Bob Iger Returns/Disney CEO Thread (2022)

[Nico]

I’m not in favor of a merger. But Apple and Disney used to be referred to as examples of great corporate reputations. I dunno if that can be said about Disney at this point for all the reasons people have mentioned lately. Apples still pretty good.

 

[Nick]

I’m not in favor of a merger. But Apple and Disney used to be referred to as examples of great corporate reputations. I dunno if that can be said about Disney at this point for all the reasons people have mentioned lately. Apples still pretty good.

I don’t want to see it happen and essentially end TWDC as it has been operated for 100 years. However, I do feel like it’s more likely now than ever before and if Disney needs to be under the umbrella of anyone, being under Apple and their bags of money can’t hurt. Apple would also probably fix Marvel and Star Wars better than Disney can.

 

[TheUniC6]

I don’t want to see it happen and essentially end TWDC as it has been operated for 100 years. However, I do feel like it’s more likely now than ever before and if Disney needs to be under the umbrella of anyone, being under Apple and their bags of money can’t hurt. Apple would also probably fix Marvel and Star Wars better than Disney can.

Any investment for the Disney parks would basically be a drop in the bucket for Apple. If Apple were to implement their tech expertise into things like interactive attractions and ride vehicles at the Disney parks, that would be a game changer for the entire industry. I mean Disney under Apple could finally give us a worthy rise level Avengers E ticket.

 

[Grabnar]

Would/could they spin off Parks and Resorts as its own business? I’ve seen it wish casted by fans, but I don’t know the legal and financial regulations.

Would be antithetical to the vertical integration at this point. Films is essentially a driver for merch/parks sales, not much else.

 

[rageofthegods]

Yeah Parks is their second biggest source of EBITDA after cable, and unlike cable it's actually growing/flat rather than declining. It would be like someone buying Apple and spinning off iphone (and speaking of, Apple does have experience running retail through their stores).

If they spin off anything, it'll be ABC/FX/ESPN. Profitable, but declining, and can get saddled with all of their bad fox merger debt. But either way, this is predicated on the idea that Iger sells, and while I do think he'll be forced to make some bad decisions soon, I don't think he'll do that.

 

[Grabnar]

Yeah Parks is their second biggest source of EBITDA after cable, and unlike cable it's actually growing/flat rather than declining. It would be like someone buying Apple and spinning off iphone (and speaking of, Apple does have experience running retail through their stores).

If they spin off anything, it'll be ABC/FX/ESPN. Profitable, but declining, and can get saddled with all of their bad fox merger debt. But either way, this is predicated on the idea that Iger sells, and while I do think he'll be forced to make some bad decisions soon, I don't think he'll do that.

I don’t believe the Apple/Disney mergers at all, but ESPN would be the one that wouldn’t get spun off imo.

 

[Viator]

I really do not want to believe the Apple/TWDC merger talk at all, feels like corpo suicide.

 

[Mad Dog]

All I see is ABC, and some cable channels, sold.....The theme parks are 'the brand'. Suicide for the company to sell them.

 

[TheUniC6]

All I see is ABC, and some cable channels, sold.....The theme parks are 'the brand'. Suicide for the company to sell them.

Cable is declining in the age of streaming. I have know people who have dropped cable all together and gone with streaming services. But if ABC is spun off, would Disney content like say Pixar and Disney Animation movies be licensed for programming on ABC?

 

[Mad Dog]

Cable is declining in the age of streaming. I have know people who have dropped cable all together and gone with streaming services. But if ABC is spun off, would Disney content like say Pixar and Disney Animation movies be licensed for programming on ABC?

Licensing agreements/contracts for what's shown where are so varied it's nearly impossible to figure what will occur in the future. Example: The Warner Potter films were contracted to the Disney Freeform channel for a decade or so even though the Potter lands were in Universal. Bottom line is the content usually follows the money.

 

[GAcoaster]

There are too many unknowns about what an Apple acquisition would look like. Could be if they did they just sell the parks and other "non-core" business units to private equity firms who run things under license agreements. That's what Comcast was ready to do before they saw the potential in the parks...

 

[Grabnar]

There are too many unknowns about what an Apple acquisition would look like. Could be if they did they just sell the parks and other "non-core" business units to private equity firms who run things under license agreements. That's what Comcast was ready to do before they saw the potential in the parks...

I just struggle to think of a situation where a company purchases Disney but doesn't keep it vertically integrated, whether that's Apple or another company.

I think with any merger they're going to need to spin off the Fox debt to a dying division, probably cable, and then either sell off Hulu or finish the process of merging with D+.

I just don't see a situation where a merger with another company occurs and is a good thing, though. They need some new blood to come in and shake things up, but I don't think that a merger would do either company any justice.

 

[GAcoaster]

A company looking for quick cash could easily sell any unit off. The parks are core to Disney, but not Apple. Apple wants content. If they sold the parks off they could still make money on licensing fees (just like Disney does with OLC now). After a merger or acquisition companies often look to reduce costs and pay down what they spent on the purchase.

 

[Grabnar]

A company looking for quick cash could easily sell any unit off. The parks are core to Disney, but not Apple. Apple wants content. If they sold the parks off they could still make money on licensing fees (just like Disney does with OLC now). After a merger or acquisition companies often look to reduce costs and pay down what they spent on the purchase.

I understand that, but there's no reason that a company would pick up Disney that would not want the parks. You're paying a premium for the fact that you have a content -> hospitality/tourism -> merch pipeline established.

As far as Apple studio acquisitions go, I think they'll aim for the mid-high tier first, their brand ethos for the Apple TV+ has been high production value, relatively "high brow" content. I think something like A24 makes much more sense given their relatively high content quality as compared to Disney's, and I would not at all be surprised if that eventually happens, as was rumored back in '21.

 

[Mad Dog]

The theme parks are the heart and soul of the Disney brand. Without them there is essentially no brand. The value of that is not something that a dollar figure can be put on. The park division always makes lots of profit, short of a national disaster like covid. The other divisions of the company are up and down and suck off the park's profit to survive in their bad quarters. Unfortunately, Disney uses the parks as their cash cow, and instead of putting a high share of profits back in the division, they divert it to other divisions and investors. The parks suffer under this arrangement.

 

[GAcoaster]

I understand that, but there's no reason that a company would pick up Disney that would not want the parks. You're paying a premium for the fact that you have a content -> hospitality/tourism -> merch pipeline established.

Because shareholders want money, and if activist shareholders see weakness in profitability, they want it gone. That's why shareholders were pushing Disney to split the movie studio from the rest of the company a few years ago-- to maximize their profits. Wall Street doesn't care about heart and soul, only dollars and cents. All of that pipeline of hospitality and merch still happens with licensing agreements (which they would charge a premium for).

It doesn't matter at the moment either way because it hasn't happened and might not happen, it's just something that could happen depending on the whims of company leadership and stockholders who they are beholden to.

 

[Nick]

I understand that, but there's no reason that a company would pick up Disney that would not want the parks. You're paying a premium for the fact that you have a content -> hospitality/tourism -> merch pipeline established.

As far as Apple studio acquisitions go, I think they'll aim for the mid-high tier first, their brand ethos for the Apple TV+ has been high production value, relatively "high brow" content. I think something like A24 makes much more sense given their relatively high content quality as compared to Disney's, and I would not at all be surprised if that eventually happens, as was rumored back in '21.

Disney does have FX and Searchlight it can pitch to Apple as their “highbrow” content.

 

[JungleSkip]

I still don't buy the "Apple is gonna buy Disney" talk...but if they did, selling the parks would be dumb. They're the most bullet proof sector of Disney's business

 

[fryoj]

Fast forward 10 years, when the new owners of the Disney parks have to start retheming Galaxy's Edge, Cinderella's Castle, Pandora, and Toy Story Land because Uni outbid them with Apple for the rights.

 

[tielo]

Is the de-theming that Disney is doing a precursor from things to come? The new look of these area's look a lot like an Apple store.
Imagine all parks being sparkling white.