DIS Shareholders and Stock Info ONLY

I can see it happening. Especially with that big ship they bought last year.
Yeah I’m under the impression they keep the casino on that ship since it will likely exclusively serve the Asian market. Similar to how at launch D+ domestically had minimal adult content but international had things like “Pam and Tommy”.

That “Family” perception is more exclusive to the domestic audience.
 
Yeah I’m under the impression they keep the casino on that ship since it will likely exclusively serve the Asian market. Similar to how at launch D+ domestically had minimal adult content but international had things like “Pam and Tommy”.

That “Family” perception is more exclusive to the domestic audience.
Very sad.... to me that is a huge part of their identity. Just listen to Walt talk about DL...
 
Maybe they could open up a Disney Princess Gentlemen's club on the edge of Lake Buena Vista city limits too while they are at it. They could even bring back the "Body Wars" name or maybe the "Sum of all Thrills".
 
Nice to be a Penn shareholder today:

PENN Entertainment, Inc. (PENN)​

NasdaqGS - NasdaqGS Real Time Price. Currency in USD

24.84-0.17 (-0.68%)
At close: 04:00PM EDT
29.35 +4.51 (+18.16%)
After hours: 5:49PM EDT


And I guess that means the news did not leak out pre-close.
Disney will also benefit from the growth of Penn’s stock while using the ESPN brand name.

Penn will be operating all of the gambling but paying ESPN $150M annually over 10 years for licensing of the brand name for its sportsbook.

Disney also apparently will have $500M in warrants to acquire around 31.8M shares of Penn.
 


Hope this does not foreshadow gambling on DCL cruises... Disney is a family company. Sad to see them losing focus of that.
I can see it happening. Especially with that big ship they bought last year.
Yeah I’m under the impression they keep the casino on that ship since it will likely exclusively serve the Asian market. Similar to how at launch D+ domestically had minimal adult content but international had things like “Pam and Tommy”.

That “Family” perception is more exclusive to the domestic audience.
Very sad.... to me that is a huge part of their identity. Just listen to Walt talk about DL...
Maybe they could open up a Disney Princess Gentlemen's club on the edge of Lake Buena Vista city limits too while they are at it. They could even bring back the "Body Wars" name or maybe the "Sum of all Thrills".
NONE OF THIS SHOULD HAPPEN!!! That TV executive twit Bob Iger needs to LEAVE DISNEY NOW, or get kicked in the crotch by a mule!

I’d rather quit my love for Disney until Iger suddenly dies in a freak accident or gets shot!

I apologize for my rant, but I am extremely angry at all this "Disney does gambling" nonsense!
 
Last edited:
https://variety.com/vip/netflix-disney-ad-tier-scale-pricing-1235690012/

August 8, 2023 6:00am PT
Pricing Key for Netflix, Disney+ to Scale Ad Tiers
by Tyler Aquilina

More than half a year on from Disney+ and Netflix entering into the advertising game, it’s more apparent than ever that the biggest streamers’ transition to ad-supported businesses is going to be a long, slow one.

According to new estimates from Ampere Analysis, both services’ ad-tier memberships in the U.S. account for around 2% of their respective domestic subscriber bases. By these estimates, Netflix had over 1 million U.S. ad-plan subscribers as of June, while Disney+ had about 800K.

Neither company has regularly disclosed such figures, but during its Upfront presentation in May, Netflix said its AVOD tier had nearly 5 million monthly active users worldwide, and claimed in its Q2 earnings letter that “ads plan membership has nearly doubled since Q1.”

However, the letter continued, “it’s still off a small membership base, so current ad revenue isn’t material for Netflix. Building an ads business from scratch isn’t easy and we have lots of hard work ahead, but we’re confident that over time we can develop advertising into a multibillion dollar incremental revenue stream.”

The question is how long Wall Street will wait for that to happen. Recent stock slide notwithstanding, Netflix is doing just fine, but Disney is another matter.

There seems to be nothing CEO Bob Iger can do to repair the Mouse House’s Wall Street woes, with Disney stock sagging in the $80-$90 range, down about 20% year over year. And the company’s financial burdens — a heavy debt load, decaying linear TV networks, a direct-to-consumer unit bleeding red ink every quarter — are not so easily resolved.

In theory, advertising should continue to boost average revenue per user for Disney+, which grew 20% domestically in Q1 thanks to the price hike that accompanied the AVOD tier’s launch. (Netflix, meanwhile, said in its Q1 shareholder letter that its own ad-supported tier had already surpassed the ARPU of its ad-free Standard plan.)

But ad revenues won’t be able to offset the streaming segment’s massive expenses until Disney is able to scale its AVOD offering, which is not likely to happen anytime soon given its current trajectory.

The good news is consumers are amenable to ad-supported streaming. In a recent survey by Hub Entertainment Research, about 60% of streaming users polled said they would choose an ad-supported plan over an ad-free one if the former would save them $4-$5 per month.

Furthermore, Disney+’s and Netflix’s ad experiences scored high approval among consumers in Hub’s survey, with more than 70% rating Disney+ “a lot” or “a little better” than other providers with ads; 64% said the same of Netflix.

The bottom line here is Disney and Netflix have the potential to convert many more consumers to their ad tiers, but to do so, the streamers may have only one viable recourse: through pricing strategies.

Assuming Netflix has nearly reached its total addressable market in the U.S. — which, given the password-sharing crackdown, should be true soon if it isn’t already — future growth for the ad tier will need to come from current ad-free users migrating to the plan. Indeed, Netflix is already working to push consumers toward its AVOD tier through pricing tactics.

The streamer recently cut off sign-ups for “Basic,” its cheapest plan without ads, in the U.S., the U.K. and Canada, with the minimum ad-free price for new and returning users now $15.49/month (versus $6.99 for “Standard with ads”). One imagines the elimination of the Basic plan altogether can’t be too far behind.

Meanwhile, Iger has announced plans to begin integrating Hulu content into the Disney+ app this year for customers who subscribe to both services, which seems to be a prelude to a more definitive hard bundle of the two platforms. If and when that comes to pass, rather than preserve an ad-free Disney+ without Hulu programming, Disney may want to push users who are unwilling to pay more for Hulu content to an ad-supported, Disney+-only plan, à la Paramount+ With Showtime, thereby increasing the revenue those users generate even as they downgrade to a lower-priced tier.

Of course, there’s also a simpler option here: Just keep pushing ad-free prices higher. It seems likely SVOD will get significantly more expensive over the next few years, as most services are clearly underpriced considering their operating costs.

Should those prices indeed rise, we can expect to see more and more consumers migrating to cheaper ad-supported choices, fueling SVOD’s transformation from a subscription-based business to an ad-based one.

AVOD: Advertising-based Video on Demand
SVOD: Subscription Video on Demand
 
Last edited:


ESPN and Disney today announced an agreement with PENN Entertainment to launch ESPN BET, a branded sportsbook for fans in the US. PENN Entertainment will rebrand its current sportsbook and relaunch as ESPN BET effective this Fall in 16 legalized betting states.
Very predictable. Too much money in gambling to not be fully immersed into sports betting.
 
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/disney-apple-deal-1235559416/

A Disney Sale to Apple? Don’t Count It Out This Time

Facing the staggering problems afflicting all legacy studios, is Bob Iger contemplating a once-unthinkable option? The signals he sent in Sun Valley suggest that it could happen.

By Kim Masters, Alex Weprin
August 9, 2023 4:45am PDT

A few weeks before Bob Iger sat down for that CNBC interview in which he said Disney’s linear TV networks, like ABC and FX, “may not be core” to the company’s business, a veteran Hollywood executive mused to The Hollywood Reporter on the possibility of a deal that would rock the industry: Apple buying Disney. It’s an idea that keeps being discussed, even though many top executives have scoffed at it and many still do. Apple doesn’t want to buy a studio, they say, and there’s no way the feds would allow a huge deal like that to go through.

But this observer wasn’t so quick to rule it out. “I don’t think [Apple] would buy the company as it presently exists,” he said. “But if you see Bob start to divest things … that feels like he’s prepping for a sale. And there’s clearly no buyer like Apple.”

Not long after that, Iger went on television and hung a possibly-for-sale sign on Disney’s TV businesses. And just like that, it was a little more possible to see the outlines of a slimmed-down Disney that could be a tempting acquisition target.

There clearly is no buyer like Apple, which is sitting on $62 billion in cash and cash equivalents and has a $2.8 trillion market cap. And while it may be very true that Apple doesn’t want to buy a studio, maybe it would want to buy this studio —the one that, despite the challenges of the moment, has a vault full of priceless IP and remains the most valuable brand in entertainment.

And there has been a long-standing “special relationship” between Disney and Apple: Steve Jobs served on Disney’s board of directors from 2006 until his death in 2011. Iger joined Apple’s board shortly after Jobs died. He resigned from that position Sept. 10, 2019, the same day Apple officially announced that it was getting into the content business through its Apple TV+ service.

Some Hollywood executives have been anticipating a future in which the studio herd will continue to thin — dramatically. “There will end up being three or four platforms and everybody else gets hollowed out and acquired,” says one industry veteran. “There will be Apple, Amazon, Netflix and one other. If you could put NBCUniversal, Warners and Paramount together, you probably have enough to survive.” (The feds might have something to say about any version of that potential combination.) If Iger sees the world the same way, finding a home for Disney could be a temptation.

Multiple sources say Iger, having returned to the CEO job in November, has never faced more stress. Not only is he confronting an industry in transition, but much of the team that was with him in the good years is no longer at the company: General counsel Alan Braverman and film studio chief Alan Horn have retired. CFO Christine McCarthy, having gotten a bit too close to Bob Chapek during his tenure as CEO, is gone after 23 years at the company.

This may explain Iger’s rapprochement with former top Disney execs Kevin Mayer and Tom Staggs, both of whom were passed over for CEO but who have recently been named as consultants to the company. (The two are partners in their own business, Candle Media.) They know the company well, and not only can they help figure out how to trim Disney+ costs, but they can also assist in a possible sale of the linear TV assets, including the ABC broadcast network and its eight local TV stations, as well as cable channels like Freeform and National Geographic.

Other holdings, like Disney Channel and Disney Junior, would seem to be of minimal value without the larger company’s content and backing — and FX without the programming hand of John Landgraf and his team would seem to be devalued as well. One knowledgeable observer predicts Disney will “load those assets with debt and sell to private equity.” He believes the properties, which could be expected to generate $7 billion a year in profits, would sell for $50 billion. (Disney’s linear networks generated $8.5 billion in profits in fiscal 2022, though that is expected to decline as cord-cutting continues.) Disney could put $25 billion of Disney debt on the deal, cutting its debt load to $20 billion.

The company is already mulling a sale of the India businesses that it acquired from Fox. And it would not be surprising to see a sale of its majority stake in Nat Geo (perhaps in conjunction with a sale of the cable channel). Disney’s 50 percent stake in A+E Networks would also likely be available to the right buyer (Hearst owns the other half).

The idea that Disney might sell is top of mind for some Wall Street analysts. Needham & Co. analyst Laura Martin has contended for some time that Disney could sell to Apple. She predicts that Disney “will be purchased during the next three years,” noting that takeover premiums for media companies have typically been in the 30 to 40 percent range. “If they don’t sell, Disney will be competing against those [tech] companies in an industry with deteriorating economics (because they never need to make money from content), we believe,” Martin wrote July 14.

In a research note in June, Martin said that Disney could give Apple the catalyst it needs to drive adoption of its forthcoming Vision Pro augmented reality headset. “The fact that Disney CEO Bob Iger was on stage touting Apple’s Vision Pro goggles demonstrates the compelling strategic fit between Disney’s content and Apple’s wearable technology,” she wrote.

Not everyone is so bullish on a deal. Anthony Sabino, an attorney and professor at St. John’s University (and a self-described “insane Disney fan”), says Iger’s contract extension and potential sale of Disney’s linear TV assets “demonstrates that they [Disney’s board] want him to guide the company, and there’s no thought of him selling off the company.”

Any deal that Disney makes would be sure to invite tough scrutiny from the Biden administration, which has been aggressive in suing to prevent significant deals from being completed, albeit with mixed results.

“It’s a given, it’s an absolute certainty that if there was some talk of Disney merging with somebody else, that would be scrutinized to the nth degree by the FTC, by the Department of Justice,” Sabino says. “So that would be basically walking into a bear trap that I’m not sure any company would be willing to get itself immersed with.” A Republican administration may prove to be more lenient when it comes to a major deal (although it was the Trump administration that tried and failed to stop AT&T’s acquisition of Time Warner).

The actual areas of overlap between Apple and Disney are not that significant — nowhere near the overlap of, say, Disney’s Fox acquisition, which took down a legacy studio. The issue would be the sheer size and power of the combined companies.

But a pair of recent lawsuits, one from the FTC and another from the DOJ, could be relevant to any Disney deal. Most recently, the FTC has faltered in its efforts to block Microsoft’s takeover of the video game publisher Activision Blizzard. It’s a similar situation, with a tech giant and platform owner seeking to acquire what is first and foremost a content company. Microsoft preemptively promised to continue making key games available to competitors like Nintendo and Sony, a decision that was persuasive to the judge in the case, providing a possible road map for a Disney deal with a tech giant.

On the other hand, the Justice Department had a big win when a judge blocked Paramount’s sale of Simon & Schuster to Penguin Random House in 2022. The DOJ made a “monopsony” argument, namely that the merger would be harmful to authors looking to sell their work. With all the logical Disney buyers already owning their own studios, the government could make a similar case, though one source speculated that Disney could offer to preemptively divest some studio assets (like 20th Century Studios and Searchlight Pictures) to keep the level of competition in the market stable and forestall a monopsony case.

Loyal Disney fans, many of whom are shareholders, would be wary of a tech company’s commitment to Disney’s core entertainment and theme park businesses. It’s a group that includes Sabino. “The uproar from Disney shareholders would be insane,” he says. But with more than 1.8 billion shares outstanding, and with more than 60 percent of those shares held by institutional investors, Disney’s retail shareholder fans may not have what it takes to block a deal.

There’s one person who has been thinking about a deal between Apple and Disney for years. In his 2019 memoir, The Ride of a Lifetime, Iger wrote extensively about his friendship with Jobs, who had founded Pixar and sold it to Disney in 2006. Before there was a pandemic, before he returned from retirement to manage a Disney facing enormous challenges, Iger wrote: “I believe that if Steve were still alive, we would have combined our companies, or at least discussed the possibility very seriously.”


Big Hollywood, Small Fish for M&A (chart)
 
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mo...-feels-a-bit-strange-analyst-says/ar-AA1f1f5A

ESPN's Penn Deal Isn't Good for Disney Stock. 'It Feels a Bit Strange,' Analyst Says.
by Jack Denton
8/9/23

Disney opened higher Wednesday ahead of the media giant’s earnings later in the day, and for that investors can look to the gambling tie-up just struck between ESPN, which it owns, and Penn Entertainment. But hold on, the deal may not be as good as it looks.

Disney’s (ticker: DIS) ESPN has sold exclusive rights to the “ESPN Bet” trademark to Penn (PENN) for 10 years for $1.5 billion in cash and $500 million worth of Penn warrants. The deal gives Penn media, marketing, and brand rights to ESPN, including promotion across the group’s platforms and access to its talent.

Shares in Penn—which Lightshed analyst Richard Greenfield calls “a second/third-tier sportsbook”—were up more than 15% Wednesday. Investors understandably cheered its access to the premier U.S. sports media brand, even though it came at the cost of essentially giving away its ownership of Barstool Sports, which is going back to founder Dave Portnoy. That might tell you all you need to know about the balance of the deal, and why Disney stock’s 1% early advance might not last long.

The whole deal sort of reeks for Disney. At least, that’s the key takeaway from a note put out by Greenfield at Lightshed on Wednesday.

“All the major sportsbook appear to have passed, with only Penn willing to cut ESPN a large, albeit far less than originally desired, annual licensing check for the ESPN brand,” Greenfield said, which underscores the ESPN’s growing profitability hole stemming from rising programming costs and revenue pressures.

It all begs the question of what Disney’s plan is for ESPN.

“Everything about Disney is premium quality. Penn is not a market leader in sports betting and nobody believes their technology is good enough to compete with the industry leaders,” Greenfield said.

Now, with ESPN’s 10-year marriage to Penn, Disney’s strategic options for the sports media group are limited. No longer can it merge ESPN with Flutter’s (FLTR.U.K.) FanDuel or DraftKings (DKNG), which many investors had hoped for, Greenfield said.

Nor does it make finding investors for ESPN, which CEO Bob Iger flagged last month, any easier. As Greenfield asks: “Why would sports leagues or distribution platforms (like Verizon (VZ) or T-Mobile (TMUS)) that might have been interested in investing in ESPN want to be associated with a sports betting platform that is not best-in-class?”

There are more questions without answers, too, including why Disney would sell ESPN to a group that is not licensed anywhere where the parent company or the sports group have a major presence, Greenfield notes. Penn is not licensed in ESPN’s home state of Connecticut, nor New York, and sports betting remains illegal in Florida and California. “It feels a bit strange,” the Lightshed analyst said.

Unfortunately, Greenfield’s best guess as to why the Penn deal was announced now bodes even worse for Disney investors in the short-term than the ESPN deal does in the long-term.

“Disney is reporting earnings this afternoon and investors are expecting weak results and a lowering of go-forward expectations given Iger’s recent commentary on the challenges facing Disney being greater than he expected,” the analyst said. “We suspect Disney wanted something new to divert investor attention away from their near-term struggles.”

Investors only have to wait hours now until Disney earnings to find out.
 
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/elemental-pixar-quietly-made-box-210000233.html

‘Elemental’ and Pixar Have Quietly Made a Box Office Comeback
Jeremy Fuster
Tue, August 8, 2023 at 4:00 PM CDT

When it earned the worst opening weekend in studio history it seemed like “Elemental” was a sign that
had lost the magic touch that made it a cornerstone of Disney’s box office dominance for years.

But over the past two months, “Elemental” has quietly won over audiences worldwide and steamed along to a $423 million total through this past Sunday, with $148 million coming from North America. While still not a theatrical hit, director Peter Sohn’s romantic tale is no longer the “Lightyear”-esque flop it once appeared destined to become, and has shown that Pixar is not as far off from returning to its past form as it seemed.

“It’s rare for any sort of film to earn a 5-times multiple in this box office,” Comscore analyst Paul Dergarabedian told TheWrap, noting how the film went from an anemic $29.6 million domestic opening to an overall domestic total of nearly $150 million. “A lot of people gave up on this film, but audiences didn’t, and it had lasting power with families that let it play for weeks,” he said.

In fact, “Elemental” has the highest global box office total of any original film so far this year, “original” in the sense that it has no pre-existing IP attached or is directly based on a true story or nonfiction literature. If the scope is expanded to true story inspiration, the only films that have topped “Elemental” are the indie film “Sound of Freedom,” which has a higher domestic total with $163 million, and Christopher Nolan’s “Oppenheimer,” which passed $550 million worldwide this past weekend.

