peter11435
Well-Known Member
Not exactly something to celebrate. That’s kind of the problem with Florida’s actions hereSure seems to have stopped the political rhetoric in its tracks.
Not exactly something to celebrate. That’s kind of the problem with Florida’s actions hereSure seems to have stopped the political rhetoric in its tracks.
I get it…but they don’t need a public stance. I guarantee Disney’s stock would be much higher with them just keeping quiet (regardless of their stance)That was the attitude before Citizens United but the Supremes decided differently. A corporate leader needs to be all encompassing in matters of community as it is the fabric of their workforce. They live or die by their stance but if it is raw dollars that are the only motivation then life just isn't worth it, it isn't life
I don't think their current stock woes have much to do with this.I get it…but they don’t need a public stance. I guarantee Disney’s stock would be much higher with them just keeping quiet (regardless of their stance)
AgreedI don't think their current stock woes have much to do with this.
How some may recall, there were a lot of critics when Chapek got the top job. Rewind years ago , when the hated Eisner basically hand picked Iger to get the top job and the critics came out in force saying that was a mistake. Both came into the roles not fully welcomed but Iger never walked into the challenges that Chapek walked into. Iger did have that entertainment background charm in my opinion that others do not have. In regards to messaging , Chapek's top PR guy abruptly " resigned" after less than 4 months on the job.I don't think their current stock woes have much to do with this.
But you're wrong - they would have had an employee revolt on their hands had they not spoken out. Bob's mistake wasn't speaking out - it was doing so clumsily and only after there was a threat of revolt.
Iger spoke out on politics many times without this sort of backlash. It's perfectly consistent to say that Chapek did a horrible job at messaging and at the same time recognize that it is Disney's constitutionally protected right to do so and that the aggressor here is DeSantis and the FL legislature.
We can debate the wisdom of Chapek speaking out. But the outrage here needs to be at DeSantis and the FL legislature for their authoritarian tactics of working to suppress political speech.
As has been shown, this has not appeared to affect attendance at the parks or the box office of Disney movies like Dr. Strange. People significantly overestimate the financial impact of companies engaging in politics.Disney is a great example of how weighing into politics can potentially damage a company.
A for-profit primarily exists to enrich its shareholders.
For most companies, customers run across the entire political spectrum. Taking stances on political issues risks alienating a percentage of paying customers, hurting overall sales and adversely impacting shareholders.
If shareholders say, “we don’t care about the money, this issue is more important to us then some lost sales,” then companies should actively pursue goals preferred by shareholders.
Chapek’s primary job is to enrich shareholders. But this does not mean Disney shareholders don’t have other objectives that are important to them.
Did Chapek engage with a majority of shareholders before taking his public stance or was his pushed into this stance solely by his employees? I genuinely don’t know - Chapek or his team might have discussed this issue privately with major shareholders before issuing the statements that he did. For all I know, a majority of shareholders back Chapek 100% on this.
Remember, the First Amendment protects you from the government. It does not protect you from other consequences of your words.
As Michael Jordan famously said, “Republicans buy sneakers, too.”
Many of us think this is an easy First Amendment victory for Disney, if they decide to go that path.
But, win or lose, what financial impact will this have on Disney? Do Disney shareholders think it was wise for Chapek to weigh in on this?
There should be outrage on both sides. As a Disney fan, they have looked foolish in lots of things over the last few years.I don't think their current stock woes have much to do with this.
But you're wrong - they would have had an employee revolt on their hands had they not spoken out. Bob's mistake wasn't speaking out - it was doing so clumsily and only after there was a threat of revolt.
Iger spoke out on politics many times without this sort of backlash. It's perfectly consistent to say that Chapek did a horrible job at messaging and at the same time recognize that it is Disney's constitutionally protected right to do so and that the aggressor here is DeSantis and the FL legislature.
We can debate the wisdom of Chapek speaking out. But the outrage here needs to be at DeSantis and the FL legislature for their authoritarian tactics of working to suppress political speech.
Certainly, Dr Strange is performing well but not as well as Spider-Man.
There’s been some discussion of cancellations at the theme parks. For example, rooms that previously were unable have become available.
Exactly right, unless DVC members dont care about Disney’s views. Try finding a room , for even one night from September through December is virtually impossible. We tried to switch resorts for just 2 nights in a row anywhere during our 2 week stay and nada.If we do see a lot of cancellations in the near future, I think the biggest culprit would likely be the cost of fuel, rather than political issues that most guests probably neither care about nor are aware of.
Zero financial impact. I understand what your saying but Disney is a beast and short of having the characters in the parks cursing at guests i dont see them losing money.Disney is a great example of how weighing into politics can potentially damage a company.
A for-profit primarily exists to enrich its shareholders.
For most companies, customers run across the entire political spectrum. Taking stances on political issues risks alienating a percentage of paying customers, hurting overall sales and adversely impacting shareholders.
If shareholders say, “we don’t care about the money, this issue is more important to us then some lost sales,” then companies should actively pursue goals preferred by shareholders.
Chapek’s primary job is to enrich shareholders. But this does not mean Disney shareholders don’t have other objectives that are important to them.
Did Chapek engage with a majority of shareholders before taking his public stance or was his pushed into this stance solely by his employees? I genuinely don’t know - Chapek or his team might have discussed this issue privately with major shareholders before issuing the statements that he did. For all I know, a majority of shareholders back Chapek 100% on this.
Remember, the First Amendment protects you from the government. It does not protect you from other consequences of your words.
As Michael Jordan famously said, “Republicans buy sneakers, too.”
Many of us think this is an easy First Amendment victory for Disney, if they decide to go that path.
But, win or lose, what financial impact will this have on Disney? Do Disney shareholders think it was wise for Chapek to weigh in on this?
If we were to see an impact on their numbers, it would be in Q3.
I'm not necessarily saying that Disney's numbers will be hurt in sufficient amounts to justify a course correction. That said, their reputation has been shown to have taken a hit in several public opinion polls. Whether that translates into a noteworthy financial impact, only time will tell, and Q3 should give us an answer.Disney would be able to see a downturn earlier and would know today if there were any downsides to pushing their "politics," but considering that they double downed yesterday with the news on Pride month, it seems unlikely that they see any impact and/or see a greater risk in not continuing down this path.
It wasn't the same world before either. The norms that people followed were different in the past.Iger spoke out on politics many times without this sort of backlash. It's perfectly consistent to say that Chapek did a horrible job at messaging and at the same time recognize that it is Disney's constitutionally protected right to do so
I get it…but they don’t need a public stance. I guarantee Disney’s stock would be much higher with them just keeping quiet (regardless of their stance)
This entire thread would not exist if it was just a customer (or stockholder) reaction to Disney statements. Literally nobody in this thread would have any issue with any customer or stockholder reactions based on Disney's statements. All of that is expected, and exactly what should happen.Disney is a great example of how weighing into politics can potentially damage a company.
A for-profit primarily exists to enrich its shareholders.
For most companies, customers run across the entire political spectrum. Taking stances on political issues risks alienating a percentage of paying customers, hurting overall sales and adversely impacting shareholders.
Again, there’s not enough data to know at this time.
Did you even bother to read the rest of my post or did you just fixate on this one sentence?
Cost of fuel, and pretty much cost of everything, is eventually going to have an impact on discretionary spending for most except the most avid fans- especially as prices continue to go up.If we do see a lot of cancellations in the near future, I think the biggest culprit would likely be the cost of fuel, rather than political issues that most guests probably neither care about nor are aware of.
The cost of hotels, gas, and flights, even from a close place like NC, has been a factor into why we're not going this summer as usual. It doesn't mean we aren't going to try and sneak down for a weekend this fall, though. But in the short term, a summer jaunt to FL is financially out of the question.Cost of fuel, and pretty much cost of everything, is eventually going to have an impact on discretionary spending for most except the most avid fans- especially as prices continue to go up.
There should be outrage on both sides. As a Disney fan, they have looked foolish in lots of things over the last few years.
It’s dumb on both sides. They all need to stay in their lanes regardless of any believes or disagreements. Taking a stance one way or the other publicly alienates half of your customers in todays political climate which is not smart business.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.