Disney Shocker! Bob Iger Back As CEO, Bob Chapek Out

https://deadline.com/2022/11/disney-bob ... 235178223/

The company’s board has sent out a notice that Bob Iger is back and the recently re-upped Bob Chapek is out.

Iger massively expanded Disney market penetration and revenues - he was a hard act to follow. Makes sense to bring him back temporarily.

Of course some will celebrate Iger's return and see it over the 'woke' policies Chapek fostered that some key shareholders believe have hurt the company's revenues. While Chapek was trying to make the company be able to attract and keep for example staff in Florida who may be LGTBQ and women who want to be able to get legal abortions, stating those polices was used by the governor of Florida, a state they have much of their investments, threatening their special quasi local government authority status in the state, possible higher taxes and regulations hurting their profits. Many of their customers don't like the 'woke' stands Chapek took like having more diverse casting and characters like Women of Color, LGTBQ', bowing to demands of China, one of its biggest markets in some of their recent entertainment products to appeal to all audiences. Then there are the revenue concerns at divisions like ESPN and 'woke' issues there too as well as several movies that did poorly in revenues. Likely Iger will in the board's view to navigate the company to make bigger profits, the real goal of the company, by taking more careful stands. .

ltbewr wrote:

Of course some will celebrate Iger's return and see it over the 'woke' policies Chapek fostered that some key shareholders believe have hurt the company's revenues. While Chapek was trying to make the company be able to attract and keep for example staff in Florida who may be LGTBQ and women who want to be able to get legal abortions, stating those polices was used by the governor of Florida, a state they have much of their investments, threatening their special quasi local government authority status in the state, possible higher taxes and regulations hurting their profits. Many of their customers don't like the 'woke' stands Chapek took like having more diverse casting and characters like Women of Color, LGTBQ', bowing to demands of China, one of its biggest markets in some of their recent entertainment products to appeal to all audiences. Then there are the revenue concerns at divisions like ESPN and 'woke' issues there too as well as several movies that did poorly in revenues. Likely Iger will in the board's view to navigate the company to make bigger profits, the real goal of the company, by taking more careful stands. .

Can we stop we the politics, Iger was critical of Chapek for not coming out fast enough against the "don't say gay" bill. Yes, Disney is an entertainment company that supports the LGTBQ community, as does every entertainment company. Besides that, this is a huge improvement, and many Disney fans like me are rejoicing. Now Iger is not perfect, he sunk a ton of money into Disney + and buying 20th Century Fox which has been dragging down the company's bottom line. The parks are their most profitable asset, yet they've been cutting costs driving loyal fans away to help shore up finances from losses on the digital end of the company. I've taken my family almost every year to WDW since 2014, there are some issues with getting rid of the free fast passes and going to the paid Genie, getting rid of Magical express, park reservations and many other changes enacted since the pandemic which many loyal families like mine feel are cheapening the experience while at the same time pricing many middle-class families out of the market in favor of wealthy adults without children.

My Mom, a NYC high school teacher, took me and my brother to WDW many times when we were kids, teenagers and into our twenties. We usually drove and even then, were able to afford to stay at the Contempory Resort in the '90s. All on a NYC teacher salary. Today that is impossible, many Disney hotels are $500-$900 per night. And the park ticket costs are outrageous.

ltbewr wrote:

Of course some will celebrate Iger's return and see it over the 'woke' policies Chapek fostered that some key shareholders believe have hurt the company's revenues. While Chapek was trying to make the company be able to attract and keep for example staff in Florida who may be LGTBQ and women who want to be able to get legal abortions, stating those polices was used by the governor of Florida, a state they have much of their investments, threatening their special quasi local government authority status in the state, possible higher taxes and regulations hurting their profits. Many of their customers don't like the 'woke' stands Chapek took like having more diverse casting and characters like Women of Color, LGTBQ', bowing to demands of China, one of its biggest markets in some of their recent entertainment products to appeal to all audiences. Then there are the revenue concerns at divisions like ESPN and 'woke' issues there too as well as several movies that did poorly in revenues. Likely Iger will in the board's view to navigate the company to make bigger profits, the real goal of the company, by taking more careful stands. .

Erm... okay?

Are you projecting a little anxiety about black Ariel?

This isn't political, Chapek didn't do a great job of running the business. His extension was largely viewed as a second chance - he got savaged by Iger for being a slow business leader, he was notoriously awkward at any public events and just didn't look or feel the part. On the law in Florida, he just straight crashed the car. Somehow he managed to alienate both the LGBTQ community, and the anti-LGBTQ community. Doesn't matter what the issue is, or "how woke" you might think it is, you don't get to make those kinds of miscalculations and keep your job.

As mentioned by STT757, he's also been helming a loss-leader in Disney+ which isn't supposed to turn a profit until 2024. and had a reputation of being deaf to criticism on the parks and hotel properties, which are what keep Minnie in silk and pearls, and provide her Ossetra caviar.

Just a bad CEO. His departure is unrelated to the legion of deeply, truly racist people on YouTube insisting that the Little Mermaid can only be white. Add that to the list of cultural grievances against Disney.

In Iger, you have someone affable, smart, beloved by the media, with the experience of running a profitable company that he helped diversify with acquisitions. Unencumbered by baggage, clean, fresh new Bob.

bluecrew wrote:

ltbewr wrote:

Of course some will celebrate Iger's return and see it over the 'woke' policies Chapek fostered that some key shareholders believe have hurt the company's revenues. While Chapek was trying to make the company be able to attract and keep for example staff in Florida who may be LGTBQ and women who want to be able to get legal abortions, stating those polices was used by the governor of Florida, a state they have much of their investments, threatening their special quasi local government authority status in the state, possible higher taxes and regulations hurting their profits. Many of their customers don't like the 'woke' stands Chapek took like having more diverse casting and characters like Women of Color, LGTBQ', bowing to demands of China, one of its biggest markets in some of their recent entertainment products to appeal to all audiences. Then there are the revenue concerns at divisions like ESPN and 'woke' issues there too as well as several movies that did poorly in revenues. Likely Iger will in the board's view to navigate the company to make bigger profits, the real goal of the company, by taking more careful stands. .

Erm... okay?

Are you projecting a little anxiety about black Ariel?

This isn't political, Chapek didn't do a great job of running the business. His extension was largely viewed as a second chance - he got savaged by Iger for being a slow business leader, he was notoriously awkward at any public events and just didn't look or feel the part. On the law in Florida, he just straight crashed the car. Somehow he managed to alienate both the LGBTQ community, and the anti-LGBTQ community. Doesn't matter what the issue is, or "how woke" you might think it is, you don't get to make those kinds of miscalculations and keep your job.

As mentioned by STT757, he's also been helming a loss-leader in Disney+ which isn't supposed to turn a profit until 2024. and had a reputation of being deaf to criticism on the parks and hotel properties, which are what keep Minnie in silk and pearls, and provide her Ossetra caviar.

Just a bad CEO. His departure is unrelated to the legion of deeply, truly racist people on YouTube insisting that the Little Mermaid can only be white. Add that to the list of cultural grievances against Disney.

In Iger, you have someone affable, smart, beloved by the media, with the experience of running a profitable company that he helped diversify with acquisitions. Unencumbered by baggage, clean, fresh new Bob.

Well said, just to add with Universal's Epic Universe coming around the corner if Disney doesn't get their act together Universal is going to take a huge a permanent chunk out of Disney's Central Florida business. What Universal has done in the last ten years is amazing, Wizarding World of Harry Potter, Volcano Bay, tons of new hotels for all price ranges, a hugely popular Halloween horror nights and now Epic Universe which will include a Super Nintendo world and a classic Monsters land.

Disney is taking 5 years to get Tron coaster operational; it took 4 years to get Cosmic Re-wind open, and the crater they made of EPCOT is inexcusable. And the railway is still out of service. They need to get the current projects straightened out and opened, then they need to come up with a serious plan on what they are going to do next and when it will come to fruition.

I know I brought up the factor of his mishandling of LGTBQ and diversity issues in Disney's product as to the firing of Chapek, but that is more what the public will see as the reasons, and only part of the Board's decision. As others here and elsewhere have brought up the massive increases in fees to visit and declining quality of experiences at Disney US theme parks, mistakes with the Disney+ streaming service with losses greater than expected, misreads of the movie business side with the shift to streaming, competition like from Universal Studios in Orlando, and longer term issues greased his skids to Chepek's exit.
I also think Disney has longer term issues. They rely on the almost 100 year old Mickey Mouse and related characters, most of which are being replaced by other studios' newer and more relatable characters. They don't really have anything new with their theme parks, just bland stuff. Some divisions like ESPN have issues with product, they spent too much for NBA rights and can't make enough in revenues from games. Too many superhero movies and people may be tiring of them. The biggest film this year wasn't a Disney one, it was Top Gun: Maverick, an updated version of 1980's Top Gun with its action, rah-rah Americana and other factors brought people back to the theaters.
It will be interesting to see how and if Iger will bring back the Disney magic and profits.

Why Disney Is Collapsing: The Coming Disney Crisis (Retrospective)
China, Blackrock, and the demands of the Global Markets

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ps34BrekZds

Don't care who's at the helm, just as long as I keep getting some new Star Wars shows

DIRECTFLT wrote:

Disney Shocker! Bob Iger Back As CEO, Bob Chapek Out

https://deadline.com/2022/11/disney-bob ... 235178223/

The company’s board has sent out a notice that Bob Iger is back and the recently re-upped Bob Chapek is out.

FWIW, Fox News did a piece on Iger - probably not the news the GOP wants to hear.

Disney CEO Bob Iger has long history of cozying up to China while bashing conservative efforts in the US

Source: Fox News

Don't look to Iger to turn WDW into "Praiseland".

https://simpsonswiki.com/wiki/File:Praiseland.png

Disney was created to make money, lots of money, the ousted ceo was not able to maximize that idea, Iger did and will again. Chapek was just a mediocre leader who was in over his head.

Iger definitely had the golden touch during his 15 years as CEO, the problem is there really was no succession. There was Tom Staggs who was the heir apparent, but Iger didn't leave so Staggs left in 2016.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-disney-iger-staggs-20160404-story.html

The Disney Board has given Iger a two-year contract to straighten the company out and to develop a transition to a new CEO. I don't know who that will be, would Tom Staggs come back or are they going to promote Josh D'Amaro, or someone else? I know Josh D'Amaro has some fans, but I'm not sold on him. It's going to be interesting to watch, Iger is already making moves https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/21/kareem-daniel-disney-head-of-media-and-chapeks-right-hand-is-out-following-igers-return.html

I would love if they could bring back Joe Rohde.

dmg626 wrote:

Disney was created to make money, lots of money, the ousted ceo was not able to maximize that idea, Iger did and will again. Chapek was just a mediocre leader who was in over his head.

NT Times Article:

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-a ... r-bog-iger

“Bob Chapek is a very good guy, but he was in over his head,” said Jeffrey A. Sonnenfeld, a senior associate dean at the Yale School of Management. “And he had a very slow taking-charge process that didn’t serve him well. The timetable is usually eight months for an insider. For an outsider, it often takes two years.”

“But Iger was still there, so this process was slow,” Sonnenfeld added.

Tim Cook, Bob Iger, and Larry Fink walk into a bar . . .

Rumors afoot that Apple may try to buy Disney...

The thing Bob Chapek and the Disney BOD didn't get about their stance on the "Don't Say Gay" situation and other "woke" pivots is that they weren't picking a fight with the government of Florida, they were picking a fight with PARENTS, the very people who control where their family's entertainment dollar is spent. You don't start a fight with parents - you'll lose.

EA CO AS wrote:

The thing Bob Chapek and the Disney BOD didn't get about their stance on the "Don't Say Gay" situation and other "woke" pivots is that they weren't picking a fight with the government of Florida, they were picking a fight with PARENTS, the very people who control where their family's entertainment dollar is spent. You don't start a fight with parents - you'll lose.

Ummm well yes but no. 300K US children have same sex couples for parents.

https://www.census.gov/library/stories/ ... ehold.html

And among hetero parents, it’s likely only the evangelicals who give a rat’s behind what stance Disney takes with politicians stuck in the 1950s. And only 30% of Americans reported regular attendance of religious services in 2021, and you can bet a good chunk are in the gray-haired crowd and not parents to small kids.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/358364/rel ... icans.aspx

Aaron747 wrote:

among hetero parents, it’s likely only the evangelicals who give a rat’s behind what stance Disney takes

My wife and I aren't churchgoers, and we're very socially moderate to liberal, but even though we're not residents of FL, we agreed when this was making news nationally that teaching kids about sexuality or gender identity in schools below a certain age just isn't appropriate. The vast majority of parents just don't want it, and felt Disney had no business injecting itself into the conversation. You want to spend class time on this with my 10 year old who's in 5th grade? Knock yourself out - he's mature enough to handle that. But leave my kindergartener alone.

And my friend, we're not alone in our beliefs on this. You have many reasonable, rational, moderate or even liberal folks who are 100% in agreement with us that there's a certain age where it's ok to dive into those topics, and around 4th grade or beyond was where most I'd talked to felt more comfortable with it. And the majority of those parents wanted Disney to butt out. FL voters seemed to agree when largely sweeping those on the left aside a few weeks back, many of whom campaigned on this issue, among others.

EA CO AS wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

among hetero parents, it’s likely only the evangelicals who give a rat’s behind what stance Disney takes

My wife and I aren't churchgoers, and we're very socially moderate to liberal, but even though we're not residents of FL, we agreed when this was making news nationally that teaching kids about sexuality or gender identity in schools below a certain age just isn't appropriate. The vast majority of parents just don't want it, and felt Disney had no business injecting itself into the conversation. You want to spend class time on this with my 10 year old who's in 5th grade? Knock yourself out - he's mature enough to handle that. But leave my kindergartener alone.

And my friend, we're not alone in our beliefs on this. You have many reasonable, rational, moderate or even liberal folks who are 100% in agreement with us that there's a certain age where it's ok to dive into those topics, and around 4th grade or beyond was where most I'd talked to felt more comfortable with it. And the majority of those parents wanted Disney to butt out. FL voters seemed to agree when largely sweeping those on the left aside a few weeks back, many of whom campaigned on this issue, among others.

Fair enough, some parents certainly don't want programmatic approaches to these topics at those ages, and that would be reasonable. My understanding at the time though was the Florida DOE was on record saying they had no such formal instruction on those issues in any state curriculum, and the issue was being hyped up by state politicians. Disney's position was thus understandably that no kids should unfairly be made to feel singled out in a classroom just because their family circumstances might differ from whatever is 'mainstream'.

Anyway, I still think most non-Floridians pretty much shrugged at the story, like I did.

Another factor that may explain why Chapek got canned so suddenly was that he was playing games, shifting with programing sourcing to try to make Disney+ budget look better financially, reducing its apparent losses. Likely that came up in the audits, reported to the Audit Committee of the Board and had to take immediate action as such improper financial transfers violate Securities Law and made financial reporting as a stock company inaccurate, something the SEC doesn't like. https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/compani ... 64d05aba0e

Aaron747 wrote:

EA CO AS wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

among hetero parents, it’s likely only the evangelicals who give a rat’s behind what stance Disney takes

My wife and I aren't churchgoers, and we're very socially moderate to liberal, but even though we're not residents of FL, we agreed when this was making news nationally that teaching kids about sexuality or gender identity in schools below a certain age just isn't appropriate. The vast majority of parents just don't want it, and felt Disney had no business injecting itself into the conversation. You want to spend class time on this with my 10 year old who's in 5th grade? Knock yourself out - he's mature enough to handle that. But leave my kindergartener alone.

And my friend, we're not alone in our beliefs on this. You have many reasonable, rational, moderate or even liberal folks who are 100% in agreement with us that there's a certain age where it's ok to dive into those topics, and around 4th grade or beyond was where most I'd talked to felt more comfortable with it. And the majority of those parents wanted Disney to butt out. FL voters seemed to agree when largely sweeping those on the left aside a few weeks back, many of whom campaigned on this issue, among others.

Fair enough, some parents certainly don't want programmatic approaches to these topics at those ages, and that would be reasonable. My understanding at the time though was the Florida DOE was on record saying they had no such formal instruction on those issues in any state curriculum, and the issue was being hyped up by state politicians. Disney's position was thus understandably that no kids should unfairly be made to feel singled out in a classroom just because their family circumstances might differ from whatever is 'mainstream'.

Anyway, I still think most non-Floridians pretty much shrugged at the story, like I did.

I would disagree. Most parents have an opinion and want sexual education out of early grades. I do not attend church, but the difference between how parents see this issue and how the media portrayed it is... stark. Now this is just off my conversations.


There is a group of parents who question Disney on their subject matter for young children. Their latest movie revenue seems to reflect this.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/2022/ ... -bob-iger/

But far more damaging was the studio’s attempt to chart a path through the real-world political row around the so-called “Don’t Say Gay” bill in Florida, which managed to alienate all interested parties in the process.


This is a company that seems to have forgotten the primary market is intact families. Looking at numbers, 74 million children. I think the vast majority do not want little kids asking questions parents aren't ready for, nor are the children.

https://www.childstats.gov/americaschildren/glance.asp

My opinion is as soon as you get political, you anger 60% of the customers. It doesn't matter what issue.

I now vote with my money on any company intruding into my life with politics. I don't care which side. I'm not alone.

Let kids be kids.

FWIW, every twenty something married couple I know with kids is religious. There are trends (and less likely to divorce).
https://www.aei.org/articles/the-religi ... s-divorce/

Disney is a mass marketer and must get Disney+ profitable, the studios profitable, and keep park profits up.

Disney has lot of debt due to their past/current CEO. With rising rates, not a great position.

https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/char ... -term-debt

Job #1 must be getting movie and streaming profits up. That will involve brutal cost cutting, in my opinion.

