News Chapek FIRED, Iger New CEO

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Wow!...lol..."100%" wrong? Not even 10% right? Not even 1% right?

Ok...we know where you are on the Disney apologist spectrum. That's cool. I'm not knocking it. There are certainly good folks that defend Disney's problems 100% right to all possible human limits. To each their own. ;-)

I think you are partially right…

And “Disney apologist” doesn’t mean what it did 2 years ago…I personally have seen those that believed Iger’s toxic snake oil in a drunken, overhyped economy start to adjust with the realities…which is what “adulting” is all about.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Wow!...lol..."100%" wrong? Not even 10% right? Not even 1% right?

Ok...we know where you are on the Disney apologist spectrum. That's cool. I'm not knocking it. There are certainly good folks that defend Disney's problems 100% right to all possible human limits. To each their own. ;-)

Calling you out for completely fabricating a backwards narrative that makes no logical sense and hiding behind “Nobody really knows!” is not one and the same with being a Disney apologist.

 

[Cliff]

Calling you out for completely fabricating a backwards narrative that makes no logical sense and hiding behind “Nobody really knows!” is not one and the same with being a Disney apologist.

Wait....when I say that "nobody really knows"...does that "not" apply to you? If you are a Disney insider, if you councel Chapek and the Board and the shareholders, if you are privy to the phone calls and Zoom meetings they make with each other?...if you "actually" DO know "why" decisions are made the way they are?

If that is the case, then yes, I apologize to you and my statement certainly does not apply to "you" specifically.

But if you are NOT somebody privy to these confidential discussions....then sorry, you DO fall under the "nobody knows" catagory like the rest of us do.

 

[mikejs78]

Wow!...lol..."100%" wrong? Not even 10% right? Not even 1% right?

Ok...we know where you are on the Disney apologist spectrum. That's cool. I'm not knocking it. There are certainly good folks that defend Disney's problems 100% right to all possible human limits. To each their own. ;-)

I'm not defending Disney's problems at all. And I'm not being an apologist. I just think you're completely misdiagnosing them. The root of the problems at Disney right now is embodied in its CEO, and the board that enables him. If anything, you're being a Chapek apologist.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Non of us know the insider investor discusions. I suspect that they are aware of internal information that we are not. I think THIS is why they are making moves that many people here find shocking.

Again, this is just speculation and guesswork by ALL of us here. Disney will publically say that everything is going great and wonderfull. Even when we know its not. Disney spins information really REALLY hard. Look at the Galactic StarCruiser hotel? Disney pretends to the public that its an enormously popular and sucessful masterpeice...but most of us know that's FAR from the case.

I would suspect that Disney is in far deeper financial trouble than the public knows and investors want to change that fast.

Well?...perhaps Im 100% wrong and Disney is doing amazing and all this Chapek vs Iger vs Board vs Shareholders vs woke vs politics vs profit/loss vs customer opinion talk...is just all fake news.

But I dont think so.

Calling you out for completely fabricating a backwards narrative that makes no logical sense and hiding behind “Nobody really knows!” is not one and the same with being a Disney apologist.

Gawd…I’m the peacemaker

I don’t think we have to ditch this thread by turning it into a feces tossing fest.

We’re probably not all that far apart here in the end.

Disney isn’t looking to be particularly well run…we can interpret the nuance…but they are not.

But I think the woke/woke backlash is too tribal and has been interpreted wrong in MOST cases on the forums

 

[lazyboy97o]

Wait....when I say that "nobody really knows"...does that "not" apply to you? If you are a Disney insider, if you councel Chapek and the Board and the shareholders, if you are privy to the phone calls and Zoom meetings they make with each other?...if you "actually" DO know "why" decisions are made the way they are?

If that is the case, then yes, I apologize to you and my statement certainly does not apply to "you" specifically.

But if you are NOT somebody privy to these confidential discussions....then sorry, you DO fall under the "nobody knows" catagory like the rest of us do.

Not knowing specifics doesn’t validate every wild supposition. You’re using that to push a narrative not only without evidence, but one contrary to the evidence. You don’t wait years to change your outward activities if you are concerned about your image and trying to change course. You take action now on those public facing areas of concern,

 

[Cliff]

Gawd…I’m the peacemaker

I don’t think we have to ditch this thread by turning it into a feces tossing fest.

We’re probably not all that far apart here in the end.

Disney isn’t looking to be particularly well run…we can interpret the nuance…but they are not.

But I think the woke/woke backlash is too tribal and has been interpreted wrong in MOST cases on the forums

Awwe...it's OK! You dont need to be a peacemaker. There is no war here.

We are just having a bit of back and forth banter here on this controvercial topic. I hope I can say that no harm is being done to the others in the talk either.

Yes, I also agree with much of what you say too about the state of Disney management right now.

It's all good and this is a passionate topic and its certainly normal for it to get a bit "strong" sometimes. We are all big Disney fans here. We ALL have that in common with each other. We all want the best for the company...we just disagree sometimes on how to get to that same end goal. ;-)

 

[Cliff]

Not knowing specifics doesn’t validate every wild supposition. You’re using that to push a narrative not only without evidence, but one contrary to the evidence. You don’t wait years to change your outward activities if you are concerned about your image and trying to change course. You take action now on those public facing areas of concern,

I'm not looking for validation for my wild suppositions. Im simply throwing out posibilites and then declaring that I also dont "know" either. It would like me saying that ancient aliens might have come to Earth. Then I say because we can see all these structures that existed that we don't know how man could have made. But then I say that there is just know way to know for sure...either way. How horrible is that?

Are we not allowed to theorize, guess, wonder or give a supposition about anything Disney...unless we have direct insider knowledge about that topic? No...if that was the rule...this thread would be almost completely empty.

99% of everything that is typed on these forums are somebodies "opinion" about that subject and are not 100% hard, actual "fact". (Yes, that includes my "99%" number claim...because I have no way to run metrics on this forum to get the exact value

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Awwe...it's OK! You dont need to be a peacemaker. There is no war here.

We are just having a bit of back and forth banter here on this controvercial topic. I hope I can say that no harm is being done to the others in the talk either.

Yes, I also agree with much of what you say too about the state of Disney management right now.

It's all good and this is a passionate topic and its certainly normal for it to get a bit "strong" sometimes. We are all big Disney fans here. We ALL have that in common with each other. We all want the best for the company...we just disagree sometimes on how to get to that same end goal. ;-)

I know…and going nowhere because fleshing it out properly will get wiped

 

[Cliff]

I know…and going nowhere because fleshing it out properly will get wiped

Well?...let's be honest. It's impossible to flesh this topic out with true "facts" Why?... because nobody here is privy to the "actual" Disney investor/board/management talks that lead to these changes. Do y'all know what I mean?

Joe states his opinion...Sam counters Joe's oppinion with a different one...Marry counters Joe with her own opinion and Jack fires back at Sam with his opinion. This all happens because everybody thinks "they" are right one and it goes round and round endlessly.

The truth is...we could ALL be wrong about this subject. There might be some big shareholders reading this saying: "These people act like they understand...but they really have no clue about what is REALLY happening in our confidential meetings"

At the risk of getting flamed...I'll say it again.

Nobody really knows....

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Well?...let's be honest. It's impossible to flesh this topic out with true "facts" Why?... because nobody here is privy to the "actual" Disney investor/board/management talks that lead to these changes. Do y'all know what I mean?

Joe states his opinion...Sam counters Joe's oppinion with a different one...Marry counters Joe with her own opinion and Jack fires back at Sam with his opinion. This all happens because everybody thinks "they" are right one and it goes round and round endlessly.

The truth is...we could ALL be wrong about this subject. There might be some big shareholders reading this saying: "These people act like the understand...bu the really have no clue about what is REALLY happening in our confidential meetings"

At the risk of getting flamed...I'll say it again.

Nobody really knows....

Yes…but that’s not what i meant

We are drifting toward interpreting politics as related to profit…that’s when it always ends badly

 

[Cliff]

Yes…but that’s not what i meant

We are drifting toward interpreting politics as related to profit…that’s when it always ends badly

Gotcha.

Well? I would only say that I believe that the "lack" of politics leads to the best financial results. The more any company avoids it, the better off they are.

But maybe that's a cynical, terrible and messed up way to think about it. ;-)

 

[Tha Realest]

while we don’t know about the specifics of the finances, we can infer enough from what’s publicly available to suggest it’s doing well for now. The “board supports the CEO” reassurance feels more like they’re trying to overcompensate for something rather than to truly defend him. It’s like the husband who feels the need to lavish expensive gifts and baubles to their spouse who is feeling unappreciated.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

while we don’t know about the specifics of the finances, we can infer enough from what’s publicly available to suggest it’s doing well for now. The “board supports the CEO” reassurance feels more like they’re trying to overcompensate for something rather than to truly defend him. It’s like the husband who feels the need to lavish expensive gifts and baubles to their spouse who is feeling unappreciated.

Their stock is bleeding and now ALL stocks are bleeding…which is probably why they are testing where they stand on Wall Street with Chapek.

There are those that have said the two things don’t matter on this thread. They are of course wrong.

The assumption is this “systemic” and not really a “Disney” problem. But that is also not correct.

There is also an assumption that in a year…the board and chapek will be RAKING it. So they’re all kismet. That is likely wrong as well.

Here’s something I’ll toss on the fire. Enough innuendo/sources with access have painted the picture that Iger - and perhaps by extension the board - want chapek gone. But if he’s “fired”…that is a stain on them and Bob’s precious ego.
So they’re doing the oldest trick in the book: letting him twist to save their face. Just a thought.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Gotcha.

Well? I would only say that I believe that the "lack" of politics leads to the best financial results. The more any company avoids it, the better off they are.

But maybe that's a cynical, terrible and messed up way to think about it. ;-)

Since March we’ve debated on a variety of thread about how “a-political” is a unicorn…

As real as a function yeti on Everest.

Disney is not apolitical, never really was (the oppo…actually), and couldn’t be here.

The coke comparison is bubkas…but I don’t want to go too far down that well. As is the interpretation of what that specific resulted in.

 

[MarvelCharacterNerd]

What will be interesting - IF Chapek's contract is extended - is the length of that extension.

Will it be one year - essentially saying "we're just waiting for the ink to dry on your successor's contract and for their Tesla to be delivered"?

Will it be two years - giving Chapek a little saving face time but no vote of future confidence?

Will it be three years - saying "this is the guy you're getting for now and we're sticking with him for the time being"?

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Report: Disney CEO Bob Chapek Likely to Have Contract Extended This Summer

Walt Disney World news, photos, and reviews! We provide you with daily news from the Walt Disney World theme parks and beyond

blogmickey.com

I'm sure this will make a lot you very happy.

Dude…that’s Blog.Mickey. Not exactly Woodward and Bernstein

Can we stick to at least entertainment or financial outlets??

But I see you got the Praets to cheer for you…they just can’t sleep or eat breakfast unless all things Disney are “universally loved”

 

[Cliff]

What will be interesting - IF Chapek's contract is extended - is the length of that extension.

Will it be one year - essentially saying "we're just waiting for the ink to dry on your successor's contract and for their Tesla to be delivered"?

Will it be two years - giving Chapek a little saving face time but no vote of future confidence?

Will it be three years - saying "this is the guy you're getting for now and we're sticking with him for the time being"?

I would guess that they will give him a contract long enough to complete the changes they want him to make. I suspect 2-3 years?

I think Chapek will be safe for 3 years as long has he executes whatever plans they have him doing "properly". I also think he needs to do it "cleanly" with no more PR misteps on his part.

I can only guess that he will have to execute and deliver on some ugly decisions that will be harshly criticized by the fans and the media but if he does it gracefully from a CEO point of view, he will make it 3-ish years and jump off the ship with a great paraschute.

I dunno....just get the popcorn, sit back and watch the show. Only time will tell.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Dude…that’s Blog.Mickey. Not exactly Woodward and Bernstein

Can we stick to at least entertainment or financial outlets??

But I see you got the Praets to cheer for you…they jsut can’t sleep or eat breakfast unless all things Disney are “universally loved”

BlogMickey was quoting some other linked source.

I don't approve of linking to articles that get their information for some other source... link to the darned original source!

But, it's not BlogMickey saying that, but "Business Insider."

You may now proceed to do an ad hominem on that source.

Anyhoo, the articles coming out on this are all over the place. Which one was written by one of the BoDs?

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I would guess that they will give him a contract long enough to complete the changes they want him to make. I suspect 2-3 years?

I think Chapek will be safe for 3 years as long has he executes whatever plans they have him doing "properly". I also think he needs to do it "cleanly" with no more PR misteps on his part.

I can only guess that he will have to execute and deliver on some ugly decisions that will be harshly criticized by the fans and the media but if he does it gracefully from a CEO point of view, he will make it 3-ish years and jump off the ship with a great paraschute.

I dunno....just get the popcorn, sit back and watch the show. Only time will tell.

Who’s “they”?

And what on earth makes you think chapek was their “choice”?


Some details are missing here