The Spirited Sixth Sense ...

[ford91exploder]

Stock price is the combination of current worth + future expectation.

And in many cases too much money invested in a sector, Entertainment as a sector has been doing miserably and Disney is perceived as 'safe" so we have too few 'good' opportunites so the ignorant money is ending up with Disney.

If Iger's Star Wars tentpoles bomb at the box office. Which they in all likelyhood WILL because too much money will be spent on them (recall original Star Wars only cost 10M to film). A limited budget enhances the filmmakers creativity, Unlimited budgets encourage the suits to dump in the 'effect of the day' because marketing tells them that this explosion type sells X tickets, Not that it makes any sense for the story.

If and When StarWars sequel bombs at box office Disney's stock will follow. If I had to guess they will probably blow 400-600 million on the sequel.

 

[maxairmike]

The future expectations part is real the real differences of opinion come in. In my mind there are real concerns with the network TV and cable business long term. Is ESPN capable of evolving and remaining relevant with the push by sports and college conferences to have their own dedicated networks. Is ABC capable of continuing to produce long term value. The bright spot is the success of Disney channel itself which is growing in popularity and value. The live action film studio seems to be well positioned to make some big money from the acquisitions, especially Lucas Films. It's a matter of opinion if you think the comic book movies will remain popular long term. IMHO they have to be close to a saturation point by now, but they keep making them and people keep paying to see them. Pixar and Disney animation appear to be have a pipeline of potential hits (although they may be relying too heavily on sequels). P&R is a well oiled machine churning out earnings and cash which can be used to fund big money movies. Record domestic park attendance and a runaway hit in DCL coupled with a new park in China looks really positive on the surface.

It really depends on how far out you look. If your window is 5 years or less it's a bright future for TWDC. If you try to look longer term, it's a lot more muddy. Wall Street tends to think shorter term these days. That's why the stock is way up.

To further affect the bolded statement, now they have to start considering how the Chicago NLRB ruling might effect the college football (and eventually basketball and all the other sports) product they televise. ESPN is really starting to look much more volatile in the future than it has been the past decade when it comes to the college sports cash cow.

 

[FrankLapidus]

-Thanks to Bob Iger, I and millions of other fans can actually be excited about Star Wars and Indiana Jones again. No longer having to dread how Lucas is going to mess it up or make it more childish. I know that he will treat Lucasfilm with the same respect that he has given Pixar and Marvel (and they have SOARED to new heights under Iger) and with Lucas now retired, Kathleen Kennedy in charge and folks like Lawerence Kasdan back in the saddle we can rest easy knowing that Star Wars Trilogy 3 and the inevitable new adventures of Indiana Jones will be of the highest quality.

Its perhaps a bit premature to say this before we see what Disney do with Star Wars. I'm hopeful that they will reinvigorate the series and I like that they've brought someone like JJ Abrams on board to direct the next film but having good, talented people involved doesn't always culminate in a good final product. The early signs are promising but it seems a bit soon to be proclaiming that they will be films of the "highest quality" at this point.

Same goes for Indiana Jones, we know less about a possible fifth film than we do about the upcoming Star Wars 7 so I'm not resting easy at this point, there's just as much chance of them plunging the series to the same depths that Kingdom of the Crystal Skull did as there is of them restoring Indy to his former glory. I'm hopeful for both franchises as a fan but I've learned not to raise my expectations too high anymore.

In Conclusion, Bob Iger will be hailed a hero when he steps down from the CEO position in about 2 years time (Something Eisner never wanted to do because he was a power hungry and arrogant maniac who felt he OWNED the company) for saving a company that was on it's way to becoming irrelevant forever.

Barring a catastrophe between now and the end of his tenure I think he'll be remembered for doing a good job in getting the company back on an even footing and then putting it in a position to go on and prosper in the coming years. I still believe that a company like Disney needs to have a more creative figure at the helm but Iger deserves credit for the job he's done, not one I'd personally describe as heroic but he'll leave the company in a better position than when he inherited it, although with areas that his successor will hopefully look to improve.

 

[FigmentJedi]

I also really enjoyed Meet the Robinsons, though given the release date it's possible this counts more as an Eisner era project (i'm betting much of the development began when Eisner was still in power).

Actually, most of Meet the Robinsons was reworked right after the Pixar buyout and John Lasseter became animation overlord, so it is more of an Iger production.

 

[ASilmser]

Two words: ECONOMY and WELLS:

Eisner had the benefit of a much more stable economy during his golden years. He also had a trusted partner who balanced his faults. The Wells/Eisner partnership has become a bit of exaggerated folklore in Disney history, but I still believe there is some truth to it. Eisner's biggest fault was not recognizing that he needed some balance in his leadership (after Wells' death).

