If you own Disney (NYSE: DIS) stock, you know that this cord-cutting trend — consumers ditching cable TV for standalone streaming services — has been badly inhibiting the company’s growth.
Specifically, Disney-owned ESPN, which in recent years has generated more profits than both its theme parks and hit movies, is really starting to feel the pain from the cable industry’s downtrend.
And in 2017, Disney decided, finally, to do something. The company announced two upcoming streaming services of its own: one for Disney-branded movies and content and one for sports under the ESPN umbrella.
[Read: Netflix Is Marching to 240 Million Subscribers.]
It also decided that when its contract with Netflix ( NFLX) ends in 2019, it will stop licensing its movies to the streaming leader.
These are all dramatic moves, and mark a major concession from arguably the most stable and legendary entertainment business in the world.
But is this a good move for Disney stock? Or too little too late? You’ve got to look at the two streaming offerings and the Netflix relationship to understand.
An epic ESPN handicap. ESPN, which in Disney earnings reports are included under its “cable networks” segment, has been directly responsible for the steady erosion of that wildly profitable unit’s growth.
Cable networks revenue fell 3 percent and operating income plunged 23 percent in Disney’s second quarter, by far the most dramatic decline in recent memory. Even after that decline, Cable networks accounted for 36 percent of Disney’s total operating income last quarter, making it more profitable than both its parks and resorts segment and studio entertainment segment.
It’s a lot easier to understand the recent underperformance of DIS stock — shares are down 5 percent in the last two years, lagging the Standard & Poor’s 500 index by 22 percentage points — when you consider how ESPN has been shedding subscribers.
Between fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2016, ESPN went from 99 million to 90 million U.S. subscribers. Recent Nielsen data suggests that number could now be around 87 million; these cord-cutters aren’t playing around.
At an estimated value of $7.50 per month per subscriber — ESPN is the single most expensive non-premium channel in traditional cable packages by a mile — Disney has hemorrhaged insane amounts of money in recurring revenue since 2013. Twelve million subscribers at $7.50 a pop? That’s a deficit of $1.08 billion (and growing.)
Disney’s long-awaited ESPN streaming service. The question when it comes to ESPN is: Can this new streaming service make up for the revenue DIS stock owners are missing out on?
“That’s the hope,” says Toby Chapman, associate partner at global strategy consultant OC&C.
“Sports is an interesting one. Because unlike premium drama and movies, which is the bulk of Netflix viewing, sport has this live social dimension which lends itself quite well to online services, because you can do other things at the same time,” Chapman says.
That said, there are still a lot of question marks around the upcoming ESPN streaming service, which debuts in 2018:
— No one knows the exact business model or price point.
— Only current ESPN subscribers will be able to stream the content actually playing on ESPN’s multiple cable channels. The remaining unaired scraps will likely be a chunk of what’s offered in the over-the-top streaming service.
— Third, will the content be mostly the obscure, like e-sports and college tennis? If so, how much do people care about that?
Finally, Disney CEO Bob Iger seems to describe a freemium-like service that sounded more like a marketing gimmick than an enjoyable experience.
“You’ll watch a highlight, and if you want to buy maybe part of a game that’s going on live … you’ll be able to buy it directly through the app or subscribe to the service,” Iger says.
Disney service, Netflix decision. Despite the unrivaled per-subscriber fees ESPN is able to command from cable companies, the decision to also create a separate, Disney-branded streaming service — and pull Disney content from Netflix — made bigger headlines.
[Read: Pros and Cons of Buying Netflix Stock.]
In all fairness, it’s a major strategy shift that signals a mainstream recognition of Netflix as a competitive threat not to be underestimated or enabled, even if licensing content to Netflix makes them small fortunes in the short term.
“The thought process for all these guys is: ‘we’ve created this monster in Netflix, which 10 years ago we saw as this irrelevant great new customer,'” Chapman says. “And it grew and grew and grew. And it’s created problems for them as a content owner and producer as well. They’re hoovering up good writing talent, onscreen talent, production talent, et cetera.”
Disney has now officially decided to retire from its role as Frankenstein. But due to its contract, Disney (and Pixar) won’t be able to pull their movies from Netflix until 2019. Disney’s standalone app will benefit from an immediate slate of hot new content, which in 2019 will include blockbusters like “Toy Story 4,” “Frozen 2” and a live-action version of “The Lion King.”
Until then, Netflix will keep wreaking havoc on the cable TV market, and further subscriber losses are almost certain over that time.
Absolutely necessary, with potential costs. At the end of the day, are Disney’s streaming ambitions and its rift with Netflix net positives for DIS stock owners?
“Absolutely. I think it’s a good idea, but definitely a little late. It’s a shame it’s going to be another 18 months,” says Andre Swanston, CEO and co-founder of Tru Optik, an over-the-top connected TV data management platform. “Also, Netflix doesn’t share ratings data,” Swanston says, which is an intangible value Disney will reap from controlling its own platform.
But whether Disney will recover its lost subscribers — and the billions in recurring revenue they entail — is another question entirely.
Plus, there will be immediate costs to these services. Most directly, Disney will instantly lose its licensing revenue from Netflix.
There are somewhat invisible risks, too.
“If Disney thinks it can get the same revenue per sub while competing with cable, I don’t think it will work. Cable operators will want to re-negotiate the deal,” says John Carey, professor of communication and media management at Fordham University’s Gabelli School of Business.
And if net neutrality rules are backtracked, which looks likely now under the Trump administration’s deregulatory Federal Communications Commission, many of those same cable companies will be in a position to actually charge Disney greater fees to deliver its content speedily to the end consumer.
Not to mention the sheer scale of what Disney needs to make up for — most notably the 12 million and counting ESPN subscribers — will take many, many years. CBS ( CBS), the first network to plunge headfirst into over-the-top programming, recently crossed the 4 million subscriber mark. That took three years.
As if the road weren’t littered with obstacles already, there’s another, somewhat glaring, problem with Disney being so late to get on the stream team.
“If this trend of a la carte streaming continues, it could cost more to ‘assemble’ a TV service than subscribe to cable,” Carey says.
Thus ultimately defeating the primary reason streaming became popular to begin with: affordability.
[See: 7 Dividend Stocks to Buy That Pay More Each Year.]
It’s true that Disney — with its diversified revenue streams from parks, merchandising, licensing, media and movies — isn’t going anywhere. It’s good DIS is waking up to streaming’s popularity. Still, the early bird gets the worm. And Disney just reserved front-row tickets to see Netflix happily gobbling its earthy victim.
More from U.S. News
The 25 Best Blue-Chip Stocks to Buy for 2017
7 of the Best Stocks to Buy for 2017
Artificial Intelligence Stocks: 10 Companies Betting on AI
Why Streaming Can’t Solve Disney (DIS) Stock’s Massive ESPN Problem originally appeared on usnews.com
