Al Weiss Retirement

Captain Chaos

Well-Known Member
^ Agreed. I'm wrestling with that, too. Does the community really need to know details?

If it has to do with him, his health, or family business, then no.. we don't need to know.. But if it is corporate restructuring, such as selling Parks and Resorts, then by all means, spill the beans....

I think we should leave his personal life out of it though, if that is the case...
 

menamechris

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Well, it sounds like it is a personal hardship/tragedy situation, in which case, theres no real reason to get into it. It will probably come out in time as it is.
 

DisneyNut2007

Active Member
Spirit, Kevin Yee, SeaCastle, etc. are completely wrong!

Others like Lee have already made it clear that Al Weiss' departure is going to bring more good things back to the company and that's that, so hush up!
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
if it were just a tragedy... why would people be leery of posting it.. and you don't have to retire.. that's why there is FMLA, etc.

Sounds like suspicion of more nefarious things... not family loss, etc.
 

SeaCastle

Well-Known Member
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.
 

HMF

Well-Known Member
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.

Remember, Cynthia Harris and Ed Grier's departures from Disneyland were billed as "So they can spend more time with their families".
 

Cosmic Commando

Well-Known Member
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, ala Disneystore. It would be a conspiracy on the level of a faked moon landing, or "all the people who died in 9/11 are really living on an island somewhere". It's a multi-billion dollar gamble at best.

Could they sell Parks & Resorts? It's not inconceivable... but I firmly believe it would be a PR disaster that would dwarf anything like it in corporate history. Unless the company is in serious danger of going under, you cannot sell the parks.
 

Lee

Adventurer
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.
"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.
Remember, Cynthia Harris and Ed Grier's departures from Disneyland were billed as "So they can spend more time with their families".
Cynthia who, if I recall correctly, wasn't married and had no kids? Yeah...:rolleyes:
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...
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.
 

Malvito

Member
Cynthia who, if I recall correctly, wasn't married and had no kids? Yeah...:rolleyes:

A husband and kids are not the only members of a family.

I'm as curious as the next person, but if a person says that they are leaving for "personal reasons," whatever those personal reasons may be, IMO said person deserves to be left alone.
 

MMFanCipher

Well-Known Member
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:
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
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.
 

MichWolv

Born Modest. Wore Off.
Premium Member
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.

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?
 

Cosmic Commando

Well-Known Member
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 sure all kinds of crazy discussions do happen; you owe it to the shareholders to consider everything. Should we sell Hyperion Books? Should we sell Radio Disney? Just as long as they don't consider selling the parks for much more time than it takes to verbalize the question. I really cannot envision it going well.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
I guess I miss your point, since I was talking about DisneyLand and Walt Disney World.
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?
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 am more against this idea for the reasoning, the belief that parks are a burden and only able to sell other works. And since The Walt Disney Company would rather sell than create, the parks fit into such a model less and less. I think a big hurdle to such a prospect would be a workable licensing agreement. Not being desperate for money and overvaluing their brands, Disney would have no incentive to offer up an extremely long term, steady and reasonably priced deal. I think they would end up following Six Flag's history in how that name, brand and operation, but not the actual parks, were sold off and eventually over exploited as the new operators sought out new avenues of exploiting their new brand that did have goodwill. I do not think that the current path of the Company would not get excited over new licensing opportunities as a new owner sought new revenue streams.

Due to its size, I think spinning off the division into a separate company would be more likely than selling it off wholesale the way Anheuser-Busch InBev sold off Busch Entertainment (now SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment). Of course they could follow the Universal model and sell of portions or all of each aspect of Walt Disney Parks & Resorts to a different investor.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom