Vinnie Mac
Well-Known Member
October 29th - November 1st
-
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
Satans Hockey
Active Member
I know I'm a bit late in this thread but I've seen a bunch of commericals for this movie every single day for a few days now.
TwilightZone
Well-Known Member
It's not the number I think is an issue. There is a ton of commercials, you are right there. But the synergy that is usually used to advertise Disney products isn't there. There's no SW lunchboxes, toys, magazines, etc. Also the advertising makes it look...kinda bland if I am being honest here.
I will give Lightyear credit, it was synergized SUPER well.
Vegas Disney Fan
Well-Known Member
Sounds like we missed you by about a week, Nov 2021 was honestly one of my all time favorite WDW trips, masks indoors only, not crowded, met my family there, everyone (us, other guests, CMs) was in such an amazing mood to be at Disney after being stuck inside for a year… its trips and memories like that that make us lifetime Disney parks fans.
TwilightZone
Well-Known Member
Let's talk more about synergy, because I feel its important to add based on my own view of things.
Now 90s - 00s Disney Synergy was a BEAST. Defunctland gave a good example in his new video (watch it btw!), where those behind Disney Channel's bumpers at the time discussed a meeting in which the board talked about what they were doing for the Lizzie Mcguire movie. Some did toilet paper, some did notebooks, etc. All ready for the next year. There was also another example about doing "fish facts" one year before Finding Nemo premiered on the Disney channel, that way when it came out the kids who were regulars on the Disney channel would already be "coincidentally" into fish. I feel the most infamous examples of recent memory are the Stitch and Frozen explosions, where synergy was ALL over the place.
But more modern-ish Disney seems to be, at least to me as someone very uneducated about Disney merch, not as synergetic as past Disney. I mean sure, gives us some breathers and reassurance as park fans, but also very curious how quiet a lot of modern marketing is in comparison. Maybe its because I outgrew Disney Channel and don't really buy merch, but its something to ponder about.
Now 90s - 00s Disney Synergy was a BEAST. Defunctland gave a good example in his new video (watch it btw!), where those behind Disney Channel's bumpers at the time discussed a meeting in which the board talked about what they were doing for the Lizzie Mcguire movie. Some did toilet paper, some did notebooks, etc. All ready for the next year. There was also another example about doing "fish facts" one year before Finding Nemo premiered on the Disney channel, that way when it came out the kids who were regulars on the Disney channel would already be "coincidentally" into fish. I feel the most infamous examples of recent memory are the Stitch and Frozen explosions, where synergy was ALL over the place.
But more modern-ish Disney seems to be, at least to me as someone very uneducated about Disney merch, not as synergetic as past Disney. I mean sure, gives us some breathers and reassurance as park fans, but also very curious how quiet a lot of modern marketing is in comparison. Maybe its because I outgrew Disney Channel and don't really buy merch, but its something to ponder about.
Raidermatt
Active Member
So many things wrong with that. Starting with how bad Eisner actually was.
Raidermatt
Active Member
No. Eisner was horrible. The first 10 years he was in a power sharing arrangement with Frank Wells, and that is why things went (for the most part) well. Roy and the investors wanted Wells to run the company with Eisner as his second, brought in primarily for his Hollywood clout. Eisner refused to accept that arrangement, and Wells didn't have Eisner's ego, so they gave Eisner the CEO job with Wells as president, but with the unique stipulation that Wells reported directly to the Board, not Eisner.
Eisner was the face of the company, but it was Wells who kept it moving in the right direction.
The moment Wells passed, and Eisner became the sole leader of Disney, things began going awry.
This is not out of context, it is pure and simple truth. You can track all issues to that change in the power structure. Had Wells never been there, it likely would have been a complete disaster from the get-go. But fortunately that was not allowed to happen. By the time he had complete control, the company was no longer a takeover target (though Comcast gave it a shot in Eisner's later years).
Eisner was in many ways a different kind of bad than Chapek, but he was still bad.
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
Indeed. I certainly understand not liking Turning Red, but I don't get the line of argument that it was alienating because it was about Chinese-Canadian women. As neither Chinese, Canadian, nor a woman, I didn't find anything in Turning Red that was too specific or niche for me to understand and I feel like I have seen many movies that aren't about Australian men living in The Netherlands.
MrPromey
Well-Known Member
Man, I feel like that's all the Netflix algorithm ever points me towards.
Can't tell you how tired I am of hearing that "bitterballen on the barbie" line!
Last edited:
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
Don't disrespect my culture!Man, I feel like that's all the Netflix algorithm ever points me towards.
Can't tell you how tired I am of hearing that "bitterballen on the barbie" line!
Br0ckford
Premium Member
I'd like to see what Kramerica Industries can do with the brand.
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
Beautiful Bob stopped by overnight and erected the tree. Chapek has never erected anything in his life. Such a Scrooge.
Is it out of the question to get say a real “partner” to help burden the bill these parks need? Tesla with say a speedway update and maybe promote them with Tron and an updated Space Mountain? Also Apple as much as i love the company and stock has been kinda in a rut maybe revisit that & see if they be on board with some cash infusion to finish the SE refurb and possibly love elsewhere. Not sure what other brands may or may not be on board and make sense but its something they should look at if the goal is to truly make things better and expand and do it quicker than Disneys pace
MaximumEd
Well-Known Member
Since this is a parks-centric board, I’m guessing those calling for Eisner to be brought back in some capacity are saying that due to the state of the parks. It’s unnecessary. We all know what he would need to do. Stand an inch from Iger’s ear and yell “build more stuff” over and over. I’d be willing to do that for 200k a year and save us all a bunch of money.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
…I figured something like this was coming. But it’s off because it doesn’t look at the whole tenure in totality in the context of what Disney was before he arrived and what it was when he left.
Quite simply: it was 5x the company it was when he left and an international corporation. I can’t take anyone seriously who believes that to be easy to steward and instead chooses the worst moments.
If your point is Frank wells was key…then I’ll grant that. But there’s no way you can separate the two completely. And I’m sure Frank wells would disagree with your assessment.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
You mean the egomaniac that is on pace to bankrupt Twitter in 45 days? And is erratic as almost anyone we’ve seen?
The sponsorship model is also broken…but that’s due to technology as much as anything. What’s in it for companies to pay fees for signage that people have been trained to tune out in the cyber/digital world for 25 years?
Heppenheimer
Well-Known Member
I don't think the movie was meant to be marketed to any one particular demographic. Seemingly like all things these days, the "too niche" debate grew out of social media comments that were probably taken out of context.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
Actually the opposite. I would think it might be wise just to show stability and take a lot of the PR stink of what’s been a rough couple of years at Disney. They are criticized in the news cycle for things that they carefully crafted an image to avoid for a century prior.
Disney was not a “ripoff” or “incompetent”…and that had been increasingly inferred. The value - not the price - is what was key to their brand loyalty and that is being questioned.
Nothing to do with parks. It would be for an interview, a speech and some press photos.
MaximumEd
Well-Known Member
Value and price of what?
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
Wow…they fired Daniel at warp speed