Iger's compensation dropped slightly to $43.9 million in 2016

[Goofyernmost]

Missed the point of my post. Decisions are being made for short term profits - probably small ones - at the expense of the BIG cash cow - the parks. That's what kept Disney afloat in the mid 1980s when things were really tough and Sony was knocking on the door. And that cash cow generates an enormous amount of income for Florida's economy. Disney is the largest single site employer in Florida. Governor Scott released 2015 tourism numbers at Disney for a reason.

Remember that old adage, what's good for GM is good for the country? (the actual quote is what's good for the country is also good for GM). Same thing applies to Disney and the State of Florida. Its a very symbiotic relationship.

My comment about removing Walt's name was just an aside, not the major point of my post.

Yes, but, as an aside it really only sounded like it was really happening. I remember the GM thing, however, General Motors and the affiliated companies that were implicated in that same statement are not Disney. Nor do they have the same responsibility toward the public as companies that in many ways have become a necessary part of our lives. Things we cannot do without. That original turned out to be not true in the complete sense, but, it surely doesn't apply to a totally, completely and unarguably luxury business. Unless they pass a law that states that we have to go there on a regular basis and we have to shell out money for those extras whether we want them or not, it just isn't the same thing. They operate under a completely different set of rules and are there only as long as the public willingly supports them. They are not food, clothing, shelter and transportation. They are strictly a leisure time hobby with no consequence to most of us personally, if they went under tomorrow. The market for that type of establishment would still be there and someone new with better long range vision would take their place. It is amazing just how much power we have if we decide to exercise it. It's just that we want to see Mickey (sob) (sob). So we have to pay what they ask or we lose our recreation fix.

I know about the history, but, that is history. Disney is no longer in that position. They only have that control if we give it to them. Other then a small amount of boredom we would all survive if they weren't there anymore. All those employees are pretty much people that came in from other states and countries. They will just go back home or someone else will step up, use Walt's old business plan and except for the inflation factor will once again be on top. That would have happened if Sony had bought the place. It is a cash cow and has been one for many years. It has very little chance of being bought up and sold in pieces. It's real value is as a whole. Florida was a tourist destination long before Walt bought the swamp. Remember they have some pretty sizable beach frontage.

 

[LAKid53]

Yes, but, as an aside it really only sounded like it was really happening. I remember the GM thing, however, General Motors and the affiliated companies that were implicated in that same statement are not Disney. Nor do they have the same responsibility toward the public as companies that in many ways have become a necessary part of our lives. Things we cannot do without. That original turned out to be not true in the complete sense, but, it surely doesn't apply to a totally, completely and unarguably luxury business. Unless they pass a law that states that we have to go there on a regular basis and we have to shell out money for those extras whether we want them or not, it just isn't the same thing. They operate under a completely different set of rules and are there only as long as the public willingly supports them. They are not food, clothing, shelter and transportation. They are strictly a leisure time hobby with no consequence to most of us personally, if they went under tomorrow. The market for that type of establishment would still be there and someone new with better long range vision would take their place. It is amazing just how much power we have if we decide to exercise it. It's just that we want to see Mickey (sob) (sob). So we have to pay what they ask or we lose our recreation fix.

I know about the history, but, that is history. Disney is no longer in that position. They only have that control if we give it to them. Other then a small amount of boredom we would all survive if they weren't there anymore. All those employees are pretty much people that came in from other states and countries. They will just go back home or someone else will step up, use Walt's old business plan and except for the inflation factor will once again be on top. That would have happened if Sony had bought the place. It is a cash cow and has been one for many years. It has very little chance of being bought up and sold in pieces. It's real value is as a whole. Florida was a tourist destination long before Walt bought the swamp. Remember they have some pretty sizable beach frontage.

Yeah, I know, I've lived in Florida 50 years..longer than WDW has been here. Tourism in Florida pre-Disney was a lot different than it is now. Most tourists were winter visitors and Spring breakers and ended up along the East Coast or Sarasota. Central Florida was, well, just swamps and orange groves, with a few cities like Orlando, Ocala and Gainesville. To go east/west or south from where I live, had to take 90 or 27 - there was no I-10 until the late 1970s.

I have a question. Why are you even on this board? You clearly have no interest in WDW since you've stated in many posts repeatedly that you've not visited in a long time. And have no interest in ever visiting again. You constantly berate Disney as a luxury item and people are foolish to spend money there. You don't even live in Florida, so you really don't have any idea how important it is to the state's economy. Yes, I know a visit to Disney isn't a necessity of life. But what people choose to do with their disposable income, after covering the necessities, is no one's business but theirs. They could decide to gamble, buy drugs, drink whiskey, play the stock market, travel or whatever gives them joy - okay the drugs, alcohol and gambling aren't the best of choices. But it's their business, not mine (okay as a Florida resident, I will admit to an interest in their visiting Florida and spending money) and certainly not yours.

And once again you've missed the point of my posts. I'm looking at Disney from a business perspective, given my education and the years I've spent working in Florida, the last 10 as a manager. I'm looking at the current management team, the decisions they are making for profitability, both short and long term, with respects to an asset that generates a significant portion of their bottom line. One that I see as a frequent visitor. And I am troubled. Why? Because until recently, I didn't see an investment for the long term. And some bad decisions, like an investment in limited wearable technology that was expensive, over budget and may not have been the best ROI. I see a VP over Parks and Resorts with a merchandise background...and an explosion in merchandise and upcharged events for short term profits. Yes, people have become entitled and Disney, as the huge brand it is, wants to tap into that. I see an increase in room capacity, but not at a pricing level many guests can afford. I see Disney constantly regigering the existing footprint of the parks to add more and thus increase crowding...never thinking to expand the footprint of a park that is desperate need of more square footage before adding more attractions. I see $600 tacky looking tents shoved into a park. While employees, those folks we interact with every time we visit, making pretty poor wages at the largest entertainment company in the world.

And I watch a company on the other side of town that doesn't have the same brand identity add attractions, hotels, a new water park - all very nicely done and in a time frame Disney can only dream of. Diagon Alley is really nice and the new Kong ride - Uni hit it out of the park. How long did it take Disney to complete the hub renovations? And what is Disney doing? Overlaying beloved rides with an IP Bob spent a lot of money on...and can't use most of the characters in that big park east of the Mississippi because that park across town holds an exclusive and in perpetuity contract for use of those characters. So he has to settle for an Iron Man overlay on the monorail that doesn't enter a park. While Uni is talking Marvel land. And laughing....

I see management more concerned with Wall Street and operations that increase share prices short term. But that's sadly typical of much of corporate world.

Trust me, I want Disney to succeed and grow and be here for the long term. Not just because I like to visit, but because as a Florida residents, I'd really like to see an important sector of our state's economy do well. Keeps my taxes low.

 

[toolsnspools]

Is this a trick question?

Nope. It's an opportunity to be thoughtful about why a CEO is very highly compensated. I wouldn't take the job for $90 Million. It's pretty easy to see a large salary and dismiss it as gluttony. I don't see it that way...

 

[Goofyernmost]

@LAKid53, it seems to me that we are arguing the same thing. I am aware that they haven't kept up and I am also unhappy about that because now that they are, by the time they get it done there is a better then even chance I will be to old to really enjoy it. I have to question your age though. You lived in Florida for 50 years before WDW even existed? Wouldn't that make you about 95 years old, give or take?

Just kidding, I understand your concern, but, really, what you are saying is that we cannot control it by not spending there and I'm saying that no one can force them to do it in the manner that we think it should be? Why then are we discussing it. None of us really likes what they have been doing, but, they have been doing it and there is absolutely nothing that we can do about that. I still maintain that we cannot compare a luxury, playtime resort to regular commercial business. There business is completely different and not dependent on any physical need, just emotional. They cannot get rid of the Disney moniker (even though I know that wasn't your point) because that is not just an important part of the appeal, but, it is the only real draw that they have. We long timers look at is as we remember it from years ago. That memory may or may not be influence by time and reality, however, even if it were all true, the current new people do not have that point of memory reference and they are still packing them in with no real tangible signs of it slowing up any significant amount.

As a business person I'm sure that you realize that when you are expanding as massively as Disney has over the last few years, you have tied up a lot of capital either in actual investment or collateral. The cash cows, as we have so wonderfully named them, DL and WDW, have been sacrificed because they were maintaining income without substantial investment during that time. They are currently spending billions there, but, to so many, that's not enough. I think that considering the circumstances this is the first time that they have actually been running the place like a business should be run. Spending on capital investments and at the same time spacing it out and staying with some reasonable plan to minimize outward cash flow.

Considering the transportation alternatives of 40+ years ago were so much different then today, to state that the tourist traffic was smaller. Yes, of course it was, for one thing there wasn't much there to see. I remember as a teenager in the early 1960's going to Florida and seeing things like Silver Springs, Cyprus Gardens, Gator-land, Weeki Wachee Springs, Marineland, Daytona Beach, The Florida Keys, Historic St. Augustine,The Everglades and so on. Disney... no but, it was still a comparatively popular spot. With todays more dependable and larger variety of transportation possibilities it would still be fairly good, but, all the desire in the world of the government of Florida will not save it if they don't continue to keep people coming. I, like you, feel the same way, but, again neither you or I are running the company nor do we have even an iota of influence.

As for no interest. I have been going there steadily since 1983... 45 visits to be exact and most of them from Vermont. That in itself is an average of over once a year. I was there in February of 2015 and missed 2016 because I went to Europe instead. But, I did go to Disneyland Paris while I was there. Does that count?

 

[LAKid53]

Nope. It's an opportunity to be thoughtful about why a CEO is very highly compensated. I wouldn't take the job for $90 Million. It's pretty easy to see a large salary and dismiss it as gluttony. I don't see it that way...

Okay, then, I'll answer...

I've earned enough and wisely invested so that means me, my significant other, our children and their children and successive generations will be secure financially, provided no financial catastrophe occurs, like another 1929.

If I've already not done so, I'm buying about 100 acres somewhere out West - Northern California (but not the crazy part up past Eureka), Oregon, Washington, Wyoming, Montana. Gonna build a nice log home, with views of the mountains, ocean, whatever the stunning view is. Will try to clear as little land as possible to build my home, put up a barn for some horses, grow some food, raise chickens, cows, goats, probably about 5 acres. The rest would remain undeveloped. I'd learn to ski, fish and maybe hunt, if I don't already know how. I'd learn to brew my own beer.

I'd tell myself and my significant other that I'm done. My creative juices have been spent. I want to spend what time I have left on this planet with the ones I love and who really matter...in some of the most beautiful country in our nation. I'd be happy as a clam, peaceful, and content. But there'd better be a Costco within 100 miles...and Amazon has to be able to deliver to my oasis.

That's my slice of heaven....

 

[LAKid53]

@LAKid53, it seems to me that we are arguing the same thing. I am aware that they haven't kept up and I am also unhappy about that because now that they are, by the time they get it done there is a better then even chance I will be to old to really enjoy it. I have to question your age though. You lived in Florida for 50 years before WDW even existed? Wouldn't that make you about 95 years old, give or take?

Just kidding, I understand your concern, but, really, what you are saying is that we cannot control it by not spending there and I'm saying that no one can force them to do it in the manner that we think it should be? Why then are we discussing it. None of us really likes what they have been doing, but, they have been doing it and there is absolutely nothing that we can do about that. I still maintain that we cannot compare a luxury, playtime resort to regular commercial business. There business is completely different and not dependent on any physical need, just emotional. They cannot get rid of the Disney moniker (even though I know that wasn't your point) because that is not just an important part of the appeal, but, it is the only real draw that they have. We long timers look at is as we remember it from years ago. That memory may or may not be influence by time and reality, however, even if it were all true, the current new people do not have that point of memory reference and they are still packing them in with no real tangible signs of it slowing up any significant amount.

As a business person I'm sure that you realize that when you are expanding as massively as Disney has over the last few years, you have tied up a lot of capital either in actual investment or collateral. The cash cows, as we have so wonderfully named them, DL and WDW, have been sacrificed because they were maintaining income without substantial investment during that time. They are currently spending billions there, but, to so many, that's not enough. I think that considering the circumstances this is the first time that they have actually been running the place like a business should be run. Spending on capital investments and at the same time spacing it out and staying with some reasonable plan to minimize outward cash flow.

Considering the transportation alternatives of 40+ years ago were so much different then today, to state that the tourist traffic was smaller. Yes, of course it was, for one thing there wasn't much there to see. I remember as a teenager in the early 1960's going to Florida and seeing things like Silver Springs, Cyprus Gardens, Gator-land, Weeki Wachee Springs, Marineland, Daytona Beach, The Florida Keys, Historic St. Augustine,The Everglades and so on. Disney... no but, it was still a comparatively popular spot. With todays more dependable and larger variety of transportation possibilities it would still be fairly good, but, all the desire in the world of the government of Florida will not save it if they don't continue to keep people coming. I, like you, feel the same way, but, again neither you or I are running the company nor do we have even an iota of influence.

As for no interest. I have been going there steadily since 1983... 45 visits to be exact and most of them from Vermont. That in itself is an average of over once a year. I was there in February of 2015 and missed 2016 because I went to Europe instead. But, I did go to Disneyland Paris while I was there. Does that count?

I've lived in Florida since 1966 - WDW arrived in 1971, so I've been in Florida 5 years longer. But I moved as a teenager, not an adult. I'm probably about the same age as you.

Look, I'm glad to see Disney finally investing in the parks...both DLR and WDW...they've let languish. Is it because the condition of both, especially WDW, made them realize it's desperately needed? Or did the success of Universal's expansion give Iger and crew pause? A billion is an enormous capital investment. My hope is that who ever replaces Iger understands that ongoing investment in the parks, not just routine PO&M, is critical to the long term health of those parks, the company and the economy of Florida, with regards to WDW. Because I don't want to be back on this board as we approach the 75th anniversary of WDW discussing how management once again made stupid decisions like tents in parks for $6000 and After Hours EMH for $1000, while the park declined....because with my family's genes, I won't be here. But then, I won't care....

 

[xdan0920]

This poor SoB is only making 121k a day. Golly, it's so sad.

 

[BrerJon]

Where are the 'Disney is a business!' people, always making out like the company is on the poverty line, desperately excusing them as having to make cutbacks to survive... how do they square that with Iger's salary payments?

 

[toolsnspools]

Okay, then, I'll answer...

I've earned enough and wisely invested so that means me, my significant other, our children and their children and successive generations will be secure financially, provided no financial catastrophe occurs, like another 1929.

If I've already not done so, I'm buying about 100 acres somewhere out West - Northern California (but not the crazy part up past Eureka), Oregon, Washington, Wyoming, Montana. Gonna build a nice log home, with views of the mountains, ocean, whatever the stunning view is. Will try to clear as little land as possible to build my home, put up a barn for some horses, grow some food, raise chickens, cows, goats, probably about 5 acres. The rest would remain undeveloped. I'd learn to ski, fish and maybe hunt, if I don't already know how. I'd learn to brew my own beer.

