News Splash Mountain retheme to Princess and the Frog - Tiana's Bayou Adventure

[91JLovesDisney]

This same sentiment could be applied to what you said.

LMAO
Maybe you didn't catch my statement, "So don't take anybody's word for it, but I HEARD from a source that he heard from a source that.."
and
"But obviously IDK, just something I heard."

what's your point?

 

[celluloid]

That’s not what independent means. It means they don’t work for the Walt Disney Company. They already work somewhere else.

Two different sentences there. They are independent from the company. They are also not captive. Any person on that independent committee could get a job somewhere else. Just like you said Chapek could do if he was not permitted to 32 million a year instead of what was about half of that. It is a circle of people making sure THEY are taken care of. They benefit from those shares too.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

Two different sentences there. They are independent from the company. They are also not captive. Any person on that independent committee could get a job somewhere else. Just like you said Chapek could do if he was not permitted to 32 million a year instead of what was about half of that. It is a circle of people making sure THEY are taken care of. They benefit from those shares too.

The bolded is basically what I said earlier - big egos feeding big egos...and is part of the problem at the core of America's income disparity issues.

 

[Brer Oswald]

LMAO
Maybe you didn't catch my statement, "So don't take anybody's word for it, but I HEARD from a source that he heard from a source that.."
and
"But obviously IDK, just something I heard."

what's your point?

Abigail Disney’s documentary about Disney paying their workers poorly is about to drop. The company is going to be under fire from the Twitter crowd. So if it was cancelled (it wasn’t), it’s sure as hell back on now for good PR.

 

[peter11435]

How do you know it hasn't been cancelled? That's all I'm asking

Because it hasn’t been

And there are teams actively working on it

 

[celluloid]

Because it hasn’t been

And there are teams actively working on it

Teams actively work on things all of the time.

It is shocking how far some things get before pulling the plug. I mean, we were not too far from having an Animatronic that wasEddie Murphy and Frankenstein's Monster characterized in MGM Studios.

If anything. Disney is going to see how this Tiana Disney Plus stuff plays out.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Teams actively work on things all of the time.

It is shocking how far some things get before pulling the plug. I mean, we were not too far from having an Animatronic that wasEddie Murphy and Frankenstein's Monster characterized in MGM Studios.

If anything. Disney is going to see how this Tiana Disney Plus stuff plays out.

True... but that doesn't have anything to do with a grain-of-salt rumor that it has already been completely cancelled.

People are working on it now. It hasn't been cancelled for now. It can be cancelled in the future. It's unlikely it'll be cancelled, tho.

 

[MisterPenguin]

How do you know it hasn't been cancelled? That's all I'm asking

It's anonymous source v. anonymous source.

Difference is that @peter11435's sources have been proven track record for being mostly right (and the times they weren't were mostly likely due to the mercurial nature of Disney's ""plans.""

 

[91JLovesDisney]

Difference is that @peter11435's sources have been proven track record for being mostly right

I have no track record at all. Maybe this will be my first score

 

[peter11435]

Teams actively work on things all of the time.

It is shocking how far some things get before pulling the plug. I mean, we were not too far from having an Animatronic that wasEddie Murphy and Frankenstein's Monster characterized in MGM Studios.

If anything. Disney is going to see how this Tiana Disney Plus stuff plays out.

Oh absolutely. That’s why when I said the project hasn’t been cancelled or significantly delayed I followed that up with… at least not yet.

 

[Dear Prudence]

Curious, do you also think there needs to be caps on athletes, movie stars, and singers' compensation?

They are paid in line with how the market values their skills, just like CEO's.

Musicians work a lot harder and have to have a lot more skills than any CEO.

 

[UNCgolf]

Musicians work a lot harder and have to have a lot more skills than any CEO.

Well that's not necessarily true of, say, a pop star. Some of them don't have to do anything but sing (and maybe learn some choreographed dance moves). They often don't write any of the songs or perform any of the music -- not that I have any problem with the money they make. People like it and pay for it, so they deserve to get their share (although they may get an outsized share compared to the studio musicians etc. who actually play on the record).

I also think that downplays how much CEOs work. A lot of them regularly work 12+ hour days.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

Curious, do you also think there needs to be caps on athletes, movie stars, and singers' compensation?

They are paid in line with how the market values their skills, just like CEO's.

I deleted my previous response because how I feel about athletes and entertainers is far more nuanced than how I feel about CEOs and huge corporations.

Corporations work extremely hard to ensure that wages stay as low as possible for their front-line employees, without whom the company couldn't function. They use their influence to ensure the laws passed are in their favor whenever possible (which, lets face it, is almost always). Look at the anti-union movement started during the Reagan years...it's still ongoing, and many people in my parents generation and even in my own generation deeply believe that unions are bad (even though every person I know who is a union member thanks God for them). The actions of big corporations and their CEOs affect MILLIONS of people's daily lives and life outcomes.

Do I think athletes are paid ridiculous amounts of money? Yes...when ticket prices have gotten to the point that going to a game is no longer something that can be enjoyed by the majority of Americans, yes. However, I also think athletes deserve to earn enough so that they don't need to worry about any potential medical consequences they may face after retirement. Professional athletes also now have MANY off-field opportunities to earn massive wealth through corporate sponsorships, etc. that didn't exist until fairly recently (recent in the history of sports)...not to mention so many now making the career shift from sports to film. Athletes also aren't responsible for making sure the pay of others stays as low as possible, and they aren't responsible for setting ticket prices at stadiums, either. They aren't "self-employed" or "in charge"...they work directly for the teams that hire them.

Actresses, actors, and musicians are similar to athletes in that they're not "in charge" of the wages of others (for the most part)...but they also spend huge amounts of time away from their families with often grueling schedules and employment requirements (lose weight, gain weight, get muscular, you need to look "this" way, etc.), many have difficulty dealing with the loss of privacy (or have to work extraordinarily hard at keeping their privacy) and they also have access to many other opportunities in their fields (producing, directing, writing, composing, etc.). I see these people as more "self-employed" than athletes, as once they've reached a certain point, they can pick and choose which songs to play or scripts to accept. But again, these "employees" aren't the ones setting ticket prices for movie theaters or concert venues.

So...do I think these types of careers need salary caps the same way executive compensation needs to be capped? Yes and no. I wouldn't mind seeing a "per contract" lump sum limit, but back end earnings, bonuses, side-gigs (advertising deals and the like), etc. should remain separate because these are the people actually producing the "product"...without them the product wouldn't exist at all. The same can't be said of CEOs...they make their money entirely on the sweat of others and put great effort and resources towards ensuring that those at the lowest end of the totem pole stay there.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

There are a very small number of CEO's who have the background and experience to run 100B+ market cap global entertainment companies.

These people (like athletes, movie stars, etc) are paid in the marketplace what the boards or private companies believe they need to pay them to attract and incent this very limited group.

Comcast, for example, has a market cap of about $200 billion dollars and has a struggling Peacock streaming service.

If the board of Comcast thinks that hiring Reed Hastings, who founded and runs Netflix, could turn that around and give their stock a 10% bump (BTW - that news could easily achieve this), thus generating an immediate $20 billion benefit for their shareholders/owners, how much should they pay Reed to come join them?

Conversely, how much should Netflix's board pay him to stay?

Also, how much would Comcast have to offer him to get him to leave Netflix and his years of unvested options?

The answer will be hundreds of millions in total long-term compensation. That decision, regardless of how it feels, has nothing to do with what they pay their front line workers.

Comcast may absolutely love the popcorn vendor working at Islands of Adventure with all their heart, but the world's greatest popcorn vendor will not move a share price a single penny. They will simply pay the going rate in Orlando to get someone to take that job.

Lebron James makes $40 million dollars a season and the guy selling the beer in the stands makes $15/hour. Because having James on a team and winning a championship can potentially increase the long-term value of that franchise by hundreds of million dollars.

That isn't an insult to the honor of the beer vendor's job - it's just the value of the role in the marketplace.

Personally, I don't think James is worth that, but what I think is irrelevant. The marketplace has determined that is his value and the Lakers are paying him accordingly. Whether James makes $20, $30, or $40 million dollars is not going to change the hourly wage of the beer vendor.

As long as there is competition for talent, there will always be an open market for compensation (well, except in collective bargaining agreements, then pay is ironically often fixed by role/seniority).

The piece you're missing is that the "marketplace" isn't really a marketplace at all...it's all the same people who are on the boards of these companies. And yes, Comcast is one of those companies that puts tons of resources into making sure that pay rates stay low...ever wonder why their tech support is so horrible? Have you tried calling and talking to an actual person lately?

 

[MisterPenguin]

The piece you're missing is that the "marketplace" isn't really a marketplace at all...it's all the same people who are on the boards of these companies. And yes, Comcast is one of those companies that puts tons of resources into making sure that pay rates stay low...ever wonder why their tech support is so horrible? Have you tried calling and talking to an actual person lately?

Lately?

Ever.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

Lately?

Ever.

I never had any issues with Comcast aside from their ridiculous prices - save for ONE. A person tried to tell me that because we were late paying our bill, our purchased movies were unavailable to us and being held "hostage". Needless to say, I called back and spoke to someone else about the situation and it was resolved immediately.

Up until recently (last year, maybe?), I was always able to call and get in touch with the people I needed to speak with...but then again, I'm very tech savvy and knew how to escalate to a higher level of tech support very quickly (and saved myself the agony of a "tech" reading through a pre-written script designed for people who don't know anything about technology). Now it's just an automated system and good luck getting it to put you through to a human.

 

[91JLovesDisney]

Well that's not necessarily true of, say, a pop star. Some of them don't have to do anything but sing (and maybe learn some choreographed dance moves). They often don't write any of the songs or perform any of the music -- not that I have any problem with the money they make. People like it and pay for it, so they deserve to get their share (although they may get an outsized share compared to the studio musicians etc. who actually play on the record).

I also think that downplays how much CEOs work. A lot of them regularly work 12+ hour days.

I'll rephrase for Dear Prudence - Producers work a lot harder and have to have a lot more skills than any CEO. I agree, most singers (and even some composers) these days don't actually do much... Producers never get anywhere near enough credit

 

[Dear Prudence]

Interesting.

Your position is that musicians' skills are more unique and valued in the marketplace than a person who can run a global quarter of a trillion dollar media conglomerate like Disney?

For example, Beyoncé's compensation should be unlimited, but Reed Hastings who created

I'll rephrase for Dear Prudence - Producers work a lot harder and have to have a lot more skills than any CEO. I agree, most singers (and even some composers) these days don't actually do much... Producers never get anywhere near enough credit

I've worked in the music business for over 10 years, producers are musicians. Many, many musicians produce their own works from top to bottom. You don't have to rephrase anything for me, thanks~!

 

[matt9112]

Certainly a fair comment. But those aren’t the rules right now, so Disney has to pay market rates for executive compensation.

Regardless of the pay of Chapek, even if you paid Chapek and the executives $0 for the last 2 years, the parks division lost $12 billion in profits and cash flow compared to if you held pre-pandemic levels flat. That money would have funded projects like the retheme. Since the money isn’t there, certain projects have to be delayed/cancelled.

They will start investing again soon, but I don’t understand why people expect them to keep spending like it’s 2019. That’s all I’m trying to say. They have taken a big hit financially any way you slice it the last 2 years. Once things get better, you’ll see more investment into the parks.

They could focus on why there ROI on new rides is so...poor....theres no excuse for the amount of money they shovel away for fancy wrist bands and fake mountains.

 

[Dear Prudence]

Yesterday

the tracks on the flume drop are so funky looking!