Eisner's replacement

[Pumbas Nakasak]

Far from family values as a foreigner what i expect from Disney is.

1. Movies that entertain have great tunes, loveable heroes and nasty villains and a craft in their making.

2. Theme parks that are clean serviced to their highest standards and staffed by people who give a toss. Ideally there should be on going ride development and all tastes should be catered for but respect should be paid to the type of attraction that started the whole thing going.

3. Merchandise that is not produced in some 3rd world sweat shop and a range that is unique to the area its being sold.

4. TV that is organised to cater for kids of varying age, programmed to reflect suitable subjects for that group and presented by something other than screaming twenty something yahoos (or is this just the UK)

5. The Touchstone division make a diverse range of films not hemmed in by the Disney core business.

6. Cheaper pins.

 

[speck76]

Far from family values as a foreigner what i expect from Disney is.

1. Movies that entertain have great tunes, loveable heroes and nasty villains and a craft in their making.

2. Theme parks that are clean serviced to their highest standards and staffed by people who give a toss. Ideally there should be on going ride development and all tastes should be catered for but respect should be paid to the type of attraction that started the whole thing going.

3. Merchandise that is not produced in some 3rd world sweat shop and a range that is unique to the area its being sold.

4. TV that is organised to cater for kids of varying age, programmed to reflect suitable subjects for that group and presented by something other than screaming twenty something yahoos (or is this just the UK)

5. The Touchstone division make a diverse range of films not hemmed in by the Disney core business.

6. Cheaper pins.

I strongly agree with 5 of the 6 points you state.....I can sort of agree with the 6th point, but I am not a pin collector, and I believe the market sets the price (if nobody bought them, they would be much cheaper).

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

I strongly agree with 5 of the 6 points you state.....I can sort of agree with the 6th point, but I am not a pin collector, and I believe the market sets the price (if nobody bought them, they would be much cheaper).

Yes I thought that last one was an ask too far

 

[Gail Hayden]

In trying to be all things to all people, you take no position. what defines a family? You mean you don't know? Or you aren't sure? Moreover, why can't you say clearly why you don't believe that the company should return to its core family values, instead of taking the cop out of, who defines what a family is, or who defines what the standards are? We all know, including you, what good family values are. Some people have the courage to stick their necks out and express their true beliefs and values. Others run with the crowd, so as not to have to take the verbal attacks. I'm okay with the attacks. They strenghthen my resolve and prove to me that what I am doing is right. When everyone just goes along with you all of the time, there's something wrong.

It's easy to agree with everyone all of the time, and never suffer the slings and arrows so to speak. Where the rubber meets the road is when you take on the popular view, stick to your core beliefs, and fight thru to the end to see that you were in fact, correct. Again, recent events prove that a large majority of people in this country still believe in family values, god, and country. I'm sorry that you don't like or believe that to be the case. And as it relates to Disney, again, my view is that a a return to those core values and beliefs will only strenghthen the company, it's cms, and its shareholders.

Let me ask this: Would it hurt you personally if they did? If so, how?

Not sure who you are addressing this to.

I know how I define a family. I wanted to hear your opinion. That is why I asked the question. My core beliefs are correct, for me. I don't need a majority to tell me that. I stand on my own. To say that it will be proven to be right in the end is not a correct statement. It will be something you agree with, hence, it will be correct for you, but, not everyone.

I don't always agree with everyone and trust me, I have plenty of scars from the arrows and knives when I have expressed my opinon. I also have come very major core beliefs and I do stick to them.
If you are speaking of the national election as a current event, I think you are painting with a wide brush and giving credit to only one side.
I would like to belive that all Americans have core beliefs, the fact that they don't follow the agenda of the majority does not make them wrong.

I don't begrudge ME his salary or bennies, I realize he signed a contract and it was an excellent one.

Why don't I feel it would be good to return to core beliefs? Because EVERYONE'S CORE BELIEF IS DIFFERENT. IT IS A COMPANY OUT TO MAKE A PROFIT. Saying it is for familes and children excludes a LOT of people. There are empty nesters, like myself, that go with just their s/o. There are functions for various lifestyles that would feel the effects of this. That is not right.
I would love to see changes: ie: bikini tops are not shirts. Shirts and shoes are a requirement. I dislike T-shirts with provocative slogans. BUT, who am I to say what is provocative or not.

Would it hurt you personally if they did? If so, how?[/

Hard to say. But, if your belief is to go back to you apparent core values for families and children, they it would, by default exclude me. That would hurt me personally.

 

[HennieBogan1966]

Hmmm, point #4 is very interesting, don't you think. progamming "suitable". Can you say family values?

 

[Gail Hayden]

Far from family values as a foreigner what i expect from Disney is.

1. Movies that entertain have great tunes, loveable heroes and nasty villains and a craft in their making.

2. Theme parks that are clean serviced to their highest standards and staffed by people who give a toss. Ideally there should be on going ride development and all tastes should be catered for but respect should be paid to the type of attraction that started the whole thing going.

3. Merchandise that is not produced in some 3rd world sweat shop and a range that is unique to the area its being sold.

4. TV that is organised to cater for kids of varying age, programmed to reflect suitable subjects for that group and presented by something other than screaming twenty something yahoos (or is this just the UK)

5. The Touchstone division make a diverse range of films not hemmed in by the Disney core business.

6. Cheaper pins.

I like your points, except for #4. I do have a question. At what time do adults get to see something of quality? Or, do we continually cater to the children?

6# - I don't buy them, but less expensive for you would be great. They are already cheap (in their quality).

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

Hmmm, point #4 is very interesting, don't you think. progamming "suitable". Can you say family values?

No common sense, my 17 year old is at a different stage of development and life experiences to my 12 year old. What is appropriate for someone about to complete high school and enter the world of work is vastly different from someone who plays with Barbies. And what is normal here is not normal there, im thinking attitudes towards firearms and nudity. Disney should reflect that in its productions, but in these days of eisners cut n paste and one size fits all there is no variation.

 

[HennieBogan1966]

Again, Gail, you're misunderstanding my point about core values. You say if they did return to core values if would exclude you. You're taking my statement too literally. As you say, values vary based on who you're talking to. It's different thing to different people. And no, I'm not crediting one side or the other, but rather providing a snapshot of (1) of the MAJOR issues which shaped our election, and by extension, the views of a MAJORITY of the electorate. A lot of which I think you would agree are most likely Disney fans and patrons.

A return to those core values would not exclude you, but in fact, take you into account. What I mean by that is that Disney would take into account in all products/services, that they have an obligation to provide clean, wholesome, and safe entertainment. And in that obligation, that they would also be responsible for setting a standard that says, we won't stoop to trash tv, trashy movies, or trashy products to make a profit. It may be about money for them, but is it about profits at all costs? Why does it appear that people are so afraid of a return to decency? What's to be afraid of? Safe neighborhoods, clean movies, etc. etc. Oh, we can't have that. God forbid that those things should make a comeback. I've personally seen a lot in my life that this world could do without as it regards entertainment. What would it hurt for Disney to throw those associations to the wayside, and return to its core values? Again, if they do that, you're saying you'll no longer patronize them?

How's that for loyalty?

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

I like your points, except for #4. I do have a question. At what time do adults get to see something of quality? Or, do we continually cater to the children?

6# - I don't buy them, but less expensive for you would be great. They are already cheap (in their quality).

Sorry but in the UK the 4 Disney channels are aimed at kids n teens so never thought of Disney TV as anything other than that.

 

[Gail Hayden]

So you're saying you live by NO particular core family values, which you might have learned from your elders? No idea of the line between right and wrong. Rather that right and wrong is in the eye of the beholder, and that it's more of a shade of gray, than black and white? See, when Walt Disney took information from his staff, he did think it over, and in the end, the decision was his, and his alone. He didn't waver, and think, I wonder what joe blow will think of this. I think I should ask him. When he had an idea or vision of what he wanted, I don't BELIEVE that he wavered at all. Instead he stuck to his guns and saw it thru to the end. Was he always right? No. No one is either. But what he did was learn from those mistakes to do it better the next time. And he used those same core values, even after having made some of those mistakes.

I'm not here to discuss certain social issues, b ut rather the idea that if someone is hired to replace Michael Eisner that has solid family values, that I BELIEVE that is what would be best for the company.

Of course my core values are an offshoot of what I was taught growing up.
However, how I chose to use them is my decision alone. Right or wrong is, indeed, in the eye of the beholder. Think about it. What may be correct for you, is possibly not correct for me. You might think it allright to tell a little white lie, but, I don't. Your parents and mine might have told us it was ok to do. I might think it perfectly ok to eat grapes from the produce department of my grocery store before paying ok, I doubt you would. (BTW, I don't think it ok to eat the grapes, just an example). Your parents and mine may have said don't do that, it is stealing.

Yes, Walt stuck to his guns and practically ran the company into financial ruin because he thought his opinion was the only one.
Disney was a great dreamer and his concept of the parks was an ever changing atmosphere. Well, it is still ever changing, just not in the direction you like.

I have no issue with the next CEO treating the CMs better, improving the parks, etc.

As to the subs, all I know is the bottom line is in the black. As a stockholder, that makes me very happy.

 

[HennieBogan1966]

Again Pumbas you're preaching to the choir and proving my point to be correct. That a return to solid family values takes all those issues, with the exception of firearms and nudity into account. That it addresses those core audiences with all types of programming, movies, and park operations.l

 

[Gail Hayden]

Sorry but in the UK the 4 Disney channels are aimed at kids n teens so never thought of Disney TV as anything other than that.

You did not say Disney channels, so, I assumed that you meant general TV.

 

[HennieBogan1966]

So Gail, profits at ANY cost is okay with you then?

What about with Drug Companies? How about with Civilian contractors working with the Military?

Profits at any cost okay for them too? I'll bet that's different isn't it? How about if you're a stockholder?

Now keep in mind here that I am referring to profits, and shareholders being happy, as you mentioned.

 

[Gail Hayden]

Again, Gail, you're misunderstanding my point about core values. You say if they did return to core values if would exclude you. You're taking my statement too literally. As you say, values vary based on who you're talking to. It's different thing to different people. And no, I'm not crediting one side or the other, but rather providing a snapshot of (1) of the MAJOR issues which shaped our election, and by extension, the views of a MAJORITY of the electorate. A lot of which I think you would agree are most likely Disney fans and patrons.

A return to those core values would not exclude you, but in fact, take you into account. What I mean by that is that Disney would take into account in all products/services, that they have an obligation to provide clean, wholesome, and safe entertainment. And in that obligation, that they would also be responsible for setting a standard that says, we won't stoop to trash tv, trashy movies, or trashy products to make a profit. It may be about money for them, but is it about profits at all costs? Why does it appear that people are so afraid of a return to decency? What's to be afraid of? Safe neighborhoods, clean movies, etc. etc. Oh, we can't have that. God forbid that those things should make a comeback. I've personally seen a lot in my life that this world could do without as it regards entertainment. What would it hurt for Disney to throw those associations to the wayside, and return to its core values? Again, if they do that, you're saying you'll no longer patronize them?

How's that for loyalty?

Again, you make excellent points.

As to the trashy TV, movies, etc. People as a whole need to rebel with their hard earned dollars. If there was NO market for this, then it would end. But, there is a market for this and the sponsers know this. Stop using the sponsers, write to them, take a stand and those programs will go.
It does appear that it is "a profit at all costs" and that is a problem. Trust me, I don't like it. I don't watch it, I don't purchase the sponsers' products, etc. BTW, I don't think the new hit is wonderful, I enjoy it when there is nothing else to do. Most of the time my nose is in a book.
There is nothing wrong with safe neighborhoods, clean, fun, movies, etc.
I would love that big time.
Unfortunately, they will never do that, never take that stand because it would mean financial ruin for them.
If no one was excluded from the parks because of someone's idea of core values, then it would not have an effect on me. However, exclude any single minority or majority from them, and I am outta there. Exclusion is, in effect, censorship and I destest that.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

Again Pumbas you're preaching to the choir and proving my point to be correct. That a return to solid family values takes all those issues, with the exception of firearms and nudity into account. That it addresses those core audiences with all types of programming, movies, and park operations.l

I think youve missed my point, or I yours.

Yes i want a variety of films and TV, some reality TV is fine I hate it but the kids love big brother, in both our arguments we are saying all tastes should be catered for. Except I get the impression that you are saying all tastes are limited to what you would find as being appropriate.

many of the hit shows in the UK and Europe would not be shown in the US because of the core values you talk of. Im an adult I dont see why anyone should be able to dictate what I watch. For that matter it should be up to me what my kids watch, but there must be a choice to let parents make these informed decisions not some self appointed bastion of the public good.

 

[Gail Hayden]

So Gail, profits at ANY cost is okay with you then?

What about with Drug Companies? How about with Civilian contractors working with the Military?

Profits at any cost okay for them too? I'll bet that's different isn't it? How about if you're a stockholder?

Now keep in mind here that I am referring to profits, and shareholders being happy, as you mentioned.

Nope it is not. I have stock in Pfizer. They are doing quite well, but, I don't like what any drug company is doing. I did not like Enron, I don't like the fact the the Pres. and VP are oil men. I don't like the fact that your VP's company managed a contract into Iraq without any approval at all.

Profit at any cost is the way this country is run, unfortunately. Companies are in business to make a profit. I don't really see anything wrong with that.
Disney hardly comes under the heading of drug companies or civilian contractors.

The fact that you don't like what is on TV or what is at a park is the same for you as it is for me. I change the channel or avoid what I don't like in a park.

 

[Gail Hayden]

I think youve missed my point, or I yours.

Yes i want a variety of films and TV, some reality TV is fine I hate it but the kids love big brother, in both our arguments we are saying all tastes should be catered for. Except I get the impression that you are saying all tastes are limited to what you would find as being appropriate.

many of the hit shows in the UK and Europe would not be shown in the US because of the core values you talk of. Im an adult I dont see why anyone should be able to dictate what I watch. For that matter it should be up to me what my kids watch, but there must be a choice to let parents make these informed decisions not some self appointed bastion of the public good.

Change your footer, you have made the profound statement. THANK YOU!!!

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

Change your footer, you have made the profound statement. THANK YOU!!!

I have? point it out then please :animwink:

 

[Gail Hayden]

I have? point it out then please :animwink:

right here:

many of the hit shows in the UK and Europe would not be shown in the US because of the core values you talk of. Im an adult I dont see why anyone should be able to dictate what I watch. For that matter it should be up to me what my kids watch, but there must be a choice to let parents make these informed decisions not some self appointed bastion of the public good.<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

I LOVE the commercials I have seen from the UK, they are wonderful.

 

[HennieBogan1966]

Again, not speaking of excluding anyone for any reason. I'm speaking of a return to the core family values upon which I BELIEVE Walt Disney started his parks. True, there can be no good that can come from exclusion of any person, and I don't believe that I have stated that in any of my comments. Rather, I speak with yes a broader brush regarding the presentation of product from Disney on a wide scale. (products, movies, parks,tv programming, etc. )

And I don't believe it would be their ruin. I believe that in time it would be to their great benefit. That in fact, there would be a return of patrons who had long ago determined to stay away due to their strongly held beliefs.

But since you bring it up, let me mention one "group" if you will. Now, I know that Disney in no way promotes this day, but let's mention Gay Day. What do you think the reaction would be if a group of people walked around the parks, wearing t shirts stating "we're conservative christian heterosexuals, here for straight day.?) What do you think the fallout would be from that? Don't you think there'd be a major issue with a lot of people there? I certainly do. There seems to be some deep fear of conservative views, religion, and christianity as a whole in our country. As though it's something so terrible. Yet, in this case, people are asked to quash their opinions as groups of people walk throughout the parks, utilizing their 1st amendment rights I admit, to express their sexuality in a place not built for that purpose.

Or we can talk about when Disney bought into the movie business. And how a lot of those movies have adult content, be it nudity, language, violence, or both. Now, I know people will say it's about profits, and synergy. Well, guess what? IF you managed the company properly to begin with, there wouldn't be a need to go into those types of businesses to stay afloat. I'll give you an example. It would be like a car dealer saying, well, we'd like to go into the vacuum business, cause people need to vacuum their cars. While we're at it, we'd like to go into the DVD business, cause we sell cars with DVD players. Well, if you manage your company properly, you won't need those "other" outlets of business to make money. So the whole synergy thing doesn't really wash with me. It's a cop out and a way of saying, I've so poorly mis-managed the company, that I need to leverage my loses with the profits of other business ventures. That way, I can cover up my ignorance of how to run this business. And you just continue to operate more and more to cover up more and more loses of all the other arms of your company, which all begin losing money. (i.e. ABC, ESPN, Anaheim Angels, Mighty Ducks, etc. etc.).