Roy & Stanley to sue Disney

askmike1

Member
General Grizz said:
When many of the ex-Florida animators I know refer to someone to thank for the revival, it's Roy.
I wonder why.:rolleyes: Would you thank the person who fired you? I don't think so. As for Roy, one can say that he was initially good but the last 10 years he has slipped. Where was he during Treasure Planet(-142)...Atlantis(-71)...Fantasia 2000(-45)? The numbers in parenteses is the amount in millions the film lost. I'm not saying these films are bad (I like all of these), but where was Roy?

-Michael
 

askmike1

Member
angelfaerie52 said:
He resigned... he could have fought the age limit, which was made to get rid of Roy and other older Disney heads... there was talking of "letting" him stay if it was going to be a big deal, but he quit instead.
Thre is a chance I'm wrong, but didn't Roy himself vote for that age rule?

Didn't WDFA begin to suffer once JK left......if my timeline is correct
Box Office wise, yes it did.

-Michael
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
askmike1 said:
I wonder why.:rolleyes: Would you thank the person who fired you? I don't think so. As for Roy, one can say that he was initially good but the last 10 years he has slipped. Where was he during Treasure Planet(-142)...Atlantis(-71)...Fantasia 2000(-45)? The numbers in parenteses is the amount in millions the film lost. I'm not saying these films are bad (I like all of these), but where was Roy?

-Michael

Roy seems to have a track record with WDFA similar to that which the Roy fans say Eisner has....things started out good, but then it all went to crap....

Of course Roy fans will blame this back to Eisner anyway....
 

angelfaerie52

New Member
He's been working in animation since the 80s... I believe he last worked with Lilo and Stitch.

But my answer as to why does he care? HE'S THE ONLY DISNEY LEFT IN THE COMPANY. i mean, that is important. he also emulated many of Walt's view on quality, not financial cuts like Eisner.

speck76 said:
Didn't WDFA begin to suffer once JK left......if my timeline is correct

If he left after Lion King, then the last film that he would have had influence over would have been Hercules or Mulan....correct?
 

angelfaerie52

New Member
He was taken to lunch by one of Eisner's board members when he was told. They said he wouldn't get renominated to the board, etc. So he resigned the next day.

There are a million other things which Eisner did that just insult the Disney name. He went on Larry King Live and went on and on about how Walt was buried in some unmarked field, but that's not true. His ashes are in a public area, and so are Lillian's. It's no big secret. It's bull like that which has Diane Disney Miller hating on Eisner as well.

askmike1 said:
Thre is a chance I'm wrong, but didn't Roy himself vote for that age rule?

Box Office wise, yes it did.

-Michael
 

askmike1

Member
400th Post

angelfaerie52 said:
But my answer as to why does he care? HE'S THE ONLY DISNEY LEFT IN THE COMPANY. i mean, that is important. he also emulated many of Walt's view on quality, not financial cuts like Eisner.
He is no longer in the company. He is no more in the company than Diane Disney-Miller or any of his or her children. Also, no one is like Walt and nobody knows what he would think. HIs own family was surprised at some of the things he did (wife, brother, children, etc).

-Michael
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
angelfaerie52 said:
He's been working in animation since the 80s... I believe he last worked with Lilo and Stitch.

But my answer as to why does he care? HE'S THE ONLY DISNEY LEFT IN THE COMPANY. i mean, that is important. he also emulated many of Walt's view on quality, not financial cuts like Eisner.

Just because he is part of the Disney family, it does not mean he holds the same views or talents of Walt.

Hilton is a company that was a "Family business" but does that mean that Paris and Nikki should be on the Board of Directors?
 

angelfaerie52

New Member
Roy didn't push the Comcast bid. He was opposed to it, like Eisner, which was pretty ironic because SaveDisney was just getting started at that point.

Thrawn said:
Because he's a Disney, you're right in that.
His cause is correct though. He's trying to restore "Walt Disney" to the WDC. Yes, it will benefit him to do so. But who does anything that wouldn't benefit themselves?

Woody, you're a little incorrect on that facts you posted, but close enough, and thats 20 years in the past. The Comcast bid, well, that was probably pushed by Roy, yes.
 

mickhyperion

Active Member
CTXRover, you ask interesting questions. Just as your comments were not aimed at me personally, mine are not aimed at you. (Is that clear to everyone? ...Thrawn?)

CTXRover said:
While not true (well, at least I hope so), it raises the question, what is really driving these men's quest now?
I think at this exact moment in time the driving factor is that Disney & Gold feel the board has essentially lied about conducting a proper search for a new CEO.

CTXRover said:
...it was really about a personal vidnetta against Eisner and basically utter hate for the board.
I don't think it's a personal vendetta at all. Disney & Gold have made their points numerous times about TWDC's board being completely under the thumb of Eisner which has more to do with ethical corporate governance than whether or not Mikey and Roy like each other. Disney & Gold's point is that there might as well not even be a board as it stands now because they believe the only person making decisions is Eisner. Eisner has a history of driving out any dissenting point of view and demanding that everything be his way or no way. Disney & Gold feel he has groomed the board so that it is now completely under his control. This is an unethical way to govern a corporation.
 

Thrawn

Account Suspended
angelfaerie52 said:
Roy didn't push the Comcast bid. He was opposed to it, like Eisner, which was pretty ironic because SaveDisney was just getting started at that point.

Thats one heck of a coincidence. A company like Comcast doesn't make a hostile takeover bid and then retract it out of the blue. They talk to someone in the know about it.
 

Thrawn

Account Suspended
mickhyperion said:
CTXRover, you ask interesting questions. Just as your comments were not aimed at me personally, mine are not aimed at you. (Is that clear to everyone? ...Thrawn?)

I don't care who you talk to, the point of my post was that you had no idea what you were posting about, and your post was very inflammatory towards everything you mentioned.

As for the rest of the post of yours that I quoted this time: This suit has absolutely nothing to do with Eisner. He's gone. That part is done. In Oct when the change happens, he is no longer part of TWDC.
 

Woody13

New Member
angelfaerie52 said:
Roy didn't push the Comcast bid. He was opposed to it, like Eisner, which was pretty ironic because SaveDisney was just getting started at that point.
May I remind you that back in 2003, Roy sold 7.5 million shares of his Disney stock (40% of his holdings). He also retained the voting rights on those shares until 2008! Roy Disney and Stan Gold run Shamrock Holdings. They specialize in corporate takeovers and slum landlord acquisitions (among several other undesirable ventures). As I stated before, don't listen to what they say, watch what they do.
 

General Grizz

New Member
askmike1 said:
I wonder why.:rolleyes: Would you thank the person who fired you? I don't think so. As for Roy, one can say that he was initially good but the last 10 years he has slipped. Where was he during Treasure Planet(-142)...Atlantis(-71)...Fantasia 2000(-45)? The numbers in parenteses is the amount in millions the film lost. I'm not saying these films are bad (I like all of these), but where was Roy?

-Michael

Atlantis and Treasure Planet lost tons of money. I didn't like the films. Didn't like Home on the Range, either. But I don't believe these failures should be blamed on Roy. (As we know, his power was being slowly diminished before he resigned in 2003). Take it from one animator who supports Mr. Disney (keep that in mind):

Ex-animator said:
Many of you may already know that I have left the studio. For some, this fact may have slipped by unnoticed. But, whatever category you may fall into, I can assure you that the decision to leave Disney Feature Animation was neither an easy or quick choice to make.

You see, I have a very deep affinity for and commitment to the medium of character animation as both a vocation and as an art form. It is an appreciation that I have cultivated since I was a child. I feel it has been a dream come true and a great blessing to have worked in the animation industry and particularly at Disney Feature Animation for the past 20 some years. The shouldering of the arduous work of Disney quality animation and the resulting characters that I have helped bring to life on the screen are achievements that I am indeed proud of. I also feel extremely fortunate to have had the opportunity to work with such fine fellow artists during this time. To have helped contribute to the great rediscovery of Disney Feature Animation through the success of the "The Little Mermaid", "Aladdin", "Beauty & The Beast", "Pocahontas", "The Lion King", "The Hunchback of Notre Dame", and "Atlantis."

But, despite the joy of having been associated with these productions, I have known for some time that there was trouble in paradise. I have watched with increasing concern and consternation as the artists of the studio were ever increasingly left out of the creative process to the point where their contribution was reduced to little more than numbers on a ledger. I helplessly watched as projects not fully developed were pushed into production, despite the warnings of animation veterans, and saw millions and millions of dollars needlessly wasted. I have seen focus groups and business people steering the path of projects and effectively stealing the soul out of an idea right before our eyes. I have endured the pain of having my voice silenced as my harmless "Potts Picks" articles in "The Twilight Bark", (Remember that? The newsletter created as an outlet and a source of information by the artists for the artists?), were stopped by the powers that be.

These things, (and many others that would be pointless to recount in this writing), I could no longer bear. To that end, I made the personal decision in 1998 when I left the ill fated "Kingdom of the Sun" that, if things did not improve in the department, I would finish out my contract and move away from Feature Animation. It is an understatement to say that things did not improve. On the contrary, conditions worsened. Morale at the studio has not been lower since I began work in the animation department some 20 years ago and, from what I understand from the old timers, it has never been lower in the whole 65-year history of Feature Animation production. I am also well aware that the majority of my artistic colleagues, from the top down, share these sentiments.

Through my final years at Disney I have made it a point to always remain professional in spite of some very unscrupulous and unprofessional behavior focused both personally and at the production staff. I continued, to the end, to honor my word and fulfill contractual obligations by offering the highest quality character design and animation that I was capable of achieving in the style, tradition and philosophy handed down to me by Eric Larson, Frank Thomas and Ollie Johnston among others.

I would like to thank the creative leads of the studio. By this I mean the directors of the films I have been associated with. The people who, from time to time, made things tough for me, but who helped push me into areas of greater creativity that I was not even aware were within me. I have enjoyed working as a team on the Disney animated pictures, side by side with other fine artists in an effort to make something greater than anything we could have done on our own. In the end, it is the people of Feature Animation that I will miss. It is that and the personal feeling of accomplishment in my life. The feeling of being a part of a great family of entertainment. A legacy shared with some of the great films of all time: "Snow White and the Seven Dwarves", "Cinderella", "Peter Pan", "Lady and the Tramp" and "Dumbo" to name just a few.

I wish you all well in whatever changes may come to Feature Animation. And, in closing, I encourage all the creative staff left, when the smoke of recent developments clears and the damage is accessed, to return to using our hearts as well as our heads to create stories and characters that we KNOW are true. To avoid settling for what we think executives and audiences want to see, but instead to trust our instincts and our imaginations to lead the way. This is the kind of gut level creativity that I believe Walt Disney himself brought to the art of film animation and to theme parks and to television and to anything else he touched. It is what made Walt Disney Studios great, it is what made Walt Disney Studios last and it is what is most needed right now.

So, in the words of Mrs. Potts, "Back to the cupboard with you, now."
 

Thrawn

Account Suspended
Woody13 said:
May I remind you that back in 2003, Roy sold 7.5 million shares of his Disney stock (40% of his holdings). He also retained the voting rights on those shares until 2008! Roy Disney and Stan Gold run Shamrock Holdings. They specialize in corporate takeovers and slum landlord acquisitions (among several other undesirable ventures). As I stated before, don't listen to what they say, watch what they do.

So corporate takeovers and slum landlord acquisitions are always a bad thing?
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
Fromt Shamrock's Website

Shamrock has been an activist investor for over two decades. During this time, Shamrock has utilized its activist strategy to invest over $600 million of investment capital in 21 companies.

Shamrock's theory of activist investing relies on the ability of an influential shareholder to steer corporate decisions in a manner that will unlock shareholder value. Our activist investment philosophy is simple:

A disciplined search for companies with deep value

Buying influential equity stakes that permit responsible activism

Using that position to promote strategic, structural, financial and operational improvements and to establish best governance practices

The Shamrock Team has extensive experience working in the “trenches” to assist Portfolio Companies in enhancing shareholder value through the companies' developing new business strategies, recapitalizing their balance sheets, instituting corporate restructurings, divesting subsidiaries or divisions, upgrading management teams and streamlining operations.
 

Thrawn

Account Suspended
speck76 said:
Shamrock has been an activist investor for over two decades. During this time, Shamrock has utilized its activist strategy to invest over $600 million of investment capital in 21 companies.

Shamrock's theory of activist investing relies on the ability of an influential shareholder to steer corporate decisions in a manner that will unlock shareholder value. Our activist investment philosophy is simple:
A disciplined search for companies with deep value
Buying influential equity stakes that permit responsible activism
Using that position to promote strategic, structural, financial and operational improvements and to establish best governance practices
The Shamrock Team has extensive experience working in the “trenches” to assist Portfolio Companies in enhancing shareholder value through the companies' developing new business strategies, recapitalizing their balance sheets, instituting corporate restructurings, divesting subsidiaries or divisions, upgrading management teams and streamlining operations.


No different than any other Holding company.

A question for speck and woody: Regardless of your feelings for Roy, shouldn't someone be trying to do what he is? Bring the spirit of Walt back to the high ups of TWDC? And if no one else will, then look who we are stuck with.
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
Thrawn said:
No different than any other Holding company.

A question for speck and woody: Regardless of your feelings for Roy, shouldn't someone be trying to do what he is? Bring the spirit of Walt back to the high ups of TWDC? And if no one else will, then look who we are stuck with.

I think his "Bring back the spirit of Walt" crap is just that, crap.....nothing more than a red herring....
 

Woody13

New Member
Thrawn said:
So corporate takeovers and slum landlord acquisitions are always a bad thing?
No, not at all. Just pointing out that Roy and Stan are known to be the types to do most anything to make a buck. They'll tell you anything, if it makes the look good. They are not to be trusted.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom