Rumors that Disney is in negotiations to sell Star Wars back to George Lucas!

[KayMichigan]

I have heard some rumblings that Marvel is considering bringing back Iron Man, with a second snap. No idea if that is true, but certainly know the current phase of Marvel is not capturing the box office, like the Marvel films of years ago.<<

With Robert Downey Jr.? Well, I guess he's not really doing anything else right now...

The problem with the modern Marvel films is they're not building up to a joined climax the way the previous set built up to Infinity Wars and Endgame. They're just random movies that aren't connected. Also, the Marvel universe lost its two most popular heroes, RDJ and Chris Evans as Steve Rogers.

But bringing RDJ as Iron Man back would be pretty much admitting defeat and saying "Hey, we know the new movies aren't that great so here's one of the older stars back. We give up."

 

[Elijah Abrams]

About that stuff on Disney's financial health and getting Hulu in this thread, what I really think Disney should do is move 20th Century Studios to a separate unit and then sell it off, along with its IP and library (excluding Avatar, the Lucasfilm catalog, and the Marvel films/shows). I also really think the new Disney CEO should take risks and make fresh, new ideas for the big screen (not just Disney+, especially for live-action content), or everyone will get burned out by too many remakes and sequels (I disagree on your comment about that, @BrianL)!

 

[Aluminum Falcon]

About that stuff on Disney's financial health and getting Hulu in this thread, what I really think Disney should do is move 20th Century Studios to a separate unit and then sell it off, along with its IP and library (excluding Avatar, the Lucasfilm catalog, and the Marvel films/shows). I also really think the new Disney CEO should take risks and make fresh, new ideas for the big screen (not just Disney+, especially for live-action content), or everyone will get burned out by too many remakes and sequels (I disagree on your comment about that, @BrianL)!

I think that for now people still want sequels, and remakes. Disney is pretty reactive to what their customers want so if and when that changes i wouldn't worry too much. Disney has such a large IP catalog at this point it could keep them running with new content for decades, so the long term potential is not worth the short term gain from selling IMO

 

[BrianL]

I think that for now people still want sequels, and remakes. Disney is pretty reactive to what their customers want so if and when that changes i wouldn't worry too much. Disney has such a large IP catalog at this point it could keep them running with new content for decades, so the long term potential is not worth the short term gain from selling IMO

The issue is that they are very reactive to what the customers want, but often not reactive enough. If they hit big with a remake, then they start pumping them out. The audiences may get sick of them, but there are still five more in the pipeline. That leads to these eras where the movies aren't hitting like they should. We may be starting to enter a phase like that now, but Disney won't notice for a while.

 

[PolymerSkywalker]

The issue is that they are very reactive to what the customers want, but often not reactive enough. If they hit big with a remake, then they start pumping them out. The audiences may get sick of them, but there are still five more in the pipeline. That leads to these eras where the movies aren't hitting like they should. We may be starting to enter a phase like that now, but Disney won't notice for a while.

The Disney ship is a very big one, it's takes a good while to turn that sucker in a new direction. The current wrong (less profitable) direction they are heading was set in motion by Iger a years ago well before Chapek was even put in the head role. People seem to want to blame it all on Chapek, but this slate of movies has been in development for about 4 years likely and was greenlit by Iger.

Chapek had his own issues, like money grabs in the parks and such, but the theatrical stuff is likely mostly Iger's doing.

 

[Wells Larsen]

Could be but you can't deny that Disney is in a world of hurt financially. Those facts are known and when a company is between a rock and a hard spot they scramble to stay alive. Iger has run this company into the ground and we are about to see the results of a train wreck that has been his tenure.

My personal opinion of Disney being "in a world of hurt financially" and "Iger has run this company into the ground" is a little overstated. I agree that Disney has taken a downturn, but the impression that your statements seem to give is one that puts Disney on the edge of bankruptcy. So, just wanted to point out my disagreement there.

On the point of the video -- And, I'm just going to use what I would think is common business sense... If Disney really felt that they were in a position to have a fire sale... don't you think they would start selling off assets that aren't a cash cow for them first?

 

[PolymerSkywalker]

I don't think Disney is in a world of hurt or impending disaster or anything like that. I do think the following has occurred:

- They have hit a rough patch with both their movies and Disney+ content
- They may not release a single profitable movie in 2023 other than Guardians (Investors will be skittish)
- Disney plus is proving much harder to make profitable, than they expected
- Star Wars is not in a great place right now, previous cash cow
- Marvel is not in a great place right now, previous cash cow
-Pixar is not in a great place right now, previous cash cow
- Disney is closing a very expensive Star Wars hotel, and taking a substantial loss in the process
- Disney plus has started losing subscribers, and this has people a little concerned
- The fight with Desantis is not endearing them to conservative families (about half the population of America)

My recommendation is they need to get back to good wholesome family friendly content that appeals to everyone, and stop choosing a side in anything political. Focus on great innovative stories that appeal to all, make telling a good story the most important thing again. There is nothing to gain by choosing a side in this culture war battle imho.

Michael Jordan said it perfectly years ago when asked to comment on a political issue. "I have no comment" Why? "Because republicans buy sneakers also".

 

[Disney Bobby]

My personal opinion of Disney being "in a world of hurt financially" and "Iger has run this company into the ground" is a little overstated. I agree that Disney has taken a downturn, but the impression that your statements seem to give is one that puts Disney on the edge of bankruptcy. So, just wanted to point out my disagreement there.

On the point of the video -- And, I'm just going to use what I would think is common business sense... If Disney really felt that they were in a position to have a fire sale... don't you think they would start selling off assets that aren't a cash cow for them first?

If what they want to sell isn't a cash cow, who is going to buy it, especially with the cost of borrowing so high right now? Selling sounds easy, but in the current environment, interest rates make purchasing really expensive if you need to borrow. That drives valuations down. And the folks that have cash are getting a good guaranteed return now, so they aren't very motived to spend that cash on something that isn't going to produce quick returns.

But I agree that the financial woes are probably being overblown. But the closing of the Star Wars hotel was a little alarming, especially considering they are accelerating the depreciation. That sounds like they are scrapping for cash and felt like an act of desperation.

 

[nancipants]

- The fight with Desantis is not endearing them to conservative families (about half the population of America)

I think this is overstated. There are a lot of "conservative families" who don't support what the governor is doing in regards to Disney. That's all I'll say on the subject so this doesn't turn into yet another political argument.

 

[PolymerSkywalker]

I think this is overstated. There are a lot of "conservative families" who don't support what the governor is doing in regards to Disney. That's all I'll say on the subject so this doesn't turn into yet another political argument.

While I agree with you on this, I just don't think it is wise to pick a political fight as a company. You will be guaranteed to upset at least a portion of your customers.

My place of employment is owned by a Christian Conservative family. Our single biggest customer is very left leaning and based in southern California. We don't talk politics at all. We deliver quality products to them at a fair price, and they are a great customer who have bought from us for many years. We talk about the technology, our kids, our hobbies, the industry as a whole.......but we both steer clear of politics.

 

[nancipants]

While I agree with you on this, I just don't think it is wise to pick a political fight as a company. You will be guaranteed to upset at least a portion of your customers.

It's already been discussed ad nauseum on this board, but one of the reasons Disney made a statement was due to its cast members. If that makes people angry, they really shouldn't be going to Disney parks anyway.

 

[PolymerSkywalker]

It's already been discussed ad nauseum on this board, but one of the reasons Disney made a statement was due to its cast members. If that makes people angry, they really shouldn't be going to Disney parks anyway.

Agree to disagree on this, you can support your employees without getting into a massive fight with the state's government. Most everyone I know could care less about what someone does in their bedroom.

 

[Aluminum Falcon]

If what they want to sell isn't a cash cow, who is going to buy it, especially with the cost of borrowing so high right now? Selling sounds easy, but in the current environment, interest rates make purchasing really expensive if you need to borrow. That drives valuations down. And the folks that have cash are getting a good guaranteed return now, so they aren't very motived to spend that cash on something that isn't going to produce quick returns.

But I agree that the financial woes are probably being overblown. But the closing of the Star Wars hotel was a little alarming, especially considering they are accelerating the depreciation. That sounds like they are scrapping for cash and felt like an act of desperation.

Disney has done similar things in the past, think Disney Institute, and Celebrations to name a few. it happens and they typically come out the other side fine. It would be fiscally irresponsible to not grab at every dollar available and it could have caused waves with stock holders (unlikely), so i don't think that part is alarming at all

 

[BrianL]

It's already been discussed ad nauseum on this board, but one of the reasons Disney made a statement was due to its cast members. If that makes people angry, they really shouldn't be going to Disney parks anyway.

Certainly, and I think it's totally fine for them to make a statement. That said, Chapek's statement could have been better and less clumsy, but supporting your employees is not a bad thing. There's nothing inherently wrong with a company making a statement on socio-political issues.

 

[Aluminum Falcon]

Certainly, and I think it's totally fine for them to make a statement. That said, Chapek's statement could have been better and less clumsy, but supporting your employees is not a bad thing. There's nothing inherently wrong with a company making a statement on socio-political issues.

i would agree, and they shouldn't have to fear government retaliation because of a statement. I'm sure Chapek regretted making that statement, but at the same time how could he have known Florida's government would respond the way it did. Hind sights always 20 20

 

[Douglas Dubh]

Certainly, and I think it's totally fine for them to make a statement. That said, Chapek's statement could have been better and less clumsy, but supporting your employees is not a bad thing. There's nothing inherently wrong with a company making a statement on socio-political issues.

We don’t know if a majority of cast members were in favor of the “support” or not. It might have been a vocal minority.

 

[PolymerSkywalker]

Certainly, and I think it's totally fine for them to make a statement. That said, Chapek's statement could have been better and less clumsy, but supporting your employees is not a bad thing. There's nothing inherently wrong with a company making a statement on socio-political issues.

Nothing inherently wrong with making a political statement I agree, but also not immune from any backlash that might come your way from said statement. I still think it is wise for companies not to wade into a political fight, if they could remain neutral.

 

[BrianL]

Nothing inherently wrong with it I agree, but also not immune from any backlash that might come your way from said statement.

BUT, when it comes to the government, they SHOULD be. It's in the constitution.

 

[DefnotDLav]

Nothing inherently wrong with making a political statement I agree, but also not immune from any backlash that might come your way from said statement. I still think it is wise for companies not to wade into a political fight, if they could remain neutral.

Well you are constitutionally protected from retaliation by the government.

Or at least used to be….

 

[PolymerSkywalker]

Sorta like Bud Light and Target had freedom to make the statements they made right? Do you think the investors in those companies believe that these statements have served the shareholders well?

We are free to saying pretty much anything, we aren’t free from the consequences of what we say.