For all you Eisner Haters!

[Mr. Eggz]

NONE of the mutual funds......then who made up the 55% that did not vote no-confidence? Perhaps you do not know any better?

Mutual Funds Reveal Shareholder Votes

By Ben White
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, September 1, 2004; Page E01


Vanguard Group Inc. voted in favor of a shareholder proposal demanding that Intel Corp. expense stock options. Putnam Funds and Fidelity Investments voted to dump Walt Disney Co. Chairman Michael D. Eisner.

 

[Mr. Eggz]

66.88% of the comany is owned by 2,031 institutional investors

The largest is Barclay's Bank PLC, with 91,880,047 shares, which was up 545,777 when they reported on 12/31/04

The second largest is Fidelity Management and Research, with 75,297,348 shares, which was up 7,686,083 when they reported on 12/31/04

The largest mund that is invested in WDC is the Fidelity Magellan fund, with 19,501,500 shares, which was down 200,000 shares when they reported on 12/31/04

The largest insider investor is Roy E Disney, with 16,510,280 shares

Okay, now tell me how they voted the year of the 45% no vote?

 

[speck76]

From CNN...

Following Wednesday's vote, California's Calpers, the nation's largest pension fund, called for Eisner to resign by the end of the year and urged Disney to split the role of chairman and CEO. Calpers owns more than 9.9 million shares of Disney. The pension fund had said it would withhold its vote for Eisner at Wednesday's meeting, but this is the first time Calpers has specifically called for Eisner's ouster.

9.9 million shares......oooh.....wow.......

Barclays owns 91,880,047 shares.......

 

[speck76]

Okay, now tell me how they voted the year of the 45% no vote?

45% no-confidence still equals 55% confidence/no vote....correct?

Since the company is 66.88% owned by institutions, some would have had to have voted no-confidence.....but obviously, not all of them did.......not even the majority of them did.

 

[askmike1]

Whoever started all this :cough:Roy's family holds more TWDC stock than anyone else...including the Basses who have significantly more billions than Roy.-Mr. Eggz:cough: what difference does it make. However the 45% vote was distributed, what difference does it make. The past is behind us. Remember, "In order to seize the future, you must grasp the present." The most recent shareholder meeting was less than a 10% no confidence. Does anything I just said make a difference? No. If we resort to name calling, the thread will be closed and people who wanted to comment on the original article won't be able to make their opinion.

Remember this post made just before this whole going off on a tangent...

Hey guys, I just wanted to say thank you for making this an actual discussion and not one of the all-too-frequent "Because I say so and you're an idiot for disagreeing with me" threads. It's very nice, refreshing even. If only more people on these boards would carry on debates and discussions like this, I think we would all find our experiences here even more magical. Thanks again guys.

That went well. All I'm saying is that we keep this thread to the original article and if we want to argue about the meeting, we can make a new thread about it.

Hoping this will stop, here is the original post...

Read this article: http://slate.msn.com/id/2116794/?GT1=6334

Just a little food for thought! I mean, as far as dollars and cents go this guy has been a blessing towards the Disney Compnay! The numbers dont lie.

So maybe, just maybe, Eisner wasn't NEARLY as bad as you guys make him out to be. Just a thought.

-Michael

 

[speck76]

Whoever started all this :cough:Roy's family holds more TWDC stock than anyone else...including the Basses who have significantly more billions than Roy.-Mr. Eggz:cough: what difference does it make. However the 45% vote was distributed, what difference does it make. The past is behind us. Remember, "In order to seize the future, you must grasp the present." The most recent shareholder meeting was less than a 10% no confidence. Does anything I just said make a difference? No. If we resort to name calling, the thread will be closed and people who wanted to comment on the original article won't be able to make their opinion.

Remember this post made just before this whole going off on a tangent... That went well. All I'm saying is that we keep this thread to the original article and if we want to argue about the meeting, we can make a new thread about it.

-Michael

Without comments like these.......that would be no problem

Please read Storming the Magic Kingdom by John Taylor for more information...but thanks for coming out to play.

Are you trying to re-write history or do you just not know any better.?

 

[Mr. Eggz]

Speck, the tone of my statements was a direct response to the tone and language of your statements. The disrespect you showed Grizz and the Guests of the Disney theme parks came before anything I said. And any sarcasm in my statements pales in comparison to your behavior. But I doubt I'll ever convince you that you are the problem. There is no reason for anyone to put up with being called names and there is no reason why I should spend any more my time talking any of this over with you.

Askmike1, you're right this conversation was once productive. Although I almost always disagree with you, I've actually kind of admired your constancy. You've rarly sunk to the level of Speck here and we've been able to have interesting productive conversations. I'm sorry to see you take the side of someone behaving so rudely. It's disappointing.

Well, you win, you've bullied me off your street corner. I wont ever visit WDWMagic again. You get the last word. I'll never see it.