7 ms·

Disney is laying off 7k workers... >>> “While this is necessary to address the challenges we’re >>> facing today, I do not make this decision lightly,” said

Disney is laying off 7k workers... >>> “While this is necessary to address the challenges we’re >>> facing today, I do not make this decision lightly,” said >>> CEO Bob Iger, " From the same article >>> ...the company released better than expected financial >>> results for the fourth quarter of 2022. Disney revenue in >>> the quarter rose 8% to $23.5 billion, edging past >>> estimates of $23.4 billion Truly they are facing major challenges /s https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/08/business/disney-earnings/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/08/business/disney-earnings/inde...

actually_a_dog 4y ago
Well, for Disney, making up for some of that early pandemic park revenue is certainly a challenge. Nobody messes with Mickey Mouse’s money!
- bogomipz 4y ago
  Disney has already raised prices at their parks twice this year though: https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/disney-raises-ticket-prices/index.html https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/disney-raises-ticket-pric...
ChuckNorris89 4y ago
Disney is laying off people because their movies keep bombing in the theaters. All they do is remakes and spinoffs of the famous old IPs they devoured, but that gravy train is coming to a stop. After a while people get tired of watching more half-baked Star Wars and Marvel sequels of bootleg quality. They're running out of franchises to milk, and making something new and original is not in their corporate culture.
- bentlegen 4y ago
  I’m guessing you didn’t read the article because Avatar made in over 2 billion dollars, exceeding even their expectations, becoming the 6th highest grossing film of all time. Or maybe it bombed, beats me.
  - vondur 4y ago
    Once the accounts get to it, it will be shown to have lost money. (I'm referring how movie studios will get financially creative to portray popular movies "losing" money in order not to pay royalties to actors/writers"
    - willcipriano 4y ago
      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting They brought some of the accountants from Hollywood to the bay area and now all equity not owned by the founders or investors mysteriously becomes worthless right before a liquidation event.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - ARandomerDude 4y ago
    FTA, Iger's goal is the "return [of] creativity to the center of the company."
    - xapata 4y ago
      That makes a good soundbite.
  - greedo 4y ago
    Avatar grossed roughly $3.8B worldwide Avatar 2 has grossed roughly $2B worldwide. None of these figures matter a damn. Gross figures aren't profit. And you need to adjust for inflation. Avatar 2 doesn't even show up in the top 25 all time when you adjust for inflation. If the prod cost for Ava2 is $250 as reported, and marketing is roughly the same, then you're down to $1.5B before all the theaters take their cut. It doesn't mean that Disney netted $1.5B.
    - 4y ago
- efficax 4y ago
  the comment you're replying to shows revenue up 8% for them. Is there any evidence of this claim? It seems like everyone is watching Andor, and they're fresh off the new Avatar movie, one of the highest grossing films ever? like i don't watch any of these movies, hate marvel and the new star wars, but you're just wrong?
- zeroonetwothree 4y ago
  Their movies are making more than ever. Have you actually looked at the figures?
- deeviant 4y ago
  Disney+ was also a financial disaster.
- gamblor956 4y ago
  Disney's film division made a huge profit last year. One of their films made over a billion in around 10 days, has passed the $2 billion in just over a month, and is still on track to earn another hundred million before it leaves theaters. (Disney demands, and gets, 100% of opening weekend revenues, and a declining share each week thereafter; the exact breakdown varies from chain to chain. For small/independent chains, Disney retains at least 50% of box office revenues for the first 8 weeks.) Their parks and live experiences made a huge profit last year: $29 billion in revenue, and approximately $8 billion in operating profits. Their tech-heavy streaming division was the part that lost money: over $4 billion for the year, almost entirely offsetting the gross revenue made by the the film division from theatrical releases. Yep, that's right: the only part of Disney that lost money was the tech-focused part.
Alesiono 4y ago
And how is Disney related to gitlab?!
- IshKebab 4y ago
  It's a similar example of a company justifying layoffs with "difficult macroeconomic conditions" which actually doing very well. (Well I don't know if Gitlab are doing well but there are plenty of more examples like Disney.)
- gregors 4y ago
  I mean it as a response that I feel the macroeconomic environment for companies are amazing and not tough.
rhino369 4y ago
Revenue alone is a bad way to judge how a mature company is doing. Their net profit margin is under 1%. And the best way to capitalize on high revenue is to cut costs--layoffs.
danesparza 4y ago
It's part of a restructuring, and the cuts account for about 3% of their global workforce.
cragfar 4y ago
Their NI was $1.2 billion and cash flow was -$2 billion. YoY their cash balance went down by $8, while debt only went down by $5.
xwolfi 4y ago
But to be fair if a company can continue to operate or even grow while laying off employees, were these employees necessary in the first place ? I mean, should profit be given to employees, or owners ? Should company sacrifice their profit buffer to give it to employees they dont need ? Do they have a social responsibility to employees ? I m european so we see work in a way more controlled, mutualized way were companies are expected by the state to provide for the citizens, but the success of the american model is that they disagree with us and are way more liberal with all of it. Should they change to copy us ?
- tablespoon 4y ago
  > But to be fair if a company can continue to operate or even grow while laying off employees, were these employees necessary in the first place ? You can drive a car a long way even if you never change the oil, but eventually it catches up with you. You can't conclude that an employee wasn't necessary if the company doesn't crash and burn soon after he was laid off. The negative consequences may not be manifested until years later.
willio58 4y ago
You can almost picture the Executive team at Disney on one of their private yachts on an island somewhere being fed food and drinks cackling at each other about how they'll be able to convince people they "Had to" layoff workers.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

actually_a_dog 4y ago

Well, for Disney, making up for some of that early pandemic park revenue is certainly a challenge. Nobody messes with Mickey Mouse’s money!

bogomipz 4y ago
Disney has already raised prices at their parks twice this year though: https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/disney-raises-ticket-prices/index.html https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/disney-raises-ticket-pric...

