A Spirited Perfect Ten

lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
stlphil said:
Just to add a bit to this point, the reason Walt went "all in" on the New York Worlds Fair was to gauge how east coast audiences and their tastes would react to Disney-style themed entertainment.
Click to expand...
I've never really bought this idea. It's not like Fisney films did poorly in the East. Nor was Disney big into that sort of market testing anywhere else. And why the double standard assumption that if it works in California it might not work in New York but if it works in New York it will work in California?
 
AEfx

AEfx

Well-Known Member
ford91exploder said:
The difference being is Iger sees Disney as simply a 'brand' not a philosophy based on creativity and superior customer service. Eisner embraced the 'Disney Difference'. Iger is embracing the WalMart business model.
Click to expand...

I just find that hogwash, to be honest. Many of the "Disney Difference" losses were already well-underway before Eisner departed. Eisner talked the talk when he was in front of cameras, but that's about as as far as it went.
 
AEfx

AEfx

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
I've never really bought this idea. It's not like Fisney films did poorly in the East. Nor was Disney big into that sort of market testing anywhere else. And why the double standard assumption that if it works in California it might not work in New York but if it works in New York it will work in California?
Click to expand...

Things were different 50, 60 years ago, though. I don't know if it's true in this case, but different coasts having different tastes is definitely a thing, and it was much more so back then. Remember, most folks were just starting to get televisions around this time - which had 2, maybe 3 stations (and much of the content was local/regional). Not only did we not have the "global" communication we have now, even nationally it really didn't exist much for average folk outside of the newspaper.

So again, not sure about the specifics in this case, but there certainly are many differences that can lead to how folks will perceive entertainment. I recently dated someone from Southern California - and being a born, bred, and educated New Englander, there certainly were many things that I found quite, quite different in both perception and behavior expectations, which of course would impact something like entertainment choices. (But he was SMOKIN' hot, so I gave him a pass on some of the obnoxious California flakiness LOL. ;) )
 
DDLand

DDLand

Well-Known Member
@Phil12's favorite book...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Disney:_Hollywood's_Dark_Prince

I don't see what Walt Disney did during the creation of Disneyland as any different than going to other financial sources for the construction of Disneyland Hotel. The whole project was horribly expensive, technically complicated to build, and truly a major risk. By taking design in house and covering the cost of the rail road he was the one mitigating risk factors of Walt Disney Productions. If this went south, he'd be slammed with a lot of the liability. Plus his money ensured they happened. We don't know if the Rail Road would've been built if he hadn't personally stepped in.

You also ignore that the monorail was built during a time when Roy was trying to curtail spending. The Matterhorn, Autopia, Submarines were expensive. By personally investing in the monorail he ensured it was built.

Just a thought...
 
Last edited:
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
AEfx said:
Things were different 50, 60 years ago, though. I don't know if it's true in this case, but different coasts having different tastes is definitely a thing, and it was much more so back then. Remember, most folks were just starting to get televisions around this time - which had 2, maybe 3 stations (and much of the content was local/regional). Not only did we not have the "global" communication we have now, even nationally it really didn't exist much for average folk outside of the newspaper.

So again, not sure about the specifics in this case, but there certainly are many differences that can lead to how folks will perceive entertainment. I recently dated someone from Southern California - and being a born, bred, and educated New Englander, there certainly were many things that I found quite, quite different in both perception and behavior expectations, which of course would impact something like entertainment choices. (But he was SMOKIN' hot, so I gave him a pass on some of the obnoxious California flakiness LOL. ;) )
Click to expand...
I'm not doubting or denying regional differences, just the narrative that Disney was suddenly overly self-conscious about the East Coast. Freedomland USA's floundering seems like a doubtful cause. The notion seems to come more from East Coasters who want to seem superior to the vain trappings Hollywood.
 
NearTheEars

NearTheEars

Well-Known Member
Phil12 said:
But Walt did lie and trick many people not the least of which were his shareholders. In 1952 he secretly created WED Enterprises and made sure that the shareholders did not know about the existence of the company. He then hired away top talent from the studio, increased their salaries, hired his own company (without competitive bidding) as the primary contractor to build Disneyland, charged back all expenses plus costs (including his own salary) to ABC, Walt Disney Productions and Western Publishing (the companies that owned 83% of the investment).

And Walt build his private railroad (and later the monorail) within Disneyland yet he never paid the principal owners (i.e. ABC, Walt Disney Productions and Western Publishing) for any right of way or any lease fees. WED built his railroad with sponsorship from the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway. The AT&SF signed a five year deal with Walt Disney (not with Disneyland) and their lease fee was $50,000 per year. The railway (and other transportation) was owned and operated by Walt Disney, not Disneyland. You've got to remember that Walt was a minority owner in Disneyland with only a 16.55% interest but Walt owned 100% of the railway, monorail and other transportation.

To be fair, a lot of these underhanded business dealings ended up haunting Walt toward the end. Walt and his brother Roy had argued for many years about the illegitimacy of WED. However, Roy finally convinced Walt that selling WED to Walt Disney Productions was the right thing to do rather than continue diverting large sums of money away from the studio and park operations.

When the lawyers examined the WED financial records, they found it hard to believe how much money Walt had siphoned away from the studio and the park. Walt was required at that time to pay back right of way and lease fees on the railway for the previous ten years. WED was bought by Disney Productions on February 5, 1965 (just a little less than two years before Walt's death).

And then there was RETLAW...
Click to expand...

Not saying this makes it OK, but this sounds a lot like what already happens in corporate America when companies spin off divisions but continue to do business much the same, but technicality as separate entities.
 
Goofyernmost

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
If I could, might I point out that Walt has been dead for almost 50 years. What he did or didn't do before that, is of little relevance to anyone at this point.

It was stated that they loved the theme parks and the concept along with movies, etc... that is Walt's legacy, not what he may or may not have done to make that happen. So far no one has said that he killed anyone in the process, so a creative mind is what we got and because of that we got a whole lot more then whatever the "negative" adds up to.

To clarify another point, Walt and Roy did not co-found Disney. It was completely Walt's baby and he asked Roy to come in to help him. Roy did and without him there probably wouldn't still be a Disney for us to enjoy, but, he was for all purposes a hired hand. He created nothing, but, was financially savvy and that is what kept it running. Originally it was The Disney Brothers Studio, but, even Roy knew that he was not the creative force so when Walt decided to change the name to Walt Disney Studios, Roy knew where his bread was buttered and couldn't justify that he had created anything. He helped to finance the creation, but, he didn't create it.

As someone said, it was a much different world back then and for us to stand in judgement based on today's standards is terribly erroneous and a useless comparison.
 
Last edited:
ParentsOf4

ParentsOf4

Well-Known Member
Phil12 said:
But Walt did lie and trick many people not the least of which were his shareholders.
Click to expand...
Perhaps the single best reason for fans of Walt Disney World and Disneyland to like Walt Disney over today's Disney leadership, who spend billions annually on stock buybacks and dividends while domestic theme park investment levels approach near-record lows despite double-digit annual pass ticket price increases. :greedy:

Walt Disney invested to impress paying customers. :)

Today's Disney leadership "invests" to impress Wall Street. :(
 
The Empress Lilly

The Empress Lilly

Well-Known Member
ParentsOf4 said:
Perhaps the single best reason for fans of Walt Disney World and Disneyland to like Walt Disney over today's Disney leadership, who spend billions annually on stock buybacks and dividends while domestic theme park investment levels approach near-record lows despite double-digit annual pass ticket price increases. :greedy:

Walt Disney invested to impress paying customers. :)

Today's Disney leadership "invests" to impress Wall Street. :(
Click to expand...
I love your originality of thought! =D
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom