Eisner at Animal Kingdom Lodge

[ImaginEAR]

Of course it's true. He has done so much for the company in past years. But now the only thing he has done in the 21st century is announce his retirement and get rid of traditional, 2D Animation

Oh, brich. I think your signature is a little too long. Isn't the limit 5 lines?

 

[FigmentJedi]

It's either 200 characters or 5 lines as the signature limit. As for what Eisner's done, I know he did some really good stuff beforee but most of that was around the time his partner Frank Wells was alive. Since then, he and his goons have been cutting costs excessively which is leading to one of the greatest mass extinctions in history, the extinction of animatronics and traditional animation. That and some of the new stuff being attractions or film are lacking that Spark of Imagination or dash of Pixie Dust.

 

[brich]

Oh, brich. I think your signature is a little too long. Isn't the limit 5 lines?

How's that? I appologize for breaking the rules and thank you ImaginEAR for bringing it to my attention. So are you the new undercover secret agent signature police?? Now back to our regularly schedule Eisnerbash... :lookaroun

 

[PurpleDragon]

I think all the positive changes made during the early years of Mr. Eisners reign, were all directly attributed to Mr. Frank Wells alone and not Eisner. Eisner was still young and didn't know alot about how to run a company, he looked to Frank for advice on everything. Then when Frank Wells died, Michael Eisner was left to think for himself. From that point on he has done nothing but drag the Disney name thru the mud with his cost cutting, micromanagment, and "easy money" schemes. He has successfully run out almost all the creative talent that once thrived within the Disney studios. Now all that is left are entry level minimum pay animators, and underpaid imagineers with gags in their mouths(since they must have approval to think out loud )

So in my opinion, anyone they can bring in to the CEO position that is outside of Mr. Eisners direct influence, would probably do much better that Mr. Michael "Money" Eisner has done over the last few years. Especially if Roy Disney, Stanley Gold, and the majority of the share holders have any say in the matter. :animwink:

 

[Hakunamatata]

Someone bring tomatoes and turkey legs, we have a chance to further humiliate him.

Why waste perfectly good tomatoes and turkey legs. Lets throw Beverly and sardines.

 

[HauntedPirate]

The first ten years were wonderful under Eisner - rebirth of FA, good theme park expansion/upkeep, and creativity. The last ten years have been a nightmare of "Yes" men, branding/merchandising/marketing, and sole focus on profit.

 

[PurpleDragon]

Why waste perfectly good tomatoes and turkey legs. Lets throw Beverly and sardines.

Hahahahahah!!!:lol: :lol: Yeah lets throw those little mini cups full of Beverly at him, I bet he'll run for cover real fast then.

 

[v_misses_epcot]

I remembered when he stay at our resort last year at yacht and beach for who knows what, we had to "behave on our best behavior" those 3 days. And since I really don't keep up with disney news, what has this man done? Can someone please explain in a short summary. I just want to know. I'll leave the bashing to someone else considering that everyone, in our lifetimes make a lot and I mean a lot of mistakes.

 

[PurpleDragon]

I'll leave the bashing to someone else considering that everyone, in our lifetimes make a lot and I mean a lot of mistakes.

This is true but not everyone makes such huge mistakes with a multibillion dollar company, to the point of being hated by the majority of the company shareholders and public alike. Very few people have accomplished that.

 

[Master Yoda]

He normally stays in a house nearby DTD when he visits.

Would that be a rather large house on 535?

 

[Wilt Dasney]

Oh, brich. I think your signature is a little too long. Isn't the limit 5 lines?

Signature length really isn't an issue anymore since Steve set the software to automatically cap 'em at 200 characters. You literally can't have a signature that's too long anymore, because it will be rejected automatically.

 

[imagineer99]

How's that? I appologize for breaking the rules and thank you ImaginEAR for bringing it to my attention. So are you the new undercover secret agent signature police?? Now back to our regularly schedule Eisnerbash... :lookaroun

The sarcasm in your post is obvious. However, it seems to me that people love to focus on the negative and completely discount the positive.

