DIS Shareholders and Stock Info ONLY

Well it looks like DVC is responding to be called out in the Q3 conference call. Pretty interesting.

"It’s intriguing that DVC would choose to intervene at this point, especially considering that multiple contracts were sold and passed below these rates earlier this year. The decision to buy back a Grand Floridian contract is also particularly interesting, as this resort is still actively selling, and Disney has historically not exercised ROFR in such cases.

These recent buybacks coincide with the news of decreased direct DVC sales, as revealed during the Q3 2023 Walt Disney Company earnings call."

https://www.dvcresalemarket.com/blog/disney-vacation-club-exercising-rofr-after-a-six-month-lull/
 
Well it looks like DVC is responding to be called out in the Q3 conference call. Pretty interesting.

"It’s intriguing that DVC would choose to intervene at this point, especially considering that multiple contracts were sold and passed below these rates earlier this year. The decision to buy back a Grand Floridian contract is also particularly interesting, as this resort is still actively selling, and Disney has historically not exercised ROFR in such cases.

These recent buybacks coincide with the news of decreased direct DVC sales, as revealed during the Q3 2023 Walt Disney Company earnings call."

https://www.dvcresalemarket.com/blog/disney-vacation-club-exercising-rofr-after-a-six-month-lull/
Trying to keep prices propped up?
 
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/hollywood-strikes-costing-studios-130000766.html

What the Hollywood Strikes Are Costing the Studios
Kayla Cobb
Tue, August 15, 2023 at 8:00 AM CDT

Ever since the WGA strike began in early May, there have been two questions haunting Hollywood: When will these strikes be over? And how much is this costing?

The answer to the first question will depend on negotiations between the WGA, SAG-AFTRA and the AMPTP. As for the financial toll, it’s already been estimated that California’s economy lost $3 billion due to the strikes. But now, thanks to the conclusion of earnings season, the studios and streamers have shed a bit of light on just how much the work stoppage is costing them.

Or rather, not costing them. In some cases, the companies are experiencing a short-term financial benefit, since they don’t have to lay out money for halted productions. In most cases, though, that’s spending that will shift from 2023 to 2024, so it’s more a matter of timing.

The biggest divide is between buyers and sellers of content. For studios that are primarily producing or commissioning movies and shows for their own distribution channels, the strikes have provided a short-term boost to cash flow, since they don’t have to lay out money for halted productions. That bill will come due after the strikes end and production resumes, so Wall Street is largely treating those savings as a wash. Suppliers like Sony and Lionsgate are feeling the pinch in lost revenue, since they don’t get paid for shows that aren’t getting made.

Not every company assigned an exact number to the strike’s impact. Massive tech companies like Apple and Amazon were able to skip over the issue altogether: At their scale, the cost of interrupted productions wouldn’t be material. But thanks to prodding from Wall Street analysts, six companies did assign a dollar value to the issue. These figures appeared in several different ways that are specified throughout this guide, such as adjustments in content spending budgets, increases in free cash flow and decreases in projected sales revenues.

In total, TheWrap identified nearly $5 billion in delayed or reduced spending or additional expenses that companies attributed to the ongoing WGA and SAG-AFTRA strikes. Disney, Netflix and Warner Bros. Discovery accounted for the bulk of that figure — not a surprise, given their large content budgets.
Here are the details on each company’s strike costs.

Disney

The head of the House of Mouse did not waste much time when it came to addressing the elephant in the room: Between the strikes and other cost-cutting moves, Disney will be saving $3 billion a year on what was a $30 billion annual content budget, CEO Bob Iger told analysts.

“We currently expect fiscal 2023 content spend to come in at approximately $27 billion, which is lower than we previously guided due to lower spend on produced content, in part due to the writers’ and actors’ strikes,” Iger said on the earnings call.

This $3 billion figure does not only reflect savings from the strikes. In February, Iger unveiled a companywide restructuring that led to mass layoffs as well as a $5.5 billion cut across nonsports content budgets.

Disney impact: $3 billion savings on content spending for the fiscal year

Lionsgate

In its most recent annual report, Lionsgate reported producing some 80 television shows for 35 different networks. That role as a Hollywood “arms dealer” meant it felt the pinch from the strikes: The mini-major reported an estimated impact of $30 million a quarter. Though that number was spread across several business units, the divisions most affected were 3 Arts, a talent management and production subsidiary, and TV operations.

“We have built in an assumption that the strike goes through the September quarter,” Lionsgate CFO James Barge said during the company’s call for the first quarter of its 2024 fiscal year. “If it goes longer, it’s a similar impact, probably, as it rolls quarter to quarter. If it does, we’re hopeful that things get resolved and we’re back to work in the mid-fall.”

Lionsgate impact: $30 million a quarter

Netflix

The company that’s perhaps most at the center of the ongoing WGA and SAG-AFTRA strikes didn’t shy away from addressing the financial impact during its earnings. From a financial perspective, the strikers are doing Netflix shareholders a favor, at least in the short term.

Previously, Netflix had given Wall Street guidance that its free cash flow for 2023 would be around $3.5 billion. However, due to production timing and the ongoing strikes, that number is now expected to be $5 billion, an improvement to the upside of $1.5 billion. In short, Netflix is saving money on canceled or postponed productions in 2023, though it might have to spend that money in 2024 as productions resume and Hollywood catches up from the strikes’ effects.

Though co-CEO Ted Sarandos dodged questions on the company’s second-quarter earnings call in July about about how long Netflix could run on content that’s already in the production pipeline before it feels the effects of the strikes, he did address the ongoing pickets.

“We very much hoped to reach an agreement by now,” Sarandos said before noting that he was raised “in a union household.” “We’re super committed to getting to an agreement as soon as possible, one that’s equitable and one that enables the industry and everybody in it to move forward into the future.”

