Raidermatt
Active Member
Calling them equals is patently false. I agree Roy played a big role, and he does deserve more credit than he often gets, but he did not call the shots. He was more of a filter for Walt's visions to run through. And while he sometimes did have to convince Walt something simply could not be done, more often his role was to figure out HOW to make Walt's plans viable financially. And he was great at it. But he did not out an out run major portions of the company as Wells did. The overall vision of the company came 100% from Walt. He was THE creative force within the company, and he also knew how to get creativity out of the very talented people he recruited. He also had a very strong business acumen on his own. He understood what people wanted without having to take a survey, But yes, he needed Roy when it came to high finance.Walt and Roy were effectively equals as well. Yes, Walt was the public face of the company and today his name is known far more than Roy's. And Roy did try very hard to make the creative visions that Walt had work. But Roy was a powerful force as well and could stand up to his brother and tell him something wasn't going to work. Roy does not get nearly enough credit for the success of the company as he deserves. Kinda like how today folks still remember Michael Eisner but rarely hear Frank Wells' name associated with Disney.
Eisner was never that creative force, no matter how he thought of himself. And again, Wells out and out ran major portions of the company. He was the choice to lead the company and for the most part, he did just that, and he was fine letting Eisner give the speeches and put himself on TV. The contrast of pre-Wells and post-Wells, almost to the day he passed, shows exactly who was keeping the company moving forward.
In other words, Wells was more than capable of running Disney himself. Eisner clearly was not. As important as Roy O was, nobody would ever say the company would have been better off with him running the show without Walt.