Iger, the former CEO who is staying on as senior advisor with strong support amongst the rest of the board will likely have significant influence within the company. Not sure why that is so controversial.You’re suggesting that a board member, who is not charged with running the daily operations of a company, will influence the daily operations of a company. Okay
Not sure why you’re assuming this significant influence stuff. Where is this information coming from. Who said it, did Iger said he was planning on having significant influence over Josh? Did Josh say this? This all reads as you assuming Iger has some
It seems obvious. That is why you stay on as senior advisor and board member. Kinda done debating though. We are not going to change opinions.
Chapek was indeed immediately undercut when the Board wanted Iger to deal with the pandemic and call the shots rather than the new CEO. [So much for claims that Iger ran away when the pandemic happened.]
Agree to disagree...Iger undermined Chapek significantly. If Josh does things he doesn't like, will he do the same to him (I actually don't think Josh is going to change path significantly while Iger is still there)?
And you’ve finally said the word - advisor. An advisor does exactly that, not dictate decision making.
We know Iger planned to be in charge of Chapek (even if Chapek fought back on it), and the CEO answers to the board, who are all Iger's people. I don't think it's crazy to think Iger will have influence on the direction of the company. I'm not sure any are saying he will be directly involved in the day to day stuff, but I don't think it's crazy to think he will still have a large influence on the general direction of the company.You’re suggesting that a board member, who is not charged with running the daily operations of a company, will influence the daily operations of a company. Okay
Board members generally won’t interfere with the operations of a company unless something is going horribly a mess. I don’t think Josh plans on doing anything that would put the company in such Dire Straits as to force their hand to make moves above him. So again this whole narrative that somehow the board is going to be puppeteering everything Josh does seems fairly ridiculous. I don’t see any example of other companies where this is the case. When you install a CEO it’s with the understanding that this person will be running the operations of the company. The board overseas them yes to make sure they are doing their job.
That may have been the case, but the BoD were deeply embarrassed by Chapek and they admitted they didn't do their due diligence in vetting Chapek and following what was supposed to be the usual role of the BoD in picking a new CEO.
Iger is staying as a “senior advisor.” Basically making him available if D’Amaro wants his advice. And even that contract expires completely at the end of the year. With Chapek, Iger was promoted to executive chairman, an oversight role with creative responsibilities.
Look, if you want to downplay the role Iger is going to play for the remainder of the year, that is fine. I just disagree. This company reeks of politics more than most.
This can be seen in departure of Iger-appointed leaders across the ranks.
You seem to be using "all" and "know" differently than I do.
Whatever, feel free to use a magic 8 ball for all I care. Surmise what you will
Woah, chief…don’t know why this is being taken as a rub?
Unlike Chapek, D’Amaro is widely liked by Disney employees. This isn’t a “the emperor has no clothes” situation it’s a “Iger’s a lame duck, and we like the new guy.”
I’m not offended or anything, just feeling spry todayWoah, chief…don’t know why this is being taken as a rub?