A Spirited Perfect Ten

[WDW1974]

It's absolutely amazing the level of cultural ignorance at TWDC, I've spent time in China (for business) and it might as well be an alien civilization - my father also spent time there (also for business) and before first trip basically told me to leave my assumptions behind when I boarded the plane.

Disney would have done better to license rights from Sanrio and opened a 'Hello Kitty' park. You can't go anywhere in China and not see the cute cat face.

Hey @Lee ... you think that would have made DD happier?

 

[the.dreamfinder]

You make an interesting point. But I do think you need some media background, some context to pull from when building a themed resort in a market that has never had one (or one of this magnitude). Even Walt set people up for DL with his TV shows as well as some IPs. Who knows? DL may have flopped without Walt's expert salesmanship

In Shanghai, there is just such a dearth of knowledge about Disney. Again, I'd caution to not believe the PR about how cosmopolitan the city and its people are. It's true, but only to a small and limited degree.

It's nice to sit back and think everyone the world over knows Mickey Mouse and Walt Disney, but that is far, far from accurate.

Are there reporatory theaters in Shanghai?

 

[ford91exploder]

There is a very misguided notion over here about how well known and beloved Disney's characters are. Disney plays this lie up because it's obviously in its best interests to do so. Sure, there is some penetration. But it is tiny relative to the audience.

On a similar subject, anyone think Bob walked into the Dwarfs building today humming Hakuna Matata?

Like I said earlier Disney characters are virtually unknown in China, Disney would have been better off building a park around Hello Kitty as THAT is EVERYWHERE in China (or at least everywhere I went but I spend most of my time in Shenzhen and Guangdong ) because of the industry i'm in.

 

[ford91exploder]

Oh, for a hashtag to USC ... #firewillowbay.

Already tweeted

 

[Lee]

Courtesy of @klstorey on twitter... #WandaGroup, so how about #WillowGroup

What's a WandaGroup?

 

[WDW1974]

Wait...so you aren't curious as the the Redstone family stake in this incident...you are only concerned with Iger having the piece pulled? That seems unusually one-sided. I know you don't like Iger, but what was the author up to in his articles. Why was he picking a fight? Is he trying to damage Iger's job, or is advocating for a job for himself. Is he trying to make disney vulnerable to a take over?

The story is a lot bigger than why it got pulled, but you wrote a lot of words on that aspect only. Both parts are important, but it looks like Viacom threw the first punch...why?

Curious? You bet your ar$e that I am. Just like Disney, all major media companies fascinate me. And the Redstones are as entertaining as h e l l (not sure we can use that word anymore or not).

The Iger thing just reeks more to me because it was blatant censorship and using his wife's position, where she has to be above reproach (which is why she never should have been given it to start with). This is the head of a prestigious journalism department.

I'm not sure whether he was picking a fight or opting to do what I and others here try to, just enlighten an audience on a subject they may not be familiar with ... or as familiar as he is. I can argue that Iger did more to harm his job and his interests by interjecting his wife into this, than if he had simply ignored it. It's the freaking Huffington Post ... what is Bob doing there?

I can't see anyway that this was done to advocate a takeover. Who is, realistically, in any position to take over Disney? Now, could it help foster talk of selling one or multiple pieces of Disney? I think that may be a better question. Or, it may simply be a power play between a bunch of filthy rich people. What do I know? I may wind up dining at TGI Friday's tomorrow!

 

[flynnibus]

I was thinking the same thing.

that's the difference... thinking.

 

[ford91exploder]

Are there reporatory theaters in Shanghai?

Not that you would recognize

 

[Smiddimizer]

#Disneygate

 

[Lee]

Already tweeted

And I just posed the question to Annenberg.

 

[Lee]

Hey @Lee ... you think that would have made DD happier?

Sadly....yep.

 

[BrerJon]

Whatever, it still looks cheap to me and you will find that most high end hotels do not resort to that type of atmosphere. It might look nice to some people, but, to me to justify the image and feeling of a high end hotel, gaudiness should not be a requirement. I'm glad that they are all out! That is theme park stuff

The thing is the clue is in the name. It's not supposed to be a generic Hilton or whatever, it's supposed to be themed like the grand Florida hotels down towards Miami which do indeed have lights like that. If Florida knows how to do one thing well, it's gaudy.

 

[ford91exploder]

The thing is the clue is in the name. It's not supposed to be a generic Hilton or whatever, it's supposed to be themed like the grand Florida hotels down towards Miami which do indeed have lights like that. If Florida knows how to do one thing well, it's gaudy.

It's prototype was the Hotel Del Coronado - fun fact 'Some Like it Hot' was filmed there and the Del has always had the lights outside and unlike the GF they take great pride in ensuring they ALL work ALL the time.

In fact the first electric bulbs there were installed by Thom Edison personally as the Del has always been on the leading edge of tech.

 

[Phil12]

I, for one, don't think that Iger had to reach out, through his wife, to get the hit piece pulled. There isn't a media outlet anywhere that would knowingly let a hit peice on a board member stand (unless placed there by a better connected board member). Bob didn't lift a finger to have this pulled, it was toast soon after Bay or Huffington saw it. If anything, knowing it would be pulled almost immediately was part of the plan: everyone's familiar with the Streisand effect now, and the discussion of its removal is almost as useful as the article itself. The players know who the players are and the people directly involved all know that this was a strike right at an exposed flank.

The interesting question isn't 'Why was it pulled', it is 'Why was it written?'

What does Redstone get out of it?

#1) As part of an acquisition scheme? An attempt to shake apart the loose collection of IP that TWDC currently controls? Possible, but while Redstone may be money while Iger is still little more than staff, Viacom doesn't dwarf TWDC to nearly the same degree. (edit -- or at all, as it may be)

#2) How does Viacom/Redstone gain from the implication of graft on the part of Iger/TWDC? If they've been in the country for so long, they certainly know about, hear rumors about, or be part of much bigger deals than this. They might be trying to imply to Chinese authorities that the $800M might not have been invested in the way that Iger said, but it seems to me that this is a dangerously glassy house for any western country to go throwing rocks at.

#3) This is the most interesting possibility -- TWDC doesn't want western investors to know how weak its efforts in China are. If this is part of the reason, then it represents a rhotorical hip check on Disney, potentially weakening their resolve to see their move into China out. But I don't think I buy this as the reason for writing it.

4 & 5 are about Bob, who's known to be a short timer burning through the longterm assets to drive up his personal wealth at the expense of the company. That's not Viacom's problem: if anything, its behavior they'd like to see continue.

Is it to cause TWDC to lose face? Does any part of this tell the Chinese anything they didn't already know?

You've asked a lot of very interesting questions. And, like you, I don't buy any of the explanations that have thus far been presented to explain any of this. Perhaps time will tell. The story seems strange and the explanations offered fit too neatly into the puzzle. It's seems as if the entire event was carefully prepared and executed for effect.

 

[WDW1974]

A rival business owner taking such an unprofessional jab at Iger and TWDC twice, that says a lot. Especially when Viacom is vulnerable and the analysts have been beating up on the company for years. It could be as simple as trying to pull focus away from Viacom's succession woes as the Staggs announcement seemed to re-ignite concern over Viacom's future.

I think something isn't clear. The author I don't believe has claimed to be working for his family's companies. Indeed, he states that he is an advisor in China. That seems to indicate he isn't. That shouldn't be surprising as even Sumner's own son has nothing to do with the media companies.

There also are no succession woes with Viacom. This is BS planted by folks in media with interests in putting the company in play. If you read enough online, you'll find that the company had to disclose all of the details of this in Sumner's ugly divorce from longtime Wife No. 1. The company will be in that family's hands unless they decide otherwise and Phil Dauman is a widely respected exec. I'd expect him to continue and answer to Shari just as he now does to her old man.

 

[ford91exploder]

A (possibly libelous) statement which they later removed.
I have independent sources. That statement was a smokescreen that was removed.

Rocks in glass houses, Nah in this case grenades.

 

[ford91exploder]

I think something isn't clear. The author I don't believe has claimed to be working for his family's companies. Indeed, he states that he is an advisor in China. That seems to indicate he isn't. That shouldn't be surprising as even Sumner's own son has nothing to do with the media companies.

There also are no succession woes with Viacom. This is BS planted by folks in media with interests in putting the company in play. If you read enough online, you'll find that the company had to disclose all of the details of this in Sumner's ugly divorce from longtime Wife No. 1. The company will be in that family's hands unless they decide otherwise and Phil Dauman is a widely respected exec. I'd expect him to continue and answer to Shari just as he now does to her old man.

I'd expect this to be the case as well.

 

[Phil12]

The person who posted the story is unimportant. The way all of the large scale blogs work is almost entirely automated: it's likely that the person joined the site just to shoot this once bullet. Get a few pieces in the door to get whatever editorial controls there are (and there may not be very many at all) smoothed over, then when the few humans involved in the process are used to seeing your byline with few if any problems, take the real shot. I'm sure he or she was paid well enough for a few dozen hours worked.

Thus my theory that it may indeed have been an imposter. However, if the author was in fact Gary Snyder, he most certainly has other outlets he could use to communicate his viewpoint. It'll be interesting to see if we hear anything.

 

[Funmeister]

I am curious about the $800m. A payoff to someone or some government (China)? $800m is a nice budget for a theme park much less theme park "additions." Something smells funny that all the chlorine in the reservoir behind Splash Mountain cannot mask!

 

[WDW1974]

Oh look...another random report that minimizes concern around china.

http://www.nasdaq.com/article/disne...er-budget-but-more-amazing-than-ever-cm446531

This whole thing is weird. I think this is how people become conspiracy nuts.

Funny how that happens, ain't it?

Also funny that the author knows that it's going to be so amazing. Considering that the park is so under wraps, I wonder how he reaches that conclusion.

And I must have missed Disney announcing it will open before Chinese New Year in 2016 (it won't!)

But anything to make the picture rosier ...

I'll also flat out guarantee the park doesn't outdraw the MK next year (or any year for quite a while).