Staggs resigns

[DGracey]

Another wrinkle in this twisted lemon, is Disney's corporate governance itself.

Media reports claim Staggs came under scrutiny by Disney board members who were not convinced he had the skills for CEO.

A Chief Executive Officer of a company normally deals with and reports to the Chairman of the Board on governance and executive issues.

Who is Chairman of the Board of Directors of The Walt Disney Company? Bob Iger.

Who is Chief Executive Officer of The Walt Disney Company? Bob Iger.

Bob Iger reports to ... Bob Iger.

I mention this because any way you slice it - Iger had his hands in this Staggs blowup big time. If members of the board did not think Staggs was fit for leadership, is that not an indictment of Iger's decision-making when he was the one who chose and promoted Staggs several times?

If members of the board felt Staggs was not CEO material, is it not an awkward structure to voice their opinion to the Chair of the Board - who also happens to be the CEO who Staggs directly reports to, and is the person solely responsible for Staggs being an Executive in the first place? How convoluted.

This is yet another reason why the positions of Chairman and CEO need to be separate. Iger can not be an objective Chairman when he also serves as CEO. They are two different functions of governance, and for good reason.

Oh - and as Chair of the Board, Iger is even more powerful to recommend a replacement for CEO than he ever would have been simply as CEO. How can a new Disney CEO be an agent of change if they are being appointment by the former CEO.

Save Disney.

 

[DallasDis]

I feel this has much more to do with ESPN than anything going on in Shanghai, MM+, or anything parks related.


Despite our feelings about the parks, from a bottom line standpoint they are solid. Attendance is up, profits are up, and even with cost over runs in Shanghai the cuts in other parks will off set them. From the perspective of the BOD they are probably happy with the Parks and Resorts division.


Disney's biggest problem is ESPN. The Media Markets division of Disney makes up 50% of their profit. ESPN is the biggest earner of that group and has for many years pulled in the cash. However cord cutting is a major concern and of all cable channels, ESPN may be the least prepared. It has huge contracts with the NFL, MLB, NCAA, etc. The model of ESPN is built upon the bundling of their channels with others. These contracts work in the model of ESPN being bundled with other channels to increase it's subscribers, but put it on a single platform and those contracts become a major liability. Wall Street is scarred of ESPN. That makes the BOD scarred of Tom Staggs and his inexperience with Media Markets. He spent the last year focusing mainly on this division.


From the perspective of the BOD, the next CEOs most important job will be dealing with the major problem of ESPN.

 

[DallasDis]

Another wrinkle in this twisted lemon, is Disney's corporate governance itself.

Media reports claim Staggs came under scrutiny by Disney board members who were not convinced he had the skills for CEO.

A Chief Executive Officer of a company normally deals with and reports to the Chairman of the Board on governance and executive issues.

Who is Chairman of the Board of Directors of The Walt Disney Company? Bob Iger.

Who is Chief Executive Officer of The Walt Disney Company? Bob Iger.

Bob Iger reports to ... Bob Iger.

I mention this because any way you slice it - Iger had his hands in this Staggs blowup big time. If members of the board did not think Staggs was fit for leadership, is that not an indictment of Iger's decision-making when he was the one who chose and promoted Staggs several times?

If members of the board felt Staggs was not CEO material, is it not an awkward structure to voice their opinion to the Chair of the Board - who also happens to be the CEO who Staggs directly reports to, and is the person solely responsible for Staggs being an Executive in the first place? How convoluted.

This is yet another reason why the positions of Chairman and CEO need to be separate. Iger can not be an objective Chairman when he also serves as CEO. They are two different functions of governance, and for good reason.

Oh - and as Chair of the Board, Iger is even more powerful to recommend a replacement for CEO than he ever would have been simply as CEO. How can a new Disney CEO be an agent of change if they are being appointment by the former CEO.

Save Disney.

The dual role of CEO/Chairman of the board isn't usually, but it's not uncommon. As a matter of fact Roy Disney was the Chairman/CEO!

While Bob is the Chairman, he is not the only voice in the room.

 

[DGracey]

The dual role of CEO/Chairman of the board isn't usually, but it's not uncommon. As a matter of fact Roy Disney was the Chairman/CEO!

