^ Agreed. I'm wrestling with that, too. Does the community really need to know details?
Since it actually *is* a family issue and not just a PR line, there's no reason for the public to know.
Spirit of 74 over on LP is calling the "family issues" being cited as being largely a spin movement by Disney. I understand his reputation on here, but you'd have to imagine that this may be the case.
Totally agree...
"Family issues" is a broad description, and can certainly be used in this case as I understand it. I fully expect the particulars to be common knowledge at some point, but I'll let others take care of that.Spirit of 74 over on LP is calling the "family issues" being cited as being largely a spin movement by Disney. I understand his reputation on here, but you'd have to imagine that this may be the case.
Cynthia who, if I recall correctly, wasn't married and had no kids? Yeah...Remember, Cynthia Harris and Ed Grier's departures from Disneyland were billed as "So they can spend more time with their families".
The buying them back part is purely speculation. The rest is not. I assure you such discussions have taken place. Very unlikely to ever happen, though.I'm sorry, I just can't buy the implication on LP that there are elements in TWDC seeking to devalue the parks by selling them so they can ultimately buy them back at a cheaper price...
Cynthia who, if I recall correctly, wasn't married and had no kids? Yeah...
The Walt Disney Company only owns the domestic properties and a minority stake in the French and Chinese Resorts.So, let me see if I understand this. Staggs is De-Rasuloing the parks, which is a good thing, and Iger is trying to sell DL and WDW?
How can the Disney Co sell DisneyLand and Walt Disney World and not think that would be a complete disaster?
:shrug:
The Walt Disney Company only owns the domestic properties and a minority stake in the French and Chinese Resorts.
I guess I miss your point, since I was talking about DisneyLand and Walt Disney World.
The buying them back part is purely speculation. The rest is not. I assure you such discussions have taken place. Very unlikely to ever happen, though.
I guess I miss your point, since I was talking about DisneyLand and Walt Disney World.
That was exactly my point. Also, when it first opened Disneyland was owned by Disneyland, Inc. which was in turn owned by Walt Disney Productions (the Studio), WED Enterprises (Walt Disney) and the American Broadcasting Corporation. So Walt Disney Parks & Resorts actually started as a separate company that was not completely owned by "Disney". ABC was bought out early on, decades before being bought by The Walt Disney Company, and WED Enterprises was bought out in the 1960s, with a few attractions remaining personally owned by Walt Disney, being transferred from WED Enterprises to Retlaw Enterprises.I shall attempt to connect those dots. Since Disney has proved that owning a minority stake in the parks is workable, even with the parks having the word Disney in their name, it could apply the same model to the US parks.
How'd I do, lazyboy97o?
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.