News Chapek FIRED, Iger New CEO

[el_super]

But honestly, how much hands on input did Bob the Elder and does Bob the Lessor have in the daily operation of the Parks?

Almost none.

Yes they are put out front in PR events to give the appearance of involvement but there is not enough time in the day for any person the be hands on, in the guts of all the different business units that make up DIS.

Pretty much this. I suppose someone could make the argument that the CEO is responsible for all the positions below them, but honestly it's a team effort from Wall Street to the Board of Directors, to the CEO, and then down to the park managers.

Help me better understand this emphasis on computer data that apparently Chapek is fond of. Is he advocating A.I. created scripts? Seems like the worst “numbersy” thing we can really say about Chepek is that he wants to cut budgets, cut out the inefficiency of creating new IP, because he feels the strength of current IP will be sufficient.

I think it's mostly related to this Iger quote in the article:

“In a world and business that is awash with data, it is tempting to use data to answer all of our questions, including creative questions,” he said. “I urge all of you not to do that.” If Disney had relied too heavily on data, he noted, the company might never have made big, breakthrough movies like Black Panther, Coco and Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings.​

It's a rather interesting idea, because at the core: there's nothing really wrong with big data. A company like Disney should listen to their customers, conduct market research and make decisions based on what people want. I understand the idea that, every so often you need to take a chance on something new and different, but you can't base your business strategy on one person's "Instinct and Taste."

That quote from Iger is seems especially disconnected considering how cookie-cutter the marvel movies have been.

That, and coming across as a normal guy doesn’t seem to be in his skill set. But I won’t hold that against him if he was making inspired decisions.

OK I think you are probably thinking about the same as I am here and after this article I feel like I need to give Chapek the benefit of doubt. My biggest complaint against Chapek to date has been how unpolished and uncomfortable he feels in front of the crowds, but to be fair to him, that makes him far more like a "normal guy" than someone who feels at ease in the CEO suit.

Late Eisner started down the path of cheap park experiences (DCA 1.0). He also set up the company for a hostile takeover attempt, which would have basically ended Disney.

A couple notes here. Eisner opened up 6 Disney parks across the globe. Iger opened 1. You can argue that this was a case of quantity over quality, which in some way it was, but the nature of the parks meant that the opportunity always existed to go in and fix them later. Iger on the other hand spent fabulously on Shanghai Disneyland, and was also criticized for the expense (and to some people, is still being criticized for even bothering to open the park).

I think it's also worth noting, regarding the second line there, that Eisner defiantly defended the company from takeover attempts at a time when it was deeply unpopular on Wall Street to do so. When Wall Street eventually pushed him out, the financial papers all made note of his unilateral decision not to sell the company to AOL and later Comcast as the primary reason why investors wanted change. A lot of big players on the street stood to make a lot of money and Eisner rebuked them for silly things like tradition and history.

It's really obvious that not everything Eisner did was great, but Eisner literally did save Disney, multiple times.

Iger, for all his flaws, shored up the company with his acquisitions to the point where it would take a *lot* for Disney to completely fail for a long time. Anything is possible of course, but Disney is still, even with everything that's going on, in relatively good financial shape. If this pandemic had happened in the late Eisner years, Disney would be done.

Iger was just following the same philosophy that Eisner established: to keep Disney an independent studio. Eisner believed that Disney could become just as big on it's own, that Disney could be the next Pixar and Marvel and LucasFilm in one. When the talent wasn't there, and the hits didn't come, Disney was just left with nothing. Had the acquisitions not been made under Iger, Disney could have been swallowed up by someone else by now.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Well things sure didn't get better for Epcot when Iger arrived, I'll give you that. It had already been mortally wounded, but could have been saved.

The problem with Epcot is that the customers - the majority at least - have given up on the concept just as much as management. Sadly…the IP and misguided attempts at repurposing the pavilions have been accepted. The bad imagination is easily pointed to and hung on Eisner…but all the bleed since wasn’t created because of that or test track costing hundreds of millions…it was allowed to continue because the public has low or no standards for the park.

320 days a year of food booths

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Late Eisner started down the path of cheap park experiences (DCA 1.0). He also set up the company for a hostile takeover attempt, which would have basically ended Disney.

Iger, for all his flaws, shored up the company with his acquisitions to the point where it would take a *lot* for Disney to completely fail for a long time. Anything is possible of course, but Disney is still, even with everything that's going on, in relatively good financial shape. If this pandemic had happened in the late Eisner years, Disney would be done.

Nothing other than Walt + Roy can top Eisner + Wells. The 90s were really a golden age of expansion and investment, and they are still living off that today. But to say late Eisner is better than Iger is a bit myopic.

Do you get a newsletter with your fan club membership?

you can love Bob…and see how it shakes out.

but I do have one dispute in this: you’re recounting the details of the “hostile takeover” wrong

that was 100% Hollywood espionage engineered by Roy Disney.

 

[FantasiaMickey2000]

It’s not magical as the fiscal year ends with September. So it’s over a month before the earnings call.

The post I replied to said the earnings call was today, October 7. Therefore, my comment corrected them on the date of the earnings call and said if they were able to have a call on October 7 that would be a magical paradise.

 

[mikejs78]

I think it's also worth noting, regarding the second line there, that Eisner defiantly defended the company from takeover attempts at a time when it was deeply unpopular on Wall Street to do so. When Wall Street eventually pushed him out, the financial papers all made note of his unilateral decision not to sell the company to AOL and later Comcast as the primary reason why investors wanted change. A lot of big players on the street stood to make a lot of money and Eisner rebuked them for silly things like tradition and history.

It's really obvious that not everything Eisner did was great, but Eisner literally did save Disney, multiple times.

Eisner made a lot of decisions in the late 90s and early 2000s that put Disney in the position where it was vulnerable to a hostile takeover. Yes, he deserves credit (as does Iger) in that he fought the idea for a merger at every turn. But there was a severe risk of a takeover where Eisner wouldn't have a choice in the matter, and the fact that he put the company in that position was not a great finish for him.

 

[mikejs78]

Do you get a newsletter with your fan club membership?

you can love Bob…and see how it shakes out.

but I do have one dispute in this: you’re recounting the details of the “hostile takeover” wrong

that was 100% Hollywood espionage engineered by Roy Disney.

I'm more of a realist - I think Bob did incredible things for the company but also made a lot of mistakes. As far as the takeover attempts, I don't think the facts support that. Roy did want Eisner out - and he engineered a lot of things to make that happen - but he definately did not want Disney in the hands of another company.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I'm more of a realist - I think Bob did incredible things for the company but also made a lot of mistakes. As far as the takeover attempts, I don't think the facts support that. Roy did want Eisner out - and he engineered a lot of things to make that happen - but he definately did not want Disney in the hands of another company.

The roberts…who had ties to the Disney old guard…show up and launch an unsolicited bid for Disney just as Roy - who I remind was the largest shareholder at the time and still connected to the Bass brothers - and Eisner were warring about stock value and succession…and then just go away after Eisner loses the proxy battle?

if it waddles and quacks…you know what it is.

Disney doesn’t have to give a press release for things to be apparent.

…they usually just leak it to the Hollywood reporter

 

[el_super]

Eisner made a lot of decisions in the late 90s and early 2000s that put Disney in the position where it was vulnerable to a hostile takeover. Yes, he deserves credit (as does Iger) in that he fought the idea for a merger at every turn. But there was a severe risk of a takeover where Eisner wouldn't have a choice in the matter, and the fact that he put the company in that position was not a great finish for him.

On this, I think you are overestimating Eisner's influence here. Disney wasn't doing great in the late 90s, but it was far from doing poorly. Most of the fervor driving those takeover attempts was being generated from the dot-com boom of the late 90s, the explosion of cable TV and the desire to start consolidating content distribution to content creation. When Eisner rejected the calls from Steve Case, AOL just went along and bought Time-Warner. After Comcast gave up on Disney, they went and bought Universal.

It wasn't really Eisner's fault that content creation was seen as the lesser of the two sides at the time (and maybe to some degree still is).

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I think Iger just tweeted about GE being open and millions of SW fans innundated th… oh wait…

His biggest failure was screwing up what everyone on the planet knew he couldn’t screw up

 

[JD80]

I'm still amazed by how much the screwed up Star Wars, but equally surprised by their success of clawing back some goodwill from the fanbase with Mandalorian.

The Star Wars brand is so completely tangled right now. I'm really curious where it goes over the next 5 years.

 

[el_super]

…they usually just leak it to the Hollywood reporter

You know... I'm a little surprised and perpelxed that no one seemed to have noticed this article was written by Eisner's BFF Kim Masters.

I'm not going to call conspiracy just yet, but it seems like, if anything, Chapek has angered the Hollywood elite with his refusal to show up to promenade with high society.

 

[EPCOTCenterLover]

The problem with Epcot is that the customers - the majority at least - have given up on the concept just as much as management. Sadly…the IP and misguided attempts at repurposing the pavilions have been accepted. The bad imagination is easily pointed to and hung on Eisner…but all the bleed since wasn’t created because of that or test track costing hundreds of millions…it was allowed to continue because the public has low or no standards for the park.

320 days a year of food booths

Agreed!
I wrote at length about this exact idea- how we are the reason Epcot is changing- back in 2017. Right Here.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

You know... I'm a little surprised and perpelxed that no one seemed to have noticed this article was written by Eisner's BFF Kim Masters.

I'm not going to call conspiracy just yet, but it seems like, if anything, Chapek has angered the Hollywood elite with his refusal to show up to promenade with high society.

I didn’t notice that Barry Diller was referenced as “evidence” in here either

 

[EPCOTCenterLover]

I think whatever Chapek green lights for the parks next will be the real indicator as to whether he gets it or not. I'm willing to give the quick and dirty makeover of California's Tower a pass. I think he was trying to say "We can create for less without losing quality." The results are debatable.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I think whatever Chapek green lights for the parks next will be the real indicator as to whether we gets it or not. I'm willing to give the quick and dirty makeover of California's Tower a pass. I think he was trying to say "We can create for less without losing quality." The results are debatable.

The playbook now is that they will authorize no projects of consequence for a considerable time on their own. Only external pressure may change that.

Iger did almost nothing for 5 years…was forced to try to address loss of their operational pad/advantage for the middle 5…and then got concerned with “legacy” for the last.

I expect zero changes to that approach. They’ll also use covid changes as a crutch to build nothing and increase prices. We already are there

 

[Nubs70]

I think whatever Chapek green lights for the parks next will be the real indicator as to whether he gets it or not. I'm willing to give the quick and dirty makeover of California's Tower a pass. I think he was trying to say "We can create for less without losing quality." The results are debatable.

This is where the issue begins. Whomever bring the plan forward is the initial issue. If Chapek red lights, that is his call. But if he inserts himself into the creative process and replaces fi ancillary for creative, Chapek is within his authority but out of bounds in the process.

For example Mine Train, creatives were given a task, subject to budget. Under these constraints they developed a plan and presented a plan that should have been a simple red light/green light decision by Iger. However, the original plan was reduced due to financial over creative process. The result was a nice adequate ride instead of a great ride.

 

[britain]

I think whatever Chapek green lights for the parks next will be the real indicator as to whether he gets it or not. I'm willing to give the quick and dirty makeover of California's Tower a pass. I think he was trying to say "We can create for less without losing quality." The results are debatable.

On the contrary, I think the Parks are the most susceptible to pandemic-related economic factors. He could be totally on board with building a 5th park chock full of E-tickets, but the economy might not let him.

Eisner "got it" - until the financial drain of Euro Disney made him lose his appetite over anything ambitious.

 

[pdude81]

The playbook now is that they will authorize no projects of consequence for a considerable time on their own. Only external pressure may change that.

Iger did almost nothing for 5 years…was forced to try to address loss of their operational pad/advantage for the middle 5…and then got concerned with “legacy” for the last.

I expect zero changes to that approach. They’ll also use covid changes as a crutch to build nothing and increase prices. We already are there

I'd agree with you entirely except that I believe Epic Universe will force something big from Disney. We can thank WWoHP for Pandora (Avatar), and I'm hoping that we can thank Epic Universe for something better. If not then I will investigate whether future technology would allow for a triple facepalm

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I'd agree with you entirely except that I believe Epic Universe will force something big from Disney. We can thank WWoHP for Avatar, and I'm hoping that we can thank Epic Universe for something better. If not then I will investigate whether future technology would allow for a triple facepalm

That is a notable elephant in the room in this case…which is why I hedged my comment, Padawan

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

This is where the issue begins. Whomever bring the plan forward is the initial issue. If Chapek red lights, that is his call. But if he inserts himself into the creative process and replaces fi ancillary for creative, Chapek is within his authority but out of bounds in the process.

For example Mine Train, creatives were given a task, subject to budget. Under these constraints they developed a plan and presented a plan that should have been a simple red light/green light decision by Iger. However, the original plan was reduced due to financial over creative process. The result was a nice adequate ride instead of a great ride.

correct…and the 2 hour wait 10 years later is the customers literally torpedoing their future travels by overconsuming the product and skewing how management assesses the longterm needs in the park.