News Chapek FIRED, Iger New CEO

Liberty6

Active Member
I was always of the impression they merged the two together to expand Chapek's 'span of control' as part of preparing him to take on the CEO role. He was already running products and then they added Parks and Experiences to his plate. While it would not happen right away, he could certainly choose to change that depending on the people they find to backfill the role(s). The issue now is that Wall Street is used to that organizational structure when comparing quarter over quarter earnings so they just can't do it on a whim. Changing a corporate structure at that level is done slowly and very deliberately. Wall Street likes easy year over year comparison and restructuring would need to be demonstrated to add value to the company to do that.
They combined the two so as to hid the exact Consumer Products numbers. Just like they rolled up Interactive Media into Consumer Products.
Makes it easier to avoid talking specifics about consumer products which is a tough industry to be successful in. The Parks have enough margin to absorb it.
 

donsullivan

Premium Member
They combined the two so as to hid the exact Consumer Products numbers. Just like they rolled up Interactive Media into Consumer Products.
Makes it easier to avoid talking specifics about consumer products which is a tough industry to be successful in. The Parks have enough margin to absorb it.
Choose your conspiracy theory. The fact remains that Wall Street is used to this structure and while it could certainly be changed, there would have to be a reason to do it, not just because some people on a Disney related web site don't like it.
 

No Name

Well-Known Member
Parks and Resorts guest facing roles is all about the Disney look. How would it look if Rohde was in charge looking like Cheech and Chong?

It’s “all about the Disney look” that frequently come under scrutiny? Questionable. Obviously you see things differently than me.

To answer your question, it would look creative. It would look like a creative company is creative. How horrible. Let’s stick to 70s dress codes. :rolleyes:
 

TrainsOfDisney

Well-Known Member
It’s “all about the Disney look” that frequently come under scrutiny? Questionable. Obviously you see things differently than me.

To answer your question, it would look creative. It would look like a creative company is creative. How horrible. Let’s stick to 70s dress codes. :rolleyes:

Disney Imagineering is not bound to the Disney look. If you hang out and talk with the imagineers at events like D23 (they staff the imagineering booth each year) you’ll see piercings, visible tattoos, and extreme hair styles.
 

toolsnspools

Well-Known Member
After watching the CNBC interview, my very unqualified reading between the lines:

At the quarterly earnings meeting...
Iger: I need to see the Q1 numbers for closing 2 parks and gutting EPCOT.
Chapek: We're down about a $1 Billion. Maybe $1.5B.
Iger: Guess who's in charge now?

At the interview...
Iger: I'm so happy I left this company in great shape. Who knows what will happen now, but I left it in great shape.
Chapek: There is SOOOO much of Iger's legacy in place, that we'll just ride his momentum until something major comes up. I'll only make changes if I absolutely have to.
Iger: My leaving is DEFINITELY NOT connected to an impending nose-dive in stock prices. ABSOLUTELY NOT.
 

A Noble Fish

Well-Known Member
Yes. See: Spider-Man, Black Panther, Captain Marvel all $1B+ films



See: The Mandalorian
It will obviously still exist and be something a lot of people will go to still, but it will not be possible to replicate the unearthly success of Endgame. Captain Marvel was more one-off since it was the precursor to Endgame. A sequel could still make 600M (timing, quality, marketing make sure there are too many variables to certainly predict), and I think that's a more realistic target for most of these films going forward.

An Avengers vs. X-Men film could make 1.5B if it's really good as Guardians 3, Black Panther 2, and Spider-man 3 could all be billion-dollar films, but Disney+ will have to make up the slack since the film studio will never have a better year than 2019 until inflation changes that. That's just the nature of the business and you can't hold that against a movie company. Fox should be more successful over time, so with Disney lowering to more realistic levels and Fox doing the same, they will be fine.

Star Wars won't hit 2B again in the box office because TFA was a culmination of multiple generations with a promise of a solid film, but the quality of some of the next films destroyed a lot of trust that the franchise could never be anything more than the prequels. A new film could hit 1.5B+ if there are multiple great films leading up to it, like say, Batman Begins, and then the legendary Dark Knight, but it will take more than Mandalorian. Mandalorian just shows that the franchise has reach outside of the films since it is such a part of pop-culture, which makes Star Wars still very valuable. Yet, quality is what's key here.

Disney is not dead and has no chance of it. This is just a 1-2 year adjustment period the company is going through. Longterm it's still a buy, but smart trading can get more out of it.
 

Phil12

Well-Known Member
Mmm, im happy” good by bobby,
And hello Bobby!
1582772107703.png
 

Nubs70

Well-Known Member
It occurs to me: now they can just go ahead and make the new mousegear an actual target!!

Outsourcing employees and increasing sweatshop supply...I ❤ It
Replace MouseGear with a set of kiosks from which you.can order any customized item you want. No employees , no inventory, mass customization

Better yet make a MouseGear App. No employees, no inventory, mass customization, no building, no upkeep.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom