danyoung56
Well-Known Member
Oops! I meant rudder. Fixed. Thanks!
I was pretty sure that's what you meant, but I also thought that there maybe was a word that I'd never heard!
-
The new WDWMAGIC iOS app is here!
Stay up to date with the latest Disney news, photos, and discussions right from your iPhone. The app is free to download and gives you quick access to news articles, forums, photo galleries, park hours, weather and Lightning Lane pricing. Learn More -
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Pining for the days of Eisner
- Thread starter Gitson Shiggles
- Start date
I was pretty sure that's what you meant, but I also thought that there maybe was a word that I'd never heard!
Under Iger, P&R has been forced to invest in the theme parks, WDW specifically, due to years of stagnation. Iger & Staggs approached WDW as "mature", if memory serves, and not needing significant investment.
Investment in DL was coming back quickly near the end of Eisner's time as CEO, with Matt Ouimet leading the charge. But lack of maintenance made DL almost dangerous for years. WDW saw its share of neglect, but as noted, it wasn't quite as bad.
DLP was a good foundation, but poorly executed. WDSP was/is a hot mess, but look at what they're spending to try and make it a full-day park. More of Iger's acquisitions going in there than anything else, with Frozen the obvious exception (and it's so overused now...).
DCA... a nightmare from the start. I have to think it would never have happened if Frank Wells was still alive when it was proposed/approved and they started planning it. "Design by spreadsheet" is how I remember someone describing it one time.
Shanghai and Hong Kong? Ego moves. "Gotta leave my mark" type things. And while they have some hits, the misses are there as well (and I have to admit to not visiting those AsiaPac parks yet. Maybe someday, especially with Tokyo being at the top of my Disney bucket list.)
The bottom line, I guess, is that Eisner did well with a lot of things during his first decade, and then fumbled things badly in his second (post-Wells death). In contrast, Iger's been a slave to shareholders since Day 1. Seeing as how he's amassed more and more stock during his 12 years as CEO, it shouldn't come as any surprise that everything he's done has been shareholder-focused. This is what you get when you let financials run a creative company. A slow, painful decline into IP mandates and upcharges and cupcakes and dance parties galore. While he is/may not be personally responsible for those things, the buck stops with him. He picked the people who enacted those changes and concocted the plans. I'm not ignoring Pandora (7 years in the making) or SW:GE (questionable capacity/execution). Both were needed, but many feel they were bungled by poor long-term planning. And, getting two extra-base hits in 12 years is not a record to hang your hat on. Increasing shareholder returns by mining revenue short-term, while also padding your healthy nest egg, doesn't exactly say "long-term thinking".
When your memorable quotes are around "de-risk" and "cost containment", and your focus has been on the "Disney brand" instead of creative, organic growth, what does that say for your legacy at a company that was built on creativity such as TWDC? Great for shareholders, guests can go suck an egg (that we sold them at 12x normal prices)?
Investment in DL was coming back quickly near the end of Eisner's time as CEO, with Matt Ouimet leading the charge. But lack of maintenance made DL almost dangerous for years. WDW saw its share of neglect, but as noted, it wasn't quite as bad.
DLP was a good foundation, but poorly executed. WDSP was/is a hot mess, but look at what they're spending to try and make it a full-day park. More of Iger's acquisitions going in there than anything else, with Frozen the obvious exception (and it's so overused now...).
DCA... a nightmare from the start. I have to think it would never have happened if Frank Wells was still alive when it was proposed/approved and they started planning it. "Design by spreadsheet" is how I remember someone describing it one time.
Shanghai and Hong Kong? Ego moves. "Gotta leave my mark" type things. And while they have some hits, the misses are there as well (and I have to admit to not visiting those AsiaPac parks yet. Maybe someday, especially with Tokyo being at the top of my Disney bucket list.)
The bottom line, I guess, is that Eisner did well with a lot of things during his first decade, and then fumbled things badly in his second (post-Wells death). In contrast, Iger's been a slave to shareholders since Day 1. Seeing as how he's amassed more and more stock during his 12 years as CEO, it shouldn't come as any surprise that everything he's done has been shareholder-focused. This is what you get when you let financials run a creative company. A slow, painful decline into IP mandates and upcharges and cupcakes and dance parties galore. While he is/may not be personally responsible for those things, the buck stops with him. He picked the people who enacted those changes and concocted the plans. I'm not ignoring Pandora (7 years in the making) or SW:GE (questionable capacity/execution). Both were needed, but many feel they were bungled by poor long-term planning. And, getting two extra-base hits in 12 years is not a record to hang your hat on. Increasing shareholder returns by mining revenue short-term, while also padding your healthy nest egg, doesn't exactly say "long-term thinking".
When your memorable quotes are around "de-risk" and "cost containment", and your focus has been on the "Disney brand" instead of creative, organic growth, what does that say for your legacy at a company that was built on creativity such as TWDC? Great for shareholders, guests can go suck an egg (that we sold them at 12x normal prices)?
Dunston
Well-Known Member
Eisner was more creative, but also had a legendary knack for screwing people over for no reason. Iger is not creative, and made Disney bigger than it ever has been. Say what you will about the IP-driven park additions Iger oversaw, but they are more impressive, well-themed, and exciting than most of the stuff Eisner was OK-ing in his final years.
Still, Iger completely disrespected Expedition Everest in that interview, so I'm not crazy about him.
Still, Iger completely disrespected Expedition Everest in that interview, so I'm not crazy about him.
flynnibus
Premium Member
Remember it was also Eisner that couldn't get the Pixar deal done... and would have Marvel or Lucasfilm gotten done either?
Eisner was bold.. but he also failed to adapt when needed and often drove things poorly. Why we may love the ambition of the Disney Decade.. we also have the follies of the dot-com era.. DCA.. Cynthia Harris.. and his flops afterwards. He had not adjusted well to the 2000s.. and we don't know if it would have been able to afterwards either.