I have no doubt that Eisner has made many POOR decisions. However, he has made an some GREAT decisions.

I don't support him, but I do realise the fact that he has made WDW what it is today.

It's really easy to sit back behind a computer and blame Eisner for all of Disney problems. That's not reality--anybody can see that.

 

[imagineer99]

the extinction of animatronics

yeah...I guess Stich and the Yeti don't count :lookaroun

In all truth though, I shutter at the thought of so many classic Disney ideas being tarnished for a quick buck.

But is Eisner really to blame for EVERYTHING? He is definitely responsible for some...just not all.

I just really dislike how everytime someone MENTIONS eisner on this board, the discussion turns into an insult fest.

[/rant]

 

[FigmentJedi]

Well, what I meant by the Animatronics extinction is that some of the attractions with loads of them have closed and new animatronic based attractions are becoming less common.

 

[v_misses_epcot]

This is true but not everyone makes such huge mistakes with a multibillion dollar company, to the point of being hated by the majority of the company shareholders and public alike. Very few people have accomplished that.

NO!!!!!!! we all make mistakes

 

[MrDisney16]

I actually feel sorry for Eisner. One of the reasons he is hated is because he was successful. Yes he has made mistakes but who are we to say he did. None of his critizers (sp?) would do any better including us and Roy Disney. In fact probably if any of us o this board were in charge the company would go bankrupt. So just let the man retire in peace.

 

[Hakunamatata]

Back to the basics....

Walt created Disney as a family focussed business (theme parks, movies, etc.). After Walt left us , and more intensively under the Eisner reign, Disney has "diversified" into allot of questionable areas. Many of the production companies, recording studios, television networks, that are owned by Disney under another name do not promote the same values that Walt orriginally did and produce smut and crap that would cause Walt to turn over in his grave.

Its rather sad and I hope that under new leadership, the focus would return to a family focussed business overall, and not just under the "Disney" brand, but all brands owned by the Disney Company.

 

[PurpleDragon]

Back to the basics....

Walt created Disney as a family focussed business (theme parks, movies, etc.). After Walt left us , and more intensively under the Eisner reign, Disney has "diversified" into allot of questionable areas. Many of the production companies, recording studios, television networks, that are owned by Disney under another name do not promote the same values that Walt orriginally did and produce smut and crap that would cause Walt to turn over in his grave.

Its rather sad and I hope that under new leadership, the focus would return to a family focussed business overall, and not just under the "Disney" brand, but all brands owned by the Disney Company.

This is a quote from Roy E. Disney from the savedisney.com website that falls along the same lines as what your saying:

"I also believe that our identity, as I've described, has been compromised by many factors: the addition of unrelated assets which live by different value systems; the perception that, in the absence of ideas, the road to success is to cut, slowly and cruelly, back on everyone and everything that once made us successful, no longer giving our guests value for money; the shifting moral grounds that this conglomeration of companies has created. Try this one: "The Walt Disney Company's ABC Presents the Victoria's Secret Lingerie Show." I'm not making that up, in case you wondered."

Case in point: "The Walt Disney Company's ABC Presents the Victoria's Secret Lingerie Show." Come on now, does that make you think of wholesome family fun?? I think not!!

 

[Lynx04]

Case in point: "The Walt Disney Company's ABC Presents the Victoria's Secret Lingerie Show." Come on now, does that make you think of wholesome family fun?? I think not!!

Yes it is family material. It is where a father can sit down with his soon and introduce him to the strip club culture with out actually taking him to a strip club. Consider it a baby step in the world of the perverted male mind.

That has to be the reasoning behind it. I doubt man watch it for the lingerie.

 

[imagineer99]

...but ABC should not be forced to act under "Disney"-values. When ABC aired the fashion show, it just happened to appear on a Disney owned network. Disney didn't sponser DIRECTLY. If the show was shown right before "The Wonderful World of Disney," then I take issue.

After all, Miramax (owned by Disney) makes movies that are definitely not intended for the family audience. However, does that mean that Disney should remove all ties to them?