That didn’t take long

[Chef Mickey]

Do you think Disney is different than any other large company?

Yes, management matters. All I have to do is look at their earnings and stock performance. They are terrible and it's not because they don't charge enough.

Contrary to what casuals tell you, there are differences in how companies operate, their management, and their execution.

 

[DisneyHead123]

Disney doesn't sweat anything because they literally don't care about their shareholders or if they lose money. They have something else they care about more.

I use the word “sweat” loosely, because yeah, we’re lucky enough to live in a time and environment where the stakes are high but not that high. It’s not like a king is throwing people in the dungeon if their venture doesn’t bring glory to the kingdom or whatever they did in the dark ages. But within the relatively lower stakes capitalist framework they operate in, I think Disney is definitely trying to be a successful business. In fact I’d say they get more scrutiny specifically because they need to be constantly building and innovating in a way that many more static businesses do not.

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

What do they care about more than their shareholders?

Themselves

 

[Chi84]

Themselves

Who does that mean in a large corporation?

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

Who does that mean in a large corporation?

I'd think Director Level and above. Anybody with that low to mid six figure salary as a minimum, who is just looking out for the best interests of their personal gravy train.

 

[Chi84]

I'd think Director Level and above. Anybody with that low to mid six figure salary as a minimum, who is just looking out for the best interests of their personal gravy train.

How many people are at that level and wouldn’t their personal gravy trains conflict?

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

How many people are at that level and wouldn’t their personal gravy trains conflict?

Personal gravy trains conflict all the time. Hence, office politics.

 

[Chi84]

Personal gravy trains conflict all the time. Hence, office politics.

So how do they become united enough to care about “themselves” when running a large corporation?

How many people are at the director level?

 

[TheHonorableDisney]

Themselves

Yeah, they are a really unique business in that regard.

 

[Chi84]

Yeah, they are a really unique business in that regard.

How many people are we talking about?

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

So how do they become united enough to care about “themselves” when running a large corporation?

How many people are at the director level?

I wouldn't refer to "Themselves" as exactly uniting. It's only uniting when a group or faction realizes there is a common goal or benefit and uniting gives them a better chance of acheiving that goal or benefit.

I'd be guessing at a number.

It's not an issue exclusive to Disney. Most large companies have this dynamic. It's just seemed to get progressively worse with Disney over the past several years.

Do you remember the articles from a few years ago about the Chapek/Iger dyanmic where Chapek had his people and Iger had his? Decisions were made, projects were greenlit, budgets were approved, and changes happened.

Probably most if not all of that was done without too much thought about the customer and probably done without too much thought of the long term impact to the company.

It was all about which side you were on and how could you best position yourself for advancement. Now of course if you were on the losing side of that. Well. Then. You probably don't work at Disney anymore.

 

[Disstevefan1]

Who does that mean in a large corporation?

Iger for sure having made enough money for multiple lifetimes like a vampire, now that money is a long gone concern, Iger is most concerned about his legacy.

Then again he may be laughing at all of us on the way to the bank as he cant possibly live long enough to spend all of his money.

 

[Chi84]

I wouldn't refer to "Themselves" as exactly uniting. It's only uniting when a group or faction realizes there is a common goal or benefit and uniting gives them a better chance of acheiving that goal or benefit.

I'd be guessing at a number.

It's not an issue exclusive to Disney. Most large companies have this dynamic. It's just seemed to get progressively worse with Disney over the past several years.

Do you remember the articles from a few years ago about the Chapek/Iger dyanmic where Chapek had his people and Iger had his? Decisions were made, projects were greenlit, budgets were approved, and changes happened.

Probably most if not all of that was done without too much thought about the customer and probably done without too much thought of the long term impact to the company.

It was all about which side you were on and how could you best position yourself for advancement. Now of course if you were on the losing side of that. Well. Then. You probably don't work at Disney anymore.

Okay thanks for the explanation.

 

[TheHonorableDisney]

Are you suggesting that Martin and others do that?

I can be 100% against guardians in Epcot and still have a fun time when riding and experiencing it.

You just made literally the exact same point that I made, so unless that is what you are suggesting about Martin, I’m not sure why you would think that I was suggesting it?

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

You just made literally the exact same point that I made, so unless that is what you are suggesting about Martin, I’m not sure why you would think that I was suggesting it?

I just misread your post - I thought you were suggesting those with critical thoughts against the parks don’t have fun when they visit.

 

[TheHonorableDisney]

I just misread your post - I thought you were suggesting those with critical thoughts against the parks don’t have fun when they visit.

No, not at all! Trust me, I have a lot of complaints but I still manage to have a lot of fun. Indeed, your GOTG example was a perfect one!

 

[mkt]

I'd think Director Level and above. Anybody with that low to mid six figure salary as a minimum, who is just looking out for the best interests of their personal gravy train.

Saying TWDC only cares about directors and up misses the mark a bit. Plenty of Sr. Managers are in the low six figures after years in, and some highly specialized hourly CMs can technically break six figures too with brutal OT and no work-life balance.

Also, “Director” at an entertainment company isn’t necessarily some sacred executive tier. Depending on the function, that "director" is equivalent to a middle manager.

If you want to draw the line where the company really starts caring, shift it to VP and up. That’s where the perks, power, and protection start kicking in.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Saying TWDC only cares about directors and up misses the mark a bit. Plenty of Sr. Managers are in the low six figures after years in, and some highly specialized hourly CMs can technically break six figures too with brutal OT and no work-life balance.

Also, “Director” at an entertainment company isn’t necessarily some sacred executive tier. Depending on the function, that "director" is equivalent to a middle manager.

If you want to draw the line where the company really starts caring, shift it to VP and up. That’s where the perks, power, and protection start kicking in.

Lb for lb…Disney always has…and probably always will…pay a bit below market rate


They feel the nametag is part of the “compensation” in the long standing philosophy

 

[mkt]

Lb for lb…Disney always has…and probably always will…pay a bit below market rate


They feel the nametag is part of the “compensation” in the long standing philosophy

I don’t disagree. But I know people at managers and highly specialized hourly CMs at Disney titles pulling six figures, and “directors” making five figures who aren’t anywhere near executive-level. The original post is using a standard American corporate lens - but Disney doesn’t operate like a normal company. It just doesn’t.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I don’t disagree. But I know people at managers and highly specialized hourly CMs at Disney titles pulling six figures, and “directors” making five figures who aren’t anywhere near executive-level. The original post is using a standard American corporate lens - but Disney doesn’t operate like a normal company. It just doesn’t.

That’s fine…though “highly specialized hourly employees” is a bit of a misnomer

I prefer “unicorn positions”

Like waiters at the early character Buffetts in the 1980s would make $80,000 a year…enough to pay for a central Florida mansion in cash then…

PI bartenders would clean $1000 in off the books on son busy nights during its prime

Etc etc etc