-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Eisner Vs Iger
- Thread starter THEMEPARKPIONEER
- Start date
L.C. Clench
Well-Known Member
Time will tell if anything on the horizon actually turns out great. Under Iger amazing concept art has come out but the end results have never matched what was pitched. Its champagne concepts on a Miller High Life budget.
HMF
Well-Known Member
Personally I left during Dino Thunder. Though I felt Ninja Storm was stupid. I have heard good things about RPM but have never actually seen it so....
Chef Mickey
Well-Known Member
I'd argue the only thing on my list that was decent is Toy Story. Art of Animation is nice, but most of the hotel expansion came under Eisner.
Just look at the attractions on my Eisner list...pretty hard to argue the greatness of the rides we got...
Well all I can say is that I can't afford to go to Disney anymore and my last trip left me in financial distress so I have no problems saying where this crook can go!! Half my favorite attractions are gone and the price is just not worth it. With Eisner I could spend 3 days in the parks for 150+ tax. I spent 400 this year including tax.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
Yea, and when Eisner was there I bought a new car for around 6K. Things change all the time. The year that WDW opened I bought a brand new Buick for $3200.00.
Inflation kills
Gordon Buford
New Member
Disney admission prices haven’t just kept pace with inflation.
When the Magic Kingdom opened in 1971, an 11 Adventure Book—the most expensive admission you could buy short of guided tour—cost $5.75. In 2015 dollars, that equates to $33.60.
In 1981, the most expensive one-day ticket you could buy (A 12 Adventure Book) cost $11. That’s $28.70 in 2015 dollars. (Surprisingly, slightly less than the 1971 price!)
By 1991, the concept of individual ride tickets had been done away with, so a One Day Ticket was now “all you could ride”. The price was $33—$57.40 in 2015 dollars.
Yet another decade later, a One Day ticket had risen to $48—$64.20.
So even in inflation adjusted dollars, the price of a one-day admission didn’t reach even half of 2017’s adult peak season ticket price until 2000. That also doesn’t account for the fact that in the early days, parents and grandparents could tag along on a less expensive general admission ticket that didn’t include rides.
You can make arguments about today’s Magic Kingdom offering more than it did decades ago—that’s a separate issue. But unquestionably, even taking inflation into account. Walt Disney World has never been more expensive or less accessible.
They could charge 50$ a day and all the hotels around it can be 29.99 a night...Wait, we have that close to where I live. Its called Six Flags. It is a business , simple as that. Eisner had some good points ( very few) but overall he was running the heart of the company ( which isnt theme parks) into the ground. Ask all the animators he booted what they thought of him. We know what Roy thought and if anyone knew if the "direction" or heart of the company was being misled, it was him. Iger is cleaning up a bigger mess than most people realize and it had to start with the Animation side of things. The parks will get their due. Things take time and we live in a world with impatient people who dont understand business.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
When in real time has Disney ever given a "special" tag along rate for parents and grandparents. Disney has always been a family park, Walt insisted on that. It was for the whole family to partake in, not tag along with. If that ever really happened is was a very well kept secret and it didn't last for very long. Everything you could care to mention has never been more expensive. I'm not sure what you mean by less acceptable. If that means that not everyone can go because of cost, that was true in 1955 as well when minimum wage was $.75 per hour.
Disney, as it has been stated since time began, does not come under any part of inflation figuring. It is a luxury item and not factored in anyplace. Anymore then a Cadillac is compared to a Ford Focus. It is not a necessity of life and has no reason to "stay in line with inflation". It is a what the public will bear, type of commodity. Hell, even the cost of gasoline isn't factored in with inflation. It is more like necessities, food, housing and a few other things that are used to measure it. Disney should never even be mentioned with any thought that it should or shouldn't be higher then the rate of inflation, because it has no bearing on it. None. You can live a long, happy, healthy life without ever stepping foot in a park.
The Disney Company does not owe anyone, you, me or the Pope, anything other then an entertainment venue that exists for those that can afford it and/or feels worthwhile to whomever is spending the money to go there. Not everyone can afford everything. I'd like to have a Castle on the Rhine, but, I cannot afford it. I can't have it. It doesn't keep with inflation. It doesn't have to because I can live without it.
