The Spirited Sixth Sense ...

[Kuzcotopia]

I'm wondering that too, if it's supposed to be a jab back from us railing on him.

I wish this part were true.

If a corporate executive falls in the mesageboards , does he make a sound?

 

[Captain Neo]

But I can safely say that whether this was true or not, I don't believe the timing was coincidental. Bob knew Michael was going to WDW and who he was going with before Michael tweeted those adorable pics to the world. He also knew that people would make the usual excuses they do for people of power and privilege getting to cut in front of the rest of the dirty huddled masses. So, very few people would be angry that Bob Iger doesn't wait for anything and simply goes in front of people who paid to be there.

I do find it amusing that this little note just slid on into that column after the EisnerTweets, though.

Come on WDW1974 give it a rest already. There is no big conspiracy here. Bob goes to the parks just as much as Eisner did. It is purely a coincidence that Eisner took his grandkids to WDW around the same time Iger took his family to Disneyland.

Concerning using power to cut in front of the line over paying customers, Eisner himself has done it many times (I've personally seen him do it once) and it is well documented he would do it on numerous occasions for both himself and his hollywood & financial buddies (It's covered in Realityland a book I mentioned earlier for those who haven't read it).

Stop obsessing about the "glory days" and come back to reality

 

[lazyboy97o]

Come on WDW1974 give it a rest already. There is no big conspiracy here. Bob goes to the parks just as much as Eisner did. It is purely a coincidence that Eisner took his grandkids to WDW around the same time Iger took his family to Disneyland.

Concerning using power to cut in front of the line over paying customers, Eisner himself has done it many times (I've personally seen him do it once) and it is well documented he would do it on numerous occasions for both himself and his hollywood & financial buddies (It's covered in Realityland a book I mentioned earlier for those who haven't read it).

Stop obsessing about the "glory days" and come back to reality

Are you convinced Jay loves the parks as well?

 

[Darth Sidious]

There was instant messaging and texting back in 2005. And word spread just fine when he was in the parks well before those items were things.

I completely disagree about security, though. I know folks who actually own companies, some are billionaires, and they walk around the world (or the World Showcase) just like the rest of us.

A few years back, I was told Iger has 24/7 security has part of his employment contract with Disney and that the cost to the company is seven figures annually. All I could think of was why does he need this? Does he think some fanboi is going to put him in a hole and ask him to take the lotion from the basket?

It just reeks of self importance. Exaggerated sense of self import that is.



I'd venture to say that most guests have no clue who Michael Eisner or Bob Iger are. I'd further venture that more CMs likely don't have a clue who either man is.



Why? What exactly are you saying?



No. Because I am not sure whether Steve Jobs has ever set foot in WDW (sound familiar?)

Michael would visit middle of nowhere Disney Stores as well. Plus I've seen the way more rich Mark Cuban standing next to me after a show without security. That guy is a billionaire and he's on tv, yet nobody really noticed him and when they did nobody bothered him.

 

[jt04]

Ah, so you are just looking to stir it up like the old days ... when do you go back to school (how many years can you attend a community college anyway?)

As many as you want.

 

[jt04]

I think your wrong. Eisner would TOTALLY take advantage of social media like Twitter and Instagram if we was in charge today. He loves it. Look at his current accounts, they are very active and FUN to follow. Bobs is a snooze-fest. Social media is not a fad. Just look at this thread '74 created. 300+ pages and over 400,000 views.

Eisner would be rocking social media to the hilt and would be doing it himself. With Iger we have the parks blog and mommy's spewing out socially safe comments on the "immersiveness" of rides like 7DMT. We would see pics of Eisner inside with a big smile on his face. We will see Bob in a suit on opening day and thats about it. (social media wise.) And do you think when Bob retires from Disney that we will EVER see him in the parks 5, 10, or 20 years from now with his kids and grand kids having a good time? Negative, Ghostrider!

Pretty sure you completely misunderstood the meaning of my post. And yes, I believe his grand children will insist and he will go with them.

And it is "you are" or "you're" not "your".

You're welcome.

 

[WDW1974]

Just dropping by for a bit to clarify something above. I made an inquiry and Bob Iger, indeed, has two young granddaughters by daughter Katie and her husband. They are both quite young (under seven). Bob's other daughter, from his first marriage, is expecting a boy in May. I have additional info. on them but feel that has no place in a public forum, so it gets left right there.

That said, I still don't buy what was placed out on Micechat today. It was way too convenient in thinking of recent events.

I also don't see young girls of that age (one who absolutely can't ride RSRs for safety reasons) being interested AT ALL in Marvel meet and greets (and, also there are only two of those, not three) and interested in RSRs. Sure, I'll go with the Frozen meet and greet. But, frankly, most kids of that age would be a whole lot more interested in everything from Casey Junior to Playhouse Disney, the Carousels to Peter Pan's Flight, perhaps even Pirates of the Caribbean or Jungle Cruise or any number of attractions that didn't read like a Disney publicist put it together. Everything mentioned was tied to Iger's favorites (Cars, Marvel, Frozen), not to what his young granddaughters might like.

It smells.

Also, guests in Anaheim are not guests in Orlando. When Bob Iger walks up at least half the people are going to likely know who he is ... and snap a photo and put it up on the Twitter or FB or other social media. Where are the photos? Where are the others commenting 'I just saw Bob Iger in Adventureland' ... ''OMG!!! Bob Iger rode the Matterhorn in the bobsled behind us. He smiled at me ... sorta!!!'' They don't exist.

Just like I think this whole visit didn't exist, either. Or certainly not as portrayed.

To put it more bluntly, Iger's grown children have no attachment to the Disney BRAND or Disney Parks. They are Upper Westside all the way. A family vacation is taking a chartered yacht to the south of France, renting a villa in Tuscany or staying at a Four Seasons resort in Hawaii. It most definitely isn't visiting WDW or DLR ... or any Disney anything, anywhere.

And unlike this bogus report, I can CONFIRM that Iger's family took vacations to the places I just listed.

 

[WDW1974]

One other quickee on Eisner, Iger and the numbers (and maybe @ParentsOf4 can add financial perspective, although this is pretty self evident), did you read my post where I quoted an email I got from a friend in the business?

The one where it mentioned how Michael grew the company MORE THAN 30 TIMES before being forced out in 2005, while Bob has simply doubled it?

And yet Bob is somehow viewed as the better financial (and ... excuse me while I puke a bit ... creative leader)? And how has Bob done his financial MAGIC? How much of those numbers are the result of buying Pixar and Marvel -- we'll leave Lucas on the sidelines here? How much of that is simply the juggernaut that is ESPN (part of Michael's biggest and best acquisition and one that brought Bob to TWDC to start with)?

Now, how much of those numbers are the result of organic growth?

C'mon, I have always been lousy at math, but I can read these numbers quite well.

 

[Phil12]

One other quickee on Eisner, Iger and the numbers (and maybe @ParentsOf4 can add financial perspective, although this is pretty self evident), did you read my post where I quoted an email I got from a friend in the business?

Which business is that?

 

[WDW1974]

And I'll leave you with this to chew on. It's something I have never put out and not something I can prove. I know it to be true and you can either believe it or not. Doesn't change a damn thing.

But to all who think Bob was a genius for buying Pixar and that it couldn't have happened with Michael, well, you are right.

A very similar offer was on the table from Disney's standpoint when Michael was still running Disney. And almost everyone, including John Lasseter (even if you'd have to get him drunk to admit this ... admittedly not the most difficult of tasks) wanted it to happen. Almost everyone.

Except a petty man that people worship these days that went by the name of Steve Jobs. Even Jobs saw that the only smart, viable option for Pixar was to officially become part of TWDC but he had this little thing called an ego. And it was bruised because the guy that ran Disney also had this little thing. So ... Jobs sat back and waited ... waited for Michael to step down. Then, following the same script the Iranians followed when releasing the American hostages as soon as Ronald Reagan took over to stick the knife in Jimmy Carter a bit more, he said 'let's do it''.

Just a little history lesson on giving people credit and not realizing how petty, petulant and poorly bred many of our top business leaders can be.

 

[GoofGoof]

Wonder if this was setup in response to the Eisner visit.

Even if it wasn't, what a difference in the visuals from the two trips.

Iger - skipping lines for private sessions.
Eisner - enjoying ice cream with the grandkids.

I don't think it was a setup in response to Eisner. I think it was a response to being called out by @WDW1974 for not visiting the parks. Wow, they really do read this thread

 

[WDW1974]

I don't think it was a setup in response to Eisner. I think it was a response to being called out by @WDW1974 for not visiting the parks. Wow, they really do read this thread

It was a response, no doubt.

But really, no one reads here. They are much more interested in Lifestyler Tweets. Yep ... that's it!

 

[Figments Friend]

Someone may have already answered ( still catching up on the reading...) but thought i would reply.

What became 'Splash Mountain' started life originally as the 'Zip-a-Dee-River Run' in 1984, right around the time Mr. Eisner was coming on board to run the Company.

One of the first things he did once taking the reigns of Office was to visit Imagineering and see what kind of projects they had in the pipeline, or were ready to propose.
Both 'River Run' and 'Star Tours' were on the table ( among other things..) when Michael arrived and see what they were up to on Flower Street.

There is a famous story you may have already heard about how he brought his son with him, then a 13/14 year old, to gage his excitement level to the proposed projects.
Both of them were pretty blown away by the 'River Run' concept, mainly because of the fact it was to be the 'tallest, fastest, flume ride ever made'. So it was 'greenlit' into production soon after, if not that very day.

Since it was a 'water ride', Michael made the suggestion to those present that they could theme it around the then quite successful live-action Disney/Touchstone film 'Splash'.
This film was released in March of 1984, and popular at the time this project was getting off the ground, thus why it was suggested.
Much like if WDI was working on a winter-themed attraction today, someone might suggest overlaying a 'Frozen' theme to it.
Back in 1984/early 1985...'Splash' was fresh in people's minds.


Thankfully, those at Imagineering told him this was not a good idea..and carried on.
The name from the film, however, stuck...and Michael ended up suggesting the name change from 'River Run' to simply 'Splash Mountain'
He did'nt think teens and young adults would flock to Disneyland to ride a attraction called 'Zip-A-Dee River Run'...but WOULD if the title alined with the already present legacy of 'Disney Mountains' ( BTMR, Space Mountain, The Matterhorn...etc.).

 

[nor'easter]

If I was CEO, I'd skip the line for Anna & Elsa too.

Better yet, skip the whole stupid thing. Don't even have to be CEO.

 

[FrankLapidus]

And I'll leave you with this to chew on. It's something I have never put out and not something I can prove. I know it to be true and you can either believe it or not. Doesn't change a damn thing.

Its not that hard to believe; Jobs swore he would never again work with Disney while Eisner was in charge so Roy got in touch and told Jobs something along the lines of "when the wicked witch is dead we (Disney & Pixar) will be together again." I always presumed that there was some sort of agreement or understanding in place where Pixar would come back into the Disney fold once Eisner was out of the picture that allowed Job to sit back and wait and that he ended up with a lot more out of the deal than he ever would have gotten from Eisner, along with Lasseter and Catmull who ended up being handed control of Disney animation (one of the smartest things Iger has done in my opinion). I give Iger credit for getting it done and massaging some damaged egos in the process but think that the wheels were in motion on an agreement between Disney & Pixar before he became CEO and him agreeing to rubber-stamp it made him a more amenable choice in the eyes of Roy and Stanley Gold

 

[ParentsOf4]

Someone may have already answered ( still catching up on the reading...) but thought i would reply.

What became 'Splash Mountain' started life originally as the 'Zip-a-Dee-River Run' in 1984, right around the time Mr. Eisner was coming on board to run the Company.

One of the first things he did once taking the reigns of Office was to visit Imagineering and see what kind of projects they had in the pipeline, or were ready to propose.
Both 'River Run' and 'Star Tours' were on the table ( among other things..) when Michael arrived and see what they were up to on Flower Street.

There is a famous story you may have already heard about how he brought his son with him, then a 13/14 year old, to gage his excitement level to the proposed projects.
Both of them were pretty blown away by the 'River Run' concept, mainly because of the fact it was to be the 'tallest, fastest, flume ride ever made'. So it was 'greenlit' into production soon after, if not that very day.

Since it was a 'water ride', Michael made the suggestion to those present that they could theme it around the then quite successful live-action Disney/Touchstone film 'Splash'.
This film was released in March of 1984, and popular at the time this project was getting off the ground, thus why it was suggested.
Much like if WDI was working on a winter-themed attraction today, someone might suggest overlaying a 'Frozen' theme to it.
Back in 1984/early 1985...'Splash' was fresh in people's minds.

Thankfully, those at Imagineering told him this was not a good idea..and carried on.
The name from the film, however, stuck...and Michael ended up suggesting the name change from 'River Run' to simply 'Splash Mountain'
He did'nt think teens and young adults would flock to Disneyland to ride a attraction called 'Zip-A-Dee River Run'...but WOULD if the title alined with the already present legacy of 'Disney Mountains' ( BTMR, Space Mountain, The Matterhorn...etc.).

Thank you. That story's timeline makes more sense than the E Ticket article referenced on Wiki.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Someone may have already answered ( still catching up on the reading...) but thought i would reply.

What became 'Splash Mountain' started life originally as the 'Zip-a-Dee-River Run' in 1984, right around the time Mr. Eisner was coming on board to run the Company.

One of the first things he did once taking the reigns of Office was to visit Imagineering and see what kind of projects they had in the pipeline, or were ready to propose.
Both 'River Run' and 'Star Tours' were on the table ( among other things..) when Michael arrived and see what they were up to on Flower Street.

There is a famous story you may have already heard about how he brought his son with him, then a 13/14 year old, to gage his excitement level to the proposed projects.
Both of them were pretty blown away by the 'River Run' concept, mainly because of the fact it was to be the 'tallest, fastest, flume ride ever made'. So it was 'greenlit' into production soon after, if not that very day.

Since it was a 'water ride', Michael made the suggestion to those present that they could theme it around the then quite successful live-action Disney/Touchstone film 'Splash'.
This film was released in March of 1984, and popular at the time this project was getting off the ground, thus why it was suggested.
Much like if WDI was working on a winter-themed attraction today, someone might suggest overlaying a 'Frozen' theme to it.
Back in 1984/early 1985...'Splash' was fresh in people's minds.


Thankfully, those at Imagineering told him this was not a good idea..and carried on.
The name from the film, however, stuck...and Michael ended up suggesting the name change from 'River Run' to simply 'Splash Mountain'
He did'nt think teens and young adults would flock to Disneyland to ride a attraction called 'Zip-A-Dee River Run'...but WOULD if the title alined with the already present legacy of 'Disney Mountains' ( BTMR, Space Mountain, The Matterhorn...etc.).

I still do not think this makes any more sense. As I stated earlier, Song of the South was not yet the obscure title it is today. It was in theaters only four years before. The story only really makes sense today where the intellectual property has become unknown. This is why your analogy of a winter-themed attraction being given a Frozen connection is not quitter accurate. It would be more like someone pitching a Frozen aspect to an Edward Scissor Hands attraction because he too makes it snow at the end.

 

[tirian]

One other quickee on Eisner, Iger and the numbers (and maybe @ParentsOf4 can add financial perspective, although this is pretty self evident), did you read my post where I quoted an email I got from a friend in the business?

The one where it mentioned how Michael grew the company MORE THAN 30 TIMES before being forced out in 2005, while Bob has simply doubled it?

And yet Bob is somehow viewed as the better financial (and ... excuse me while I puke a bit ... creative leader)? And how has Bob done his financial MAGIC? How much of those numbers are the result of buying Pixar and Marvel -- we'll leave Lucas on the sidelines here? How much of that is simply the juggernaut that is ESPN (part of Michael's biggest and best acquisition and one that brought Bob to TWDC to start with)?

Now, how much of those numbers are the result of organic growth?

C'mon, I have always been lousy at math, but I can read these numbers quite well.

But, but — Cars sells so much merchandise.

 

[Funmeister]

Here is a neat little mind blowing thought. (for the anti-Universal folks out there)

For just a moment. Switch the theme of every attraction and show between Disney and Universal. For instance. Take Harry Potter FJ and take the same exact ride (ride system and level of theme) but imagine it as a Frozen ride. Take Spider Man and take the same exact ride and think of it with a Peter Pan overlay. Imagine Toy Story Mania as Men in Black. Terminator with a Mickey's Philharmagic theme.

Universal not so bad is it? Proves that Universal IS doing it right and will continue to do so. Stop the nostalgia warm fuzzy feeling inside BS and see what is going on. BTW a few of those attractions (Universal) mentioned are quite dated and STILL have better theme and ride system than most Disney attractions. Debate?

 

[Rodan75]

One other quickee on Eisner, Iger and the numbers (and maybe @ParentsOf4 can add financial perspective, although this is pretty self evident), did you read my post where I quoted an email I got from a friend in the business?

The one where it mentioned how Michael grew the company MORE THAN 30 TIMES before being forced out in 2005, while Bob has simply doubled it?

And yet Bob is somehow viewed as the better financial (and ... excuse me while I puke a bit ... creative leader)? And how has Bob done his financial MAGIC? How much of those numbers are the result of buying Pixar and Marvel -- we'll leave Lucas on the sidelines here? How much of that is simply the juggernaut that is ESPN (part of Michael's biggest and best acquisition and one that brought Bob to TWDC to start with)?

Now, how much of those numbers are the result of organic growth?

C'mon, I have always been lousy at math, but I can read these numbers quite well.

So the better question is....why are you pushing this so hard? Why does this have to be about a winner or a loser. They have both been good for TWDC in different ways...and they both have their own growth opportunities. (As most ppl do). Why is ME promo worth 20 pages in your thread?