventing what happened (wrongful death on a ride, an allergic reaction at a Disney-owned restaurant, etc). In this case it just felt like a hail mary to avoid going to trial and incur more expenses on a deeply unfortunate situation that they don't think they have responsibility for.

Right, I don't disagree, when just looking at this case, but I really really don't like them bringing in unrelated ToS in as a defense. Why even go there when you probably have a half dozen real reasons to get Disney dismissed from the case?

 

[fatmanatee]

Right, I don't disagree, when just looking at this case, but I really really don't like them bringing in unrelated ToS in as a defense. Why even go there when you probably have a half dozen real reasons to get Disney dismissed from the case?

I'd guess they did and those reasons didn't work either. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[wabbott]

https://www.wsj.com/business/media/...nts-paramount-stake-b7704a11?mod=hp_lead_pos3

Edgar Bronfman Submits $4.3 Billion Bid for Redstone’s National Amusements, Paramount Stake

Bronfman is looking to scuttle a previous agreement to merge Paramount with David Ellison’s Skydance Media

By Lauren Thomas and Jessica Toonkel
Updated Aug. 19, 2024 11:01 pm EDT

Media executive Edgar Bronfman Jr. is formally making his play for Shari Redstone’s media empire, in an attempt to scuttle a previous agreement to merge Paramount Global with David Ellison’s production company Skydance Media.

Bronfman has submitted a $4.3 billion offer for National Amusements, the company through which Redstone’s family controls the media giant, and a minority stake in Paramount Global, according to people familiar with the situation.

As part of the offer, Bronfman has proposed buying National Amusements in an equity deal valued at $1.75 billion, equal to what Skydance has offered for Redstone’s company, plus investing $1.5 billion onto Paramount’s balance sheet, also similar to what Skydance has offered, the people said.

The figure also would cover a $400 million breakup fee owed if Paramount chooses to go with an offer other than Skydance.

Bronfman, who formerly ran Warner Music and liquor giant Seagram, has secured financing commitments primarily from high net-worth individuals and family offices, the people said. He has also teamed up with movie producer Steven Paul, who previously expressed interest in National Amusements.

The new offer marks the latest twist in a monthslong effort to sell Paramount, which owns CBS, cable networks Comedy Central and Nickelodeon, the Paramount+ streaming service and movie studio.

Last month, Redstone agreed to sell National Amusements to Skydance Media, run by David Ellison, the son of billionaire Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison. Under that deal, Skydance and its investors have agreed to spend more than $8 billion to acquire National Amusements and then merge Skydance into Paramount, creating a new iteration of the iconic business.

Under the terms of that deal, Skydance agreed to buy National Amusements in a transaction with an equity value of $1.75 billion. Skydance and its investors agreed to put $1.5 billion on Paramount’s balance sheet, which it can use to pay down debt.

Skydance is committing another $4.5 billion that Paramount can use for an offer to buy out about 50% of nonvoting shares at $15 each, or can roll into the new company. Non-Redstone voting shareholders would be eligible to cash out for $23 a share or roll into the new company as nonvoting shareholders.

The Skydance deal is subject to a “go-shop period,” when other potential buyers can make offers, which ends on Wednesday.

Now it is up to a special committee of directors at Paramount to decide if Bronfman’s bid “is or would reasonably be expected to lead to a superior proposal,” relative to Skydance’s offer, and thus warrants extending the go-shop period for another two weeks, according to the Skydance deal terms.

Skydance declined to comment.

Bronfman’s pitch is that his deal is better for Paramount shareholders because they wouldn’t be diluted like they would be in the Skydance deal, under which Paramount would buy Skydance in an all-stock transaction. Many Paramount shareholders have voiced concerns about the Skydance deal because they say it is a sweetheart deal for Redstone.

In a letter sent on Monday evening, Bronfman related to Paramount’s special committee that he has financing commitments for about $5 billion, the people said.

Bronfman still faces a significant challenge in getting the deal done. Under the terms of Redstone’s deal with Skydance, Skydance has the right to improve the terms of its deal.

Bronfman, who has served as the executive chairman of sports-centric streaming service Fubo since 2020, has discussed bringing in new partners from the technology and other industries for possible strategic partnerships, should he take over Paramount, The Wall Street Journal previously reported.

Bronfman separately scored a major victory last week following his company Fubo’s suit against Warner Bros. Discovery, Fox Corp.and Disney for announcing the launch of a joint venture earlier this year. On Friday, a judge blocked the new sports streaming service from debuting, dealing a major blow to the three companies’ efforts.

Write to Lauren Thomas at lauren.thomas@wsj.com and Jessica Toonkel at jessica.toonkel@wsj.com

 

[wabbott]

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/us-streaming-viewership-surges-july-123058435.html

US streaming viewership surges in July due to Olympics, Nielsen reports

Reuters
Tue, Aug 20, 2024, 1:30 PM GMT+1

 

[RivShore]

Better late than never but this should have been the initial response as I said again and again!

Disney backtracks on tossing wrongful death lawsuit by NYU doctor's widower because of Disney+ subscription​

https://nypost.com/2024/08/20/us-ne...ctors-widower-because-of-disney-subscription/

Disney has now backtracked on its push to have a wrongful death lawsuit filed by a New York University doctor’s grieving husband tossed because of fine print in the widower’s Disney+ streaming service subscription.

The theme park juggernaut revealed its decision to reverse course late Monday after sparking outrage for arguing in court filings that Jeffrey Piccolo shouldn’t be able to sue over his wife Kanokporn Tangsuan’s allergy-related death because of the subscription agreement he had signed years earlier.

“At Disney, we strive to put humanity above all other considerations,” Josh D’Amaro, the chairman of Disney Experiences, said in a statement to The Post about the company’s decision.

“With such unique circumstances as the ones in this case, we believe this situation warrants a sensitive approach to expedite a resolution for the family who have experienced such a painful loss. As such, we’ve decided to waive our right to arbitration and have the matter proceed in court.”

Disney has yet to officially file its latest motion in Orange County, Fla., circuit court as of Tuesday morning, records show......

 

[wabbott]

Better late than never but this should have been the initial response as I said again and again!

Disney backtracks on tossing wrongful death lawsuit by NYU doctor's widower because of Disney+ subscription​

https://nypost.com/2024/08/20/us-ne...ctors-widower-because-of-disney-subscription/

Disney has now backtracked on its push to have a wrongful death lawsuit filed by a New York University doctor’s grieving husband tossed because of fine print in the widower’s Disney+ streaming service subscription.

The theme park juggernaut revealed its decision to reverse course late Monday after sparking outrage for arguing in court filings that Jeffrey Piccolo shouldn’t be able to sue over his wife Kanokporn Tangsuan’s allergy-related death because of the subscription agreement he had signed years earlier.

“At Disney, we strive to put humanity above all other considerations,” Josh D’Amaro, the chairman of Disney Experiences, said in a statement to The Post about the company’s decision.

“With such unique circumstances as the ones in this case, we believe this situation warrants a sensitive approach to expedite a resolution for the family who have experienced such a painful loss. As such, we’ve decided to waive our right to arbitration and have the matter proceed in court.”

Disney has yet to officially file its latest motion in Orange County, Fla., circuit court as of Tuesday morning, records show......

It is notable that from the beginning, DIS has a history of hard-nosed litigation. Recall how aggressively they went after copyright infringements. IIRC, they were in the big,fat middle of the Betamax case VCR recording).

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-Walt-Disney-Companys-history-with-lawsuits

 

[RivShore]

It is notable that from the beginning, DIS has a history of hard-nosed litigation. Recall how aggressively they went after copyright infringements. IIRC, they were in the big,fat middle of the Betamax case VCR recording).

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-Walt-Disney-Companys-history-with-lawsuits

Yes, their lawyers were always known as the best...or is it worst? LOL

This one just hits way to close to home and our basic rights, if successful, it would have striped the right of a jury trial from 100M+ D+ subscribers for anything that happened at any time with any part of the Disney empire. Way too broad and it probably needs some legislation to prevent that from happening with all app ToS's