On layoffs, very bad attendance, and Iger's legacy being one of disgrace

[Brer Oswald]

The CEO of TWDC has a difficult job just trying to live up to the reputation of some of the past CEO's. In particular, Walt Disney himself.

Walt was always the front man for his movies, TV shows, Disneyland and Walt Disney World. We knew about these things because good ole Uncle Walt told us all about his plans on his TV shows. And the public loved him!

Of course, that was all pure public relations. Walt was not one bit as he appeared on TV. In reality he was a chain smoker, he drank to excess and he swore like a sailor. He was also a very brutal businessman. But after all, he was in show business. So he hired the best in the business to make him look good. And it worked perfectly because he came off looking great and was able to sell the public most anything. He was a great pitchman!

After Walt died, Roy Disney and the others after didn't have the on camera charisma to effectively sell the Disney product. That is until Eisner came along. Eisner was a rather ruthless guy (just like Walt) but he realized the valve (just like Walt) of being able to pitch the product to the fans. And Eisner did well on camera and used the TV shows to sell product in an effective manner.

Unfortunately, Iger left most of his personality with whomever replaced him as a weatherman. I'll give Bob credit in that he tried to sell the Disney product on camera. But the camera just doesn't like Bob. He comes off as a stiff dupe and a smarmy CEO. He comes off almost as creepy as the Dreamfinder. Iger is just not a guy the fans felt comfortable with nor someone they could trust.

And now we have Bob Chapek. Poor Bob comes across on camera like a wet dishrag. He just can't sell the product. Now let's hope that a brave someone in TWDC confronts Bob and tells him that his on camera personality sucks. Given the proper acting lessons and guidance, they can make him look good or even great!

They did it for Walt and I'm sure they can do it for Bob. I think the difference is that Walt was willing to put on his fake persona for the sake of building his personal fortune (i.e. greed). I'm not sure that Bob is motivated by greed as was Walt.

Here's an example of poor Bob trying to sell the Disney product:

A couple things. Walt was never CEO. Walt also wasn’t fuelled by greed. I’m not sure where this perception comes from? He was a notorious spender when it came to his company projects, and would mortgage his house, borrow off his life insurance, etc.

No, he wasn’t the perfect Uncle Walt character he created. He was ruthless when you contradicted his vision, he was a sucker for love and attention, and definitely had a bit of an ego when it came to his endeavours. A money man? Not sure where you came to that inclusion. He wasn’t a businessman. He was an entertainer. That’s why he needed Roy so badly.

The rest of your assessment is pretty accurate though.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

That's a big part of it. Also a part is many aren't interested in going to theme parks at all. Look at the regional parks. Their attendance is much lower then expected as well. Usually when people can't afford a Disney trip many will opt for their local park and people aren't even doing that. Many are opting for cheaper staycations like going to state parks.

It’s almost like there’s a constant threat of being infected by something Invisible that can hurt you or everyone you come into contact with?

Why should that limit amusement park visits??

 

[Phil12]

A couple things. Walt was never CEO. Walt also wasn’t fuelled by greed. I’m not sure where this perception comes from? He was a notorious spender when it came to his company projects, and would mortgage his house, borrow off his life insurance, etc.

No, he wasn’t the perfect Uncle Walt character he created. He was ruthless when you contradicted his vision, he was a sucker for love and attention, and definitely had a bit of an ego when it came to his endeavours. A money man? Not sure where you came to that inclusion. He wasn’t a businessman. He was an entertainer. That’s why he needed Roy so badly.

The rest of your assessment is pretty accurate though.

He and Roy stopped speaking to each other for almost two years due to Walt's greed. Walt was siphoning off money from the studio into WED for himself and his family. The mortgage house story fails to mention that the house in question was his second house, not his primary residence. Borrowing off of life insurance at that time was common. Cheaper to do that then to pull a loan from the bank. I'd explain more but this is way off topic. Here's some reading for you:

How Walt Disney Used WED Enterprises, Inc. as a Private Family Holding Company

WED Enterprises was the private family holding company of Walt Disney, through which he amassed a fortune alongside his shares of Walt Disney Productions.

www.joshuakennon.com

 

[Brer Oswald]

He and Roy stopped speaking to each other for almost two years due to Walt's greed. Walt was siphoning off money from the studio into WED for himself and his family. The mortgage house story fails to mention that the house in question was his second house, not his primary residence. Borrowing off of life insurance at that time was common. Cheaper to do that then to pull a loan from the bank. I'd explain more but this is way off topic. Here's some reading for you:

How Walt Disney Used WED Enterprises, Inc. as a Private Family Holding Company

WED Enterprises was the private family holding company of Walt Disney, through which he amassed a fortune alongside his shares of Walt Disney Productions.

www.joshuakennon.com

He siphoned off money into WED for Disneyland development. WDP became a public company and he didn’t want the stock holders getting in the way of his extravagant and expensive plans for the parks. He liked having complete control.

He was a control freak. Not a money freak.

 

[Tha Realest]

I think it's because the Quarantine of 14 days when guests arrive from various States such as NJ, NY and CT has really affected attendance as this area of the country makes up a large attendance group for WDW. We have a trip scheduled for the end of October but unless they lift the quarantine restriction, we will have to cancel our trip.

WDW should offer up a quarantine package. Guests arriving from a quarantine state can stay at Art of Animation for $150/night.

 

[GoneViral]

The decline started before Wells died. Strategic Planning played a critical, and ultimately harmful, role in the company’s history.

Giving the quants that much power was obviously a mistake, one that clearly irritates Iger to this day.

 

[flutas]

WDW should offer up a quarantine package. Guests arriving from a quarantine state can stay at Art of Animation for $150/night.

I know of a certain hotel site currently selling Pop for $79/night, so they gotta do better than that.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

According to reports (as seen in the other Covid thread), DeSantis just rescinded the quarantine for travelers from the NY tri-state area.

In a “what a coincidence” move...the US rescinded it’s “travel ban” to other countries...

Which most of us completely forgot because nobody wants US and we going nowhere.

It’s the great Oz day.

 

[GoneViral]

I realize all that stuff...

And yet - Disney tent poles don’t have a good history in China outside of marvel and Pixar

This circles back to the market's maturation. The Lion King earned $120 million in China despite being a lousy copy of the original. Name recognition carried that one, and it wasn't based on a Chinese legend.

If I'd worked at Walt Disney Pictures, I would have pushed *hard* for Mulan due to its Chinese box office potential and accompanying long-term revenue streams. And the tracking for the film was extremely strong right when the pandemic hit. Variety had it at $85 million, which would have made it a likely $300 million film in the US. And that's about the right number for a $1 billion blockbuster worldwide.

 

[csmat99]

Mulan was not going to do well at the box office...just my humble O...

I think this release works out in their favor.

But it was yet ANOTHER attempt by Iger to kiss Chinese butt. For the 500th time. I wish we could understand where they think el dorado is located in the Gobi desert??

They partially ruined their most valuable IP chip at least in part chasing a market that isn’t there...

At $30 bucks a pop and not having to share with movie theaters Disney is looking at nice profit. It will probably do about $900 million in home sales worldwide easy.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

At $30 bucks a pop and not having to share with movie theaters Disney is looking at nice profit. It will probably do about $900 million in home sales worldwide easy.

Exactly...and that’s a win for them

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

He and Roy stopped speaking to each other for almost two years due to Walt's greed. Walt was siphoning off money from the studio into WED for himself and his family. The mortgage house story fails to mention that the house in question was his second house, not his primary residence. Borrowing off of life insurance at that time was common. Cheaper to do that then to pull a loan from the bank. I'd explain more but this is way off topic. Here's some reading for you:

How Walt Disney Used WED Enterprises, Inc. as a Private Family Holding Company

WED Enterprises was the private family holding company of Walt Disney, through which he amassed a fortune alongside his shares of Walt Disney Productions.

www.joshuakennon.com

That’s the story as I recall hearing/reading it...

And Roy got a little payback when he bought Walt’s name...sour grapes From he Walt family Branch if I recall?

He siphoned off money into WED for Disneyland development. WDP became a public company and he didn’t want the stock holders getting in the way of his extravagant and expensive plans for the parks. He liked having complete control.

He was a control freak. Not a money freak.

The most accurate take is probably that he was both.

