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

Lilofan

Well-Known Member
You’re not totally wrong.

The Disney executive “profiles” as featured in the article do generally get a editorial read from Zenias office in Burbank before going to press.

This was a typical executive gushing article just like the classic ones.
Those pics of the executives looks like massive airbrushing or makeup or both.
 

robhedin

Well-Known Member
Advertisement
...you’re in a hot zone. And one that sorta chose to be one...following the C Student pied piper.

I hate to bring up that being a thing...but it is a thing. Same with Florida

And the money and demographics of travelers to Florida and wdw...are what they are. They are heavily weighted.

I know a guy...couple of kids (who have been there dozens of times), bought DVC in his 20’s, APs....like a good wdw bar....pays the redonkulous menu prices at the sitdowns as the preferred dining style.

That’s what wdw needs and in large numbers. Wherever they come from...but they know there’s a geographical distribution that’s completely disrupted.
Hot zone or not is pretty immaterial. We're talking about people being unwilling to travel but the South East seems willing to travel -- as long as they can drive.

Take a look at the Sturgis Rally in South Dakota. If you went to that you were driving by definition to bring your bike, and they pulled in what? 250k people from all over the US. Granted these may or may not be the same demographic as would go to Disney (although the income is likely there, the kids may not be).

It seems that some people are willing to travel but they don't want to fly and they don't want restrictions.

Others just aren't willing to travel.
 

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
Those ones you listed are at most risk. Dependent on a collapsed model that consisted of large amounts of state and federal funding that isn’t there anymore.

I disagree. I think the schools with the biggest risk are the large public ones that don't have elite standing. The ones I mentioned are some of the top universities in the country, public or private.

I think more average, non-flagship public universities are the ones who could really feel a crunch. Places like UNC Charlotte, Alabama-Birmingham, etc. -- if states cut funding, they're going to cut it from those schools and try to keep the flagships running smoothly. Even if it's just essentially for PR.
 
Last edited:

Nubs70

Well-Known Member
As a lecturer at a university in The Netherlands, I have the same impression.

After years of pressure in higher education to move toward online delivery, I think the current pandemic has actually reinforced the value of having physical lectures and tutorials for both students and administrators. On the one hand, online delivery entails far more and less efficient work for staff and students. On the other, I think/hope there is a greater appreciation of the mental health benefits of having to be in a particular place at a particular time surrounded by fellow human beings. Indeed, at our university a lot of the energy in planning for the next semester is going toward trying to figure out how to deal with first year students feeling adrift with so few opportunities to be anywhere near the campus or meet their peers face to face.

I know this is a bit different considering it's in The Netherlands where most of the higher education is public and less profit-driven. We're also in the midst of a rapid resurgence of COVID which (as far as I can tell) is going to preclude any on campus teaching this semester. However, my impression from US colleagues is that the general lessons are the same.
How in the world are future engineers, doctors, and scientists going to do lab work with an online education?
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
I disagree. I think the schools with the biggest risk are the large public ones that don't have elite standing. The ones I mentioned are some of the top universities in the country, public or private.

I think more average, non-flagship public universities are the ones who could really feel a crunch. Places like UNC Charlotte, Alabama-Birmingham, etc. -- if states cut funding, they're going to cut it from those schools and try to keep the flagships running smoothly. Even if it's just essentially for PR.
“Elite status” is relative with billions in annual costs. They also tend to be relative to the school who feels that way about themselves.

But changes at minimum are coming from them too.

The ghosts of dean smith and Bo Schembechler aren’t donating their legacy funds.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
Hot zone or not is pretty immaterial. We're talking about people being unwilling to travel but the South East seems willing to travel -- as long as they can drive.

Take a look at the Sturgis Rally in South Dakota. If you went to that you were driving by definition to bring your bike, and they pulled in what? 250k people from all over the US. Granted these may or may not be the same demographic as would go to Disney (although the income is likely there, the kids may not be).

It seems that some people are willing to travel but they don't want to fly and they don't want restrictions.

Others just aren't willing to travel.
And we’re right back where we started. Nice chatting.
 

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
“Elite status” is relative with billions in annual costs. They also tend to be relative to the school who feels that way about themselves.

But changes at minimum are coming from them too.

The ghosts of dean smith and Bo Schembechler aren’t donating their legacy funds.

When I say elite, I mean generally recognized as elite by the public as a whole. In rankings (which you could argue are meaningless) but more importantly in hiring status. Companies look more favorably upon degrees from UNC, UCLA, Michigan, UVA, and the other so-called "Public Ivies" than they do from other public universities.

But who knows what will happen.
 
Last edited:

Sir_Cliff

Well-Known Member
While I’m sure established students aren’t bailing out in masses, a lot of large colleges are seeing deferred enrollment for freshman year and kids opting to go to a community college or less expensive school for the first year since most everything is online anyway. My son was enrolled to begin at a Big 10 school this fall however, everything is online. There’s no point of paying those rates for him to be home. Instead, he deferred his enrollment and is approved to attend the first semester, at a minimum, at a local community college on an approved transfer plan.

I will say both schools have put forth amazing efforts to help incoming freshmen with the unconventional transition.
This is definitely a concern for us, too. There has been very close monitoring of enrolment numbers and no-one is entirely sure how many will show up. That concern is rolled into the preoccupation with the experience of freshmen/first years such that they can be convinced to still enrol. Another wrinkle is the travel involved, which for us means students from other parts of the EU but in the US means students from other parts of the country having to relocate, pay for accommodation, etc. It's hard to convince them or us it's necessary for them to do this when everything is likely to be online anyway. We're also not supposed to be doing long-distance learning, however, and ideally in-person learning will be phased in as possible. In the US, I think that whole ecosystem is a big part of the push to start on-campus teaching this coming semester.

As a lecturer, this makes me kind of happy as it provides some recognition that it is worthwhile keeping us employed rather than just recording lectures or reducing higher education to a handful of elite on-campus institutions and a slightly lower tier marketing online courses to the world. It is not great for students or universities, though.

Honestly, if a student could defer the upcoming semester I would find it hard to advise them not to.

How in the world are future engineers, doctors, and scientists going to do lab work with an online education?
For some fields, it's simply impossible not to have some on-campus education. However, even that is being curtailed. I've heard stories from colleagues about labs shutting due to COVID outbreaks in several countries now.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
When I say elite, I mean generally recognized as elite by the public as a whole. In rankings (which you could argue are meaningless) but more importantly in hiring status. Companies look more favorably upon degrees from UNC, UCLA, Michigan, UVA, and the other so-called "Public Ivies" than they do from other public universities.

But who knows what will happen.
I went down the rabbit hole and looked at the rankings (haven’t in decades - thankfully)...and I noticed how heavily those rankings are weighted private now. Not so in the past. Way more “football schools” back when.

You forgot Georgia Tech and Wake Forest and BC in your list 😉

I’m proud to say I got in to 3 of the top 30...and didn’t go to any of them 😂

Shout out to Pomona College! Frank wells and Roy E Disney.
 

robhedin

Well-Known Member
This is where we fundamentally disagree. Having a limited number of locals, APs and “damn the torpedoes” regional travelers is not gonna make them money. It’s not a 1:1 scenario. They don’t make money off selling a Mickey plush...they make it Off selling 1,000. You have to first outrun the overhead costs.

That’s the model. That’s the framework. Can’t flip a switch now.

If you consider that...limiting cms and APs makes complete sense. They’d just be increasing their overhead to accommodate them and never get over the top.

This is gonna take awhile even if things go better than they have. And that’s assuming this ridiculous “v-shaped recovery” nonsense goes (it won’t)...

The canary in the coal mine to me is the recall of college program...things won’t be close to normal till that happens.
Generally I agree here, except for the comment on the "they'd just be increasing their overhead to accommodate them" part.

If the part has open but non-AP holder capacity, and they're contributing positively (not turning a profit, but covering their operating costs plus a bit) which they must be since this is the basis of being open, then allowing additional AP holders in on that day would increase what they make, not decrease it (their operational costs are covered, remember?). So while some AP holders may come in and spend nothing, others are going to eat or get a drink or a snack at a minimum. If the AP holder gets a room, that's also room revenue.

Does that make a huge difference to the bottom line? Nope. But it should help the bottom line, plus build good will with the AP holders.

Now, the real question here is: does Disney even want the current AP program or not?
 

Brer Panther

Well-Known Member
Has this article gotten any buzz on here?


Some gold quotes:

Besides scrapping the networks, he shut down a musical version of the animated film “Frozen” that opened with much fanfare on Broadway two years ago, closed a chain of English-language schools in China, and scaled back a $1 billion resort-technology project that has largely been replaced by a simple mobile-phone app.

“He’s going to be looking in every corner where they can save money,” said Dave Heger, an analyst who follows the company at Edward Jones and recommends buying Disney stock. “Considering what Disney is dealing with, he’s the right guy to have at the wheel.”

And my favorite:

“But Chapek is beginning to get out from beneath Iger’s shadow. The ex-CEO wasn’t even on Disney’s last earnings call with analysts -- a surprise to some who expected Iger to keep a tight hold on the company.”
Hopefully cancelling the Splash Mountain rethemes is one of the ways that they try to save money.

Also, "ex-CEO"? Isn't Iger still the CEO? He made Chapek CEO back in February, then came back a month or two after that?
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
Hopefully cancelling the Splash Mountain rethemes is one of the ways that they try to save money.

Also, "ex-CEO"? Isn't Iger still the CEO? He made Chapek CEO back in February, then came back a month or two after that?
Absolutely no way they cancel the splash move. None.
Chapek is still CEO. Iger is Executive Chairman of the Board. I think he just decided to take a more hands-on approach.
Iger is in charge. He “fake quit” to not be the guy on the door when or if Disney suffered a huge collapse under the weight of covid and/or the economics...
I will never not believe that the billionaires didn’t think it was gonna be much worse in February/March. They shut down everything over a week without a peep.

You know how much fear it took to overpower the normal greed?
 

ImperfectPixie

Well-Known Member
Absolutely no way they cancel the splash move. None.

Iger is in charge. He “fake quit” to not be the guy on the door when or if Disney suffered a huge collapse under the weight of covid and/or the economics...
I will never not believe that the billionaires didn’t think it was gonna be much worse in February/March. They shut down everything over a week without a peep.

You know how much fear it took to overpower the normal greed?
It didn't though. They aren't losing anything but a rounding error. It's the rest of us that are losing.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
It didn't though. They aren't losing anything but a rounding error. It's the rest of us that are losing.
Ahhh...patience.

I’ll admit...I didn’t think the Federal Reserve would completely rig the stock market so it would stay the same as the entire world economy shutdown...shame on me for not thinking of that.

But Disney is still going to lose massive amounts of free money for some time that Bob Does backstrokes in a la Ducktales....that’s when he’ll slither away.
 

CaptainAmerica

Premium Member
@wdwmagic IRL

maxresdefault (1).jpg
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Top Bottom