Disney/Iger response to Desantis battle?

flynnibus

Premium Member
In order to compromise you first have to have a genuine, good faith disagreement. You also need mutual concessions. One side making concessions in response to a proxy concern isn’t compromise.
You keep saying this - but it doesn't match reality.

Not all negotiations start from a 'good faith disagreement' - Who cares if you call it, you're ing into the wind with this definition of compromise. Compromise is how one finds a way OUT of a disagreement, no matter its origins.

Compromise of 1820 manipulating slavery
Compromise of 1877
or Britian's concessions to Germany in the 30s..

These were not 'good faith disagreements' - you often had one side heavily abusing the other. But we still use the word 'compromise' when talking about how the parties negotiated settlements.

It's about finding a solution both sides agree to, not about who was legitimaltely wronged or not.
 

Krandor

Member
The best option is the one Iger already proposed. To sit down and talk things out with DeSantis privately. Iger wasn't here when the tiff started.

Problem is I'm not real sure what DeSantis endgame is here unless it is for disney to never speak out against any of his bills again. And while I think it is best for disney not to (or any governer's bill) I'm not sure if they should ever actually agree to that either because you never know what may come down the road.

What I still wonder is next time Disney wants to build a new ride or hotel or anything that needs reedy creek approval, what are they going to ask for in return for the approval? That is going to be the big question in terms of is there room to comprimise.

But trying to get a meeting between the two is what they should be trying to do to see if there is a comprimise to be found.
 

JoeCamel

Well-Known Member
The best option is the one Iger already proposed. To sit down and talk things out with DeSantis privately. Iger wasn't here when the tiff started.

Problem is I'm not real sure what DeSantis endgame is here unless it is for disney to never speak out against any of his bills again. And while I think it is best for disney not to (or any governer's bill) I'm not sure if they should ever actually agree to that either because you never know what may come down the road.

What I still wonder is next time Disney wants to build a new ride or hotel or anything that needs reedy creek approval, what are they going to ask for in return for the approval? That is going to be the big question in terms of is there room to comprimise.

But trying to get a meeting between the two is what they should be trying to do to see if there is a comprimise to found here
End game is to rally base for donations/grift
 

Krandor

Member
End game is to rally base for donations/grift
I agree but you can't just take over the reedy creek board and do nothing with that. At some point the reedy creek board has to say "no" or "no unless you do this" to something that disney wants to do. What is that point going to be and what are they going to demand for approval? They can't takeover the board and still say yes to everything disney wants and so far the most they have done is the covid provision that nobody can require masks or vaccinations. That is not going to be enough.

So I'm waiting for when the next shoe is going to drop from the board either approving something disney doesn't want or not approving something disney wants. That is coming. It has to.
 

JoeCamel

Well-Known Member
I agree but you can't just take over the reedy creek board and do nothing with that. At some point the reedy creek board has to say "no" or "no unless you do this" to something that disney wants to do. What is that point going to be and what are they going to demand for approval? They can't takeover the board and still say yes to everything disney wants and so far the most they have done is the covid provision that nobody can require masks or vaccinations. That is not going to be enough.

So I'm waiting for when the next shoe is going to drop from the board either approving something disney doesn't want or not approving something disney wants. That is coming. It has to.
I think the suit will be enough to stymie/neuter this board
 

Krandor

Member
I think the suit will be enough to stymie/neuter this board
Problem is lawsuits take time and they are going to have a chance to be a thorn in Disney's side before the lawsuit gets that far and I expect them to take it when they can. They shouldn't but then none of this should have gotten this far.
 

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
Folks have to stop pretending the point of all this nonsense is to improve the safety of the monorail or to get Disney to pay their "fair share" or any other legitimate policy goal.

The lesson DeSantis has learned from the last several years of American politics is that the primary thing his supporters want is to hurt those they consider their "enemies." To do this, governments they support may use the full, naked power of their office, absolutely unconstrained by the constitution or any preexisting laws or tradition. In fact, even acknowledging the existence of such restraints on power is viewed as unforgivable weakness and cowardice, as is admitting error (even if it has been proven beyond any doubt) or entertaining compromise.

Now, whether DeSantis is right in his conclusions about his voting base is absolutely open for debate. But as long as he is confident that what he has learned is the key to continued power, he will never negotiate with Disney in any meaningful way, and hoping he will is naïve. The only thing that will stop him is a superior power, either the courts (although he is already defying them on multiple fronts and might have to be forced to comply) or the voters.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom