While most of Disney’s problems stem from the fact that the movies Eisner makes all suck, there has been a fundamental shift in thinking about disney among many people with small kids. This goes far beyond the gay/straight debate and is an overall mistrust of the moral viewpoint preached by the Disney marketplace. This has definitely hit the Disney bottom line, as the Jonah movie put out by the evangelical Veggietales characters made as much money as any of the last three disney films (not counting Pixar). Again, you don’t have to agree with these people, but life’s a lot easier when you can at least look at it from more than one perspective.

AHA! Printing companies are part of the pro-gay conspiracy!

Seeing that the AFA is fairly little known as far as wingnut organizations go (unlike, say, Focus on the Family), I think the effect on Disney was minimal (especially when you take into account that Disney owns, well, a LOT of stuff, and I don’t think even the most dedicated wingnut sports fan would give up ESPN ;-)).

Duh. Of course, if you exclude Disney, the other 29 stocks definitely rose more than 82%. My bad.

Brad R.> A fair point, although a stock like Disney is considered a healthy long-term investment because it’s such a well-known brand. It won’t make you instantly rich, but its stock price will rise fairly steadily.

Well, okay. Let’s compare it to the Dow Jones Industrial Average, which is more commensurate in terms of market cap and brand recognition. The DJIA rose about 82% in the same time period. Exclude Disney, and the other 29 stocks probably rose more.

Brad R.> And of course, you’d have to work really hard to prove that Disney’s relatively lackluster stock performance over past decade was due to the AFA’s boycott. Let’s go for a better indicator of corporate health: income statements.

Adjusted for inflation, the 1996 figure is roughly $1.5 billion.

Did the AFA boycott have any effect on Disney income? I have no idea, but you’d have to concede that unless you know the income growth for the other DJIA 29, you can’t argue that Disney’s income growth is a sign of relative corporate health. (And I’m too lazy to check myself, so I’ll have to concede the point.)

http://www.eugenemirman.com/showandtell.html

thanks to Andrew Sullivan for pointing me to it.
This is a comedian fucking with telemarketers from an anti-gay phone company which is trying to get you to sign up for long distance to fight gay marriage.

priceless.

A fair point, although a stock like Disney is considered a healthy long-term investment because it’s such a well-known brand. It won’t make you instantly rich, but its stock price will rise fairly steadily. And of course, you’d have to work really hard to prove that Disney’s relatively lackluster stock performance over past decade was due to the AFA’s boycott. Let’s go for a better indicator of corporate health: income statements.

Net income for Disney in 1996 (the year the boycott started)- $1.214 billion

Last year’s net income- $2.345 billion

Adjusted for inflation, the 1996 figure is roughly $1.5 billion. (I used this chart for conversion (PDF)- if there’s a more accurate one out there, let me know, but I think it’s just about right).

Now, it’s true that Disney got hit with greatly reduced earnings figures in 2000 and 2001 (they actually LOST money in 2001). But again, you’d have to work incredibly hard to show conclusively that this was caused by AFA’s boycott and not, say, drops in tourism after 9/11, an economy in recession, Michael Eisner’s incompetence, etc.

Bottom line, though, is that Disney was quite profitable last year dispite Sr. Wildmon’s nine year boycott.

“Sarcasm”? I thought you were just channeling your inner Kaye, “Grogan”.

That’s a 48% increase. Over that same period of time, the S&P 500 index increased 76.5%. There’s a technical term for stocks that massively underperform the broader market over a 9-year period: losers.

That sounds like something a lesbian would say, Kris ;-)

D. Sidhe- you’ve been on a “trick ‘em into not breathing” kick, haven’t you? ;-)

Oh, but it’s worse than that. I happen to know for a fact that gay people use oxygen, too! Focus on the Family needs to boycott breathing!
(They might need help. Where’s the duct tape?)