Eisner gone in 06!!

[cherrynegra]

I find it quite amusing when people gloss over the decline of the Disney Empire in the past ten years for five months' worth of so called good work.

I for one am not fooled by any of his new found love and affection for the parks or the Disney legacy. Where was it when the parks in DL were falling into disrepair? Where is it now that the animation studios are closed and the art form of hand drawn film animation trumpeted by the man whose name is on the company is now extinct? Where is it now that the shares are worth half of what they were? Where was his concern for Disney when he drove talented people away from the Mouse House.

Please. Eisner may not be Satan. But he is CERTAINLY no saint either!!

 

[Testtrack321]

I find it quite amusing when people gloss over the decline of the Disney Empire in the past ten years for five months' worth of so called good work.

I for one am not fooled by any of his new found love and affection for the parks or the Disney legacy. Where was it when the parks in DL were falling into disrepair? Where is it now that the animation studios are closed and the art form of hand drawn film animation trumpeted by the man whose name is on the company is now extinct? Where is it now that the shares are worth half of what they were? Where was his concern for Disney when he drove talented people away from the Mouse House.

Please. Eisner may not be Satan. But he is CERTAINLY no saint either!!

Yeah, I can't believe they replaced those trees with that god awful ride Splash Mountain. TALK ABOUT NO RERIDE VALUE! And that Disney ruining ride Star Tours in Tomorrowland. I can't belive they added that MGM park, no one goes!

Just people, I mean, really, just stop this whole bad thing. What about Fantasia? That movie flopped. Or some of the other animated features during Walt's time.

I agree that Eisner has done stupid things, but he has done many GREAT things.

 

[cherrynegra]

I agree that Eisner has done stupid things, but he has done many GREAT things.

Oh, I agree that he has done a lot of good things. But come on. In the past ten years?? How long does one coast on their laurels when their major achievements were in the first ten years of a twenty year career?? That's all I'm saying.

 

[askmike1]

Oh, I agree that he has done a lot of good things. But come on. In the past ten years?? How long does one coast on their laurels when their major achievements were in the first ten years of a twenty year career?? That's all I'm saying.

I want to know what terrible things Michael Einser has done between the period of 1994-2004. You may mention buying ABC, but ABC did great until 2001 when they overaired 'Millionaire.' Next you may mention losing Pixar. Yes, Eisner did want the deal exactly his way, but then again so did Steve Jobs. Both wanted things their way. Was Jobs expecting Eisner to go from a 60-40 deal favoring Disney to a 5-95 deal favoring Pixar? Michael Eisner was smart knowing that the company would have lost money. Now Jobs has had a long time so far to get a new distributer, but do you see them with one? No, and that's because Steve Jobs thinks Eisner is bluffing but it is really the other way around. Next you may mention animation and sequels. Sure, Disney has released good-but-flopped films (Treasure Planet, Home on the Range) and not-so-good sequels (Cinderella II, Hunchback II), but he also released immensly popular films such as Huncback, Mulan, Tarzan, Brother Bear, Lion King 1.5, Lilo & Stitch, etc. The only point I can see you on would be ABCFamily, as that has not yet made any big Profits. However, I like the channel as I can see repeats of my favorite show (Whose Line is it Anyway?) every week night.
So I ask, what has Eisner done majorly wrong in the past 10 years?

-Michael

 

[niteobsrvr]

I know a lot of folks are very happy about the departure of Eisner, but lets not be to hasty to think everything will be coming up roses after that. The transition from a man who has been at the helm of the company for 22 years to anyone else could prove to be quite rocky and even harmful to the company if things don't go well.

 

[joefox97]

It's good to get new blood into the parks. There are considerably worse choices than Bob Iger out there... people had suggested Steve Jobs and a few others -- but none of them know about theme parks. And you'll say that Walt Disney didn't know anything about them when he started either -- but it would be nice to have someone who has the Disney heart -- that's the most important thing.

That being said, I would LOVE to see one person made CEO of Disney... Lee Cockerell. He's the Executive Vice President of the Walt Disney World resort. He's amazing. His weekly communication with the Cast Members at WDW and just the way he handles everything I've seen so far leads me to believe that he would be a perfect choice for the job. Al Weiss would be another good choice.

