Summary

Franco Chomonalez’s Thunderbird thesis rests on an extreme valuation: less than 2x next-12-month EBITDA, later framed as 1.6x EBITDA and roughly 4x after-tax free cash flow. The C$75 million market-cap studio has net cash and an asset-light, contractor-heavy model, but traded only about $75,000 the previous day. The discount is therefore both the opportunity and the warning: this is a very tiny, highly illiquid stock whose longtime holders have already been burned.
Thunderbird is a diversified production studio whose service work supplies cash while owned IP supplies asymmetric upside. It produces animation and unscripted factual programming through three models: low-risk fee-for-service work without IP ownership, owned-IP productions monetized through licensing and consumer products, and partnerships combining larger production fees with backend economics. With 24 productions across 15 partners including Disney, Netflix, Max and Nickelodeon, Chomonalez calls it a streaming “pick-and-shovel” rather than a bet on one platform.
Atomic Cartoons’ claimed moat is not content ownership but unusually efficient execution reinforced by Canadian labor incentives. Chomonalez says stacked federal and British Columbia programs can rebate up to 75% of production labor costs, letting Thunderbird bid aggressively while operating in California’s time zone. Just shy of 30 interviews with industry participants consistently described it as highly reliable under Disney-level specifications—“the Goldman Sachs of animation”—but Andrew Walker’s unresolved challenge is whether that reputation earns excess returns or merely wins commodity work at lower cost.
The clearest unanswered question is why Disney outsources Spidey and His Amazing Friends while retaining other animation internally. Chomonalez conceded his channel checks “didn’t provide me too much insight” into that make-versus-buy decision; his best answer was cost, process expertise, operational simplicity and “why reinvent the wheel.” Walker’s pushback survives: without elite IP or distribution, Thunderbird may be assembling contractors for returns that remain structurally below those earned by Disney or Netflix.
AI is simultaneously the most important operating upside and the risk that reportedly led private-equity firms to step away from a near cash offer. Chomonalez heard through major shareholders that private-equity firms approached the company and came close to a cash offer, but repeatedly stepped away over AI uncertainty. Fewer animators per production could lift Thunderbird’s capacity and margins, yet Walker’s harder scenario is that Disney eventually needs almost no outside studio at all; Chomonalez’s honest answer was, “I won’t even pretend to know with certainty how this is all going to play out.”
The failed strategic process and management’s decision not to prioritize buybacks are part of why cheapness has persisted. About 50% of the float is reportedly held by five or six investment firms, with Chomonalez suspecting quite a few may be sellers, while Marnie Waisman and Frank Giustra have favored “batting singles” in owned IP to pursue the next breakout franchise. Chomonalez favors a mix: he believes Thunderbird could option The Last Kids on Earth for under $10,000, suggesting it can fund inexpensive IP experiments while repurchasing stock at an “outrageous” valuation.
The near-term catalyst is a planned TSX uplisting, while the larger bet is that streaming content spending reaccelerates. Chomonalez expects better visibility, liquidity and different buyback rules to produce a rerating to a 3–4x valuation multiple. Longer term, he argues bundling is merely the “frenemy era”: with households averaging four subscriptions, many wanting to cut back, and content remaining the consumer differentiator, platforms may have to resume spending to defend their place in the bundle.

Deep dive

1. The price is the thesis—and also the warning

Chomonalez places Thunderbird between “great businesses that you can get at a fair price” and “fair businesses that you can get at a great price.” He calls it a very good business available at an outstanding price: below 2x next-12-month EBITDA.
The scale is unforgiving. Thunderbird’s market capitalization was about C$75 million, or roughly US$50 million, while only around $75,000 of stock changed hands the previous day. Institutions constrained by liquidity effectively cannot participate.
Walker’s framing keeps the history attached to the multiple: Thunderbird was already promoted as a cheap streaming pick-and-shovel around $4, yet traded near $1.50 two years later. Every bullish answer confronts the same question—“why hasn’t this worked?”—even if 1.6x EBITDA appears extraordinary.

2. Thunderbird combines production fees with selective IP bets

The lowest-risk model is service production: a network or streamer hires Thunderbird, pays a fee and cash-flows Thunderbird’s production costs other than labor through the project, while retaining the intellectual property. Thunderbird bears limited capital risk but receives no franchise upside.
Owned-IP development reverses that tradeoff. Thunderbird makes or options properties, pitches them to buyers, and retains licensing and consumer-products economics; Chomonalez said management reports a hit rate above 80%, specifically for these owned-IP pitches, not service-work bids. He guessed that ordinary service-side bidding hit rates might be single-digit.
Partnership projects sit between the two: Thunderbird can manage writing, pre-production and animation, earn a larger fee, and participate mainly in consumer-product backend. Chomonalez characterized service activity as roughly 90% of the business, leaving IP as a smaller but potentially transformative layer.
The company began in 2003 with an IP-led ambition. Frank Giustra’s 2011 investment helped acquire Blade Runner rights; Thunderbird then bought factual-content producer Great Pacific Media in 2014, animation studio Atomic Cartoons in 2016, and entered public markets through a 2018 reverse merger with Golden Secret Ventures.

3. Atomic’s moat is process power plus subsidized labor

Atomic is the “crown jewel.” Its factual sibling produces comparatively low-cost, high-margin unscripted shows such as the long-running Highway Thru Hell, but animation drives the debate because Disney and other demanding customers repeatedly return with franchise work.
Chomonalez’s cost case centers on refundable Canadian incentives: a cited 25% labor rebate plus federal and British Columbia credits that can, when stacked, recover as much as 75% of labor expense. Vancouver also offers California’s time zone and cultural proximity without Los Angeles labor costs.
His just-under-30 interviews—with agents, creators, animators, producers, streamer employees and former employees—consistently praised Thunderbird’s reliability and ability to meet exacting specifications. Borrowing Hamilton Helmer’s language, Chomonalez calls this “process power”: an execution system Disney may struggle to reproduce as efficiently.

4. Disney’s outsourcing decision remains the thesis’s hardest hole

Walker rejects “pick and shovel” as sufficient analysis. If elite IP and distribution capture the economics, Thunderbird may simply win work because it can produce a Disney show for $4.5 million that would cost Disney $5 million internally—earning a return at or around its cost of capital, rather than an exceptional return.
His concrete challenge: why outsource Spidey and His Amazing Friends to Thunderbird while producing What If…? through Marvel Studios Animation, which Walker believes is made in-house? If Vancouver incentives are decisive, Disney could hire its own Vancouver employees; if Thunderbird is uniquely efficient, why does Disney not outsource everything?
Chomonalez’s candid response: “The channel checks I did didn’t provide me too much insight into that question.” His inferred answer combines lower cost, accumulated expertise, trusted relationships and operational simplification—Disney can concentrate on financing, marketing and distribution instead of rebuilding a proven production process.
Repeat work on Spidey, Iron Man, 101 Dalmatian Street and other Disney franchises supports durability, and Thunderbird grew revenue in 2023 while much of the industry retrenched. Still, Walker’s pushback stands: an asset-light professional-services brand can be recurring in practice without being contractually recurring or owning valuable balance-sheet assets.

5. AI can improve the production model—or dissolve it

Chomonalez says the failed-sale discount has a specific, underdiscussed cause: he heard that private equity came close to a cash offer, then withdrew repeatedly because it could not underwrite AI risk. That matters when five or six investment firms reportedly control roughly half the float and some may want out.
His base case is productivity enhancement. If ten animators become three, Thunderbird could produce more work at higher margins; Chomonalez argues that intricate professional animation still exceeds what current consumer tools can reliably deliver, while copyright uncertainty may make major branded clients wary of models trained on third-party material.
Walker pushes the endpoint further: perhaps one elite animator will eventually supervise 20 AI-generated shows, just as recorded media concentrated rewards among a few global singers. In that world, the relevant question is not whether AI helps Thunderbird’s employees but whether Disney still needs Thunderbird.
Chomonalez concedes the unknowability. He thinks outsourcing also simplifies Disney’s organization and therefore could survive narrowing cost gaps, but identifies the opposite scenario—Disney using AI internally—as the principal risk. His conclusion remains explicitly hedged: productivity is “probably going to be a good thing for all the players.”

6. Capital allocation is a fight over Thunderbird’s identity

The proxy drama divided two philosophies. Frank Giustra and former Lionsgate CFO and board member Marnie Waisman favored building the next Lionsgate by recycling service cash into owned children’s IP—continually “batting singles” until Thunderbird “strike[s] gold.”
Voss Capital represented the financial-engineering side: press for tangible shareholder-return actions rather than relying solely on reinvestment. Walker crystallizes the frustration with the company’s own phrases—“content is king” and “cash is king”—before objecting that “there can only be one king.”
Chomonalez does not demand a binary choice. Thunderbird could, he believes, option the rights to The Last Kids on Earth for less than $10,000, so modest IP investment need not preclude buybacks. Walker frames the company as a net-cash, asset-light business trading at roughly four times after-tax free cash flow; Chomonalez says he would ideally like to see both meaningful IP investment and more repurchases.
Management’s caution has delayed rerating actions: it shelved a contemplated Nasdaq listing around 2021–22 because it feared the IPO could be unsuccessful, and capital-markets fees were estimated at $1 million–$2 million. Chomonalez nevertheless regards CEO Jennifer Twiner McCarron highly, while predicting that continued failure to create a breakout IP will strengthen shareholders demanding repurchases.

7. The TSX uplisting and renewed content spending are the two catalysts

Chomonalez expects Thunderbird to move from the TSX Venture Exchange to the main TSX by year-end. He believes greater visibility, institutional accessibility and different rules governing buybacks could improve liquidity materially; he cited the Venture Exchange’s 10%-of-float buyback limit.
He expects the uplisting and improved liquidity to help rerate the stock to at least a 3–4x valuation multiple. Walker resists the comforting floor—after Chomonalez says, “This can’t go that much lower,” the host answers, “I’ve told myself that before”—but frames the low valuation as the crux, at roughly 1.6x EBITDA or four times after-tax free cash flow.
The broader thesis is a new content-spending cycle. Chomonalez divides streaming into 2020–22 “peak TV,” a profitability retrenchment, and today’s bundled “frenemy era”; surveys he cites show four subscriptions per average household, more than half wanting to rationalize spending, and only one in five services bought indirectly.
Where others see bundling as proof the streaming wars are over, Chomonalez sees another competitive turn. Because content still differentiates platforms for consumers, each service must defend its place in increasingly rationalized bundles—potentially reaccelerating spending across Thunderbird’s 15 partners and 24 productions.

Chen Tianqi on Long-Termism, XGBoost, MXNet, and TVM Are We Past Peak iPhone? + Eliezer Yudkowsky on A.I. Doom