MerlinTheGoat
Well-Known Member
No that wording was my own joke on the situation, but that is effectively the message being communicated regardless. Iger has a $2.5+ billion disaster on his hands with the magicband garbage (how much is it now?), and his short term solution is to further slash and mutilate operations budgets in an attempt to sweep the mess under the rug. Maintenance is getting ever worse (now even Disneyland is reportedly beginning to show signs of decay again) and any new attractions/expansions probably aren't going to fare well once their budgets have gone through the bean counters' slimy hands. I don't see how they can keep this mess quiet though no matter how much they cut, the budget has gotten wildly out of control with still no end in sight and there are no signs that it's going to be able to start being majorly profitable for them in the way Iger and his flunkies promised the board...
I don't know whether he did or didn't care about the parks in the end. I get the impression that he did initially care up until around 1994. My impression as a child of that era was that he enjoyed the things his company was creating (it was neat to see him get on TV to talk about new rides or even introduce the Wonderful World of Disney movies). But I also realize that people can change (for better or for worse and it can happen no matter what age you are) and sometimes lose interest in (or even turn against) things we used to love. So no I didn't know how Eisner personally felt about the parks in the latter half of his time as CEO. Given the bad conditions the parks were in along with the poor quality of new attractions (in stark contrast to the fantastic condition of the parks and amazing new rides in the first half of his reign), I assumed he lost interest in the parks or something during the latter half of his reign. I assumed something happened to change him. Whether it was due to Wells' death, or the failure of Disneyland Paris financially, or heck even the surgery he went through (i've heard of people who have changed due to health problems). If i'm wrong then you've just corrected me, but something definitely seems to have happened to put a damper on park quality right around that general vicinity of time. And that shift in quality ended up eventually affecting other aspects of the company such as movies and TV.
The disastrous safety inspections I was referring to are in regards to the deaths of several guests on Disneyland attractions. Big Thunder and Columbia for example were apparently found out to be caused by improper maintenance or operation (and if there's another story to that then I am not aware of it, it was reported by mainstream media to be caused by poor maintenance or improper operation of rides). Possibly other issues as well in other attractions. I've heard Space Mountain wasn't in great condition in 2000 when one of the vehicles lost a wheel. Accidents can always happen, but some were definitely preventable with proper maintenance. And that was clearly lacking for quite a long time before Eisner took the initiative to put Ouimet in charge of cleaning the place up for the 50th.
I see the problems that happened during that era kind of like a sort of parent-children situation (though obviously much more complex and difficult to handle of course). Heck any situation with a hierarchy of power could be compared to a parent-child situation. Where Eisner (and now Iger) represents the supervising parent, and the park managers (among other executives under Eisner) are the children. While it's often the kid directly responsible when they misbehave (and they lie about it to avoid being caught just like the executives at Disney) a lot of the problems with the kids can be traced back to the parent (the leader in charge). Even if the parent didn't deliberately raise their kids to misbehave and had good intentions, it's still a part of their job to properly police and discipline their children when necessary to keep them in line, and to see through their deception when they try to get away with it. It requires diligence though.
I'm completely open to changing my views about how directly responsible Eisner was for certain things that happened during his reign. Heck i'm happy to know that the guy cared more than I suspected, I actually liked him as a kid as I said when he'd get on TV to talk about exciting new projects. But i'm still of the opinion that he didn't do enough to prevent issues from occurring and still contributed to the escalation of budget cuts that has now gotten out of control and become the norm. But regardless, your comments have piqued my interest in Eisner again and made me wonder where the Disney company would be today had he been left in charge. Still think that going forward Disney needs some new blood more willing to invest in quality and creativity again. Either way though I think you and I both agree that the current state under Iger is looking absolutely dire, and the future isn't looking better (worse even)...
I definitely understand Iger's BS, but I was under the impression Eisner had some hand in his rise to power within Disney's ranks (before he was kicked out). I thought he actively helped Iger gain influence in the company (and other bean counters). Roy Disney Jr liked Iger though didn't he (he certainly seemed to hate Eisner at the end, though only because of stock prices as you said)? Or is that another lie being spread around online?
I'm curious as to what lies were cobbled together to cover up blatantly obvious maintenance problems that Eisner would have little choice but to notice whenever he visited Disneyland (which I assume he did often enough given the comments here). It would have been hard not to notice them and see that there were problems that never used to be there before his budget cuts. It should have raised eyebrows for most meticulous persons running such a quality oriented company. With his appointment of Ouimet it does sound like he did make attempts to correct mistakes, but it was too little too late for him (and we're kind of back in an even bigger mess now that Iger has control).True. I always say a fish rots from the head down. ... BUT ... the reality of the situation is that lots of folks under him either lied, did bad jobs, were afraid to tell him the truth or just didn't care. Some of that certainly bounces back on him. I really don't know how much because I do understand how small many of these people (some still working at Disney ... how you doing Georgie?) can be.
Last edited:
