News Bob Iger is back! Chapek is out!!

[Laketravis]

They can and they generally should be. There is no standard for posting these comments and no way to verify how many of these people were actually Disney customers previously (and/or to what degree they spent on Disney products) or whether they are actually not spending on Disney today.

It's possible something COULD come of this sentiment at a future date, but we would need to look at other more scientific surveys (if they are ever done) or actual objective reporting, such as a downturn in Disney revenues or changes in content direction to discern if there was ever a noticible impact.



Generally... yes. How many people have said they will never go back to the parks? Parks are still busy. People here will point to fan outrage all day and night but it usually translates into exactly nothing in the real world.

Public sentiment - whether right or wrong - has an impact. And I'm in the camp who believes the parks are not "still busy" - they just feel that way because of how capacity is manipulated.

Sentiment such as this will certainly persuade others:

I'm canceling my Disney World annual pass after 11 years. Here's why my family is finally done with the parks.

The parks are no longer worth it for our family. We're done spending thousands to wait in long lines, lose perks, and struggle with technology.

news.yahoo.com

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Exactly. And do you think, for example, that the anti-Chapek sentiment that is so widespread here is in any way representative of what people out there in the real world feel about Disney? Do you think most people even know who Chapek is?

Online communities are self-selecting tribes rather than microcosms. This one is better than most.

100%. That's part of the reason there are so many posts instructing people not to go to WDW: there is rarely much of if any correlation between the reaction to various decisions made by Disney on here to how people out there in the 'real world' react.

Parks are a little bit different because most people don't visit frequently. If some family is planning a 2023 trip, they're thinking back to their last trip in 2016 and saying "hey we loved it back then!" Their opinion of Walt Disney World doesn't update in real time like it does for Media (or like Parks would for people like us who follow it closely and visit often). The damage (or not) done by stuff happening in 2023 isn't going to be felt until years from now when people don't (or do) decide to return.

$10 a month for Disney+ is a much different feedback cycle than $8,000 every 6 years.

In terms of social media comments and that sort of thing, I don't think they're very instructive at a given point in time, but I think there's information contained in how they've changed over time. If you see a cesspool Facebook comments section, it's easy to say "ah, Facebook comments sections are cesspools." But if these particular Facebook comments sections have only become cesspools recently and were previously relatively positive, it's worth asking the question "why?"

 

[Nubs70]

But the CEO *is* the face of any large company. WDW is no different.

Yes, but WDW is a subset of the greater DIS.

The CEO of GM does not insist on being the face of Chevrolet for example.

 

[SpaceCoastPaul]

Parks are a little bit different because most people don't visit frequently. If some family is planning a 2023 trip, they're thinking back to their last trip in 2016 and saying "hey we loved it back then!" Their opinion of Walt Disney World doesn't update in real time like it does for Media (or like Parks would for people like us who follow it closely and visit often). The damage (or not) done by stuff happening in 2023 isn't going to be felt until years from now when people don't (or do) decide to return.

$10 a month for Disney+ is a much different feedback cycle than $8,000 every 6 years.

In terms of social media comments and that sort of thing, I don't think they're very instructive at a given point in time, but I think there's information contained in how they've changed over time. If you see a cesspool Facebook comments section, it's easy to say "ah, Facebook comments sections are cesspools." But if these particular Facebook comments sections have only become cesspools recently and were previously relatively positive, it's worth asking the question "why?"

If only it was $8,000. WDW has become inhospitable for all but the most affluent households. Works out if you did DVC back in the day (we did). And this isn't my imagination-- it was the aim of Chapek-- and I don't think he was alone. Walt is spinning.

 

[Laketravis]

Parks are a little bit different because most people don't visit frequently. If some family is planning a 2023 trip, they're thinking back to their last trip in 2016 and saying "hey we loved it back then!" Their opinion of Walt Disney World doesn't update in real time like it does for Media (or like Parks would for people like us who follow it closely and visit often). The damage (or not) done by stuff happening in 2023 isn't going to be felt until years from now when people don't (or do) decide to return.

$10 a month for Disney+ is a much different feedback cycle than $8,000 every 6 years.

In terms of social media comments and that sort of thing, I don't think they're very instructive at a given point in time, but I think there's information contained in how they've changed over time. If you see a cesspool Facebook comments section, it's easy to say "ah, Facebook comments sections are cesspools." But if these particular Facebook comments sections have only become cesspools recently and were previously relatively positive, it's worth asking the question "why?"

To your point, positive articles like this normally contained comments of support and agreement from like-minded fans.

But now?

I paid $180 to go to Mickey's Very Merry Christmas Party at Magic Kingdom. Here's why I think it's worth it.

Mickey's Very Merry Christmas Party is an annual ticketed event at Magic Kingdom, and even though it's pricey, it's a magical festive experience.

www.yahoo.com

 

[JoeCamel]

To your point, positive articles like this normally contained comments of support and agreement from like-minded fans.

But now?

I paid $180 to go to Mickey's Very Merry Christmas Party at Magic Kingdom. Here's why I think it's worth it.

Mickey's Very Merry Christmas Party is an annual ticketed event at Magic Kingdom, and even though it's pricey, it's a magical festive experience.

www.yahoo.com

That is what Disney is putting out? Wow cringe, no wonder there would be backlash to that drivel.
Best comment was from Nate
"I love advertisements disguised as articles. "

 

[_caleb]

You're right, I wasn't very clear with that, and the fact police have apparently issued a warrant for my arrest.

What I meant was when I read current articles about Disney - whether it's stock prices or financial performance or streaming related or (insert topic about Disney here) on Forbes or Market Watch or Barron's or Motley Fool or Facebook or Instagram or (insert other sources here), "most" and what seems like to me a "majority" of the opinions expressed in the comments (which I was referring to in my original post) are statements like "go woke, go broke" or "Canceled my Woke Disney long ago." etc.......

In fact, here's a link to the first one I just pulled up - I'm sure the fact police can easily count the number of comments and issue another arrest warrant for semantics violations but my point is outside their own comfort zone the number of comments I see about people "leaving" Disney because they say Disney is "woke" can't be ignored:

Disney+ officially launches $7.99 ad-supported tier in push toward profitability

Disney has officially launched its ad-supported tier and raised prices on its ad-free option as streaming competition heats up.

finance.yahoo.com

Just from that link:


View attachment 684052

I see. Yes, I agree that the “tides” of online opinions seems to have turned negative. I don’t think this is indicative of actual consumer behavior, but I do think it may affect overal sentiment.

And widespread negative sentiment tends to breed more of the same. On these boards, we often see the dog pile effect on new rides and films.

I think its this overall public sentiment that Disney’s marketing folks pays attention to, so I expect to see some attempt on their part to push back a bit. I don’t think we’re to the “Domino’s Pizza Admits Their Pizza is Terrible” point just yet (can you imagine Iger doing a similar commercial walking around WDW and commenting on the bad guest experience, nickel-and-diming, and bad show?), but I’m watching to see what they do.

 

[LittleBuford]

In terms of social media comments and that sort of thing, I don't think they're very instructive at a given point in time, but I think there's information contained in how they've changed over time. If you see a cesspool Facebook comments section, it's easy to say "ah, Facebook comments sections are cesspools." But if these particular Facebook comments sections have only become cesspools recently and were previously relatively positive, it's worth asking the question "why?"

I agree that any shift in discourse is worth pondering, and there has been a shift in recent years, one centring on supposed wokeness. As I see it, however, Disney is simply one of many battlegrounds where this culture war is playing out. Those declaring the company lost to political correctness feel similarly about many entities and institutions, and nothing is going to put an end to their belief, because the changes that are taking place to make them feel this way are not going to be reversed. It’s a particular moment we’re living through, and I believe it will pass before too long. I call it the Woke Scare.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

If only it was $8,000. WDW has become inhospitable for all but the most affluent households. Works out if you did DVC back in the day (we did). And this isn't my imagination-- it was the aim of Chapek-- and I don't think he was alone. Walt is spinning.

It wasn’t chapek. His tenure with actual power Wasn’t long enough to actually affect much change…

So who was it, then?

 

[Ayla]

Yes, but WDW is a subset of the greater DIS.

The CEO of GM does not insist on being the face of Chevrolet for example.

You're right. I should have clarified I meant Disney overall (including everything Disney encompasses), not singled out a specific theme park.

 

[_caleb]

It wasn’t chapek. I
His tenure with actually power Wasn’t long enough to actually affect much change…

So who was it, then?

Chapek had plenty of time to make bad decisions and to implement neutral decisions badly. It wasn’t like he had NO power in the company until Iger retired (the first time).

I’m all for holding the CEO ultimately accountable for everything a company does, but Senior Vice Presidents can do a lot of damage while flying under the radar.

 

[Andrew C]

$lappie had exactly zero parks experience. Yes, he was the head of P&R, but he never worked a day in the parks. He was a crap peddler, nothing more, nothing less.

And you don’t like Josh either, right?

Also, he did have parks experience because he led the parks. You are unlikely to see jungle cruise captain become ceo. Leaders and executives are shifted around pretty consistently within a company so their knowledge and experience isn’t pigeon holed in one area.

 

[Sir_Cliff]

In terms of social media comments and that sort of thing, I don't think they're very instructive at a given point in time, but I think there's information contained in how they've changed over time. If you see a cesspool Facebook comments section, it's easy to say "ah, Facebook comments sections are cesspools." But if these particular Facebook comments sections have only become cesspools recently and were previously relatively positive, it's worth asking the question "why?"

As others have said, it is certainly worth pondering. However, the answer may not be entirely clear or straightforward. For example, it might just be that one group or organization has been targeted by another for whatever reason but you would need to know a lot more information to determine whether that had any broader significance. Same with certain groups just being more active or organised online than others without them necessarily suddenly multiplying in numbers or representing a shift in public opinion.

I must admit that I use Twitter to gauge topics of discussion among journalists, academics, opinion leaders, etc. in a particular country, but that is easy as you can expressly follow those people. A lot of what goes on around it is just noise.

 

[el_super]

Public sentiment - whether right or wrong - has an impact. And I'm in the camp who believes the parks are not "still busy" - they just feel that way because of how capacity is manipulated.

Public sentiment is so notoriously unreliable as a metric though. Even when professional surveys and polls are done, they can still be wildly different from the reality on the ground.

I'm still of the opinion that Disney wanted to lower attendance and crowding in their parks and that price increases are a smart way to achieve that without depressing revenues. In the public sentiment arena, seeing angry people unable or unwilling to pay increased pricing was expected. It happens every single time the parks raise prices. Every time they raise prices and every time we go through a round of "I'm never going again because they are too greedy" the parks stay busy and crowded and the cycle just keeps repeating.

That's pretty much the reason I've grown to just ignore the sentiment.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

I must admit that I use Twitter to gauge topics of discussion among journalists, academics, opinion leaders, etc. in a particular country, but that is easy as you can expressly follow those people. A lot of what goes on around it is just noise.

Disney is not Rolls Royce, they're Toyota. They can't get by on peddling pop culture to the blue checks of the world. They need the broad support of "the noise."

 

[Sir_Cliff]

Disney is not Rolls Royce, they're Toyota. They can't get by on peddling pop culture to the blue checks of the world. They need the broad support of "the noise."

That wasn't my point. The point is it's hard to know what, if anything, the noise represents on a platform like Twitter.

 

[Laketravis]

Public sentiment is so notoriously unreliable as a metric though. Even when professional surveys and polls are done, they can still be wildly different from the reality on the ground.

I'm still of the opinion that Disney wanted to lower attendance and crowding in their parks and that price increases are a smart way to achieve that without depressing revenues. In the public sentiment arena, seeing angry people unable or unwilling to pay increased pricing was expected. It happens every single time the parks raise prices. Every time they raise prices and every time we go through a round of "I'm never going again because they are too greedy" the parks stay busy and crowded and the cycle just keeps repeating.

That's pretty much the reason I've grown to just ignore the sentiment.

And I would offer that was a reaction to public sentiment. Bad press. Complaints.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

$lappie had exactly zero parks experience. Yes, he was the head of P&R, but he never worked a day in the parks. He was a crap peddler, nothing more, nothing less.

Correct…a month ago many were advocating playing dumb on this point…but now we can “air it out”

And you don’t like Josh either, right?

Also, he did have parks experience because he led the parks. You are unlikely to see jungle cruise captain become ceo. Leaders and executives are shifted around pretty consistently within a company so their knowledge and experience isn’t pigeon holed in one area.

…you’re shockingly off here.

“Lead parks” involves understanding what goes on in them and how the CUSTOMERS consume and perceive them. Because that’s how you can do a comprehensive analysis.

Neither of these two have shown any tact with that…

Let’s see how skinny jeans does now without the gorilla attached to him?…if he survives…which i wouldn’t put one cent on

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Chapek had plenty of time to make bad decisions and to implement neutral decisions badly. It wasn’t like he had NO power in the company until Iger retired (the first time).

I’m all for holding the CEO ultimately accountable for everything a company does, but Senior Vice Presidents can do a lot of damage while flying under the radar.

We have to work on the context…

Any decision with measurable finances is ceo and board and it stops there…full stop.
So you’re biggest revenue chunk is closely controlled from the board room. The work is done by others…but not the decisions.

Iger stayed and wrestled with chappo for all of 2020 (after he quit like coward)…and then haggled more as the kingmaker till the end of 2021…

So Chapek’s actually unfettered condrol was 6-9 months really at best.

Did chappo suck? Oh yeah…

But the gloss on this is that the “problems” are really back to Bob. The meat of them - at least.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

And I would offer that was a reaction to public sentiment. Bad press. Complaints.

It was less well thought out than that..Iger pulled that from his lower digestive track on a mic when their attendance slowed for a couple years about 5-7 years back…

That hasn’t stopped fans from repeating it as if it was something else for the last 5-7 years though?

Not everyone is Sherlock Holmes.