Current Disney (DIS) board members picked up a win against activist investor Nelson Peltz at their annual shareholder meeting on Wednesday, having enough shareholder votes in their favor. Disney's proxy battle has been very much in the public eye with questions about CEO Bob Iger's leadership.

Needham Senior Internet and Entertainment Analyst Laura Martin joins Market Domination Overtime to give insight into why she believes Peltz lost his poxy fight with Disney.

Martin lays out her reasons: "The Disney brand is iconic and to have hostility in the boardroom is really off brand for Disney. Two, 95% of shareholders voted for Bob Iger which is 100% of shareholders that weren't Nelson Peltz, so there is a lot of faith in Bob Iger as a leader, that's the second thing. And then third, Nelson Peltz has no entertainment experience. He did a hostile on P&G (PG) and Unilever (UL), but he has no entertainment experience so its not helpful to have him on the board other than as a rabble rouser and I think that worked against him.

Watch the video above to hear what Martin thinks will help drive Disney's stock higher.

For more expert insight and the latest market action, click here to watch this full episode of Market Domination Overtime.

Editor's note: This article was written by Nicholas Jacobino

Video Transcript

JULIE HYMAN: So it sounds like from what you're saying, Laura, it's not as though the issues that Peltz was bringing up were invalid. Why do you think in the end he didn't win? Was it that Disney that it's full court press was successful using its IP to convince shareholders to vote on its behalf? Was it that Iger was already making the right moves? What do you think went on there?

LAURA MARTIN: I think there's three things. The Disney brand is iconic, and to have hostility in the boardroom is really off brand for Disney, too. 95% of shareholders voted for Bob Iger, which is 100% of shareholders that weren't Nelson Peltz. So there is a lot of faith in Bob Iger as a leader. That's the second thing.

And then third, Nelson Peltz has no entertainment experience. He did a hostile on P&G and Unilever, but he has no entertainment experience. So it's not helpful to have him on the board other than as a rabble rouser. And I think that worked against him.

JOSH LIPTON: And Laura, final question to you. Listen, I mean, bottom line, Laura, you do have a buy on the name, you're a believer. What are the catalysts ahead lower that you see that are going to move this name even still higher?

LAURA MARTIN: Right. So I really like the ESPN-Warner Brothers-Fox joint venture is going after 10 million cord cutters that currently Disney earns no money from. So I like that as a catalyst. I really like streaming losses are now-- they're going to hit profitability in the September quarter instead of the December quarter. And I definitely talk to a lot of investors who are skeptical about that ever happening. So if it happens, I think that is a catalyst for the stock.

Continued margin expansion at the parks, parks are now a third of revenue and 3/4 of profitability. So parks have to continue to do well to drive earnings per share growth. And I expect that they will. So I would say those are the three key things I'm looking for in '24 and '25 to keep these shares moving to the upside.