As long as the parks remain full it means that people are still able and willing to pay the money to get in. Because of that there is no reason to ever mention that. We can say that it is getting to expensive for many to go there but it does not now nor has it ever had any connection to inflation and it never will. It simply means that some can afford the Ford Focus, but, cannot afford the Cadillac. It is just a fact of economic life.
RobidaFlats
Well-Known Member
This is false.
The primary measure of reported inflation in the U.S. is the Consumer Price Index. The CPI includes gasoline. Furthermore, one of the categories measured is recreation. The CPI has nothing to do with "necessities of life".
Gordon Buford
New Member
Today, the price of a Magic Kingdom admission ticket includes all of rides within the park, but through the early ’80s, that wasn’t the case. In the early days, you paid a modest general admission charge to get into the park, then you paid extra for tickets to get on the rides. Therefore, if Mom and Dad or Grandma and Grandpa didn’t plan on riding any rides, they could just buy the cheaper general admission ticket, stroll around the park, and take in the parades, musical shows, etc. Not so today: An elderly woman who rides no rides at all pays the same admission as a twenty-something who rides Space Mountain ten times in a row.
I don’t think anyone is disputing that Disney is a private enterprise with the full right to charge whatever price it can get away with. You’re correct in that Disney doesn’t have any responsibility to keep ticket prices low.
But that said, I don’t think Uncle Walt—champion of capitalism and private enterprise that he was—ever intended Disneyland or Disney World to be a “luxury”.
In fact, circling back to the topic at hand, here’s my outsider take on Disney, Eisner, and Iger.
I see Walt Disney as a dreamer and visionary who saw making money as being incidental to realizing his dreams. Walt certainly didn’t want to lose money, and he had business-minded brother Roy around to keep the corporate ship on course. Walt would say “Here’s the dream, Roy. Can we do it?” And Roy would figure out how to make Walt’s dream make money.
By the Eisner era, that was reversed: Making money came first; the dream was secondary—if it ever came along at all. And simply making money wasn’t good enough. Making the most money was the new prerequisite. That worldview may be logical, sensible, and pleasing to the shareholders, but I don’t think it will ever allow a dollars and cents CEO inspire creative people and drive them to follow with the fanatical devotion that Walt commanded.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
Walt Disney was a great man. I think one of the most impressive people that ever lived. I have read a lot of books and done a lot of research on the man. One of a kind. However, that said, I don't have any idea what would motivate him at this point in time and neither do you. He never missed an opportunity to make whatever money he could on anything he did. Disneyland was a dream that through "profits" and ingenuity he was able to build. With the proceeds from that, and other things, he was able to acquire the land in Florida. (He didn't have enough money to actually build it without corporate support.)
The idea that he wouldn't have taken advantage of a product that he created to further enhance his ability to keep expanding and exploring new things is just crazy hero worship. Prices were cheap in the beginning and so was inflation, but, that never stopped Disneyland from being a luxury and the only way he would have gotten it off the ground initially was to be really careful about his ticket pricing structure. But, he certainly did capitalize on other aspects of the business. He would have done just like every other business venture and taken advantage of creating something that people valued. I will submit that he would have continued to invest in the parks more then the current company does, but, he was never foolish enough to let opportunities pass him by and it is an insult to his memory to even think that he would have done that.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
If stuff like that were to be included inflation rate would be double digit. It is not, at least no as figured by the government. And it still doesn't matter at all. It is a what the public will bear type of business, NO ONE has to go to Disney. It is strictly voluntary and no one has to pay anything, they just don't go. It is not figured into the Cost Of LIVING! That is the cost of playing!
RobidaFlats
Well-Known Member
Are you intentionally obtuse? You're spouting 100% nonsense with nothing to back it up. 5 seconds with Google proves that you're full of it: https://www.bls.gov/cpi/cpifaq.htm#Question_7 That statistic is compiled by the US government and the CPI-W is even used to determine the Cost of Living Adjustments for Social Security.
So whenever you're ready to apologize to the guy that you jumped on (it was only his second post ever, by the way) and admit that you have no idea what you're talking about regarding inflation, feel free to use that link.
