Is the reign of Micheal Eisner under appreciated?

[menamechris]

Heh? They didn't "walk out" on Walt, they worked for another producer back in the 20's when they did some animation together.

Well, not QUITE that simple. There's lots of reading about the relationships Walt had with the animators. Ub Iwerks, who was said to be one of Walt's best friends, had a very turbulent working relationship with Walt. He DID walk out - started his own studio - and worked for competitors (including the creators of Looney Tunes). Not to mention the animators' strike. The list goes on.... Walt was amazing at what he did, but he did do exactly what people are accusing Eisner of doing.

 

[misterID]

Well, not QUITE that simple. There's lots of reading about the relationships Walt had with the animators. Ub Iwerks, who was said to be one of Walt's best friends, had a very turbulent working relationship with Walt. He DID walk out - started his own studio - and worked for competitors (including the creators of Looney Tunes). Not to mention the animators' strike. The list goes on.... Walt was amazing at what he did, but he did do exactly what people are accusing Eisner of doing.

You made it sound like Walt got rid of, or let the guys who started Looney Toons walk off, which isn't the case. They all worked for Universal before he started his own studio. This wasn't some big loss to Disney, he had nothing to do with Looney Toons. And Ub eventually went back to work for Disney after their falling out. That really wasn't the same... :lookaroun

 

[menamechris]

You made it sound like Walt got rid of, or let the guys who started Looney Toons walk off, which isn't the case. They all worked for Universal before he started his own studio. This wasn't some big loss to Disney, he had nothing to do with Looney Toons. And Ub eventually went back to work for Disney after their falling out. That really wasn't the same... :lookaroun

Yes, Ub did eventually return to Disney (whether friendship or ultimately the desire to work was the reason - who knows), but many biographers will say that their relationship was never the same. One thing that Walt didn't lack was a strong ego. If workers wanted to leave- or felt underappreciated or as if they didn't get enough credit - Walt showed them the door. He was not a negotiator or the least bit interested in appeasing his employees. He knew he had a great thing going on - and if his workers didn't realize they were part of it and happy about it, they were free to leave.

Seriously, there are several great books and biographies about all this. I have read a few, and they are great reads. I would encourage anyone to read up on this.

 

[Edeyore]

Just remember not all successful people are warm & fuzzy. The fact of the matter is that the company had some of it's greatest successes when Eisner was in charge.
My understanding of Walt is that he was not always the same Walt we saw on screen describing a new project or program.
The results for both can't be argued about.

 

[devoy1701]

Just remember not all successful people are warm & fuzzy. The fact of the matter is that the company had some of it's greatest successes when Eisner was in charge.
My understanding of Walt is that he was not always the same Walt we saw on screen describing a new project or program.
The results for both can't be argued about.

Correct. Walt's persona that we saw as a character. Perfected with years of practice.

from what you said they walked out, not fired,(correct me if im wrong ) so it was their choice to leave not Walt's. Walt could not force them to stay. Additionally Eisner fired people and they went to other companies

It was Walt's choice. They "walked" out because he failed to give them the respect and recognition that they felt they deserved.

Well, you've just shown what a failure Eisner was. When he was in charge, calling the shots, not only did he let some of his best workers go, but let them go to the competition and become successful, where they created projects that could have made Disney even more successful. His replacements were awful. On his own, without the guidence of others, he failed.

He never had the hands on involvement that Walt had and keeping the good guys around. I'm not comparing them and I'm not going to. The 2 were not even in the same universe. At all.

This is the bias opinions that I referred to early that people so blatently throw out. As I just wrote above, Walt failed to give MANY of his creative genuises the credit they were due, and alienated them on their projects, and stopped caring about the work they were doing as he moved on to work something else. Walt was very hands on, but he also had a one track mind. When he personally went to oversee a particular project, you could forget him caring about or making decisions on any other projects. So yes, while it was "their decision" to walk out, he set the storm for it to happen. And in many MANY cases Walt fired, or repositioned some of his best leaders when he felt they were taking on too many responsibilities or making too many decisions for the sole purpose of making it clear that HE was the ONE STOP decision maker of the company.

I don't want anyone to take me the wrong way and think that I hated Walt, but I understand that he had huge flaws in his one track mind and the way he ran the company. He was a creative genious however and was able to channel his thoughts and ideas through people who could make his ideas a reality. Eisner acted in very much the same way, except that he was not necessarily the one to come up with the ideas...he was more of the facilitator and vetter of those ideas. They were very much in the same league.

 

[captainkidd]

That's like saying all the credit show go to Roy...Walt on his own not so much. :shrug:

Exactly.

 

[DisneyFan 2000]

Lets just say, for argument's sake, that Walt and Eisner were bread of the same species. How does that make Eisner's actions anymore justifiable? Walt had one thing going that Eisner could never claim, it was Walt's company. Eisner was a CEO, and a pretty awful one towards the end. Wether similar to Walt or not is irrilevant to the fact that he failed to deliver and drove creative forces out the door just because of a supersized ego.

 

[MAF]

Eisner pretty much copied Universal by creating Disney Studios and copied Busch Gardens to come up with Animal Kingdom. IMO we could have gotten a lot better themed parks if it wasn't for Eisner.

 

[menamechris]

Eisner pretty much copied Universal by creating Disney Studios and copied Busch Gardens to come up with Animal Kingdom. IMO we could have gotten a lot better themed parks if it wasn't for Eisner.

No, we just wouldn't have other parks. I think we see how sluggish any real type of development has gotten at the resort since Eisner left. Eisner seemed to enjoy building things and enhancing the guest experience. Iger seems to like to buy and collect things.

 

[Jimmy Thick]

Eisner took over a company that was on the verge of being taken over and turned it into a 60 billion dollar conglomerate that has become a media power, that in itself far surpassed, business wise, anything Walt, Roy, Ron Miller, etc pulled off.

Granted it would not have even happened if not for Walt, I'll never dispute that, but Eisner with all his warts turned Disney into something that far surpassed anything Walt dreamed.



Jimmy Thick- oh my little wild one...

 

[Jimmy Thick]

Eisner pretty much copied Universal by creating Disney Studios and copied Busch Gardens to come up with Animal Kingdom. IMO we could have gotten a lot better themed parks if it wasn't for Eisner.

Disney would have gotten taken over by someone and all the individual parts would have been sold off for a hefty profit, Eisner was the one who made sure that didn't happen.


Jimmy Thick- guess who just got back today...

 

[menamechris]

Lets just say, for argument's sake, that Walt and Eisner were bread of the same species. How does that make Eisner's actions anymore justifiable? Walt had one thing going that Eisner could never claim, it was Walt's company. Eisner was a CEO, and a pretty awful one towards the end. Wether similar to Walt or not is irrilevant to the fact that he failed to deliver and drove creative forces out the door just because of a supersized ego.

To put simply - its corporate politics. It's not personal; it's business. And as a side note, I am not quite sure what Eisner failed to deliver on....

 

[Jimmy Thick]

To put simply - its corporate politics. It's not personal; it's business. And as a side note, I am not quite sure what Eisner failed to deliver on....

His biggest complaint was buying ABC for billions of dollars and how poorly ratings were at first. What was overlooked at the time was ESPN was included in the deal which was brilliant, and in time ABC came around to become viable and I believe the network has to be close to getting back the sale price since it was purchased, but Iam not certain.

If that is his biggest gripe as a businessman, thats rather shallow.

And he had a huge ego.


Jimmy Thick- and I shot him with both barrels...

 

[misterID]

Correct. Walt's persona that we saw as a character. Perfected with years of practice.



It was Walt's choice. They "walked" out because he failed to give them the respect and recognition that they felt they deserved.



This is the bias opinions that I referred to early that people so blatently throw out. As I just wrote above, Walt failed to give MANY of his creative genuises the credit they were due, and alienated them on their projects, and stopped caring about the work they were doing as he moved on to work something else. Walt was very hands on, but he also had a one track mind. When he personally went to oversee a particular project, you could forget him caring about or making decisions on any other projects. So yes, while it was "their decision" to walk out, he set the storm for it to happen. And in many MANY cases Walt fired, or repositioned some of his best leaders when he felt they were taking on too many responsibilities or making too many decisions for the sole purpose of making it clear that HE was the ONE STOP decision maker of the company.

I don't want anyone to take me the wrong way and think that I hated Walt, but I understand that he had huge flaws in his one track mind and the way he ran the company. He was a creative genious however and was able to channel his thoughts and ideas through people who could make his ideas a reality. Eisner acted in very much the same way, except that he was not necessarily the one to come up with the ideas...he was more of the facilitator and vetter of those ideas. They were very much in the same league.

How is whether or not Walt was or wasn't a task master, tough, a hard a$$ or not the nicest guy in the world have anything to do with this? If anyone deserved the credit after Walt died it was Roy E. Disney who brought Eisner and Wells together to save the company and make Disney what it once was. And he did. Mission accomplished. And when he saw Eisner's incompetence and his vain, arrogant, terrible decision making when he was left to his own devices, he was instrumental in outsting him and saving Disney again.

Eisner, on topic, gets way too much credit. The subject this "fake" thread, that is only meant to get the OP the desperate attention that he and his many other usernames/buddies needs, is about Eisner alone.

Whatever your problems with Walt are are your own and not a part of what we're talking about. History shows what Walt accomplished and what Eisner didn't. Eisner did good with help. He did nothing on his own and never had the creative accoplishments involving, running Disney that Walt did. Comparing the 2 is ridiculous.

"Eisner acted in very much the same way, except that he was not necessarily the one to come up with the ideas...he was more of the facilitator and vetter of those ideas. They were very much in the same league."

That's a HUGE difference. They were not in the same league. Ever.

Again, this isn't what my opinions are from things I've read. My father delt with Eisner before and after Wells died. We knew the people that worked with them. And it's not a bunch of people on a message board slagging poor, innocent, mistreated, misunderstood, Michael "the appart genius" Eisner. It's coming from people who worked for him.

 

[menamechris]

How is whether or not Walt was or wasn't a task master, tough, a hard a$$ or not the nicest guy in the world have anything to do with this? If anyone deserved the credit after Walt died it was Roy E. Disney who brought Eisner and Wells together to save the company and make Disney what it once was. And he did. Mission accomplished. And when he saw Eisner's incompetence and his vain, arrogant, terrible decision making when he was left to his own devices, he was instrumental in outsting him and saving Disney again.

Eisner, on topic, gets way too much credit. The fact that this "fake" thread that is only meant to get the OP the desperate attention that he and his many other usernames/buddies needs, is about Eisner alone.

Whatever your problems with Walt are are your own and not a part of what we're talking about. History shows what Walt accomplished and what Eisner didn't. Eisner did good with help. He did nothing on his own and never had the creative accoplishments involving, running Disney that Walt did. Comparing the 2 is ridiculous.

That's a HUGE difference. They were not in the same league. Ever.

Again, this isn't what my opinions are from things I've read. My father delt with Eisner before and after Wells died. We knew the people that worked with them. And it's not a bunch of people on a message board slagging poor, innocent, mistreated, misunderstood, Michael "the appart genius" Eisner. It's coming from people who worked for him.

After reading this - I think you build Walt up a little bit too much - and kick Eisner down a little too much. It's somewhere in the middle on both.... You seem to have a personal feeling or belief about it. I really don't - it is what it is. Whoever did, said, thought, whatever - it doesn't matter at this point. That's the difference. Seeing something for what it is - or being emotionally caught up in it..

 

[devoy1701]

How is whether or not Walt was or wasn't a task master, tough, a hard a$$ or not the nicest guy in the world have anything to do with this? If anyone deserved the credit after Walt died it was Roy E. Disney who brought Eisner and Wells together to save the company and make Disney what it once was. And he did. Mission accomplished. And when he saw Eisner's incompetence and his vain, arrogant, terrible decision making when he was left to his own devices, he was instrumental in outsting him and saving Disney again.

Eisner, on topic, gets way too much credit. The fact that this "fake" thread that is only meant to get the OP the desperate attention that he and his many other usernames/buddies needs, is about Eisner alone.

Whatever your problems with Walt are are your own and not a part of what we're talking about. History shows what Walt accomplished and what Eisner didn't. Eisner did good with help. He did nothing on his own and never had the creative accoplishments involving, running Disney that Walt did. Comparing the 2 is ridiculous.

"Eisner acted in very much the same way, except that he was not necessarily the one to come up with the ideas...he was more of the facilitator and vetter of those ideas. They were very much in the same league."

That's a HUGE difference. They were not in the same league. Ever.

Again, this isn't what my opinions are from things I've read. My father delt with Eisner before and after Wells died. We knew the people that worked with them. And it's not a bunch of people on a message board slagging poor, innocent, mistreated, misunderstood, Michael "the appart genius" Eisner. It's coming from people who worked for him.

I like how you shrug off points that you brought up. In your earlier post you mentioned that Eisner "never had the hands on involvement that Walt had and keeping the good guys around." I pointed out that Walt actually didn't have that skill either and now you say it's irrelavent? How is it irrelevent when it was Eisner's ego that lead to his demise? They both were very similar in terms of personality traits, so to say it was his ego and need to ultimate control over everything was Eisner's problem, it was Walt's too.

