A Spirited Perfect Ten

ford91exploder

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
flynnibus said:
Account for it? They will. Break it down into how/where/why? Nope... Not unless they feel the need to appease something. And unless you get the institutionals... Disney doesnt care about you. And given the recent stock performance... Chances of starting a witchhunt with the institutionals? Zero

Very little is required to be disclosed
Click to expand...

All very true.
 
R

RandySavage

Well-Known Member
BrianLo said:
Absolutely, I agree that as of today we have yet to see anything new, let alone Toy Story (which was on Spirit's "menu" last year). I also agree it is for the best, the Chinese have no real afininity to Toy Story, and it's already been done in HKDL.


On a separate note... how did we know what the Crystal Grotto track segment was supposed to look like? I don't think I've been privy to those plans (my PM is always open :angelic:)
Click to expand...

This is the original base plan (sans Soarin, Hub restaurant, temporary performance venues & Playland), posted on a Chinese site:
http://img.212300.com/forum/201305/16/125320ourmk0d0dri93mdm.jpg

If you look closely you can see the backwards segment on the ride. The new sat pics show the ride course has been abbreviated from this plan.
 
tirian

tirian

Well-Known Member
WDWFigment said:
I haven't been to Mainland China, so I can't really comment on that, but you see a lot of Westerners (probably not Americans) in Hong Kong. In Macau, the only other area of China (still just a SAR) I've visited, it was decidedly more Eastern, but I'm guessing still with more of a Western flavor than the mainland. Even HKDL feels decidedly more Westernized than TDR. I know this has nothing to do with park demographics, maps, and all that, but figured I'd at least offer my 2 cents before asking about this HuffPo article...

This is the first I've heard of it. What I'm gleaning from this thread is that there was something critical of TWDC in Shanghai (I'm "shocked" by the way) in the HuffPo, and the article was "inexplicably" pulled? Anyone happen to save a copy or have a link to any sites that reposted it?
Click to expand...

I've been to Hong Kong for DL's opening and my best friend goes to mainland China every few weeks for work (non-Disney related). The public at large has no emotional connection to Disney. None. This park could still be successful, but it will not be like American parks that coast off a reputation built up in the general consciousness.

In most Communist countries, "Disney" = "Western Capitalism and Excess." Why would anyone in the WDC think Shanghai was a good idea?
 
tirian

tirian

Well-Known Member
ford91exploder said:
Makes me wonder whether China is changing terms, To quote Darth Vader "I am altering the terms of the deal, Pray that I don't alter them any further..."

But I think Iger just made a huge mistake, Now since this came from the Redstone camp IF they are truly interested in a shooting war with TWDC, They can now say we published an OpEd piece in independent media so the articles would not be seen as a competitive issue.

Now the Redstone's have the moral high ground about how Disney is suppressing stories which question their business practices which should be ratings gold for CBS etc and TWDC is on the defensive as how can you defend this type of action.

If Disney had published rebuttal articles or sued the author they might have achieved the effect of killing the story or blunting it's effect. Instead they went the coverup route which to many on the 'Street will confirm that the stories were indeed true SINCE DISNEY DID NOT SUE.

It really makes one wonder about the content of those articles as I'm sure TWDC could have found a tame judge to issue an injunction temporarily taking those stories offline, That they did not choose this route makes me wonder whats under hiding under the rug.

Beautiful Bob and TWDC are about to reap the whirlwind.
Click to expand...

—except that nobody is talking about it unless it's a Disney forum.
 
Last edited:
ford91exploder

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
tirian said:
I've been to Hong Kong for DL's opening and my best friend goes to mainland China every few weeks for work (non-Disney related). The public at large has no emotional connection to Disney. None. This park could still be successful, but it will not be like American parks that coast off a reputation built up in the general consciousness.

In most Communist countries, "Disney" = "Western Capitalism and Excess." Why would anyone in the WDC think Shanghai was a good idea?
Click to expand...

Because all Iger could see was money to be made in China and he thinks business in the East is just like the West, Wrongo Bob - prepare to lose your shirt.
 
Phil12

Phil12

Well-Known Member
tirian said:
—except that nobody is talking about it except on Disney forums.
Click to expand...
That is interesting to me as well. This incident has had a very narrow focus and that makes me wonder, why? Of course this entire story broke over the weekend so perhaps come Monday when the normal news cycle ramps up we'll see some more information from independent sources.
 
GoofGoof

GoofGoof

Premium Member
Nubs70 said:
Or a standard case study in MBA programs
Click to expand...
True, EuroDisney still comes up as a classic case study in a lot of business schools. I remember writing a paper on it back in the 90s.

We need to wait a little while to see what the moral of the story will be. If this latest story all blows over and they hit the projected targets for attendance it will go down as a classic "win" story about an American company branching out into China. If the park flops it will be EuroDisney all over again. I think a big part of Iger's legacy will depend on the success or failure of this project. He already has the Pixar/Marvel/Lucas Film tifecta that he's most known for, but for P&R this is really his legacy. In the grand scheme of things FLE, Avatar, DCA 2.0 and even Nextgen are trumped by this project.
 
Nubs70

Nubs70

Well-Known Member
GoofGoof said:
True, EuroDisney still comes up as a classic case study in a lot of business schools. I remember writing a paper on it back in the 90s.

We need to wait a little while to see what the moral of the story will be. If this latest story all blows over and they hit the projected targets for attendance it will go down as a classic "win" story about an American company branching out into China. If the park flops it will be EuroDisney all over again. I think a big part of Iger's legacy will depend on the success or failure of this project. He already has the Pixar/Marvel/Lucas Film tifecta that he's most known for, but for P&R this is really his legacy. In the grand scheme of things FLE, Avatar, DCA 2.0 and even Nextgen are trumped by this project.
Click to expand...
I could see this being case #1 in BUS 6501 - Cultural Awareness
 
GoofGoof

GoofGoof

Premium Member
Based on the discussions this weekend about the vanishing article and the potential issues Disney is having in China it seems some people feel Disney made a mistake going forward with this project. That may turn out to be true. I really thought the idea was a sound one from a business prospective. There is a largely untapped market with billions of potential customers. It made a lot of sense to attempt to penetrate that market. The obvious political risks are trumped by the vast market upside. To me it seemed like a no brainer. Getting into bed with the Chinese government also seemed to mitigate at least part of the risk and half of the costs. I still think it was a solid plan. Maybe it comes down to poor execution.

We talk negatively here about stock buybacks and how the company should be reinvesting the cash flows they generate instead of returning it to shareholders. If they are going to do this they need to branch out into new and untapped markets. If the idea of expanding in China is a bad one then what should the company have done with the $5.5B dollars (or half of it anyway). There's no way they were going to invest that much money in WDW without a quantifiable ROI. I know we as fans would like that very much, but that's just not reality. Most of it would have probably gone to stock buybacks.

I know that there are a lot of issues with the execution in China as opposed to the idea of expanding there. I'm not talking about that here or disputing it. My real question is for the people who think the whole idea was just a bad idea. What should they have done instead?
 
ford91exploder

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
GoofGoof said:
Based on the discussions this weekend about the vanishing article and the potential issues Disney is having in China it seems some people feel Disney made a mistake going forward with this project. That may turn out to be true. I really thought the idea was a sound one from a business prospective. There is a largely untapped market with billions of potential customers. It made a lot of sense to attempt to penetrate that market. The obvious political risks are trumped by the vast market upside. To me it seemed like a no brainer. Getting into bed with the Chinese government also seemed to mitigate at least part of the risk and half of the costs. I still think it was a solid plan. Maybe it comes down to poor execution.

We talk negatively here about stock buybacks and how the company should be reinvesting the cash flows they generate instead of returning it to shareholders. If they are going to do this they need to branch out into new and untapped markets. If the idea of expanding in China is a bad one then what should the company have done with the $5.5B dollars (or half of it anyway). There's no way they were going to invest that much money in WDW without a quantifiable ROI. I know we as fans would like that very much, but that's just not reality. Most of it would have probably gone to stock buybacks.

I know that there are a lot of issues with the execution in China as opposed to the idea of expanding there. I'm not talking about that here or disputing it. My real question is for the people who think the whole idea was just a bad idea. What should they have done instead?
Click to expand...

For China TWDC should have partnered with someone like the Wanda Group, Disney could have provided the expertise and done licensing deals, Wanda KNOWS what the Chinese market wants, Disney is trying to clone its business in China where it will not work right now as 'Hello Kitty' is far, far better known than Mickey Mouse and the rest of the Fab Five.

Disney should have built a park in Brazil, Yes it would have cannibalized some of the Orlando trade but the South Americans LOVE Disney so why not give them what they WANT because that's also a huge untapped market and it's one which is favorable to US based businesses much more so than China.
 
Nubs70

Nubs70

Well-Known Member
GoofGoof said:
Based on the discussions this weekend about the vanishing article and the potential issues Disney is having in China it seems some people feel Disney made a mistake going forward with this project. That may turn out to be true. I really thought the idea was a sound one from a business prospective. There is a largely untapped market with billions of potential customers. It made a lot of sense to attempt to penetrate that market. The obvious political risks are trumped by the vast market upside. To me it seemed like a no brainer. Getting into bed with the Chinese government also seemed to mitigate at least part of the risk and half of the costs. I still think it was a solid plan. Maybe it comes down to poor execution.

We talk negatively here about stock buybacks and how the company should be reinvesting the cash flows they generate instead of returning it to shareholders. If they are going to do this they need to branch out into new and untapped markets. If the idea of expanding in China is a bad one then what should the company have done with the $5.5B dollars (or half of it anyway). There's no way they were going to invest that much money in WDW without a quantifiable ROI. I know we as fans would like that very much, but that's just not reality. Most of it would have probably gone to stock buybacks.

I know that there are a lot of issues with the execution in China as opposed to the idea of expanding there. I'm not talking about that here or disputing it. My real question is for the people who think the whole idea was just a bad idea. What should they have done instead?
Click to expand...
To build in the mainland is a no brainer and in the play on the words of Ms. Aswad, a "Disney must do". However, foreign development must be done with a cultural awareness of the market being penatrated as not to repeat the performance of Euro Disney.
 
B

Bolna

Well-Known Member
This has been an interesting weekend thanks to the disappearing article. First I learned a new English word: "graft" (in case anyone wonders why it was new to me: English is not my first language). To be honest, when I first read that article after a link was posted here, I kind of ignored that little blurb about graft. It wasn't until people were talking about this and the 800 million dollars and where they went after the article had vanished, that I actually went to my preferred online dictionary to find out what the hell they were talking about.

And then I was surprised that people seem to look at this whole topic more in a way as if that was affecting Iger's ego. I was surprised that bribing foreign officials might not be a crime in the US and poked around on Wikipedia. Of course it is a crime, there is something called Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

I was surprised to read that it is enforced not only by the Department of Justice, but also by the SEC. So, this is not only a matter of criminal law, but also a matter of securities law. I get that Iger might have a big ego - but big enough for just pulling an article that called him "vanilla on toothpaste"??? But an article that might get the SEC interested in how TWDC conducts business in China? That might be a nightmare for a CEO I would think. So, suddenly that whole story made more sense to me...
 

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

Back
Top Bottom