Glad Iger is back. Chapek was absolutely not the guy.
As for Iger's return with Disney+ being a hot topic.
Streaming is going to have to consolidate. Right now, to pay for "streaming content", consumers are seemingly purchasing it for premium, above network level shows. Disney seems to need to keep ESPN, Hulu and Disney+ separate, but they are also undercharging for each of these 3 services, and they've priced themselves into a bit of a box. No one likes price increases, and the content I've consumed, outside of marvel and Star Wars really isn't for me, or is just so lackluster in quality for Streaming I can't really stand it. I see a future where we go from something like 200 streaming platforms now, to somethings close to 40-50 that are bundled with smaller upcharges to other services or are apart of other tech ecosystems.
Many of these streaming services will fold into companies that have their own bit of a flywheel where they can can afford to spend money to keep consumers in their ecosystem (i.e Apple, Google, Amazon and yes to a lesser extent, Comcast).
Apple's primary market is Tech. They can afford to bleed billions of dollars to compete for market share. Same with Amazon. Prime offers free shipping, next day delivery for damn near everything you could ever need, plus free ad-less tv and movies? And then they're still making money on individual transactions. Their product is probably undervalued. Google? They are a bit late to the game, but they have a kicker. Youtube is unlike any of these other streaming platforms and it already generates money, but is still, not their core business. A clever, better integration and original content could begin to send them over the moon, and they aren't Apple, but their market cap is still sitting above 1 Trillion, even now. They could play harder if they wanted to, they just need to consolidate their services into a single platform that is user friendly. Right now, I have to do a search just to get to the page with their free movie content as it is easier to navigate from there then from within youtube.
And then, you have my favorite, Comcast. Comcast is a Telecom. These services can't function without an internet connected device, and at the end of the day you still need an internet provider for your home. Cable sales may be slowing down, but if they can restructure cable for the "streaming wars" and offer new ways of delivering cable and internet to people's homes at an effective price point in conjunction with "cable", they probably end up being a clear winner in the long game, with some stipulation. Comcast owns NBC Universal, they already have T.V networks, a legacy studio, streaming (which needs work), and their biggest competitor in this space will probably be Amazon, with they themselves launching a Starlink competitor to become an ISP. Comcast, if they play their cards right, can become a trillon dollar market cap company, But they need to play a close hand and at more utility to their ecosystem.
Either way, my unpopular hot take is streaming is an expensive redundancy to a service like Xfinity with content on demand. Cable had "netflix" long before netflix switched over to a streaming oriented business, which made sense for their business model. I think wallstreet and several companies jumped the gun on going all in on streaming. It's expensive to populate brand new platforms to fit the model laid forth by netflix... Which leads to another problem, which is content oversaturation which is a whole other pages long rant.
There will probably not be many more, especially when you can monetize content on a platform like Youtube without having to build your own backend. When channels can deliver content on demand via cable or free-for-all content platforms with dedicated channels the "streaming wars" make no sense... Comcast and other cable providers just lost the plot on pricing and informing the consumers. Either way, the whole cable box thing will probably not last another 20 years, when you can integrate cable service (personalized dvr for live television+ on demand content delivery) with something like a Sony or even Nintendo gaming console with a dedicated app. Perhaps in a few years even internet connected Tv's have dedicated storage built in, but even then, DVR is a redundancy for on demand content delivery. These things can all be achieved with apps and cloud storage and perhaps be scaled more efficiently this way. Who has the better footing for that kind of environment, and can deliver "streaming quality" shows? NBC can do the big budget show, (i.e 2013's Dracula, a show before its time) but they need to figure out what they are doing with streaming... Can't do it with reality TV alone, and the market is becoming crowded.
I'm curious to see how this all pans out... Either way, my opinion is that smaller streaming platforms, plus things like Disney plus are going to be outpaced by companies that have infrastructure that they simply do not. Netflix had first mover advantage and that is it. They all can't survive on IP alone, and Disney's branding and "Disneyfication" just does not mesh well with other properties (Marvel, Star Wars)... Add to Disney's problems bin, Comcast owns a stake in Hulu, and quite frankly I can't imagine any scenario where they give up that leverage, if there is ever a time Disney can afford to buy them out in the near or long term.
I'm anxiously awaiting to see what happens under Iger with Disney Plus, and am equally curious to see what happens with Galactic Star Cruiser, and quality of attractions in the parks... How will Disney adapt to this complex business environment and course correct and future proof their service.