Has anyone noticed, in the past several months, (and it's more likely that Cast Members will recognize this more than non-CMs) a tendency to let WDW do their own thing and manage themselves? Yes, Mike still had to green-light projects, but WDW has been given considerably more leeway to manage their own affairs than it seemed they had before. Also, they're being asked to extend their success outside the boundaries of Florida. The WDW resort is managing the two new Disney Stores; the one in Manhattan and the one in Burbank. These are being opened with the ORIGINAL idea of the Disney store -- to give people a vision of the theme parks, give them a taste of the experience and give them access to some of the merchandise and benefits they'd have there.

The reason they've been given these reins (in my opinion) is that they've done such a good job taking care of their own business (with the possible exception of consolidating merchandise and offering the same product in every merch. shop anymore) and making it work the right way.

So, in my mind, since the WDW resort has had such great success, it makes sense to promote someone from the most successful arm of the Walt Disney Company to be the big "Cheese."

Thoughts?

Joe

 

[jrriddle]

To be honest I don't know about Lee Cockerell, but I would have to point out one very important thing...The Walt Disney Co. is more than themeparks. What would this fellow know about movies, tv, sports franchises, merchandiseing. It's a big diverse company.
Again, I really know nothing of his background, and he seems to be doing a great job with the resort, but the CEO really needs to a little more diverse.

 

[jrriddle]

So I ask, what has Eisner done majorly wrong in the past 10 years?

Hmm, I'm not sure if it's that Eisner has done anything wrong,
(mind you there is the Miramax mess, the on again off again Pixar negotiations, failing to make a concrete rescue plan for DLP, the Ovitz mess, hiring Pressler, cutting off relationships with Spielberg, Jobs, Katzenberg, Lucas & most of Hollywood, ABC, Go.com, overpaying for ABC Family, going for merchandise over product at the parks...that list was longer than I thought it was going to be).
At any rate, I think that while he (and the team that he had surrounding him back in the good days) did some real good.
But it's time for Mike to move on and let a new CEO come in and put a fresh prespective on things. Again much like he did in the 80's/90's.

 

[cherrynegra]

Hmm, I'm not sure if it's that Eisner has done anything wrong,
(mind you there is the Miramax mess, the on again off again Pixar negotiations, failing to make a concrete rescue plan for DLP, the Ovitz mess, hiring Pressler, cutting off relationships with Spielberg, Jobs, Katzenberg, Lucas & most of Hollywood, ABC, Go.com, overpaying for ABC Family, going for merchandise over product at the parks...that list was longer than I thought it was going to be).
At any rate, I think that while he (and the team that he had surrounding him back in the good days) did some real good.
But it's time for Mike to move on and let a new CEO come in and put a fresh prespective on things. Again much like he did in the 80's/90's.

Thank you JR. Once again you have take the words out of my mouth, but in your much more eloquent fashion. I concur with your observations.

 

[imagineer99]

My position is divided. I don't fall into either the "love Eisner" and "hate Eisner" camp.

Instead, I recognize the good he has done, along witht he bad. I just wish that the Eisner haters would be more intelligent, instead of simply posting clever insults.

"Ding, Dong, the Witch is Dead!" People that say such comments really don't understand the situation at all.

Finding a replacement is not going to be easy. Frankly, I can't think of ONE person that is experienced in all the areas that one needs to be in order to be in charge of Walt Disney Corporation.

 

[McArcDes]

"Ding, Dong, the Witch is Dead!" People that say such comments really don't understand the situation at all.

First thing. Saying I dont understand the situation at all because I made reference to Eisner being the wicked witch (CEO) is just untrue. I have been following the Disney Company for longer than Eisner has been there. I am not saying that he has never done anything good. Or should I say approved anything good. It is made out to sound like he does it all. He does not. There are thousands of cast members that do all that work. The ideas, good or bad for the movies, attractions etc. are not his. They are presented to him and then they go through an approval process. There have been some great things and some complete disasters during his rein. You have to agree that he was at his best when he was working along side of FranK Wells. Since the Frank Wells death he has been floundering. During that time, as a friend of mine would say, "Even a blind pig can get lucky".

For all you ardent Eisner supporters, I just have to say this. He is a man, not a god. He has done some good but also a lot of things that were not so good and in my eyes down right shamefull. He has NEVER had the ability to dream, inspire or relate to the world or cast members they way Walt did. His focus has ALWAYS been money and how to make more of it. All Walt wanted was to provide good wholesome family entertainment. I believe that one of Walts credos was "You cant top pigs with pigs" With Eisner you get three and four generations of pigs even though they should of been made into bacon after the first generation.

