Spirited News & Observations II -- NGE/Baxter

HMF

HMF

Well-Known Member
WDW1974 said:
No, it was created for MK. And shilled as such ... until Tony departed.

Maybe Bruce accidentally poured acid all over it?
Click to expand...
Wait a minute, What were the circumstances, Did Tony leave voluntarily in protest or was he forced out? because if they were planning to let him go to begin with then why bother to unveil that portrait which is clearly a tribute.
 
WDW1974

WDW1974

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
WDW1974

WDW1974

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
asianway said:
A group of people implementing this that have zero operations experience whatsoever...

Isn't McPhees role to make sure this kind of eff up wouldn't happen?
Click to expand...

Sorta.

But so many things have slipped through the cracks.

MM+ was designed for guests who either stay at Disney resorts or don't. They didn't stop and think that Swan/Dolphin/DD Hilton have always had special relationships with Disney ... and the rest of the Hotel Plaza properties ostensibly do as well.
 
WDW1974

WDW1974

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
HMF said:
Wait a minute, What were the circumstances, Did Tony leave voluntarily in protest or was he forced out? because if they were planning to let him go to begin with then why bother to unveil that portrait which is clearly a tribute.
Click to expand...

I have said all that I am going to say regarding Tony's leaving the company.

What you are asking isn't really important at all anyway. What is important is the fact the parting was in no way amicable. Just as much of Tony's final 15 years (yep, that long!) weren't very amicable.
 
HenryMystic

HenryMystic

Well-Known Member
WDW1974 said:
Since I just read this, why shouldn't you guys/gals?

It speaks to one of best execs in Disney's stable -- and he's an outsider. Fitting reading with Oz unspooling today.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324034804578344372132435986.html

EDIT: and a longer read that I haven't read yet for the Star Wars geeks:

http://www.businessweek.com/article...-bought-lucasfilm-and-its-plans-for-star-wars
Click to expand...
As far as I can tell, no twits are at the midnight showing and the film has been downgraded to "rotten" on rotten tomatoes.

I think $80m domestic is way too optimistic.
 
WDW1974

WDW1974

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
HenryMystic said:
As far as I can tell, no twits are at the midnight showing and the film has been downgraded to "rotten" on rotten tomatoes.

I think $80m domestic is way too optimistic.
Click to expand...

The Twits either went to the Blog showing for free or to 'media' showings for free. You think they're going to PAY for a movie?!?!

I am sticking with my $69 million prediction, but I'm also not heading out to see it this weekend.

BTW, we need to get my old @EPCOT Explorer buddy to get his lazy over here and post 1,002 times (@Lee says he can do it in a week, I say two) so he can claim 50K posts and get a free FP to an attraction of his choice at Epcot. So anyone in the Twitverse, hit him up and harass and harangue until he stops Tweeting in his sleep and rejoins this MAGICal community.
 
articos

articos

Well-Known Member
WDW1974 said:
Since I just read this, why shouldn't you guys/gals?

It speaks to one of the best execs in Disney's stable -- and he's an outsider. Fitting reading with Oz unspooling today.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324034804578344372132435986.html
Click to expand...
Alan is a class act and incredibly intelligent and savvy. He knew Oz's problems and did what he could to fix them (which isn't much) - more importantly, he added an element that could be merchandisable and/or creatively used in the parks, on purpose. His challenge is going to be getting himself up to date on digital, like the article says.
 
George

George

Liker of Things
Premium Member
WDW1974 said:
BTW, we need to get my old @EPCOT Explorer buddy to get his lazy over here and post 1,002 times (@Lee says he can do it in a week, I say two) so he can claim 50K posts and get a free FP to an attraction of his choice at Epcot. So anyone in the Twitverse, hit him up and harass and harangue until he stops Tweeting in his sleep and rejoins this MAGICal community.
Click to expand...

Just for bleeps and giggles? I like the guy OK, but he does single handedly make the entire board move at such a pace that I actually ignored him a couple of times, just so I could see was being talked about (then un-ignored, since his posts didn't bother me just the rapid fire speed). I think if he posts at his original pace he might be able to do it in a week. He did slow down a bit over time. Also, I have a memory of some kind of banning? Is that a false memory? Drama can fly right by me and my interest in it is less than many so I am very often wrong about such things.
 
Lee

Lee

Adventurer
ASJHLJ said:
Also, I have a memory of some kind of banning? Is that a false memory? Drama can fly right by me and my interest in it is less than many so I am very often wrong about such things.
Click to expand...
Though there was a lot of banning happening around that time, he wasn't one of them.
His exile is self-imposed.

He really should make a triumphant return, even if only for a limited time.
(Not that he's reading this or anything...)
 
wm49rs

wm49rs

A naughty bit o' crumpet
Premium Member
Lee said:
Though there was a lot of banning happening around that time, he wasn't one of them.
His exile is self-imposed.

He really should make a triumphant return, even if only for a limited time.
(Not that he's reading this or anything...)
Click to expand...

I think it was made pretty clear that his presence was not longer welcomed.....
 
Lee

Lee

Adventurer
wm49rs said:
I think it was made pretty clear that his presence was not longer welcomed.....
Click to expand...
I didn't get that, else he would've been banned along with the rest of the...ummm....damn, I hate to say it....malcontents.
(Apologies)

I saw it more like he was grounded and sent to his room and just never came out. Just stayed in there...tweeting.
 
tracyandalex

tracyandalex

Well-Known Member
Figments Friend

Figments Friend

Well-Known Member
WDW1974 said:
I have said all that I am going to say regarding Tony's leaving the company.

What you are asking isn't really important at all anyway. What is important is the fact the parting was in no way amicable. Just as much of Tony's final 15 years (yep, that long!) weren't very amicable.
Click to expand...
-
Sad, but true.
One can only imagine what the guy was going through those last few years.
A four letter word comes to mind....

:oops:
 
dhall

dhall

Well-Known Member
Here's an article that seems to reinforce all sides to the privacy debate:

http://www.propublica.org/article/everything-we-know-about-what-data-brokers-know-about-you?1

From the article:

But thanks to California's "Shine the Light" law, researchers at U.C. Berkeley were able to get a small glimpse of how companies sell or share your data. The study recruited volunteers to ask more than 80 companies how the volunteers' information was being shared.

Only two companies actually responded with details about how volunteers' information had been shared.

...

Walt Disney also responded and described sharing even more information: not just a person's name and address and what they purchased, but their age, occupation, and the number, age and gender of their children. It listed companies that received data, among them companies owned by Disney, like ABC and ESPN, as well as others, including Honda, HarperCollins Publishing, Almay cosmetics, and yogurt company Dannon.

But Disney spokeswoman Zenia Mucha said that Disney's letter, sent in 2007, "wasn't clear" about how the data was actually shared with different companies on the list. Outside companies like Honda only received personal information as part of a contest, sweepstakes, or other joint promotion that they had done with Disney, Mucha said. The data was shared "for the fulfillment of that contest prize, not for their own marketing purposes."
Click to expand...
 
flynnibus

flynnibus

Premium Member
dhall said:
Here's an article that seems to reinforce all sides to the privacy debate:
Click to expand...

Yup - you aren't anonymous once you start sharing your info with others. And while the government could in theory make it illegal to share your data with others without your permission.. I find it highly unlikely you would ever reach a point where it would be illegal for companies to collect that data themselves.

The best you can do right now is force companies with your dollars to implement and adhere to better privacy standards.

Hiding yourself from a company I think is futile - but countering the idea that you should be a commodity that can be resold is worthwhile fight IMO.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom