News Chapek FIRED, Iger New CEO

Vegas Disney Fan

Well-Known Member
What is the measure of money being well spent?

Disney’s California Adventure investment was pushed by the City of Anaheim which was threatening to make changes to the Anaheim Resort District. The project had notable wastes such as The Little Mermaid and Luigi’s Flying Tires.

Galaxy’s Edge cost $1 billion each for a couple of rides. Huge chunks were cut to keep it on that huge budget. Despite that plus the few hundred million dollars spent on Toy Story Land and Mickey and Minnie’s Runaway Railway, the capacity of Disney’s Hollywood Studios didn’t really increase and the park is likely stuck as the least visited at Walt Disney World.

Pandora was a temperamental reaction to the success of the Wizarding World of Harry Potter. It too cost nearly $1 billion and couldn’t deliver its third attraction and had its C-ticket reduced in scope.

Shanghai Disneyland was all about doing what Eisner could not and even then the deal didn’t include the distribution guarantees that kept Eisner from going forward. Nearly half a billion had to be spent to get the project back on track.

Hong Kong Disneyland was expanded to make up to the government and (keep Shanghai negotiations afloat) who were still upset at the initial park and under performance. Iger was COO when Disney decided to reduce the size of the park for “cultural” reasons.

At Epcot great expense was to be undertaken for a fancy starchitect building that’s purpose was to be a fancy starchitect building just like Mike used to build.

Then there are all of the basic design issues that will be incredibly difficult to fix/improve. The late Eisner parks had issues but we’re also cheap. Even a park like Disney’s California Adventure had decent bones such that a large chunk of even Buena Vist Street has been there since 2001.

Short answer is making the parks better than they were before. I wouldn’t undo any of the changes and go back to what was there before.

Whether it was the best use of the money is arguable, and in many cases (money spent on Rivers of light, FP+, etc) undeniably bad but I’d argue most of the money was spent well compared to wasted.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
What is the measure of money being well spent?

Disney’s California Adventure investment was pushed by the City of Anaheim which was threatening to make changes to the Anaheim Resort District. The project had notable wastes such as The Little Mermaid and Luigi’s Flying Tires.

Galaxy’s Edge cost $1 billion each for a couple of rides. Huge chunks were cut to keep it on that huge budget. Despite that plus the few hundred million dollars spent on Toy Story Land and Mickey and Minnie’s Runaway Railway, the capacity of Disney’s Hollywood Studios didn’t really increase and the park is likely stuck as the least visited at Walt Disney World.

Pandora was a temperamental reaction to the success of the Wizarding World of Harry Potter. It too cost nearly $1 billion and couldn’t deliver its third attraction and had its C-ticket reduced in scope.

Shanghai Disneyland was all about doing what Eisner could not and even then the deal didn’t include the distribution guarantees that kept Eisner from going forward. Nearly half a billion had to be spent to get the project back on track.

Hong Kong Disneyland was expanded to make up to the government and (keep Shanghai negotiations afloat) who were still upset at the initial park and under performance. Iger was COO when Disney decided to reduce the size of the park for “cultural” reasons.

At Epcot great expense was to be undertaken for a fancy starchitect building that’s purpose was to be a fancy starchitect building just like Mike used to build.

Then there are all of the basic design issues that will be incredibly difficult to fix/improve. The late Eisner parks had issues but we’re also cheap. Even a park like Disney’s California Adventure had decent bones such that a large chunk of even Buena Vist Street has been there since 2001.
Yep…what he said…thanks for saving me the keystrokes 👍🏻
 

CastAStone

5th gate? Just build a new resort Bob.
Premium Member
I still find it odd the man who invested more money into the parks than any previous CEO (Iger) is so unpopular on a Disney parks fan site. Especially considering his replacement seems to be a tightwad cutting costs wherever possible.
I think Iger is one of the best CEOs we’ve seen lead a developed, blue chip company in my lifetime. Most CEOs at companies that Wall Street views like they view TWDC are Chapeks.
 
Last edited:

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
I think Iger is one of the best CEOs we’ve seen lead a developed, blue chip company in my lifetime. Most CEOs at companies that Wall Street views like they view TWDC have Chapeks.

I think Iger was a good-to-excellent CEO for the Disney corporation. I don't think he was an especially good CEO for Disney theme parks.

Those are two very separate things. Since this is essentially a theme park board, when people are down on Iger I assume they're solely focused on the parks.
 

CastAStone

5th gate? Just build a new resort Bob.
Premium Member
I think Iger was a good-to-excellent CEO for the Disney corporation. I don't think he was an especially good CEO for Disney theme parks.

Those are two very separate things.
That’s fair but I think he was a much better CEO for the parks than the average person does. He clearly by the end of his tenure though had developed a mentality of cutting the small things to funnel more money to big things, and I don’t think that is good. Chapek has doubled down on that.
 

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
That’s fair but I think he was a much better CEO for the parks than the average person does. He clearly by the end of his tenure though had developed a mentality of cutting the small things to funnel more money to big things, and I don’t think that is good. Chapek has doubled down on that.

I think his IP mandate caused some significant problems and probably eliminated some potentially interesting attractions we could have otherwise seen. The Frozen shoehorning into Maelstrom is still an awful decision from nearly every perspective -- for an EPCOT purist it doesn't belong there and really screwed up the Norway pavilion, and for big Frozen fans it's a mediocre afterthought attraction with a tiny hourly capacity. That's an IP that deserved a newly designed impressive attraction, not something quickly thrown together.

