News The Walt Disney Company Board of Directors Extends Robert A. Iger’s Contract as CEO Through 2026

[MisterPenguin]

You forgot Igers biggest skill, buying companies that are actually creative, that’s been his MO for the last 20 years. He bought Pixar and capitalized on their success, he bought Marvel and capitalized on their success, he bought Star Wars and capitalized on their success, even Disneys own revival with Frozen, Moana, etc was under Lasseter… unfortunately they’ve killed the golden geese and people now expect them to actually be creative themselves, and they are failing miserably. Unfortunately for him there’s nothing left to buy… he’s still trying though, they paid Taylor Swift and she just set records for D+ and they just signed that new deal with fortnight so maybe they’ll come up with something creative for Disney, 20 years of hiding behind bought talent and now he’s grasping at straws.

And Peltz's ideas for new creativity are....?

 

[Casper Gutman]

You forgot Igers biggest skill, buying companies that are actually creative, that’s been his MO for the last 20 years. He bought Pixar and capitalized on their success, he bought Marvel and capitalized on their success, he bought Star Wars and capitalized on their success, even Disneys own revival with Frozen, Moana, etc was under Lasseter… unfortunately they’ve killed the golden geese and people now expect them to actually be creative themselves, and they are failing miserably. Unfortunately for him there’s nothing left to buy… he’s still trying though, they paid Taylor Swift and she just set records for D+ and they just signed that new deal with fortnight so maybe they’ll come up with something creative for Disney, 20 years of hiding behind bought talent and now he’s grasping at straws.

Yes, being able to make smart acquisitions is a good thing for a CEO. That’s a big point in Iger’s favor. Any other studio in Hollywood could have bought Marvel… but they didn’t and Disney did. And most of Marvels incredible success came after Disney bought them - before that, the studio had released only Iron Man and Hulk, hardly a guarantee of the unprecedented success that was to follow.

The idea that Lasseter was the sole engine of Disneys animated success is patently absurd. What mattered at Pixar was the collaborative process, not one creator. Let’s look at what Lasseter has done on his own… not impressive. One gets the idea that if Iger was accused of sexual harassment, some of his current critics would start defending him very passionately.

The awkward truth for those who want to paint Iger with the broadest negative brush possible is that, as bad as he’s been for the parks, he’s been amazing for the studios.

 

[Casper Gutman]

And Peltz's ideas for new creativity are....?

Well, maybe he’ll take advice from Perlmutter. That way, he can do great things like block the production of Black Panther because it stars the… wrong… sort of hero or kill successful, beloved franchises because someone involved with them made him feel personally insulted.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Well, maybe he’ll take advice from Perlmutter. That way, he can do great things like block the production of Black Panther because it stars the… wrong… sort of hero or kill successful, beloved franchises because someone involved with them made him feel personally insulted.

I'd like to see season 2 of The Inhumans!!

 

[WoundedDreamer]

I actually respect you for giving some concrete reasons for opposing this. I will review your worst case scenario list.

Try to place Rasulo on the throne.

This is possible. Though, I'm not convinced he's materially worse than the other candidates that have been suggested. He might be, but what's the material difference between Rasulo and Staggs? The Seven Dwarfs incident is perhaps the biggest feather in Staggs' cap.

I suppose if you believe that Staggs or Mayer is materially better than Rasulo, then I can't really disabuse you of that position. Fair enough.

Force out Feige (are we pretending Perlmutter has forgiven him?)

After the success of Phase 4, Feige is not at all vulnerable. Do you think Disney's board of directors would give up on the chance to make more Marvels, Quantumanias, or Secret Invasions?

In all seriousness, it might be time for Feige to move on. Despite the puff pieces, Kevin Feige was never the singular architect behind the MCU's success. He contributed to be sure. But as much credit should go to the Russo Brothers, Whedon, Favreau, Markus and McFeely, and many others. Feige has been doing this for nearly 20 years. He might be burning out.

