[dcolkitt]

It's interesting that Disney today almost the entire profits of the company come from the parks division (which also includes cruises, resorts and "experiences"). The media division by itself is in a massive war for eyeballs with tons of other streaming competitors, all of whom are probably over-investing in content relative to what consumers can support.

One interesting possibility is that maybe the business model of media companies in the 21st century will become content as a loss leader for the purpose of providing valuable IP to amusement parks. Certainly seems like a similar thing is happening with Comcast with their massive expansion of Universal parks.

[citizenpaul]

You have what is a common misconception. That the actual IP/Content is ever what has made money. It is not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_media...

Look at the totals broken out by area of revenue. Pokemon is a big offender, the games and movies might as well not exist from a revenue standpoint.

Pokémon $88 billion Licensed merchandise – $80.8 billion[b] Pokémon mobile games – $6.13 billion[c] Box office – $1.156 billion[26]

Now you know why everthing has to have some sort of T-shirt, hat, pen, keychain blah blah.

[throw7]

That is nuts. Queue up Space Balls: "MERCHANDISING!"

Well now though, I see a video game I never heard of "Dungeon Fighter Online". Here's one of the recent reviews from the Steam Store:

"I spent $45,000 on a relentless journey into the heart of darkness with Dungeon Fighter Online (DFO), a 2D beat-em-up game that has garnered both fervent enthusiasts and critical skeptics,..."

Holy Cow. I can't even.

[fyrn_]

Dungeon fighter is one of the most valuable media IPs ever, beat a ton of video games player count and revenue records. It's one of the things that put tencent on the map.

Something north of $20 billion in revenue. Just not known in the US.

[dcolkitt]

This is a fair point, but as of their most recent financials merchandise (excluding merchandise sold inside the parks) only made up $5bn of the $28bn in the "Parks, Experiences and Product" category. By contrast park admissions was $8bn, resorts was $6bn and food/merchandise sold in the parks was $6bn.

So IMO this is a departure from the classic merchandise based strategy. It seems pretty clear that the theme parks more so than the products are the major profit centers today.

[ethbr1]

Obligatory 1957 Disney growth plan, which hasn't changed that much: https://hbr.org/resources/images/article_assets/2013/05/disn... [0]

Change some distribution models and mediums of distribution, and it's the same cycle between content, brand, and customer eyeballs.

Which makes sense, as the key observation was: brands and characters are more valuable than content, but content creates and sustains them.

And you can afford more content if you have more channels to monetize it through. Which is the same observation Google made with respect to advertising integration, albeit just buying platforms instead of works.

[0] From article: https://hbr.org/2013/05/what-makes-a-good-corporate-st

[doctorpangloss]

Amusement parks are part of the inefficient monetization Hollywood is built around. The video games that make the most money give gameplay away for free too, but the difference is you can sell infinite skins and pay only 30% to assholes like Apple. It remains to be seen if even that cost will remain.

Disney lost not due to streaming, but due to its failed interactive division.

[danmaz74]

This is if course highly subjective, but for all this investment in content I, as a consumer, seem to find less and less content I like. Maybe it's just because I'm not part of the demographics that Hollywood cares about any more, but I personally would like to get much more "good" content.

[Solvency]

I was under the impression the real money came from merchandising the IP.