 

[tirian]

A couple things. Walt was never CEO. Walt also wasn’t fuelled by greed. I’m not sure where this perception comes from? He was a notorious spender when it came to his company projects, and would mortgage his house, borrow off his life insurance, etc.

No, he wasn’t the perfect Uncle Walt character he created. He was ruthless when you contradicted his vision, he was a sucker for love and attention, and definitely had a bit of an ego when it came to his endeavours. A money man? Not sure where you came to that inclusion. He wasn’t a businessman. He was an entertainer. That’s why he needed Roy so badly.

The rest of your assessment is pretty accurate though.

Yeah, that’s been kicking around the Internet a lot lately. IDK why it’s hard for people to accept he was a businessman who also cared about quality and innovation. Those kinds of leaders do exist.

I also read a blog from a film history professor who said the only differentiation between Walt Disney and Fleischer was that Disney marketed animation as “hard to do” and gained public respect. That’s one of the most idiotic statements I’ve ever read. The alleged professor didn’t mention animation quality, story, music, characterization, etc. I wonder how he feels about Chuck Jones or Studio Ghibli.

 

[el_super]

He siphoned off money into WED for Disneyland development.

Not entirely accurate. Most of Disneyland's development was funded thru WDP and ABC. Walt arranged to keep the Monorail and Steam Trains under his private company and Disneyland leased them back from Walt for millions upon millions. That money didnt go to any development, but to Walt's pockets directly.

 

[Nubs70]

This circles back to the market's maturation. The Lion King earned $120 million in China despite being a lousy copy of the original. Name recognition carried that one, and it wasn't based on a Chinese legend.

If I'd worked at Walt Disney Pictures, I would have pushed *hard* for Mulan due to its Chinese box office potential and accompanying long-term revenue streams. And the tracking for the film was extremely strong right when the pandemic hit. Variety had it at $85 million, which would have made it a likely $300 million film in the US. And that's about the right number for a $1 billion blockbuster worldwide.

I would not bank on Mulan making a big splash in China due to elder reverence.

 

[Robbiem]

According to wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulan_(2020_film)#Release

mulan is being released theatrically in China so maybe the combination of theatrical there and PVOD elsewhere has been calculated to max profits in the relevant markets?

 

[GoneViral]

At $30 bucks a pop and not having to share with movie theaters Disney is looking at nice profit. It will probably do about $900 million in home sales worldwide easy.

And the metric goal is even smaller for Disney this way. When the studio releases a movie in theaters, it splits the take. By dropping this on Disney+, the company takes everything, which is why exhibitors are saying nasty things about Disney right now.

Disney selling Mulan at $30 a pop (really, $37 since you need the subscription) means that 10 million sales would provide $337 million in revenue (technically, it might be as little as $256 million, based on current non-Star ARPU, but I think that's low in this specific instance).

For perspective, Deadline had Aladdin's total profit as $356 million.

I think a fair estimate for when Mulan matches/surpasses Aladdin in "theatrical" revenue is 15 million in Disney+ sales.

NOTE: This post has an edit because Rowrbazzle correctly pointed out that I mistakenly said 1 million originally when I meant 10 million. I've updated the information to prevent additional confusion.

 

[GoneViral]

I would not bank on Mulan making a big splash in China due to elder reverence.

Well, it certainly won't now, as China primarily reopened and managed a whopping $17 million for the weekend.

However, back in March, most people involved in my industry felt strongly that as long as China didn't make an issue of Liu Yifei again, Mulan would perform better than any other Disney live-action movie there.

To be fair, those were primarily American and Canadian people talking about a foreign market, though. So, we all could have had it wrong.

 

[easyrowrdw]

Disney selling Mulan at $30 a pop (really, $37 since you need the subscription) means that 1 million sales would provide $337 million in revenue (technically, it might be as little as $256 million, based on current non-Star ARPU, but I think that's low in this specific instance).

One million sales at $37 each is $37 million. Or am I misunderstanding what you're saying?

 

[GoneViral]

One million sales at $37 each is $37 million. Or am I misunderstanding what you're saying?

No, I just made a stupid math error because I'm too distracted by my cat asking for dinner. Yes, I meant 10 million/15 million. Thank you for the important correction.

Now, if you'll excuse me, there's a tuna can I must open...