Welcome back. Everyone today on the jobs of
Carlson show, he's back. He's finally back to save the
day. We have Bob Iger returning as
the CEO of Disney. This is a little surprised that
I was not expecting but we have this happening.
It's real Bob Iger is the CEO of Disney effective immediately and
even more importantly than that Bob Che pack is gone.
Bob capex tenure as Disney CEO has been disastrous.
And in this episode, we're going to Go over it.
We're going to go over, both everything, that's happened over
the past two years with Bob, capek as CEO.
And what I think the future holds with Bob Iger as the new
CEO. So we have a lot to unravel and
unpack in this video a lot to go over.
And even to add two twists, we have another surprising twist.
Something that I don't see too often and I hesitate to even
highlight this because I think it's a dangerous game, I'm
playing here, I have an instance where I think Jim Cramer may
have been, right? You may have made an accurate
prediction. Action.
This may be one of the few cases, and I'm going to go ahead
and highlight it with caution on my channel.
And then outside of the Disney news, we also have some
important news with Elizabeth Holmes, the case has concluded
and she received her sentence of a little over 11 years.
In federal prison. I'm going to show how this
Stacks up against other cases and compare her sentencing to
that of Sunny bhawani. So I'll be going over this as
well. So as always, we have a lot to
get to in this episode. Let's go ahead and Jump Right
In. Now like I mentioned many times
this, Channel is a little bit different than most channels on
YouTube rather than just talking about investing and talking
about finances. I actually show which
transparency everything I'm doing with my portfolio, whether
it's good or bad. I track the passive income
portfolio, week by week. This is a variation of a
dividend growth portfolio with a strong emphasis on Compounders
companies that have certain characteristics that I think
lead to outperformance. Now this portfolio has done
really well in fact, year-to-date, it's only down
twelve point three, seven percent that's Bad being down,
12 percent, the S&P 500 for examples, down 17.5, and the
qqq's down a bit more at, minus thirty percent.
So, even though the portfolio performance overall is doing
well, there's one company in my portfolio that's doing
particularly bad. That company is Disney.
I'm down seven thousand five hundred dollars on Disney.
Now, when I originally picked Disney, this is supposed to be
one of the safest picks in the market.
This is a company with Incredible brand value.
A huge mode, it has, As International presence, it had
high profitability, Disney was a shoo-in.
This was a company that's been around for 100 years and isn't
going anywhere. But this company has been my
worst performer by far in the passive income portfolio,
Disney's done. So poorly over the past couple
of years, it's down 41 percent year-to-date and it wasn't doing
great before then, in fact, over the past five years, half a
decade. Disney's down - 11%, and this is
a company that No longer pays a dividend so it doesn't pay a
dividend and the capital gains are down.
This has been a very difficult stock to hold onto.
It's been very discouraging to keep invested in Disney and
before Bob iger's surprisingly took back the CEO role.
The sentiment for this company has never been lower.
And I personally believe that a large part of Disney's under
performance is related to one individual who was the CEO of
the company, Bob, capek. His tenure over Disney has not
been good. Let me lay out the trail of
problems and unforced errors, that Bob, Okay, Peck caused
problem, number one, Scarlett Johansson sued Disney 450
million dollars. A public lawsuit, from one of
their biggest and most respected Stars.
She sued them because they didn't want to pay her as much
because of their streaming service.
There is problems with the deal, and they tried to undercut.
Her pay Scarlett, Johansson probably talk to them privately
when they refused, she made it public with a lawsuit.
This was an absolute disgrace for Disney.
It was an embarrassment. It was a black eye on the
company. One thing that Bob Iger prided
himself was his relationship with Talent.
He had a very positive strong relationship with all of their
cast members all of their Stars. He never experienced something
like this one of their biggest stars ever someone that they've
worked with for literally decades is suing them openly
because of a dispute over a payment contract that was a
black guy and this happened under Che Peck and most likely
could have been resolved under Che Peck.
But instead of resolving this problem quietly outside of the
public eye, it became a huge public Fiasco and Scarlett
Johansson ended up settling the case with Disney, for likely the
exact same amount that she was originally supposed to be paid.
So Disney really had nothing to gain from this.
All they could really do is hurt their own image.
They made this look like a big bad company.
This huge corporation was going against one individual trying to
get the paycheck. She agreed to the imagery and
Optics from this case couldn't get possibly worse.
This is a foolish unforced error by Bob capek problem.
Number two, There's another massive unforced error by Bob
jpg. Not only did he decide to go
into the Mucky world of politics where everyone gets some mud on
them? Everyone gets a little dirty but
he did it in the most strategically.