Netflix impact: $1.5 billion improvement in free cash flow in 2023

Paramount Global

Paramount is a tricky one to analyze. Though CFO Naveen Chopra did attribute some improvement in the company’s free cash flow due to “continued delays in production due to the strikes,” and anticipated more cash savings through the remainder of 2023, he did not break down exactly how much of that figure had to do with the halting of work. Instead, he merely said it “included modest impact from the strikes.”

Paramount’s continuing operations used $210 million of cash in the quarter, Chopra said.

The company also said it would use Paramount+ content to fill out CBS’ programming slate in the interim.

Paramount impact: A “modest” amount of improvement to free cash flow


Spider-Man/Miles Morales (Shameik Moore) in Columbia Pictures and Sony Pictures Animations’ “Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse.” (Sony Pictures Animation)

Sony

For the technology and entertainment giant, the strikes’ impact appeared in an adjusted 2023 forecast for its Pictures segment. In April, the sales forecast for this segment for the year was about $10.49 billion. But in the company’s second quarter, that projected forecast dropped to $10.14 billion, a negligible decrease of 3% or $34.5 million, reflecting Sony’s primary role as a supplier to other studios.

In the second quarter earnings report, Sony noted that the strikes are expected to lead to “release date changes for some theatrical releases” and “delays in deliveries of television series.”

Sony impact: $34.5 million decrease in projected sales revenue for 2023


Matthew Macfadyen and Sarah Snook in “Succession.” (HBO)

Warner Bros. Discovery

In its second quarter earnings report, Warner Bros. Discovery credited its outperformance on free cash flow for the quarter to several reasons. Among them was “modest cash savings from the impact of the WGA and SAG-AFTRA strikes, which we estimate were in the low $100 million range during the quarter,” CFO Gunnar Wiedenfels said on the earnings call.

Wiedenfels also noted that company was projecting a return-to-work date for early September.

“If the strikes run through the end of the year, I would expect several $100 million of upside to our free cash flow guidance and some incremental downside for adjusted EBITDA.”

Warner Bros. Discovery impact: $100 million improvement in operating cash flow

The others

Not every company addressed the financial impact of the strikes. For some movie studios, it’s still too early to say what the cost will be. Other companies, such as Nexstar, pointed to programming pivots as an explanation for why the strikes haven’t presented much of an impact. Still, others in the tech sector are simply too big to waste shareholders’ attention on this relatively small matter.

Here’s how the rest of Hollywood addressed the strikes:

Comcast/NBCUniversal

Comcast did see a $200 million year over year increase in free cash flow to $3.4 billion for the second quarter of 2023. But the NBCUniversal parent, whose businesses range from cable and wireless service to theme parks, did not attribute a specific amount to strike-related savings.

After noting that Comcast is committed to ending the strikes, President Mike Cavanagh said that the financial toll of the strikes was “all manageable” and would merely “shift studio working capital out of the near term and into the future.”

“Obviously, the longer the strike, the more that could have an effect as you look into 2024 and beyond,” he added.

Apple and Amazon

Amazon and Apple share the same problem: They’re both such massive companies, their TV and film offerings are little more than a line item on their earnings reports. In their recent quarterly earnings calls, the WGA and SAG-AFTRA strikes weren’t discussed in any meaningful way.

AMC Entertainment

The theater chain didn’t spend much time on the strike. With the releases of “Barbie,” “Oppenheimer” and “Sound of Freedom,” CEO Adam Aron said the company’s third quarter was off to an “explosive start” and that these movies led to the company’s highest monthly revenue in its history for July.

“With the first half of the year now behind us, the 2023 domestic industry box office is 20% ahead of last year, and we believe the second half of the year could be even better unless the current writers’ and actors’ strikes wind up delaying the release of movie titles into next year,” Aron said.

AMC Networks

AMC is in a coveted position as far as TV networks are concerned. Because of its production schedule, its show slate has yet to be substantially impacted.

“In the short term, the reality for AMC Networks is that we have a pipeline of finished shows that will allow us to continue to serve our viewers across all of our platforms for the remainder of this year and well into 2024,” CEO Kristin Dolan said.

Cinemark

Because Cinemark depends on the schedules of film studios, the company was unable to give a straight answer about the impact of the strikes. That means no numbers from Cinemark.

“The evolution of these strikes is something we are watching closely, and their degree of impact on near-term film volume in box office will ultimately depend on how long negotiations progress,” Sean Gamble, president and CEO, said.

Fox Corporation

Aside from CFO Steven Silvester Tomsic acknowledging that the company’s content spend will likely be down next year “given the strike,” Fox also didn’t address the strikes in any major way.

“The entertainment business from a linear perspective probably holds steady if you normalize for the strike,” Tomsic said.

Imax

Because Imax productions for the rest of the year are either finished or “about to be finished,” CEO Richard Gelfond did not see the strikes presenting an immediate problem. Gelfond also noted that the company believes studios’ reluctance to give up agreed-upon Imax windows will make them think twice about pushing back theatrical runs and that “local language films” taking the place of any delayed Hollywood productions overseas could help the company in the second half of the year.

“None of this is really likely to be a 2023 issue. In terms of 2024, if the strike lasts a long time, it likely wouldn’t affect a lot of content in the first half of ’24,” Gelfond said. “It would more likely affect content in the second half of ’24.”

Nexstar

Nexstar and its channels are in an enviable place. Because NewsNation, the Food Network and the Cooking Channel rely on unscripted content and talk shows, its programming has yet to take a substantial hit. As for The CW, the broadcast network was already pivoting to include live sports, international acquisitions and unscripted content as part of its programming shift in the wake of its acquisition. No company on this list is strike-proof, but for a major TV player, Nexstar is pretty close.

Roku

The company did not comment on how the strikes would affect its programming lineup, though it’s leaning more into unscripted lately. CEO Anthony Wood did note that ad revenue from media and entertainment would be “further challenged” due to the strikes.
 

Disney Sued by Film Financier TSG Over “Chilling Example” of Hollywood Accounting


https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/b...disney-tsg-lawsuit-accounting-1235566787/amp/


In a lawsuit filed Tuesday, TSG says 20th Century Studios and Disney "have tried to use nearly every trick in the Hollywood Accounting playbook" to short them hundreds of millions of dollars in connection with its investments in films including 'Avatar: The Way of Water.'

  • Ashley Cullins
  • AUGUST 15, 2023 12:43PM PDT
Disney is being accused of hindering a deal between 20th Century Studios and TSG Entertainment Finance in an effort to boost Disney+ and Hulu subscriptions, stock prices and executive compensation. In a new lawsuit, TSG Entertainment Finance says an independent audit of three films including best picture winner The Shape of Waterrevealed it’s owed more than $40 million — after all is said and done, the company suspects the total will be in the hundreds of millions — and the cash shortfall has caused it to take a worse position in its investment in Avatar: The Way of Water.

TSG on Tuesday sued 20th Century Studios for breach of contract and Disney for inducing that breach. The financier says it has invested more than $3.3 billion into well over 100 films, which also include Bohemian Rhapsody, Deadpool, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, The Martian, The Grand Budapest Hotel and The Banshees of Inisherin.

In a blistering intro, TSG’s attorney John Berlinski opened with discussing “Hollywood Accounting” and arguing that it’s now a common practice employed by studios to “cheat” profit participants out of money.

“Disney (and the executives running it) had and continue to have every incentive to do anything and everything they can, including manipulating distribution of the Qualifying Pictures and preventing TSG from liquidating its interests in certain tranches of Qualifying Pictures, to attempt to boost Disney’s share price at the expense of TSG and other profit participants,” writes Berlinski in the complaint.

Berlinski — who led Scarlett Johansson’s fight against Disney over her payment on Black Widowafter it was given a simultaneous release on Disney+ and the stars of Bones in their profit participation dispute with Fox — described this as a “chilling example” of the practice.

TSG says 20th and Disney “have tried to use nearly every trick in the Hollywood Accounting playbook” to short them hundreds of millions of dollars. Their initial revenue participation agreement dates back to Dec. 31, 2012. Under the deal, which has been amended nine times since then according to the complaint, TSG would co-finance the production and marketing costs in exchange for a share of the defined gross receipts.

Over the years, the money TSG received from its investments “decreased dramatically” and the company launched an independent audit to investigate the financial records. Based on what the auditors found in their sample, they estimate that TSG’s defined gross receipts were reduced by at least $54.5 million from Electronic Sell-Through distribution and it was improperly charged $35 million in costs related to Movies Anywhere.

According to the complaint, those auditors sampled three films and found 20th failed to credit TSG with revenue, charged tens of millions in distribution fees not permitted under their deal, deducted expenses not related to the pictures in their slate and “uncovered rampant ‘self-dealing,’ the practice by which a studio enters into ‘sweetheart’ deals with its licensee affiliates to artificially minimize the profit payments to stakeholders like TSG.”

With The Shape of Water, for example, TSG alleges that 20th ignored a standing agreement with FX Networks that calculated license fees tied to domestic box office performance and “did a secret side deal for a fraction of what the parties had previously agreed was fair value.”

TSG also says it’s been damaged by changes in distribution windows.

According to the complaint, 20th had agreed to license films to HBO for the “Pay 1 window” from 2012 – 2022 for a reported $200 million per year. That changed in 2019 when Disney acquired 21st Century Fox. TSG believes Disney made 20th renegotiate its deal with HBO to boost Disney+ and Hulu and “give up a significant portion of its guaranteed HBO license fees” in order to do so — and that it shortened its home video window to get things up on its streamers faster.

“On information and belief, these deviations from the traditional windowing of Fox’s films — in spite of Fox’s express and implied obligations to TSG — were a direct result of Disney’s interference with the RPA in pursuit of its ultimate goal: to prop up its wholly- or majority-owned streaming platforms and the share price of its stock using content from other divisions of the company,” writes Berlinski in the complaint. “Moreover, as Disney’s own CEO, Bob Iger, has admitted, his company pursued this strategy recklessly and with little forethought. For example, during Disney’s August 9, 2023 earnings call—in which Mr. Iger announced Disney+’s second subscription price increase in a year—Mr. Iger admitted with respect to Disney+, ‘We grew this business really fast, really before we even understood what our pricing strategy should be or could be.'” (The complaint uses shorthand for 20th throughout by naming it as “Fox,” although Disney has since retired that moniker for 20th Century Studios.)

Because of all of this, TSG alleges, by 2022 it didn’t have the cash it needed to fund future pictures. So, it started exploring the “Qualified Picture Slate Repurchase Procedure” that was included in their agreement, which allowed TSG to request a repurchase of a group of five consecutively-released films. If TSG and 20th couldn’t come to a deal on a repurchase price, TSG could then market and sell the tranche of pictures to a third party to free up cash to fund future films.

From June 2022 through June 2023, TSG inquired about thirteen different tranches of films, according to the complaint, but says 20th wasn’t interested. Citing an email from Disney CFO Paul Shurgot as proof, TSG argues that Disney is interfering in its deal with 20th. Shurgot wrote: “While we don’t agree with your characterization of the agreement, we are open to finding a path forward to resolve this which makes economic sense. However, as discussed, we are not open to providing an offer on selected non-consecutive tranches that are among the most profitable tranches released to date, as doing so is counter to the agreement and would undercut our ability to recoup the TSG Additional Contributions.”

With no cash on hand, TSG says it had to take an advance from 20th to meet its funding obligations on films including Avatar: The Way of Water, which reduces its share of defined gross receipts and triggers a provision that entitles 20th to some of its profits.

“Perhaps most egregiously, after TSG informed Fox of its intent to file this action, Fox and Disney capitalized on Fox’s own breaches of the RPA in a bad-faith attempt to whitewash their misconduct,” writes Berlinski. “On August 11, 2023, Fox sent TSG an e-mail taking the position that, because it had previously issued the Fox Picture Advance, it was entitled to invoke a provision of the RPA that would purportedly allow it to repurchase all released Qualifying Pictures and extinguish TSG’s hundreds of millions of dollars of legal claims.”

Disney has not yet commented on the suit.
 
Not just an issue with Disney…

View attachment 785683
Yes. Its an absolutely insane budget for the 10th installment of a franchise that heavily relies upon cars racing around for thrills and chills.

Another problem, the movie was 2 h and 21 m. Really? How many car chase scenes can you have in one movie?

At least MI:DR Pt. 1 has elaborate set pieces and on location shooting to help explain a $291M budget. Yes, about $50M less than Fast X.
 
Yes. Its an absolutely insane budget for the 10th installment of a franchise that heavily relies upon cars racing around for thrills and chills.

Another problem, the movie was 2 h and 21 m. Really? How many car chase scenes can you have in one movie?

At least MI:DR Pt. 1 has elaborate set pieces and on location shooting to help explain a $291M budget. Yes, about $50M less than Fast X.
Just spitballing here, but I suspect the studios are in no big hurry to settle the SAG/AFTRA & WGA strikes, as they can use the strikes to whittle down the personnel costs of movie production.
 
Yes. Its an absolutely insane budget for the 10th installment of a franchise that heavily relies upon cars racing around for thrills and chills.

Another problem, the movie was 2 h and 21 m. Really? How many car chase scenes can you have in one movie?

At least MI:DR Pt. 1 has elaborate set pieces and on location shooting to help explain a $291M budget. Yes, about $50M less than Fast X.
Pretty sure the F&F movies also have elaborate set pieces and location shooting. They’ve gotten increasingly ridiculous with it as they’ve had to keep raising the bar with each new movie.
 
A big problem with most movies is Covid. It is said that Covid related costs have ballooned some budgets up to 25%.

Fast & Furious has a big problem that they can't really adjust at this point and it is cast bloat. With every movie comes more people coming into the family and with the latest movie, they brought back a lot of big named people.

They have an star studded cast the does not come cheap and are not getting cheaper.
 
I think the Hollywood rags are reading these threads...

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/hollywood-blockbuster-budget-problem-analysis-130000522.html

Hollywood Has a Blockbuster Budget Problem | Analysis
Scott Mendelson
Wed, August 16, 2023 at 8:00 AM CDT

Moving forward, Disney will try to make fewer, cheaper movies while “focus[ing] on improving the quality of our films,” Bob Iger promised analysts on a recent earnings call. While Iger has made promises to Wall Street about this before, it’s an issue that has raised alarm bells over the course of the summer as a slew of Hollywood tentpoles have failed to become profit-gushing blockbusters, in part due to their exorbitant budgets.

The likes of “Fast X,” “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny,” “The Little Mermaid” and “Transformers: Rise of the Beasts” ended up costing so much above the norm — at least in relation to their likely theatrical revenue — that they may not make money (or produce sequels) even with objectively decent box office.

Tom Cruise’s “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” is on track to take in just $165 million domestically and $550 million globally despite strong reviews and solid buzz. That’s disappointing considering the last three chapters earned between $682 million and $792 million, and this seventh chapter cost $290 million alone to make.

“I highly doubt that Hollywood intended to spend $300 million each on the fifth Indiana Jones movie or the seventh ‘Mission: Impossible’ film,” BoulderLight Pictures partner Raphael Margules told TheWrap, echoing other insiders who spoke to TheWrap about the bloated budgets of this summer’s blockbusters.

Inflation is an obvious culprit, as the dollar has lost 15% of its value since 2020. This upped the cost of every portion of the production pipeline, from labor to materials to transportation. A film greenlit at $200 million in 2019 would cost at least $230 million to achieve comparable production value today. And the other X factor in all of this is on top of the rising production costs, marketing spends add at least another $100 million in many of these blockbuster cases, further increasing the difficulty of getting to profitability.

TheWrap spoke to filmmakers, executives and industry insiders to ask just why the most recent slate of tentpoles cost so much, and whether it’s a temporary situation.

COVID delays were expensive

Yes, shooting a blockbuster movie during a global pandemic — an unlikely-to-be-replicated situation — can make that movie pricier.

Margules broke it down for TheWrap. “PPP equipment, testing and accommodations related to social distancing can add at least 5% to a budget,” he said.

However, he noted that the big factor was the delays that occurred as productions stopped and started amid the pandemic. “Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One” saw its production begin and pause several times, often in far-flung international locales like Venice or Rome.

Shutdowns and restarts mean filmmakers must pay to prep and wrap a location multiple times, all while keeping stages reserved far longer than initially intended. That can add weeks, if not months, to the shoot while certain creatives and crew remain on the payroll amid the hiatus.

The resulting costs associated with principal photography (stages, crews, actors, etc.) and post-production (finishing effects-packed tentpoles amid a COVID-clogged pipeline) helped make the industry a comparative seller’s market.

Big stars want big bucks

“There’s still a box office value in the big stars,” stated one high-level studio executive. “We pretend for a while that there aren’t [but] they still bring an audience.”

“Fast X,” for example, has a dozen returning cast members, along with new-to-the-franchise actors like Jason Momoa and Oscar-winner Brie Larson. That partially explains how the tenth “Fast and Furious” movie cost 70% more than “F9.” The $340 million budget means a box office performance on par with the $722 million total of “F9” wasn’t enough to be exceptionally profitable.

Another veteran writer-director with experience in indies, tentpoles and streaming titles who wished to remain anonymous explained to TheWrap, “Sequels with contractual pay bumps for ensemble cast members can add over $50 million – plus perks.”

“Marvel had control of the actors’ salaries,” stated “xXx: Return of Xander Cage” and “Disturbia” director D.J. Caruso. “Now, they no longer have the power once the actor has established themselves as being defined with the character.” Actors like Chris Hemsworth and Elizabeth Olsen were relative newcomers when they joined the Marvel Cinematic Universe, but are now inextricably linked to Thor and Scarlet Witch — not to mention fielding offers for other major films of their own outside the MCU.

A high-ranking studio executive said, “It’s almost impossible to make a franchise sequel that is cheaper than [its] predecessor.”

Streaming — which often pays the cast and crew upfront since there are no immediate revenue sources (box office, DVD sales, etc.) for backend bonuses — has also changed the math for star salaries. As one high-level Hollywood executive explained, “The often intentionally inflated quotes movie stars had been getting from streamers can inflate the asking price for theatrical features.”

Platinum Dunes co-owner Brad Fuller said that, in more questionable theatrical circumstances, “movie stars are likely to ask for more money upfront with less ‘risky’ backend,” therefore adding to the production budget.

The high cost of fear

“They are all trying to outdo each other in terms of effects and production value,” another studio executive said as franchises as varied as “Fast & Furious,” “Indiana Jones” and “Mission: Impossible” vie for the same eyeballs.

Moreover, the writer/director said, a desire for studio control pushes more of the filmmaking process into post-production. Hesitancy to make firm pre-production decisions can also cause indecision and cost overrun.
Caruso recalled visiting the set of a tentpole film with “every conceivable piece of equipment in a parking lot near the set, just in case.”

When a film is stuffed with razzle-dazzle — like a de-aged Harrison Ford fighting Nazis for 20 minutes — or copiously trying to hide the metaphorical strings, every cut in the editing bay means more or revised VFX work, which means more money.

Caruso argued that “the reliance on visual effects burns money like there is no tomorrow.”

“Films by committee,” he added, require “reshoots and fixes [that] are not simple three-day pickups but a crew reassembling for three weeks, constructing new sets, and shooting multiple endings to cover their asses to ensure one works.”

A pre-COVID Hollywood mindset

Most of the films released this summer were greenlit with the presumption of pre-COVID theatrical habits. Before the pandemic, more people were able and willing to go to theaters and studios were not as aggressive about pushing streaming and meddling with the theatrical window.

That meant this batch of films underwent production beset by pandemic complications, inflation and global disruptions in the global supply chain. They then arrived in theaters amid a changed economic ecosystem.

In the mid-2010s, Disney dominated the box office. In the last pre-COVID year, they accounted for 40% of domestic earnings in 2019. Marvel/DC superhero movies and modern live-action remakes of Katzenberg-era Disney toons were mostly performing at peak levels. When non-“Mission: Impossible” Tom Cruise movies usually had a $400 million theatrical ceiling, “Top Gun: Maverick” seemed riskier than another Ethan Hunt adventure.

Meanwhile, China was fully embracing Hollywood tentpoles. Such patronage provided the likes of “Hobbs & Shaw,” “Rampage” and “Captain Marvel” with an extra $150-$200 million in theatrical grosses. Dwayne Johnson wasn’t wrong to expect a boost for “Jungle Cruise” and “Black Adam” had they been released in a pre-COVID Chinese marketplace. As TheWrap previously reported, Hollywood has essentially written off China.

“Since COVID, there’s a 20% decline in available moviegoers,” a high-level studio executive who requested anonymity told TheWrap. “Unless you luck into a cultural event, you have to presume that your film will make around 80% of what it might have previously earned.”

Too big to succeed?

The end result is several movies that earned strong theatrical revenue but lost money for their respective studios. Theaters were thrilled with the $296 million in domestic earnings for “The Little Mermaid” and the $573 million in overseas grosses for “Fast X.” But both films may struggle to break even (at least prior to post-theatrical revenue streams) due to soaring costs.

Ditto “Transformers: Rise of the Beasts,” which ended up topping a slew of mid-June tentpole releases with $434 million worldwide. That might have been a sequel-justifying hit on a budget closer to the $135 million spent on “Bumblebee,” but at a cost of $195 million, it’s in doubt. The “G.I. Joe” crossover teased in the finale may never see the light of day.

Yes, streaming platforms still get a boost from theatrical premieres. But there has been little one-to-one correlation between subscription bumps and A-level movies. Nor is there much of a connection between high viewership for a specific piece of content and the stock price. If “Dungeons and Dragons: Honor Among Thieves” earns $200 million on a $150 million budget, strong Paramount+ viewership doesn’t move the needle.

Slower, cheaper, better?

“There are definitely conversations about cheaper tentpoles,” stated one executive.

This was before “Barbenheimer” ended up on track to earn a combined $1 billion in North America alone. Warner Bros.’ “Barbie” cost $145 million while Universal’s “Oppenheimer” cost $100 million. Neither had to break box office records to break even, even after heavy marketing spends.

Can slow and steady help keep costs down? Smaller-budgeted ($90-$120 million) franchise titles like “The Super Mario
Bros. Movie,” “Sonic the Hedgehog,” “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle” and “John Wick: Chapter 4” showed that IP can be created or continued without budgets so large as to require astronomical box office.

“You hear anecdotes from crew members of brutal waste,” said a writer-director with experience in both indie and blockbuster films. “You get money to shove in a fire, but you lose the autonomy.”

“Barbenheimer” has earned praise over how both features feel distinct and personal even within familiar genres or popular IP. With production mostly out of the COVID storm and new films being budgeted for the current new normal in terms of theatrical revenue and post-theatrical value, Hollywood may test whether less money for more autonomy may lead to better — or at least more profitable — tentpole films.
 
Originally we had 3 basic channels, then it went to 4. Plus a few local channels. WIth cable it went into the hundreds. So now with streaming we are going back to 3 or 4 main streamers. I really do not think people will stop watching TV. Yes there is a transition period, but Disney is in a very good spot long term.
 
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/hollywood-strikes-could-deal-another-130000900.html

How the Hollywood Strikes Could Deal Another Blow to the Already Shrinking Linear TV Business | Charts
Lucas Manfredi
Thu, August 17, 2023 at 8:00 AM CDT

With Hollywoods’ strikes still unresolved, media companies have wrapped up negotiations with advertisers that kicked off with a season of upfront presentations marred by the absence of talent and dogged by writers’ picket lines outside.
Linear TV, which has been struggling with a soft advertising market on top of audiences steadily eroded by cord-cutting, officially fell below 50% of viewership for the first time ever in July according to Nielsen — and new data shows that some advertisers are shifting their spend away from broadcast and cable to get the most bang for their buck.
According to preliminary estimates from ad consulting firm Media Dynamics Inc., which tracks the upfronts, combined prime-time TV sales for the 2023-24 season for both linear and streaming grew 3% to $27.1 billion, compared to $26.3 billion last season. Advertisers placed another $10 billion to $12 billion for morning, daytime and late-night TV slots.
But the broadcast television networks and cable channels saw combined time sales decline 5% year over year to $19.1 billion from last season’s $20.1 billion. In aggregate, the broadcast TV networks were down about 3% in ad revenue, generating an estimated $9.6 billion compared to $9.9 billion last season.

Meanwhile, the cost per thousand or CPMs on 30-second spots for adults dropped 3% from $49.35 last season to $48.04 in the current upfront. Cable took a somewhat larger hit with a 7% decline in ad dollars ($9.5 billion) and a 5% reduction in adult CPMs ($22.14).
FAST and AVOD streaming services were a notable bright spot, with time sales increasing 31% from $6.1 billion last season to $8 billion. Their gains came at linear’s expense.
ae1e817b6f59adb93b7c181ab7d25d08

After over 100 days on strike, the WGA and AMPTP have returned to the negotiating table, though it’s unclear when a possible deal could be reached. Meanwhile, SAG-AFTRA passed the one-month mark in its strike, with no return to the negotiating table in sight.

The questions that haunt Madison Avenue now are: Will the strike further exacerbate linear advertising’s troubles? Or is this just a short-term blip that will resolve itself when the labor dispute ends?

The shift from linear​

Despite the attractiveness of cable’s lower CPMs compared to broadcast TV and most ad-supported streaming services, MDI president Edward Papazian said that there was a feeling during the upfront that cable’s “continuing loss of reach was an issue that had to be dealt with,” especially by advertisers whose prime sales prospects were in the under-50 age category.

The largest pay-TV providers in the U.S., representing about 96% of the market, lost about 1.73 million net video subscribers in the second quarter of 2023, just above the 1.725 million lost during the same period a year ago, according to Leichtman Research.

In those worst-case scenarios, brands will be building safeguards into their TV buys.”
Optimine CEO Matt Voda
Buyers were “determined not to pay anything approaching the huge CPM hikes that the sellers scored in the past two years,” Papazian added.

“I think that [the writers’ strike] gave the buyers additional ammo to counter the sellers’ efforts to gain CPM price increases,” he told TheWrap. “Why pay more for lower-quality program fare?”

Guideline, a firm that tracks about 90% of the U.S. agency market using billing data, estimates that digital advertising accounts for around 60% of ad spend in 2023. Meanwhile, linear TV accounts for about 34% of ad spend, compared to 50% just five years ago.

Though there’s concern about a prolonged strike’s effect on programming, particularly scripted shows, most brands are unlikely to change their spend decisions due to networks’ and streamers’ healthy backlog of content, Optimine CEO Matt Voda told TheWrap. But it isn’t too early for brands to begin game-planning for contingencies and scenarios later in 2024 and into 2025, where the effects of the strike might still be felt.

“In those worst-case scenarios, brands will be building safeguards into their TV buys that allow them to exit cleanly, or to reassess pricing assuming networks are forced into situations where they are not delivering new shows and programming,” he said.

The networks’ pitch​

Despite that gloomy picture, the networks did their best to present this upfront season as a victory.

When asked to elaborate on the impact the strikes had on upfront negotiations, Paramount, Netflix and Fox declined to comment. Warner Bros. Discovery deferred to executives previous upfront remarks on its second quarter earnings call. Representatives for Disney did not immediately respond to TheWrap’s request for comment.

NBCUniversal said advertisers were committed to its fall schedule and total cash commitments were roughly in line compared to last year. In 2022, the company had its highest-grossing upfront in its history with $7 billion in commitments, according to AdWeek. The company touted sales strength tied to the Paris 2024 Olympic Games as well as interest across 13 product categories for the 50th anniversary season of “Saturday Night Live.” Peacock saw upfront commitments increase 30% compared to last year.

Paramount Global reported total commitments “up low to mid-single digits,” implying a modest percentage increase, with EyeQ, an ad-sales tool; Vantage, an ad-targeting tool; and its sports vertical seeing double-digit growth on a combined basis.

Disney ended negotiations with revenue and volume commitments “in line with the prior year” when it had $9 billion in ad commitments. Over 40% of total dollars committed went to streaming and digital, led by Disney+, ESPN+ and Hulu, and it saw single-digit increases in sports volume and pricing. Disney+’s ad tier has attracted 3.3 million users since its launch in December.

Fox wrapped its negotiations with price and volume growth at Fox News Media and Fox Sports. Additionally, Fox Entertainment increased upfront sell-out over last year, while Tubi, its ad-supported streamer, saw volume growth for the fourth consecutive year.

Warner Bros. Discovery CFO Gunnar Wiedenfels also touted “strong progress” on the company’s upfront deals, noting that linear volume is expected to be up, with “pricing on balance pretty consistent with the prior year.” He added that DTC volume is “up more than 50% in the marketplace in which CPMs were positioned to drive scale, for us as much as for the broader market.”

Advertisers will want to have more flexibility to tap into unsold inventory.”
Darrick Li, Guideline’s vice president of sales for North America media owners
Netflix, which is relatively new to the advertising business with a cheaper, ad-supported version of its service launched in November, closed its first-ever upfront negotiations with total commitments “in line with expectations,” an individual familiar with the matter told TheWrap. The company took share from traditional TV broadcasters as well as digital video platforms and filled nearly all inventory for 2023-2024. The streamer’s ad tier has grown to over 10 million monthly active users, doubling from the nearly 5 million MAUs disclosed at its presentation to advertisers in May.

Linear’s loss, connected TV’s gain​

Darrick Li, Guideline’s vice president of sales for North America media owners, told TheWrap that while the ongoing shift in ad dollars from linear TV to digital isn’t surprising, there will “definitely” be a pullback in linear’s overall spend due to the strikes’ potential impact on programming inventory.

“You’re going find more dollars allocated to” connected TV, Li said. “We’re going to still see a significant chunk of dollars, one in three, going to linear TV, but it may shift to unscripted programming and the media owners will need to do that to make commitments that they have with advertisers. I think you’re going see a lot of juggling in terms of program schedules, playing with the prime time daypart, to deliver on their commitments with the buy side.”

September, October and November, when remaining ad inventory will be bought in the scatter market, will be a “really revealing time” for how fast ad dollars shift, Li said.

“Advertisers will want to have more flexibility to tap into unsold inventory and place their investments closer to the air date to mitigate risk tied to a short runway of new programming as a result of the strikes,” he added. “Media owners may be amenable to this as being closer to the air date gives them a better understanding of the reach and target audience composition of their programming, which also reflects in a ‘scatter premium’ pricing.”

People have been saying it’s going to be over for the last 10, 20 years, that this is not a sustainable model, and yet it’s proven to be very resilient.”
Brad Adgate, independent media consultant
Li, who expects the shift in scatter versus upfront buying to be “less pronounced” when the new fall season begins, believes the biggest beneficiaries will be streaming services, live sports and digital audio.

Other areas that could see a boost include video services like TikTok and YouTube as well as Amazon and Apple’s growing advertising businesses, Brad Adgate, an independent media consultant and a former senior vice president of research at Horizon Media, told TheWrap.

Last month, Alphabet reported that YouTube’s advertising revenue grew 4% year over year to $7.7 billion for the second quarter of 2023. Meanwhile, Amazon reported that advertising services revenue grew 22% year over year to $10.6 billion.

A death knell for linear?​

Linear has “passed the point of no return,” Macquarie media analyst Tim Nollen warned in a research note to clients Monday. The metrics are “all bad.” While he acknowledged that streaming’s growth has helped offset linear’s losses, DTC’s gains are not enough to make up for them, he added.

The firm estimates that the public pay TV operators that it covers reported an average 9.6% year-over-year drop in subscribers and 2.5% drop in affiliate fee revenues, while ad revenue across its media network coverage fell 13% on average in the second quarter, down from 8% in the first quarter, which included the Super Bowl.

“Even pricing does not drive upside; this revenue line is probably permanently negative,” he wrote. The only potential upside, he added, was “the return of college and NFL football.”

Despite the decades-long erosion of the linear TV audience, Adgate does not believe that the latest shift in ad dollars will result in linear TV’s abrupt collapse, arguing that marketers continue to spend billions of dollars on it even as its audience only gets older.

“This could just be a correction from the strong markets the last couple of years, so I’m not really completely and totally sold on this being the death of linear TV,” Adgate said. “People have been saying it’s going to be over for the last 10, 20 years, that this is not a sustainable model, and yet it’s proven to be very resilient.”

AVOD services are currently carrying fewer ads than linear, Dave Morgan, founder and CEO of the cross-channel advertising technology company Simulmedia, pointed out. Advertisers prematurely shifting spend to streaming will create “a lot of demand for a limited amount of streaming product,” he said.

“The [linear] audiences have been diminished, but still it’s unique in that there’s no other place you can get so many people so efficiently at a relatively low rate as cable TV,” he argued. “While every brand says they want to make sure they can get in front of tomorrow’s customers, virtually all the major categories that have been spent on TV are not luxury categories looking for young people. It’s cars, banks, insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, package goods and those tend to be” geared towards consumers over 65 years old.

Morgan predicted that the legacy media will be less concerned about ad market softness in the third and fourth quarter, given the short-term cash flow benefits from the dual strikes’ effects on production. Instead, they will attempt to “reset pricing expectations with productions going forward.”

He expects a “robust” scatter market with higher pricing than the upfront, but warned that the total amount of spend on TV ads will likely decline for the fiscal year.

Insider Intelligence predicts that linear TV ad spend in the U.S. will decline from $61.3 billion this year to $56.8 billion in 2027, while CTV will grow from $25.1 billion to $40.9 billion in 2027. If there’s any cause for optimism, it’s the idea that the connected pie may be growing: The firm anticipates that total TV ad spend will grow from $86.4 billion in 2023 to $97.7 billion by 2027.
 
https://www.fool.com/investing/2023...hoo-host&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=article

Cord-Cutting Claimed Another 1.7 Million Cable Customers in Q2. Here's What Investors Need to Know.
By James Brumley–Aug 18, 2023 at 5:37AM CDT

Key Points​


Cable service cancellations are still holding at their pre-pandemic pace.

While the advent of streaming alternatives is the core cause, cable companies (and their content studios) aren’t picking up their share of these customers.

Without a clear and proven plan to replace these shrinking profit centers, there are better options for investors than these companies.

The industry appears powerless to even slow the tide of cancellations, and its efforts to recapture these customers another way are falling short.

Cable television companies are still losing customers... in droves.

That's the big takeaway from last quarter's fiscal results for the industry, anyway. All told, another 1.7 million people in the U.S. cut the cord during the second quarter. The contraction hasn't altered its pace since before, during, and now after the COVID-19 pandemic. And nothing credibly suggests these cancellations will slow down anytime soon.

If you're a shareholder of Comcast (CMCSA -0.36%), Charter Communications (CHTR -0.01%), or any other company operating a cable TV business, you might want to buckle up. Indeed, you may want to find a healthy exit point sooner than later.

More of the same​

The graphic below tells the tale. Led by Comcast and Charter, the nation's six biggest cable television companies collectively shed nearly 1.6 million paying customers during the three-month stretch ending in June. Throwing in the continued attrition from smaller names like Frontier, the figure inches up to 1.7 million.

Counting just the mainstream traditional and satellite cable names, only 56.3 million U.S. households are now paying for cable television. That's down from more than 85 million at this point in 2018.

Chart showing that cord-cutting claimed another 1.7 million U.S. cable customers in Q2 of 2023.

Data source: All data provided directly from the companies cited on the chart, with the exception of DirecTV's subscriber numbers, which are provided by Leichtman Research Group. Chart by author.
Adding streaming cable platforms like Alphabet's (GOOGL -1.98%) (GOOG -1.98%) YouTube TV and Dish Network's (DISH -1.30%) Sling TV to the mix cranks the total household count up to 72 million domestic cable customers, according to numbers from Leichtman Research Group.
Even so, this alternative (and usually cheaper) form of cable is now facing its own headwinds. YouTube TV's growth isn't offsetting every other platform's customer losses.
Image of streaming cable's slowing growth.

Data source: All data is provided directly from the companies cited on the chart. Chart by author.
And let there be no mistake -- traditional cable customers aren't watching more cable TV in the meantime. The latest numbers from Nielsen indicate that for the first time ever, cable and broadcast programming accounted for less than half of what people watched on their television sets in July. Conversely (but not surprisingly) streaming content notched another record usage on U.S. television sets last month, nearing 39% of time spent in front of the TV.

Chart showing the decreasing viewership of cable and network programming, and the growth of streaming's viewership time.

Data source: Nielsen. Chart by author.
The remaining "other" is mostly video gaming.
No cable television company or its shareholders can afford to pretend these trends don't pose an enormous problem for the traditional cable business, and for that matter, broadcast networks like Comcast's NBC.

Missing out on most of the cord-cutting shift​

There are remedies. Take Comcast's Peacock, for instance. Rather than making an effort to curb cord-cutting, Peacock positions Comcast to collect those consumers canceling cable and looking for streaming entertainment. Dish Network's Sling TV arguably mainstreamed the idea of a smaller, cheaper cable-like bundle delivered as a streaming product. Charter is co-owner of ad-supported streaming service platform Xumo, along with Comcast.

Cable's content providers are also answering the call. After all, their fates are largely intertwined with those of cable service providers. CBS parent Paramount now boasts 61 million paying customers for streaming service Paramount+. ABC parent Walt Disney (DIS 0.06%) of course owns and operates Disney+, ESPN+, and most of Hulu. Fox's Tubi now regularly entertains on the order of 64 million viewers per month.
Even so, none of these streaming platforms being operated by studios, broadcast networks, and cable companies are actually gaining market share. Nielsen's latest report also illustrates that market-leading Netflix (NFLX -0.43%), YouTube, and Amazon's Prime are the only streaming services now reliably gaining share. Peacock, Disney+, Hulu, and Paramount's Pluto TV are stuck in neutral in terms of the amount of total time they're being watched... despite streaming's overall market share growth.
Image showing the increased viewing time for Netflix, YouTube, and Amazon Prime streaming content while consumption of other streaming content remains flat.

Data source: Nielsen. Chart by author.
Again, it's a trend that's too troubling to ignore. Several studios' intended alternatives to cable programming -- and replacements of cable's waning revenue -- aren't actually stemming the tide in a meaningful way.

Cable companies' stocks remain tough to own​

Never say never. Consumers aren't watching less television. They're just shifting how and what they watch. It's still possible today's cable powerhouses could be tomorrow's (proverbially speaking) streaming powerhouses. In the meantime, most of today's cable powerhouses are today's and tomorrow's broadband powerhouses.
That's not the way things are presently shaping up, though. None of the growth leaders among streaming outfits like Netflix and YouTube are the nation's top cable players. Indeed, very few of streaming's higher-growth names are even owned by the studios and networks with the most to lose from the ongoing demise of the cable TV business. That's Paramount and Comcast.
Meanwhile, the U.S. broadband internet market itself may be nearing its peak. Numbers from Leichtman indicate that 89% of U.S. households already subscribe to a broadband service. That doesn't leave a whole lot of room for continued expansion.

Bottom line? With more questions than answers, it remains difficult to be excited about owning any stocks directly -- or even indirectly -- exposed to the cable TV business, or for that matter, the broadband business.
 
https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/DIS?mod=refsymb_mw

Shares of Walt Disney Co. DIS, -3.78% are flirting with what could become their lowest close since 2014. The stock was off 2.2%, trading at $83.95 in Thursday morning action, and thus on pace to finish lower than it did Dec. 28, 2022, when it ended the session at $84.17. Disney shares haven’t closed lower than $84 since Oct. 17, 2014, when they finished at $83.83. They’re on pace for their lowest close since then, according to Dow Jones Market Data. Disney’s stock is down 58% from its all-time closing high of $201.91 that was set March 8, 2021.

82.46 USD−3.39 (3.95%) today

Not. Good.
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!











facebook twitter
Top