Iger on CNBC this afternoon ...

[Lee]

I really wish there was a way to get the OP's inside information without all his annoying schtick.

Annoying to whom? Certainly not me.
Read the posts, take what you want, and move on.

 

[PeterAlt]

You must have been an expert dodge ball player as a kid.

Iger made Shanghai happen.

Whether Disney made mistakes at WDI is a moot point. I was referring to the here and now and the reality of the situation.

Whether there was a plan for China before is also a moot point as the park was completely reimagined by today's WDI. And it looks pretty good to me.

The Disney Springs model reeks of greatness.

True, and very good point. Iger's strength has been what Donald Trump once called The Art of the Deal. That he triumphs in and even beats Eisner (who mastered the ABC deal and zillions of smaller ones) at. However, everyone has their strengths and weaknesses. His weakness is that he just doesn't get the theme park business (much like how Roy O. Disney didn't get the future urbanism business that Walt dreamt up). Eisner got that theme parks are very similar to movie business. For films, you have to keep producing movie after movie of all types of genres and budgets in order to get people to keep coming back (they won't come back to the same movie over and over again - unless it's Rocky Horror, an exception to the rule). Same is true with theme parks. You have to keep building new rides of all genres and budgets. If you don't, people won't keep coming back. If you keep old rides, at least make sure it stays new so that the people who haven't seen it could enjoy it as much as the people who have. What the theme park goer likes is pretty much the same formula as what movie theater patrons like when they see a movie. Both venues tell stories. Both venues use sensory effects. Rides have the unique ability to use sensory effects that are not found in films today, such as motion, smell, and 3D in 360 degrees. The ride has to be as effective as a movie to use these sensory effects in order to tell a story. How that story received is the same psychological reaction as a movie. Eisner and Walt Disney himself understood this. Iger just doesn't get it. Someone with enough guts at the company needs to sit down with him and explain exactly what I just explained here.

 

[jt04]

True, and very good point. Iger's strength has been what Donald Trump once called The Art of the Deal. That he triumphs in and even beats Eisner (who mastered the ABC deal and zillions of smaller ones) at. However, everyone has their strengths and weaknesses. His weakness is that he just doesn't get the theme park business (much like how Roy O. Disney didn't get the future urbanism business that Walt dreamt up). Eisner got that theme parks are very similar to movie business. For films, you have to keep producing movie after movie of all types of genres and budgets in order to get people to keep coming back (they won't come back to the same movie over and over again - unless it's Rocky Horror, an exception to the rule). Same is true with theme parks. You have to keep building new rides of all genres and budgets. If you don't, people won't keep coming back. If you keep old rides, at least make sure it stays new so that the people who haven't seen it could enjoy it as much as the people who have. What the theme park goer likes is pretty much the same formula as what movie theater patrons like when they see a movie. Both venues tell stories. Both venues use sensory effects. Rides have the unique ability to use sensory effects that are not found in films today, such as motion, smell, and 3D in 360 degrees. The ride has to be as effective as a movie to use these sensory effects in order to tell a story. How that story received is the same psychological reaction as a movie. Eisner and Walt Disney himself understood this. Iger just doesn't get it. Someone with enough guts at the company needs to sit down with him and explain exactly what I just explained here.

I think he is leaving the fun stuff for the next team. Kind of like James Cameron only makes movies when he has the tech to carry out his vision. And R&D has been pumping out some interesting patents lately. (See the new Belle M&G for example) Seems Iger has some vision as far as future tech goes and that should pay off big time in the years ahead.