A Wells Fargo analyst argues that The Walt Disney Company could unlock more value by licensing its library instead of competing as a streaming distributor.
“We don’t think the box office, Experiences or brand value would suffer if the library were on a competing global streamer,” analyst Steven Cahall wrote in a research note reported by The Hollywood Reporter.
The idea is provocative precisely because Disney+ has become one of the company’s most visible consumer products. Disney is also one of the few legacy entertainment companies widely viewed as having the scale to compete with Netflix in subscription streaming.
Cahall’s argument is not that Disney’s stories have lost their appeal. It is that Disney might gain more by returning to a model that prioritizes making and managing intellectual property, then licensing it broadly, rather than owning the distribution relationship too.
The analyst estimated that such a shift could add 40 percent to Disney’s share price. The Hollywood Reporter said Cahall pointed to Sony’s pay-one licensing deal with Netflix as a comparison and suggested Disney could potentially earn far more because of its library and larger movie output.
The question arrives while the wider business keeps changing. Disney+ EMEA General Manager Karl Holmes recently told an industry conference that the service’s strategy includes local originals, advertising and a strong movie lineup, according to a separate Hollywood Reporter report.
Related: Disney CEO Makes His Plans for Disney+ Clear
Holmes said nearly 40% of Disney+ viewing hours in the United Kingdom came from people ages 16 to 34, citing BARB in-home viewing data. He also said the company planned to keep building in a competitive market through content, advertising and local production.
That makes Cahall’s proposal a debate about strategy, not a prediction that Disney will abandon Disney+ tomorrow. The company’s franchises, parks, consumer products and streaming business work together in ways that are difficult to separate neatly.
Yet the analyst’s core point will interest families who follow where beloved stories live and how they reach an audience. A service can offer convenience, but a company that owns enduring characters and libraries also has options about licensing, theater releases and home viewing.
Competition may make those choices more urgent. The Hollywood Reporter noted that Netflix, Amazon and Google remain formidable players, while the potential Paramount-Warner Bros. combination could reshape the field. A recent report on that proposed deal described Paramount’s argument that consolidation would help it compete with technology giants.
For now, Disney has announced no exit from streaming. Cahall’s report is a Wall Street case for reconsideration, but it underscores a larger truth: in an industry crowded with platforms, the value of a good story may lie not only in who makes it, but in who gets to carry it into the home.
For Disney, the decision would also touch the relationship between its entertainment brands and its other businesses. A movie that moves from theaters to a streaming service can keep a franchise visible, but licensing that same library can put beloved stories in more homes and on more platforms.
There is no single formula for that balance. The issue is whether owning every stage of delivery is still the best way to sustain the creative work families recognize, or whether a more open licensing model could protect the stories while easing the cost of competing in streaming.
Read Next: Disney+ EMEA Boss Says Streamer Is in Growth Mode
Questions or comments? Please write to us here.
