Eisner's replacement

[PurpleDragon]

Steve Jobs...hmmmm
Jobs is a greater control freak than Eisner on his worst day. Ego is as big and he will hold a grudge to his grave.

Apple - innovative, superior product, refused to share or use compatible technology so now is on the computer B list.

iPOD - also amazing innovative technology. Again refuses to share platform compatibility information in an attempt to control the whole market. Hasn't learned from Apple mistakes, will be the demise of iPOD.

Pixar - Great track record due to great partnership. Allows ego and personal agenda to bite the hand...greedy beyond belief in unrealistic demands...no one running to fill the partner gap, will be the business demise of Pixar.

Yup, that's who I want at Disney :brick:

Your "facts" are more like personal opinion.


Apple- Not neccesarily on the computer "B" list as far as personal PCs. Just not at the top of everybodies list. Check their sales records, they are still selling alot of MACs, even without any type of ad campaign, high amount of repeat customers. As well Apple products are used by 80% of all graphic design companies and at least 90% of all productions studios worldwide, because of their proprietary use of high-end technology. They also have high-end software vendors who generate software specifically for MAC platforms.

iPOD- I believe it is the number 1 MP3 player on the market right now. Due to good marketing and yes it IS compatible with PC's and other various software platforms. iPOD brought rise to iTunes, a fair alternative to online music theft. Music is downloadable to any platform and can be played on any media software.

Pixar- The partnership termination issue falls on the shoulders of Eisner as well, he was the one who terminated contract negotiations because he was simply tired of negotiating. He just wanted to get Jobs off his back. I don't know the specifics on all this but I wouldn't soley blame Jobs for that.

Jobs brought Apple out of a downwards spiral upon his return. He has since turned Apple into a respected global electronics company. Yea his methods are sometimes wierd but he has a great track record and you can't ignore it.



On a different note, we must rememebr Walt was never actually in a control position in the company, not the President or any type of company head. Roy O. Disney was the president and CEO when Walt was alive. Walt was more like a "creative consultant" so to speak.

 

[yodathefrog]

Thanks all of you who responded to my posts, I apprciate your casual and friendly responses, despite disagreeing with me. Alot of stuff ya'll said, I had never heard/known before. Thanks!

I also agree with the "group" idea, even though I would have no idea what it would look like, but great idea overall.

 

[Lauriebar]

I know this is a bit of a thread drift, but I am so sick of hearing about this. It seems that since "boobygate", everyone is way oversensitive about everything. If someone was offended by the clip shown on Monday Night, all they would need to do is turn the channel, not tell everyone how wrong it was and that it shouldn't be allowed on tv. Sorry, had to vent. :hammer:

Not necessarily...as a parent I do avoid programs and channels that might have objectionable content, however, I did not expect Monday Night Football to be one of these programs. That, is the point. Adding fuel to the fire our Nashville affiliate decided not to air Saving Private Ryan the night before because Steven Speilberg insists that it not be edited for television. Explain to me how this great movie is censored because of content yet, the Desperate Housewives promo is aired in primetime?

I am not a prude, believe me, but it just isn't as simple as turning a channel once your ten year old son has already seen something he doesn't quite understand and is absolutely not ready for.

 

[PurpleDragon]

However, we've progressed to a point where PC's are equally viable in that particular market. Saying you can't do digital media on a PC as well as you can on a mac, is just ludicrous.

If I'm not mistaken, pixar uses their fair share of PC's when creating their films

You can't! MACs have consistently stayed one step ahead of the PC market as far as graphics processing speed. They've been doing it for years.

How would that look? An Apple company using PCs for graphic design. They used either MACs or another type of high-end multi processor machines.

Just an FYI, I am an IT professional, I can give you the specifics on this, but I would probably only give you a headache.:lol:

 

[imagineer99]

You can't! MACs have consistently stayed one step ahead of the PC market as far as graphics processing speed. They've been doing it for years.

How would that look? An Apple company using PCs for graphic design. They used either MACs or another type of high-end multi processor machines.

Just an FYI, I am an IT professional, I can give you the specifics on this, but I would probably only give you a headache.:lol:

In recent bench mark tests, it is has been proven that there is no advantage.