Prior to release, “Elemental” received mixed reviews from its world premiere at the Cannes Film Festival, while the film’s marketing, focused on the colorful setting and its inhabitants, didn’t boost interest among moviegoers.

But after release, word of mouth slowly but surely began to pick up worldwide. Sohn based the film’s story, which follows a fire element named Ember as she trains to take over her father’s shop and unexpectedly falls in love with a water element named Wade, off of his experience growing up in New York with his Korean immigrant parents.

That connection turned “Elemental” into a big hit in South Korea, where the film has grossed a Pixar record of $48 million. In other countries like the United States, France, Mexico and Britain, that same story of culture clash and honoring one’s parents resonated with adults while the colorful imagery and characters of Element City charmed kids.

Unlike last year’s “Lightyear,” which was too detached from its “Toy Story” roots and didn’t have a compelling enough story and visuals to keep families coming in, “Elemental” had the recipe to leg out in a manner similar to DreamWorks’ “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish,” which grossed $480.9 million this past winter.

But while “Puss” carried a reported production budget of $90 million, “Elemental” comes in at more than double that at $200 million. Films produced by Pixar and Walt Disney Animation typically come with such a budget for a variety of reasons, including its use of in-house animators instead of vendors.

But that price tag means that a $425 million global total, which would be a success for a studio like DreamWorks or Illumination, still comes short of the rough break-even point for Pixar.

While “Elemental” shows that Pixar can still charm audiences, Disney has work to do to figure out how to sell the studio’s animated films — especially non-sequel ones — to a moviegoing public that has many more options for family entertainment than it did in Pixar’s 2000s heyday. That’s when the studio could afford to show off plot-light trailers for films like “Wall-E” and “Up” and still rake in millions because of Pixar’s immense audience clout.

To get back to the form seen with films like “Inside Out,” which grossed $857 million worldwide in 2015 and is now getting a sequel, building up that pre-release buzz for new characters and stories is critical, and not just for theatrical prospects but for the plethora of revenue streams that these films create after they leave cinemas.

When a film like “Lightyear” or last year’s Disney film “Strange World” fails to launch culturally and financially, it stifles Disney’s plans to reuse those characters and films in merchandising, theme parks and other parts of the company’s massive portfolio. (That said, even films that skipped theaters entirely, like Pixar’s 2022 streaming exclusive “Turning Red,” have seen Disney stores stuffed with items featuring that movie’s red panda heroine, Meilin.)

The slow-burn success of “Elemental” will keep Disney’s hope of selling toys and clothes with Ember and Wade on them alive, but the company doesn’t make original films like this just to turn a profit from post-theatrical revenue. While Pixar’s next summer film will be a sequel, with “Inside Out 2,” the studio has another original film before that with “Elio,” a story about a young boy who is mistaken by an intergalactic congress of aliens as Earth’s leader.

It’s unclear whether the SAG-AFTRA strike will force Disney to move “Elio” or “Inside Out 2” from their current release spots in March and June of next year, as insiders told TheWrap that Pixar banked voice recordings from actors for those projects prior to the start of the strike. If “Elio” does stay put, it will at least not have to worry about competition from “Spider-Man: Beyond the Spider-Verse,” which did have to move out of its March 2024 slot because of the strike.

Disney has already released a teaser for “Elio” showing off the film’s plot and its lead character, and will likely release another trailer in November ahead of Disney Animation’s Thanksgiving release “Wish.” If those trailers, along with audience goodwill from “Elemental” and better pre-release reviews next spring, can help build more early public buzz for “Elio,” the recent poor opening weekends Pixar has suffered could be left behind.

It’s probably too much to ask “Elio” to match the $857 million total of “Inside Out,” but a global box office total between $550 million and $650 million would be a modest success for Pixar, and a sign that “Elemental” was in the long run a stepping stone in getting the studio back on track as a major player at the animation box office.
 
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/elemental-pixar-quietly-made-box-210000233.html

‘Elemental’ and Pixar Have Quietly Made a Box Office Comeback
Jeremy Fuster
Tue, August 8, 2023 at 4:00 PM CDT


In fact, “Elemental” has the highest global box office total of any original film so far this year, “original” in the sense that it has no pre-existing IP attached or is directly based on a true story or nonfiction literature. If the scope is expanded to true story inspiration, the only films that have topped “Elemental” are the indie film “Sound of Freedom,” which has a higher domestic total with $163 million, and Christopher Nolan’s “Oppenheimer,” which passed $550 million worldwide this past weekend.
Just to note that there's a missing word in the first sentence of that paragraph that makes it confusing at first read. It should say "or is NOT directly based on a true story..."
 
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/com...-bob-igers-deal-making-to-do-list/ar-AA1f13kX

Disney Earnings Put Focus on Bob Iger's Deal-Making To-Do List
Analysts expect streaming losses to widen, subscriber count to fall, TV troubles to continue
By Robbie Whelan
Aug. 9, 2023 11:32 am EDT

As Disney prepares to report third-quarter earnings Wednesday, Bob Iger has a lot of pots boiling on the stove.

