The majority of them also have sparkly signatures laden with cr@p. I wouldn't put too much stock in their opinions.
This is funny and sadly true. As long as some people focus only on the pixie dust aspect of Disney, they'll miss everything else.
About the only thing Eisner had right was that Disney needed to diversify in order to be successful; but he misunderstood what "Disney" really meant to the public.
Let's briefly take a look at Walt's business by the time he died:
• Zorro
• MMC, including the Adv. of Spin and Marty, Hardy Boys, etc.
• True-Life Adventures
•
20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, The Swiss Family Robinson, The gy Dog, Mary Poppins, and other live-action films
• TV specials ranging from Disneyland to the Wonderful World of Color, all of which featured various programs
• An educational division
• A wide array of animated features, only three of which were actually fairy tales
• A massive library of animated shorts that featured characters with personalities. Mickey didn't just smile all the time.
• Disneyland, in which only Fantasyland was laden with characters
• Plans for E.P.C.O.T. (the Florida Project)
• Constant innovations from his Imagineers—so many, in fact, that companies begged him to construct their pavilions at the 1964 World's Fair
Disney has never only been about pixie dust. That's the result of marketing departments that don't really know their product.
And the company wonders why their reputation can't progress past children and tweens.