Give me anything your MAC can do...my computer can do it equally fast (or faster). It's a myth.

People consistenly believe that there is a HUGE difference between Macs and PC's. This is truly false. While the OS is different, the "guts" are pretty much the same.

i.e. Homestarrunner.com (an intesnive flash site) does their cartoons on both PC's and MAC's.

Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Flash, Illustrator, After Effects, and Premiere run equally fast on a PC as they do on a MAC.

 

[PurpleDragon]

In recent bench mark tests, it is has been proven that there is no advantage.

Give me anything your MAC can do...my computer can do it equally fast (or faster). It's a myth.

People consistenly believe that there is a HUGE difference between Macs and PC's. This is truly false. While the OS is different, the "guts" are pretty much the same.

i.e. Homestarrunner.com (an intesnive flash site) does their cartoons on both PC's and MAC's.

Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Flash, Illustrator, After Effects, and Premiere run equally fast on a PC as they do on a MAC.

First off I am no MAC user, I am writing this post form my own hand built PC. You are right that all those graphics programs are good programs, and yes PCs are closing the processing gap fairley fast. However there are still a large number of highend software vendors, graphics and music alike, that have been unable to duplicate the performance of their software on a PC, so their software is still lies strictly with MAC. I know for 1 ProTools, which is a studio production software, has released a Windows version of their software. However you cannot get the same number of tracks or processor effects due to the difference in memory caching and other various performance differences. Its a LE(Limited Edition) instead of the full version, so the superior product still lies with MAC. The whole thing is that they both use pretty much the same hardware, but its the way MAC software systems utilizes that hardware that makes the big difference. I don't blame anyone for not wanting to give those type of secrets away.

 

[Gail Hayden]

>News is considered entertainment.

Not by me it isn't.

>If someone was offended by the clip shown on Monday Night, all they would need to do is turn the channel, not tell everyone how wrong it was and that it shouldn't be allowed on tv.

That's what everyone always says. It's such a cliche. Even those people who tuned in to watch a football game? So people should never complain about anything they disagree with? They should just turn a blind eye and ignore it? Unfortunately, that attitude has led to many tragedies over the course of history.

So if I go to WDW and there's a Desperate Housewives attraction in Fantasyland, I shouldn't complain - I should just ignore it and go to the next attraction? "Daddy, why can't we go on that?"

We can all agree or disagree with anyone at any time. But, it serves no purpose to get puckish about it.

The fact that you do not consider news in the entertainment category, is one you are in the minority for. It is your choice to view it as you will, it simply will not change it's classification, btw.

I am a FIRM believer if something offends you, you avoid it. I find football a totally boring waste of time, but, realize that not everyone would (or should) agree with me. Because I don't like it does not mean that it should be gone, I simply change the channel. Rather easy, especially with the advent of remote controls.

If something like Desperate Housewives was to become an attraction and you did not like it, by all means, complain. But, just because you don't like it and complain, don't expect it to disappear. Others may find it nifty.

As to Cliche's. Well, it is common sense to ignore something you don't like or common sense to change a channel if you don't like what is on. I hardly think Janet Jackson's breast being exposed on TV is going to cause any huge tragedy or the football scandel either.

 

[Gail Hayden]

Not necessarily...as a parent I do avoid programs and channels that might have objectionable content, however, I did not expect Monday Night Football to be one of these programs. That, is the point. Adding fuel to the fire our Nashville affiliate decided not to air Saving Private Ryan the night before because Steven Speilberg insists that it not be edited for television. Explain to me how this great movie is censored because of content yet, the Desperate Housewives promo is aired in primetime?

I am not a prude, believe me, but it just isn't as simple as turning a channel once your ten year old son has already seen something he doesn't quite understand and is absolutely not ready for.

Didn't the Janet Jackson thing happen during the Super Bowl?

Nope being a parent is not easy and the kids will see stuff they are not ready for and do not understand, but, that is the way it goes. It happens to everyone and we all managed. The nightly news is more horrible than any show out there.

Desperate Housewives does not include the content you would see in a war movie. It is also supposed to be a comedy, Ryan is not.
I believe Desperate Housewives is on after the family hour, and the promos are pretty sterile in primetime.

 

[gobuckeye@wdw]

Eisner's fan mail seems as though it is a little light these days. When he is finally gone, what changes would you like to be made for the betterment of Disney?

One name comes to mind in Eisner's likely replacement: Robert Iger. Iger, the current President at ABC seems to be the boards favorible canidate. I recently read an interesting article in USA Today about Iger. In the article it showed many of Igers crudentials and previous management positions. One thing that kind of scares me: in a way Iger is pretty much a clone of Eisner in that their previous positions in the comoany are identical. Personally, I think that Iger is probably the most probabal canidate. I mean come on, do you guys honestly think that Roy Disney could take that position? I think not! Although I would want to see him on the board!!!!!!!!!!

 

[PurpleDragon]

One name comes to mind in Eisner's likely replacement: Robert Iger. Iger, the current President at ABC seems to be the boards favorible canidate. I recently read an interesting article in USA Today about Iger. In the article it showed many of Igers crudentials and previous management positions. One thing that kind of scares me: in a way Iger is pretty much a clone of Eisner in that their previous positions in the comoany are identical. Personally, I think that Iger is probably the most probabal canidate. I mean come on, do you guys honestly think that Roy Disney could take that position? I think not! Although I would want to see him on the board!!!!!!!!!!

I know Iger is Eisner's recommended successor, since Iger is currently his puppet. Eisner is working the board hard to convince them that Iger is a viable canidate. The only problem is that if Iger gets the poisition he will more than likely do the same if not worse than Eisner is currently.

But I think Roy and Stanley and a majority of the shareholders would more than likely not allow that to happen. I'm sure they would propose a new board be elected before they would allow the current board to elect one of Eisners puppets into the CEO position.

 

[Lauriebar]

Didn't the Janet Jackson thing happen during the Super Bowl?

Nope being a parent is not easy and the kids will see stuff they are not ready for and do not understand, but, that is the way it goes. It happens to everyone and we all managed. The nightly news is more horrible than any show out there.

Desperate Housewives does not include the content you would see in a war movie. It is also supposed to be a comedy, Ryan is not.
I believe Desperate Housewives is on after the family hour, and the promos are pretty sterile in primetime.

I was not refering to the Janet incident. Last Monday on MNF, there was a promo shown for Desperate Housewives which included one of the stars of that show in a towel stradling a football player. Suggestive language was used and it was inappropriate for young children.

I, of course, do not let my young children watch Desperate Housewives and MNF IS partly during the family hour.

I'm not satisfied with your "that is the way it goes". As a parent I have a right to expect not to have to worry about sexual content on a televised football game. And as I said, by the time I realized what I was seeing it was to late to censor.

The reason Private Ryan needed to be censored was mostly language not the horrors of war.

 

[Jekyll Baker]

We can all agree or disagree with anyone at any time. But, it serves no purpose to get puckish about it.

The fact that you do not consider news in the entertainment category, is one you are in the minority for. It is your choice to view it as you will, it simply will not change it's classification, btw.

I am a FIRM believer if something offends you, you avoid it. I find football a totally boring waste of time, but, realize that not everyone would (or should) agree with me. Because I don't like it does not mean that it should be gone, I simply change the channel. Rather easy, especially with the advent of remote controls.

If something like Desperate Housewives was to become an attraction and you did not like it, by all means, complain. But, just because you don't like it and complain, don't expect it to disappear. Others may find it nifty.

As to Cliche's. Well, it is common sense to ignore something you don't like or common sense to change a channel if you don't like what is on. I hardly think Janet Jackson's breast being exposed on TV is going to cause any huge tragedy or the football scandel either.

Gail, I whole-heartedly agree

The news (or "olds" as I prefer to call it because it's the exact same day after day) it pure sensationalist entertainment.

Football (and pretty much every sport, ie NASCAR, tennis, any ball game, etc) are boring to watch. Who wants to waste hours watching a bunch of grown men who act like children run back and forth from one side of a field to another (or run or drive in circles, etc).

The remote control and cable/satellite television have to be some of mankinds' greatest inventions. You're not forced to watch any one thing in particular, even the president's speeches or hurricane watches. There's always at least one other thing to watch.

(And sorry, I have to say I don't watch much network TV, so I have never actually seen anything about Desperate Housewives or Janet Jackson's faux pas.)

 

[Indy95]

One name comes to mind in Eisner's likely replacement: Robert Iger. Iger, the current President at ABC seems to be the boards favorible canidate. I recently read an interesting article in USA Today about Iger. In the article it showed many of Igers crudentials and previous management positions. One thing that kind of scares me: in a way Iger is pretty much a clone of Eisner in that their previous positions in the comoany are identical. Personally, I think that Iger is probably the most probabal canidate. I mean come on, do you guys honestly think that Roy Disney could take that position? I think not! Although I would want to see him on the board!!!!!!!!!!

If I could get back ON TOPIC, for one sec. (As in, no more MNF rants)

Yes, Iger would be the most LIKELY candidate, but he shouldn't be. One of Iger's only major assignments at Disney has been to get ABC back on top. Not only has this not happened, but ABC has been DEAD LAST in ratings since Millionaire hit the skids (which was overproduced by creatively bankrupt ABC executives). Not only have they not come up with any good, successful shows, but any good shows they could pick up they grossly undermarketed and/or targeted the wrong audience. Iger is nothing more than Eisner's puppet, and has been groomed as such since he came on board. He has been trained specifically to be Eisner's successor, and should not be.

The ideal future Disney CEO is not one who has the talent and passion of Walt. That talent and passion should belong to the heads of the various divisions of the company. Walt's knack for pushing the limits of animation should reside with the Chairman of the animation dept., etc. Walt would not be able to wield such a large company as Disney is right now. As such, the CEO should NOT attempt to manage the company the way that Walt did, or the way Eisner is now. This is why Eisner is failing as a CEO. He tries to run the various divisions himself, and if he makes a mistake, it's always the OTHER guy's head. The last three heads of animation have seen a COMBINED three movies in production from start to finish. As a result, the people under him fear for their jobs, so they try to desperately cut costs and improve the bottom line. What Disney really needs is a CEO who lets the heads of the divisions ACTUALLY RUN their divisions, given enough money as they need, and let the results (as in: success) speak for themselves. If the parks aren't improving their attendance, then they WON'T be improving their bottom line. If the division isn't doing well after at LEAST five years, THEN they should reevaluate. Heck, even Pressler (who was also groomed to be a potential Eisner successor) got canned after only three years (granted, he was doing a terrible job, but the point is this should have been seen sooner, instead of promoting him willy-nilly)! It really doesn't matter to me WHO becomes the next CEO, as long as they believe in these qualities, Disney will soon find themselves back on top. I guarantee it.

 

[longfamily]

Very well said!

 

[Buzzes Dad]

The thing that really bugs me about ABC is the show Alias(Great Show).

This show has been on now for 3 years and ABC decides to use it this season as a mid season replacement and move the time slot.(I know that they said they will be able to show all episodes in with an interuption) I feel that this is a bad move for the show.

Not only are we confusing prople about what night the show will air but we are going to confuse it about if it will even air. I have not even seen an TV advertising for the show let alone the DVD's since the show ended last season. Also the little merchandising that they have done for the show is not geared to the right demographics. Example: The books that they published based on the show are geared towards early teen readers while the clothing/jackets carry a very adult price tag( 19.99 T-Shirt, 19.99 Ball Cap, ect).

Hey ABC, No advertising = Noboby watching = No show = Lower ratings = Lost revenue


Now to put this back on topic The new CEO really needs to develope/Hire a great talent pool(Not just yes men) for all divisions and have them work together instead of it being a competition. This could lead to cross promotion within divsions. Using my ABC example from above lets have a Alias merchandise store at MGM or better yet a more Generic ABC store at MGM that would sell items based on the shows that air.(If anyone from Disney management is reading this please feel free to borrow my ideas, and no I will not sue you over it)

As an aside maybe they should hire a bunch of us to manage Disney, we obviously can not do any worse:animwink:

 

[mikeymouse]

www.savedisney.com

 

[PetePan]

I, of course, do not let my young children watch Desperate Housewives and MNF IS partly during the family hour.

I'm not satisfied with your "that is the way it goes". As a parent I have a right to expect not to have to worry about sexual content on a televised football game. And as I said, by the time I realized what I was seeing it was to late to censor.

The reason Private Ryan needed to be censored was mostly language not the horrors of war.

Sorry, was busy and didn't have time to answer before. I realize that what I said before may have been a bit harsh and I apologize. My frustration was more in general, I guess, than just with the Monday Night incident. I realize the pressures of raising a child and keeping them away from certain things. However, the parent has the ultimate responsibility for a child, not what the child sees on tv or movies, hears on the radio...etc. I would never say everyone does this, but it seems that many would like to blame the entertainment industry for the way their children behave. Kids are going to see and hear things that they shouldn't, that's a given. However, it is the parents' responsibility to inform the child on what is right and wrong.

 

[diz420]

"creative consultant"

Purple- Walt was more like a "creative consultant" so to speak.I almost fell out of my chair when I read this. Roy was great at working the co. side of things but with out Walt the would be "NO" Disney co. The movies the parks all of it was Walts ideas and dreams. What ever Walt wanted to do Walt did. Walt also knew kow important Roy was in helping him get his dreams to work in real life. "Steamboat Willie to wdwmagic" all goes back to one great man Walt Disney

 

[Indy95]

The thing that really bugs me about ABC is the show Alias(Great Show).

This show has been on now for 3 years and ABC decides to use it this season as a mid season replacement and move the time slot.(I know that they said they will be able to show all episodes in with an interuption) I feel that this is a bad move for the show.

Not only are we confusing prople about what night the show will air but we are going to confuse it about if it will even air. I have not even seen an TV advertising for the show let alone the DVD's since the show ended last season. Also the little merchandising that they have done for the show is not geared to the right demographics. Example: The books that they published based on the show are geared towards early teen readers while the clothing/jackets carry a very adult price tag( 19.99 T-Shirt, 19.99 Ball Cap, ect).

Hey ABC, No advertising = Noboby watching = No show = Lower ratings = Lost revenue

Now, I'm not a viewer of Alias, but from what Buzzes Dad says here it seems like ABC is trying to mold Alias into Fox's "24." This is another vice of the current Disney management: they try to be like everybody else!
"Hey, 24 is popular on Fox, so if we make Alias like that, then it will be just as popular!"
"Hey, reality shows are so popular these days, let's make like THREE reality shows, then we'll see the money pour in!" (To get the humor of this statement, see "The Chair," "Are You Hot," and "I'm a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here")
"Hey, if it's good enough for Six Flags, it's good enough for DCA!" (Actual Disney executive quote)

You CANNOT seriously think you can make money from doing this! You get money from making ORIGINAL shows, with ORIGINAL ideas. Why is this so hard?

 

[Epcot82Guy]

Purple- Walt was more like a "creative consultant" so to speak.I almost fell out of my chair when I read this. Roy was great at working the co. side of things but with out Walt the would be "NO" Disney co. The movies the parks all of it was Walts ideas and dreams. What ever Walt wanted to do Walt did. Walt also knew kow important Roy was in helping him get his dreams to work in real life. "Steamboat Willie to wdwmagic" all goes back to one great man Walt Disney

While I certainly agree, I think this (as is often the case) is a classic example of not giving Roy the status he deserves. Walt Disney certainly created the magic in his head, and much more that was not realized, but his concepts were often simply blue sky in nature until Roy was able to balance them out with sound money skills and a necessary realistic approach. He was the left-brain to Walt's right-brain. And, obviously, if you take one away, you are left with half a brain that simply does not function.

That would be my reasoning for a CEO that understand money and bottom lines but has the creativity to yield control of that to very talented people. Ideal structure would be to have Roy at the helm with Walt I in charge of Animation & Creative Ventures (i.e. shows, WDEntertainment, etc.), Walt II in charge of Parks and Resorts (including the Cruise Line), and Walt III in charge of Merchandising (including all the park merchandise and outside merchandising enterprises). Walt was a man that could do all three, but I have not seen anyone that could with the company's current size. Having three talented people, with Walt's ideals, under a man/woman that understands business but is fully comfortable letting the creative ventures happen (regardless of how "unorthodox" they may be) is the key to a Disney revival IMHO.