News Chapek FIRED, Iger New CEO

MiddKid

Well-Known Member
The dude gave us Alien Encounter what's not to like? But seriously, he wasn't afraid to take chances. Some ideas were bad (really bad) sure but I'd take something over the risk averse Disney of today.

What's not to like? While I'm no fan of the recent moves of the company, they pale in comparison to final 5-ish years of Eisner's reign. A few examples:
  • New parks were DCA and WDS...two of the most embarrassing parks ever built with zero chances taken. Unless you consider it "taking a chance" to build parks with off the shelf rides and zero creativity. HKDL was incredibly cheap and under-built (again, with zero chances...all rehashes)
  • Put the likes of Paul Pressler and Cynthia Harriss in charge of the parks. Paul literally once compared DL to a mall and is famous for the "If it's good enough for Six Flags..." comment.
  • Eisner was making enemies left and right (see Pixar)
  • Embraced cheap direct to video sequels (setting up Disneytoon Studios) severely diluting the brand
  • Animated Films in his later years: Atlantis, Treasure Planet, Brother Bear, Home on the Range, Chicken Little
In Roy Disney's words: "The perception by all of our stakeholders—consumers, investors, employees, distributors and suppliers—that the Company is rapacious, soul-less, and always looking for the "quick buck," rather than the long-term value, which is leading to a loss of public trust."

Very few complaints about Eisner's early years, but let's not gloss over those final years. I was a Cast Member at the time it was an embarrassing time to be there. I'd take the last 5 years of Disney over 2000-2005 Disney all day long...
 

DonaldDoleWhip

Well-Known Member
What's not to like? While I'm no fan of the recent moves of the company, they pale in comparison to final 5-ish years of Eisner's reign. A few examples:
  • New parks were DCA and WDS...two of the most embarrassing parks ever built with zero chances taken. Unless you consider it "taking a chance" to build parks with off the shelf rides and zero creativity. HKDL was incredibly cheap and under-built (again, with zero chances...all rehashes)
  • Put the likes of Paul Pressler and Cynthia Harriss in charge of the parks. Paul literally once compared DL to a mall and is famous for the "If it's good enough for Six Flags..." comment.
  • Eisner was making enemies left and right (see Pixar)
  • Embraced cheap direct to video sequels (setting up Disneytoon Studios) severely diluting the brand
  • Animated Films in his later years: Atlantis, Treasure Planet, Brother Bear, Home on the Range, Chicken Little
In Roy Disney's words: "The perception by all of our stakeholders—consumers, investors, employees, distributors and suppliers—that the Company is rapacious, soul-less, and always looking for the "quick buck," rather than the long-term value, which is leading to a loss of public trust."

Very few complaints about Eisner's early years, but let's not gloss over those final years. I was a Cast Member at the time it was an embarrassing time to be there. I'd take the last 5 years of Disney over 2000-2005 Disney all day long...
Add in the maintenance-related deaths that plagued DL under Pressler-Harriss, and clearly we’re better off now, as grim as the Chapek era may seem.

Here’s hoping things never get that bad again.
 

the.dreamfinder

Well-Known Member
In Roy Disney's words: "The perception by all of our stakeholders—consumers, investors, employees, distributors and suppliers—that the Company is rapacious, soul-less, and always looking for the "quick buck," rather than the long-term value, which is leading to a loss of public trust."
Yeah and Roy E was ok with it until the stock price went down and Eisner kicked him out of the company.
 

Chicken Guy

Well-Known Member
What's not to like? While I'm no fan of the recent moves of the company, they pale in comparison to final 5-ish years of Eisner's reign. A few examples:
  • New parks were DCA and WDS...two of the most embarrassing parks ever built with zero chances taken. Unless you consider it "taking a chance" to build parks with off the shelf rides and zero creativity. HKDL was incredibly cheap and under-built (again, with zero chances...all rehashes)
  • Put the likes of Paul Pressler and Cynthia Harriss in charge of the parks. Paul literally once compared DL to a mall and is famous for the "If it's good enough for Six Flags..." comment.
  • Eisner was making enemies left and right (see Pixar)
  • Embraced cheap direct to video sequels (setting up Disneytoon Studios) severely diluting the brand
  • Animated Films in his later years: Atlantis, Treasure Planet, Brother Bear, Home on the Range, Chicken Little
In Roy Disney's words: "The perception by all of our stakeholders—consumers, investors, employees, distributors and suppliers—that the Company is rapacious, soul-less, and always looking for the "quick buck," rather than the long-term value, which is leading to a loss of public trust."

Very few complaints about Eisner's early years, but let's not gloss over those final years. I was a Cast Member at the time it was an embarrassing time to be there. I'd take the last 5 years of Disney over 2000-2005 Disney all day long...
It makes me wonder how someone who previously understood the company so well could even make those types of moves. I know about all the Disney War drama and stuff, but he so obviously “got it” and then dropped off. The same person who approved WoL and ToT also approved DCA and Dino-Rama. How?
 

Sonconato

Well-Known Member
Yup. The 11th hour can refer to many things. In this case, it refers to Bob Weis and his new title and how one can go from potential goat (on the barbie) to potential savior in short order ... at the 11th hour.

First, some facts. Bob 'Chappie' Chapek, recently installed as Disney's global head of Parks and Resorts because apparently he is very adept at selling Thor toys, Star Wars tees and plush Olafs and that is as good a reason as any, came in and wanted to -- as all execs today do -- make his mark on his division quickly and show that he meant business.

In multiple meetings and conversations, Chappie (sorry, to that special O-Town fanboi who keeps telling me that since Bob's name is pronounced CHAY-PEK that I can't call him Chappie, you have no idea how BRANDING works, my young friend!) made it known that he wasn't happy with the way WDI conducted business (is anyone?) and his mantra would be ''We will build quicker and cheaper'' and then he brought in a few fresh faces, like new DCA/DD VP Christie Fleischer who has never worked in theme parks or hospitality in her life because again that is how these companies operate.

In the meantime, Pandora was shooting over its budget in the swamps, the HK SAR leadership was telling Disney that 'No, we don't want another Buzz Lightyear attraction in our park' and a mess in Shanghai was causing delays in projects around the globe as Disney feverishly sent in reinforcements (I truly wish I could show you some of the photos I have received just in the last month if you think that SDL is ready to roll, despite announcing an opening date).

That brings us to last week's reorganization on Flower Street in which, for the first time this century, a true creative in Bob Weis will run the MAGIC Factory, with former co-head Craig Russell acting as his budget guy to carry out Chappie's mandate. Loveable Brucie Vaughn already has left the building and very likely will wind up with another major company as soon as he is legally allowed to per the terms of his employment agreement with TWDC.

There are two ways of looking at the hows and the whys of how Bob Weis came to be where he is sitting now. A far higher perch than could have been imagined for the same guy (lead designer of The Disney-MGM Studios among many project) who was sent off as fall guy in the mid-90s after he told reporters about Disney's America park (that he also was top designer on) would, among other historical things, let you experience what slaves did leading up to the Civil War. It is a position no one, likely including Bob himself, would have predicted when he returned to the company in 2007 to recreate/reboot DCA (which really has always been a mix of the Studios park and concepts from the America concept).

One, is the simpleton answer. The Ozzie and Sharon Amazing Back Hair Razor would say Bob Weis has been elevated to this position for being a good soldier and not only fixing DCA, but, much more importantly, getting Shanghai Disneyland built and ready (sorry, I am still ROTFLMFAO as the kewl kidz used to say back in 2002!) to debut. He is simply being rewarded for a job well done.

What the most obvious 'answer' fails to take into consideration is that Disney isn't exactly warmhearted when it comes to creatives who toil at 1401. Disney doesn't reward them. This isn't George Kalogridis getting a chance to end his career as head of WDW because he has always known when to live up to Disney's old standards and when to shred them to make the bottom hum.

Another possibility goes something like this: Weis having lived the Shanghai mess since construction began in 2011 had a feeling that he was about to get scapegoated yet again, something that always seems to happen with creatives. Bob also knew where each and every body was buried on this project. Maybe someone talked to him about writing a book? Maybe a few reporters contacted him about the 'challenges' of building in the mainland (hey, did y'all hear about those Hong Kong booksellers who disappeared months ago and now are in China and confessing to all sorts of crimes that they did not commit? ... that's part of the reality of dealing with life under Commie rule...)?

Anyway, maybe Bob just had a nice sit-down with The Weatherman (Bob Iger for those of you who have forgotten the players in my extended absence) or Tom Staggs (the ''oddly waifish man of anemic personality'') and explained how much he'd like a chance to run WDI given all he had done and since he was more than happy to work within Chappie's edict, they decided ''Just why the hell not!?!''

Now, I certainly have a bit more than what I am putting out at this time. But what makes sense to you? I don't have all the facts. But I do have quite a few and I have some very knowledgable opinions that have been given to me. I have a very good idea of what went down.

Anyway, not looking to start another 1500 page thread. But I didn't want to have to wade through pages of posts about network TV dying (it's not and @flynnibus you are wasting your breath and I do owe you a note back ... it's coming), how super-awesome-amazing TFA's box office is or which Lifestyler was arrested this week chatter. So, at the 11th hour you get a new Spirited thread to play on.

BTW, I don't want to sound down on these moves at all. Vaughn getting thrown out and replaced by Weis is a fundamentally solid move that could be a great one IF they allow him to do the job they placed him in. I also have no issue's at all with Chappie wanting a 'faster and cheaper' WDI. I can't see how any fan would have issues with that at all. These are good moves.

But again, that is dependent on leaving Weis alone (Mangum getting more responsibility is also a good thing). It also means that Chappie needs to think about all those consumers who he sold all that crap to when he ran CP. Miceage ran an update today talking about how he and DLR Prez Michael Colglazier had nixed moving walkways and a sky bridge as part of DLR's new parking structure. That kind of minor league BS needs to be stopped. At the same point, they are quite accurate that SW is being pushed for a late 2018 debut. You may have also noted the comment about future Fantasyland plans as I have told you Toontown got a reprieve, but that is all it is.

Those are my thoughts. Yours?
To clarify who the oddly waifish man was, here is a post from @WDW1974 himself. It's rather long, but it's in there; I checked.
 

JoeCamel

Well-Known Member
To clarify who the oddly waifish man was, here is a post from @WDW1974 himself. It's rather long, but it's in there; I checked.
Saved me a bunch of reading. I don't pay that close attention as it really is about a theme park company after all and not the red cross or something life affecting (;)) but what entertainment those few million posts held. Spirit was masterful even to those that hated him. Thanks

"Anyway, maybe Bob just had a nice sit-down with The Weatherman (Bob Iger for those of you who have forgotten the players in my extended absence) or Tom Staggs (the ''oddly waifish man of anemic personality'') and explained how much he'd like a chance to run WDI given all he had done and since he was more than happy to work within Chappie's edict, they decided ''Just why the hell not!?!''
 

fgmnt

Well-Known Member
What's not to like? While I'm no fan of the recent moves of the company, they pale in comparison to final 5-ish years of Eisner's reign. A few examples:
  • New parks were DCA and WDS...two of the most embarrassing parks ever built with zero chances taken. Unless you consider it "taking a chance" to build parks with off the shelf rides and zero creativity. HKDL was incredibly cheap and under-built (again, with zero chances...all rehashes)
  • Put the likes of Paul Pressler and Cynthia Harriss in charge of the parks. Paul literally once compared DL to a mall and is famous for the "If it's good enough for Six Flags..." comment.
  • Eisner was making enemies left and right (see Pixar)
  • Embraced cheap direct to video sequels (setting up Disneytoon Studios) severely diluting the brand
  • Animated Films in his later years: Atlantis, Treasure Planet, Brother Bear, Home on the Range, Chicken Little
In Roy Disney's words: "The perception by all of our stakeholders—consumers, investors, employees, distributors and suppliers—that the Company is rapacious, soul-less, and always looking for the "quick buck," rather than the long-term value, which is leading to a loss of public trust."

Very few complaints about Eisner's early years, but let's not gloss over those final years. I was a Cast Member at the time it was an embarrassing time to be there. I'd take the last 5 years of Disney over 2000-2005 Disney all day long...
I quite honestly do not think a more wretched person has been given more power in the company than Pressler. In the free-est of free time in my brain I can find myself wondering if the company my friends have sold themselves into under Chapek is doomed. It can certainly appear ominous, and I have asked on here before if the devil we came to know in strategic planning is worse than the devil we don't in Chapek. I am starting to lean that Chapek will be less bad than the Staggs and Presslers of the company could have been. None of the candidates to succeed Iger would reverse the institutional rot in Burbank, but Staggs likely would have embraced it.

Saved me a bunch of reading. I don't pay that close attention as it really is about a theme park company after all and not the red cross or something life affecting (;)) but what entertainment those few million posts held. Spirit was masterful even to those that hated him. Thanks

"Anyway, maybe Bob just had a nice sit-down with The Weatherman (Bob Iger for those of you who have forgotten the players in my extended absence) or Tom Staggs (the ''oddly waifish man of anemic personality'') and explained how much he'd like a chance to run WDI given all he had done and since he was more than happy to work within Chappie's edict, they decided ''Just why the hell not!?!''
I miss checking in on those threads. Spirit was (is(?)) a bit full of himself but he could really weave a takedown of the dweebs pulling down 8 figures in compensation at TWDC.
 

fgmnt

Well-Known Member
Lmao that dude was wrong about EVERYTHING.
I can't imagine taking the effort to go back and look at those arduous threads, but I mostly was commenting on how he had a funny voice on the internet. In other places of discussion I try to do that (I don't really have one here), so it's interesting to me when I spot it from others.
 

CaptainAmerica

Well-Known Member
I can't imagine taking the effort to go back and look at those arduous threads, but I mostly was commenting on how he had a funny voice on the internet. In other places of discussion I try to do that (I don't really have one here), so it's interesting to me when I spot it from others.
He played his character well, that's for sure.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
People around here hated Staggs more than they hate Chapek. I believe the preferred term used to refer to him was "an oddly waifish man of anemic personality."

people hated staggs and rasulo at the time because nobody could believe “that’s the best you can do?”

…not because they were particularly Dangerous.

that was also 10 years into “upcharge Bob” and there was thirst for creative.

that in no way makes the last 5 years since and Slaphead less awful. It’s been awful.

the Eisner complaints in the last years - while valid - have zero context to what is going on right now and the dangers. But that’s all deep and stuff. 👍🏻
 
Last edited:

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Iger makes the pharaohs look like amateurs when it comes to rewriting history. He’s now suddenly the creative guy. All of these “problems” with Chapek were the reasons Iger was such a “great” replacement for Eisner, because he didn’t fancy himself as a creative and Hollywood insider. His mantra was “Franchises! Franchises! Franchises!” all built around the data of box office performance and merchandise sales.

And that list of potential internal candidates! It’s a lot of Strategic Planners, the master minds behind the worst parts of Eisner’s later years that Iger supposedly disbanded and banished but really just promoted and considered for the top job. Jay Rasulo creative? Ha! But again, Iger is a master of changing even the most recent of history and if he now fancies himself a creative because his dreams of being a statesman or NFL team owner have been dashed then so be it, Ozymandius is and always has been a creative!
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
They did also rebuild the entire entrance from what looked like a fairly tacky outlet mall to Buena Vista Street and, IMO, spent the money to make some worthwhile enhancements to Hollywood, Condor Flats, and Paradise Pier.

Of course, the recent developments have not been so positive, starting with Pixar Pier.
Except they didn’t rebuilt the entire entrance. Most of the original entrance is there. The work of Eisner’s later years isn’t much to look at but they also didn’t cost much and a lot of the fundamentals are still there. Whereas the work done during Iger’s tenure is overly expensive, still doesn’t quite resonate the same way and is completely lacking in the fundamentals.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
Iger makes the pharaohs look like amateurs when it comes to rewriting history. He’s now suddenly the creative guy. All of these “problems” with Chapek were the reasons Iger was such a “great” replacement for Eisner, because he didn’t fancy himself as a creative and Hollywood insider. His mantra was “Franchises! Franchises! Franchises!” all built around the data of box office performance and merchandise sales.

And that list of potential internal candidates! It’s a lot of Strategic Planners, the master minds behind the worst parts of Eisner’s later years that Iger supposedly disbanded and banished but really just promoted and considered for the top job. Jay Rasulo creative? Ha! But again, Iger is a master of changing even the most recent of history and if he now fancies himself a creative because his dreams of being a statesman or NFL team owner have been dashed then so be it, Ozymandius is and always has been a creative!
There’s no doubt on revisionist Bob…every D+ documentary is spinning that crap.

here’s what he is/was…a suit. But to be fair…he was a wise suit. Michael HAD to be the boss of his first employer (abc)…and he damn well did it and suffered Bob as a toss in.

but at least Bob has experience dealing with production, talent, agents, lawyers and contracts. That has some value.

but the rasulo/staggs debacle really highlighted Disney’s worst idea: corporate swapping. When they “flipped” from finance to parks and vice versa.

that is wrong. Stop acting like people don’t have lanes.

fast forward to Slaphead…people on these very threads say “he has park experience”…

hows that? What “experience”? He did nothing in his brief tenure to add value to “attractions” or improve the operation. Just stupid reorganization, exploitation and pushing pricing boundaries.

he’s a crap peddler…plain and simple. Sells low grade junk and looks how to bleed it more.

but Disney allowing its execs to rewrite their own narratives each day allows those people to insulate themselves against their own shortcomings…which makes the worst.
 
Last edited:

fgmnt

Well-Known Member
There’s no doubt on revisionist Bob…every D+ documentary is spinning that crap.

here’s what he is/was…a suit. But to be fair…he was a wise suit. Michael HAD to be the boss of his first employer (abc)…and he damn well did it and suffered Bob as a toss in.

but at least Bob has experience dealing with production, talent, agents, lawyers and contracts. That has some value.

but the rasulo/staggs debacle really highlighted Disney’s worst idea: corporate swapping. When they “flipped” from finance to parks and vice versa.

that is wrong. Stop acting like people don’t have lanes.

fast forward to Slaphead…people on these very threads say “he has park experience”…

hows that? What “experience”? He did nothing in his brief tenure to add value to “attractions” or improve the operation. Just stupid reorganization, exploitation and pushing pricing boundaries.

he’s a crap peddler…plain and simple. Sells low grade junk and looks how to bleed it more.

but Disney allowing its execs to rewrite their own narratives each day allows those people to insulate themselves against their own shortcomings…which makes the worst.


I made a comment, possibly even in this thread, about the Imagineering Story. I spent the early parts of it silently stunned the company would produce and distribute something with that much criticism of the company... until you see the narrative form near the end of Iger being the great white hope. Then it all made perfect sense!

I think you are bang on in the core problem with Bob 2 is his experience in the most hateable part of the company, consumer products. It's an insult that the most prestigious and foundational aspect of "The Disney Difference" in WDPR became the mishmashed Cronenberg horror of DPEP. That's not just on him, but is definitely emblematic of how the company direction views the parks: a vector for selling cheap crap.
 

Sonconato

Well-Known Member
I can't imagine taking the effort to go back and look at those arduous threads, but I mostly was commenting on how he had a funny voice on the internet. In other places of discussion I try to do that (I don't really have one here), so it's interesting to me when I spot it from others.
Don't worry about that. It actually took longer to write this response than for my son to find it.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom