• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

Bob Iger Stepping Down, Bob Chapek New CEO

VJ

Well-Known Member
I think we can evolve. D'Amaro is head of parks now, he should take the heat for the parks (that he's in charge of...which is all of them...because he's chairman).

I understood the Chapek hate when he was head of the parks we love, but now we can hate him for screwing up marvel contracts and such

We certainly shouldn't hate Chapek when the goal of the unscrupulous article was to get people to hate him over unsubstantiated claims of personal hatred. That does LITERALLY NOTHING except stroke the ego of a blogger
Why don't we hate both? D'Amaro is just as bad anyway, he's just better at hiding it.
 

jaxonp

Well-Known Member
I think we can evolve. D'Amaro is head of parks now, he should take the heat for the parks (that he's in charge of...which is all of them...because he's chairman).

I understood the Chapek hate when he was head of the parks we love, but now we can hate him for screwing up marvel contracts and such

We certainly shouldn't hate Chapek when the goal of the unscrupulous article was to get people to hate him over unsubstantiated claims of personal hatred. That does LITERALLY NOTHING except stroke the ego of a blogger

now I hate him even more.
Why don't we hate both? D'Amaro is just as bad anyway, he's just better at hiding it.

Disagree. Josh is a good guy under a dictator. He’s biding his time
 

brb1006

Well-Known Member
If he's pretending to only care about money and "leveraging the brand" in order to make Chapek happy, he's doing a very good job of it.

Exactly. People need to wake up and acknowledge this .
Strongly agree, unlike this lady. :rolleyes:
FAnXRoOXIAEuf0m.jpg

FAnXR3dXoAIxzYj.jpg

FAnXx7NXIA8IBkP.jpg
 

MisterPenguin

🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧Fully Pfizered!🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧
Premium Member
Why don't we hate both? D'Amaro is just as bad anyway, he's just better at hiding it.
Please cite your source that Josh totally, on his own, and not because he's being paid to do a job is:
  • onboard with IP everywhere all the time;
  • OK with nickel and diming guests;
  • and OK with diminished offerings.
For extra credit, please explain what someone in his position, if he didn't like the CEO's mandates, could do to countermand the CEO's policy without getting fired.
 

SoFloMagic

Well-Known Member
Please cite your source that Josh totally, on his own, and not because he's being paid to do a job is:
  • onboard with IP everywhere all the time;
  • OK with nickel and diming guests;
  • and OK with diminished offerings.
For extra credit, please explain what someone in his position, if he didn't like the CEO's mandates, could do to countermand the CEO's policy without getting fired.
Yep. He's always been focused on the cast members. I'd imagine he feels he can move the needle and support CMs in his role, but has to fall in line with the initiatives presented to him as well. That doesn't make him a bad person.
 

Disney Analyst

Well-Known Member
Please cite your source that Josh totally, on his own, and not because he's being paid to do a job is:
  • onboard with IP everywhere all the time;
  • OK with nickel and diming guests;
  • and OK with diminished offerings.
For extra credit, please explain what someone in his position, if he didn't like the CEO's mandates, could do to countermand the CEO's policy without getting fired.

Stop bringing logic to the table. Some people just want to rant and rave and foam about anything and everything.
 

Not Creathir 🚫

Premium Member
Please cite your source that Josh totally, on his own, and not because he's being paid to do a job is:
  • onboard with IP everywhere all the time;
  • OK with nickel and diming guests;
  • and OK with diminished offerings.
For extra credit, please explain what someone in his position, if he didn't like the CEO's mandates, could do to countermand the CEO's policy without getting fired.
While I agree with this premise, the same must equally be true for Chapek as well.
Meaning, Iger too was just as bad.
 

Unbanshee

Well-Known Member
Disagree. Josh is a good guy under a dictator. He’s biding his time

Lol, do you still have the shirt you wore on October 1 to Magic Kingdom?

Yep. He's always been focused on the cast members. I'd imagine he feels he can move the needle and support CMs in his role, but has to fall in line with the initiatives presented to him as well. That doesn't make him a bad person.

I don't think he's a bad person, but it was D'Amaro that ultimately made the call on Cast layoffs. He did manage some crocodile tears at Downtown Disney while handing out the pink slips, so that's a good thing, I guess.

At the end of the day, either he's a completely ineffective and unnecessary executive that is in lockstep with Chapek, or the park decisions that are being made are *GASP* actually his ideas

There are no saviors in executive leadership right now, despite our hopes and Bald Man Bad petitions
 

MisterPenguin

🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧Fully Pfizered!🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧
Premium Member
While I agree with this premise, the same must equally be true for Chapek as well.
Meaning, Iger too was just as bad.
The difference with Chapek is that he's now in a position to speak his mind and the big decisions are under his rule and watch. So, the things we all hate are in his lap. Those under him, might agree with what he's doing, or, they might not -- we don't know. As employees who wish to retain their jobs, they do what he says in either case and don't publicly disagree with their boss.
 

SoFloMagic

Well-Known Member
Lol, do you still have the shirt you wore on October 1 to Magic Kingdom?



I don't think he's a bad person, but it was D'Amaro that ultimately made the call on Cast layoffs. He did manage some crocodile tears at Downtown Disney while handing out the pink slips, so that's a good thing, I guess.

At the end of the day, either he's a completely ineffective and unnecessary executive that is in lockstep with Chapek, or the park decisions that are being made are *GASP* actually his ideas

There are no saviors in executive leadership right now, despite our hopes and Bald Man Bad petitions
Either way, the decisions that group is making are anti-customer. They're making it harder to want to give them my money. That used to be the opposite of their job. It was two steps - 1) make customer happy 2) get money
Unfortunately they figured out that they can make shareholders happier by rewriting: 1) get money 2) cut costs to get more money.

It's short-sighted and you'll never be able to maintain the pace of growth made from cuts. Whereas building growth through loyalty can reap rewards. Until you get too greedy. I saw a plastic Starbucks tumbler in the parks yesterday for $49.99. I think we've passed the point of no return.
 

HauntedPirate

Park nostalgist
Premium Member
Either way, the decisions that group is making are anti-customer. They're making it harder to want to give them my money. That used to be the opposite of their job. It was two steps - 1) make customer happy 2) get money
Unfortunately they figured out that they can make shareholders happier by rewriting: 1) get money 2) cut costs to get more money.

It's short-sighted and you'll never be able to maintain the pace of growth made from cuts. Whereas building growth through loyalty can reap rewards. Until you get too greedy. I saw a plastic Starbucks tumbler in the parks yesterday for $49.99. I think we've passed the point of no return.
Except for the flocks of consumers who will run each other over to get that insipid Starbucks tumbler. And the eBay trolls who buy up gobs of merch to resell and Disney pretends to care but in all honesty doesn’t really give a whit about it because they are making money.

Vote with your wallet, it’s the only thing that matters anymore.
 

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

Top Bottom