Yesterday, Disney announced that its profit dropped to $1.36 billion on $11.34 billion in revenue, reflecting a dip in the company’s margins, despite growing revenue. I found the earnings report fascinating in that it reflects the company’s profound diversification into non-film endeavors: the movie division booked only $234 million in profit, representing only about one-fifth … Continue reading Disney and Diversification
There is a great metric by which companies’ success can be measured. Effectively, if the name of a corporation’s good or service becomes interchangeable with the product category as a whole, the company’s product – or at least its marketing – is probably pretty successful. Older examples would be the use of the word “Xerox” as a verb, or “Kleenex” as a catchall for tissues. In our generation, the use of “Google” as a verb is likely the best example.
There is a fascinating article in The New York Times that explores the increasing level of coordination between Hollywood studios and Chinese censors. The studios – like all other industries – want access to China’s vast population, which has newfound disposable income and a greater desire for Western entertainment and material goods. But the Chinese government rigidly filters what elements make their way into theaters, generally censoring extreme sex scenes, religious criticism, and lukewarm sentiments about China itself. These limitations are unsurprising, given the government’s ban on pornography, wariness of religion, and repressive maintenance of a positive national image.