The entertainment giant’s chief executive is pursuing three complex transactions at the same time—involving Hulu, ESPN and the company’s other traditional TV assets—with the goal of securing the company’s future and reducing its debt load.

At the same time, Iger is under pressure to show Wall Street the company is on the right track, despite persistent questions about losses in its streaming business and a legacy TV operation that continues to deteriorate.

Iger announced last month in an interview that ESPN was seeking strategic partners and that Disney’s TV networks “may not be core” to the business anymore, indicating to investors and media rivals that the TV business is for sale.

Analysts polled by Factset projected that the TV segment will report operating income of just shy of $2 billion for the June quarter, down 19.5% from the year-earlier period.

The CEO recently hired Kevin Mayer and Tom Staggs, both former top lieutenants to Iger who had left the company, as consultants to advise him on TV business, according to people familiar with the matter. News of Mayer and Staggs’s advisory roles was earlier reported in Puck’s media newsletter. Disney is exploring a menu of options for both ESPN and its other linear networks, which include ABC and cable channels such as Freeform and Disney Channel, these people said. Those options could include selling some networks or bringing on equity partners—or spinning some assets off into a new company.

Despite their declining reach because of cord-cutting, TV channels still bring in income from advertising sales and cable subscription fees. Iger and ESPN chief Jimmy Pitaro have both said they hope to attract partners who can bring new content or new technology to ESPN, and the network has held talks with Major League Baseball about streaming some baseball games in local markets, The Wall Street Journal has reported.

On Tuesday, gambling company Penn Entertainment announced a marketing partnership with ESPN under which Penn will pay Disney $2 billion in cash and warrants on Penn stock over the next decade to rebrand the casino operator’s sports-betting app as ESPN Bet. In recent weeks, Iger has told associates that he wants to reduce Disney’s exposure to the declining cable-TV industry but would prefer to avoid a spinoff of ESPN, and instead attract strategic partners to raise capital and ease the pressure on the business, people who have spoken to him said. Disney’s TV assets also include several local TV stations. On occasion, the company has considered selling some of its smaller market stations, but the tax penalties proved to be prohibitive. Selling the entire traditional TV business would likely result in a significant tax bill, according to people familiar with the business.

One potentially complicating factor as Disney tries to sell or find partners for its traditional media outlets is its relationship with Hearst, which owns 20% of ESPN and 50% of A&E Networks, which operates the A&E and History cable channels. Several years ago, Disney discussed internally the prospect of acquiring Hearst’s stake in ESPN, but no approach was made, a person with knowledge of those talks said.

Separately, Iger is trying to take full control of Hulu, the streaming service Disney owns in partnership with Comcast. A deadline that could force the sale of Comcast’s one-third stake to Disney is approaching in a few months, and the two companies have already had on-and-off discussions. Battle lines are being drawn over the fairest way to calculate Hulu’s value, setting the stage for a potential fight next year, people close to the discussions said.

Investors will be looking for more clarity about how to fix the TV business, said analyst Michael Nathanson. Disney shares closed at $88.13 Tuesday, a fraction of the price at which they traded about two and a half years ago, when the stock briefly topped $200. “The market is unsatisfied so far, because we’ve only heard part of what they’re thinking,” Nathanson said. “People are afraid to buy the stock until they get the all-clear sign.”

Another problem area for Disney is streaming. Since launching flagship streaming service Disney+ in late 2019, the company has lost more than $10 billion in its direct-to-consumer segment, which also includes Hulu and ESPN+. Analysts surveyed by Factset projected a streaming loss of $758 million for the three months ended in June, a bigger loss than it reported for the March quarter but a smaller one than it posted a year earlier.

For more than three years, Disney has promised investors that Disney+ would achieve profitability by September 2024, but in recent months some executives have begun to doubt whether that goal is achievable, the Journal has reported.

Disney+ reported 157.8 million global subscribers in its March quarter, a total that has declined since the streaming service lost the license to air matches from a popular cricket league in India, which is home to about one-third of its total customers. Analysts expect that total to fall to 155.5 million.

Write to Robbie Whelan at robbie.whelan@wsj.com
 
So, does Iger get the normal softball questions in today's question and answer session? Or does he actually have to field some tough questions today?
 
So, does Iger get the normal softball questions in today's question and answer session? Or does he actually have to field some tough questions today?
With all the drama of the strike, his shine has been dulled a bit. I look for a pretty lively discussion. Wall Street is historically a tough taskmaster long-term. Investors get fooled every day over the short term. But eventually, if a business isn't delivering a service or product that paying customers are buying, it shows up in the numbers.
 
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/elemental-pixar-quietly-made-box-210000233.html

‘Elemental’ and Pixar Have Quietly Made a Box Office Comeback
Jeremy Fuster
Tue, August 8, 2023 at 4:00 PM CDT

When it earned the worst opening weekend in studio history it seemed like “Elemental” was a sign that
had lost the magic touch that made it a cornerstone of Disney’s box office dominance for years.