With that said, I think he still has a few more years to try to get Marvel back on course. We shall see.

Insist upon the dismemberment of the company for short term gain.

There are various methods of running a business. On one pole is the streamlined business, and the other pole is the conglomerate business. Apple under Steve Jobs (though, increasingly less under Tim Cook) is an example of a streamlined business. Each product in a streamlined business reinforces the other. They work together. Siemens, 3M, and GE are examples of the conglomerate form of business. These firms might own completely unrelated businesses in order to maximize shareholder value. There are advantages and disadvantages to each type.

At different points one style of business might become more stylish than the other. For a time in the 1980s conglomerates were all the rage. That's how Coca Cola ended up owning Columbia Pictures... That's a weird footnote in history. Then a period of divestment will follow.

I'm not always in favor of divestment and streamlining. Having diverse businesses can help ensure the health of the parent business. However, creative businesses are somewhat different. When they become buried within layers upon layers of reporting structure, this can sometimes stifle creativity. Creatives won't be able to talk to the CEO and board of directors because they're off in some remote division way down the chain.

The Walt Disney Company is massive. And I think there's reasons to consider shrinking the size of the firm. Not for short term gain (though, it would unlock shareholder value), but because it would bring the creatives closer to the CEO and board of director. There was a time when Walt Disney Imagineering reported directly to the CEO and not to the Chairman of Parks and... DPEP. Shrinking the business would lead to renewed discipline and focus.

What does my ideal Walt Disney Company look like?

1) Disney Parks and Resorts

2) Disney Consumer Products and Services
->Disney+
->Product Licensing
->Gaming
->Theatrical Distribution

3) Walt Disney Animation

4) Walt Disney Pictures
-> National Geographic

5) Pixar

6) Marvel

7) Lucasfilm



This new structure would make each of Disney's core brands directly accountable to the CEO and board of directors. Businesses that lack synergy with the parks division and consumer products division could jettisoned. More focus would be on the core Disney businesses. Just because Michael Eisner decided to buy Capital Cities in 1996, doesn't mean ABC and ESPN are stuck with Disney forever.

I think you're letting a sentimental attachment to ESPN and ABC get in the way of what's best for the future of the entire Walt Disney Company. ESPN is not a storied part of the business like Disneyland or Walt Disney Animation. I care about Walt Disney's legacy, Pixar's legacy, Lucas's legacy, and the MCU's legacy. ESPN is just a middleman for sports teams and the consumer. It could fade away and it would be forgotten. It just doesn't matter. Teams like the Dallas Cowboys, the New England Patriots, and the Kansas City Chiefs are the real strong brands in sports. Not a beleaguered sports channel.

Make enormous cuts to the studios and theme parks. Initiate mass layoffs at both. Block any expansion of the theme parks (which, yes, has happened, though not fast enough in Florida). Kill the plans for Disneyland that Anaheim just approved.

The studios could be shrunk dramatically. No doubt about that. I don't see Peltz harming the parks though. He's basically said that he views the parks as the only valuable part of the business. Everything else is imploding or losing money. He's also said he views the parks as dilapidated (which admittedly, they are) and in need of investment to compete with Universal.

The Disneyland expansion is going to be cemented with a contract. Disney can't get out of it, or else they would be failing to maintain their side of the contract with Anaheim.

Insist on using AI to develop new animated characters (Blackwell suggested this).

Interesting. AI, barring some unforeseen catastrophe, will completely demolish the movie business. AI is insane. It's not something you can avoid. But it's also incredibly dangerous to use. I'd outlaw it outright. It's that dangerous. But if everyone else is doing it, Disney probably should too. It's too dangerous not to.

Shutter or sell Searchlight.

Hmm, maybe you're a Searchlight fan. I don't care about Searchlight one iota. Who cares if they sell it?

Start shelving finished projects like Warners.

This is actually a good thing. If a product is garbage, it's better to never let it see the light of day. It's better to take the financial loss than ever ship something mediocre. Disney, Lucasfilm, Marvel, and Pixar should represent excellence every single time. Period.

End the development of original animated IPs like Encanto or Elio or Soul (this would be a priority, since animation, particularly at Disney, is the only genre that has partially escaped the IP focus). Increase the IP focus of the studios even further.

This is what Iger has already said he's doing. This is his strategy. So, you're worried that Peltz is going to follow Iger's strategy?

Block risky IP projects like Andor or Black Panther or Moon Knight or Ms Marvel. Cut film budgets to the bone.

I think we need to accept that the great streaming boom of the late 2010s/early 2020s is over. Experimental and wacky stuff might not get made as much, because the free money is over. A lot of interesting and cool stuff got made over the last decade. And a lot of bizarre garbage was also made. Hollywood is going to be more disciplined moving forward.

One gets the idea that if Iger was accused of sexual harassment, some of his current critics would start defending him very passionately.

This argument I don't respect. I disagree with many of your arguments, but I didn't think a single one of your earlier arguments betrayed a lack of intelligence or character. This comment I do take issue with. You're doing two objectionable things. You are suggesting that fans of Lasseter's work and those who see him as essential to Disney's success are somehow attracted to sexual harassment. This is not only absurd on its face, but it's also just offensive. I've never seen @Vegas Disney Fan argue that you have a moral defect because of a position you have here.

You're also ignoring the exonerating evidence and investigation that SkyDance conducted. They concluded that there were no further incidents beyond those reported. And while Lasseter showed a lack of professionalism, he owned up to the mistakes and took corrective action. Two reasonable and moral people may feel completely differently about Lasseter's behavior and employment. Look at the controversy surrounding James Gunn. It's an individual decision. @Vegas Disney Fan (and myself!) can reasonably believe that Lasseter has suffered enough, and that he should not continue to be shunned. The same can be said for your position, which is to play more conservative and continue to socially sanction him. Each one is defensible. I don't think we should view each other as morally deficient because we disagree.

 

[monothingie]

Cute trick limiting it to 2 years. You still went too wide - you need to limit the relevant range to about 1 year and 2 months. Whoopsie!

It’s actually 1 year 5 months. But if you want to get super technical, Iger’s contract made him special consultant upon his departure as Chairman, he never left company. He never even relinquished the office to Chapek.

But I would gladly extend the window into Iger’s first go round, it only highlights the recent decline even further.

Peltz and Iger spring from the same corporate culture, but Peltz (and Perlmutter and Rasulo) are EXPONENTIALY worse. This has been demonstrated again and again by posters providing copious evidence of past actions and statements. In response, the Peltz fans offer absolutely no evidence - nothing - instead pouring forth disingenuous hand waving and changing the subject back to Iger.

You keep pulling this disingenuous argument that it is a binary choice and if you’re not with “us” you’re against “us” by lumping anyone unhappy with Bob’s rule into the Peltz crowd.

What can Peltz do?

Nothing. Absolutely Nothing.

Try to place Rasulo on the throne. Force out Feige (are we pretending Perlmutter has forgiven him?) Insist upon the dismemberment of the company for short term gain. Make enormous cuts to the studios and theme parks. Initiate mass layoffs at both. Block any expansion of the theme parks (which, yes, has happened, though not fast enough in Florida). Kill the plans for Disneyland that Anaheim just approved. Insist on using AI to develop new animated characters (Blackwell suggested this). Shutter or sell Searchlight. Start shelving finished projects like Warners. End the development of original animated IPs like Encanto or Elio or Soul (this would be a priority, since animation, particularly at Disney, is the only genre that has partially escaped the IP focus). Increase the IP focus of the studios even further. Block risky IP projects like Andor or Black Panther or Moon Knight or Ms Marvel. Cut film budgets to the bone.

That's just a taste.

Even in the unlikely event he gets both seats there is 0 possibility that he could be in a position to make ANY changes, let alone your bizarre rambling fever dream list.

The parks have deteriorated, but they are still great. The performance of Disney Studios until 2023 has been incredible. The idea that things can't get worse is either bad faith or infantile.

Wow.

 

[LSLS]

It’s actually 1 year 5 months. But if you want to get super technical, Iger’s contract made him special consultant upon his departure as Chairman, he never left company. He never even relinquished the office to Chapek.

But I would gladly extend the window into Iger’s first go round, it only highlights the recent decline even further.

You keep pulling this disingenuous argument that it is a binary choice and if you’re not with “us” you’re against “us” by lumping anyone unhappy with Bob’s rule into the Peltz crowd.

Nothing. Absolutely Nothing.

Even in the unlikely event he gets both seats there is 0 possibility that he could be in a position to make ANY changes, let alone your bizarre rambling fever dream list.

Wow.

If peltz can't do anything, why would he want to be on the board? He's made billions and he's 80. He chose disney specifically to try to get on the board of. What does he gain if he would have no impact at all? I don't pretend to have a large business knowledge, but common sense would tell me he's expecting to be able to do something to change the company to what he would like done.

 

[monothingie]

If peltz can't do anything, why would he want to be on the board? He's made billions and he's 80. He chose disney specifically to try to get on the board of. What does he gain if he would have no impact at all? I don't pretend to have a large business knowledge, but common sense would tell me he's expecting to be able to do something to change the company to what he would like done.

All it would be is bad PR and embarrassment for Bob, which seems exactly what Ike is looking for. At best It gives him a peak behind the curtain and a voice on the board.

In the unlikely event he is successfully elected, It means nothing operationally or organizationally unless he can find additional board members who would support him, which is equally unlikely to occur.

The most probable outcome is that because of all the attention this received, it puts a very public spotlight on Bob to make noticeable organizational improvements for investor return. If he does Peltz goes away forever, if it’s more of the same, Peltz comes back, possibly with more clout.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Cute trick limiting it to 2 years. You still went too wide - you need to limit the relevant range to about 1 year and 2 months. Whoopsie!

Peltz and Iger spring from the same corporate culture, but Peltz (and Perlmutter and Rasulo) are EXPONENTIALY worse. This has been demonstrated again and again by posters providing copious evidence of past actions and statements. In response, the Peltz fans offer absolutely no evidence - nothing - instead pouring forth disingenuous hand waving and changing the subject back to Iger.

What can Peltz do? Try to place Rasulo on the throne. Force out Feige (are we pretending Perlmutter has forgiven him?) Insist upon the dismemberment of the company for short term gain. Make enormous cuts to the studios and theme parks. Initiate mass layoffs at both. Block any expansion of the theme parks (which, yes, has happened, though not fast enough in Florida). Kill the plans for Disneyland that Anaheim just approved. Insist on using AI to develop new animated characters (Blackwell suggested this). Shutter or sell Searchlight. Start shelving finished projects like Warners. End the development of original animated IPs like Encanto or Elio or Soul (this would be a priority, since animation, particularly at Disney, is the only genre that has partially escaped the IP focus). Increase the IP focus of the studios even further. Block risky IP projects like Andor or Black Panther or Moon Knight or Ms Marvel. Cut film budgets to the bone.

That's just a taste.

The parks have deteriorated, but they are still great. The performance of Disney Studios until 2023 has been incredible. The idea that things can't get worse is either bad faith or infantile.

2 years is what the markets go on…

You want to give Bob credit for the the little mermaid? The good one 35 years ago…not the garbage remake that people didn’t want do see?

That’s not how it works…very “cute”

And it’s more like 5+ years…if you’re paying attention.

2024 is lining up to be another disastrous parks and box office year…again…
And even the “profitable” stream…
Do you know why they say that will happen? $7.5 bil in cost cutting. So that’s how you take in streaming? - strip it down and hope people keep paying…
Right

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

If peltz can't do anything, why would he want to be on the board? He's made billions and he's 80. He chose disney specifically to try to get on the board of. What does he gain if he would have no impact at all? I don't pretend to have a large business knowledge, but common sense would tell me he's expecting to be able to do something to change the company to what he would like done.

But that’s just it…2 board seats doesn’t effect “creative control”

Lucas’s statement looks unnecessary and kinda silly. It appears to be cronyism.

And I’m glad Jamie dimon is the “beacon of creativity” that now decrees what a good story telling is…
He’s a Bob clone - dudes who need a mirror to talk to their best friends

 

[LSLS]

All it would be is bad PR and embarrassment for Bob, which seems exactly what Ike is looking for. At best It gives him a peak behind the curtain and a voice on the board.

In the unlikely event he is successfully elected, It means nothing operationally or organizationally unless he can find additional board members who would support him, which is equally unlikely to occur.

The most probable outcome is that because of all the attention this received, it puts a very public spotlight on Bob to make noticeable organizational improvements for investor return. If he does Peltz goes away forever, if it’s more of the same, Peltz comes back, possibly with more clout.

So, it doesn't mean nothing then. It means it forces Iger to make larger cuts and concentrate even more on stock, and if not, gives Peltz more power in a year to bring in more members and attempt to dismantle the company for large short-term profits.

 

[LSLS]

But that’s just it…2 board seats doesn’t effect “creative control”

Lucas’s statement looks unnecessary and kinda silly. It appears to be cronyism.

And I’m glad Jamie dimon is the “beacon of creativity” that now decrees what a good story telling is…
He’s a Bob clone - dudes who need a mirror to talk to their best friends

Eh, it kind of does. Maybe not now, but it could make Peltz feel he has the power to go for more seats next time, and he could threaten that if they don't go more along with his visions.

The Lucas stuff is weird to me. Could be he was given something, could be his wife, or it could be there is a real fear that massive budget cuts could put his prized work at risk of being totally shut down. But it is really kind of left field.

I'll say, another interesting tidbit. Disney is advertising on NPR. And not "Come to the Parks" or "Watch D+." It is about knowing your vote, and going to their site to see who to vote for.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

All it would be is bad PR and embarrassment for Bob, which seems exactly what Ike is looking for. At best It gives him a peak behind the curtain and a voice on the board.

In the unlikely event he is successfully elected, It means nothing operationally or organizationally unless he can find additional board members who would support him, which is equally unlikely to occur.

The most probable outcome is that because of all the attention this received, it puts a very public spotlight on Bob to make noticeable organizational improvements for investor return. If he does Peltz goes away forever, if it’s more of the same, Peltz comes back, possibly with more clout.

Exactly

I don’t expect everyone here to be a Wall Street pundit…but your explanation is not that hard to grasp.

Instead we have had 6 months of boogieman scar tactics…”existential crisis”

Just stop. Rasulo on the board would just be an ignored empty chair who they wouldn’t invite to golf after the meetings. Or to christen Bob’s new sloop like judge smails in caddyshack.

But it might at least make them cognizant of the failings that they can’t recognize they have. Mismanaged flagship parks - for instance? Movies that don’t resonate with the money audience? Dragging feet with their tv offerings that just causes longterm
Bleed.

And then there’s “creativity”. Bob isn’t creative…so what are you losing? All their stuff is rehashed crap at this point.

And what will happen is this: both will claim victory. Peltz will say he increased investor return by putting on pressure. Iger will double down and reappoint himself.
And we’ll watch the same problems.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Eh, it kind of does. Maybe not now, but it could make Peltz feel he has the power to go for more seats next time, and he could threaten that if they don't go more along with his visions.

The Lucas stuff is weird to me. Could be he was given something, could be his wife, or it could be there is a real fear that massive budget cuts could put his prized work at risk of being totally shut down. But it is really kind of left field.

I'll say, another interesting tidbit. Disney is advertising on NPR. And not "Come to the Parks" or "Watch D+." It is about knowing your vote, and going to their site to see who to vote for.

They need new leadership no matter what happens. Change is inevitable.

And so YOU are that one guy listening to NPR?

I’ll tell you this…they are way overreacting to the proxy fight at this point. Something iger’s personality would not want to draw attention to…I still think we’re missing something. I hope every shareholder does what I’m doing…
It gives Peltz nothing and lets Bob know he’s no longer needed. The best of both worlds.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

So, it doesn't mean nothing then. It means it forces Iger to make larger cuts and concentrate even more on stock, and if not, gives Peltz more power in a year to bring in more members and attempt to dismantle the company for large short-term profits.

And guess whose fault that would be?


There’s only one path forward here fans should want: sweep the decks with these guys and move on to a new crop of management. They’re out there

Proxy wars and an ego trip consisting of another sham “search” and “but nobody’s as good as you, Bob” is what we have right now

 

[monothingie]

So, it doesn't mean nothing then. It means it forces Iger to make larger cuts and concentrate even more on stock, and if not, gives Peltz more power in a year to bring in more members and attempt to dismantle the company for large short-term profits.

Wash Rinse Repeat. Short-term profits have been all that mattered for almost 2 decades. It has inflicted tremendous damage to the company and is nothing new, just a different face with Peltz.

 

[LSLS]

And guess whose fault that would be?


There’s only one path forward here fans should want: sweep the decks with these guys and move on to a new crop of management. They’re out there

Proxy wars and an ego trip consisting of another sham “search” and “but nobody’s as good as you, Bob” is what we have right now

I'm not denying who is at fault in the least. All I'm saying is that I don't see the logic in that Peltz is in this to get nothing (or just embarrass Iger). There must be a lot more he is after than that, and it seems it would be to cut everything and maximize everything he can for right now. Again, I completely agree, Iger should have been gone 6 years ago. And I absolutely have 0 faith he is leaving in 2 years (or whenever the latest extension is up). But I also don't think Peltz is just looking to hang out with some board members for fun.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I'm not denying who is at fault in the least. All I'm saying is that I don't see the logic in that Peltz is in this to get nothing (or just embarrass Iger). There must be a lot more he is after than that, and it seems it would be to cut everything and maximize everything he can for right now. Again, I completely agree, Iger should have been gone 6 years ago. And I absolutely have 0 faith he is leaving in 2 years (or whenever the latest extension is up). But I also don't think Peltz is just looking to hang out with some board members for fun.

That’s what I keep trying to tell people (reading comprehension is a lost art) in these threads.

The problem is they need new management now. Peltz is irrelevant other than he’s highlighted that it’s time for the guard to change - for a multitude of reasons

 

[Tha Realest]

It’s not what you don’t know, it’s what you won’t or can’t acknowledge. Peltz is an existential threat to Disney, and any individual or entity with even a passing knowledge of him, Perlmutter, or the entertainment industry understands this.

You are so fanatically devoted to your incredibly narrow point of view that you would rather invent massive conspiracy theories and assume nefarious hidden motives and conspiratorial activities from hundreds of individuals rather then acknowledge that one man is EXACTLY what he appears to be. It’s not a unique position in modern America, unfortunately…

I can’t imagine how exhausting this must be for you to be so emotionally invested in a catty fight between a bunch of billionaires over the fiscal stewardship of a decreasingly relevant entertainment conglomerate.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I can’t imagine how exhausting this must be for you to be so emotionally invested in a catty fight between a bunch of billionaires over the fiscal stewardship of a decreasingly relevant entertainment conglomerate.

But it’s an EXISTENTIAL CRISIS!!!

without Bob…how will they spend billions for bad Star Wars rides based on terrible movies?