New Walt Disney World logo,

[COProgressFan]

Once again that isn't true. Look at DCA... Buena Vista Street is all Walt. Additionally, there was an article in the Wall Street Journal about Tim Cook (Apple's CEO) and he spoke on following Steve Jobs and the advice Jobs gave him. To sum it up... Jobs, who sat on Disney's board until the end of his life told him to be himself and use his own creativity. He referenced his experiences with Disney and how he believed there was too much talk of what Walt would do in executive meetings. Jobs believed if you tried too hard to emulate another person's vision and creativity, you'd stagnate your own and never truly achieve theirs. Although the point was made for other reasons, I think it shows that Walt still is highly regarded within the company. They may have changed the logo on films but they aren't cleansing themselves of Walt. The reasoning provided in my previous post was the one I found when researching this change.

Here's the thing -- the Walt Disney Company is so large and complex, and so fragmented that the various divisions have not idea what the others are doing. (Which is an organizational and management problem - it doesn't have to be that way). While WDI works on creating a new Walt-based nostalgia at DCA, corporate Disney comes up with the ingenious (ahem...) idea of branding everything just "Disney". Thus we end up with the grammatically ridiculous "Disney California Adventure". Not "Disney's California Adventure" as it once was or even "Walt Disney's California Adventure" (wasn't it all about Walt?). So now "Disney" California Adventure is lumped into the same corporate boat as the just as absurd sounding "Disney Dumbo" and poorly made Chinese "Disney" junk from the dollar store.

This is all the result of an ill-conceived corporate branding decree from Iger, etc. Just slap the word "Disney" on everything you make whether it be films, or toys, or theme parks and it will all be better, somehow.

 

[HMF]

Walt on Buena Vista Street is a shallow overlay that was likely tossed in to get the project approved so that it was associated with a franche (the selling of Disney history). The reason of phone screens is simply ridiculous. The type of people who are going to be streaming full movies to a phone are not on some cheap Android device that is three versions behind. It was all part of the stupid branding movement away from the possessive. It's why new stuff went from "Disney's" to "Disney," "Disney's California Adventure" to "Disney California Adventure" and most recently the title card dropped "Walt" and "Pictures." It's a process that has been slowly moving forward for at least five years.

Bob Iger was actually quoted a few years back saying that he wanted to lessen the companies reliance on "tradition".

 

[elchippo]

This annoys the frick out of me every time I see it! It's obviously getting worse now as they've started to omit 'Walt' from the DVD cases of classics like Dumbo.
I think it really sucks that they are just dismissing the fact that they think 'oh, no one knows who the Disney Brothers are any more, and Disney is a massive co orperation and we just want to make money so lets forget about them.'

Well, yeah because people don't understand that it's a person. It's like, it's just a company.

Much agreed. We wouldn't start calling the Chef Boyardee brand just "Boyardee" would we?

 

[HMF]

Much agreed. We wouldn't start calling the Chef Boyardee brand just "Boyardee" would we?

If Bob Iger was named the CEO of whatever company owns Chef Boyardee, I could see that happening.

 

[lazyboy97o]

If Bob Iger was named the CEO of whatever company owns Chef Boyardee, I could see that happening.

He'd spend billions on a way to ensure you get the NextGen cheap, canned pasta experience. Don't you wish you could just download your next order of Chef pasta?

 

[Darth Sidious]

Walt on Buena Vista Street is a shallow overlay that was likely tossed in to get the project approved so that it was associated with a franchise (the selling of Disney history). The reason of phone screens is simply ridiculous. The type of people who are going to be streaming full movies to a phone are not on some cheap Android device that is three versions behind. It was all part of the stupid branding movement away from the possessive. It's why new stuff went from "Disney's" to "Disney," "Disney's California Adventure" to "Disney California Adventure" and most recently the title card dropped "Walt" and "Pictures." It's a process that has been slowly moving forward for at least five years.

Possessives can't be trademarked hence the dropping of 's of DCA. The original logo was copyrighted but the new logo is trademarked. It is also worth noting that a copyright lasts only 60 years past the death of the originator. Perhaps some copyrights are expiring soon... again I am just speculating. I just want to make the point that there isn't always a conspiracy theory behind such maneuvers. There could be many legal and financial decisions behind such moves. I don't want to see Walt's name dropped as much as the next person but I genuinely believe Bob Iger isn't leading some coup d'etat on Walt's name presence.

EDIT: The more I search possessive trademarks... I think it is possible but perhaps more difficult to obtain. We need a lawyer here! haha

 

[alphac2005]

Possessives can't be trademarked hence the dropping of 's of DCA. The original logo was copyrighted but the new logo is trademarked. It is also worth noting that a copyright lasts only 60 years past the death of the originator. Perhaps some copyrights are expiring soon... again I am just speculating. I just want to make the point that there isn't always a conspiracy theory behind such maneuvers. There could be many legal and financial decisions behind such moves. I don't want to see Walt's name dropped as much as the next person but I genuinely believe Bob Iger isn't leading some coup d'etat on Walt's name presence.

EDIT: The more I search possessive trademarks... I think it is possible but perhaps more difficult to obtain. We need a lawyer here! haha

I think that partially what is at play here is the fact that Walt Disney is so removed from life, that the name Disney to many kids is just that, a name, a brand. Of course, by continuing to name properties and divisions under the "Walt Disney" banner, many kids actually understand that Disney is the namesake of an actual person. You don't hear people saying "Can I go buy a new Henry Ford?" It's long past Henry Ford's time and most just know Ford as a brand just like Chevrolet or Audi.

What's going on with Disney is a concerted effort that many companies have gone to in branding their products or properties without possessives. It's absurd, but then again, let us get real about Disney itself. The fact that every darn thing that they operate has to be called DISNEY (or DISNEY's) XYZ is obnoxious in its own right. You kind of figure that Animal Kingdom is a Disney theme park, you know, because it's on their property and has Disney characters and everything, everywhere, yet it's Disney's Animal Kingdom. UGH.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I don't want to see Walt's name dropped as much as the next person but I genuinely believe Bob Iger isn't leading some coup d'etat on Walt's name presence.

While there are most definitely people inside The Walt Disney Company who sneer at the name Walt Disney, I would not count Iger as one of them. His problem is more that he lacks any sort of attachment to Walt Disney or The Walt Disney Company. It's just a company to him and he'd be running any other company in just about the same manner. He has his clear fascination with branding and franchises and "Disney" versus "Walt Disney's" and "Disney's" and everything else is just a more simple branding mechanism. Same as DisneyParks versus Walt Disney Parks and Resorts made up of Disneyland Resort Resort, Walt Disney World Resort, Disney Cruise Line, et. al. I do not see it as a direct attempt to remove Walt, just a non-attachment that therefore does not question simplifying the branding of a massive conglomerate.

 

[COProgressFan]

What's going on with Disney is a concerted effort that many companies have gone to in branding their products or properties without possessives. It's absurd, but then again, let us get real about Disney itself. The fact that every darn thing that they operate has to be called DISNEY (or DISNEY's) XYZ is obnoxious in its own right. You kind of figure that Animal Kingdom is a Disney theme park, you know, because it's on their property and has Disney characters and everything, everywhere, yet it's Disney's Animal Kingdom. UGH.

I find it ridiculous as well that everything (especially in Florida) has to be possessive, from theme parks, to resorts, to mini golf attractions. But as pointless as Disney's Animal Kingdom is, Disney Animal Kingdom is far worse.

 

[Darth Sidious]

Bob Iger was actually quoted a few years back saying that he wanted to lessen the companies reliance on "tradition".

Here:

Harvard Business Review: You’ve been quoted as complaining about the “baggage” of tradition. To what extent are you still resisting that?
Bob Iger: There’s been tension for a long time at Disney between modernists and traditionalists. I firmly believe in respecting the tradition but making sure that it continues to evolve. If you’re too adherent to tradition, you tend to be less innovative. Every once in a while the staunch traditionalists at Disney still stand up.

It is extremely important that Bob Iger be himself and not Walt. He knows that because like Steve Jobs had believed... innovation is stifled by adhering too much to tradition. Iger has been adherent to tradition while still taking the company into the future. Is Iger perfect? Absolutely not but he is a good CEO and it is difficult for anyone to follow in the footsteps of Walt. Trying to do so if quite a task since Walt is in an elite group of American thinkers, innovators and businessmen.

Does it suck that Walt was dropped from the Pictures logo... absolutely but I don't think it is so much of a cleansing and slap in the face as believed. I think it was driven by some combination of stupidity, legality, marketing and financials.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Here:


It is extremely important that Bob Iger be himself and not Walt. He knows that because like Steve Jobs had believed... innovation is stifled by adhering too much to tradition. Iger has been adherent to tradition while still taking the company into the future. Is Iger perfect? Absolutely not but he is a good CEO and it is difficult for anyone to follow in the footsteps of Walt. Trying to do so if quite a task since Walt is in an elite group of American thinkers, innovators and businessmen.

Does it suck that Walt was dropped from the Pictures logo... absolutely but I don't think it is so much of a cleansing and slap in the face as believed. I think it was driven by some combination of stupidity, legality, marketing and financials.

The problem though is the tradition he has dropped is innovation and creativity. He wants to play it safe. That's why he'd rather buy other companies than rebuild was brocken at Disney (before it gets brought up, I am not yet convinced that Walt Disney Animation Studios can do a good film without Lassiter watching overhead). It's why the theme parks have to focus on franchises. It's why the Studio is only making live action films that they hope become franchises. He is spinning in that quote, just as so often happens. It's not about following hard what was already done, but the spirit. He wants none of the spirit, but spins it as though he is fighting against people who still want things done only as they were in the 1960s.

 

[mackate]

Wishing we could kick off people that don't contribute to the discussion, but just bring nastiness and pettiness.

 

[Darth Sidious]

The problem though is the tradition he has dropped is innovation and creativity. He wants to play it safe. That's why he'd rather buy other companies than rebuild was brocken at Disney (before it gets brought up, I am not yet convinced that Walt Disney Animation Studios can do a good film without Lassiter watching overhead). It's why the theme parks have to focus on franchises. It's why the Studio is only making live action films that they hope become franchises. He is spinning in that quote, just as so often happens. It's not about following hard what was already done, but the spirit. He wants none of the spirit, but spins it as though he is fighting against people who still want things done only as they were in the 1960s.

I agree that Iger doesn't have the creativity Walt had but he has great business sense. Those acquisitions as he discussed were intended to sort of build a foundation in different demographics. In the HBR interview he talked about being behind on edgy and mature content, so I would imagine this was part of the fix. I also think they will continue to try building more original IP in this area.

To touch on the quote... of course he is spinning to a degree haha. I just don't think it is some conspiracy most believe it to be. His belief of being stuck in the 60s is a very typical political statement used when you have no real argument. That being said I think he does have a point with adherence to traditions. Traditions are great and should exist but they need to evolve in this industry. It is all about finding the right balance... opposite sides meeting in the happy medium.

@Eddie Sotto mentioned in his thread his thoughts on Iger and Lassiter and I think they are pretty noteworthy. He likened the potential 'tag team' of Lassiter and Staggs to Walt and Roy. Roy was the business mind and Walt was the visionary and dreamer. He also noted that no one person will ever fill the Walt Disney shoes but it will likely be achieved through a good team. He mentioned Staggs and Lassiter as good replacements for Iger when he retires. Staggs could be the financial mind while Lassiter is very much the creative visionary. They need to pull each other back a little, just like Walt and Roy used to.

 

[Darth Sidious]

Wishing we could kick off people that don't contribute to the discussion, but just bring nastiness and pettiness.

I don't see any nastiness in this thread. Just good discussion with good intentions and thoughts. We drifted a bit to the reasoning behind logo changes but it all ties in. However to bring it back to the OP... I like the new logo .

 

[mackate]

I don't see any nastiness in this thread. Just good discussion with good intentions and thoughts. We drifted a bit to the reasoning behind logo changes but it all ties in. However to bring it back to the OP... I like the new logo .

Then you didn't read the comments regarding people with higher education degrees. Any predjudice against a group of people detracts from the subject of the thread and the enjoyment of sharing our thoughts, ideas and dreams within this forum. This is a place for happiness and enjoyment like the parks themselves.

 

[HMF]

@Eddie Sotto mentioned in his thread his thoughts on Iger and Lassiter and I think they are pretty noteworthy. He likened the potential 'tag team' of Lassiter and Staggs to Walt and Roy. Roy was the business mind and Walt was the visionary and dreamer. He also noted that no one person will ever fill the Walt Disney shoes but it will likely be achieved through a good team. He mentioned Staggs and Lassiter as good replacements for Iger when he retires. Staggs could be the financial mind while Lassiter is very much the creative visionary. They need to pull each other back a little, just like Walt and Roy used to.

The difference there is Roy did not start his career as a key member of the infamous "Strategic Planning" division otherwise known to the creative people at Disney as "The place where ideas go to die". Staggs gets way too much credit around here. Granted he is better than Jay Ra$ulo but he still was Eisner's CFO during the dark years.

 

[puntagordabob]

I find it ridiculous as well that everything (especially in Florida) has to be possessive, from theme parks, to resorts, to mini golf attractions. But as pointless as Disney's Animal Kingdom is, Disney Animal Kingdom is far worse.

Agreed...

 

[EpcotFanForever]

Much agreed. We wouldn't start calling the Chef Boyardee brand just "Boyardee" would we?

I think you picked a bad example. "Chef Boyardee" is derived from Ettore Boiardi, so his real name was dropped long ago. Also, at one point the company was known as Boyardee Foods. It's a brand name, not a person (just like Betty Crocker).

Like it or not, Disney is a brand name for a large corporation, and it has a distant relationship to values of the gentleman who started it all.

 

[TRONorail10]

SIGH! No more removing Walt's name from things. They already did that with the Walt Disney Pictures title card.

Removing Walt from "Walt Disney Pictures" was one of the worst decisions you could make as a company. Generations of people have grown up with Walt Disney Pictures Presents... etc. and to just slap the word Disney on something, doesn't give it the same meaning or justification as did before. "Disney" is the commercialized machine that is trying to milk the world of every hard earned dollar we have. "Walt" represented the magic of Disney and the inspiration and love for characters and shows that will last a lifetime.

 

[EpcotFanForever]

This is probably a more accurate version of what the 2013 logo should be: