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

[Casper Gutman]

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.

If you have any knowledge of Hollywood history, you would understand that what Feige accomplished is unprecedented and breathtaking. No other Hollywood studio has been able to come close, and they’ve all tried. Marvels stumbles came when Feige stepped back, and that has been rectified.

Trying to give the directors equal credit to Feige reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of how Marvel works. It is a producer-driven franchise. The directors have been chosen for their unobtrusiveness, malleability, and willingness to work within Feige’s system. That’s why so many are new directors and very few (only Gunn and Raimi excepted) have anything like a distinctive directorial voice.

Feige’s nemesis is Perlmutter. I’d love to here a defense of his creative track record.

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.

I don’t need a history of Hollywood mergers and acquisitions- I’m very familiar. Disney is not a Coca-Cola style conglomerate. It is a vertically integrated entertainment company in which one division feeds another and the overall organization allows for the efficient exploitation of IPs at every level. No one is worried about losing divisions for sentimental reasons. The justifiable fear is that components will be sold off for short term gain despite the fact that it hurts the company’s long term ability to fully profit off successful content.

The idea that Peltz wants to streamline operations to increase creativity is utterly laughable. Nothing in his history indicates any such desire. He wants to dramatically limit creativity by restricting output to an even more tightly controlled group of IPs very narrowly defined - to minimize risk. The idea that he wants to open up creative pathways is pure fan projection. Peltz is not a blank slate.

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.

He said this in boilerplate PR designed to appeal to fans, just like the cloying pictures of Peltz in the parks. It was an utterly transparent lie. His more detailed proposals make clear he wants to dramatically limit any spending in the parks. Again, Peltz has a history, and nothing in it indicates any actual belief in the parks.

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.

It strikes me as naive to believe that Disney could not severely limit or cancel this expansion if they were motivated to do so.

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

Searchlight just won a major Oscar. It’s the division producing the kind of unique, adventurous, non-IP content posters on these boards (many in this thread) claim to want. Eliminating it would be a huge blow to Disney creatively.

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.

This has already been addressed by a poster, but this take is divorced from reality. Product is being shelved for financial reasons… and because of management egos. Coyote vs Acme tested incredibly well - about the same as the franchise-launching Deadpool.

The larger issue is that, as many have said in this thread, Peltz and Iger and other execs are not creative. They hire people who are. The last thing anyone should want is non-creative execs meddling to the degree that they kill completed films out of personal pique or judgements they are unqualified to make. Shelving projects in this way will dramatically limit the creative personnel willing to work for Disney.

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?

Nowhere has Iger said he’s killing original animated IPs. His tenure has been very strong in that regard. Like any beleaguered CEO he is turning more to sequels like Frozen 4 or Toy Story 5, but that’s not instead of originals. And he certainly isn’t gutting Disney Animation or Pixar as Peltz would or as Universal is doing to Dreamworks.

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.

Peak TV is over, yes. That doesn’t mean all innovation is dead. In fact, in a moment when room for creativity is contracting, it seems particularly unwise to welcome executives who will limit it even more. IPs can still provide a space for new, even risky storytelling.

I also wasn’t simply talking about TV. Peltz would limit creativity in film as well - hence the Black Panther example. I invite you to examine the creative track record of Peltz, Perlmutter, and Rasulo.

All of my examples were off the top of my head. The key point is that things can get exponentially worse. The idea that Disney is currently at some sort of nadir is incredible hyperbole.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

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

No idea, but change is needed. Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.

I often compare Disney to a sports team, when they win you praise the coach, when they lose you want a coaching change, in this case Iger is the coach, 10 years ago Disney was the undisputed champ and Iger was viewed as the best coach in the world, over the last decade he’s has made a lot of questionable moves and now all their star players are stumbling, time for a coaching change.

There’s no guarantee a new coach will make the team better but we do know keeping the same team and keeping the same game plan does mean more losing.

 

[Casper Gutman]

They’ll criticize it…to the point it ends at the “safe space” of not disrupting the way things are done.’

Y’all need a shove

It’s not “keep bob or the thing is dismantled and sold for scrap parts”

That’s the goal lines…it misses the entire field in the middle

People are caught up on what they think trian is…not the reason they’re involved and what it represents

Yes, people are concerned with what Trian is, what they have done, and what they will do. Because that’s the relevant discussion. No one needs to hear your opinion about Iger restated as nauseam. We’re all familiar.

You don’t need to “shove” anyone. Many of the folks arguing against you are extremely articulate, cutting, trenchant critics of Iger. They simply have perspective.

Tell you what, after Trian is dispatched, we’ll all go back to screaming about Iger and demanding he name a successor. Promise.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Feige’s record is great…that can’t be taken away.

But they’re also hit the wall to a certain extent…which uses up past credit quickly.

Just remember: the persons telling him what to do would NOT be the first to take a fall.

 

[celluloid]

Here comes the guy who said the movie star concept is dead and sequels no longer make more money than their predecessors to tell us how Hollywood works.

Like what are now the classic monsters and westerns always being around trying somewhere, and a popcorn flick or two at least a year, the superhero genre will have its triumphs occasionally as well, but that trend is not the trend it was from 2008 to 2021. And in decades time it may return.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

No idea, but change is needed. Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.

I often compare Disney to a sports team, when they win you praise the coach, when they lose you want a coaching change, in this case Iger is the coach, 10 years ago Disney was the undisputed champ and Iger was viewed as the best coach in the world, over the last decade he’s has made a lot of questionable moves and now all their star players are stumbling, time for a coaching change.

There’s no guarantee a new coach will make the team better but we do know keeping the same team and keeping the same game plan does mean more losing.

I had no idea you were a penguins/steelers fan

 

[Casper Gutman]

No idea, but change is needed. Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.

I often compare Disney to a sports team, when they win you praise the coach, when they lose you want a coaching change, in this case Iger is the coach, 10 years ago Disney was the undisputed champ and Iger was viewed as the best coach in the world, over the last decade he’s has made a lot of questionable moves and now all their star players are stumbling, time for a coaching change.

There’s no guarantee a new coach will make the team better but we do know keeping the same team and keeping the same game plan does mean more losing.

Peltz, Perlmutter, and Rasulo have track records. Defend them. The consistent refusal to do so is in bad faith.

By your analogy, In the last ten years Disney has won seven or eight Superbowls. You’re trying to disassemble and sell the team after it just missed the playoffs.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

No idea, but change is needed. Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.

I often compare Disney to a sports team, when they win you praise the coach, when they lose you want a coaching change, in this case Iger is the coach, 10 years ago Disney was the undisputed champ and Iger was viewed as the best coach in the world, over the last decade he’s has made a lot of questionable moves and now all their star players are stumbling, time for a coaching change.

There’s no guarantee a new coach will make the team better but we do know keeping the same team and keeping the same game plan does mean more losing.

"Change is needed" doesn't mean "take an even worse option." It's like being stuck in a prison cell and thinking things will improve if my captors torture me, too.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Yes, people are concerned with what Trian is, what they have done, and what they will do. Because that’s the relevant discussion. No one needs to hear your opinion about Iger restated as nauseam. We’re all familiar.

You don’t need to “shove” anyone. Many of the folks arguing against you are extremely articulate, cutting, trenchant critics of Iger. They simply have perspective.

Tell you what, after Trian is dispatched, we’ll all go back to screaming about Iger and demanding he name a successor. Promise.

After Trian is gone…he’s gonna extend himself…again

Can’t wait for the “articulation” on that.

Am I bothering you? Because if that’s the standard then we got some old posts to discuss that were WAY over the line and stupid, noble warrior.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Peltz, Perlmutter, and Rasulo have track records. Defend them. The consistent refusal to do so is in bad faith.

By your analogy, In the last ten years Disney has won seven or eight Superbowls. You’re trying to disassemble and sell the team after it just missed the playoffs.

And there’s the reset

NOBODY likes them…back to the “crisis” talk

Thanks for playing

I guess we need more articulation?

 

[denyuntilcaught]

This is a totally fair take. Admittedly, my argument on this point wasn't that good. It was a little bit aggressive and not very convincing. The insinuation from my post is either you agree with me or you like "garbage." And that's not fair to those who see the issue differently.

I'll expand on my point here. You may still disagree, but it should at least give you better understanding of where I'm coming from.

I strongly ascribe to the Steve Jobs philosophy of brands as a bank account. Every interaction with a firm can either deposit or withdraw from the relationship. For example, if someone watches a Pixar film that is really good, that would make people love the Pixar brand more. In short, that would be a deposit into the Pixar brand bank account. If on the other hand someone sees a Pixar film that is not enjoyable, this would withdraw from the Pixar brand bank account. The more positive experiences with the brand (deposits) help people to love the brand. No company will be perfect, so always having a healthy amount of positives to offset any negatives is important.

Withdrawals should be avoided whenever possible. If that takes cancellation, reshoots, or rewrites it's worth it.

Your objection to this seems to be that always avoiding losers might actually hamper art and storytelling. Sometimes, taking a risk with something the studio believes is a loser, might actually net positive results. The studio doesn't always know what will succeed and what won't. It's a fair argument. I still lean towards mimicking the Pixar model of trying to weed out or rework expected flops, but you're not wrong that some classic films were considered duds by studio executives only to take the world by storm.

Cheers!

I hear you and MisterPenguin entirely, but I almost feel like there's a slight difference here between scrapping a film's release because it's not up to par and scrapping a release because of "financial reasons." The latter is what we've seen from Warners, not the former, and again there's nothing Disney has shown that makes me believe they also wouldn't take the Wall Street route versus the integrity of branded storytelling route.

I completely agree that a film's release should be scrapped if it proves damaging to the brand, but then in actuality if it gets to the point where the question is "do we even release this?" then scrapping the release is treating the symptoms, not the cause, of how you got to that point to begin with. Write good scripts. Tell good stories. Lessen the budgets to force the storytellers to rely on the integrity of the story and cast to do the heavy lifting versus CGI. Not everything needs to be a tentpole, as that's a horrible strategy since every tentpole is a brand statement. Too many statements in the market at once creates brand dilution. We know that.

 

[Casper Gutman]

Here comes the guy who said the movie star concept is dead and sequels no longer make more money than their predecessors to tell us how Hollywood works.

Like what are now the classic monsters and westerns always being around trying somewhere, and a popcorn flick or two at least a year, the superhero genre will have its triumphs occasionally as well, but that trend is not the trend it was from 2008 to 2021. And in decades time it may return.

Your lack of knowledge of film history is incredible.

The movie star system is largely dead, replaced by IPs as an organizing principle. Movie actors themselves talk about this frequently. It’s been widely discussed in the trade and academic press.

As to sequels making less than their predecessors - I never said anything remotely like that. As has happened before, you’re either confused or lying.

 

[celluloid]

Your lack of knowledge of film history is incredible.

The movie star system is largely dead, replaced by IPs as an organizing principle. Movie actors themselves talk about this frequently. It’s been widely discussed in the trade and academic press.

Number one, not the best source as they are just seeing the increase in competition in a world that has changed since they started and is increasing with rapid rushes to viral fame.

Also, someone tell Timothy Chalamet and everyone that still signs multi picture deals.

Celebrity is not dead, there are just more of them than ever, so at times they are more expendable.

 

[Casper Gutman]

And there’s the reset

NOBODY likes them…back to the “crisis” talk

Thanks for playing

I guess we need more articulation?

Trian is the current alternative to Iger. That is the topic of discussion.

Of course, to you, every thread has the same topic.

 

[Tha Realest]

Number one, not the best source as they are just seeing the increase in competition in a world that has changed since they started and is increasing with rapid rushes to viral fame.

Also, someone tell Timothy Chalamet and everyone that still signs multi picture deals.

Celebrity is not dead, there are just more of them than ever, so at times they are more expendable.

“The movie star system is largely dead,”

and

“Disney has a secret deal to bring back Robert Downey Jr and Chris Evans to juice the next phase of Marvel”

Same person.

 

[celluloid]

“The movie star system is largely dead,”

and

“Disney has a secret deal to bring back Robert Downey Jr and Chris Evans to juice the next phase of Marvel”

Same person.

Isn't that wild?

For one, other than a cameo like mentor role one day, Robert Downey Junior is done with it/Disney can't afford those guys in leading roles.

It is time to take a decade off and let the hype build for that kind of thing.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Trian is the current alternative to Iger. That is the topic of discussion.

Of course, to you, every thread has the same topic.

For the 4,000th time…it is NOT a binary choice.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Number one, not the best source as they are just seeing the increase in competition in a world that has changed since they started and is increasing with rapid rushes to viral fame.

Also, someone tell Timothy Chalamet and everyone that still signs multi picture deals.

Celebrity is not dead, there are just more of them than ever, so at times they are more expendable.

It’s a bigger world with many more distribution outlets now…that’s the change

Howard Hughes Brain would explode now…but he could still make a better plane than Boeing

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

By your analogy, In the last ten years Disney has won seven or eight Superbowls. You’re trying to disassemble and sell the team after it just missed the playoffs.

This is where we see things differently, I view it as they won the Super Bowl from 2013-2016, in 2017 -2020 they made the playoffs, from 2021-2023 they missed the playoffs. Winning 4 SBs in a 10 year time span would absolutely buy most coaches some leeway but when the last one was 6 years ago, and they’re now consistently missing the playoffs, the nostalgia isn’t enough to keep them.

 

[celluloid]

It’s a bigger world with many more distribution outlets now…that’s the change

Howard Hughes Brain would explode now…but he could still make a better plane than Boeing

The world where Mr. Beast has the Networth than Robert Downey Jr and Kevin Feige put together.