News Expose reveals WDC control in online fan community

DDLand

Well-Known Member
From over at MC:
Folks, we are completely shocked by this article, which is nothing more than a rumor created out of bitter hostility from former MiceChatters. Their attempts to hurt Al Lutz and MiceAge sources are evil, and the fan community should respond with disdain and distrust.

Their evil attacks should result in their being shunned by the fan community. They also have sources who could easily be exposed and destroyed; however, we won’t play those games. Unlike them, we aren’t evil, and we don’t go about trying to destroy the lives of others.

We are going to leave this (closed) thread here for now as we don’t want to go down a path of he said/she said with folks with compromised ethics. These former MiceChatters should be ashamed of themselves for pretending to be fans while at the same time hurting the fan community.

The article that appeared in the Medium is nothing more than a disgusting and pathetic display by little people with sad lives.


*Please don't shoot the messenger. If this should be deleted, then just delete it*
This is really a remarkable response. This isn't incorrect or ridiculous, it's "EVIL." Instead of the Onion, this is the Devil. It really is an emotional and vicious message. Apparently they know the individual involved.

I am a little underwhelmed by their words. If anything, it gives credence to Snyder (whether or not the claims made in the medium post are true). What's always been clear, and what's clearer than ever before, is Spirit/Snyder are brilliant and tenacious. These MiceChat guys are outmatched. It's a little sad.

What we have to credit Spirit on is his consistency. He's been telling the same story for years. This wasn't something that emerged a month ago, no, he's been claiming to have known George since at least the early 2010s. He's also hammered Zenia for at least as long. We're to the point where either @WDW1974 /Snyder is psychotic (concocting an elaborate story involving multiple parties) or he's right. I'll write more after a little more reading.

Super super interesting...
 

TrojanUSC

Well-Known Member
This is really a remarkable response. This isn't incorrect or ridiculous, it's "EVIL." Instead of the Onion, this is the Devil. It really is an emotional and vicious message. Apparently they know the individual involved.

I am a little underwhelmed by their words. If anything, it gives credence to Snyder (whether or not the claims made in the medium post are true). What's always been clear, and what's clearer than ever before, is Spirit/Snyder are brilliant and tenacious. These MiceChat guys are outmatched. It's a little sad.

What we have to credit Spirit on is his consistency. He's been telling the same story for years. This wasn't something that emerged a month ago, no, he's been claiming to have known George since at least the early 2010s. He's also hammered Zenia for at least as long. We're to the point where either @WDW1974 /Snyder is psychotic (concocting an elaborate story involving multiple parties) or he's right. I'll write more after a little more reading.

Super super interesting...

That post is so over the top, it's ridiculous. Not to get political but it reminds me of when the media reports something, Trump tweets some noisy bluster saying how fake it is and it turns out to be pretty darn true.
 

Filby61

Well-Known Member
I agree that the Bobs don't care what we say, but this isn't about us. It's about what Al Lutz says, and they do care about that. Al's article last week caused a massive spike in traffic on many Disney fan sites, not just MiceChat. Al's reach goes beyond fan sites; it extends well into mainstream media, and that has the ability to affect what the Bobs care about most - the price of Disney stock.

Not to minimize Al, the reality is that no matter what he writes, he doesn't show up on the TDB radar unless his article generates a strong Twitter trend and/or is repeated in the main stream media. His last article didn't do either of those.

Disney's stock is affected by a lot of things, particularly news of Disney's performance vs. its expectation. Al's blog isn't part of that equation -- unless he breaks news of ground-shaking importance which then gets repeated in, and magnified by, Twitter trends and the main stream media. Back in the day, Al's articles got mainstream media coverage because they were connected with a story that was already big in the mainstream media, namely, the business screwups and public meltdown of Michael Eisner, and the drama of Roy Disney publicly wanting him out.
 