Sorry this is a rant but I get ticked off when someone makes an assumption based only on one comment. That shows me that they are closed minded and of a singular view.

 

[jrriddle]

Thank you JR. Once again you have take the words out of my mouth, but in your much more eloquent fashion. I concur with your observations.

No problem bro! :wave:

 

[imagineer99]

For all you ardent Eisner supporters, I just have to say this. He is a man, not a god.

Excuse me? When did I EVER insinuate that I was an Eisner supporter? Please reference the post.

If I misread your post, that was not my intention. :wave:

I think Eisner has brought plenty good, but even more bad Hence, your entire post is based upon a something I didn't even say or write. Now, that's a pretty close-minded thing to do.


I've read way too many posts on this board proclaiming Eisner to be Satan's spawn (he's no saint either). This just ain't true, no matter whom you support. I'm sorry I took your post as an example, but WAY too many members here like to say these petty comments without the knowledge or factual basis to back it up. That to me is annoying.

 

[NemoRocks78]

I'm incredibly happy to hear that he's finally leaving ( :sohappy: ), but we all must remember that we have to live with him for another two years....

 

[askmike1]

Hmm, I'm not sure if it's that Eisner has done anything wrong,
(mind you there is the Miramax mess, the on again off again Pixar negotiations, failing to make a concrete rescue plan for DLP, the Ovitz mess, hiring Pressler, cutting off relationships with Spielberg, Jobs, Katzenberg, Lucas & most of Hollywood, ABC, Go.com, overpaying for ABC Family, going for merchandise over product at the parks...that list was longer than I thought it was going to be).

Mirimax- First of all, I never understood why Disney had Mirimax in the first place. Mirimax is not the most family-friendly studio in the world. The only reason Disney wanted Mirimax was for it to make low-budget, artsy films that would contend for Oscars. Mirimax started out that way, but ended up now making wide-release films that cost a lot of money, and most are not that successful.

Pixar- All I have to say is that both CEO's have their Ego's at stake, and neither are willing to compromise. Yes, Eisner is being a little unfair to Pixar, but Jobs is being a little unfair to Disney.

Pressler- Yes, Pressler was a bad choice. Pressler is very good at what he does (retail), just not good at the parks. However, Mr. Eisner has made very good choices (Al Weiss, Rasulo, Oumiatt, Anne Sweeny, and Stephen McPherson among others).

Katzenberg- Michael Eisner was not the sole person in making Katzenberg leave. In fact, one of the Big Players that helped get him out was Roy Disney.

ABC- First of all, ABC has only been swaggering since 2001 (with the decline of Millionaire). You can't expect a network to go from number 4 to number 1 overnight. About overairing Millionaire, ABC is not the first network to pass that way, nor shall it be the last (like my WDW reference?). NBC always airs repeats of Law & Order whenever it can (especially on Saturdays). Last Spring, FOX plagued TV with endless American Idol specials, airing the show as much as 4 times a week (sound familiar). Sure Michael Eisner made a bad decision, but I think it is even worse for others not to learn from it. He learned, others didn't.

Sure, Eisner may not be Walt Disney (no one will), but I think he has done a great job leaving his own legacy that will be remembered in years to come. In twenty years, no one is going to remember Pixar negotiations, a few years where ABC was 4th place, Ovits, or Go.com. People tend to remember the good things over the bad. I'm sure everyone here knows every good thing Walt did, but do you know all the bad things?

-Michael
"Paging Mr. Morrow, Mr. Tom Morrow"

 

[DarkMeasures]

Mirimax- First of all, I never understood why Disney had Mirimax in the first place. Mirimax is not the most family-friendly studio in the world. The only reason Disney wanted Mirimax was for it to make low-budget, artsy films that would contend for Oscars. Mirimax started out that way, but ended up now making wide-release films that cost a lot of money, and most are not that successful.

Actually, you are wrong. Miramax started out as distributing and translating foreign films. They went into a full studio several years after starting and just grew. Disney saw them as a powerhouse and bought them. All you said is a quote from "Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back".

Anyway, Disney has been aiming above just family friendly for years. Movies like Tron and such were the first but those movies had a hard success rate due to the Disney name. That lead to the alternative name for Disney Movies which is Touchstone. (which is the exact same everything but name).

 

[DisneyFan 2000]

Read the article I've posted in the animation section. Apparently, animation was something that he never liked and was persuaded to do by animators. I don't consider something like that a legacy *he left* when all he wanted was to merchandise. I'd be ashamed to hold the title of the man who made Disney's golden years when it ain't true! I wouldn't be suprised if the same goes for Imagineering.




And on a little side-note. If it were me, I'd kick him out just because of the way he let his employees neglect Disneyland.

 

[jrriddle]

Mirimax- First of all, I never understood why Disney had Mirimax in the first place. Mirimax is not the most family-friendly studio in the world. The only reason Disney wanted Mirimax was for it to make low-budget, artsy films that would contend for Oscars. Mirimax started out that way, but ended up now making wide-release films that cost a lot of money, and most are not that successful.

Pixar- All I have to say is that both CEO's have their Ego's at stake, and neither are willing to compromise. Yes, Eisner is being a little unfair to Pixar, but Jobs is being a little unfair to Disney.

Pressler- Yes, Pressler was a bad choice. Pressler is very good at what he does (retail), just not good at the parks. However, Mr. Eisner has made very good choices (Al Weiss, Rasulo, Oumiatt, Anne Sweeny, and Stephen McPherson among others).

Katzenberg- Michael Eisner was not the sole person in making Katzenberg leave. In fact, one of the Big Players that helped get him out was Roy Disney.

ABC- First of all, ABC has only been swaggering since 2001 (with the decline of Millionaire). You can't expect a network to go from number 4 to number 1 overnight. About overairing Millionaire, ABC is not the first network to pass that way, nor shall it be the last (like my WDW reference?). NBC always airs repeats of Law & Order whenever it can (especially on Saturdays). Last Spring, FOX plagued TV with endless American Idol specials, airing the show as much as 4 times a week (sound familiar). Sure Michael Eisner made a bad decision, but I think it is even worse for others not to learn from it. He learned, others didn't.

Sure, Eisner may not be Walt Disney (no one will), but I think he has done a great job leaving his own legacy that will be remembered in years to come. In twenty years, no one is going to remember Pixar negotiations, a few years where ABC was 4th place, Ovits, or Go.com. People tend to remember the good things over the bad. I'm sure everyone here knows every good thing Walt did, but do you know all the bad things?

-Michael
"Paging Mr. Morrow, Mr. Tom Morrow"

MIRAMAX- It brings prestige to the company. The company has a really good Oscar track record. As far as not being a "Disney" like company Dark Measure is right Disney started down that track long before Miramax. Eisner's first film of the new regime was "Down and Out in Beverly Hills" and believe it or not it was Disney's first R rated movie.

PIXAR- I'll give you the ego thing on both sides. But Pixar is a huge cash cow for Disney.

PRESSLER- We agree. And I'll give Ouimet and Weiss. My verdict is still kind of out on Rasulo, he was Presslers right hand man for a long time. I've yet to see him do anything besides the "State of the Nation" speach. And he has not gone to bat for his old resort in Paris. That place needs all the help it can get.

KATZENBERG- Eisner was not the sole person by any means just the key person, He also severed the relationship further by not paying Katzenberg out and letting it go to court.

ABC- Agree to disagree. . Eisner also let alot of really great shows slip by ABC. He does love to micro-manage and thus has final say in these things.

I agree that ABC will recover and no one will remember. Same with Go.com with so many other internet companies. I disagree about Pixar, especially if it goes to another studio and has continued success (share holders have really long memories about these things). And I don't think that the Ovitz thing is anywhere near being over and could haunt the company for a long time to come.
Again, read my old posts. I think Eisner did alot of great things. And he did alot of really dumb things. He's human and it's just time for a change.
With some new blood I'm sure that Disney can also make some ammends with Spielberg, Katzenberg, Lucas & Jobs. Just give it some time.

BTW My source for alot of this post was Keys to the Kingdom by Kim Masters. Excellent book, thanks to Cherrynegra for the recomendation.

 

[jrriddle]

AskMike1, I do have one more question.
On your own Disney Web site you only gave Eisner's performance a "4" on a scale from 1-10. Isn't that kind of a bad grade for him. Even I would give him a 7.5. Possibly a 8.5 before Frank Wells died and Jef Katzenberg left.

 

[imagineer99]

Besides the recent headaches that Miramax has been causing Disney, I must say that the purchase was a very good idea.

Oscar worthy films make BIG money...especially ones that are nominated (or win) best picture. Miramax gave Disney a chance to make money off of films that would never be allowed to exist under the wholesome "Disney" name.

However, like the Pixar situation, things don't look good for the future...