A Spirited Perfect Ten

[BrerJon]

I honestly don't know the answers but I think Iger is media savvy enough to know about The Streisand effect and realize all of its implications.

They certainly did a fantastic job at not falling for the Streisand Effect with how they dealt with 'Escape From Tomorrow' (by ignoring it), so somebody at the company gets it that's for sure.

 

[ford91exploder]

I honestly don't know the answers but I think Iger is media savvy enough to know about The Streisand effect and realize all of its implications.

Actually he is probably NOT that new media savvy at all, I'd bet he's one of those executives who has their assistant print out web pages and emails for his review. He's thinking old media where you drop the story from the news rotation and it's promptly forgotten, Whereas in the new media world when something high profile is pulled the question WHY goes up.

And that assistant printing culture is probably one of the reasons TWDC's online products are so bloody awful because the executives just see the 'pretty pictures' on paper and never actually USE the product on offer so they never experience the timeouts and slow page loads or hard failures that the rest of us endure.

 

[ford91exploder]

They certainly did a fantastic job at not falling for the Streisand Effect with how they dealt with 'Escape From Tomorrow' (by ignoring it), so somebody at the company gets it that's for sure.

I'm sure that TWDC does have people who 'get it' I'm just not certain that any of them inhabit the C suite in burbank.

 

[ford91exploder]

The one thing that I find really strange about this whole thing of the story disappearing is that at first after it was pulled there was the blurb about the writer not having the credentials he claimed to have. Now this has disappeared as well. So strange that they kill a story, give a reason for killing it and then go and delete the supposed reason for why it was deleted. Kind of makes me wonder why they really deleted the story in the first place...

Because Iger WANTED it deleted and used his wife to make it happen.

 

[RandySavage]

At this current time, we don't even have evidence that everything that was already budgeted for (aka Toy Story Playland) is coming, let alone *NEW* attractions.

The latest satellite photo (taken within the last few months) shows nothing happening in the plot assigned to Toy Story. This meshes with the official birdseye also omitting Toy Story, so maybe Playland has been dropped from the menu (a good thing, IMO). Or perhaps it could be built from scratch in a year's time at China speed. We'll see.

Additionally, the sat pic shows that Voyage to the Crystal Grotto has been shortened (a reverse segment, like Maelstrom's, appears to have been cut) from the earlier plan.

 

[Phil12]

Oh no, the HuffPo gave the reason.

That apparently wasn't the reason.

The question was "...how did it become an established fact the Iger got this story spiked?" The answer is we have no established facts to conclude that Iger got the story spiked.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

The question was "...how did it become an established fact the Iger got this story spiked?" The answer is we have no established facts to conclude that Iger got the story spiked.

Are you expecting a press release from the desk of Bob Iger proclaiming his guilt?

There is a reason conservatives make lousy journalists. And your reasoning skills are a perfect example why.

 

[the.dreamfinder]

While it's very likely a lot of that $800 million was for "favors", I wonder how much was simply devoted to tearing down and rebuilding structures that were not up to western/American building codes?

 

[ford91exploder]

Are you expecting a press release from the desk of Bob Iger proclaiming his guilt?

There is a reason conservatives make lousy journalists. And your reasoning skills are a perfect example why.

/RANTON

Politics should have nothing to do with being a journalist, Walter Cronkite was a flaming liberal yet he just reported the truth and let the audience decide. Walter did not give LBJ a pass for Vietnam just because both voted 'D' yet many of todays so called journalists do exactly that if 'my side' is doing it it's OK not OK if your side is doing it.

When you let your politics decide what gets covered and what gets ignored you are a propagandist not a journalist and FAR too many of the US media 'stars' are merely propagandists and an embarassment to their profession.

/RANTOFF

 

[Phil12]

Are you expecting a press release from the desk of Bob Iger proclaiming his guilt?

There is a reason conservatives make lousy journalists. And your reasoning skills are a perfect example why.

Your prejudice is duly noted. I'm in no rush to find guilt. I can wait until more objective voices are heard.

 

[RandySavage]

And yet, one looks at the menu of what will be in SDL and they don't get overly excited because this isn't a park full of brand new cutting edge E-Tickets. It is lighter on attractions than any castle park except HKDL.

A fairer way would be comparing it to Castle Parks at opening, where SDL crushes dinky opening-day HKDL and is on par with the more front-loaded DLP & TDL.

I think the success of SDL will rely on two factors.
1. How well-executed/recieved the "first-time" marquee rides are (PotC, Tron, Crystal Grotto & Rapids). Roaring Rapids looks very similar layout-wise to Grizzly Peak, but if that indoor stretch has some really good AA dinos and effects (as once rumored), that could raise it to another level. Tron could be Rock n' Roller Coaster 2.0 or something more.

2. If the park's environments, minor attractions and inbetween areas are so well-rendered that whole lands and the park itself just 'click'... that will be a first for mainland China. The great Disney parks have/had that harmonizing aspect - where the park itself becomes the E-ticket attraction.

I think #2 is pretty likely, judging by the style of WDI output over the last five+ years. It ought to be an aesthetically-awesome park (if the city air conditions cooperate). #1 is more of a "wait and see."

 

[Disneyhead'71]

/RANTON

Politics should have nothing to do with being a journalist, Walter Cronkite was a flaming liberal yet he just reported the truth and let the audience decide. Walter did not give LBJ a pass for Vietnam just because both voted 'D' yet many of todays so called journalists do exactly that if 'my side' is doing it it's OK not OK if your side is doing it.

When you let your politics decide what gets covered and what gets ignored you are a propagandist not a journalist and FAR too many of the US media 'stars' are merely propagandists and an embarassment to their profession.

/RANTOFF

We have entered an age of intellectual dishonesty. A place where facts are debatable.

Facts aren't debatable, the analysis of those facts. Yes. The facts themselves? No.

 

[dhall]

Respectfully...that is incorrect. Bay had it pulled. For Bob.
And I certainly didn't see it as a hit piece. It was a well reasoned opinion piece on how Disney is handling it's move into China. Nothing "hit" about it.

Also, I see that Willow took some big shots from Huff on a tour of the Annenberg school last month. She's the top dog there now, was a top dog at Huff.

I wonder what Annenberg folks would think about their head getting a piece pulled just because her husband didn't like how it painted him and his business moves. Ethics?

Here's an idea. What if everyone here who is on Twitter tweeted Annenberg school and asked why their boss is censoring articles that are negative toward her husband? Somebody think of a hashtag...maybe we could get it trending.

Oh, and here's another idea....#wheredidthat$800milliongoBob?

I just find the initial reaction of "Bob reached out, through his wife, and censored a news article" overwrought. I doubt that Iger had any active role in pulling the piece. He wouldn't have to.

It's easy to imagine that Bay had the piece pulled, and it could be true if she happened to be one of the first muckity mucks to see the piece on the web. It's also easy for me to imagine that she also had no direct involvement in the piece being pulled. It could easily have been anyone on the board or any of the managing editors who are high enough in the food chain to have met the board members & to recognize the piece for what it was.

My main point was that no media company anywhere will (under normal circumstances) publish an opinion piece that is critical of the company's owners or board members. Where did CNN ever write pieces critical of Turner or Fox ever write pieces critical of Murdoch? At any media company anywhere, you just don't nip at the heels of someone that high in your own company.

With that said, I just don't see this as an ethical breach at all. That it got to the web at all is just a bug in the system for a largely automated online operation. That it got pulled as soon as anyone high enough in the operation saw it is to be expected, and really isn't at all worthy of comment.

 

[Cesar R M]

Not completely unrelated. The city of Coronado which the Hotel del Coronado is in/named after, and the Mexican-themed resort at WDW, are both named after a conquistador who explored Mexico and the southwestern US.

Wikipedia - Francisco Vázquez de Coronado

But the similarities end there.

That said, out of all the names associated with Mexico, I can't help wondering if Disney deliberately sought out a name with an existing connection to WDW.

the hotel sadly, doesnt look very mexican in the real mexican aspect lol.

 

[Cesar R M]

I'm sorry, but I must have missed the part of history where anyone ever thought Ryan Reynolds was ever a big star or expected to be a breakout actor. I can't even think of anything he was the lead for that was a big hit. Doesn't remind me of Pratt at all.

considering he made like 10 movies in a row on the same year.. Id say he was quite "popular" or "the to go" male star for cheesy movies.

 

[Cesar R M]

My point was that the initial reaction of "Bob reached out, through his wife, and censored a news article" is overwrought. I doubt that Iger had any active role in pulling the piece. He wouldn't have to.

I concur, It could have been his wife alone.
or someone below her who knew the story might "the big olde Iger".

thus they took down the article and they might want a bone for the job well done.

 

[GoofGoof]

The question was "...how did it become an established fact the Iger got this story spiked?" The answer is we have no established facts to conclude that Iger got the story spiked.

You will never have "facts" directly stating that Iger killed the story. Neither Iger or anyone at Disney is going to publicly make a statement about a story they wanted killed. They want it to go away, not make it a bigger story. From the Huffington Post side what could they gain by confirming publicly what happened? The only hope you have of further public discussion is if the writer comes out in a blog or another publication and tells his side. But, if that happens would you consider it established fact?

 

[dhall]

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.

If Snyder's for real, then he had to know what he was doing by publishing on HuffPo. He could easily have placed that almost anywhere he wanted, but he deliberately chose to put it out on Iger's wife's site. That's the part that make me think that the inevitable streisanding was part of the plan to begin with.

If it goes up on Bloomberg or Forbes or Motley Fool, and stays there, no one is talking about it come Monday.

 

[ParentsOf4]

I disagree with this. You are looking at HKDL too much in a microcosm (the problem with quarterly reports and the problem with only looking at the numbers). 2014 attendance as a whole was up, as was revenue.

The 2013 Winter quarter was coming fresh off the finished expansion, spending hadn't yet kicked off on Iron Man. Of course attendance was at an all time high and spending at a low.

2014 was a slower year for additions. Spending is up due to Iron Man AND the Third hotel having broken ground.

Euro Disney on the other hand is coming off a 2013 quarter when attendance was down year-on-year and spending was up due to Ratatouille.

It's easy for Euro Disney to look impressive when they set a low bar, and HKDL to look like it's struggling when they set a high bar, but neither tells the actual story.

Context is needed, not just the numbers.

The context is that Iger squashed an article that questioned Disney's China investments.

As we all know, an analysis of financial investments should not concentrate on numbers. After all, there is a "problem with only looking at the numbers".

Find me a CEO/CFO who doesn't act as the company's biggest cheerleader and I'll stop focusing on numbers.

Find me a financial analyst who doesn't focus on numbers and I'll show you someone with a seriously bad gambling addiction.

Disney (not me) reported that Hong Kong Disneyland's attendance is down for the first quarter of fiscal year 2015 (which ended in December) while expenses are up. Disney (not me) reported attendance elsewhere is up for the quarter. Disney did not report, "We had a great 2014 so a decline in 2015 should be expected."

Don't heap DLP's 9% attendance gain on Ratatouille. Ratatouille is not that good. There are other factors in play, both in Paris and in Hong Kong.

I readily admit that my post was not my usual attempt at being objective. (Can anyone ever express a thought that's truly objective?) What, my post's sarcasm wasn't dripping enough for you?

However, Disney is the one who said MyMagic+ is going to make up for Shanghai's shortcomings in fiscal year 2015.

Disney is the one who squashed an article criticizing what is happening in China. A day later, we get a puff piece in Motley Fool singing the virtues of Disney's China investment. "Still an incredible new park", "Still in time for a record breaking 2016", "Still the first to open in Mainland China". Who wrote this; Bob Iger himself? This is not a coincidence; this is spin.

I actually like Disney's play in China. I think it's a good move by the company. Disney is not a well-established brand in China. A successful theme park in Shanghai could open opportunities that pay dividends across all business segments.

However, there are risks. The business climate in China is different than Disney’s traditional environments while other companies are fighting for the same emerging Chinese consumer market. Disney will have to play by a different set of rules. Disney will have to compete. It won’t survive using its usual “We’re Disney” strategy.

Perhaps more importantly, Disney is playing a very distant second fiddle to the totalitarian Chinese government. Ultimately, they are the one calling the shots and can crush Disney at any time. "Thank you very much for investing billions. Now that the infrastructure is built, we've decided our people don't like the Disney brand. We've decided to use our own IP. Oh, unless you hand over another 10% of profits." In order to survive, Disney will have to learn to say, “Thank you sir, may I have another” in a way it never has in the past.

The reality is that Shanghai is causing Disney headaches right now. The reality is that the project is behind schedule and, as anyone who has managed a project knows, being behind schedule usually means being overbudget. It's cause for concern; not cause for panic.

My concern is not what’s happening in China; it’s that Iger seems to have developed the same thin skin Eisner had before his downfall.

This sorry episode reminds me too much of Eisner's bad years, when Eisner was more focused on crushing dissent than on running the company.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

My point was that the initial reaction of "Bob reached out, through his wife, and censored a news article" is overwrought. I doubt that Iger had any active role in pulling the piece. He wouldn't have to.

It's easy to imagine that Bay had the piece pulled, and it could be true if she happened to be one of the first muckity mucks to see the piece on the web. It's also easy for me to imagine that she also had no direct involvement in the piece being pulled. It could easily have been anyone on the board or any of the managing editors who are high enough in the food chain to have met the board members & to recognize the piece for what it was.

My main point was that no media company anywhere will (under normal circumstances) publish an opinion piece that is critical of the companies owners or board members. Where did CNN ever write pieces critical of Turner or Fox ever write pieces critical of Murdoch? At any media company anywhere, you just don't nip at the heels of someone that high in your own company.

With that said, I just don't see this as an ethical breach at all. That it got to the web at all is just a bug in the system for a largely automated online operation. That it got pulled as soon as anyone high enough in the operation saw it is to be expected, and really isn't at all worthy of comment.

The Huffington Post isn't a Tumblr blog. This article wasn't posted through an automated system and an editors eyes read it before it was posted. Snyder took a shot across the bow about a month ago. This was a cannonball to the starboard side. The Igers returned fire with a clunky one sentence rebuttal. Which was not as media savvy and was also redacted. Why do all Disney CEOs think that with a big enough hammer, they can solve any problem.

My guess is Arianna is not happy to have her reputation sullied by two petty media families. But to be fair, the Sumners threw the first punch.

There IS a whole big batch of "why" here.