And as usual you continue ranting about an argument that no one is making. No one is saying that Disney vacations are a right or an entitlement. But since you can't even get your facts straight and then blatantly deny reality when you're called out on it, I don't know why I would expect anything else. You constantly spout nonsense around here, and everyone is entitled to their opinion (although not facts) but the way that you treated that new member is just appalling. Get your facts straight, stop putting words in people's mouths and try reading what they have to say instead of just sticking your head in the sand and yelling.
jlsHouston
Well-Known Member
I read Disney War on my trip summer of 2013. Awesome book. Eisner eventually just got to narcissistic or something..Sold out for Wall Street value. I found myself admiring him and then despising him all the way through. In the end I felt a little sorry for him...
jlsHouston
Well-Known Member
Okay so I voted Eisner..And this is why: I have no idea what WDW was like from the 70's until I first drove under the sign in 2011. But the Disney magic, the Disney vibe whatever it is or was I felt it in 2011 on that first trip and now I think it's pretty much gone. I think Igor and TWDC under his leadership snuffed the light out. I believe Eisner did try to build on Walt's dream and legacy but then sold his soul out to Wall Street and lost his way struggling to stay on top and in control. All of the wonderful resort options on Disney property we can thank Eisner for. I don't think Igor has ever been much more than a bean counter with little or no vision. Anyway that is why I picked Eisner for CEO over Igor.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
If I want moral advice I will talk to someone that actually knows something about morality. No one has to believe anything I put up here and I can assure you that whether or not you do will not cause me any loss of sleep. You don't qualify or have any right to judge me or my motivation. I'm so sick of the "inflation" BS. that I could scream. It just plain isn't relative to the amount they charge or how much higher it is now then it was 40 plus years ago. It just doesn't matter.
If you insist that in spite of the fact that I pay at least 20% more out for the same thing then I did 3 years ago and the Cost of Living that the Government used as justification for an increase of .3% over that time is the rate of inflation, what choice do I have but to believe it. Again I am going to say, but, for the last time, commodities like WDW are not going to ever care what the inflation rate is or isn't. They are selling a perceived quality special product that is not required for us to live and therefore it just doesn't matter and constantly saying that it does, does not make it so. As I stated before, when WDW opened I had just purchased a new Buick for a little over $3000.00 today that Buick is upwards of $58000.00. It matters not one iota what the rate of inflation is, they are charging what they can get for it. Know why they can do that? Because you don't have to buy a Buick. You don't have to go to WDW, you just want too. There is a difference! That is my point, not what the rate of inflation might or might not be.
I just got a great idea... Please put me on ignore so you don't have to partake of my constant nonsense. Both of us will be a lot happier. Ba-Bye!
RobidaFlats
Well-Known Member
And they shouldn't, because even when you flat out lie and get called on it you won't back down and admit it. Ignoring you is a great idea that everyone should probably consider, but since not everyone has been here long enough to see what you're about, posts like these serve a purpose.
So to anyone who might be curious about what just happened:
@Goofyernmost stated the following:
1.
It was obvious from context that the poster was referring to gate admission being cheap and separate from attraction ticketing. This was pointed out and consequently ignored.
2.
This is patently false and was pointed out but he stuck by his statement.
3.
This is patently false and was pointed out but he stuck by his statement.
4.
This was never suggested by anyone and is merely a strawman that he likes to rail against.
5.
It was pointed out that recreation is included in CPI calculations, but it was once again ignored.
6.
This is just as false as the first time he said that "stuff" wasn't included. Furthermore, proof was provided that it was used in the government calculation. That proof was ignored.
So to anyone who might be considering lending any weight at all to this poster's references to inflation: Be advised that he doesn't understand what it is, what it is used for or how people see it as a benchmark of value over time. Furthermore, he is incapable of accepting facts that refute what he says and is only interested in tilting at windmills while ignoring legitimate discussion. To the new members that get caught up in his ranting, I'm sorry.
Walt Disney would have not been pleased with either of these leaders. Walt knew the importance of family values and that was one of his top priorities from the beginning. That culture is not as important to the current leadership and they should thread carefully to keep from alienating a majority of their potential customers.