I'm not sure why you deleted it from your post but you keep mentioning the employee's that "didn't walk out on Walt because they had no choice as they were under contract with Universal." However those employees were asked to signed with Universal and were given better pay to entice them away, they had a choice (I believe Ub was the only to remain). But I am referring to many MANY more employees throughout the history of the Disney Company under Walt's reign that left the company, or were fired, or repositioned because of run ins with Walt and his desire for ultimate power.

And no offense to your father, but his retelling of events is no better than biographies or interviews of the whole ordeal. If your father or anything he knew that worked with Eisner got burned once, of course they would recall him as being a horrible person, much like if someone (like Iger) who benefited from decisions made by Eisner, I'm sure he would recall his leadership as being great for the most part.

Sounds like you need to expand your readings to include arguments and observations from both sides, not just go off of the recollection of your father.

 

[Jimmy Thick]

Eisner, on topic, gets way too much credit. The fact that this "fake" thread that is only meant to get the OP the desperate attention that he and his many other usernames/buddies needs, is about Eisner alone.

How is it a "fake" thread when its a thread about the importance of Eisner and what he accomplished while in charge and the besmirching of said accomplishments? No one forced you to post in it or offer any kind of opinion, if thats too much for you, feel free to post elsewhere. I feel Eisner was the right choice for the job at the time, even Frank Wells agreed as both were offered the job and Wells kowtowed to Eisner.

Again, this isn't what my opinions are from things I've read. My father delt with Eisner before and after Wells died. We knew the people that worked with them. And it's not a bunch of people on a message board slagging poor, innocent, mistreated, misunderstood, Michael "the appart genius" Eisner. It's coming from people who worked for him.

And how was Disney before Eisner showed up? How was your "father" and all these people you know, [/sarc], how was their attitude and morale about the future and direction of the company then?

Eisner had a great supporting staff, so did Walt, but they were the ones who pulled the actual trigger for their time, no one else.

And there are many great articles and books about how Eisner WAS good for the company, but that seems to get lost due to the fact he tended to rub people the wrong way.

No matter what you might possibly think, you or these people you know, don't know the entire story, but facts are what was accomplished during Eisner's reign, and those facts speak volumes.


Jimmy Thick- Pardon me sir, it looks like another clown car just pulled up...

 

[DisneyFan 2000]

To put simply - its corporate politics. It's not personal; it's business. And as a side note, I am not quite sure what Eisner failed to deliver on....

To name a few: Successful theme parks (see: California Adventure, Walt Disney Studios) profitable and favorable movies, namely in the animation department (see: Home on the Range, Brother Bear, Chicken Little) oh, and the successes he did deliver on were far from being to his credit. Did you know he wanted to change Depp's character in PotC for being too flamboyant, and risked being perceived as a "gay" character? Did you know he declared Lost and Finding Nemo flops before even being released and even fired some of the people responsible for Lost's pilot. Oh, did I mention his passing on a Lord of the Rings feature film? And need I remind anyone how he failed to keep the most loyal of people in the company or do we need to relive how he made the board of directors vote for the rule that no member can be allowed above the age of 73, which just so happened to be Roy Disney's age at the time?

 

[devoy1701]

After reading this - I think you build Walt up a little bit too much - and kick Eisner down a little too much. It's somewhere in the middle on both.... You seem to have a personal feeling or belief about it. I really don't - it is what it is. Whoever did, said, thought, whatever - it doesn't matter at this point. That's the difference. Seeing something for what it is - or being emotionally caught up in it..

agreed. this was the point I brought up in the end of my previous comment. I am in no way calling his father a liar, but people are going to remember events how they want to based on how it effected them. If his father's career, or those friends of his father who knew and worked with Eisner, grew by leaps and bounds because of the way Eisner managed (if his career was that interlaced), i'm sure they would recall Eisner as a great leader and say that he is misunderstood by the public. If they were sidestepped, burned, or left out to hang, i'm sure their opinion would be the opposite. He needs to read books about both sides of the situation.

lastly, in corporate related issues, there is always a scapegoat...someone is always to blame for the problems of a company, in this case it was Eisner. I am not saying it wasn't rightfully so, I'm just stating a fact.

 

[ajt5027]

Here is why I respect Michael Eisner. Near the end of his run Comcast made a hostile takeover bid, Roy E. had already left the Board and started his campaign to get Eisner out. Lets face it Eisner knew his days at Disney were over, but instead of letting Comcast takeover Disney, which would have resulted in very lucrative stock options for Eisner, he fought very hard because he knew what was in the best interest of the Walt Disney Company.

Besides all that he did for the company, and the bad choices he made towards the end, this is why I ultimately respect Eisner.