That said, Iger's tenure is a mixed bag. It does you no good to acquire all these companies if your core values suffer because of it.

 

[ford91exploder]

To further affect the bolded statement, now they have to start considering how the Chicago NLRB ruling might effect the college football (and eventually basketball and all the other sports) product they televise. ESPN is really starting to look much more volatile in the future than it has been the past decade when it comes to the college sports cash cow.

That ruling was a LONG time coming,

Notre Dame's fall from the leadership of college football was directly tied to the fact that ND expects you to be a ND graduate FIRST and an athlete second, Many of us from Harvard were AMAZED (and VERY pleased) that Harvard made it to the finals but once again at Harvard you are expected to be a HARVARD graduate FIRST and Athletics are just for fun (THE GAME notwithstanding - It always feels good to beat the Eli's).

In too many schools 'student' athletes just serve the athletic program which operates at a loss so the entire school is negatively affected, I think college athletics are going to change dramatically over the next few years and ESPN I'm not sure is up to the challenge.

The NCAA will also need to change in light of this, What I'd really like to see is College athletes be REQUIRED to take a demanding academic program because the reality is while there are THOUSANDS of college athletes there are only a few hundred jobs in all of the BIG leagues, Right now too many college athletic programs are merely farm teams for the professional leagues.

IF the students actually GRADUATED with a worthwhile degree they could actually do something post athletic career instead of 'Do you want fries with that'.

To that end I've always felt that students should not be eligible for the pro draft until their senior year, If not perhaps for each student who leaves before they graduate we take away 2 scholarship slots in that program so as to encourage the colleges to actually GRADUATE their athletic scholarship students.

 

[raymusiccity]

Its perhaps a bit premature to say this before we see what Disney do with Star Wars. I'm hopeful that they will reinvigorate the series and I like that they've brought someone like JJ Abrams on board to direct the next film but having good, talented people involved doesn't always culminate in a good final product. The early signs are promising but it seems a bit soon to be proclaiming that they will be films of the "highest quality" at this point.

Same goes for Indiana Jones, we know less about a possible fifth film than we do about the upcoming Star Wars 7 so I'm not resting easy at this point, there's just as much chance of them plunging the series to the same depths that Kingdom of the Crystal Skull did as there is of them restoring Indy to his former glory. I'm hopeful for both franchises as a fan but I've learned not to raise my expectations too high anymore.



Barring a catastrophe between now and the end of his tenure I think he'll be remembered for doing a good job in getting the company back on an even footing and then putting it in a position to go on and prosper in the coming years. I still believe that a company like Disney needs to have a more creative figure at the helm but Iger deserves credit for the job he's done, not one I'd personally describe as heroic but he'll leave the company in a better position than when he inherited it, although with areas that his successor will hopefully look to improve.

'Ding, Ding, Ding'....please retire to your neutral corners. Ladies and gentlemen, we have a tie!

 

[ford91exploder]

Agree 100% but if the acquisition of star wars was in the works, it should have taken precedence over pandora. Love it or hate it, it is the biggest franchise to grace Disney other than their own IPs. Now, we're not looking at anything star wars related in the parks for at least 5 years.

My feelings about AVATAR are well known, But Disney NOT capitalizing on the Star Wars franchise is beyond stupid it's an IP which appeals to people from 5 to 70+,

Avatar has a few fanboi's but Star Wars has tens of millions of fanboi's - Heck just look at the 501'st Legion tens of thousands of cosplayers, Kids want US to do it so they can point to us in Star Wars weekends If we do it it will be as Imperial Officers, Lets face it Storm Troopers are like Star Trek 'Red Shirts' .

If Disney TRULY wants a 'Potter Swatter' they have one in Star Wars they could build a whole GATE around it, Imagine a TIE vs Rebel live simulator you could actually battle the opposition in a full motion simulator or run down the trench on the Death Star I'd wait a few hours for THAT ONE.

 

[Andrew C]

My feelings about AVATAR are well known, But Disney NOT capitalizing on the Star Wars franchise is beyond stupid it's an IP which appeals to people from 5 to 70+,

Avatar has a few fanboi's but Star Wars has tens of millions of fanboi's - Heck just look at the 501'st Legion tens of thousands of cosplayers, Kids want US to do it so they can point to us in Star Wars weekends If we do it it will be as Imperial Officers, Lets face it Storm Troopers are like Star Trek 'Red Shirts' .

If Disney TRULY wants a 'Potter Swatter' they have one in Star Wars they could build a whole GATE around it, Imagine a TIE vs Rebel live simulator you could actually battle the opposition in a full motion simulator or run down the trench on the Death Star I'd wait a few hours for THAT ONE.

Star Wars will come. They just may wait until the new movies start to be released.

 

[71jason]

Star Wars will come. They just may wait until the new movies start to be released.

Been sitting on this, but the Star Wars project is being called "the 10 year plan" internally. Still no guarantee it will happen--again, words from the horse's mouth--but that's the current timeline. No details other than it will be "awesome" if you're a SW fan.

 

[ford91exploder]

Star Wars will come. They just may wait until the new movies start to be released.

Which is beyond stupid, You have empty suits thinking about merchandising synergies instead of asking the average 10 year old what they would want to see, If WDW had a StarWars gate you could not pull the kids out with a dozen AT-AT's pulling all at once and I'm sure I'm not alone in this observation.

They have StarWars toys and Star Wars Lego's and they really love that stuff, I don't understand why Disney is messing with Avatar unless they are completely unaware of popular culture, Even at work there is star wars stuff on people's desks etc. Avatar nope - none to be found anywhere...

 

[ford91exploder]

Been sitting on this, but the Star Wars project is being called "the 10 year plan" internally. Still no guarantee it will happen--again, words from the horse's mouth--but that's the current timeline. No details other than it will be "awesome" if you're a SW fan.

They need to build it NOW before HP 3.0, Or just sell the rights to UNI who will actually DO something with them.

 

[Andrew C]

Which is beyond stupid, You have empty suits thinking about merchandising synergies instead of asking the average 10 year old what they would want to see, If WDW had a StarWars gate you could not pull the kids out with a dozen AT-AT's pulling all at once and I'm sure I'm not alone in this observation.

They have StarWars toys and Star Wars Lego's and they really love that stuff, I don't understand why Disney is messing with Avatar unless they are completely unaware of popular culture, Even at work there is star wars stuff on people's desks etc. Avatar nope - none to be found anywhere...

I would rather see Star Wars too (because it just makes sense for the reasons you mentioned) but I am hoping they can handle both projects. I assume they have a plan for Star Wars as Iger has said we will see more Star Wars in the parks. I have said this in the past; If Iger wants Star Wars like he wants Pandora, he will get it.

 

[GoofGoof]

Been sitting on this, but the Star Wars project is being called "the 10 year plan" internally. Still no guarantee it will happen--again, words from the horse's mouth--but that's the current timeline. No details other than it will be "awesome" if you're a SW fan.

With the glacial pace Disney moves at 10 years sounds about right. I would assume it will be 5+ years from the first announcement to opening so if we hear something this year we still have a shot at 2019 or 2020 opening, but that would be the earliest I would expect. Finishing by the 50th anniversary in 2021 should be the farthest they stretch it, but it doesn't seem like the "anniversaries" mean as much anymore.

 

[Andrew C]

They need to build it NOW before HP 3.0, Or just sell the rights to UNI who will actually DO something with them.

I don't necessarily agree they need to do it now. I think instead that they need to do it RIGHT.

 

[ford91exploder]

I don't necessarily agree they need to do it now. I think instead that they need to do it RIGHT.

EPCOT only took 3 years from groundbreaking to opening, But I'm not sure that under todays TWDC anything can be done RIGHT any longer.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

I like your post but have a few comments.

Suggesting the multi-billion dollar Disney is somewhat similar to a mac&cheese stand is disingenuous. The simple truth is that it was Eisner, not Iger, who turned Disney from a small cap company with great name recognition into the multi-billion dollar megacorporation it is today.

The old adage "It takes money to make money" holds true for Iger. Iger inherited a megacorporation and grew it. In today's economy where wealth is being concentrated, Iger's performance is by no means unique. Heck, Iger doesn't even make Forbes' list of best CEOs.

Comparing market cap really depends on points in time. The Disney in 2004 under Eisner had been devastated (like most companies) by a post-9/11 economy. In 2000, Disney's market cap was something around $78B. Meanwhile, at the start of 2013, Disney's market cap was around $93B. Add in the $11B in acquisitions and, until the recent run-up in stock price, Disney's market cap has barely moved. Seriously, what has happened in the last 12 months to justify Disney's run-up from $57/share 12 months ago to today's $79/share? External market forces are at play as much as anything and, at $79 per share, Disney appears to be overvalued.

Eisner was a victim of a bad economy as much as his own character flaws. Had he not alienated Roy Disney and Stanley Gold, Eisner probably would still be running Disney.

Again, I like your post. It brings up some really good points. However, it's not telling the whole story.

Iger is an effective corporate CEO but it was Eisner who created the mega conglomerate Disney.

Exactly Po4. Those are exactly my points.

My point is not that Eisner ran a mac&cheese stand, but that using market cap fluctuation is in itself a pointless indicator of leadership qualities. Or else one would have to consider me exploding the market cap of my mac&cheese stand to the value of my local Taco Bell a sign of being a better CEO than Eisner.

The statement 'Eisner grew market cap thirty times, Iger three times' is in itself meaningless. For so many reasons, of which you explore a few more.


As two asides, I shall add to your 'it takes money to make money' another old adage: 'it is easier to get to the top than to stay there'. Lots of companies explode to the limelight, and nearly all disappear again. The real geniuses are not the ones who grow all those MySpaces or Yahoo Searches, but the silent ones who make Facebook and Google the ones to outlast all those forgotten competitors in the long run.
Secondly, I still think a dart-throwing chimpanzee could've taken the Disney of 1984 - 100% name recognition, perfect brand image, under-exploited p&r - and capitalize on all that.

 

[ford91exploder]

I would rather see Star Wars too (because it just makes sense for the reasons you mentioned) but I am hoping they can handle both projects. I assume they have a plan for Star Wars as Iger has said we will see more Star Wars in the parks. I have said this in the past; If Iger wants Star Wars like he wants Pandora, he will get it.

Iger wants Avatar for his own reasons WRT popular culture Avatar makes no sense whatsoever, Iger wants the LICENSING revenues from Star Wars Merch, I don't believe he really wants a Star Wars ATTRACTION. I think we need a TWDC failure on the 'Street to pry Iger and his cronies from TWDC and a new executive team to actually start rebuilding the Disney brand.

As much as we admire Walt remember that Disneyland created both to make a park that all could enjoy AND as a marketing tool for Disney's creative output. Which is why the failure to leverage Star Wars IP is so puzzling

 

[Cesar R M]

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.

I honestly dont think expanding that fast will do anything good, expanding too hard will just make your core base weaker and in the end, if you do not build these, your entire castle will collapse.

Agree 100% but if the acquisition of star wars was in the works, it should have taken precedence over pandora. Love it or hate it, it is the biggest franchise to grace Disney other than their own IPs. Now, we're not looking at anything star wars related in the parks for at least 5 years.

My feelings about AVATAR are well known, But Disney NOT capitalizing on the Star Wars franchise is beyond stupid it's an IP which appeals to people from 5 to 70+,

Avatar has a few fanboi's but Star Wars has tens of millions of fanboi's - Heck just look at the 501'st Legion tens of thousands of cosplayers, Kids want US to do it so they can point to us in Star Wars weekends If we do it it will be as Imperial Officers, Lets face it Storm Troopers are like Star Trek 'Red Shirts' .

If Disney TRULY wants a 'Potter Swatter' they have one in Star Wars they could build a whole GATE around it, Imagine a TIE vs Rebel live simulator you could actually battle the opposition in a full motion simulator or run down the trench on the Death Star I'd wait a few hours for THAT ONE.

Maybe they're taking it slow?
If you squeeze something too much, people will get bored or "overloaded" by it.. causing them to go elsewhere.
They might or not have a full plan on using the franchise..

 

[Captain Neo]

I honestly can't tell you any Disney attraction created during Eisner's second decade that I truly enjoyed and is regarded as a classic. Everything was so value engineered and poorly fleshed out.

For example let's look at the Asian Boat ride at DAK. Originally it was going to be a wonderful Pirates of the Caribbean style boat ride through the jungle with live animals kind of like a water based Kilimanjaro Safari:

That was deemed too costly and not thrilling enough. So the concept was changed to a white water raft ride since those were big at the time. The ride became Tiger River Rapids and Joe Rhode and his team still intended for it to have beautiful theming and animal exhibits (I just can't recall now if it was going to have real tigers or animatronic tigers or both). Unfortuanatly, despite going in a more thrilling and shorter direction the ride got its budget cut again to remove anything to do with animals from the ride. Rhode then changed the ride to be about deforestation with a single show scene showing a lumber yard burning and some very modest theming through the attraction.

Having been hyped reading Disney's official magazine and internet articles about the Asian ride throughout it's development you can imagine my disappointment when Kali River Rapids opened and was just a brief 2 minute raft ride with bare bone theming. This is just one example out of dozens I can give about how under Eisner rides would consistently get announced and then totally fail to deliver not because of the imagineers but because people he put into power like Paul Pressler, Cynthia Harris, Jay Rasulo, and the whole strategic planning department (which was Eisner's baby) deemed it unnecessary to spend so much money on attractions when simple ones would still pull in the crowds. This is the complete inverse of Eisner's first decade at the helm where Frank Wells was insist that it "takes money to make money" and they would spend lavishly on new attractions like Splash Mountain, Indiana Jones Adventure, and Star Tours.