In regards to Michael Eisner

[Magenta Panther]

I am sorry.. but I highly disagree with that last statement..

Eisner BEFORE Wells death.. May be second to Walt.. but Walts vision and having a won't TAKE NO FOR AN ANSWER attitude made all the difference..

Good heavens, yes. I don't think anyone becomes a Disney fan because of its corporate success. I think people become Disney fans because of what Walt built, what he believed in, and the risks he took to create visionary and uplifting entertainment. Even if people, especially young kids, have no idea who Walt was, his creations still inspire and delight them. The parks exist because of Walt. They were very successful during his lifetime. For me personally, Walt's the glue.

 

[devoy1701]

I have to disagree. While the sharp downturn on travel after 2001 had nothing to do with Eisner, the cost-cutting measures he forced onto the parks had begun way before then, and the damage is still being undone.

I agree 100% Eisner spearheaded a huge expansion of WDW from 1984 to 1994, but by 1995 it's clear his mind was on other things. It was around this time Disney acquired ABC and Miramax and I think these properties must have seemed new and exciting to Eisner, as well as safer playgrounds given his movie exec background and recent theme park failures.

By the late 90s he slashed budgets when building Animal Kingdom and California Adventure, and the people he placed in charge of the parks were rewarded more and more as they found ways to spend less and less on maintaining the parks.

I just wanted to point out that Walt was the exact same way. He would run with an idea and make it amazing, but when it was completed or finalized or he came up with another idea, his interest completely wanned from that first idea and he focused solely on the next. That was true from moving from cartoon shorts for full length animation, and from moving to animation to live action, from running his studio to his Disneyana project and his model trains, to building Disneyland. He even shifted his focus dramatically away from Disneyland to focus on other venture of changing society, different ideas of themed resorts, and eventually the Florida Project.

I agree with the comment that Michael Eisner was just as creative as Walt, and overall I think Eisner was a much more well rounded business leader than Walt ever was. I'm still not sure what I think of Iger, I'll pass judgement after FLE and California Adventure reboot. But I am very greatful for Eisner's tenure and accomplishments.

 

[leighann]

Im probably repeating what has already been said numerous times, but its definetly true. Eisner saved Disney...but after Frank Wells died, it seemed as if he unconciously set out to destroy it. I would never compare anyone to Walt EVER (even though I do like to call Lanchester Mini-Walt), Eisner was no Walt, and never could be. But they made a great team, Frank and Eisner - just like Walt and Roy. I think its pretty well known that Roy kept the company stable, while Walt was the creative think tank. I think Eisner and Wells worked in a similiar balancing act. So once Wells left, it fell apart. Its like Eisner forgot what Disney was and stood for and especially how to run it. Some of the things he did after Wells died would leave Walt spinning in his grave, in my opinion. I think the reason people have such hostility for him is because of that - and because he saved something and then almost destroyed it again. Really, destroyed almost, all the hard work HE did. Also, he looks kinda evil, no?

 

[flavious27]

I just wanted to point out that Walt was the exact same way. He would run with an idea and make it amazing, but when it was completed or finalized or he came up with another idea, his interest completely wanned from that first idea and he focused solely on the next. That was true from moving from cartoon shorts for full length animation, and from moving to animation to live action, from running his studio to his Disneyana project and his model trains, to building Disneyland. He even shifted his focus dramatically away from Disneyland to focus on other venture of changing society, different ideas of themed resorts, and eventually the Florida Project.

I agree with the comment that Michael Eisner was just as creative as Walt, and overall I think Eisner was a much more well rounded business leader than Walt ever was. I'm still not sure what I think of Iger, I'll pass judgement after FLE and California Adventure reboot. But I am very greatful for Eisner's tenure and accomplishments.

Walt was not the business guy for his company, roy sr was.

 

[devoy1701]

Walt was not the business guy for his company, roy sr was.

no kidding...Disney 101. And Frank was Mike's Roy and acted in the same capacity. But they were both still the leaders of the company, and in that regard, Eiser was more qualified. The thing with Walt was that when he was done with a project and moved on to a new one, he basically left the last project or other areas of the company to fend for itself without any input from him.

 

[bjlc57]

let me say this.. last night ABC programing.. a VERY SHREK Christmas..

it just tells you that Disney has to buy what sells.. instead of ALREADY OWNING IT..

 

[Enchantâmes]

let me say this.. last night ABC programing.. a VERY SHREK Christmas..

it just tells you that Disney has to buy what sells.. instead of ALREADY OWNING IT..

Ok I'm sorry but no matter how much you like Shrek it would have never been a Disney Film. (Period) :wave:

 

[Krack]

Ok I'm sorry but no matter how much you like Shrek it would have never been a Disney Film. (Period) :wave:

Why? Disney doesn't like making money?

 

[THEMEPARKPIONEER]

Im probably repeating what has already been said numerous times, but its definetly true. Eisner saved Disney...but after Frank Wells died, it seemed as if he unconciously set out to destroy it. I would never compare anyone to Walt EVER (even though I do like to call Lanchester Mini-Walt), Eisner was no Walt, and never could be. But they made a great team, Frank and Eisner - just like Walt and Roy. I think its pretty well known that Roy kept the company stable, while Walt was the creative think tank. I think Eisner and Wells worked in a similiar balancing act. So once Wells left, it fell apart. Its like Eisner forgot what Disney was and stood for and especially how to run it. Some of the things he did after Wells died would leave Walt spinning in his grave, in my opinion. I think the reason people have such hostility for him is because of that - and because he saved something and then almost destroyed it again. Really, destroyed almost, all the hard work HE did. Also, he looks kinda evil, no?

:sohappy: When wells was in charge disney was great. Allot of my most favorite attractions came to life when he was in office.

 

[flavious27]

let me say this.. last night ABC programing.. a VERY SHREK Christmas..

it just tells you that Disney has to buy what sells.. instead of ALREADY OWNING IT..

So you would want Mickey's Christmas Carol, Mickey's Magical Christmas, Mickey's Once Upon and Twice Upon a Christmas instead? Does ABC show those and the santa clause movies this time of the year anyway?

 

[flavious27]

Why? Disney doesn't like making money?

Walking through the parks you should know that Disney loves to make money. But Disney wouldn't have been able to make the shrek films in their present form or any other form. Eisner ed off Spielberg after roger rabbit, along with Disney not having a cgi animation studio until they produced chicken little in 2005. Along with that, the relationship with Pixar could have been soured if Eisner did not think he needed pixar anymore.

Now it would be interesting what the contract with dreamworks and universal studios is. A shrek land could be doable, either in DHS ( with some serious expansion and reworking of South Studio Drive) or in the oft-rumored 5th gate.

 

[xdan0920]

Just breezed through DisneyWars.

I came way with the overwhelming feeling that without Roy Jr, Disney would not even be recognizable.

Eisner was in his early days as CEO a perfect fit for Disney. Wells made a great foil for him, and things worked out wonderfully. Things were deteriorating before the death of Wells. In my opinion his death just sped things up some. Eisner needed to be removed after 10 years on the job, not 20. Unfortunately he was left in charge for far too long, and we are just now beginning to emerge from the malaise he hoisted upon the company.

The first major step was the acquisition of PIXAR. That brought John Lasseter back to us. Since that moment, things have been on a dramatic upswing. I do not see this as a coincidence.

My only worry going forward is that there is no more Roy to rescue the company. There is no one with the Disney name in the public eye to come to the rescue if management takes a turn for the worst. We just have to hope that Lasseter is who he seems to be. Which is a caretaker of the Disney name, and a creative genius. I hope he can be like Walt.

 

[flavious27]

Just breezed through DisneyWars.

I came way with the overwhelming feeling that without Roy Jr, Disney would not even be recognizable.

Eisner was in his early days as CEO a perfect fit for Disney. Wells made a great foil for him, and things worked out wonderfully. Things were deteriorating before the death of Wells. In my opinion his death just sped things up some. Eisner needed to be removed after 10 years on the job, not 20. Unfortunately he was left in charge for far too long, and we are just now beginning to emerge from the malaise he hoisted upon the company.

The first major step was the acquisition of PIXAR. That brought John Lasseter back to us. Since that moment, things have been on a dramatic upswing. I do not see this as a coincidence.

My only worry going forward is that there is no more Roy to rescue the company. There is no one with the Disney name in the public eye to come to the rescue if management takes a turn for the worst. We just have to hope that Lasseter is who he seems to be. Which is a caretaker of the Disney name, and a creative genius. I hope he can be like Walt.

Yes Roy followed in his father's footsteps to keep the family business stable. I do feel that the disney in the late 70's will never happen again, though the disney in the early part of this decade can happen again, though it won't bankrupt the financial side of the company. Roy does have children, and nothing would stop them or a non-disney employee from being the new evangelist for the disney brand.

 

[spock]

Eisner is probably more responsible than anyone for fighting off the takeover threats.

Actually there were two big takeover threats against Disney in the early 80's (first by Saul Steinberg and then by Irwin Jacobs) and both happened prior to Eisner taking the job. Those events led to the ouster of Card Walker and Ron Miller, which eventually led to the hiring of Michael Eisner. The events are connected, so a lot of people get the chronology confused and assume Eisner was responsible for fighting off the takeover attempts, but that's not correct. Technically, the Bass Brothers "saved" Disney by buying up a large amount of the stock and committing to not sell any of it for a specified number of years. That scared off any potential corporate raiders from attempting any further takeovers, thus allowing Michael Eisner and Frank Wells to focus on re-building the company without having to worry about any takeover attempts. All of this is well documented in a variety of sources including the book, Storming the Magic Kingdom.