I would think a typical guest can’t even name one Disney board of director without googling the names.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Bob Iger is back! Chapek is out!!
- Thread starter Disney4family
- Start date
Didn’t Chapek have round tables , park visits to meet with execs and cast etc after the FL Governor and Disney conflict of interest ?
el_super
Well-Known Member
I don't think that things are going to change all that much, but I also don't think the "initiated by Iger" bit is wholly the truth either.
There are literally hundreds of upper level park managers/employees that oversee the operation of the parks. We're not talking about Iger or Chapek/D'Amaro or even the people that directly report to them... but the people below them. They are the ones compiling numbers, creating the reporting, identifying the trends and devising the upper level strategy for the division. Josh may be signing off on it at the end of the day, and Iger might be aware of it, but the actual soup-to-nuts implementation of that strategy is being executed by the entire division.
Which is why, ultimately, replacing Chapek or D'Amaro or Iger does not ever result in some significant change in direction. When the people below are saying the parks are crowded or the pricing is too high, or the attractions are not rating well, whatever leader is in place is going to take direction from the team in the know.
el_super
Well-Known Member
That was specifically with regard to social issues and the impact of the specific direction he took toward the law. It wasn't a general open house "tell me how to solve the stroller parking problem" kind of roundtable.
Slpy3270
Well-Known Member
Chances that Iger doesn't make it next year or ends up emulating David Zaslav or Jeff Bewkes, if not worse, to prevent Loeb and Peltz from initiating a proxy fight next year? 'Cause it looks like they will be a thorn on Iger's side for a long time (especially since his desire to put "creative power back to creatives" will be completely at odds with shareholders and investors obsessed with profits).
Especially if the stock hits $60....
Especially if the stock hits $60....
Tha Realest
Well-Known Member
We're $0.25 from the stock hitting its 5-year low, as of this writing (86.23 (now) vs 85.98 (Covid bottom in March '20).
Could come sooner than we think.
Tha Realest
Well-Known Member
It is really fascinating to see how they're strip-mining their IP for poorly-recieved D+ series these days. Two weeks ago it was Willow, last week it was National Treasure. In a way it's reverting to the mean, like how they made terrible DTV sequels of popular films, except now they're basically throwing major motion picture budgets for D+ series that are somehow worse than those terrible Sunday night films they used to churn out.
Tha Realest
Well-Known Member
This is why the notion that Bob C. was a unique bad actor "ruining" the experience makes no sense. Most of those unpopular ideas had been in development before Bob C took over. None have been rolled back.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
As Spock would say…
“…Fascinating”
That’s on Iger too…
He promised the Street that they had bought so much gold IP, that NOTHING could dent it.
So they have to mine it. Locked in.
And what has put the “dents” in it?
Bad characters, stories…and not understanding what the audience wants for their own personal enjoyment.
Last edited:
Chip Chipperson
Well-Known Member
I don't know why you think there's some relevant difference. Just because it wasn't his original contract doesn't make the extension any less of a contract. In 2017, the Board extended his contract through 12/31/21. He stepped down in February 2020. Therefore, he stepped down with 22 months remaining on his contract. Calling it an extension doesn't make that fact any less true.
There are plenty of reasons why a person might retire. However, a CEO agreeing to stay on until the end of 2021 suddenly stepping down "effective immediately" with 22 months remaining on that contract (after stalling on previously announced plans to step down and chasing away the most likely successors) isn't typical unless there's a reason beyond "I think I'm ready to step away." Since no scandals or health issues have been reported that would have cause his to step down, we're left with very few options, and "I was just ready to be done," isn't the most likely one - especially since he remained Chairman of the Board and continued participating/meddling in Disney's affairs in ways that made his successor feel undermined. Hardly the behavior of a man who was ready to retire and relax on the beach.
Pretty much.
Sure, it's speculation, but it's speculation based on knowledge of how other large publicly traded corporations typically handle these types of transitions when the departing CEO wasn't fired. My company is on its 4th CEO since I started working here. Not one of the previous 3 just announced their retirement effective immediately - because that's not the standard behavior expected from a CEO. They announce their departure months in advance and simultaneously announce their replacement, who is then shown the ropes during that transition period - because nobody wants instability (or the perception of it) if it can be avoided.
Also, you can easily rule certain possibilities out by asking how the Board of Directors would think/act. Logically, it makes no sense to force Iger out and then beg him to come back to replace his replacement. We have a few possible options. Feel free to add your own to the list if you have any that I missed:
1. Iger was really ready to retire, so he stepped down effective immediately. Then he decided to stick around in a less visible role as Chairman of the Board and undermine Chapek by holding meetings with other executives without inviting Chapek and convincing the rest of the Board to see things his way when he disagreed with Chapek's ideas. A similar workload with less visibility to the public - because he was "ready to retire" and couldn't wait any longer.
2. The Board forced Iger out effective immediately in February 2020 because they were tired of him dragging his feet on grooming a successor - even though they were the ones who extended his contract by 4 years in 2017 when they could have easily extended it by a shorter amount of time in order to pressure him to identify potential successors - and then begged him to come back to replace Chapek so they could go through the whole situation again. Again, they did this in the face of a looming public health emergency that had already impacted their theme parks and movie ticket sales in Asia - because who cares if there's an emergency on the horizon, Iger just had to go immediately!
3. Iger didn't want his career as CEO to end with a whimper due to COVID-19 hurting the company's performance, so he took decided to step down early before things got ugly here in the US. He then stayed on as Chairman of the Board until his contract ended on 12/31/21 knowing that Chapek would be the public face of the company during the rough patch.
el_super
Well-Known Member
Problem here isn't all Disney. Somehow Wall Street has decided that, between the dead end of Disney+, and the news of Avatar's performance over the weekend, that the public no longer wants to pay for movies.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
Might have to do with some unprecedented longterm price gouging…everywhere…and people running out of cash and credit?
Tha Realest
Well-Known Member
It's hilarious when you consider some people might wait to watch this on streaming, which they'll be able to do on...HBO Max.
Tha Realest
Well-Known Member
Yet Disney's down 4.5%, and Netflix is only down 1%, and WBD only down 0.6%o, in a real sense, yes, Disney is performing far worse than its peers in the theatrical/streaming realm.
But keep waiving around those puff pieces from Christine McCarthy's alma mater to show how well she's stewarding the company's finance.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
Which false theory think tank did she come from Stanford or Chicago??
…I only accept Princetonians
Last edited:
TalkingHead
Well-Known Member
What’s even crazier is the Eisner-era DTV sequels almost always had substitutes for the celebrity voice actors from the feature films which helped the theatrical films retain prestige. Now they put the live-action star talent in series which further depletes the perceived value of a movie ticket. Talk about an industry in disarray.
mightynine
Well-Known Member
The 20th Century/HBO Max deal ends this year, so Avatar 2 is likely going to D+ whenever it hits streaming.
Rickcat96
Well-Known Member
It absolutely is ALL Disney- gouged their quests, loyal fans and told passholders to pound sand, all while cutting the service's once hailed as the Disney difference. They started charging for services that used to be complimentary, Look at the prices for the next 12 months for tickets only.
Now throw in economic slowdown, which of the above fans can they count on to help them out during this dumpster fire? Oh sorry, they lost most of them already.
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
The reason I have some hope (though not necessarily an expectation) that things might get better in the parks in the short term is that discontent with how the parks are being run has been such a big part of the narrative about why Chapek was failing and Iger had to be brought back.
Whatever the ins and outs of who is responsible for what between Chapek and Iger, it wouldn't surprise me if he wants part of his legacy to be restoring their parks to their former glory. After all, that was part of the story the first time with the overhaul of DCA. It also probably felt nice to wander through Disneyland and have people treat him like a hero and if he was at all involved in stoking the narrative of the parks' decline in the press it makes sense he wants the narrative to now be that he is their saviour.
We shall see, but I think there's also plenty of room to throw more money at the parks without it causing much of an issue with investors.