Boycott

brisem

Well-Known Member

Frankly, I don't think Roy is capable of running such a large company as Disney. People automatically like Roy because he is a "Disney." Despite this, his past record is not very favorable.

I wish that someone would come forward with viable solutions so that we could truly SAVE DISNEY!:) [/B]



I agree that Roy is not the answer.

Eisner has to name a successor this year.

AS for saving Disney, alot of that has been said before.
The way thing are right now--take half the money they just received from the Angels and Celebration--re-invested back into the parks. It can be used for refurbs, attractions and pay down some deb. The other should be put away for future use.
(Remember in 2004, there should be cash from the sales of Disney Stores and the Mighty Ducks.)
 

lebernadin

New Member
Originally posted by imagineer99 Regarding the Pixar situation, signing the contract would have been detrimental to the company. Disney would have become almost non-existent in the relationship. It may not be what we all want, but it is sadly the truth.

Exactly! Last summer Eisner allowed his personal feelings to be quoted publicly when he said that "Disney is not for rent." Which is exactly what it would be if he accepted a 90/10 split for not only the lengthy deal but also the two films that are still under the 1997 contract that are coming out in the next two years. You can bet that if he HAD accepted the deal, that Roy and the gang would be all over him for agreeing to only 10% of the profits and would use THAT as part of his "platform." :hammer:

The partnership was good, but how long would it take for people to keep seeing that the movies are created by someone else, and yet are distributed by Disney and start wondering why Disney isn't making their own animated films anymore?

Whether Eisner is here going forward or not, how the Pixar deal went down is for the best. Now Pixar has to compete against Disney and its worldwide marketing and PR empire that can even get a decent amount of people to see a dud movie like Brother Bear. If Brother Bear had been created by another company they would have had a severe uphill battle getting it distributed as a feature and it would have probably ended up on blockbuster and bestbuy shelves instead. They became what they are today because of this.

They received 15% of Toy Story's profits in their first deal. Then Disney was very generous in agreeing to a 50/50 split in the 1997 deal. They became too greedy and confident. Most stories are painting it as a war of egos(Jobs', Eisner's) but its about Eisner standing his ground on what is a wise decision and Jobs not backing away from an outrageous proposition.
 

Pixie Duster

New Member
Ya, you know what? I am not digging deep enough, I mean I have no clue. I am just a cast member.

You mention the name Esiner to ANYONE, Disney freak, regular person, whatever, and most people do not get a warm and fuzzy feeling. I just don;t see what good Esiner is doing anymore. And him naming a successor really is not going to do much since he will just have someone like him take his place. I am entitled to my opinoin and I do not need to be told to read more and dig deeper because I know enough and experience his management style almost everyday.
 

General Grizz

New Member
Originally posted by Pixie Duster
Ya, you know what? I am not digging deep enough, I mean I have no clue. I am just a cast member.

You mention the name Esiner to ANYONE, Disney freak, regular person, whatever, and most people do not get a warm and fuzzy feeling. I just don;t see what good Esiner is doing anymore. And him naming a successor really is not going to do much since he will just have someone like him take his place. I am entitled to my opinoin and I do not need to be told to read more and dig deeper because I know enough and experience his management style almost everyday.

Agreed about "a greed." :lookaroun :p
 

lebernadin

New Member
Originally posted by Pixie Duster
I am entitled to my opinoin and I do not need to be told to read more and dig deeper because I know enough and experience his management style almost everyday.

Who is taking away your right to an opinion? But if you're going to speak your mind on a messageboard realize that people are going to agree/disagree with what you have to say, hence the point of a messageboard.

As far as the link to the LA Times article i find it funny that you would take offense to that. Its a national paper and the story is objective. It doesn't praise Eisner or even Jobs, it just reports on what the facts are of the Pixar situation. These boards are full of people telling everyone to go to savedisney.com and jimhill.com two SUBJECTIVE agenda-based websites.
 

Pixie Duster

New Member
WHAT THE? When on Earth did I say I was offended by the Times article, I read it and understand it completely.
I got ticked at the fact that you assume I am partially ignorant to the situation which is an ignorant opinion :).
 

DDuckFan130

Well-Known Member
just a thought...

Does anyone else think Michael Jackson should replace Eisner?? He is a Peter Pan fan/fanatic whatever and he seems to be a fan of the parks so hey if he's not convicted of child molestation, bring him on down! What a great asset huh? :rolleyes:


hehe jk :lol: I realized things were getting a wee bit tense in here so I thought of something to lighten things up :)
 

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

Back
Top Bottom