Lightsaber

STT757 wrote:

bluecrew wrote:

ltbewr wrote:

Of course some will celebrate Iger's return and see it over the 'woke' policies Chapek fostered that some key shareholders believe have hurt the company's revenues. While Chapek was trying to make the company be able to attract and keep for example staff in Florida who may be LGTBQ and women who want to be able to get legal abortions, stating those polices was used by the governor of Florida, a state they have much of their investments, threatening their special quasi local government authority status in the state, possible higher taxes and regulations hurting their profits. Many of their customers don't like the 'woke' stands Chapek took like having more diverse casting and characters like Women of Color, LGTBQ', bowing to demands of China, one of its biggest markets in some of their recent entertainment products to appeal to all audiences. Then there are the revenue concerns at divisions like ESPN and 'woke' issues there too as well as several movies that did poorly in revenues. Likely Iger will in the board's view to navigate the company to make bigger profits, the real goal of the company, by taking more careful stands. .

Erm... okay?

Are you projecting a little anxiety about black Ariel?

This isn't political, Chapek didn't do a great job of running the business. His extension was largely viewed as a second chance - he got savaged by Iger for being a slow business leader, he was notoriously awkward at any public events and just didn't look or feel the part. On the law in Florida, he just straight crashed the car. Somehow he managed to alienate both the LGBTQ community, and the anti-LGBTQ community. Doesn't matter what the issue is, or "how woke" you might think it is, you don't get to make those kinds of miscalculations and keep your job.

As mentioned by STT757, he's also been helming a loss-leader in Disney+ which isn't supposed to turn a profit until 2024. and had a reputation of being deaf to criticism on the parks and hotel properties, which are what keep Minnie in silk and pearls, and provide her Ossetra caviar.

Just a bad CEO. His departure is unrelated to the legion of deeply, truly racist people on YouTube insisting that the Little Mermaid can only be white. Add that to the list of cultural grievances against Disney.

In Iger, you have someone affable, smart, beloved by the media, with the experience of running a profitable company that he helped diversify with acquisitions. Unencumbered by baggage, clean, fresh new Bob.

Well said, just to add with Universal's Epic Universe coming around the corner if Disney doesn't get their act together Universal is going to take a huge a permanent chunk out of Disney's Central Florida business. What Universal has done in the last ten years is amazing, Wizarding World of Harry Potter, Volcano Bay, tons of new hotels for all price ranges, a hugely popular Halloween horror nights and now Epic Universe which will include a Super Nintendo world and a classic Monsters land.

Disney is taking 5 years to get Tron coaster operational; it took 4 years to get Cosmic Re-wind open, and the crater they made of EPCOT is inexcusable. And the railway is still out of service. They need to get the current projects straightened out and opened, then they need to come up with a serious plan on what they are going to do next and when it will come to fruition.

In my opinion, Universal must expand Harry Potter. That is a gem! I once had Disney passes, now Universal. Value, much driven by Harry Potter, drove the switch.

However, Disney parks print money. Read the trend upthread, it is Disney+ and movies dragging down the company. We just exited the most intense consumption of video product. Scooby says Rhoo Rhoo.

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

Disney is a mass marketer and must get Disney+ profitable, the studios profitable, and keep park profits up.

A discussion of this transition on Bill Simmons's podcast also highlighted the streaming side.

The problem is everyone knows a market shakeout is coming, but no one knows when that will happen. Till it happens, all the key players kinda have to keep the investments high and the returns low so they can avoid being a loser in the upcoming shakeout. It's basically high stakes poker.

Maybe Iger will make a big move to kick off such a shakeout? He probably should, it's better than keeping the status quo going. As above, a play by Apple has been mentioned, but I doubt Disney would want to end up 2nd fiddle to the phone side of the business. Netflix was mentioned because they need what Disney has, revenue from something other than streaming, and it is thought Iger is the kind of leader Netflix needs, who could trim the fat at Netflix and get it on a strong footing.

Basically a lot of CEOs and corporations have staked their future on the gold rush that is streaming, but like all good gold rushes, sooner or later the rush ends, usually with a lot of shattered dreams.

I agree about the parks. They have gotten used to extortionate pricing while cheapening the product at the same time. That trend has to be reversed.

ESPN is a big problem. It was delivering huge profits years ago, which made it easy for the rest of the company. Now the situation is reversed, it is a drag on the rest of the corporation. Cord cutting is still a big issue, while at the same time royalties for sports are only going up and up since new entrants see them as attention-grabbers.

The conversation I heard asked an interesting question: why did Iger come out of retirement? He had lots of money and a glorious legacy to rest upon, now he is risking his reputation on trying to turn around a corporation whose major businesses are under duress if not tapped out. It might not end well for him.

Adding to Disney's issues is the box office failure of the new animated movie, 'Strange World'. Despite good reviews, it just didn't take the money or attention of the movie going public. Competition from other films, including by Disney, being more a product for children, poor marketing, and complaints as to its 'woke' characters seem to have doomed the film. This isn't the first time Disney had an animated film 'bomb' at the box office but the timing of it was bad. https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/str ... 00021.html

This has nothing to do with Chapek's response to Florida's bigotry - unless it is because he didn't act quickly enough and Iger felt Disney was too close to DeSantis. The real issue is that Chapek just was not the one who was supposed to guide the business - Staggs was. Since Staggs shocked everyone and left, and Chapek didn't do the greatest job in bringing back Disney after the COVID debacle - Iger is back.

Aaron747 wrote:

EA CO AS wrote:

The thing Bob Chapek and the Disney BOD didn't get about their stance on the "Don't Say Gay" situation and other "woke" pivots is that they weren't picking a fight with the government of Florida, they were picking a fight with PARENTS, the very people who control where their family's entertainment dollar is spent. You don't start a fight with parents - you'll lose.

Ummm well yes but no. 300K US children have same sex couples for parents.

How many is that compared to the tens of millions that have a mum and a dad? It's a tiny market, why force it onto everyone else? Almost all children's programs have some form of LGBT content, it's fine that some do but every single show?

lightsaber wrote:

STT757 wrote:

bluecrew wrote:

Erm... okay?

Are you projecting a little anxiety about black Ariel?

This isn't political, Chapek didn't do a great job of running the business. His extension was largely viewed as a second chance - he got savaged by Iger for being a slow business leader, he was notoriously awkward at any public events and just didn't look or feel the part. On the law in Florida, he just straight crashed the car. Somehow he managed to alienate both the LGBTQ community, and the anti-LGBTQ community. Doesn't matter what the issue is, or "how woke" you might think it is, you don't get to make those kinds of miscalculations and keep your job.

As mentioned by STT757, he's also been helming a loss-leader in Disney+ which isn't supposed to turn a profit until 2024. and had a reputation of being deaf to criticism on the parks and hotel properties, which are what keep Minnie in silk and pearls, and provide her Ossetra caviar.

Just a bad CEO. His departure is unrelated to the legion of deeply, truly racist people on YouTube insisting that the Little Mermaid can only be white. Add that to the list of cultural grievances against Disney.

In Iger, you have someone affable, smart, beloved by the media, with the experience of running a profitable company that he helped diversify with acquisitions. Unencumbered by baggage, clean, fresh new Bob.

Well said, just to add with Universal's Epic Universe coming around the corner if Disney doesn't get their act together Universal is going to take a huge a permanent chunk out of Disney's Central Florida business. What Universal has done in the last ten years is amazing, Wizarding World of Harry Potter, Volcano Bay, tons of new hotels for all price ranges, a hugely popular Halloween horror nights and now Epic Universe which will include a Super Nintendo world and a classic Monsters land.

Disney is taking 5 years to get Tron coaster operational; it took 4 years to get Cosmic Re-wind open, and the crater they made of EPCOT is inexcusable. And the railway is still out of service. They need to get the current projects straightened out and opened, then they need to come up with a serious plan on what they are going to do next and when it will come to fruition.

In my opinion, Universal must expand Harry Potter. That is a gem! I once had Disney passes, now Universal. Value, much driven by Harry Potter, drove the switch.

However, Disney parks print money. Read the trend upthread, it is Disney+ and movies dragging down the company. We just exited the most intense consumption of video product. Scooby says Rhoo Rhoo.

Lightsaber

Look at how Kaling is screwing around with the Scooby Doo universe, Velma is a complete mess. The show would have worked if it wasn't attached in any way shape or form to Scooby, but they had to connect it, they didn't read the fans who all hate it.

ACDC8 wrote:

Don't care who's at the helm, just as long as I keep getting some new Star Wars shows

Disney ruining Star Wars the way they did should be illegal.

TWA772LR wrote:

ACDC8 wrote:

Don't care who's at the helm, just as long as I keep getting some new Star Wars shows

Disney ruining Star Wars the way they did should be illegal.

It depends. They screwed the Skywalker movie saga up, however Mandalorian, the Bad Batch, Book of Boba Fett have been great, and i am looking forward to the new Disney+ series.

casinterest wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

ACDC8 wrote:

Don't care who's at the helm, just as long as I keep getting some new Star Wars shows

Disney ruining Star Wars the way they did should be illegal.

It depends. They screwed the Skywalker movie saga up, however Mandalorian, the Bad Batch, Book of Boba Fett have been great, and i am looking forward to the new Disney+ series.

Manadlorian and Bad Batch are awesome, the Book of Bobba Fett was terrible, badly acted, awful cgi, the only episode that was worth watching was "Chapter 5: Return of the Mandalorian", the production values of that episode where so much higher than the rest it wasn't funny.

casinterest wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

ACDC8 wrote:

Don't care who's at the helm, just as long as I keep getting some new Star Wars shows

Disney ruining Star Wars the way they did should be illegal.

It depends. They screwed the Skywalker movie saga up, however Mandalorian, the Bad Batch, Book of Boba Fett have been great, and i am looking forward to the new Disney+ series.

Rogue 1 was also great.
I also liked The Force Awakens, though I seem to be in a minority on that.
The other movies are all meh.

petertenthije wrote:

casinterest wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

Disney ruining Star Wars the way they did should be illegal.

It depends. They screwed the Skywalker movie saga up, however Mandalorian, the Bad Batch, Book of Boba Fett have been great, and i am looking forward to the new Disney+ series.

Rogue 1 was also great.
I also liked The Force Awakens, though I seem to be in a minority on that.
The other movies are all meh.

Rogue 1 was the best thing Disney did, and it was f-ing awesome. Force Awakens laid a good ground work for what could've been a great series. IMO they designed the sequel trilogy to make people get into the ancillary stuff instead of making it the main story where the ancillary stuff would be meant to be extensions of the main story, and not filling all kinds of purposely designed holes.

Disney went woke and is losing. I can't think of a thing they produce I'd want to see or want my kids to see (maybe Lion King and other than the classics of course). Filmmakers, Amusement Park proprietors and producers should stay out of politics; they're just going to cut their audience in half.

Disney CEO announced large employee cuts (7,000), reductions in marketing/advertising expenses, changes in certain divisions, especially the streaming business to reduce costs and bring bigger returns to shareholders. This also means a reinstatement of dividends to shareholders, suspended during the Pandemic and in the recovery from it.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/08/business ... index.html

cairns wrote:

Disney went woke and is losing. I can't think of a thing they produce I'd want to see or want my kids to see (maybe Lion King and other than the classics of course). Filmmakers, Amusement Park proprietors and producers should stay out of politics; they're just going to cut their audience in half.

Well, Disney's stock is up today in after market trading as their latest earnings report beat estimates:

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/disne ... 1675891295

Disney DIS, +0.13% posted fiscal first-quarter net income of $1.28 billion, or 70 cents a share, on sales of $23.51 billion, up from $21.8 billion a year ago. After adjusting for restructuring charges, amortization and other effects, Disney reported earnings of 99 cents a share, up from 63 cents a share a year ago.

Analysts surveyed by FactSet had on average expected adjusted earnings of 78 cents a share on revenue of $23.44 billion.

“After a solid first quarter, we are embarking on a significant transformation, one that will maximize the potential of our world-class creative teams and our unparalleled brands and franchises,” Iger, who returned as CEO in November to replace Bob Chapek, said in a statement announcing the results. “We believe the work we are doing to reshape our company around creativity, while reducing expenses, will lead to sustained growth and profitability for our streaming business, better position us to weather future disruption and global economic challenges,
and deliver value for our shareholders.”

Disney shares rose 2% in after-hours trading immediately after the results were released, then shot higher after Iger announced the cuts. They ended the regular session up 0.1% at $111.75.

Disney’s largest business segment, media and entertainment distribution, reported sales of $14.78 billion in the quarter, up slightly from $14.59 billion a year ago; analysts on average predicted $15.4 billion. Direct-to-consumer sales, which includes streaming services as well as some international products, brought in $5.3 billion, compared with analysts’ forecast of $5.44 billion on average.

Disney+ ended the quarter with 161.8 million subscribers, a decline from three months ago, when the streaming service had 164.2 million subscribers. Analysts expected the subscriber count to decline after Disney increased costs for ad-free streaming while adding an ad-supported option, but not that much — the average analyst estimate called for 162.68 million subscribers, according to FactSet.

Disney’s television networks generated sales of $7.29 billion, while analysts’ average estimates called for $7.4 billion. Content sales and licensing, a category that includes Disney’s film business, registered revenue of $2.46 billion vs. analysts’ expectations of $2.76 billion.

The company’s iconic theme parks and product sales business increased to $8.74 billion in revenue from $7.23 billion a year ago. The average analyst estimate was $6.6 billion.

Disney is well attuned to their main customer base, and is back on the upswing in terms of financial results.

cairns wrote:

Disney went woke and is losing.

Just for grins and giggles, would you mind providing us with the dictionary definition of woke? Please and thank you.

