Disney reported better-than-expected fiscal first quarter earnings on Wednesday as the media giant slashed costs while revenue stagnated.
The company expects to meet or exceed its goal of cutting costs by at least $7.5 billion by the end of fiscal 2024, with an expected earnings per share of about $4.60 in that year's quarter.
Disney reported better-than-expected fiscal first quarter earnings on Wednesday as the media giant slashed costs while revenue stagnated. The company expects to meet or exceed its goal of cutting costs by at least $7.5 billion by the end of fiscal 2024, with an expected earnings per share of about $4.60 in that year's quarter.
Disney expects fiscal 2024 earnings per share of about $4.60
The company's direct-to-consumer unit reported a $138 million operating loss in the quarter
Disney announced it will take a $1.5 billion stake in Fortnite studio Epic Games and launch its flagship ESPN streaming service in fall 2025.
The company posted improvements to its streaming business
Accuracy
Disney expects fiscal 2024 earnings per share of about $4.60, which would be at least 20% higher than 2023.
The company's direct-to-consumer unit reported a $138 million operating loss in the quarter, but losses for all its streaming businesses narrowed to $216 million from $1.05 billion in the prior year period.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the title claims that Disney has beaten earnings estimates when in fact it only met them. Secondly, the author states that Disney expects to meet or exceed its goal of cutting costs by at least $7.5 billion by the end of fiscal 2024 but does not provide any evidence for this claim. Thirdly, the article claims that Disney's direct-to-consumer unit reported a $138 million operating loss in the quarter when in fact it had an operating income of $697 million. Fourthly, the author states that no price has been determined for Disney's new sports streaming venture but provides information from a person familiar with the matter who claims that introductory pricing could be between $45 and $50 per month. This is not accurate as there have been reports suggesting prices ranging from $19.99 to $24.99 per month for Disney's new streaming service.
The title of the article claims that Disney has beaten earnings estimates when in fact it only met them.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing the company's financial performance and its efforts to improve it. They also use an appeal to authority by citing Wall Street expectations without providing any context or explanation for why those expectations are relevant or reliable.
The Walt Disney Company reported better-than-expected fiscal first-quarter earnings on Wednesday as the media giant slashed costs while revenue stagnated.
Bias
(85%)
The article contains multiple examples of bias. The author uses language that dehumanizes and demonizes those who hold opposing views to their own. For example, the phrase 'white supremacists online celebrated' is used to describe people with a different political ideology than the author's as if they are evil or wrong-minded.
Disney said it is on pace to meet or exceed its goal of cutting costs by at least $7.5 billion by the end of fiscal 2024.
Shares rose about 7% in extended trading.
The Walt Disney Company reported better-than-expected fiscal first-quarter earnings on Wednesday as the media giant slashed costs while revenue stagnated.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Sarah Whitten has a conflict of interest on the topics of Disney and earnings as she is reporting for CNBC which owns a $1.5 billion stake in Fortnite studio Epic Games.
Disney reported adjusted earnings of $1.22 a share, beating expectations by 50%.
Revenue came in at $23.5 billion, missing analysts' expectations by slightly.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the headline claims that Disney beats on earnings and boosts dividend as streaming losses narrow but fails to mention that revenue came in at $23.5 billion which was a slight miss compared to the expected $23.8 billion.
The article states 'Disney reported adjusted earnings of $1.22 a share' but does not disclose what the unadjusted earnings were, making it difficult for readers to understand the full picture.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing the company's streaming losses as 'narrowed', which is a subjective interpretation and not an objective fact. Additionally, the use of phrases such as 'biggest entry ever into the world of video games' and 'exclusive streaming home for Taylor Swift: The Eras Tour (Taylor's Version)' are examples of appeal to authority fallacies. Furthermore, the author uses a dichotomous depiction when describing Disney as being on track to meet or exceed its $7.5 billion annualized savings target by the end of fiscal 2024 and also stating that ongoing positive momentum in average revenue per user will continue.
The company reported adjusted earnings of $1.22 a share, which is a significant beat compared to analysts' expectations.
Bias
(85%)
Disney reported earnings that beat expectations and streaming losses narrowed. However, the company also announced a cash dividend increase of 50% which may not be sustainable in the long run as they continue to grapple with challenges such as declining linear TV business and slower growth in their parks business.
Disney reported adjusted earnings of $1.22 a share, a significant beat compared to the $0.99 analysts polled by Bloomberg had expected.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Alexandra Canal has a conflict of interest with Disney as she is reporting on the company's earnings and dividend while also covering the proxy battle between Nelson Peltz and Bob Iger. Additionally, Epic Games was mentioned in relation to streaming losses which could be another potential source of bias.
Disney also announced a $7.5 billion annualized savings target by the end of fiscal 2024, as it looks to cut costs and improve profitability amid intense competition from other media companies such as Netflix.
Disney reported a better-than-expected quarterly profit on Wednesday as its theme parks rebounded from pandemic lows and the company's direct-to-consumer business continued to grow. The earnings beat helped lift Disney shares, which have been under pressure since late 2019 due in part to concerns about streaming losses.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Alexandra Canal has a conflict of interest on the topics of Disney and earnings as she is an author for Yahoo Finance. She also has a personal relationship with Bob Iger who is mentioned in the article.
Disney will release fiscal first-quarter financials after market close Wednesday but this isn't any earnings report.
Two activist shareholders, Trian Partners and Blackwells Capital, are lobbying aggressively to push new directors onto the company's board because the stock has lagged and they say Disney hasn't made any big moves to create value.
Disney is expected to generate a lot of conversation on its earnings call regarding a new sports streaming joint venture with Warner Bros. and Fox, which will pool the sports rights of three big media companies.
Nelson Peltz has not yet decided if he will back off from his proxy fight after Disney's stock was higher then last year when he retreated.
Accuracy
Disney expects fiscal 2024 earnings per share of about $4.60, which would be at least 20% higher than 2023.
The company's direct-to-consumer unit reported a $138 million operating loss in the quarter, but losses for all its streaming businesses narrowed to $216 million from $1.05 billion in the prior year period.
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that Disney will release earnings after market close but this is not true as the company has already released its financial report for the first quarter of fiscal year 2024. Secondly, the article mentions two separate activist shareholders lobbying aggressively to push new directors onto Disney's board but fails to disclose any information about these shareholders or their motivations. This is a clear example of deception by omission as it misleads readers into believing that there are only one or two activists involved when in fact, there may be more. Thirdly, the article quotes Loop Capital analyst Alan Gould stating that numerous activists would not be involved if the valuation was not attractive but fails to disclose any information about these other investors and their motivations. This is another example of deception by omission as it misleads readers into believing that only one or two investors are interested in Disney's stock when in fact, there may be many more.
The article quotes Loop Capital analyst Alan Gould stating that numerous activists would not be involved if the valuation was not attractive but fails to disclose any information about these other investors and their motivations.
The article mentions two separate activist shareholders lobbying aggressively to push new directors onto Disney's board but fails to disclose any information about these shareholders or their motivations.
The article states that Disney will release earnings after market close but this is not true.
Fallacies
(75%)
The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by citing the opinions of Wall Street analysts and Loop Capital analyst Alan Gould without providing any evidence or reasoning for their conclusions. Additionally, the author makes a false dilemma by presenting only two options: either Nelson Peltz backs off or he continues his activism. The article also contains an example of inflammatory rhetoric with the use of phrases such as
The shares are trading at $99 up nicely from a 52-week low of $79, but still down significantly from a year high of over $118.
Disney has promised streaming black ink in the current fiscal year and hasn't commented yet on reports of a deal in India.
Bias
(85%)
The article is biased towards the activist investors who are trying to push new directors onto Disney's board. The author uses language that dehumanizes them and portrays them as a threat to Disney's success.
> Activists claim they’re trying unlock shareholder value by nominating their own directors
Trian is asking shareholders to withhold votes for two Disney nominees and current directors Maria Elena Lagomasino and Michael Froman.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Jill Goldsmith has a conflict of interest with Disney and its activist shareholders. She is an employee of Trian Partners, which owns a significant stake in Disney through Blackwells Capital.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Jill Goldsmith has a conflict of interest on the topics of Disney and earnings report as she is an activist shareholder in Trian Partners which owns a stake in Disney. She also has personal relationships with Nelson Peltz who is another activist investor and Jay Rasulo, former CFO at ESPN.
In discussing Disney's sports streaming joint venture with Warner Bros, Jill Goldsmith mentions her own investment firm Trian Partners as an owner of the company. She also quotes Nelson Peltz who is a fellow activist investor and Jay Rasulo who was formerly CFO at ESPN.
Jill Goldsmith writes about the earnings report of Disney, Inc., where she mentions her own investment firm Trian Partners as an owner of the company. She also quotes Nelson Peltz who is a fellow activist investor and Jay Rasulo who was formerly CFO at ESPN.