There's also been a noticeable trend towards genericism in the parks, resorts, and merchandise in addition to the clear cuts (as you mentioned) to the smaller details that really made Disney parks special.

He certainly could have been worse, though, and who knows how involved he actually was in most of those decisions (outside of the IP mandate, which we know was his).
 
Last edited:

Lilofan

Well-Known Member
That’s fair but I think he was a much better CEO for the parks than the average person does. He clearly by the end of his tenure though had developed a mentality of cutting the small things to funnel more money to big things, and I don’t think that is good. Chapek has doubled down on that.
Chapek had proclaimed he became CEO through baptism of fire during the pandemic. Classroom case studies will discuss years later how Chapek navigated out of covid etc.
 

Rumrunner

Well-Known Member
Where is the Walt Disney and his vision and leadership that made this a magical place? Disney may have lost that never to be recovered again.
 

pdude81

Well-Known Member
Where is the Walt Disney and his vision and leadership that made this a magical place? Disney may have lost that never to be recovered again.

Pulp Fiction Butch Coolidge GIF
 

Vegas Disney Fan

Well-Known Member
Where is the Walt Disney and his vision and leadership that made this a magical place? Disney may have lost that never to be recovered again.
I think that’s a somewhat mythical ideal at this point.

Walt frequently bet the whole companies survival (and his families livelihood) to make projects happen, if a CEO endangered the survival of the Walt Disney Company today they wouldn’t last a week.

Running a private company is a whole different ballgame from running a multinational corporation.
 

Sir_Cliff

Well-Known Member
That’s fair but I think he was a much better CEO for the parks than the average person does. He clearly by the end of his tenure though had developed a mentality of cutting the small things to funnel more money to big things, and I don’t think that is good. Chapek has doubled down on that.
I feel like it's hard to know how the parks will develop differently under Chapek than Iger at this point. The one thing that does seem to have notably changed is a ramping up of efforts to monetise every aspect of the experience while cutting whatever they judge they can get away with. Chapek said something about the pandemic presenting an opportunity to brush away old taboos and remake the parks business they way they wanted, and that is something he seems to have grasped with both hands. Disney getting into gambling through ESPN might be a similar example in another division of this mentality focussed almost solely on the business case.

He certainly could have been worse, though, and who knows how involved he actually was in most of those decisions (outside of the IP mandate, which we know was his).
I agree with all your criticisms, and ultimately land at this same place with probably a slightly more positive balance sheet that I'm guessing you have. The main reason is that I think we saw exactly how things could have been worse with parks like DCA and WDSP during the late-Eisner push into a 'post-theming' era. While the IP and franchise mandates made the parks less interesting and costs spiralled out of control, at least what they built was usually of a high standard under Iger. If he had just keep things going the way they were when he took over, I imagine we would have seen decades of A Bug's Lands rather than Carslands.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
I agree with all your criticisms, and ultimately land at this same place with probably a slightly more positive balance sheet that I'm guessing you have. The main reason is that I think we saw exactly how things could have been worse with parks like DCA and WDSP during the late-Eisner push into a 'post-theming' era. While the IP and franchise mandates made the parks less interesting and costs spiralled out of control, at least what they built was usually of a high standard under Iger. If he had just keep things going the way they were when he took over, I imagine we would have seen decades of A Bug's Lands rather than Carslands.
Eisner was already starting to change course by the time he left. Even Cars Land has its origins in the Eisner era.
 

HauntedPirate

Park nostalgist
Premium Member
??? The biggest price increases in the companies history were mid-Iger era. Recent %increases for tickets and hotels have been downright skimpy compared to those from ~10 years ago.
The big price increases started after $lappie was installed as head of P&R in 2015. If I had access to my spreadsheet I could show some numbers.
 

Magicart87

No Refunds!
Premium Member
Under Iger the company just stopped being creative. Why create when you can buy? All Iger did was acquire anything and everything he could to pad out the Disney portfolio. Good for shareholders but did nothing for the parks except raise prices and leverage IP to offset. Unfortuntately the strategy continues with his replacement CEO, Iger 2 the Wrath of Chapek. For the parks to ever truly become great again there needs to be a massive shift in the corporate dynamic. I'd be happy if they split off the parks into their own company. Clean house and start from scratch.

Iger's legacy will be Disney+ assuming it sticks around.
 

HauntedPirate

Park nostalgist
Premium Member
Under Iger the company just stopped being creative. Why create when you can buy? All Iger did was acquire anything and everything he could to pad out the Disney portfolio. Good for shareholders but did nothing for the parks except raise prices and leverage IP to offset. Unfortuntately the strategy continues with his replacement CEO, Iger 2 the Wrath of Chapek. For the parks to ever truly become great again there needs to be a massive shift in the corporate dynamic. I'd be happy if they split off the parks into their own company. Clean house and start from scratch.

Iger's legacy will be Disney+ assuming it sticks around.
Iger 2 the Wrath of Chapek… 🤣🤣🤣

I’d be concerned if the parks ever got spun off. Very concerned. I’m not sure there are any companies who could do right by them.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom