Disney to buy Twitter?

[lockedoutlogic]

Interesting. I'm one of those people who would stare at their phones for 2-3 hours for a game. I have done it and I would do it again. If I'm not home and can't watch my teams I'll watch them on the go if it's available. Now the NBA in my opinion is not fun to watch so I won't sit and watch that but most other things I would/will.

That's the way of the future...

...unfortunately which league has Disney foolishly put most of their eggs into one basket of?

 

[Sparkly]

Not entirely true...

Parks account for about 30% of the revenue...second only to 40% for television...

See here now is the problem: the tv revenue is almost entirely ESPN and ESPN is going DOWN after hitting the iceberg...

Yeah, but it's not like Disney are on their last dollar and would need to cut back on something else to afford buying twitter.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Yeah, but it's not like Disney are on their last dollar and would need to cut back on something else to afford buying twitter.

But that's what they WOULD do...it's the standard corporate playbook.

In a fair world...if they bought twitter and it was a disaster...they would say "well, people are still coming to the parks so we shouldn't mess
With that"

When In reality, they say "hey...people are still coming to the parks so we can slash costs there and they'll STILL come"

And In this case, they are 100% right.

 

[Waiting2goback]

But that's what they WOULD do...it's the standard corporate playbook.

In a fair world...if they bought twitter and it was a disaster...they would say "well, people are still coming to the parks so we shouldn't mess
With that"

When In reality, they say "hey...people are still coming to the parks so we can slash costs there and they'll STILL come"

And In this case, they are 100% right.

That is exactly what they would do. Shanghai cost $5 billion to build and while they seem to be having nightly parades and fireworks DL is no longer going to have nightly fireworks for a time and WDW is losing a nightly parade for the time being, if not permanently. Obviously there are other cuts but one thing Walt always wanted was nightly fireworks as his "kiss goodnight" to his guests. But people keep showing up so why do they care.

 

[mikepizzo]

Disney buying a struggling tech platform is not gonna "help it"

Look up "go.com"

Disney has no stomach to pour funds into R&D and that's what tech companies ultimately need to stay fresh or reinvent.

Ironically what helped the company get started was their R&D too. Remember that time when Disney would innovate? Hoping to see another boom with all the Star Wars stuff, but I'm not holding my breath.

It may be struggling but how do you know it couldn't help? Like I said Disney is likely interested in the streaming capabilities. Streaming NFL games to millions via twitter opens up possibilities for Disney. There has to be something there if Google is also interested.

Never ever, EVER, forget that Google is in business to sell ads to you. That's it. Their bread and butter is search because your searches typically show what you're interested in which makes it a lot easier to sell you something. If I'm not a fan of country music then Google isn't going to push ads for the latest and greatest Country music CD's to me. (Wait, are CD's still a thing...ah, never mind).

Google wants Twitter so they can get that juicy, JUICY, real time data. Imagine posting a tweet mentioning that you would love to get X item, and then a couple minutes later seeing an add for X item. More likely to purchase it.

I think that's why Google is interested. I think they could care less about any streaming capabilities.

 

[rteetz]

Ironically what helped the company get started was their R&D too. Remember that time when Disney would innovate? Hoping to see another boom with all the Star Wars stuff, but I'm not holding my breath.



Never ever, EVER, forget that Google is in business to sell ads to you. That's it. Their bread and butter is search because your searches typically show what you're interested in which makes it a lot easier to sell you something. If I'm not a fan of country music then Google isn't going to push ads for the latest and greatest Country music CD's to me. (Wait, are CD's still a thing...ah, never mind).

Google wants Twitter so they can get that juicy, JUICY, real time data. Imagine posting a tweet mentioning that you would love to get X item, and then a couple minutes later seeing an add for X item. More likely to purchase it.

I think that's why Google is interested. I think they could care less about any streaming capabilities.

What if that's a reason Disney wants Twitter. Disney loves info, just look at how they can track you in a theme park...

 

[mikepizzo]

What if that's a reason Disney wants Twitter. Disney loves info, just look at how they can track you in a theme park...

I think Disney loves to know where you are and what you spend your money on in regards to Disney. Not sure how much value Disney would get out of knowing that someone tweeted about how they think their bathroom scale is broken.

Google on the other hand can see that tweet, see that you think your bathroom scale is broken, push an ad to you about bathroom scales, etc.

Again, Google is in business to push ads to you. Disney is in business for many reasons, but I don't consider pushing ads (general ads, not Disney related ads) to you.

One of the reasons why I actually like magic bands is because if they see that I've ridden Haunted Mansion 7 times in the past 2 days, they can push me a 15% off coupon for Momento Mori. Well, maybe in the future, but you get the idea.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

What if that's a reason Disney wants Twitter. Disney loves info, just look at how they can track you in a theme park...

You're a little too in love with the rat on this one, my friend...

Disney is excellent in predicting discretionary spending habits for families and the desire for consumer products...that is what they are good at with their info.

The fact they discovered the "dessert party" and the "parade dining package" is still mind boggling to me...it's a ridiculous concept that they are exploiting at an impressive rate.

That does not translate to tech...where they can rarely get out of their own way. It's apples to grapefruits.

 

[rteetz]

I think Disney loves to know where you are and what you spend your money on in regards to Disney. Not sure how much value Disney would get out of knowing that someone tweeted about how they think their bathroom scale is broken.

Google on the other hand can see that tweet, see that you think your bathroom scale is broken, push an ad to you about bathroom scales, etc.

Again, Google is in business to push ads to you. Disney is in business for many reasons, but I don't consider pushing ads (general ads, not Disney related ads) to you.

One of the reasons why I actually like magic bands is because if they see that I've ridden Haunted Mansion 7 times in the past 2 days, they can push me a 15% off coupon for Momento Mori. Well, maybe in the future, but you get the idea.

I understand that but we don't know all the intentions behind Disney wanting Twitter. I'm guessing info is part of the reason. They can track reactions to movies, tv shows, sports, their theme parks, etc. They can then market to the masses that way.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...asons-why-it-hopes-disney-doesn-t-buy-twitter

This does a good job of just stating the truth...

Especially #1...which is Disney's reality to a T

 

[rteetz]

You're a little too in love with the rat on this one, my friend...

Disney is excellent in predicting discretionary spending habits for families and the desire for consumer products...that is what they are good at with their info.

The fact they discovered the "dessert party" and the "parade dining package" is still mind boggling to me...it's a ridiculous concept that they are exploiting at an impressive rate.

That does not translate to tech...where they can rarely get out of their own way. It's apples to grapefruits.

I understand but obviously there are some tech reasons here that they want Twitter. Streaming and data might be two of those. We just don't know for sure.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

I think Disney loves to know where you are and what you spend your money on in regards to Disney. Not sure how much value Disney would get out of knowing that someone tweeted about how they think their bathroom scale is broken.

Google on the other hand can see that tweet, see that you think your bathroom scale is broken, push an ad to you about bathroom scales, etc.

Again, Google is in business to push ads to you. Disney is in business for many reasons, but I don't consider pushing ads (general ads, not Disney related ads) to you.

One of the reasons why I actually like magic bands is because if they see that I've ridden Haunted Mansion 7 times in the past 2 days, they can push me a 15% off coupon for Momento Mori. Well, maybe in the future, but you get the idea.

100%...perfect.

There's too much faith in Disneys management on this one...
...we (I mean most everyone else here...I think it's safe to say that some of us "downers" have a better perspective on these things) have this idea that Disney doesn't fail on things.

Oh...they fail alright...they're just huge so it doesn't make too much of a dent in the aura.

This...is exactly where they fail.

 

[rteetz]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...asons-why-it-hopes-disney-doesn-t-buy-twitter

This does a good job of just stating the truth...

Especially #1...which is Disney's reality to a T

Obviously Twitter isn't going to be able to survive on its own forever. Now whoever buys it is going to have challenges whether it be Disney, google, or someone else. If google buys it would their stock drop as well? I don't know but I would say maybe due to the fact that Twitter is a struggling enterprise. A reason I see Twitter preferring Disney over google in this situation is Jack Dorsey. He is on the Disney board and from some things I've seen Disney might be the dream owner according to twitter executives.

 

[mikepizzo]

I understand but obviously there are some tech reasons here that they want Twitter. Streaming and data might be two of those. We just don't know for sure.

True, there probably are some tech reasons, but it may not be the tech reasons you're thinking of.

Google bought Motorola in 2011 for a casual 12.5 billion in cash (y'know, walking around money). Then they sold Motorola to Lenovo in 2014 for a measly 2.91 billion. Everyone thought Google bought Motorola so they could start manufacturing their own devices. Why take an almost 10 billion dollar hit? Because Google was able to obtain some 20,000 patents. That was the golden goose. Google could care less about manufacturing their own devices. They can design them and then pay LG/HTC/Huawei to actually make them.

My point being is that there is a possibility that there is something behind the scenes in regards to Twitter. I don't personally think so, and it's hard for me to think of good reasons for Disney to buy Twitter (cause we all know if they were going after streaming they should buy Netflix).

 

[rteetz]

True, there probably are some tech reasons, but it may not be the tech reasons you're thinking of.

Google bought Motorola in 2011 for a casual 12.5 billion in cash (y'know, walking around money). Then they sold Motorola to Lenovo in 2014 for a measly 2.91 billion. Everyone thought Google bought Motorola so they could start manufacturing their own devices. Why take an almost 10 billion dollar hit? Because Google was able to obtain some 20,000 patents. That was the golden goose. Google could care less about manufacturing their own devices. They can design them and then pay LG/HTC/Huawei to actually make them.

My point being is that there is a possibility that there is something behind the scenes in regards to Twitter. I don't personally think so, and it's hard for me to think of good reasons for Disney to buy Twitter (cause we all know if they were going after streaming they should buy Netflix).

That is a good point. I wonder how much in price an acquisition of Twitter would cost versus Netflix?

Disney obviously has an interest in social media they have both major social media companies executives on their board.

 

[mikepizzo]

That is a good point. I wonder how much in price an acquisition of Twitter would cost versus Netflix?

Disney obviously has an interest in social media they have both major social media companies executives on their board.

I don't know much about social media because I don't really use it too much.

I would think Disney would be more interested in the knowledge these social media companies have, and how it can be applied to Disney's business model, as opposed to being interested in actual social media.

Maybe I'm wrong though. vOv

 

[TwoMisfits]

Obviously Twitter isn't going to be able to survive on its own forever. Now whoever buys it is going to have challenges whether it be Disney, google, or someone else. If google buys it would their stock drop as well? I don't know but I would say maybe due to the fact that Twitter is a struggling enterprise. A reason I see Twitter preferring Disney over google in this situation is Jack Dorsey. He is on the Disney board and from some things I've seen Disney might be the dream owner according to twitter executives.

You know, some companies who can't survive on their own just don't survive...wouldn't be the 1st company that was a former super star that ended up in the trash heap. There are already new companies looking to gain ground right now in the same field.

 

[rteetz]

You know, some companies who can't survive on their own just don't survive...wouldn't be the 1st company that was a former super star that ended up in the trash heap. There are already new companies looking to gain ground right now in the same field.

Well that would be unfortunate because Twitter is my main social media site, I get a lot of my news there and various other things.

 

[jkh36619]

Super pumped about the thought of a Twitter dark ride at Epcot. Ooh, or re-theme Splash Mountain since it already has a blue bird in it. That'll save Iger a few bucks right there!

 

[DDLand]

I understand but obviously there are some tech reasons here that they want Twitter. Streaming and data might be two of those. We just don't know for sure.

I see their play here...

Currently Twitter is trading at somewhere around a 16 Billion dollar market capitalization. That's at least 16 Billion dollars that Disney would be required to cough up, not including the premium that the sellers would require. Disney could walk in and create or buy new technology worth a lot less than 16 Billion+ dollars. There are better internet streaming companies out there. This is quite frankly something simpler I surmise.

While synergies certainly exist between streaming and data collection and their existing content creation, I believe this is an old media company trying to diversify into new media. No media company has a dominate position across multiple mediums.

Google and Facebook control the web and social.

Google/YouTube, Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon control streaming.

Disney, NBC, Fox, and a handful of others control broadcast/cable.

Print is becoming irrelevant.

See a pattern? None of them cross markets except Google. Even they continue to struggle with social. The fragmented new media is completely cut off from old. It used to be considerably more consolidated. A handful of corporations owned or licensed out their names to all radio, television, and newspapers. Ad buyers knew exactly where to go to buy ads. A handful of player like Walt Disney, News Corp, and NBC.

Now the field is rapidly changing. The options are opening up more and more. Instead of only looking at a select number of players, they can use Adsense, or Facebook, or Netflix, or Amazon. Old media is starting to falter from a lack of new ad dollars. They're also failing to sell ads to millennials.

So while Disney still has an enviable Old Media business that will take decades to disintegrate, they also have a problem. They can see where the wind is blowing. They've been getting away with charging ridiculous amounts of money to access their channels, that most cable subscribers don't watch. In a post bundle world, that's a disaster.

How disastrous? Try 36$ per month disastrous:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/dorothy...ng-to-pay-36-per-month-for-espn/#71c1c7215798

So what to do? What can old media company do to try to offset its decline? It can grow its other existing businesses... Star Wars, Marvel, Pixar, WDA, and of course our beloved P&R. They have been doing that, but it's not enough. ESPN and broadcast are huge.

You do what Bob Iger has always done when the going gets tough, or when things are alright, or when things are great, or whenever...

Aquire a company that could actually grow quickly and supplement/enhance old media.

You buy Twitter.

Why Twitter? It serves to compare to other Social Media and Internet Firms. Alphabet (that whole rebranding thing is stupid) and Facebook. Both Google (yeah I'm calling it Google) and Facebook have been growing rapidly. They're either making more money than old media, or will within a couple years. It's clear to see which way the wind is blowing. Old media doesn't grow like Facebook is growing. It's insane, and I'm sure, jealousy inducing.

Right now Twitter, isn't making any money, in fact it's blowing through its cash hoard. What if it could be properly monetized? What if it could be turned into a Facebook like engine for growth? It would be huge. It would be enough to offset any losses at ESPN, and would firmly plant the Walt Disney Company not just as a media company of the 20th century, but as the 21st. They would have more in common with Apple, Google, and Facebook than they would with News Corp.

They could do all the streaming stuff for sure, but their ad and data sales would be unprecedented. Ad buyers could look at the field and ask themselves whether they want to work with several different companies to reach old and new media, or if they just want to work with one company that's guaranteed to reach a streaming audience, a social media audience, and a broadcasting audience. Disney would have the upper hand because they have a firm grasp on old and new. They would also understand the population's interests better than any other advertiser. They'd know what ads work on Television, online, and on social media. They could also monetize people's data in unprecedented ways.

Iger said one of his critical three points for leadership strategy was embracing technology (brands and international were the other two I believe). This is him boldly going down that road.

Now let's do a little reality check.

If new media and old media can coexist, why hasn't it happened yet? If Twitter hasn't been able to succeed, what could Disney do to fix it when clearly it's going down the tubes? When has Disney ever had a good tech acquisition? When has any media company ever had a good tech acquisition? Even Hulu, the broadcaster owned company, is smaller than Netflix. What makes Disney think they can just walk into social and do it right?

Can an old media company turn around and pick up the new media tricks?

I'd love for it to be true, but something tells me this could be the biggest mistake of Iger's career. If this doesn't work, this 16 Billion dollar mess will be on his record forever. No Avengers movie or Star Wars Episode 21 or 22 will take away the immense failure of a foolish 16 Billion dollar acquisition. His record had been almost untainted until last year, this would destroy him.

Iger's strength has been seeing, buying, and hiring great talent, and letting them do great work unless they're imagineers. Twitter seems like it has one big problem. It doesn't have great talent or else it would be suceeding.

Well enough of all that. The implications are huge though. I wonder what this would do to the successor situation? Would Sheryl Sandberg dump Facebook for their biggest rival? Why would we want Jack Dorsey?

Anyway, that's my take on it.