[throwawaycities]

> To drive it home, Disney had record revenue in 4Q2021, driven by streaming and parks revenue [1]. Maybe it’s you who had it wrong?

You are cherry picking an article from Q42021 that references park revenue, whereas I gave a very specific example of their record single day gains in company history which occurred while the parks were closed in 2020.

As to Disney+ streaming service it launched in 2020 but the Disney+ lost $2.8B in fiscal 2020, the same period of time it’s parks were closed and park losses total about $7B, and yet during this period it saw it’s record single day stock price gains in history. That record day was a direct result of the Fed and taxpayer money, not record theme park revenue (it was record losses) nor Disney+ which was a brand new division and recording its own multibillion dollar losses.

[long_time_gone]

The article is proof that investors were correct. Stock prices are a present value of future earnings. In 2020, after the stock price had already tanked due to COVID and the bailout was announced, investors thought future earnings would increase. They bid up the stock price to acknowledge that belief.

At the time Disney+ was losing money, but the pandemic and the bailout were indicators that the steaming business would take off (it did). Their huge content backlog had them perfectly placed to manage a production shutdown. There’s also the 21st Century Fox acquisition that was Closed in 2019 and gave them more content.

If investors expected future earnings to grow more than current losses (which were already priced in by the market), then it isn’t wild for the stock to bounce. A year later, their earnings pretty much prove it.

We could also go into the calculations of why the value of recurring revenue (streaming subscribers) is much higher than the value of non-recurring revenue (park visits).

[throwawaycities]

> If investors expected future earnings to grow more than current losses

Well of course Disney future theme park earnings were going to increase from zero. You aren’t considering the actual E/P ratio.

Pre-Covid Disney both stock price was a at all time high and their E/P ratio was at an all time high (about 22, where usually an 18 is considered over priced).

Those “investors” you suggest were the Fed using taxpayer money buy and prop up the stock price. With the Fed money Disney stock price once again reached a new all time high price and a P/E ratio over 90, meaning the Fed was bailing out shareholders at a historic high of $90+ to $1 earned, where an average publicly traded company should be closer to 13-14.

[long_time_gone]

> Well of course Disney future theme park earnings were going to increase from zero. You aren’t considering the actual E/P ratio.

This isn't how investors think. If you know that future earnings are going to increase from zero due to outside circumstances (COVID, in this case), why would you base your analysis on past earnings? The past earnings don't matter, especially when you admit that they were heavily influenced by COVID.

$1 of recurring revenue from subscriptions (Disney+) is worth more than $1 spent at a Disney theme park. The recurring revenue costs less to service and is more predictable going forward. This is why businesses (like Adobe, Apple, Disney, etc.) have been working to shift revenue towards subscriptions over one-time purchases.

> Those “investors” you suggest were the Fed using taxpayer money buy and prop up the stock price. With the Fed money Disney stock price once again reached a new all time high price and a P/E ratio over 90, meaning the Fed was bailing out shareholders at a historic high of $90+ to $1 earned, where an average publicly traded company should be closer to 13-14.

It feels like you are working backwards to try and find the nefarious actions you are so positive about. The Fed deciding to bailout companies and consumers obviously helped businesses (especially consumer facing businesses, like Disney). The entire stock market exploded when it was announced.

The P/E ratio of the entire S&P 500 spiked from around 20-25x to 40-45x due to Fed and Congressional actions [1]. Average publicly traded companies do not trade at 13-14x P/E, and low interest rates for decades have made that a fact. That said, Disney isn't a traditional company because their investments and growth in streaming make them look more like a growth stock. Which is, again, reinforced by their record revenue numbers.

[1] https://www.multpl.com/s-p-500-pe-ratio

[throwawaycities]

> The P/E ratio of the entire S&P 500 spiked from around 20-25x to 40-45x due to Fed and Congressional actions

Again Disney was double that at 90 after the FED began buying Disney stock/bonds using taxpayer funds and pumped it to an ATH.

> It feels like you are working backwards to try and find the nefarious actions you are so positive about.

It’s all public record, the stock was tanking, after the FED began to directly prop up Disney the stock price reached a new ATH in 2021 at which point executives/insiders, including the Chairman, began to sell sending the price downward from ATH and leaving the FED holding the bag. Despite your claims of Disney behind a growth stock the Chairman liquidated something like 50% of his holdings.

Anyway I’m not here to debate the merits of the Disney stock price. The FED shouldn’t be getting taxpayer funds much less buying Disney stock/bonds, it’s corporate welfare, and when the stock price is propped up to an ATH with taxpayer funds and the Chairman and other executives sell out it’s a golden parachute. Like I said people look back on 2008 and think taxpayers should thank the banks, and similarly people (presumably like you) will think taxpayers should thank companies like Disney that were bailed out by taxpayers.