ChuckNorris89 4y ago

Disney is laying off people because their movies keep bombing in the theaters. All they do is remakes and spinoffs of the famous old IPs they devoured, but that gravy train is coming to a stop. After a while people get tired of watching more half-baked Star Wars and Marvel sequels of bootleg quality. They're running out of franchises to milk, and making something new and original is not in their corporate culture.

bentlegen 4y ago
I’m guessing you didn’t read the article because Avatar made in over 2 billion dollars, exceeding even their expectations, becoming the 6th highest grossing film of all time. Or maybe it bombed, beats me.
- vondur 4y ago
  Once the accounts get to it, it will be shown to have lost money. (I'm referring how movie studios will get financially creative to portray popular movies "losing" money in order not to pay royalties to actors/writers"
  - willcipriano 4y ago
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting They brought some of the accountants from Hollywood to the bay area and now all equity not owned by the founders or investors mysteriously becomes worthless right before a liquidation event.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- ARandomerDude 4y ago
  FTA, Iger's goal is the "return [of] creativity to the center of the company."
  - xapata 4y ago
    That makes a good soundbite.
- greedo 4y ago
  Avatar grossed roughly $3.8B worldwide Avatar 2 has grossed roughly $2B worldwide. None of these figures matter a damn. Gross figures aren't profit. And you need to adjust for inflation. Avatar 2 doesn't even show up in the top 25 all time when you adjust for inflation. If the prod cost for Ava2 is $250 as reported, and marketing is roughly the same, then you're down to $1.5B before all the theaters take their cut. It doesn't mean that Disney netted $1.5B.
  - 4y ago
efficax 4y ago
the comment you're replying to shows revenue up 8% for them. Is there any evidence of this claim? It seems like everyone is watching Andor, and they're fresh off the new Avatar movie, one of the highest grossing films ever? like i don't watch any of these movies, hate marvel and the new star wars, but you're just wrong?
zeroonetwothree 4y ago
Their movies are making more than ever. Have you actually looked at the figures?
deeviant 4y ago
Disney+ was also a financial disaster.
gamblor956 4y ago
Disney's film division made a huge profit last year. One of their films made over a billion in around 10 days, has passed the $2 billion in just over a month, and is still on track to earn another hundred million before it leaves theaters. (Disney demands, and gets, 100% of opening weekend revenues, and a declining share each week thereafter; the exact breakdown varies from chain to chain. For small/independent chains, Disney retains at least 50% of box office revenues for the first 8 weeks.) Their parks and live experiences made a huge profit last year: $29 billion in revenue, and approximately $8 billion in operating profits. Their tech-heavy streaming division was the part that lost money: over $4 billion for the year, almost entirely offsetting the gross revenue made by the the film division from theatrical releases. Yep, that's right: the only part of Disney that lost money was the tech-focused part.

Alesiono 4y ago

And how is Disney related to gitlab?!

IshKebab 4y ago
It's a similar example of a company justifying layoffs with "difficult macroeconomic conditions" which actually doing very well. (Well I don't know if Gitlab are doing well but there are plenty of more examples like Disney.)
gregors 4y ago
I mean it as a response that I feel the macroeconomic environment for companies are amazing and not tough.

rhino369 4y ago

Revenue alone is a bad way to judge how a mature company is doing. Their net profit margin is under 1%. And the best way to capitalize on high revenue is to cut costs--layoffs.

danesparza 4y ago

It's part of a restructuring, and the cuts account for about 3% of their global workforce.

cragfar 4y ago

Their NI was $1.2 billion and cash flow was -$2 billion. YoY their cash balance went down by $8, while debt only went down by $5.

xwolfi 4y ago

But to be fair if a company can continue to operate or even grow while laying off employees, were these employees necessary in the first place ? I mean, should profit be given to employees, or owners ? Should company sacrifice their profit buffer to give it to employees they dont need ? Do they have a social responsibility to employees ? I m european so we see work in a way more controlled, mutualized way were companies are expected by the state to provide for the citizens, but the success of the american model is that they disagree with us and are way more liberal with all of it. Should they change to copy us ?

tablespoon 4y ago
> But to be fair if a company can continue to operate or even grow while laying off employees, were these employees necessary in the first place ? You can drive a car a long way even if you never change the oil, but eventually it catches up with you. You can't conclude that an employee wasn't necessary if the company doesn't crash and burn soon after he was laid off. The negative consequences may not be manifested until years later.

willio58 4y ago

You can almost picture the Executive team at Disney on one of their private yachts on an island somewhere being fed food and drinks cackling at each other about how they'll be able to convince people they "Had to" layoff workers.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]