But over the past two months, “Elemental” has quietly won over audiences worldwide and steamed along to a $423 million total through this past Sunday, with $148 million coming from North America. While still not a theatrical hit, director Peter Sohn’s romantic tale is no longer the “Lightyear”-esque flop it once appeared destined to become, and has shown that Pixar is not as far off from returning to its past form as it seemed.

“It’s rare for any sort of film to earn a 5-times multiple in this box office,” Comscore analyst Paul Dergarabedian told TheWrap, noting how the film went from an anemic $29.6 million domestic opening to an overall domestic total of nearly $150 million. “A lot of people gave up on this film, but audiences didn’t, and it had lasting power with families that let it play for weeks,” he said.

In fact, “Elemental” has the highest global box office total of any original film so far this year, “original” in the sense that it has no pre-existing IP attached or is directly based on a true story or nonfiction literature. If the scope is expanded to true story inspiration, the only films that have topped “Elemental” are the indie film “Sound of Freedom,” which has a higher domestic total with $163 million, and Christopher Nolan’s “Oppenheimer,” which passed $550 million worldwide this past weekend.

Prior to release, “Elemental” received mixed reviews from its world premiere at the Cannes Film Festival, while the film’s marketing, focused on the colorful setting and its inhabitants, didn’t boost interest among moviegoers.

But after release, word of mouth slowly but surely began to pick up worldwide. Sohn based the film’s story, which follows a fire element named Ember as she trains to take over her father’s shop and unexpectedly falls in love with a water element named Wade, off of his experience growing up in New York with his Korean immigrant parents.

That connection turned “Elemental” into a big hit in South Korea, where the film has grossed a Pixar record of $48 million. In other countries like the United States, France, Mexico and Britain, that same story of culture clash and honoring one’s parents resonated with adults while the colorful imagery and characters of Element City charmed kids.

Unlike last year’s “Lightyear,” which was too detached from its “Toy Story” roots and didn’t have a compelling enough story and visuals to keep families coming in, “Elemental” had the recipe to leg out in a manner similar to DreamWorks’ “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish,” which grossed $480.9 million this past winter.

But while “Puss” carried a reported production budget of $90 million, “Elemental” comes in at more than double that at $200 million. Films produced by Pixar and Walt Disney Animation typically come with such a budget for a variety of reasons, including its use of in-house animators instead of vendors.

But that price tag means that a $425 million global total, which would be a success for a studio like DreamWorks or Illumination, still comes short of the rough break-even point for Pixar.

While “Elemental” shows that Pixar can still charm audiences, Disney has work to do to figure out how to sell the studio’s animated films — especially non-sequel ones — to a moviegoing public that has many more options for family entertainment than it did in Pixar’s 2000s heyday. That’s when the studio could afford to show off plot-light trailers for films like “Wall-E” and “Up” and still rake in millions because of Pixar’s immense audience clout.

To get back to the form seen with films like “Inside Out,” which grossed $857 million worldwide in 2015 and is now getting a sequel, building up that pre-release buzz for new characters and stories is critical, and not just for theatrical prospects but for the plethora of revenue streams that these films create after they leave cinemas.

When a film like “Lightyear” or last year’s Disney film “Strange World” fails to launch culturally and financially, it stifles Disney’s plans to reuse those characters and films in merchandising, theme parks and other parts of the company’s massive portfolio. (That said, even films that skipped theaters entirely, like Pixar’s 2022 streaming exclusive “Turning Red,” have seen Disney stores stuffed with items featuring that movie’s red panda heroine, Meilin.)

The slow-burn success of “Elemental” will keep Disney’s hope of selling toys and clothes with Ember and Wade on them alive, but the company doesn’t make original films like this just to turn a profit from post-theatrical revenue. While Pixar’s next summer film will be a sequel, with “Inside Out 2,” the studio has another original film before that with “Elio,” a story about a young boy who is mistaken by an intergalactic congress of aliens as Earth’s leader.

It’s unclear whether the SAG-AFTRA strike will force Disney to move “Elio” or “Inside Out 2” from their current release spots in March and June of next year, as insiders told TheWrap that Pixar banked voice recordings from actors for those projects prior to the start of the strike. If “Elio” does stay put, it will at least not have to worry about competition from “Spider-Man: Beyond the Spider-Verse,” which did have to move out of its March 2024 slot because of the strike.

Disney has already released a teaser for “Elio” showing off the film’s plot and its lead character, and will likely release another trailer in November ahead of Disney Animation’s Thanksgiving release “Wish.” If those trailers, along with audience goodwill from “Elemental” and better pre-release reviews next spring, can help build more early public buzz for “Elio,” the recent poor opening weekends Pixar has suffered could be left behind.

It’s probably too much to ask “Elio” to match the $857 million total of “Inside Out,” but a global box office total between $550 million and $650 million would be a modest success for Pixar, and a sign that “Elemental” was in the long run a stepping stone in getting the studio back on track as a major player at the animation box office.
Interesting story.

Elemental isn't a huge box office success.

Elemental actually lost money at the box office.

Elemental isn't a huge flop.

And Pixar is close to its former status as a box office and artistic success?

It could be worse for Pixar, I guess. It could be Lucasfilm. :)
 
Pixar's President on ‘Elemental’s’ Unlikely Box Office Rebound: ‘This Will Certainly Be a Profitable Film’

The elements are finally coming together for Pixar’s “Elemental,” which is enjoying a rebound after a spark-less start at the box office.

The animation adventure stumbled in its debut with $29.5 million domestically and $44.5 million globally, by far the worst opening weekend in Pixar’s 28-year history. Yet two months later, its ticket sales have slowly and steadily climbed to $148 million in North America and $425 million worldwide. That’s nearly five times its initial ticket sales, a rare multiple for an original film. Set in a world inhabited by anthropomorphic elements of nature, the Peter Sohn-directed “Elemental” revolves around two fire and water elements who discover they have more in common than meets the eye.

“Elemental” cost $200 million before marketing — which included a lavish trip to the Cannes Film Festival for its global premiere — so even though audiences kept showing up after opening weekend, the family friendly movie has just inched out of the red. However, it’s an encouraging turnaround for Pixar after the box office disasters of 2019’s “Onward” and 2022’s “Lightyear,” as well as the missed opportunities of “Soul,” “Luca” and “Turning Red,” which were sent directly to Disney+ during the pandemic.

As the film crossed the $400 mark, Pixar’s president Jim Morris spoke to Variety about what’s behind the box office rebirth of “Elemental.”

When “Elemental” first opened, many outlets including Variety labeled the film a bomb. What was your sense of opening weekend?

It was certainly disappointing from a revenue point of view. We felt pretty good about the film. We had a higher hope for its opening weekend, so we were a bit crestfallen.

At what point did you notice it was enduring at the box office?

The numbers were falling off so little. In some markets, it would be a 12% drop from the week before and we had a handful of markets where [ticket sales] were rising. You just don’t see that in this day and age. You typically expect a 50% drop on an average basis. We thought, “Well that’s cool.”

Where do you think ticket sales will top out worldwide?

We’re hoping it’ll get to maybe $460 million. I always wish higher. I’d hate to disappoint myself, but I’d love to see it get to half a billion.

Why are people responding to the film?

It’s a love story of people from different worlds. It’s rare you have an animated film that’s a love story. It has an immigration story, which is fundamentally American, but speaks to people in other cultures as well.


Will “Elemental” be profitable?

We have a lot of different revenue streams, but at the box office we’re looking at now, it should do better than break even theatrically. And then we have revenue from streaming, theme parks and consumer products. This will certainly be a profitable film for the Disney company.

Is there a way to make these kinds of movies at a lower price point?

That’s a constant question. One of the ways you make these films for less money, and almost all of our competitors do this, is to do work offshore. It’s only us and Disney Animation that makes animation films in the U.S. anymore with all of the artists under one roof. We feel like having a colony of artists approach has differentiated our films. We hope to find a path to make that work. “Elemental” was particularly expensive because all the characters have visual effects. We had been getting the film costs down.

The other thing I’ll say about our film budgets is that our whole company exists only to make these films. So when we say a budget, that is everything it takes to run the whole company. Sometimes, the budgets [for other films] that get reported are physical production costs and don’t include the salaries of executives and things like that. Our budgets include all of that, so there’s some accounting context that gets lost. But that doesn’t mean they’re not expensive.

What’s the biggest challenge right now in getting family audiences to theaters?

It’s expensive for a family to go to the movies. It can be a $100 afternoon for a family, and that can be a stretch for some to do. The other thing is that during COVID, we trained audiences to watch our movies on Disney+. I won’t say there was a lot of choice. For periods of time, it was the only thing we could do. We have a little work to unring the bell and motivate families to go to the theater and not wait a few months to see it on Disney+.

Is there an ideal window between a film opening in theaters and moving to Disney+?

Thinking back historically, a summer movie would go to pay-per-view in autumn, which gave a three- or four-month window. That would be a traditional window that I’d love to see reestablished. We make our films for the big screen. We love for people to see them with an audience.

Something that has always distinguished Pixar is that parents can enjoy these movies as much as their kids. Do you ever worry that Pixar films are too smart?

We always think about those things. I’m often surprised at how astute kids are at figuring out bigger ideas. Historically, our films have dealt with more sophisticated themes. We’ve tried to make them accessible to everyone in the audience. It’s something we’re constantly working on. We make a certain kind of film that does have ideas in it. We don’t want to stop doing that. But we obviously want audiences to go to theaters for our films.
 

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