Disney wants Disney+ to connect streaming, games, merchandise, parks, cruises, and other experiences. At what point does that stop increasing customer value and start turning the app into a homepage for Disney’s org chart?
— VP, Product Strategy
When the customer has to care how Disney is organized.
Disney should absolutely connect streaming, games, merchandise, parks, cruises, ESPN, and everything else it knows about the same customer. That’s one of the biggest advantages the company has. A household that watches Pixar, visits Walt Disney World, buys Marvel merchandise, follows the NBA on ESPN, and takes a Disney cruise is worth a hell of a lot more than a Disney+ subscription.
Disney CFO Hugh Johnston said at Goldman Sachs Communacopia on Sept. 9 that the company wants Disney+ to become a “membership-like ecosystem” that can include film and TV, consumer products, parks, cruises, interactions with Disney talent and IP, and potentially gaming. Disney is also moving toward what Johnston called a “one fan, one account” ecosystem while improving recommendations and cleaning up the user experience.
I like the membership idea because it lets Disney connect value across businesses without forcing every one of those businesses into the same interface. I’d be much more cautious about giving each division permanent real estate inside Disney+.
Disney’s Org Chart Shouldn’t Become the Navigation
Every Disney division can make a legitimate argument for wanting access to Disney+. Consumer products can point to merchandise revenue, Parks can point to vacation bookings, Cruise Line has a high-value transaction, games can create hours of engagement, ESPN can increase frequency, Hulu adds programming breadth, and advertising benefits from more usage and customer signals.
Each case can make economic sense on its own. The product risk comes from allowing all of those individually rational decisions to accumulate inside the same interface.
The Disney+ home screen has limited attention, limited navigation space, and a customer who usually arrives with a fairly simple intention: find something worth watching. Every additional business that gets permanent placement makes that job harder unless the new feature creates enough incremental value to justify the product friction.
Disney needs brutal product discipline here. A division’s ability to monetize a Disney+ subscriber doesn’t automatically justify putting that business in front of the subscriber. The relevant question is whether the additional revenue, retention, engagement, or customer value exceeds whatever the feature costs in discovery, simplicity, and streaming usage.
One Fan, One Account Is More Valuable Than One App for Everything
Disney can capture most of the economic benefit without forcing every transaction through Disney+.
A shared customer identity can tell Disney that the same household watches Frozen every week, has a Disney World reservation in December, bought princess merchandise last month, and has never taken a Disney cruise. Disney can use that information to adjust recommendations, offer a relevant park benefit, surface merchandise tied to demonstrated franchise affinity, or show a cruise offer to a household with realistic purchase propensity.
The customer intelligence can operate across Disney while the individual products continue handling the jobs they’re built to do.
A cruise booking involves dates, cabins, destinations, excursions, dining, transportation, party composition, and thousands of dollars. Choosing an episode of Bluey involves pressing play. Putting both inside the same product hierarchy creates additional complexity for the customer without improving either transaction.
“One fan, one account” gives Disney a way to connect the economics while preserving specialized experiences for specialized jobs.
The Best Cross-Sell Might Be the One Most Customers Never See
Disney’s customer data should make Disney+ feel less commercial as the company learns more about each household.
A family already planning a Walt Disney World vacation may get real value from Disney+ recognizing that trip. Someone who has never demonstrated park intent shouldn’t have to navigate around vacation merchandising every time they want to watch The Simpsons. The same logic applies to merchandise, games, cruises, and other commercial surfaces.
Disney has talked about improving the Disney+ recommendation engine because customers have a limited window after opening the app before they decide there’s nothing worth watching. Every non-video feature competes inside that same window.
A recommendation, merchandise offer, game, park promotion, or notification consumes some amount of customer attention. The feature earns that attention when it increases viewing, retention, spending, willingness to pay, or another measurable outcome by more than the friction it introduces.
Good personalization should reduce how much of Disney’s commercial machinery the average subscriber has to see.
Verts Has a Much Easier Case Than Cruise Bookings
Disney’s short-form Verts product sits close to the existing job of Disney+.
A short-form clip can help someone discover a movie or series, add a title to a watchlist, or spend more time with programming already available in the service. Disney said in August that roughly 40% of Disney+ mobile users had interacted with Verts, with increases in minutes per visitor, clips per session, and watchlist interaction.
Verts still has to prove that those behaviors create enough economic value to justify the investment, but its path into the core streaming product is straightforward because discovery can lead directly into viewing.
Games can potentially clear the bar too when they deepen engagement with franchises, add membership benefits, or give subscribers another reason to keep paying. The economic value of additional engagement depends on whether it improves retention, advertising revenue, spending, or willingness to pay.
The farther an adjacency moves from entertainment consumption, the more evidence Disney should require before giving it permanent product real estate.
Disney Can Create a Membership Without Building WeChat
The “membership-like ecosystem” framing is more interesting than the super-app framing because membership can connect benefits without collapsing every product into one interface.
A Disney+ member could receive merchandise discounts, gaming entitlements, park benefits, exclusive access, special experiences, early booking opportunities, or rewards connected to other Disney businesses. Those benefits can make the subscription more valuable while the underlying transactions continue happening in the products best equipped to handle them.
Amazon Prime offers a useful business-model analogy. Its value comes from connecting a collection of benefits to one customer relationship while allowing those benefits to have different interfaces and usage patterns. Disney can apply the same principle to fandom.
Disney+ already has a recurring billing relationship and a stream of behavioral signals. Connecting those signals to benefits across the company can increase retention and customer lifetime value without loading every Disney transaction into the streaming interface.
Disney+ already sits at the center of Disney’s broader customer relationship. The harder product decision is determining which parts of the broader company actually deserve to appear inside the service.
Cross-Selling Creates an Organizational Incentive Problem
The biggest risk comes from how Disney measures success across divisions.
A merchandise feature can generate incremental commerce revenue while making content discovery slightly worse. A park promotion can produce bookings while taking merchandising space away from programming. A game integration can increase engagement while adding navigation complexity. Each business can show a positive result inside its own P&L while the combined experience reduces streaming usage or increases churn.
Disney has to measure those effects across the entire customer relationship.
Otherwise, each division has an incentive to optimize its own revenue against Disney+ traffic while the streaming product absorbs the cumulative cost.
That makes product governance more important as Disney+ becomes more valuable to the rest of the company. Someone needs authority to reject a profitable cross-sell when the broader customer economics don’t justify the interruption.
The Streaming Product Still Has to Come First
Johnston’s description of Disney’s priorities puts the streaming product at the center. Better recommendations, a cleaner UI, live programming, profile linking, and integrated Hulu offerings all improve the job customers already use Disney+ to do.
That work becomes more important as Disney creates more ways to monetize the relationship.
Disney+ has reached the point where streaming itself produces meaningful profit, which gives the company more room to be selective about which commercial opportunities enter the interface.
I’d use a simple product rule: when someone opens Disney+, the app should make the thing they came to do easier. Anything else has to earn the interruption.
Help someone find the movie they came to watch. Personalize around an upcoming Disney vacation when the connection improves the experience. Surface a game benefit when it makes the subscription more valuable. Show merchandise when the customer’s behavior indicates the offer is genuinely relevant. A division looking for access to a massive audience doesn’t clear the bar by itself.
Disney can generate revenue from the same customer across streaming, parks, cruises, merchandise, sports, games, advertising, and theatrical releases. Disney+ should understand that entire relationship while exposing only the pieces that improve the customer’s immediate experience or create enough incremental value to justify getting in the way.
That keeps Disney+ useful as the digital center of the company without turning the streaming experience into a directory of everything Disney sells.
Ask Me Anything
Whether you’re fed up, fired up, or just want the truth behind the trends, send me your questions using this form. Anonymity guaranteed. Bullshit not included.
The Streaming Wars is intentionally ad-free
We don’t run display ads. Not because we can’t, but because we don’t believe in them.
They interrupt the reading experience. They cheapen the work. And they burn advertisers’ money on impressions nobody actually wants.
So we chose a different model.
We say the things people in this industry are already thinking but don’t say out loud. We connect the dots beyond the headline and focus on explaining why things matter to the people working in this business.
If you believe industry coverage can exist without clutter and interruption, you can support it here → SUPPORT TSW.
Support is optional. But it directly funds research and continued coverage — and helps prove this model can work.
Support TSW →
