Disney Has Lost It's Way - An Article From The Federalist

[starri42]

I’m pro-Eisner most of the time because it became fashionable to crap on him as it tends to be when someone leaves, but he did great longterm work overall and understood how to handle the brand/name more than spray tan bob. He knew that the backbone of core fans/customers needed to be preserved because the longterm

Honest question: Was California Adventure a better park under Eisner or Iger?

 

[General Mayhem]

Honest question: Was California Adventure a better park under Eisner or Iger?

IMHO California Adventure was spectacular for a very short window in time from 2012-2016. I think that both Eisner and Iger are following the same trend. Both of them had a very strong and prosperous first decade and then their second decade is where it all comes crumbling down. You could really see the shift start around 2014/2015.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Honest question: Was California Adventure a better park under Eisner or Iger?

Question:

Did I say I LOVED everything he did and there were no failures?

Of course not...there were big time failures.

But it’s convenient to forget that Disney was very much a rinky dinky Hollywood studio with a couple of amusement parks when Eisner and Wells were brought in. 3 hotels and a campground in wdw.

They made them into one of the world’s largest entertainment powers. Even the “bad” moves...like euro and DCA and the capital cities overpay...allowed them to position themselves with capital to do what Iger did.

We forget and make lots of convenient excuses...later

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

IMHO California Adventure was spectacular for a very short window in time from 2012-2016. I think that both Eisner and Iger are following the same trend. Both of them had a very strong and prosperous first decade and then their second decade is where it all comes crumbling down. You could really see the shift start around 2014/2015.

Excellent point...which is why Disney should NOT have 20 year ceos. They didn’t learn a thing from Eisner. Modern business is 150% about mass thirst for truckloads of money...the stress is too extreme for an individual for that long. It’s the stockbroker effect.

The modifications - which are Philosophical more than physical - to wdw alone are going to have longterm effects that probably aren’t that good. But time will be the judge.

 

[starri42]

I'm not disputing that Eisner wasn't a good CEO, at least at first. And I actually do get why people have warmer feelings about him these days especially considering that he did craft a public persona that was affable, a lot like Walt did. But, while I wasn't really hanging around specifically Disney Parks fora during the latter days of his reign, I can remember very clearly the general entertainment industry sites were very negative on his management style. And I had a friend who was a former cast member (and just a big fan more broadly) who HAAAAAAATED what he had done to the company by around 2003 or so.

I'm not saying any one person is guilty of this specifically, but I think people's current opinions of Eisner have at least a little to with the same cycle that the Offhand Disney guy talked about in his video.

I mean, it sucks that they made a lot of budget cuts to Toy Story Land and Galaxy's Edge before they opened. But we also have a way of forgetting that Animal Kingdom was about half of the park it should have been when it opened, again because of the budget.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I'm not disputing that Eisner wasn't a good CEO, at least at first. And I actually do get why people have warmer feelings about him these days especially considering that he did craft a public persona that was affable, a lot like Walt did. But, while I wasn't really hanging around specifically Disney Parks fora during the latter days of his reign, I can remember very clearly the general entertainment industry sites were very negative on his management style. And I had a friend who was a former cast member (and just a big fan more broadly) who HAAAAAAATED what he had done to the company by around 2003 or so.

I'm not saying any one person is guilty of this specifically, but I think people's current opinions of Eisner have at least a little to with the same cycle that the Offhand Disney guy talked about in his video.

I mean, it sucks that they made a lot of budget cuts to Toy Story Land and Galaxy's Edge before they opened. But we also have a way of forgetting that Animal Kingdom was about half of the park it should have been when it opened, again because of the budget.

Again...that’s convenient. I was in the “middle” of Disney heirarchy around the time you are suggesting and there was outright vitriol for Eisner.

Don’t forget sacred cow Roy (who is probably the most impactful person in modern Disney history) led a public ouster of him...so his Internal rating was shot then no matter what.

He needed to go. When the first stockholder vote was held...he called Diane (something current management would NEVER do if she were still alive) and she said “I think it’s time, Michael”. Ultimately he stepped aside contrary to his instincts and accomplishments. That in of itself was a respectable move...even if it was too late.

There were a lot of mistakes during late Eisner...and what happened needed to happen. But it’s really easy to blame the other guy. Do you know the Khrushchev letter story? It applies here.

Eisner had the dot.com and the Bush recession to handle at once...and his own misreads came to a head.

Iger had the housing/credit crash...but where we are now is the kicker: they have really taken out the underpinning of why disney always survives when financial times are bad and rebound: because the brand is a beacon of hope and they always have flexibility to make it affordable IF NEEDED. I don’t see that now. They will bleed when the time has come and Iger walks.

I do hope I’m wrong...but decades of this gives you a feeling that can’t be dismissed, follow?

 

[starri42]

Iger had the housing/credit crash...but where we are now is the kicker: they have really taken out the underpinning of why disney always survives when financial times are bad and rebound: because the brand is a beacon of hope and they always has flexibility to make it affordable IF NEEDED.

I'm just a simple country doctor, but it seems like they still have options with affordability if/when the forecasted recession (my Spidey-sense says it's a when, but again, simple country doctor) hits. The Midday Magic tickets are that under another name, and I imagine we'll see more room promotions and something like the free tickets with volunteering like we did in the Great Recession.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I'm just a simple country doctor, but it seems like they still have options with affordability if/when the forecasted recession (my Spidey-sense says it's a when, but again, simple country doctor) hits. The Midday Magic tickets are that under another name, and I imagine we'll see more room promotions and something like the free tickets with volunteering like we did in the Great Recession.

We shall see...

People - especially around the stock market - seem to be clueless to how much cash goes away when the engine bottoms out.

The last time...they discounted 30%. But they also raised the REGULAR prices at the same time. And they have relentlessly pushed them up since.

So does it seem reasonable that 30% will cut it the next time? We’ll have “pro-rated” financial loss this time? That’s how it works??

So can Disney then do a 60% discount to fill beds and seats? Wall Street will understand, huh?

It’s just a theory...I have no experience, I know nothing