World_Showcase_Lover007

Well-Known Member
So if I am negative and critical of Disney, does that mean I am employed by Universal? The article is very lengthy and very detailed in some regards, but does not offer very much ‘proof’ for the things it asserts. It might all be true, but as an outsider, you need to come at me with a bit more concrete conclusions or smoking guns to convince me.

Fascinating all the same though. Makes me want to go buy a Dick Tracy style duster jacket and hang around Burbank asking menacing questions of passers by lol.
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
Ok, here is your secret decoder ring to 'redstone family' since you hear about it so much.. and its complicated.

Here is a streamlined family tree of this famous, pretty public family...

redstone family.png


So Michael (there are many of these!!) aka Mickey Rothstein (whose family changed their name to Redstone) was a theatre and business owner in Boston. Eventually with his sons, they turn that into National Amusements which ultimately becomes a huge movie theatre chain.

(#1) So the real money really is at the Mickey and his sons level... which is where the drama starts, because part of the deal with Mickey and his two sons was shares of the company where to be put into trusts for their grandchildren.

(#2) In the 70s and 80s.. Sumner works out deals to buy out his brother Edward (Eddie), including the future trusts. Basically Sumner consolidates all of National Amusements under him. The choice by Eddie later becomes one of the points of later lawsuits.

(#3) Later, Sumner uses his existing business assets to buyout Viacom, later Paramount, and later they merge in CBS too. So by the 90s, Sumner is a huge media mogul. Things get messy as they spin things back out, break up things (star trek gets caught up in this, etc). But Sumner remains a billionaire, CEO of major brands, etc.

Note... all this (monster) money is consolidated over in the Mickey branch of the tree.. tho Edward has millions... and Ethel didn't seem bad off from her father Morris.

So on the left, you have Ethel Redstone, who marries David Snyder.. and we get the branch being discussed here with Gary Snyder. Ethel's son, Stephen is a business man in Boston, and eventually moves to Florida. Stephen has two children, Gary and Michael Snyder. So Gary and Michael are second cousins (edit: once removed.. or whatever the right label is) to Edward and Sumner... the money men. The Snyders become based in FL.. ultimately settling outside Miami. It appears Michael keeps this base.. while Gary opts to goto LA.

(#4) Later, Michael Redstone (in orange) sues his father for selling off his claim in Mickey's empire.(#3).. which of course now is enormous. At some point, Eddie had sued to keep money for himself.. rather than give it to Michael. (This is where everything is wacky!!). Ruth Ann had passed away in her 30s and was a bit estranged.. so she's not in the picture. Complicating things.. Michael had issues to and was actually committed for a time.. and had other life issues. So now... Michael, his father, and uncle.. its all messy.

(#5) Sumner had Sheri and Brent with his first wife, and later remarried, and later still had girlfriends and live in aids.. that wanted a piece of the estate too. So in Sumner's own direct chain between himself, his children... lawsuits started going around... Brent sued his father.. and was settled... and as Sumner's health deteriorated and he aged... there were multiple suits around his estate and succession of Sheri to takeover her father's holdings. This whole circus filled the media cycles through the 2000s as the girlfriend challenges were closed out.. and Sheri's ascension was cleaned up. So all THAT business was really in the Sumner brand of the family.

All of that was going on in the ownership stuff BEHIND the more customer visible stuff like CBS and Paramount splitting, and all kinds of stuff.

So what's the take away from all this?

Yes the Snyder's come from old money their great-grandfather kicked off.. but they were one-step removed from their second cousins and THEIR kids... which is where most of the public lawsuit drama was.

(Edit: fixed the graphic a bit)
 
Last edited:

Kman101

Well-Known Member
Absolutely. But I think it is very fair game and important to realize you shouldn't take the Snyder article at face value either without some skepticism.

It all makes sense to me. WDW1974 was warning us about all of this for years and years but he lost all of his points in the rhetoric. I'm sure the evidence is there in his posts. I believe most of it. But of course the Snyder article is slanted with his own agenda.

To me, it actually confirms a lot. When I read the new 'Lutz' column it read exactly like a TP2000 post.

I think it's naive to dismiss it.
 

Filby61

Well-Known Member
I can't imagine this is going to get much traction beyond Disney fans. Imagine trying to explain this scoop to your editor: "There's this guy named Al Lutz who used to post on this site called MiceAge, then this other person called TP2000 who posts on another site called wdwmagic, and it turns out..."

I'm sure the reporter would be very quickly ushered out of the room!

Egg-zactly.
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
The story seems plausible to me. And really, wow. But why should I believe Gary Snyder is the question I have. Am I supposed to assume this article is not a fan manipulation itself?

Because we've had someone telling us all of this for years. It really does make sense to me. Of course there's some manipulation there. He has his own agenda, but that doesn't mean the facts aren't accurate. Why would he cause this stir if there wasn't some truth to it? What's the point? "Scandal" was more real than people realize, lol ;)
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
From over at MC:
Folks, we are completely shocked by this article, which is nothing more than a rumor created out of bitter hostility from former MiceChatters. Their attempts to hurt Al Lutz and MiceAge sources are evil, and the fan community should respond with disdain and distrust.

Their evil attacks should result in their being shunned by the fan community. They also have sources who could easily be exposed and destroyed; however, we won’t play those games. Unlike them, we aren’t evil, and we don’t go about trying to destroy the lives of others.

We are going to leave this (closed) thread here for now as we don’t want to go down a path of he said/she said with folks with compromised ethics. These former MiceChatters should be ashamed of themselves for pretending to be fans while at the same time hurting the fan community.

The article that appeared in the Medium is nothing more than a disgusting and pathetic display by little people with sad lives.


*Please don't shoot the messenger. If this should be deleted, then just delete it*

LOL!

All that does is make me believe the article even more.

I've always questioned "Dusty Sage" too. He's clearly paid well by the company.

And this is a general question but why is it so hard for some of you (not saying you, lol!) to believe that Disney desperately wants to influence and control the narrative? OF COURSE THEY DO. What company wouldn't? And we've been told for years that these boards are "monitored" .... it's true.
 

photomatt

Well-Known Member
I've always questioned "Dusty Sage" too. He's clearly paid well by the company.

I know Dustysage personally, and he is not paid by Disney. In fact, MiceChat was never invited to any press event that Disney held from its creation in 2005 all the way up to the premiere of Pixar Pier in 2018. MiceChat was blacklisted until the story broke about the LA Times being denied media credentials because of their negative reviews. When Disney resolved that they started inviting more Disney fan sites to media previews, even those that were historically critical of Disney.

This is fact. I have been with MiceChat since 2005, and I was the person Dustysage invited for the Pixar Pier media event. I can assure you that was the very first media event MiceChat ever attended.
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
I know Dustysage personally, and he is not paid by Disney. In fact, MiceChat was never invited to any press event that Disney held from its creation in 2005 all the way up to the premiere of Pixar Pier in 2018. MiceChat was blacklisted until the story broke about the LA Times being denied media credentials because of their negative reviews. When Disney resolved that they started inviting more Disney fan sites to media previews, even those that were historically critical of Disney.

This is fact. I have been with MiceChat since 2005, and I was the person Dustysage invited for the Pixar Pier media event. I can assure you that was the very first media event MiceChat ever attended.

But you can see why some of us view him that way, no? Personally I enjoy his commentary on the parks more times than not.

And I do appreciate you clearing it up. I've long followed the site, actually, and I'm aware of the media event history so you're right.
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
They're first cousins once removed, not second cousins. Second cousins have the same great-grand parents. I'm in a family with a lot of cousins.

Dunno.. those things always confuse me.. looking again, they should be 'second cousins first removed' because they share the same great-grandparents (second cousins) but are a different generation.. so once removed.

The definition I was using before simply said 'child of a parent's cousin'... but more elaborate definitions have said the 'removed' are about the generational up/down.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom