2015年，以神奇魔法和懷舊之情為賣點的公司沃特?迪斯尼遭遇了一些非?，F(xiàn)實的難題。

隨著消費者逐漸拋棄捆綁頻道，投入流媒體點播的懷抱，這家娛樂巨頭在美國娛樂體育節(jié)目電視網(wǎng)（ESPN）的收視率節(jié)節(jié)下滑——而ESPN是該公司有線網(wǎng)絡(luò)中最重頭的部分。截至2015財年末，迪斯尼已經(jīng)損失了700萬觀眾，投資者為此憂心忡忡，股價也一路走低。壞消息還不止于此，在本周早些時候，迪斯尼的法定繼承人和首席運營官托馬斯?斯塔格斯也離開了公司。

接下來應(yīng)該做什么？

有人建議迪斯尼加強與亞馬遜或Dish的合作。首席執(zhí)行官鮑勃?伊格爾也暗示ESPN可能會建立一個直面消費者的更強平臺——盡管這些計劃都沒有得到具體實施。

不過，投資公司宏橋信托投資集團（BTIG）表示，還有一個萬能方案：這個米老鼠的誕生地應(yīng)該收購奈飛公司（Netflix）。

在上周五的一份報告中，BTIG的分析師理查德?格林菲爾德指出，奈飛與迪斯尼已經(jīng)有了持續(xù)的共生關(guān)系。BTIG對迪斯尼的股票給出了“賣出”評級。

格林菲爾德寫道：“奈飛已經(jīng)是迪斯尼的親密伙伴，實際上，伊格爾已經(jīng)多次承認(rèn)他們對奈飛的成功起到了部分作用。迪斯尼正在把越來越多的電影和電視劇等內(nèi)容賣給奈飛，與此同時，他們在英國推行直面消費者的內(nèi)容業(yè)務(wù)卻十分艱難。收購奈飛的代價很大，但這可能是迪斯尼唯一的希望?！?/p>

對奈飛而言，這次交易意味著這家年輕的公司可以打破“直播”電視的界限，聯(lián)手一家根深蒂固的電影制片公司。對迪斯尼而言，他們可以獲得一家已經(jīng)了解并有條件繼續(xù)發(fā)展直面消費者的流媒體模式的公司。

還不止于此。

奈飛也許還能提供迪斯尼損失斯塔格斯的解決方案：奈飛的首席執(zhí)行官里德?哈斯廷斯。格林菲爾德認(rèn)為他“具有遠(yuǎn)見”。與此同時，迪斯尼的觀察者也在懷疑是否有人能夠取代他們最重要的首席執(zhí)行官伊格爾。BTIG還表示，沒錯，奈飛很貴，擁有450億美元的市值和企業(yè)價值，而迪斯尼的市值為1,570億美元，企業(yè)價值為1,670億美元。根據(jù)這些估值，奈飛的出售價值不太可能低于1,000億美元。

并非所有的華爾街分析師都不看好迪斯尼，或是認(rèn)為迪斯尼沒有能力扭轉(zhuǎn)ESPN收視率的情況。

加拿大皇家銀行（RBC）的史蒂文?卡豪爾在上周五表示，他們會持續(xù)關(guān)注ESPN的訂閱數(shù)，給迪斯尼的股票一個“基于市場表現(xiàn)的評級”。

他寫道：“我們注意到迪斯尼有許多分支，例如現(xiàn)金投資和更高結(jié)構(gòu)上的制片收益。因此，我們認(rèn)為ESPN這個分支的損失值得繼續(xù)關(guān)注，但不應(yīng)被看作是持有股票的結(jié)構(gòu)性障礙?！保ㄘ敻恢形木W(wǎng)）

譯者：嚴(yán)匡正

In the past year, Walt Disney, a company that sells itself on magic and nostalgia, has struggled with some very real problems.

The entertainment conglomerate has grappled with falling ESPN viewership—the largest division within its cable networks—as consumers turn away from bundled channels and flee to the world of on-demand streaming. The company lost 7 million viewers by the end of fiscal year 2015, worrying investors and dragging its stock down. The bad news continued flowing when, earlier this week, heir apparent and Chief Operating Officer, Thomas Staggs left the company.

So what is to be done?

Some have suggested that Disney strengthen their partnerships with Amazon or Dish. CEO Bob Iger has also hinted that ESPN might create a stronger direct to consumer platform—though none of those plans have fully materialized.

But according to one investment firm, BTIG, there is another fix-all answer: the house of mouse should buy Netflix.

In a Friday note, BTIG analyst Richard Greenfield noted that Netflix and Disney already have an ongoing, symbiotic relationship. BTIG has a “sell” rating on Disney’s stock.

“Netflix is already a great friend of Disney, in fact, Iger has repeatedly acknowledged how they are in part responsible for Netflix’s success. Disney continues to sell more and more content to Netflix spanning movies and television series, while at the same time struggling to get their own direct-to-consumer content business off-the-ground in the UK,” Greenfield wrote. “Buying Netflix is an awfully expensive acquire, but it could be Disney’s only hope.”

For Netflix, the exchange means the younger company also would breach the “l(fā)ive” TV space and gain a well-established film studio. And for Disney, the company would be snapping up a company that already understands and has the infrastructure to grow its direct-to-consumer streaming model.

And guess what?

Netflixmight also have the answer to the loss of Staggs: Netflix CEO Reed Hastings. A man who is “visionary,” said Greenfield. Meanwhile, Disney watchers have been wondering if anyone could replace their larger-than-life CEO, Iger. BTIG also noted that yes, Netflix is expensive, with a $45 billion market cap and enterprise value against Disney’s $157 billion market cap and $167 billion enterprise value. With those valuations, it’s unlikely Netflix will sell below $100 billion.

Not all analysts on the street feel so bearish about Disney or its ability to turn ESPN around.

RBC’s Steven Cahall sent out a Friday note saying that they would keep an eye on ESPN’s subscription figures, giving Disney’s stock a “market perform rating.”

“We note that Disney has plenty of offsets, such as cash deployment and structurally higher Studio earnings,” he wrote. “We thus think ESPN sub loss is worth keeping an eye on, but should not be viewed as a structural impediment to owning the shares.”