While Bob is the Chairman, he is not the only voice in the room.

It's not uncommon, but that doesn't make it right either.

And Bob Iger, is not Roy Disney.

 

[mp2bill]

Reading the article (which is just unnamed sources but it's the Times so prob accurate) it sounds like he was told he wouldn't be made CEO.

Not clear if Shanghai factors at all.

I can't imagine how much that would suck to be told that ahead of time. However, I'd imagine that Shanghai does factor in given the issues it's had and the effect it's had on other parks.

 

[DallasDis]

It's not uncommon, but that doesn't make it right either.

And Bob Iger, is not Roy Disney.

Also doesn't make it wrong.

 

[rljackson]

Conflicted about this news. As a stockholder I have been very pleased with Iger's performance and if he supported Staggs I liked the idea of an orderly transition which is good for business. After all, this is a business and you must make money to build all those new attractions. However, as a fan of the parks I have been less than satisfied with the quality of some of the new attractions and have a sense that they were less than the level of quality I expect from Disney. I hope the new CEO will be more attentive to the Parks (especially Disney World) and spending what it takes to deliver the best.

This selection will be an interesting process which I will be watching closely and boy do I hope they get it right.

 

[RSoxNo1]

Who will be Bob's riding buddy now?

View attachment 136800View attachment 136801

Searches for clip of Stacey J saying, "That's my ride buddy!"

 

[UncleMike101]

Although highly far-fetched, I would like to believe Tom was fired for those awful quotes posted on the Disney Parks Blog, which justified the addition of Frozen to the Norway Pavilion in Epcot.

Exactly!!
IMO
The Disney execs don't have the slightest idea of what most people consider worthy of being called an Icon.
It takes decades for a character, whether cartoon or real, to become so endeared to the Public that they are given the title of "Icon".
The characters that DLC and WDW were founded on were exactly that, Icons!
Mickey, Minnie, Donald, Goofy, Pluto, Chip & Dale, et al were part of growing up in America for many decades before we thought of them as part and parcel of our world.
Live actors like John Wayne, Jimmy Stuart, Betty Davis, Donna Reed, and others, didn't receive the Icon label until late in their lives after hundreds of successful films.
To hold new characters, from new films that happened to gross well at the box office, up and declare them to be Icons is not only presumptuous but invasive as well.
I take exception to the people who are making obscene incomes from those films telling me that I must consider them Icons because a theme park ride has been built in their honor.

There!!!
Got that off my chest.....


.

 

[GoofGoof]

The dual role of CEO/Chairman of the board isn't usually, but it's not uncommon. As a matter of fact Roy Disney was the Chairman/CEO!

While Bob is the Chairman, he is not the only voice in the room.

It's not uncommon, but that doesn't make it right either.

And Bob Iger, is not Roy Disney.

It's not as common as it once was in the US. After the financial markets collapsed in 2008 there was a major push to separate the roles and keep Boards more independent. I think its about a 50/50 split now (maybe higher) with Fortune 500 companies but that's way up from where it was. Disney is a dinosaur and not quick to change but maybe with the new CEO they will consider it.

 

[RSoxNo1]

ESPN keeps getting trotted out as a great punching bag. There may be issues there, but they are much less significant than fans want to believe.

Shanghai has been a (pooh) show since the start. I don't care how kewl drone pics look to fanbois in the Twitverse who are too afraid to ever travel over there.

Beyond being hurt financially, ESPN's credibility has taken a big hit over the last year or two, largely because of their NFL coverage.

They had a history of getting great personalities and when those personalities get too big for ESPN to control they push them out.

Their refusal to hold the NFL accountable for the Ray Rice situation is deplorable and they followed that up with the far less serious but equally mis-reported Deflategate. Add in the lack of reporting on concussions and you have a pretty strong trio of failure.

I hold ESPN responsible for Roger Goodell still having a job.

 

[Rodan75]

The board originally signed off on Staggs and the COO position, so to say now that he isn't potential CEO material in 2 years, says a lot. His decisions, including TSL, Shanghai, SWL and his 'deep dive' into media networks must have created enough havoc that he is seen as unsalvageable by more than just Ike.

As someone else mentioned, Iger must have soured on him as well.

 

[RSoxNo1]

I volunteer

I volunteer as tribute.

 

[ThemeParkJunkee]

So since it is tax season and I catch up on this board after I get off work at 8PM, let me just say...wow.

During the debacle that was MM+, I considered Staggs my nemesis as he peppered the media with interviews about the fabulousness of magic bands and the like. Buh Bye.

Meanwhile @DGracey brings up a huge point that has always bothered me as both a guest and a stockholder. Why, after the messes in the past (see Disney War) is the Chairman of the Board also the CEO? This is not a closely held company any longer. This is not a domestic company. This is a multinational, mega company with fingers in a lot of pies. Retirement accounts depend on the success of this company. Fans depend on the success of this company. Robert Iger reporting to a board led by Robert Iger bothers me every time I get my proxy statements. (so does Cap-ex as a percentage of total revenue but that's another topic).

Here's hoping for new, creative ideas and an outside candidate. I'm watching closely. Carry on.

 

[RSoxNo1]

Attendees at D23 will be vetted before entry is allowed. Only the lifestylers and DVC Forever Fan Club attendees are allowed in.

Iger would only appear if he was giving information that would illicit cheers.

 

[DallasDis]

It should be noted in the discussion of Iger as CEO/Chairman of the board that he has only held both titles since 2012.
My guess - no insider board knowledge - is that him becoming CEO/Chairman is part of the succession plan. The board loves Iger and if he could step into the Chairman role exclusively once a new CEO comes in, I'm sure they would love it.

 

[jt04]

I saw the warning signs when he took a chainsaw to FLE 1.O. Just seemed heavy handed even if well meaning.

Outta this thread before it gets too crazy. Star Wars Land is happening. Just wanted to say that before someone starts rumors to the contrary. Night all.

 

[RSoxNo1]

And to think Tom Staggs was all that stood between us and coloring with Sleeping Beauty in New Fantasyland.

My, how the mighty have fallen.

(But seriously, remember when some fans championed him for "fixing" the too-girly NFL...)

Staggs was probably better than Rasulo for the parks, but that's not saying much.

 

[Atomicmickey]

I think this whole thing is ginned up to deflect attention from the value-engineered cuts to the slinky dog coaster.

False flag.

 

[doctornick]

A name not referenced around this place enough is ... Isaac Perlmutter.

When Disney got Marvel, it got Ike too.

The Marvel purchase made Perlmutter one of the largest single shareholders of the Walt Disney Company.

And being the largest shareholder comes with great power and sway - with the board and over Iger (it's like Sid Bass' control over Eisner all over again).

Who has Isaac Perlmutter not liked in the Disney executive suite for years? Tom Staggs.

Rumours continually persisted Ike did not respect Staggs creative sensibilities or decisions.

In short Disney history - Perlmutter got former Consumer Products head Andy Mooney booted because he didn't like the way Marvel characters were sold, so he got someone he liked put into head that division - Bob Chapek. Then when Staggs moved to COO and Chapek took his place at Parks, Staggs put Leslie Ferraro in Consumer Products. Guess what happened there? Perlmutter did not like Staggs choice in Ferraro either - and poof - 9 months into her new role she was already gone.

Perlmutter likely strongly signalled - as Disney's largest shareholder and an activist one at that - there was no way he was supporting Staggs for the top job. And Disney's board (representing shareholders!) got the message too - Staggs was clearly out. Staggs got the message.

Iger put Staggs in the COO post so he could prove he was a worthy heir. But it actually proved the opposite - it was never meant to be.

But if Perlmutter has so much power, then he wouldn't have lost control of the Marvel Film division. Perlmutter ran that (and was notoriously miserly about it) and Feige got enough goodwill and managed to break free and now answers directly to Alan Horn.

Also, IIRC, Perlmutter is not the largest shareholder. It should be the Jobs estate, then Lucas. Eisner might even be higher than Perlmutter. Of course, these things can change when people sell or buy shares.

Edit: Nevermind, I see this stuff was already mentioned.