I'd tell myself and my significant other that I'm done. My creative juices have been spent. I want to spend what time I have left on this planet with the ones I love and who really matter...in some of the most beautiful country in our nation. I'd be happy as a clam, peaceful, and content. But there'd better be a Costco within 100 miles...and Amazon has to be able to deliver to my oasis.

That's my slice of heaven....

Good plan. It sounds like an incredible retirement.

Don't worry, an Amazon drone will be delivering toilet paper before you know it.

 

[LAKid53]

Good plan. It sounds like an incredible retirement.

Don't worry, an Amazon drone will be delivering toilet paper before you know it.

Funny you should say that, but they deliver my toilet paper now....along with laundry soap, hand soap, cat food, dish detergent, etc., etc. Love their Subscribe & Save option. If and when they start fresh groceries delivery in my area, I'll never have to leave my house!

 

[MagicHappens1971]

I don't know if it's been mentioned but it was reported that Disney spent $800,000 on security for Bob Iger in 2016.

Maybe just me but that sounds extremely unnecessary.

 

[LAKid53]

Maybe just me but that sounds extremely unnecessary.

You don't think criminal groups wouldn't consider kidnapping the CEO of a large multi-national like TWDC for a hefty ransom? I discount terrorist organizations because they'd want to do something with a much bigger impact.

This is the world we now live in.

 

[draybook]

It's your job to make sure 195K people don't lose their jobs tomorrow. You have to manage a global company with operations around the world. You're in charge of making sure wacko's don't blow up a park, making sure the employee's don't do something that will put you in jail, or put phallic symbols in your kids movies, or snap behind a furry outfit and hurt a child, or get themselves killed working on a theme park ride, or that something completely out of the blue, like an alligator attacking and killing a child, doesn't happen... and when it does, because this is life and it will, you will have to answer for it.

You have to keep stockholders happy, theme park guests happy, employees happy, the board of directors happy, the movie goers happy, the contractors happy and the union happy. You have to foster vision in the company so people can be creative and foster responsibility so they don't sink the company with their creativity. You will spend the better part of your year travelling, and when you do get a chance to spend time with your family, it will have to be someplace private, because everyone knows your face and your name. Your company will have to spend almost $1 Million dollars a year, just to keep you safe.

You already have more than enough money to retire in complete comfort for yourself and future generations of your family, so whatever salary you're paid is not personally necessary. You have the option to take a $45 Million/year salary or retire. Which will you do?

Lol @ blowing up the park.

 

[ParentsOf4]

You already have more than enough money to retire in complete comfort for yourself and future generations of your family, so whatever salary you're paid is not personally necessary. You have the option to take a $45 Million/year salary or retire. Which will you do?

Running a multibillion dollar organization in which a lot of famous Hollywood stars and captains of industry fawn all over you is more about ego than money.

 

[toolsnspools]

Running a multibillion dollar organization in which a lot of famous Hollywood stars and captains of industry fawn all over you is more about ego than money.

It's certainly part of the equation... especially with Bob.

 

[Bandini]

Running a multibillion dollar organization in which a lot of famous Hollywood stars and captains of industry fawn all over you is more about ego than money.

Great. So why not cut Iger's salary to a measly 5 million/year?

 

[LAKid53]

Great. So why not cut Iger's salary to a measly 5 million/year?

Because he wouldn't tolerate that - and quit. Oh, wait....

 

[Phil12]

He's most likely grooming Bob Chapek as his replacement.

 

[LAKid53]

He's most likely grooming Bob Chapek as his replacement.

 

[ford91exploder]

Nope. It's an opportunity to be thoughtful about why a CEO is very highly compensated. I wouldn't take the job for $90 Million. It's pretty easy to see a large salary and dismiss it as gluttony. I don't see it that way...

No it's a chance to question why US executives are grossly overcompensated relative to their European and Asian counterparts who manage to make a profit while not laying of thousands of workers at the drop of a hat and who have to deal with mandatory vacations of 2-8 weeks.