• Universal is set to cut the ribbon Thursday for its new Epic Universe theme park in Orlando.
• Buzz is building and expectations are sky-high, but executives at rival Disney aren't worried.
• Insiders say why Epic Universe could actually be a net positive for Disney World.

Disney World is facing a formidable new challenger, but execs aren't breaking a sweat — yet.

Universal's eagerly anticipated new theme park, Epic Universe, opens to the public on Thursday in Orlando. It features attractions from tentpole franchises like Harry Potter and Super Mario, plus a Dark Universe section focused on villains and rides from the "How to Train Your Dragon" movie.

"Everything is so magnificent," said Francis Dominic, a theme-park-focused influencer who toured Epic Universe before its grand opening. He described it as immersive, colorful, and "what theme parks should be and could be in the 21st century."

By unveiling this flashy new park in Disney's backyard, Universal is "now applying so much pressure on what Disney can do and should do," Dominic added.

If Epic Universe is a huge hit, it could steal attention from Disney's nearby parks. An employee at the new park told BI that "they're not trying to necessarily overtake Disney — and they don't necessarily think that's possible — but they want to be a strong and healthy competitor."

But Disney's parks chief Josh D'Amaro, who's on the short list to succeed CEO Bob Iger, isn't shaking in his shoes. He's even suggested the excitement for Epic Universe is an opportunity for Disney.

"If something is built new in Central Florida, like Epic Universe, and if it brings in additional tourists — I can almost guarantee you that, that new tourist coming into the market is going to have to visit the Magic Kingdom," D'Amaro said at MoffettNathanson's media conference in mid-May.

Travel agents and analysts that BI reached for this story also think Epic could give Disney World an unexpected boost.

A Disney spokesperson referred to comments previously made by executives, and Universal didn't respond to a request for comment.

A win-win?

While D'Amaro's remarks may sound like spin, some media analysts think he's onto something.

Morgan Stanley's Ben Swinburne pointed to Disney's US parks bookings, which are tracking up 4% and 7% in the next two quarters, the company said on its early-May earnings call.

"Thus far, Epic's impact to WDW is either neutral to potentially already expanding the market in Orlando," Swinburne wrote after Disney's earnings.

This apparent strength follows a strong quarter in which Disney's US parks revenue rose 9%, despite economic volatility.

Travel agents have also told BI that there's enough demand to keep both Epic Universe and Disney World bustling.

Jenn Novotny, who runs the Upon a Star trip-planning service, visited Epic Universe before its grand opening, which she described as "spot-on gorgeous" with theming that's "literal perfection."

Novotny said she's seen a 9% surge in Universal bookings this year ahead of Epic's launch, but that Disney World demand hasn't waned. In fact, she expects her Disney bookings to grow by 18% this year.

Disney-focused travel agent Donna DeGiacomo said her clients are also buzzing about Epic Universe — and it hasn't come at the expense of trips to Disney World.

That aligns with what D'Amaro had told analysts: "That cannibalization is not coming from us."

Trouble in paradise?

However, Joe Bonner of Argus Research doesn't buy that "rising tide lifts all boats" sentiment. The analyst told BI that Epic Universe will likely shave off some of Disney World's market share. The question is: how much?

"It's only logical to think that there will be some negative impact on Disney parks revenue," Bonner said.

If tourists flock to Epic Universe over Disney World, Bonner said Disney may have to ramp up promotions to lure guests back. Profits would suffer, but D'Amaro said he'd do so if necessary.

"We can dial promotions up and down when we need to, against specific segments, if we're sensing the need to do that," D'Amaro said.

MoffettNathanson's Robert Fishman is encouraged by Disney's parks' resilience amid concerns about consumer sentiment and competition from Epic Universe, though it's not home free yet.

"We believe some cautiousness is prudent" given the Epic Universe launch and general economic uncertainty, Fishman wrote in a note.

For some parkgoers, the economy may be a bigger deciding factor when choosing between Disney and Universal's parks.

Disney superfan Shae Noble told BI in late April that she's tempted to go to Epic Universe, but she's torn between a trip to Disneyland in California (where she and her partner have annual passes), Epic Universe's new Super Nintendo World, and destinations like Italy.

"If the economy was better, we would take those days and go to Universal," Noble said. "But because the economy's not good, we're like, 'Well, we'll just stick with Disney, for now.'"

• Cable companies Charter and Cox announced a $34.5 billion mega-merger on Friday.
• If approved, the combination will create an even more formidable rival for Comcast.
• Although Charter has slowed cord-cutting, it likely knows it can't reverse the inevitable.

The nation's biggest pay-TV provider is getting even bigger — and not a moment too soon.

Cable giant Charter unveiled plans on Friday to merge with Cox in a $34.5 billion deal. The deal could offer the companies a lifeline at a time when the pay-TV business is on shaky ground and losing subscribers to cord-cutting.

A Charter-Cox combination would be better equipped to battle Comcast in broadband internet, cellphone service, and pay TV. Leaders at both companies pitched the merger as a win for customers, employees, and even America — a not-so-subtle olive branch to Trump.

The transaction is expected to close in the next two years, pending approval from the Trump administration. The new entity would be called Cox Communications and adopt Charter's Spectrum branding for customers.

There are many reasons Charter and Cox joining forces appears to be a "no-brainer," media analyst Jeffrey Wlodarczak of Pivotal Research Group said.

By teaming up, Charter-Cox can save on marketing costs while investing more in product and technology, Charter CEO Chris Winfrey said Friday on a call announcing the deal. He added that the combined company would have a broader geographic reach.

This tie-up may also give Charter-Cox some much-needed leverage in carriage negotiations. Charter's 12.7 million video customers, more than Comcast's 12.1 million. That makes it the leading player in the rapidly shrinking pay-TV industry. The Cox merger would bring the companies' total to 14.4 million.

Cutting down on cord-cutting

There are advantages to being the biggest fish in a pond that's drying up.

While cord-cutting may be inevitable, Charter has used its leverage to slow the decline by convincing media companies to include their streaming services in its bundles at no extra charge to customers.

This arrangement is win-win. For programmers like Disney and Warner Bros. Discovery, it keeps carriage fees coming when they may otherwise shrink due to cord-cutting. Before this concession, Charter had scoffed at paying the rates Disney wanted to carry its networks.

Meanwhile, Charter's subscribers receive more value by getting streaming services for free, giving them a strong incentive not to cut the cord. Cox customers are set to get the same deal that has helped Charter reduce its cord-cutting rate from a low of 9.5% in the second quarter of 2024 to 7.3% in Q1 of this year. That's according to an analysis by equity research firm MoffettNathanson.

"Our video losses are probably the best in the MVPD industry," Winfrey said on Friday's call, using the industry term for pay-TV providers. "And we intend to improve that."

The resilience of Charter's streaming-saturated cable bundle, which includes Disney+, Peacock, Paramount+, and the soon-to-be-renamed HBO Max, has impressed analysts.

"Don't look now, but Charter's 'linear-plus-streaming' video strategy might just be working. Video subscriber trends are getting … wait for it … BETTER!" Craig Moffett of MoffettNathanson said in a note after Charter's first-quarter earnings report.

Moffett was thrilled with the proposed Cox merger. He wrote in a Friday note that it was "very, very welcome" and had "almost no downside."

"Charter's video retention rates are already by far the best in the industry, and that's largely in advance of the benefits of the streaming-included strategy, which is only now achieving full availability," Moffett wrote.

Cox's footprint could give Charter even more negotiating power with programmers, though Winfrey said he aims to "work together" with them.

But despite Charter's best efforts, including its reimagined cable bundle and potential synergies with Cox, even Winfrey knows the days of growing the pay-TV business may be over.

"Whether that means just less losses on video, or more video growth, I'm not in a position to go forecast that today," Winfrey said. "But I think it can be better than what it is on its current trajectory."

• HBO Max is once again the name of Warner Bros. Discovery's flagship streamer.
• It's one in a long line of rebrands and logo changes.
• We took a trip down memory lane and dug into all the incarnations over the years.

What's old is new again.

Max is now HBO Max — reversing a polarizing rebrand that happened two years ago. Warner Bros. Discovery announced its streaming service's new-ish name at its annual upfront presentation to advertisers.

This is the latest entrant in a series of names for HBO's streamer. Media and advertising circles are split on its merits.

The HBO Max rebrand could help restore awareness and credibility associated with HBO's storied entertainment name, said Ben Kunz, the chief strategy officer at advertiser Mediassociates. He said clients were often "puzzled" by the streamer's more generic name.

"People have limited room in their head for brand names," Kunz said. "When people get confused, they fall back on 'no.' Anchoring a streaming service with all the momentum of the past of HBO, I think that will build credibility for marketers."

The company says reverting to HBO Max signifies a return to its roots with a renewed focus on quality over quantity.

"We will continue to focus on what makes us unique — not everything for everyone in a household, but something distinct and great for adults and families," WBD streaming head JB Perrette said in a statement.

But some branding experts believe that yet another name change will only create confusion.

"Everybody now knows that Max is HBO Max," said Chris Rosica, the CEO of branding firm Rosica Communications. "It's a little late in the game to do that."

Below is a brief history of HBO's many streaming rebrands:

HBO GO (2010)

HBO Go debuted in 2010 and was only for linear HBO customers who were traveling or wanted to watch HBO on the go — hence the name.

Smartphone adoption was rising, and tablets were starting to pop up after Apple unveiled the iPad in early 2010.

HBO Now (2015)

Then came HBO Now, which brought shows like "Game of Thrones" to cord-cutters for the first time.

Pay TV was just starting to decline from its peak as millennials opted for Netflix and Hulu, which offered on-demand shows and movies at a fraction of the cost of cable and satellite TV.

HBO Max (2020)

WarnerMedia, which cellphone giant AT&T ran from 2018 to 2022, launched HBO Max in 2020 during the height of the streaming wars. Its timing was excellent, as the pandemic kept the world inside, which led to a boom in streaming viewership.

However, competition was fierce. HBO Max had to contend with stalwarts like Netflix and Hulu as well as compelling new entrants like Disney+, Apple TV+, Peacock, and eventually Paramount+.

A purple color palette was a purposeful departure from HBO's simple but iconic black-and-white look. It was distinct and "ownable," brand strategist Lily Thaler of Design Bridge and Partners said.

Max (2023)

HBO's parent company had a rocky run under AT&T, which cut its losses by spinning it off in 2022. WarnerMedia then joined forces with cable company Discovery to form a new media conglomerate, which had even more exposure to the shrinking pay-TV business.

Enter Warner Bros. Discovery. David Zaslav, who'd run Discovery since 2006, was looking to make a splash and shake up Hollywood.

Armed with HBO's prestige fare and Discovery's guilty-pleasure shows — like "My 600-lb Life" and "Dr. Pimple Popper" — Zaslav dropped the HBO name from its streamer in hopes of being a something-for-everyone service like Netflix.

This move was controversial and heavily criticized by some, though others argued the Max rebrand was necessary to protect the HBO brand.

WBD marked the rebrand to Max by swapping its purple gradient for a bright blue. Patrizio "Pato" Spagnoletto, WBD's then-marketing chief, told Vulture that this change was "intending to signal not just change from HBO Max of the purple, but a much more sustainable premium version of the service."

Max had mixed results. It struggled with a high cancellation rate but found success by bundling with Disney+ and Hulu. The service grew meaningfully in the last year, largely due to international expansion.

Max (2025)

WBD foreshadowed its HBO Max rebrand in late March by refreshing its blue color scheme with HBO's signature black-and-white look.

"Typically, moving to black in a space where a lot of brands own color might try to signal sophistication, legacy, respectability," Thaler said.

This move shows confidence, she added: "We don't need to be bright and flashy and cover all colors of the rainbow to get your attention."

HBO Max (2025)

This latest rebrand is WBD's clearest signal yet that it's no longer trying to contend with Netflix and is instead prioritizing profitability.

WBD content chief Casey Bloys said putting the HBO brand front and center "far better represents our current consumer proposition," and positions its content as differentiated and valuable.

HBO's three letters stand for high-quality, prestige programming, said Dan Green, a professor and the director of entertainment industry management at Carnegie Mellon University.

"It's hard to get attention, and HBO Max — you know what you're getting," Green said.

However, branding veteran Rosica said this move wasn't necessary — and could backfire.

Rosica said Max already had high brand awareness, especially among younger audiences. Confusion could also emerge, as some consumers may wonder if reality TV shows from Discovery are going away, or if prices are changing.

"A lot of questions will come up that really can be avoided," Rosica said.

Some ad execs said they doubted the rebrand would make a difference either way.

Mike McHale of Noble People said ads on WBD's streamer are still too expensive compared to its peers, given it has an audience that he thinks is reachable elsewhere.

"People who watch 'The Sopranos' — they probably also watch 'The Office.' There isn't an exclusive audience of people I feel like I'm missing when I leave them off buys," McHale said.

No matter what WBD calls its streamer, Thaler pointed out that it won't be able to retroactively change shortcut buttons on Roku remotes. Many of them still say "HBO Max" — albeit now in the wrong color.

• The streaming wars aren't the same cutthroat competition they used to be.
• Media giants like Netflix, Disney, and Warner Bros. Discovery have adopted different strategies.
• Netflix has zeroed in on engagement, while others are focused on goals like subscriber growth.

These aren't your older sibling's streaming wars.

The battle for audiences has evolved in recent months, as once-fierce rivals turn to frenemies and even team up on bundles. One key reason is that Hollywood titans like Disney and Warner Bros. Discovery have stopped following Netflix and are instead carving out distinct strategies.

Netflix is all in on "engagement" — how much people are watching and interacting with its platform — and no longer regularly shares its subscriber count, which was once its north star. It also just revamped its homepage with vertical video as it takes cues from social media giants like YouTube and TikTok.

Disney, meanwhile, is locked in on subscriber growth. Two Disney streaming employees told Business Insider that attracting new users remains a top priority, especially if they're in its bundles.

And Warner Bros. Discovery is prioritizing profitability with Max. Its quality-over-quantity strategy hinges on preventing cancellations instead of reaching everyone or maximizing engagement.

Disney, WBD, Comcast, and Apple didn't respond to requests for comment.

Engagement is in, thanks to ads

For years, Netflix focused on subscriber growth, which Wall Street was obsessed with. But as it approached and cleared the 300 million subscriber milestone, Netflix zeroed in on another goal (besides growing revenue and profit): engagement.

A Netflix spokesman said engagement is its "best proxy for customer satisfaction" and that highly active viewers are less likely to cancel.

Netflix drove about 8% of watch time on connected TVs in the US in March, the most recent data provided by Nielsen. Though Netflix was the highest among its paid streaming rivals, it trailed YouTube, which got 12%.

That's why Netflix's co-CEO Greg Peters said on the company's first quarter earnings call that there was "plenty of room to grow" engagement.

Boosting watch time helps Netflix achieve another top goal: building out its nascent ad business. The company is playing catch-up here. It will generate $2.2 billion in US ad revenue this year, according to EMARKETER, which is well below Hulu's $2.7 billion figure and in line with Peacock. However, those two streamers have had ad businesses for years.

John Conca, a media analyst at Third Bridge, said Netflix's ad business will blossom as it builds out its own ad tech.

Amazon is also focused on its streaming ad business, which burst out of the gate in early 2024 thanks to an unconventional opt-out strategy. The e-commerce giant turned on ads for all Prime Video users who don't pay $3 a month to remove them, instantly scaling its ad business. Nearly 34 million of Amazon's 166 million US-based Prime Video users see ads, EMARKETER estimates.

Amazon has a treasure trove of shopping data, which Conca said can help boost the effectiveness of its ads.

An employee at a rival streamer who recently interviewed at Amazon told BI the company seemed aggressively focused on growing its ad business.

Subscriber growth is still in style

Not all streamers have shifted their focus to engagement. Disney still sees plenty of room for subscriber growth, as do midsize players like Paramount+ and Comcast's Peacock.

"Disney is still not focused on engagement, as Netflix is right now," one Disney streaming employee said, adding that subscriber count is the main focus. They said engagement should improve as Hulu and ESPN fold into Disney+ through the bundle, though.

Engagement still matters to Disney. A second streaming employee said hours watched largely determine if shows or movies are considered hits, though content can also be deemed successful if it drives signups.

Disney won't go back to growth at any cost, however.

"Management's made it absolutely crystal clear that yes, they want growth — but it's got to be profitable growth," said media analyst Joe Bonner of Argus Research.

Growth rarely comes cheap in streaming, as Paramount+ and Peacock have learned.

Paramount+ has been a consistent leader in new streaming signups, data firm Antenna found. The company said this month that its global subscriber base had risen 11% in the last year to 79 million.

And while Peacock plateaued for a time after the Olympics, the US-only service added 5 million subscribers last quarter, taking its total to 41 million.

Despite those gains, neither service is profitable, though both are getting closer. Still, Bonner expects to see the two eventually join forces through a merger or bundle, reasoning that "it's hard to see them surviving on their own."

Some on Wall Street are also perplexed by Apple's streaming strategy. Apple TV+ has high-quality shows, but a shallow library means it's plagued by an industry-leading churn rate, per Antenna.

"I'm not sure what the play with Apple TV is," Conca said.

Apple's services chief, Eddy Cue, has acknowledged the challenge of building a streaming library from scratch.

"We're betting everything on the shows that we're doing," Cue said in March. "The ones that we do, they all need to stick. Otherwise, we have nothing else."

All about the bottom line

While all of these streamers are looking to make money, some are more focused on profitability than others.

WBD once hoped Max would challenge Netflix. In 2023, it dropped HBO from its streamer's brand so the service could have "truly something for everyone," as CEO David Zaslav once said.

But after a slow start, executives pared content spending and doubled down on its strengths.

"We're not going to flood the zone," Zaslav said on the company's first quarter earnings call. "We want to be telling the best stories, and we want to also be taking advantage of all the great quality content over the years."

Max no longer aspires to be a Netflix killer, but it may not have to be.

WBD successfully bundled its streamer with Disney+ and Hulu. Max is smaller than streaming titans but is steadily growing, though that's mainly due to international expansion.

While Max now has a lower ceiling, it's profitable. That's crucial for WBD, considering its hefty debt load. Max might not win the streaming wars, but it can still be a winner.

• Those borrowing an HBO log-in to watch "The White Lotus" and "The Last of Us" are on borrowed time.
• But Warner Bros. Discovery isn't cracking down on all Max freeloaders immediately.
• Instead, WBD will gently prompt users to get their own accounts in the next year or so.

Warner Bros. Discovery is putting a stop to password mooching — eventually.

HBO's parent company is now telling users that they need their own Max accounts to catch up on "The White Lotus." WBD wants users to make their own accounts or get their account holder to pay an extra $8 a month to give them access.

Netflix popularized that "paid sharing" strategy to great success, and Disney is doing the same.

But those mooching off their friend's account don't have to reach for their credit cards just yet. While WBD is starting to gently encourage freeloaders to pay up, executives said they wouldn't play hardball for a while.

"It's very soft messaging that will start getting firmer and more visible to subscribers over the months to come," WBD's global streaming head, JB Perrette, said Thursday on the company's earnings call.

This paid-sharing initiative has a 12- to 18-month timeline, Perrette said. It's starting in the US and is set to move next year to the rest of the world, where Max is still rolling out.

Anti-mooching messaging will get "more assertive" later this year and in early 2026, Perrette said.

Paid sharing could boost Max subscribers

WBD isn't alone in following Netflix's lead, as NBC is warning Peacock subscribers not to share passwords with their friends. Paramount, Amazon, and Apple haven't done so yet, but certainly could if Disney's and WBD's paid-sharing strategies pay off.

Max has made progress since its launch five years ago and rebrand from HBO Max in 2023. WBD has 57.6 million streaming subscribers in the US, up about 5 million from a year ago. The company has also grown its global customer base by more than 22 million customers, though that's largely due to rollouts in Southeast Asia and Europe.

Streaming advertising revenue surged 35% from last year in the first quarter.

A paid-sharing rollout could further boost WBD's streaming subscriber count, though engagement — and therefore advertising — could take a hit if freeloaders conclude that Max isn't worth paying for.

• Streaming customers are learning a tough economic lesson: There's no free lunch.
• Disney has found success imitating Netflix's password-sharing clampdown.
• Other streamers are following suit.

Playtime's over for freeloaders.

Password-sharing crackdowns on streaming services have exceeded expectations, so those still logged in to their sibling's or ex's account should prepare to pay up.

Netflix once made waves by locking out moochers. While customers complained, that decision drove a record year of subscriber sign-ups, including its best-ever quarter.

Other media giants are now mimicking that strategy.

Disney defied Wall Street's estimates, announcing that it added 2.5 million Disney+ and Hulu subscribers in the first three months of 2025. Many analysts had expected the customer base to shrink, considering that streaming growth had slowed in recent years.

"Paid sharing" helped revive Disney's streaming growth, CEO Bob Iger said Wednesday on the company's earnings call. This program allows account holders to pay an extra $7 to $10 a month — depending on their plan — for users outside their households. Otherwise, freeloaders who want to keep watching must get their own accounts. This rollout began for Disney+ users in the fall and for Hulu customers in March.

Disney isn't alone. Warner Bros. Discovery rolled out paid sharing for Max in late April, betting that doing so would kick-start growth, though the password-sharing crackdown hasn't extended to all users yet. It looks like NBC will follow suit, as it updated Peacock's terms of service late last year to warn users not to share passwords outside their households.

Not everyone has jumped on the bandwagon, as Paramount and the tech giants Amazon and Apple aren't yet cracking down on users who watch shows and movies on someone else's account.

But could they be next? Those streaming services are meant to be for a single household, so their parent companies could change course.

Those who get locked out of their favorite streamers won't be thrilled, but the good news is that there are more cheap options than there were a few years ago.

Most major streamers now have more affordable ad tiers, which are increasingly popular, including with customers who never wanted to pay in the first place.

• Disney parks are as busy as ever, despite economic concerns.
• US parks revenue soared last quarter, and travel agents say Disney World visits are surging.
• One avid fan said it "would take a catastrophic event" for them not to plan another Disney trip.

Disney fans say they don't plan on skipping their trips to the company's parks — even if a recession hits.

US GDP shrank in the first quarter, and trade uncertainty has some economists convinced a recession is coming.

However, in conversations Business Insider had with 12 "Disney adults" who go to the parks, only one said they would consider visiting less frequently in the event of an economic downturn.

And two travel agents who specialize in Disney trips told BI that bookings were significantly up this year.

That strength was reflected in Disney's earnings for the first three months of 2025. The company said Wednesday that domestic park revenue surged 9% despite the economic noise.

"Even with consumer confidence somewhat down and some issues in terms of the economy, people still believe that a Disney theme park experience is really special," Disney CEO Bob Iger said on CNBC. He said the parks are "incredibly resilient."

Disney's experiences head, Josh D'Amaro, added that bookings "continue to look strong." The company said Disney World bookings were up 4% so far this quarter.

While Disney analysts say there's a risk that parks take a hit this year, as they have during recessions, they aren't bracing for it. Joe Bonner of Argus Research is pricing in low-single-digit revenue growth at Disney's parks this year.

"Attendance levels are still pretty crazy at Disney World, as far as I've seen," said Jeremy Singh, an Orlando-based Disney TikTok creator.

Disney didn't respond to a request for comment.

Parks are popping off

Business is booming for Rob Stuart, who runs the Disney-focused trip planning service Creating Magic Vacations.

Bookings are up 25% year over year through April, Stuart said. It's rare for Disney World not to be packed, he said, especially with older and multigenerational groups.

Instead of sitting on retirement savings that they'll later pass along, Stuart said, many people in their 60s or 70s are opting for family trips.

"They're saying, 'You know what? I'm just going to take my kids on the trip of a lifetime — they can earn their own money,'" Stuart said.

Jenn Novotny, a lifelong Disney fan who runs the Upon a Star travel service, is also busy. Her bookings are up 14% so far this year, she said. She added that families were making trips to Disney World a top priority.

"Disney is now considered a rite of passage for a lot of kiddos," Novotny said.

But Stuart and Novotny almost exclusively serve US clients, so they might not be seeing the apparent slowdown in overall travel from places like Canada amid a trade war.

The UBS media analyst John Hodulik said foreign travel has historically made up about 20% of Disney World's attendance.

'We know it's going to be expensive'

Max Traughber-Crismon — a Disney fan living near Portland, Oregon — doesn't sweat the cost of taking his family of six to Disneyland.

"We know it's going to be expensive," Traughber-Crismon said. "We can either complain about it and not go, or we sit there and say, 'Hey, it is what it is — we're not going to let this ruin our experience.'"

When asked whether he'd consider skipping a Disney trip if money got tight, his response was telling.

"There isn't anything — honestly, it would take a catastrophic event," Traughber-Crismon said.

Lucas Lozano spent his honeymoon at the Disney parks. He and his wife are planning a Disney cruise later this year, even if there's a recession.

"I want to make experiences with my family," Lozano said. "So if I have a job and if I feel that I am comfortable, I'm still willing to go on the cruise."

Balling on a budget

Since they don't want to skip trips, some Disney fans have learned to get creative with money.

Traughber-Crismon said he brings snacks like peanut butter and jelly sandwiches into the parks and then gives his kids $50 each for treats.

"We don't feel like we're missing out," Traughber-Crismon said.

John Telyea and his wife get plenty of value from their annual passes for Disneyland, which they see as an escape from their stressful jobs.

Navigating the park's prices may also seem stressful, but Telyea said he's gamified the process.

"Part of the reason why I love Disney is I like to figure out, 'All right, here's our day: How do we make it through frugally?' That's kind of a challenge," Telyea said.

But despite the resilience in demand from fans, Disney might not be immune to a downturn.

David Lewis said that while he's pining for a Disney trip, he and his wife are already talking about what they'll do if the economy slows.

"If we need to go do something different because it's more affordable, we're going to have to make that decision," Lewis said. "It's just sad."

• President Donald Trump just proposed an addition to MAGA: MMIAA, or "MOVIES MADE IN AMERICA, AGAIN!"
• While the details of Trump's proposed film tariffs are unclear, many in Hollywood are rattled.
• Here are the potential winners and losers from this policy proposal.

Hollywood is the latest industry to be brought into President Donald Trump's trade war.

Many in the movie business were spooked when Trump said he planned to impose a 100% tariff on films produced in foreign countries.

Trump said his goal was to stop Hollywood from "dying a very fast death." But while there are more questions than answers, industry insiders and analysts said they felt tariffs could wreak havoc on an entertainment business already struggling to come back from labor strikes and spending cuts.

"It basically will hit the whole industry," NYU entertainment industry professor Paul Hardart said.

Industry insiders said they feared tariffs could raise costs (and potentially sink revenues if other countries retaliate). But there also could be winners, depending on what the ultimate plan is.

White House spokesman Kush Desai said in a statement that "no final decisions on foreign film tariffs" had been made and that the administration was "exploring all options to deliver on President Trump's directive to safeguard our country's national and economic security while Making Hollywood Great Again."

Here's a rundown of the potential winners and losers if tariffs come to the movie business.

Potential winner: US film hubs

Foreign countries have long lured productions with financial incentives. The five top destinations for filming were outside the US, including Vancouver and the UK, a survey of studio executives by production services firm ProdPro found.

If Trump's tariffs steer films back to the US, it would benefit burgeoning hubs beyond LA and New York. Cities like Atlanta and New Orleans have built film industries through tax breaks and lower living costs. At least 18 states have started or expanded film tax incentives since 2021.

Potential loser: Producers, directors, actors, and writers

Although Trump's tariffs appear well-intended, many in Hollywood are afraid of them.

"Tariffs risk triggering retaliation, inflating costs, and stalling productions — hurting the very professionals we aim to support," Producers United, an organization representing producers, said in a statement. The group instead advocated for a federal production rebate to counteract foreign tax incentives.

Film producer Randy Greenberg wrote on LinkedIn that Trump's film tariff proposal would "have the opposite effect" of what it intends and "will kill the movie industry faster."

Morgan Stanley analyst Ben Swinburne wrote in a note that Trump's proposed 100% tariff "would lead to fewer films, more expensive films, and lower earnings for all in the business."

Potential winner: Below-the-line crew

The clearest beneficiary from film tariffs would be those in LA who work in pre-production, production, and post-production, said Schuyler Moore, a partner at LA-based law firm Greenberg Glusker.

Unlike actors and directors, many of these crew members can't easily join overseas productions. The same goes for those in food catering or makeup artists. More films made in LA would make them busier.

"It's clearly a positive for the below-line crew," Moore said. "It's a hammer to everybody else."

However, these workers might not be better off if film production plummets and there are fewer projects overall.

Potential loser: Independent production companies

Independent production firms like industry darlings A24 and Neon may be big losers from tariffs.

Global outsourcing helped indie production companies that have less access to financing. Film financing is tenuous, so higher costs could mean fewer films getting made. It could also make it cost-prohibitive for indies to bring films like Neon's Best Picture-winning "Parasite," which came from South Korea, to US audiences.

"If you're going to do something to squash the independent sector, this is what you would do," said Peter Marshall, a former Lionsgate film executive who's now a media consultant.

Potential loser: International networks and production firms

Foreign TV networks with US exposure could be crushed if there are tariffs or quotas on films or shows, analyst Brian Wieser of Madison & Wall said.

Sean Furst, an overseas-focused producer, said European players have been trying to reduce their reliance on the US entertainment market. If overseas production is penalized, US producers filming abroad could similarly give up on getting US distribution and look abroad.

"Talk to anyone in Europe, and nobody is relying on a US commitment in a finance plan anymore," Furst said, adding that the knock-on effect of tariffs could be a shift to fewer productions with lower budgets.

Potential winner: AI companies

Hollywood has been slow to adopt AI and has mainly limited it to tasks like post-production, special effects, and dubbing.

However, AI use could speed up as filmmakers look for ways to cut costs. This could mean expanding to generating video from text prompts.

Potential loser: Global streamers

The tariffs have put a spotlight on Netflix, which has the most output and the biggest global footprint of the US streamers. Netflix has been seen by some investors as recession-resistant after reaching utility-like status.

We don't really know how the tariffs would be implemented. But Citi media analyst Jason Bazinet estimated that, in a worst-case scenario for Netflix, it could raise the streamer's costs by $3 billion a year and hit its earnings per share by 20%. He calculated this by assuming Netflix licenses 40% of its total content budget and produces half of the remaining 60% abroad.

However, Bazinet added that Netflix could limit the impact by shifting production to the US, cutting down US access to foreign-made content on the service, and raising prices to cover higher production costs.

Potential loser: Audiences

Frank Albarella, a KPMG partner who studies media and telecom, said tariffs could "inadvertently force audiences to pay more for what could become a narrower creative landscape."

Mike Proulx of research firm Forrester warned that if tariffs go through, there could be fewer films as production costs and the prices of movie tickets and streaming subscriptions soar.

"Any way you slice it, this measure equates to consumer pain," Proulx said.

• Disney's 20th anniversary re-release of "Revenge of the Sith" in theaters was a resounding success.
• While Star Wars shows have a mixed track record, its films have historically been box-office hits.
• Here's why Hollywood analysts and critics say the stars are aligning for Star Wars.

Star Wars is roaring back to life, much like Anakin Skywalker in "Revenge of the Sith."

Box-office analysts are buzzing about a comeback for the franchise after the success of the re-release of 2005's "Revenge of the Sith" in theaters. The popular Star Wars prequel broke through a crowded spring slate last weekend and raked in $25 million.

Disney has made a slew of Star Wars TV shows for Disney+ in recent years, but hasn't released a new Star Wars movie since 2019. That drought seems to have Star Wars fans pining to see lightsaber battles on the big screen again.

"There is a hunger out there for big-screen Star Wars content," Shawn Robbins, the director of movie analytics at Fandango, told Business Insider. "It's definitely not gone away."

Industry analysts see the reissue's success as a sign that this iconic film franchise is set to rise out of the lava despite struggles on the TV side.

Disney didn't respond to a request for comment.

Too much, or not enough?

Disney+ launched shortly before the pandemic in November 2019. Since then, Disney hasn't released a new Star Wars movie in theaters, though it debuted a dozen Star Wars shows on its streaming service.

But while "The Mandalorian" was a breakout hit and "Andor" was critically acclaimed, most of its other shows didn't get the same reception from critics or fans. Over time, interest gradually faded.

Veteran film critic Scott Mantz said that despite a few wins, the Mouse House "oversaturated" Disney+ with so-so Star Wars series.

"You had so much Star Wars stuff that was kind of OK that it diluted the franchise," Mantz said. "It just didn't feel as special as it did when we had to wait three years between each film."

However, the "Revenge of the Sith" re-release — as well as the popularity of the "Andor" series — suggests that the general lukewarm sentiment toward Star Wars shows is primarily about execution, not overall franchise fatigue.

Nostalgia sells, which is why Disney has leaned into sequels, remakes, and reboots.

"They occasionally miss, but they know exactly what they're doing," box-office analyst David A. Gross said of Disney. "Their collection of franchise film stories, and how they manage them, is outstanding."

A flurry of false starts

Although Star Wars has gone six years without a new film, that wasn't necessarily the plan.

Disney had announced splashy Star Wars movie projects from Marvel president Kevin Feige as well as a trilogy from "Game of Thrones" cocreators D. B. Weiss and David Benioff, though they've since folded.

The company also said back in 2017 that "The Last Jedi" director Rian Johnson would create a new Star Wars movie series, but nothing has come of it yet. Johnson confirmed in 2019 that he was working on the project, and reiterated in 2022 that he was set on finishing the films.

A movie starring Daisy Ridley as Rey also got delayed, while a film announced five years ago, "Rogue Squadron," from Wonder Woman director Patty Jenkins, doesn't yet have a release date.

Yet another forthcoming trilogy led by X-Men producer Simon Kinberg was announced last fall, though there's no release date set.

In short, Disney has announced a ton of movie projects in recent years, but none have seen the light of day.

After a break, Star Wars can break out

While fans may be frustrated by the long wait for new films, Robbins said Star Wars "needed a break" after Disney made so many shows in a short span. The successful re-release of "Revenge of the Sith" leads him to believe Disney is building goodwill with Star Wars fans, who proved they're willing to show up to theaters.

Robbins said that if this past weekend is an indication, anticipation is building for Star Wars' next films: "The Mandalorian & Grogu" slated for 2026 and the recently unveiled "Star Wars: Starfighter" in 2027.

The fact that legions flocked to theaters to watch a 20-year-old film they could stream on their couch signals they're craving the goosebumps they can only get from big screens, movie analysts said.

"Whenever you're in a movie theater and the opening crawl and the Star Wars theme comes on, I mean that is iconic, epic — baked into our movie-going DNA," Comscore analyst Paul Dergarabedian said.

Nostalgia strikes back

Disney analyst Jason Bazinet of Citi said investors were frustrated by the company's high-profile misses in theaters in recent years. Unlike with Star Wars, Disney has pumped out Marvel movies, but for every "Deadpool & Wolverine," there were flops like "The Marvels."

Bazinet said he thinks the conservative "go woke, go broke" critique of Disney has merit.

"It feels like there's more and more of a 'woke' overlay that's happening at a lot of the movies," Bazinet said. He thinks Disney should focus on the "old iconic stories" that appeal to fans in "the middle of America."

Despite Bazinet's comments, however, even Star Wars films that have been criticized for perceived progressiveness in some corners of the fandom — like 2017's "The Last Jedi" — have done well at the box office. Only 2018's "Solo: A Star Wars Story" was seen as a true financial flop in Hollywood.

And recent interviews BI conducted with 12 Disney superfans revealed their biggest complaint was a lack of originality in recent films, not a move toward "wokeness."

"The franchise is in a good spot to make that return to the big screen," Robbins said of Star Wars. "Disney can feel more confident in that being a potential hit — as long as that movie is good on its own merits."

• Disney is caught in the crosshairs of the culture wars in President Donald Trump's second term.
• The Mouse House has been an advocate for inclusivity, but it recently changed some DEI policies.
• Disney superfans said the company hadn't gone too "woke" and a conservative turn could backfire.

Is Disney too "woke," not "woke" enough, or not "woke" at all?

In our highly polarized political environment, asking a dozen people may yield a dozen different answers. But what do Disney's most passionate fans think?

Business Insider spoke with 12 of these superfans — sometimes referred to as "Disney adults" — and a clear takeaway emerged: They generally said they believed the company should take a stand on social issues and promote inclusivity, even if it meant getting caught in an anti-woke backlash.

CEO Bob Iger seems keenly aware of Disney's precarious task of trying to appeal widely to fans across the US and the world. Prominent conservatives have for years accused the company of being too "woke" — or generally too committed to progressive ideals. Iger said in 2023 that the company's "mission needs to be to entertain," meaning its content should "not be agenda-driven." Following Donald Trump's presidential win, Iger was uncharacteristically quiet.

That said, none of the Disney superfans BI spoke with — who were of varying ages and political convictions, and live in different parts of the US — said they felt the company had gotten too "woke."

Several said they felt Disney could be making a costly mistake by shying away from diversity, equity, and inclusion policies amid political backlash in the second Trump administration.

"There's a big audience out there that supports those initiatives and wants to see inclusivity, and they use their dollar to show their support for brands that support a world that is open and inclusive," said Trisha Daab, who was married at Disney's parks in 2005.

Disney didn't respond to a request for comment for this story.

'So what if Disney is woke?'

For much of the last decade, corporate America has often loudly supported progressive issues.

In that era, Disney was widely viewed as a champion of DEI causes. The company prioritized diverse hiring in the mid-2010s, started a "Reimagine Tomorrow" initiative for underrepresented groups in 2020, and added more nonwhite and LGBTQ+ characters into its shows and movies — including a gay protagonist in Pixar's "Strange World" and a same-sex kiss in "Lightyear."

Decisions like these made Disney a lightning rod for criticism among conservatives. But many of the Disney superfans who spoke with BI said they viewed the moves as a way to make everyone feel welcome.

Daab, who writes Disney-related stories for magazines and websites, said she'd seen how much nonwhite children love seeing princesses who look more like them, for example.

"I hope Disney doesn't shy away from that," she said.

Other Disney superfans echoed that idea.

"If every Disney movie was, let's just say the story of Snow White, and it was the same look, the same characters, the same storyline — it's not interesting anymore, and it's not reflective of the population," Shae Noble, a Disney superfan who lives in Washington state, said.

Francis Dominic, a Disney-focused content creator and social media influencer, said the company shouldn't have to apologize for making its movie characters or parks staff more diverse.

"So what if Disney is woke?" Dominic said.

Disney's casting of Latina actor Rachel Zegler as Snow White in the 2025 remake set some critics off, since in the original fairy tale, Snow White got her name from having "skin as white as snow."

Dominic pushed back on the critics: "It's not factual — it's a fairy tale."

Jay Yee, a 62-year-old Disney adult in New York City, said he wasn't sure if Disney had become "too woke." But the company shouldn't be responsible for representing same-sex couples or transgender people in stories designed for children, he said. It's a parent's job — not a company's — to initiate conversations on those topics, he added.

Max Traughber-Crismon — a self-described liberal Democrat living outside Portland, Oregon — said that while Disney isn't too "woke," he believes it "overcorrected" with "in-your-face" social messaging in movies like "Strange World."

"It's trying to put every personality, every gender, everything into one thing versus saying, 'Hey, we can have differences, and it's OK not to include everybody with everything,'" Traughber-Crismon said.

Can anything please the critics?

Disney is no stranger to the culture wars.

The company made waves by resisting a Florida law designed to give parents control over LGBTQ+ issues taught in public schools, known by critics as the "Don't Say Gay" bill. Then-CEO Bob Chapek tried to stay neutral, before reversing course after employees protested. This angered some conservatives, and some progressives were still frustrated.

Heightened political pressure in the second Trump era has led many companies — including Target, Google, Meta, and Amazon — to rethink their DEI practices. Even Disney has followed suit.

In turn, some Disney adults feel the company has "backtracked," said Ellie Banks, a lifelong Disney fan.

"I don't know if they're focused on core values necessarily, other than I think they're going to go where the money flow is," Banks said. "If they feel that there is a larger amount of people that are supportive of one ideology, I think they're going to lean into that ideology."

However, pandering to conservatives could backfire for Disney, as it might alienate progressives without winning back its detractors. Several Disney adults pointed to Target's flip-flopping on DEI as a cautionary tale.

John Telyea, who's married to Shae Noble, said Disney should try to avoid alienating people generally, though that's much easier said than done.

"No matter what you do, you're going to make somebody upset," Telyea said.

'Politics takes the magic out of the Happiest Place on Earth'

While some Disney superfans were passionate about the company's stance in the culture wars, several fans said they only care about quality content and experiences. In their view, Disney shouldn't be a political brand.

"I think it's really important to let the creative process drive itself without too many, in general, outside agendas on either side," said David Lewis, a Disney-focused travel planner based in Mississippi.

Lewis said he didn't see "Snow White" in theaters, but it wasn't because of a boycott. He said he didn't make time to see it, though he's excited to watch it with his princess-obsessed daughter once it's on Disney+.

For Disney parks aficionados like the Florida resident Melania Murphy, Disney World can be an escape from a chaotic world. That's why she has little interest in online battles about the culture wars.

"Politics takes the magic out of the Happiest Place on Earth," she said.

• Disney has made a fortune creating sequels and reimagining older movies.
• But some Disney superfans are growing wary of the Mouse House's strategy.
• Without new hits, those in the next generation may not share their parents' love for Disney.

Disney's movie executives seem focused on playing the hits, but even some diehard fans of the company are yearning for a change of pace.

One Disney superfan, Ellie Banks, told Business Insider she didn't like "being beaten over the head with the same story, same characters."

"There's so much more to explore," she added. Her sentiments were shared by most of the 11 fans BI interviewed.

Sequels, live-action remakes, and franchise reboots have been the backbone of Disney's movie strategy in recent years, and for good reason. The company had the three biggest domestic box-office hits last year: "Inside Out 2," "Deadpool & Wolverine," and "Moana 2."

More of the same is on the way. The Mouse House is set to unveil a third "Avatar" movie, "Zootopia 2," a "Fantastic Four" reboot, and a live-action version of "Lilo & Stitch," which it no doubt hopes will fare better than its polarizing "Snow White" remake.

Though Disney is betting on some new concepts this summer, like Pixar's "Elio" and Marvel's "Thunderbolts*," the company is leaning into nostalgia.

You might think that would be thrilling for the company's adult superfans — sometimes called "Disney adults" — whose passion helps boost the company's bottom line. But most of the Disney fans who spoke with BI said they were growing tired of the company's remake-heavy film strategy.

"It just seems like a cash grab," Banks said.

CEO Bob Iger has pushed back against the idea that Disney's strategy lacks creativity.

"Our creativity is, in fact, soaring," he said last month at Disney's annual shareholder meeting.

Iger has previously said that live-action remakes can leverage new technologies to help Disney's classic stories reach new generations of viewers.

Disney didn't respond to a request for comment.

Time to rethink remakes?

Since her childhood, Banks has loved Disney. She was charmed by the animation, art, and storytelling, and seeing "The Little Mermaid" in theaters is one of her earliest memories.

But she said the 2023 live-action remake of the 1989 classic didn't land the same way.

"I don't think I've seen one live-action remake that I loved," Banks said.

Shae Noble in Washington state also said she didn't love Disney's attempts to pluck the "low-hanging fruit," in her words, of hits like "The Lion King," which had both a 2019 remake that grossed $1.6 billion and a spinoff with 2024's "Mufasa," which grossed $722 million. While she said she felt nostalgic taking her kids to see "Lion King" spinoffs, she is also itching for new stories.

She said that while she rolled her eyes when live-action remakes were announced, she understood the strategy.

"Money talks in this country," Noble said. "And for Disney to maintain their parks and all their brands and stuff, they have to do what is going to sell."

Disney sticks to the tried and true

Familiarity breeds comfort, as Disney adults know firsthand.

"People cling onto nostalgia a lot, which is why people come to the parks year after year," said Casey Clark, who moved to Florida for the parks, where she now goes four to five times a week.

Remakes can be a good way to introduce beloved stories to younger generations, said Jeremy Singh, a TikTok creator in Orlando.

"Part of the reason that I fell in love with Disney the way that I did is because of the way they were able to take original concepts and stories, or even the Grimm fairytales, and make them into something," Singh said.

Disney's nostalgia-heavy strategy has shown strong returns, as evidenced by its 2024 film slate.

"There's still meat on the bone, and the consumer drives what they're putting out," said John Telyea, who's married to Noble. "And if there's meat on the bone, why wouldn't they go after it?"

The box office analyst Paul Dergarabedian of Comscore believes Disney's film slate this year will be full of hits.

"'Snow White' notwithstanding, the future looks incredibly bright," Dergarabedian said.

While familiarity doesn't guarantee success, Dergarabedian said it's still a pretty safe bet. He says fears of franchise fatigue are overstated.

"I don't think it's so much about the number after the title, or the fact that a movie is part of a franchise or a series or known IP," Dergarabedian said. Instead, he said what makes or breaks a film is its marketing campaign and whether it can get grassroots buzz.

Is nostalgia enough?

But Francis Dominic, a Disney social media influencer, thinks the focus on sequels and remakes is getting old. He's even thought about canceling Disney+ because of its lack of new original shows — but has relented since he loves the Hulu content integration.

"I think they realize that counting on the nostalgia of the movies isn't enough to funnel people into Disney+," Dominic said.

Eventually, Disney must find new versions of "Moana" and "Frozen" from the 2010s, said David Lewis, a Disney-focused travel planner.

"That's what's going to build loyalty to the company with the next generation," Lewis said. "They're not going to be as tied, as drawn to the company or the experiences if all they get in childhood as great movies is 'Moana 2' and 'Frozen 4.'"

Otherwise, children like Lewis' 3-year-old daughter will be raised by YouTubers — the most famous of whom, MrBeast, is already plotting to usurp Disney.

"What is it right now that is out and new that is endearing itself to another generation of kids?" Lewis said. "There's not much from the company that's doing that."

• Former Trump administration official Anthony Scaramucci worries that the US economy is in danger.
• Republicans may bail on Trump before the 2026 midterm elections if there's a recession.
• The vocal political commentator shared how Democrats can fight against the president.

Anthony Scaramucci has no shortage of hot takes.

The prominent investor and political commentator won't hesitate to put Donald Trump on blast, and has been warning anyone who will listen that the president's trade policy is misguided.

"You're coming into the inauguration with 4% unemployment, 2.9% GDP growth, and a trendline down for inflation," Scaramucci said in a recent interview with Business Insider. "And this man — 80 days later, he destroyed us."

It's hard to believe that just eight years ago, Scaramucci was Trump's spokesperson. Eleven days after his appointment as White House communications director in July 2017, Scaramucci got dismissed, which the vocal Trump critic now sees as a point of pride.

The war of words with Trump goes both ways. White House spokesman Kush Desai told BI: "Anthony Scaramucci is a fraud and a disgraced clown with no standing to comment on President Trump's historic action to finally address the national emergency posed by our country's chronic trade deficits."

Scaramucci is no stranger to such criticism. It doesn't stop him from speaking his mind on Trump's trade and economic policy — or how Republicans and Democrats should fight back.

Why Republicans will separate from Trump

Over the course of his career in politics and finance, Scaramucci has been tied to both major US political parties and now finds himself somewhere in the middle.

The financier has seesawed between Democrats and Republicans, supporting Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton before distancing himself from them. He called Trump a "hack politician" on Fox Business in 2015 and endorsed other Republicans in 2016, but eventually joined Trump's team. He then got fired by Trump but still backed him, before changing his tune in 2019. He then supported Joe Biden in 2020 and Kamala Harris in 2024.

This back-and-forth suggests Scaramucci has become a man without a party in the Trump age, and he has a hunch that he's not alone.

In the coming years, Scaramucci thinks other disaffected Republicans may stray from Trump's populism and form a new party, just as Republicans split off from the Whigs in the 1850s.

"The new Whig party is the MAGA party, which has the Republican name — in name only," Scaramucci said on California Governor Gavin Newsom's podcast in early April. He added that "they're the true RINOs," using the acronym for Republicans in name only.

This fissure will follow the implosion of Trump's trade and economic policies, in Scaramucci's view. Republicans control the White House and Congress, so there will be no one else to blame.

For most of the last decade, resisting Trump has been a career-ending mistake for Republicans. But if the next year and a half goes how Scaramucci thinks it will, politicians who've been friendly with Trump may have to create separation from him ahead of the midterm elections.

"There's no House Republican that's going to go into '26 and say, 'Hey, we're in a steep recession as a result of [the] Smoot-Hawley redo in 2025, and we're with Donald Trump,'" Scaramucci said. "Because Donald Trump is going to be a lame duck the day after the election is over in 2026."

Trump won't be around forever, as the US Constitution prevents presidents from being elected more than twice. That could give Republicans the courage they need to go against their leader.

"I don't think the Republicans are going to be able to say, 'This is phenomenal — the "orange cult leader" is awesome,'" Scaramucci said. "I don't see that. I think that his status — the bronze statue turns into paper mache, and then he starts to get hit by the other Republicans like a piñata."

Democrats also need a shake-up

Although Scaramucci dislikes Trump, he thinks Democrats can still learn from him.

A key aspect of Trump's political rise was that people saw him as authentic, for better or worse. His brashness was seen by some as rude or off-putting, but others found it refreshing.

Scaramucci also said on Newsom's podcast he hears kernels of truth in Trump's rhetoric, even though he often finds him dishonest. Democrats who downplayed the issues at the border or economic struggles of the middle class made a mistake, even if they dislike Trump's tactics.

Another political liability for Democrats is what's known as "woke-ism," in Scaramucci's mind. He told BI after Harris lost last fall that "the average person in America does not like the hard-left culture that's being imposed upon them," and Trump took advantage of that perceived flaw.

"Trump is winning the culture war," Scaramucci recently told BI. "He is the Napoleon of the culture war. He's the best field general out there, in terms of understanding the culture. He has literally sent the Democrats into a splintered disarray where they're fighting with each other."

For example, Scaramucci noted that some on the left are angry with Newsom for consistently appearing on Fox News and, more recently, using his podcast to give a platform to controversial figures like far-right political strategist Steve Bannon and conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

This response is moralistic, in Scaramucci's view. He thinks Democrats should speak more to moderates and disgruntled Republicans to enlist everyone they can in the fight against Trump.

"I think the only way that Democrats are going to win is if they can rebut the culture war," Scaramucci said. "And therefore, they've got to demonstrate they can get in the center."

Lastly, Democrats need better messaging, Scaramucci said. Marketing their accomplishments is one of their biggest weaknesses, and that vacuum gave room for Trump to push his trade policy.

"Globalism has actually worked," Scaramucci said. "Is it with flaws? Sure. Did we leave China unchecked for too long? Yes, we did. Did we lose too many factories? Yes, we did. But globalism has primarily worked. We're an unbelievably rich and unbelievably prosperous nation as a percentage of overall world output versus our population."

When asked if there was anyone he thought would step up among Democrats, Scaramucci had a simple answer that may startle the left: "I don't. They're in complete disarray."

• Kids showed up to theaters in droves this past weekend to see "A Minecraft Movie."
• The video game adaptation shattered box-office estimates, continuing a notable trend.
• Here's what Disney and other studios can learn from the Minecraft film's massive success.

How can Hollywood studios like Disney get kids off YouTube or video games like Fortnite and Minecraft and into movie theaters?

The best answer so far this year seems obvious in hindsight: a movie about Minecraft itself.

Movie industry observers were caught off guard by how well "A Minecraft Movie" did this past weekend. The film from Warner Bros. and Legendary Studios opened to $313 million globally, including a $163 million showing in the US that more than doubled estimates.

Box-office analysts — who are adults — may not have fully realized what a sensation Minecraft is among Gen Z and Gen Alpha.

"This was a wildly underrated movie, in terms of its potential box-office performance," Paul Dergarabedian, a box-office analyst at Comscore, told Business Insider in an interview.

Everyone in Tinsel Town is surely taking notes about the film's success, including executives at Hollywood titan Disney, which is full of famed franchises but has an uneven track record with video games.

Hollywood's video game wars are ramping up

The spectacular start for "A Minecraft Movie" makes sense considering how video game fans have shown up at theaters, said David A. Gross of movie consultancy FranchiseRe.

"Video-game-based movies are not a secret," Gross said, noting the hit movies based on Super Mario, Sonic the Hedgehog, Rampage, Uncharted, Angry Birds, and Pokémon.

Still, the Minecraft movie's success is another head-turning moment for studio heads.

"Every studio executive is really looking at this right now and saying, 'How can we amplify — or level up — our participation within the video-game adaptation category?'" Dergarabedian said. He added that "they're mining the vaults — no pun intended — for whatever IP they may own or that they could acquire that's in the video game realm."

If video games surpass superheroes as the next movie mega-trend, it could reshape Hollywood.

Universal Studios could be a big winner since it has a strong relationship with Nintendo and has already scored big hits with the Super Mario blockbuster and "Five Nights at Freddy's." And while Warner Bros. still needs heroes as it reboots its DC Comics franchise with "Superman" this summer, its success with "A Minecraft Movie" will set up a potentially lucrative sequel.

Disney could have a secret weapon

Disney could suffer most in a shift away from superheroes, given its success with Marvel movies and spotty performance with video games.

The Mouse House has been leaning heavily on sequels and remakes lately, with mixed results. This strategy gave Disney the three biggest movies of 2024, but the subpar performance of "Snow White" last month suggests the plan is far from foolproof.

Could it be time to hunt for some new blockbuster IP? If so, Disney may have an ace in the hole: its $1.5 billion investment in Epic Games, which is the company behind Fortnite.

A movie about Fortnite, one of the world's most popular video games, could be a cash cow for Disney. If executed properly, such a film could perfectly strike the balance between familiarity — the backbone of Disney's beloved franchises — and novelty since the film would be fresh for audiences.

Although Disney doesn't appear to be actively doing much with its investment in Epic so far, it could end up being the IP breakthrough its film business needs.

• Audiences aren't flocking to theaters to see Disney's "Snow White" remake.
• The movie had a shaky second weekend in which it got dethroned by a mid-budget action film.
• But the Mouse House likely isn't losing too much sleep about this box-office flop.

"Snow White" looks like a bad (or poisoned) apple for Disney. But looks can be deceiving.

After a less-than-storybook start, the controversy-plagued remake of Disney's first princess movie stumbled in its second weekend. Subpar reviews and political backlash weighed on "Snow White," which pulled in a paltry $14 million, a third of its domestic opening. With $143 million in global sales, the $270 million film (not counting its marketing budget) faces a steep road to profitability.

Fortunately for Disney, box-office analysts noted that ticket sales are only part of the picture.

Although "Snow White" will almost certainly lose money in theaters, that doesn't mean it will be unprofitable, David A. Gross of movie consultancy FranchiseRe told Business Insider.

"After it finishes selling digital copies, then renting on video-on-demand (PVOD), then streaming on Disney+, then playing on Hulu, then playing on ABC, plus selling merchandise and attracting patrons at the theme parks, it will recover its costs and be profitable," Gross said.

Streaming can give 'Snow White' a fairytale ending

All of the controversy surrounding "Snow White" may turn into the movie's secret weapon when it leaves theaters.

Disney's creative decisions, like casting a non-white actor as Snow White and using CGI dwarves, caught criticism from the right and further fueled a long-standing narrative that the Hollywood giant is "woke." Appearing "agenda-driven" is a major issue CEO Bob Iger has said he wants to avoid.

"It just became this political story and cultural maelstrom surrounding this movie," said Paul Dergarabedian, a box-office analyst at Comscore, in a recent interview. "And that's never really a good thing for a family film, for a PG-rated Disney movie."

But what were land mines at the theater could be gold mines for streaming.

"Movies that get a lot of chatter — a lot of buzz, positive or negative — around them, do really well once they hit streaming," Dergarabedian said.

He said many Disney+ subscribers may think: "Wow, I didn't go see that movie in the theater, but I'm curious about it."

While a big-budget streaming hit might not have been Disney's primary goal with "Snow White," Gross said Netflix and Amazon seem to be fine with shelling out nine-figure sums for movies like "The Electric State" and "Red One." Those streamers have proven you don't need a theatrical run to see a solid return.

"What does that make 'Snow White' worth on Disney+?" Gross said.

"Snow White" was unexpectedly unseated in its second week by the action flick "A Working Man," which had a mid-range $40 million budget. However, the Jason Statham movie won't be watched on repeat for years by kids, or used to sell Halloween costumes or dolls.

Audiences could be signaling some fatigue with Disney's seemingly endless run of sequels and remakes.

But even if "Snow White" is a creative miss that appears to be a financial flop, it might pay off anyway. So don't expect Disney to pivot away from remaking movies like "Moana" anytime soon.

"Thankfully, they do have streaming and merchandising," Dergarabedian said. "Disney's going to have to rely on all that stuff, all those other ancillary opportunities revenue-wise."

• US apartment prices are near all-time highs before the busy moving season begins.
• Consumers are bracing for higher inflation this year, and they may be right.
• A real-estate veteran shared why rent may reach record highs in the coming months.

Renters who are thinking about moving this year may want to strike before they're priced out.

Although apartment prices have drifted downward in recent months, there's reason to suspect that they'll accelerate to record highs during the bustling spring and summer seasons.

A one-bedroom unit in the 100 largest US cities went for $1,524 in March, according to a recent report from real-estate site Zumper. That's almost identical to February when it was $1,525, and the median cost of a two-bedroom setup was unchanged at $1,905.

However, each of those rent figures is up considerably from this time last year. One-bedroom places are 2.5% more expensive, while two-bedroom fixtures are up 3.1% versus last March.

Rent is rising alongside inflation expectations. Consumers surveyed in March were anxious and said they thought prices would increase 6.2% in the next 12 months, up from 5.8% last month, according to The Conference Board's new consumer confidence report.

As rental demand picks up in the warmer weather, real-estate analysts say rent could surge.

"It feels like the calm before the storm," Zumper CEO Anthemos Georgiades said in the report.

Record rent may kick-start inflation

In many parts of the US, the metaphorical tempest is already in full force.

Apartments got more expensive in 59 of the 100 cities tracked by Zumper, including 17 markets where prices rose at a double-digit rate. Units in major metropolitan areas are right around record highs, even during a seasonally quiet stretch.

San Francisco apartments soared 10.3% to $3,200 — its highest mark in nearly five years. And New York City units rose 6.4% from last March to within $30 of their all-time high, Zumper noted.

Jonathan Miller, the cofounder of New York-based real-estate firm Miller Samuel, recently said his research shows that median rents in the Big Apple have never been higher. Apartment costs steadily rose from October through February — long after the peak season of July and August.

Unless there's a recession, which some economists say is increasingly a risk, this may continue.

"If a record was set in February before the market really gets going — barring any change in the state of the economy — we could very well see new records being set quite a few more times this year," Miller told Business Insider.

Although that observation is primarily about the New York market, Miller said it could apply to the rest of the US as well, with the possible exception of the supply-dense Sun Belt region.

Apartment inventory soared to a 50-year high last summer, especially in warmer areas that became popular during the pandemic. But these supply increases may have gone too far, Miller said, as rents are now tumbling in places like North Carolina and Texas.

"Within the Sun Belt, it seems very unlikely because of overbuilding and oversupply," Miller said of rent records. "Outside of the Sun Belt, there's definitely potential for record or near-record prices, but it's really a local phenomenon."

The rental market is prone to the boom-bust cycle that commodities experience, so if apartment supply rises too much and brings down prices in the Sun Belt, builders will pull back. Indeed, Zumper noted that construction permits for new multi-family units are plunging right now.

In the meantime, renters may have plenty of options in the Sun Belt, but apartment availability elsewhere may be more limited. Limited supply combined with lofty mortgage rates, which take home purchases off the table for many, mean that people may contend with higher rent prices.

"We're looking at weaker economic conditions in 2025 generally, but not a recession," Miller said. "And I just think that, even with a weak economy, there's still a potential for higher prices."

More expensive apartments could fuel inflation, and vice versa. Zumper researchers noted that the shelter component of the consumer price index lags their firm's monthly rental data, which could mean that the consumers expecting inflation to reaccelerate may be right.

"The continued rise in annual rent growth across the national rent index signals potential inflationary challenges for the Federal Reserve as it considers future rate cuts," the note read.

• Disney's "Snow White" is a flop at the box office, but it's not all because of anti-woke backlash.
• Analysts say audiences simply didn't connect with the film, which got low marks from critics.
• The Mouse House can still make money from the movie, however.

Don't blame "wokeness" for the struggles Disney's "Snow White" is having at the box office.

The remake of the 1937 classic had a disappointing $87 million global debut that missed nine-figure expectations. It also underwhelmed in the US with a $43 million showing that fell short of the $50 million estimates going in.

Some conservative critics took a victory lap after being frustrated by Disney's attempt to modernize the movie by diversifying the cast and changing the plotline about a prince.

But box-office analysts don't think the "go woke, go broke" narrative that has weighed on Disney explains why "Snow White" hasn't been a hit.

"I don't think everybody just said, 'It's woke, let's not go,'" David A. Gross, who runs the movie consultancy FranchiseRe, told Business Insider. "I just think it is a little bit confusing; it's cross-signals. I think a lot of it goes back to the film — the reviews are not good."

The movie has a 43% critic score on Rotten Tomatoes, though a better 74% audience score. The flick got a solid but unspectacular B+ from CinemaScore, which surveys moviegoers. Gross said a B+ wasn't great for a Disney family film.

"The movie isn't completely satisfying to the audiences who are attending," Gross previously said in written commentary. "That, also, has nothing to do with woke. The movie simply isn't connecting creatively on the level of a big Disney hit."

Critics also didn't seem to think wokeness was the issue with "Snow White."

One of the most scathing reviews came from the center-left news site The Guardian: "A film made by people with cartoon dollar signs for eyes and not even the tiniest glimmer of art in their souls."

Another critic called it "a misguided and hollow attempt at modernizing the classic tale," while a third said the reimagined take was "missing charm and depth."

Indeed, Disney's remakes seem to have diminishing returns. This is the Mouse House's 14th live-action recreation in the past decade. Only three of those have cleared the billion-dollar mark worldwide, and reviews for the more recent remakes have been trending lower.

"If we went in a time machine and went back and there was no controversy, no issues with casting, on the political front — what may the movie have done? We'll never know," Paul Dergarabedian, a Comscore box-office analyst, told BI. "Was it destined to be a $100 million opener? Probably not."

Disney knows it can sell remakes outside the box office

Disney has become risk-averse with its movie strategy by prioritizing sequels such as "Inside Out 2" and "Moana 2"; remakes such as "Snow White" and "Lilo & Stitch"; reboots such as "The Fantastic Four"; and spinoffs such as "Mufasa," which is based on the three-decade-old film "The Lion King."

Not all of these seemingly safe swings lead to hits, as this past weekend shows. But some result in home runs. Disney had the three biggest movies of 2024, all of which were sequels.

Audiences say they want originality, but despite runaway successes such as the "Barbenheimer" duo, original movies often fail to break out at the box office.

"I can't fault Disney for wanting to do remakes or franchises, or any studio for doing that," Dergarabedian said, adding that often when the audience is given originals, "they don't show up at the movie theater."

Another reason Disney is set on sequels and remakes is that it can easily monetize them.

Even if "Snow White" barely makes back its massive budget at the box office, Gross said it could pay off in other ways. Families may pay to see the movie on demand or stream it on Disney+, which could drive sales for "Snow White" Halloween dresses and, eventually, perhaps even trips to Disney World.

"Theatrical is the first of many income streams," Gross remarked. "It's the locomotive pulling the train, and the train is long."

Movies, merchandise, and parks all play into the so-called "flywheel" Walt Disney himself envisioned.

"The movie should have been better, but this is not the end of the world," Gross said. "It's not the end of the business for them at all."

• Disney's biggest box-office hits in the last year were all either sequels or reboots.
• CEO Bob Iger said at Disney's annual shareholder meeting that more of the same is coming in 2025.
• There's a simple reason Disney isn't taking big swings: audiences like familiarity.

Disney's content strategy can be summed up in seven simple words: If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

After a string of creative misfires at the box office during former CEO Bob Chapek's brief tenure, the House of Mouse has regained its mojo by playing the hits.

All of Disney's most successful movies last year were sequels or reboots, as CEO Bob Iger said Thursday at Disney's annual shareholder meeting.

The company produced each of the three highest-grossing movies of 2024: "Inside Out 2," "Deadpool & Wolverine," and "Moana 2." Audiences made those installments of familiar films billion-dollar blockbusters. And "Mufasa," based on 1994's "The Lion King," fared fairly well.

Iger then listed some of the Disney movies he's most excited about this year: "Snow White," a remake of the 1937 classic; "The Fantastic Four: First Steps," which follows earlier Fantastic Four films from 20th Century Studios, "Zootopia 2," the third "Avatar" movie, and a live-action version of 2002's "Lilo & Stitch."

It's not all old hat from Disney, as Iger remarked. Marvel has "Thunderbolts*" coming in May, and Pixar is debuting an original film titled "Elio" in June.

But Disney fans and shareholders have taken note of this clear shift toward safer bets.

Safe over sorry

The first question for Iger during the shareholder meeting was: "What are you doing to prioritize the importance of creativity across the company?"

Iger's seemingly unscripted response was quite telling.

"Our creativity is, in fact, soaring," he said. He named nine titles, from "Avatar: Fire and Ash" to "Zootopia 2," meant to typify Disney's creative spirit. But only one of those films — the action thriller "The Amateur" — will be brand new to audiences.

There are several reasons for Disney's risk aversion, particularly at a moment when the company is feeling the pressure from Wall Street. Its stock has made little progress in the past decade, and the company must select Iger's successor in the next year or so.

Research indicates people crave familiar movies and shows. Sequels and reboots require little explanation, which helps them cut through a crowded and cluttered media landscape where everyone is siloed in their own algorithms. Even if audiences aren't fired up for new installments, they may be more likely to remember and talk about them, which can reduce marketing costs.

Familiar films have a higher floor. While their upside might not be the same as a new breakout hit, they're also far less likely to be a financial flop.

And considering the pressure that Iger and Disney are under, big gambles on fresh ideas can backfire — just ask Chapek about the quickly forgotten bomb "Strange World."

Audiences want comfort food — and Hollywood may pay

It's not just movies: Disney's original TV shows don't seem to be moving the needle much.

No Disney+ show made it onto Nielsen's top-10 ranking of streaming originals in 2024, LightShed Partners found. The streamer did have the chart-topping kids' show "Bluey," but it's licensed to Disney from the Australian Broadcasting Corp. What's startling is that "Bluey" made up 9% of time spent with the streamer last year, per LightShed.

Faced with this tough reality, lead LightShed media analyst Rich Greenfield floated a seemingly unthinkable idea earlier this month that could have Hollywood shaking in its shoes.

"The lack of traction in originals raises the question whether Disney should produce any meaningful original series for Disney+ or shift their focus to being a movie and TV rerun service (akin to the old Disney DVD vault)," Greenfield wrote.

Hollywood creatives and audiences may balk at that idea. But box office totals and viewership data are the ultimate truth serum, and familiarity is winning over originality.

It's hard to fault Disney for taking note.

• Rent fell across the US for the 19th month in a row in February.
• But apartment prices in Washington, DC, rose 3.3% — even as DOGE cuts hit federal workers.
• A slowdown in new apartment construction may cause rents to surge in DC and elsewhere.

While some in Washington, DC may feel like the sky is falling, new data suggests rents there aren't.

Median rents for studios to two-bedroom apartments in the nation's capital rose 3.3% last month from the year before to $2,283, a March 19 report from Realtor.com found. That's a contrast to the 50 largest US cities, where rents slid on an annual basis for the 19th straight month to $1,691.

Eagle-eyed real-estate observers may be surprised to see higher rents in the DC metro area, which includes Virginia cities like Arlington and Alexandria as well as the Maryland suburbs.

That's because median home prices in Washington, DC, fell 3.3% year-over-year in February, according to Realtor.com — the exact inverse of what its rental data in the same span showed. The drop came as homeowners in the capital suddenly listed their homes, with inventory up between 48% and 56.2% in late February to early March versus last year, per the research firm.

DC's housing market seemed to be softening at the same time that the newly formed Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, made major cuts to the federal workforce. Those whose jobs were eliminated may need to relocate, which could lead to a mass exodus.

However, February rental data contradicts this narrative about lower housing costs in cities with lots of federal workers, suggesting that it may be more rumor than reality — at least for now.

One possible explanation for this discrepancy is that return-to-office mandates are counteracting the DC emigration following the DOGE cuts, Realtor.com's economists remarked. Another is that this potentially seismic shift simply hasn't shown up yet.

"I don't think our data is totally reflecting the reality yet," Joel Berner, an economic researcher who co-authored Realtor.com's rent report, recently told Business Insider. "I think it's just a little bit behind."

Why prices could surge in DC, and beyond

Instead of rents plunging as ex-government workers look for greener pastures, there's reason to think apartment prices will surge in DC and several other major US cities in the coming years.

New rental inventory spiked to the highest level in five decades last summer, real-estate firm Zumper found, which is a compelling explanation for why apartment prices have been sagging.

But the pendulum may swing back, making new apartments harder to find in the late 2020s.

Less than 294,000 multi-family units in major cities got the green light for construction last year, Realtor.com found. That's the lowest level of approvals since 2017, even including a chaotic 2020, and is down from a peak of 461,000 in 2022.

Thirty of the 50 biggest US markets saw double-digit declines in multi-family permit approvals — including 23 down by 20% or more. That includes the DC area, where approvals plunged 35%.

"The current trend of declining rents over the past 19 months and a still-sizable number of multi-family units under construction have impacted builders' enthusiasm for new projects," Danielle Hale, Realtor.com's chief economist, said in a statement.

This apparent apartment-construction bust could worsen the US housing shortage, which Realtor.com estimates is already at 3.8 million units. In turn, rents could reverse higher, especially in major markets like New York, where apartments rose by a nation-leading 6.8%.

"The current trend of falling rents may not be sustained," Hale and Berner wrote. "We expect rents to start to grow again in the coming years as the pace of new units hitting the market slows."

• Spring is often a good time to sell a house, though that may not hold true in 2025.
• Home supply is rising, and government spending cuts may boost inventory even further.
• Here are 14 cities where prices could fall in the coming months.

Homeowners looking to relocate would normally be in luck as the weather warms up.

Spring usually ushers in the start of the busy season in the US housing market. In fact, a new report from Realtor.com remarked that the single best week to list a home is in mid-April, since median prices and buyer demand are robust, while competition and price cuts are relatively low.

But this year could be completely different — if buyers realize how much leverage they have.

Sellers' bargaining power is waning as steadily surging home inventory puts property prices under pressure, according to an analysis of Realtor.com's data on the 50 largest US markets.

And that's before accounting for the potential fallout from the sweeping budget cuts by the Department of Government Efficiency. Elon Musk, who runs the newly formed DOGE, plans to eliminate government jobs in droves, which could cause a mass exodus from cities like Washington, DC — thereby bringing down home prices in certain markets even further.

Buyers are back in the driver's seat as supply rises

For years, buying a house has been a painful process. Home affordability was in the tank since prices and mortgage rates were uncomfortably high, making ownership unattainable for many. And a widespread home shortage complicated the process for everyone, even wealthier buyers.

However, significant increases in home supply are shaking up the US real-estate market.

Active home listings rocketed 27.5% higher in February, Realtor.com reported late last month. That marked the 16th consecutive month that there were more houses available on a typical day than in the year prior, though supply is still rather stretched relative to pre-pandemic levels.

Similarly, the number of unsold homes — which accounts for those already under contract — had been up by 18.2% from early 2024, which made for the 15th straight month of growth. That includes newly listed homes, which were 4.2% more common compared to last February.

Major inventory improvements have made homes harder to sell. US houses had been for sale for about 66 days in February, versus just over two months last year. Properties have spent more time on the market than the year prior for the past 11 months, Realtor.com noted, and listings lingered longer than last year in 42 of the 50 largest US cities.

More houses on the market means that bidding wars have largely become a pandemic-era relic. Instead, sellers are resorting to price reductions to entice buyers. Nearly 17% of listings in February had received at least one price cut at some point, versus a 14.6% rate a year earlier.

"Sellers are increasingly adjusting to slower market conditions, as the share of homes with price reductions rose significantly last month," Realtor.com researchers Sabrina Speianu and Danielle Hale wrote late last month. "This trend could indicate a potential slowdown in price growth."

Median US home prices slipped 0.8% from last year to $412,000 in February, Realtor.com had found. It's worth noting that values were up 1.2% on a price-per-square-foot basis, suggesting that cheaper, small homes went to market.

Either way, prices aren't moving much, which is a win for hopeful buyers after years of explosive price growth. Even more exciting for them is the idea that home values could decline further.

14 cities where home prices could fall after Elon Musk's cuts

If DOGE's cuts to the federal government's workforce are as widespread as Musk would like, tens of thousands of employees may be looking for new places to live. Home listings could balloon in cities brimming with government workers, which could deflate their values.

This dynamic doesn't seem to be swaying home prices yet, Realtor.com's economic researchers said, noting that there isn't a discernable difference in prices, price reductions, inventory growth, or time on the market. However, they could certainly see that changing in the coming months.

"Federal workforce reductions could have ripple effects on housing markets with a high concentration of government employees," Speianu and Hale wrote. They added: "The typical home seller takes at least two weeks and often longer to prepare a home for sale, so any real impact is likely ahead."

Below are the 14 US cities where federal government employees make up at least 2% of the workforce, meaning their housing markets are most in danger of being shaken up by DOGE. Note that only the 50 largest markets tracked by Realtor.com were included in this analysis.

Along with each location its median listing price in February, its year-over-year price growth in aggregate and on a per-square-foot basis, its listing price growth since the start of this year, and the percentage of federal government employees as a share of its working population.

1. Washington, DC

Median listing price: $579,995

Median listing price growth: -3.3%

Median listing price per square foot growth: 0%

Listing price growth since Jan. 1: 7%; $40,000

Federal government employees as a share of workers: 11%

2. Virginia Beach, Virginia

Median listing price: $392,500

Median listing price growth: 1.4%

Median listing price per square foot growth: 5.4%

Listing price growth since Jan. 1: 6.4%; $25,000

Federal government employees as a share of workers: 7%

3. Oklahoma City

Median listing price: $314,992

Median listing price growth: -2.6%

Median listing price per square foot growth: 1.3%

Listing price growth since Jan. 1: 4.9%; $16,000

Federal government employees as a share of workers: 4.2%

4. Baltimore

Median listing price: $350,000

Median listing price growth: 6.2%

Median listing price per square foot growth: 2%

Listing price growth since Jan. 1: 5.8%; $20,000

Federal government employees as a share of workers: 3.7%

5. San Diego

Median listing price: $949,995

Median listing price growth: -4.7%

Median listing price per square foot growth: -2%

Listing price growth since Jan. 1: 5.9%; $56,000

Federal government employees as a share of workers: 3.1%

6. San Antonio

Median listing price: $327,000

Median listing price growth: -2.4%

Median listing price per square foot growth: -2.1%

Listing price growth since Jan. 1: 4.8%; $16,000

Federal government employees as a share of workers: 3%

7. Memphis, Tennessee

Median listing price: $328,050

Median listing price growth: 1.3%

Median listing price per square foot growth: 2.7%

Listing price growth since Jan. 1: 9.4%; $31,000

Federal government employees as a share of workers: 2.8%

8. Tucson, Arizona

Median listing price: $396,200

Median listing price growth: -1%

Median listing price per square foot growth: -1.2%

Listing price growth since Jan. 1: 7.4%; $29,000

Federal government employees as a share of workers: 2.8%

9. Richmond, Virginia

Median listing price: $429,653

Median listing price growth: -4.2%

Median listing price per square foot growth: 2.3%

Listing price growth since Jan. 1: 4.6%; $20,000

Federal government employees as a share of workers: 2.7%

10. Kansas City, Missouri/Kansas

Median listing price: $379,450

Median listing price growth: -9.9%

Median listing price per square foot growth: -0.9%

Listing price growth since Jan. 1: 7.4%; $28,000

Federal government employees as a share of workers: 2.6%

11. Jacksonville, Florida

Median listing price: $388,098

Median listing price growth: -5.3%

Median listing price per square foot growth: -3.3%

Listing price growth since Jan. 1: 7.6%; $29,000

Federal government employees as a share of workers: 2.5%

12. Buffalo, New York

Median listing price: $249,974

Median listing price growth: -0.5%

Median listing price per square foot growth: 1.1%

Listing price growth since Jan. 1: 14.8%; $37,000

Federal government employees as a share of workers: 2%

13. Cleveland

Median listing price: $241,725

Median listing price growth: 14%

Median listing price per square foot growth: 14.9%

Listing price growth since Jan. 1: 16.1%; $38,000

Federal government employees as a share of workers: 2%

14. Tampa, Florida

Median listing price: $399,000

Median listing price growth: -4%

Median listing price per square foot growth: -4%

Listing price growth since Jan. 1: 6.5%; $26,000

Federal government employees as a share of workers: 2%

• Rent growth has been accelerating in recent months, though prices are still in check.
• Apartment affordability could get stretched during a seasonally busy spring.
• Here are a dozen large US cities where rent is becoming more affordable.

Tenants should be on guard, as a brief winter slowdown in the rental market may end soon.

Rent growth rose on a year-over-year basis at the fastest pace in over 12 months in February, according to fresh rental data from listings site Zumper. One-bedroom fixtures were 2.9% more expensive than last year at $1,525, and two-bedroom units surged 3.7% to $1,905. Last month, rent increased by 2.5% and 3.2%, respectively, compared to the start of 2024.

That swifter growth "is a nod to how much demand there is across the country, even at a time of record-high supply," said Zumper's Crystal Chen, who authored the report, in a message to Business Insider. Her firm said last summer that new apartment supply had hit a 50-year high.

Curiously, apartments were actually slightly cheaper this month than in January, when the median rate for one-bedroom setups was $1,534. The same was true last year, as going rates for one-bedroom apartments fell from $1,496 last January to $1,482 in February 2024.

But renters shouldn't count on more affordable apartments — in fact, the opposite may be true.

Back-to-back years of rent sliding from January to February could simply mean that more leases end in the first month of the year. A smaller pool of tenants deciding to move or re-up could translate to softer rental demand, which would temporarily cause apartment prices to pull back.

However, that relief likely won't last long, as price growth resumed in March before taking off in the late spring and early summer. Either way, the difference in median rents at the national level was just a few dollars in either direction, which is unlikely to be a major tipping point.

"Rents staying pretty flat on a monthly basis is pretty on trend with this time of year," Chen told BI. "Winter months see lower rental demand, so even as some leases end, limited competition keeps prices relatively stable until the busier spring and summer seasons."

12 top cities for deal-minded renters

Apartment prices in the 100 largest US cities that Zumper tracks each month foreshadow what's ahead for shelter inflation, which rose at the slowest rate in three years in January. But Zumper researchers are wary of leaning on lagging indicators more than their proprietary price data.

"Although shelter inflation has eased in recent months, its lagging nature — due to the way it's calculated — means the full impact has yet to be realized," said Zumper CEO Anthemos Georgiades in a statement for the report. He added: "The annual rent increases seen in our most recent data are likely to be reflected in CPI metrics over the coming months."

More than two-thirds of the biggest US rental markets experienced rent increases in February, up from just under that mark in January. Price hikes were most prevalent in regions with fewer available apartments, like the Northeast and Midwest, Chen remarked.

Conversely, higher-inventory cities in the once-trendy Sun Belt region saw some of the largest drops, though those declines were tempered relative to early 2024.

Business Insider analyzed Zumper's latest rental data and found a dozen cities where rent for one-bedroom apartments is both below the national median of $1,525 and down more than 1% from February 2024. Below are those 12 cities, along with their median rent, year-over-year and month-over-month rent changes, and the cost savings for renters versus the national median.

1. Durham, North Carolina

One-bedroom median rent: $1,340

One-bedroom year-over-year rent change: -7.6%

One-bedroom month-over-month rent change: 3.9%

Cost savings vs national median: $194

2. Milwaukee, Wisconsin

One-bedroom median rent: $1,000

One-bedroom year-over-year rent change: -4.8%

One-bedroom month-over-month rent change: 0%

Cost savings vs national median: $534

3. Charlotte, North Carolina

One-bedroom median rent: $1,420

One-bedroom year-over-year rent change: -4.7%

One-bedroom month-over-month rent change: -1.4%

Cost savings vs national median: $114

4. Baltimore, Maryland

One-bedroom median rent: $1,290

One-bedroom year-over-year rent change: -4.4%

One-bedroom month-over-month rent change: 0%

Cost savings vs national median: $244

5. Orlando, Florida

One-bedroom median rent: $1,490

One-bedroom year-over-year rent change: -3.9%

One-bedroom month-over-month rent change: 0.7%

Cost savings vs national median: $44

6. Boise, Idaho

One-bedroom median rent: $1,300

One-bedroom year-over-year rent change: -3.7%

One-bedroom month-over-month rent change: 0%

Cost savings vs national median: $234

7. Austin, Texas

One-bedroom median rent: $1,450

One-bedroom year-over-year rent change: -3.3%

One-bedroom month-over-month rent change: -1.4%

Cost savings vs national median: $84

8. Las Vegas, Nevada

One-bedroom median rent: $1,210

One-bedroom year-over-year rent change: -2.4%

One-bedroom month-over-month rent change: 0.8%

Cost savings vs national median: $324

9. Knoxville, Tennessee

One-bedroom median rent: $1,290

One-bedroom year-over-year rent change: -2.3%

One-bedroom month-over-month rent change: -3%

Cost savings vs national median: $244

10. Irving, Texas

One-bedroom median rent: $1,270

One-bedroom year-over-year rent change: -1.6%

One-bedroom month-over-month rent change: 1.6%

Cost savings vs national median: $264

11. Glendale, Arizona

One-bedroom median rent: $1,200

One-bedroom year-over-year rent change: -1.6%

One-bedroom month-over-month rent change: 5.3%

Cost savings vs national median: $334

12. Minneapolis, Minnesota

One-bedroom median rent: $1,290

One-bedroom year-over-year rent change: -1.5%

One-bedroom month-over-month rent change: -2.3%

Cost savings vs national median: $244