FluidFlow wrote:

Parks still print cash like crazy, seems people are still going in masses. This whole screaming about their change in culture regarding modern social issues seems to have no influence on the core business.

Now lets see how they manage the bloodbath in the streaming industry. Luckily Disney have the parks to subsidize their platform compared to Netflix. Amazon can also fight due to their other two strong divisions. It will be interesting whats going to happen

I think Disney is one of the core companies that actually has a maageable streaming platform with ESPN, HULU and Disney+. The sports and the new series being released such as Willow, Star Wars, Marvel, and the coming ones for other franchises such as Percy Jackson will keep folks there rather than moving along.

The parks have and always will print money. They are the main reason for the revenue increase this year( post covid).

https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/app/up ... rnings.pdf

The following table summarizes the first quarter segment revenue and segment operating income
(loss) for fiscal 2023 and 2022 (in millions):
Quarter Ended
December 31,
2022
January 1,
2022 Change
Segment Revenues:
Disney Media and Entertainment Distribution $ 14,776 $ 14,585 1 %
Disney Parks, Experiences and Products 8,736 7,234 21 %
Total Segment Revenues $ 23,512 $ 21,819 8 %
Segment operating income (loss):
Disney Media and Entertainment Distribution $ (10) $ 808 nm
Disney Parks, Experiences and Products 3,053 2,450 25 %
Total Segment Operating Income $ 3,043 $ 3,258 (7) %


Cricket really hurt them in India due to the Covid schedule shifts. Cricket will be in the 2nd quarter 2023 results though as they are going to run Apr 1-May 28 this year.

As Covid opens up, I expect the international parks will contribute a lot more revenue, as will the movie going experiences in overseas markets.

One problem Disney and other movie companies are facing is that people are not returning to theaters but for a very few major films like "Top Gun:Maverick". That has also been bad for movies for kids audiences that Disney has been a leader with.
There are a number of factors hurting all movie makers including Disney. The price of tickets and concessions. The poor experience from others behaviors. That many have big screen TV's and accessory sound systems so get much of the experience without the hassle. The access to films at the same time or only weeks, not months on streaming.getting out of habits due to the Pandemic. The movie review websites (Rotten Tomatoes, IMDB) have also contributed to an overall decline, many looking at reviews before they go out, in particular of viewers opinions. That is compounded for Disney and some other movie makers by the opinions of social conservative commentators who object to some content who feel Disney in particular has to conform to their social views.

ltbewr wrote:

One problem Disney and other movie companies are facing is that people are not returning to theaters but for a very few major films like "Top Gun:Maverick". That has also been bad for movies for kids audiences that Disney has been a leader with.
There are a number of factors hurting all movie makers including Disney. The price of tickets and concessions. The poor experience from others behaviors. That many have big screen TV's and accessory sound systems so get much of the experience without the hassle. The access to films at the same time or only weeks, not months on streaming.getting out of habits due to the Pandemic. The movie review websites (Rotten Tomatoes, IMDB) have also contributed to an overall decline, many looking at reviews before they go out, in particular of viewers opinions. That is compounded for Disney and some other movie makers by the opinions of social conservative commentators who object to some content who feel Disney in particular has to conform to their social views.

Indeed. When it costs as much or more to see a new movie PER TICKET, as it does to buy the movie, it better be a big movie that the theater adds something to.

Disney now has an additional problem: people like myself aren’t going to be going to Disney World and giving their money to a business that has just been hijacked by the governor of Florida. How many people is that? No clue, and it may not be many. But I damn sure am not giving Disney World a dime, and may very well cancel my subscription to Disney+.

Why on earth do the heads of entertainment companies wade into politics and alienate half of their customers? That man had the common sense of a bowling bowl. Sometimes you should just STFU.

cairns wrote:

Why on earth do the heads of entertainment companies wade into politics and alienate half of their customers? That man had the common sense of a bowling bowl. Sometimes you should just STFU.

Disney’s market is not grumpy gramps, gramps. It’s educated suburban moms, and they’re largely behind whatever is ‘woke’ vogue. Arguably they *have* responded to their market.

cairns wrote:

Why on earth do the heads of entertainment companies wade into politics and alienate half of their customers? That man had the common sense of a bowling bowl. Sometimes you should just STFU.

1. Because conservatives spent the last 40 years praising business owners for their political opinions...when they agreed with them.
2. Because Citizens United means that their money goes a lot of further and they're allowed to have more opinions
3. Wealthy people tend to be more socially liberal. So it's not alienating half your customers. Its acknowledging that the poor "half" isn't going to make you as much money.