Poor way possible picking a fight against possibly the most
popular governor in the country. Rhonda, Santa's, who just won
re-election in Florida by a 20 percentage Point margin.
This is the governor that Bob capek decided he wanted to pick
a fight with and try to bully and this did not work out.
Well for Disney, this fight was centered around a bill being
passed in Florida called parental rights in education.
This bill prohibited classroom instruction on sexual
orientation and gender identity in kindergarten through third
grade. Bob capek, Not only was opposed
to this bill and a Critic of it, but he was incredibly outspoken,
going. As far as to say publicly that
the entire goal as a company. As Disney was getting this bill
quote, repelled by A legislature or struck down in the courts.
Now even if you oppose, the bill politically you Admit that this
was a strategic mistake from Disney.
Ron descent is use this as part of his re-election campaign
saying that the residents in Florida are not going to be
governed by Rich Executives in California like Bob capek and
they're not going to be bullied by big companies like Disney it
position, Rhonda Santa's as a defender of the people against
corporate, power and Rich Executives.
This was a huge talking point from Republicans across the
board. Rhonda Santa's benefited from
these attacks he wasn't hurt by them.
He benefited from them. And on the other side, it's very
difficult to argue that Disney benefited from this at all.
Not only did they lose the political fight, but they also
alienated a large portion of Their audience.
A lot of Disney customers are conservative and do support that
bill. So, they put themselves at odds
with a large portion of their customer base and their
shareholder base. They also had another
consequence, which is a retaliation from Florida by
stripping, Disney of its independent special district.
This is a very unique benefit that Disney had for decades and
now it's been removed and Ron Auntie has warned that if any
company like Disney uses quote, its economic might to attack the
parents of my state that he would view it as a provocation
and fight back. So just to revisit so far, this
is the beginning of Bob capex, tenure one, he offended.
One of his talent members putting a black eye on Disney
with an embarrassing lawsuit from Scarlett Johansson and the
to we goes to war with one of the most popular governors in
the country, in an attempt to alter and dictate the local laws
of a state that he's not even a member of.
But that's not where this stops. We have problem 3 now the third
problem with Bob jpeg is Dated to the content that Disney has
been creating. I know that Bob capek is not the
creator of the content. He's not the one that has the
direct control, but he does have Direction over what the content
should be. And the type of risks being
taken and over the past couple of years under Bob capex Helm
Disney has not been taking a lot of risks.
Their content has become so incredibly safe, that sometimes
it's now just becoming bad. Pinocchio is a prime example of
this, the live-action remake from the original Pinocchio is
almost worse than every way. The animation was good but
almost everything with the storytelling was worse and
that's apparent in both the critic reviews and the audience
reviews, 28 percent on the Tomato Meter is bad enough but
those are the professional critics sometimes they get it
wrong. When the audience has a similar
score 29%, when both critics and the audience are both
unanimously saying these shows are not good.
That should be a clear message that Disney's content is not
going in the right direction and this issue lends itself to a
bigger issue, Disney straying away.
Away from its origins in storytelling and the CEO needs
to get this back on track in this Wall Street Journal
interview just a couple months ago, the interviewer aptly
points out. This problem with Disney's
content know, your people love to get out there and say
Disney's to woke Disney's become to correct politically correct.
You know, are they right to David Point?
What's your take on that those criticisms and reaching that
wide span of people that interviewer asked a very good
and specific question? The CEO of Disney.
Many people are criticizing. The Disney has become too woke
and that's making its way into the content.
That's a direct question and listen to the way Bob capek
answers it. I think, the more complex
something is the more you have to really drill down into the
basics and we want our content to reflect the rich diverse
world that we live in. And again, I guess that's
another way of saying catering to your to your audience but the
It is a rich diverse place and we want our content to reflect
that. And we're so blessed to have the
greatest content creators and they see it.
Similarly, but I think that's good from a commercial
standpoint as well because then you appeal to the largest
possible audience and certainly, you know, we live in a world now
where everything seems to, you know, be polarized, but I think
we want Disney to stand for bringing people together.
I always A, when someone walks down Main Street and you look at
the castle, you're not thinking, you know, I'm on one side of the
political Spectrum or the other, you have a shared belief and all
the wonderful aspects of what Disney is and we want to use
Disney to bring people together. And I think we'll do that by
diverse stories and diverse characters.
What is this nothingness answer? He didn't say anything.
He just threw in the keyword diverse and diversity, six
different times and these type of mumbling jumbling nonsense.
And Answers were routine with popche APEC.
It was difficult to get any type of straight answer from him at
all. He was asked specifically about
a specific type of content, woke content making itself into
Disney repeatedly, and people complaining about that.
And his answer is to throw out some key buzzwords like
diversity, five times, and Mumble about bringing people
together, this interviewer goes on and even pushes back further
on this content trying to get a straight answer from Bob capek,
do they like the Type of content that's coming out.
And he specifically asks about Pinocchio, the new Pinocchio,
verse the old Pinocchio, you mentioned Pinocchio, if I may be
wrong, but I think the new Pinocchio, he doesn't change in
the end. He just accepts himself for who
he is. So the ending has changed a
little bit with sort of contemporary mores and that's
correct. The new Pinocchio doesn't really
change at all. He just accepts himself the way
he is, which is a dramatic difference between the old
Pinocchio. The old Pinocchio's held up as a
masterpiece specifically because of the morals behind the 3, it
was about your conscience, being your guide, following your
conscience learning, not to lie, learning not to go with
untrustworthy individuals and Pinocchio, had a learn these
lessons to become a real boy. This story taught us that if we
grow up and we go to Pleasure Island and succumb to every
worldly Temptation, will eventually become a donkey and
it's not a fun path to go down with the new Pinocchio.
Disney's new version of it. There is no such stories taught,
no overriding morals to it. There was just things happening
to Pinocchio and Didn't really have control over any of it.
And as this interviewer points out, the new Pinocchio,
basically learned. Nothing he just accepted who he
was, there's no really overarching story.
No cause and effect. The new one was just a more safe
less compelling less interesting rehash of the old original and
again, this criticism is not unfounded audiences are not
liking this. Even the critics are not liking
this. The critics are saying that it's
losing the point of the original film letting your conscience.
Be your guide, audiences are saying, just watch the original
Pinocchio. Instead now I Don't know exactly
how much influence or control Bob.
Capek has had and the creative Endeavors, but he is the CEO of
the company. He can, if he wants have direct
influence over the content of the company, and the type of
risks are taking. And in this part, Disney has
been underwhelming further along in this interview.
Bob capek basically reveals that he doesn't understand Disney as
a company. He really doesn't understand the
content portion of it at all, which is basically all of
Disney. I always say that one.
Our fans and our audiences, put their kids to bed at night after
watching Pinocchio or Dumbo or Little Mermaid.
They're probably not going to tune into another animated
movie, they want something for them.
Yes, you heard that right? The CEO of Disney, the most
creative company on Earth, views, animated content, as not
a medium of entertainment, both enjoyed by adults and children,
but just something to put the children to bed.
Throw on Pinocchio, throw on Dumbo.
Those are just children chose. And after they go to bed, then
the adults can turn on their non animated series.
The guy doesn't even understand the company that he worked for,
he didn't even understand, animated content.
And this is a slap in the face to his own employees animators
of the company, working on an animated content to suggest that
the only people driving joy out of it.
Our children problem number four and possibly, the biggest
problem, bad operating performance.
And keep in mind, this was the thing that popped a peck was
supposed to be uniquely good at. He was the ater of the parks
business. He was good at growing revenues
growing income on a consistent basis.
Having good operations, that was what he was uniquely suited for.
So you could give excuses for the other thing.
All right, maybe he's not good at dealing with Talent.
So let's go ahead and give him a pass on the whole Scarlett
Johansson suing, Disney thing. All right, maybe he's not good
at politics. He lost the battle against de
santis that didn't go. Well, that didn't turn out well
for Disney, but we can give him a pass on that because he's not
a politician, and maybe we can even get My pass on, not really
understanding the content because after all Bob, capek
isn't the creative type. You could give them a pass on
everything else. But the one thing this guy is
supposed to be good at is operations, churning out profits
from this large organization. So let's go ahead and see how
the operations of the company. The actual numbers look over the
past two years. This is about when Bob capek
took over for Disney. Now, we can't blame this large
loss right here, for these two quarters on Bob capek.
That was because of the covid-19.
Pandemic, the entire park operation was shut down for
about a year, so we can give them a pass on that.
There's nothing you can do about that, but the last seven or
eight quarters, Disney has been open fully operational.
The parks are open business as usual and the earnings have been
abysmal. Quarter after quarter a
continual disappointment, especially now that investors
are trying to focus on profits for the corporation, Disney's
not producing any profits we can.
Look at the free cash flows of the company and over the past
couple of years it's been Really pathetic.
Last quarter was 187 million dollars in free cash flows.
When we factor in stock based compensation act, based
composite actually higher than their free cash flows.
For the first time in a long time for Disney, this is no
longer profitable. Company costs are going up.
Cash flows are going down and Bob capek, the great operator.
The person that supposed to be good at turning out profits, the
seeing a continual decline in cash flows.
How much of this you can blame on Bob?
Capek is debatable, the company is going through a Transition
and I don't think he deserves 100% of the blame but I don't
think that he's blameless in this situation.
Bob capek has done a lot of changes operationally to the
company and so far every report and every piece of data we can
look at says, that most of them are negative, Disney's New World
Order leads to confusion and bruised egos.
What Bob capek did immediately when taking over was
restructuring the company? And so far this restructuring
looks like it has been a disaster.
Disney's reorganization of its media and entertainment.
Business into three, distinct content creation, groups,
Studios general, entertainment, and sports has caused
consternation for some senior managers, as well, as those
doing business with the company. The reorganization was aimed at
better positioning Disney for a future that would be determined
by its success in streaming. The goal at least on paper was
to have people work, more harmoniously across mediums,
from television to film to Disney.
Plus, the results have left. People.
Deeply confused about how to navigate the New Order, the
restructuring has made A lot of their employees upset and it's
actually made Executives in the company.
Try to keep themselves a little bit separated from what Bob
capek has been doing quote. Everyone is becoming more and
more differential tugce Peck things are radically different
than they were six months ago and this Insider who has an
executive said that they're trying to become more insulated
from the upheaval from the creative teams.
And again, you can try to make excuses for everything else.
But this was the thing that Bob capek was supposed to be good at
the operations. After this most recent earnings,
Report Disney shares drop like 15 percent in a single day
because of how disappointing the earnings were.
It was creating around like a penny stock.
And this is Disney. This is one of the best
properties and Assets in the globe and its trading like a
penny stock. And that's how we get to where
we are now. Bob capek was fired.
Bob Iger is back. Both of this to me was shocking
and I think it's shocking to most everyone that's been
following this company. Cbc's David Faber.
What his thoughts are? Sauron this because he told you
no way. Did you always think that there
was a way way back for four? I don't know what he's not
necessarily your friend but you know him.
Well did you think there was a way back?
David it? No.
I it seemed highly unlikely certainly you'd have to imagine
of course this scenario like the one that has played out and we
can talk a bit more about that but even with the idea that his
successor, mr. Champak would not succeed.
So to speak the idea that that Iger would then come back.
I think even as little as a few weeks ago, Joe, I think would
have been hard to imagine. I agree 100%.
In fact, we just heard this year.
The Bob capex signed another three-year extension to a CEO
role, so this is a complete shock.
I did not see this coming. I didn't see Bob jpg being fired
right now and I didn't see Bob Iger coming back.
But the way these things work in most cases is you have the CEO,
the supposed to guide the company, the right direction,
but the CEO works for the shareholders.
And the board protects the shareholders.
In this case, the board, obviously, felt along with many
other shareholders and many Disney customers, that the CEO
is not doing a good job running the company.
So Friday evening, they contacted Bob Iger and said,
hey, do you want to come back in?
What do you like to replace? Bob capek.
We don't like what he's doing. Once they confirmed that Bob
Iger was willing to step back into the role.
They fired Bob jpg, and they fired him Sunday evening.
So he only knew Sunday evening that he was losing his job.
Disney no longer the CEO of the company, and I can't imagine it
feels good to have a surprise firing from being the CEO of
Disney on a Sunday evening. I don't know how Bob jpg feels
right now, but I don't envy that but either way, it was something
that needed to be done, but this was a board Joe that felt like
it didn't have a lot of choices at this point, is my
understanding, you know, after speaking to a number of people
close to the situation, this came together pretty quickly,
but the board did have concerns for some period of time.
Those concerns were heightened. Of course, after this most
recent, Earnings report. It was not a well-received
report. The conference call was not
well, thought of the losses associated with
direct-to-consumer. Obviously having grown, even
though the promise to be profitable by fiscal year,
twenty four Remains the board got more and more concerned that
board led by Miss Arnold made it clear to mr.
Chae, Peck last night that he was out.
My understanding is the only approach tiger on Friday Friday
night and sealed. Able to bring him back as of
last night, Friday, the board. Contacted Bob Iger asked him if
he would do the job, he said he would and then Sunday evening,
they fired, Bob, capek, and Bob Iger right now is tentatively
going to be working for two years.
So here we are with Bob Che pick out Bob.
Iger back in the stock is up 7 to 8% and on this subject I want
to highlight one clip from 12 days ago.
This interview here was from 12 days ago right after Disney's
terrible earnings and I Highlight this and I think
daringly. So, as possibly an example of
Jim Cramer being right, can I propose that is that safe to
propose that he was correct on something?
Jim Cramer was asked what needs to happen with Disney.
And again, this was 12 days ago, Disney, if they have ESPN, if we
were on ESPN, we would say he's got to be fired.
That's pretty cut and dry. You're firing.
Bob jpac, is that we were saying absolute absolute.
Absolute because I thought that he had a couple of years, the
teams going downhill. I mean that was incredible.
Last night was really team has been going downhill.
I had Faith semi faith and Frank Reich in the Colts and I still
do it with Frank's, you know, winning record.
But there is just a doubt, no doubt that he did.
He has to go. I mean, that was just
unconscionable. There's no doubt that Bob jpeg
has to go. Absolutely, no doubt.
And he was saying this a week ago and the quartered self the
way he handled it. I mean, made it sound like he
was just a 4-star quarter delusional and I believed and I
was wrong. I was like, let me just go back
for a second. Do you think that it's shape?
Heck the man or do you think it is?
The I think he's a cyclical and secular headwinds that are
facing. There's no, no way.
You think? Yes, like a bad team.
It's the same team. What happened here?
Is that even the the stuff that he was good at the stuff that I,
that I know, it's a little harder to control theme park,
but the the losses Here, Andrew, we're just mind-boggling.
I mean, when you're going over the quarter, it's stunning.
And that's why I say, if it worked, if this was the NFL
where they have tremendous, tremendous accountability, and
we were watching their program of Sunday morning.
We would everyone together would say he should be fired.
There's got to be something really wrong with the world.
When even Jim Cramer's, getting such a correct call.
Now with all of that that brings us back to where we are now
again, Disney's one of my larger Holdings in my portfolio.
It's a company that I think has great assets.
That's the biggest reason that I've bought into this company.
I think that all of their Teas and their intellectual
properties backed up and supported by their Parks, plus
the asset of ESPN. I think all of that is
incredibly incredibly valuable with ESPN, with Hulu, with
Disney plus, with all of their various Parks.
I think this company just has great asset after great asset,
and a company with this, many good assets, should be using
them to generate profits. That's what companies do that
have. Amazing assets.
So this is a solvable problem, in my opinion, Disney should be
a highly profitable. Penny right now, I don't think
the current economics of the company reflect its true
potential and I do think that it will take time, this isn't going
to be an instant fix by Bob. Iger, it's not going to be an
overnight thing. I think it will take a number of
quarters to correct this issue, but I expect a better outcome
with him at the helm and it will give Disney.
And the board of directors, time to find a more suitable
replacement than Bob capek. So, in my opinion, I don't see
any downside with this move. I don't see any potential
problems. I think this was a great move by
the board of directors to protect the shareholder.
At the end of the day, that is who they serve.
They serve the shareholder of the company and whether or not
Che Peck was a great guy or not. He wasn't doing a good enough
job in Disney's much bigger than he is.
So, he's got to go. We have someone in there that
has proven to do the job for a long period of time.
You can do it for another two years.
So, as of right now, I'm going to continue to still hold this
company. Now moving on, we have the news
that Elizabeth Holmes was finally sentenced.
She was sentenced to eleven and a quarter years in prison.
Defrauding investors. And a lot of people argue about
whether or not this sentence is appropriate.
So let me share my quick thoughts on it.
First of all, I'm happy to see that.
It's at least not a slap on the wrist.
If she got four years, five years for this type of thing, I
think that would have been a real problem, 11 years as a
federal sentence, which usually don't get cut short too often.
That's a real sentence. She's going behind bars.
For a long amount of time that is a serious punishment.
Is it as bad as it could have been.
Absolutely not a lot of different analysis shows that
many people are sentenced to a lot longer for the same crimes.
So you can argue that Elizabeth Holmes did get off easier than
expected, but I still think that 11 years is better than it could
have been. I think there's a good chance.
It could have been six or seven years if the judge wanted to go
extra lenient. Honor the big problem.
I have overall with this entire case is not really the
sentencing. But the convictions Elizabeth
Holmes was only found guilty on four separate charges.
She was found guilty on three of the nine fraud.
Counts. And one of the two conspiracy
counts and then you look at her partner in crime and her love
interests on eBay Lonnie, who she had literally a romantic
relationship. There is so close together for a
number of years. But in his case, he was
convicted of all 12 counts of fraud.
They convicted Sunny bhawani with everything and Elizabeth
Holmes with only four. So even before we got to
sentencing, I see a huge discrepancy in the amount of
convictions, but if you take that out, I think the sentencing
of 11 years was at least decent. So that's all the news for now.
I hope you enjoyed the episode, I'll have more content.
Out in the future and I'll see you in the next one.