News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District

[JoeCamel]

Companies should not take a side. Individuals can, but companies should focus on running their business. Companies taking any side publicly will likely cause more issues than it solves with the country and likely some employees, shareholders, and customers divided on various issues.

Unless you can find five Supremes to agree with you and overturn their previous ruling your "should not" has been deemed "they may" by the court. Dead horse at this time

 

[lazyboy97o]

Now I'm actually hoping this escalates in a way that forces other companies to take a side. With silence being a form of acceptance, that may begin to not sit well with the employees and customers of the other big players in town. What then?

Unfortunately misinformation about the District remains rather widespread, which complicates getting people to be concerned.

 

[GhostHost1000]

Unless you can find five Supremes to agree with you and overturn their pervious ruling your "should not" has been deemed "they may" by the court. Dead horse at this time

I’m not saying it’s a law, “they may” do whatever they want, I’m just stating my opinion and from my business experience, If I were running a company of any size, I would stay away from anything unnecessary that could cause any problems with the business, the shareholders, the employees, the customers, and its overall image.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I’m not saying it’s a law, “they may” do whatever they want, I’m just stating my opinion and from my experience, If I were running a company of any size, I would stay away from anything unnecessary that could cause any problems with the business, the shareholders, the employees, the customers, and its overall image.

Supporting interference in the running of other businesses is not going to protect your business from interference.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

I’m not saying it’s a law, “they may” do whatever they want, I’m just stating my opinion and from my business experience, If I were running a company of any size, I would stay away from anything unnecessary that could cause any problems with the business, the shareholders, the employees, the customers, and its overall image.

But you keep glossing over the fact that any problems caused by speaking out cannot - per the 1st Amendment - come from any government entity. That's not some minor detail.

 

[JoeCamel]

I’m not saying it’s a law, “they may” do whatever they want, I’m just stating my opinion and from my business experience, If I were running a company of any size, I would stay away from anything unnecessary that could cause any problems with the business, the shareholders, the employees, the customers, and its overall image.

That is the crux of the issue. You feel companies should keep their heads down why? For fear of retaliation? From who?
This was decided that companies have the same rights as people to speech and if you want to live in a world where you are afraid to say what you feel for fear of retaliation then this isn't it nor should it be.

 

[GhostHost1000]

But you keep glossing over the fact that any problems caused by speaking out cannot - per the 1st Amendment - come from any government entity. That's not some minor detail.

I’m not talking about what Florida is trying to do to Reedy Creek. I don’t agree with that, but I also don’t think Disney or any company should risk anything negative to their business, shareholders, image, etc when it’s unnecessary.

 

[GhostHost1000]

That is the crux of the issue. You feel companies should keep their heads down why? For fear of retaliation? From who?
This was decided that companies have the same rights as people to speech and if you want to live in a world where you are afraid to say what you feel for fear of retaliation then this isn't it nor should it be.

Companies can do what they want and have the same rights. I’m not arguing that, but they have to understand negative things can happen when they make a public political stance with the country being so divided regardless of the issue. That’s all I’m saying

 

[Chi84]

Companies can do what they want and have the same rights. I’m not arguing that, but they have to understand negative things can happen when they make a public political stance with the country being so divided regardless of the issue. That’s all I’m saying

They do have to understand and accept that bad things can happen in terms of negative public perception and loss of business. I think Disney is well aware of that. But they don’t have to accept the risk of government retaliation - not in this country.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Companies can do what they want and have the same rights. I’m not arguing that, but they have to understand negative things can happen when they make a public political stance with the country being so divided regardless of the issue. That’s all I’m saying

You can’t have it both ways. You claim to be against it, but also say it’s fine and deserved. This isn’t just “negative things” like people not going to a movie or cancelling a vacation. Nobody’s buying the double speak.

 

[GhostHost1000]

They do have to understand and accept that bad things can happen in terms of negative public perception and loss of business. I think Disney is well aware of that. But they don’t have to accept the risk of government retaliation - not in this country.

I agree with that.

 

[GhostHost1000]

You can’t have it both ways. You claim to be against it, but also say it’s fine and deserved. This isn’t just “negative things” like people not going to a movie or cancelling a vacation. Nobody’s buying the double speak.

Never have I said Florida trying to remove reedy creek from Disney is fine and deserved. Stop making things up just because you don’t agree with me, you’re better than that.

 

[GoofGoof]

As I recall, several companies signed what in effect was a meaningless piece of paper. They were virtue signaling.

Disney declined to sign it and instead tried to use their impressive cadre of lobbyists in Florida to effect real change in the Parental Rights In Education Act. Unaware of this back-channel maneuvering, activists threw Disney under the bus, forcing Chapek to issue a very public statement and go on an apology tour. Only after this was Disney singled out.

In the end, it was the one company who tried to do something real that ended up being attacked by both sides.

Yeah, Disney fumbled the delivery for sure, but at the end of the day they took the same position many others did. Nobody had to sign on publicly to oppose anything. They chose to just like Disney.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

I’m not talking about what Florida is trying to do to Reedy Creek. I don’t agree with that, but I also don’t think Disney or any company should risk anything negative to their business, shareholders, image, etc when it’s unnecessary.

This thread is all about what FL is trying to do to RCID.

 

[Elijah Abrams]

Disney to Keep Perks Under Florida Bill Allowing Gov. Ron DeSantis to Assume Control of Special Tax District

The legislation gives DeSantis the power to appoint members to the district's governing body.

www.hollywoodreporter.com

 

[GoofGoof]

Companies can do what they want and have the same rights. I’m not arguing that, but they have to understand negative things can happen when they make a public political stance with the country being so divided regardless of the issue. That’s all I’m saying

Every company faces this every day. They all take positions on a large number of issues. Taking those positions may alienate people who oppose the position. Not supporting a position can also alienate people who support the issue. You can’t please everyone. Companies generally have a mission statement and with it a set of core values they supposedly live by which goes beyond just making a profit for shareholders. It’s mostly corporate mumbo jumbo talk and a bunch of buzz words but it still exists. Generally speaking the company should decide what issues to support or not support based on those values.

 

[JohnD]

Disney to Keep Perks Under Florida Bill Allowing Gov. Ron DeSantis to Assume Control of Special Tax District

The legislation gives DeSantis the power to appoint members to the district's governing body.

www.hollywoodreporter.com

Expect Democrats to offer amendments regarding the board, likely removing the Governor as the appointee of the board. Those will lose by party line vote. But there could be adjustments that are agreeable. First committee stop is tomorrow at 2pm. Will be interesting to watch.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Companies should not take a side. Individuals can, but companies should focus on running their business. Companies taking any side publicly will likely cause more issues than it solves with the country and likely some employees, shareholders, and customers divided on various issues.

Corporations are people, my friend.

 

[JoeCamel]

Corporations are people, my friend.

For now, I hope that changes in the future friend

 

[lazyboy97o]

For now, I hope that changes in the future friend

It’s not exactly a new or recent concept.