Ayla
Well-Known Member
I believe that is the general feeling of those hoping Iger wins this fight.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News The Walt Disney Company Board of Directors Extends Robert A. Iger’s Contract as CEO Through 2026
- Thread starter DCBaker
- Start date
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
I didn’t catch that one. I have read Blue Ocean Strategy though…
…and the hobbit is more grounded in reality
Surferboy567
Well-Known Member
I want Iger to win the fight make no mistake.
I absolutely don’t trust Peltz and feel he has bad intentions for the long term future of the company. What I’m trying to say is that I believe Iger is way better between the two options. I also know Iger comes with his own problems and is far from perfect but if we are talking about the lesser of two evils I feel Peltz is way worse.
WoundedDreamer
Well-Known Member
I'm not going to lie. Anyone who looks at VoteDisney's "Expert Analysis" page and doesn't get the impression that Iger is looking to hang around, should have their head examined. Here's the webpage:We should all reconvene around six months from now….we eveything is calm and we can celebrate iger’s next contract extension
Expert analysis | Vote Disney
Read what others are saying about how Disney's board and future growth. Vote using the WHITE proxy card.
votedisney.com
Does this look like a group of people who want Bob to retire in two years?
Ayla
Well-Known Member
I 100% agree with you.
WoundedDreamer
Well-Known Member
Disney is almost undoubtedly making campaign promises and providing incentives. The influencer party that Gad alluded to in his post, is one example. Bring everyone in and make them feel like they're special and on the "inside" of Disney's plans. That's a classic political tactic. They get swept off their feet by the charming Iger, who then asks for their public support.
Making promises of future consideration for board seats, green lighting passion projects, etc. are all fair game. Anything that a politician would do, Iger and the Shareholder Relations team are willing to do.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Oh the serendipity of life. Maisel just popped up in a book I started today, Song of Spider-Man. With each turn of the page I am eager to learn how Perlmutter’s creative leadership brought forth what was undoubtedly the hit of Broadway.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Either you’re too busy trying to be a contrarian or you’re deliberately ignoring what is inconvenient. Peltz is the one who considers Perlmutter creative and is repeating his grievances.
WoundedDreamer
Well-Known Member
Hmm, if Peltz believes that he's mistaken. Perlmutter himself does not think of himself as a creative.
“I learned one thing about creative people my whole life: You cannot give them an open credit card.…They’re doing this for 30 years, why would they change?”
He clearly does not consider himself a creative.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Somebody who insists on micromanaging creative decisions sees themselves as a creative, otherwise they wouldn’t be doing so. You don’t complain about things like the looks of the cast if you’re just concerned about expenses.
Maybe you can be the first to explain to us how having the board involved in movie production will allow for more creativity.
Casper Gutman
Well-Known Member
Perlmutter is so creatively "hands off" that he killed the Fantastic Four comic - the emotional and historical lynchpin of Marvel Comics, their "Snow White" - because he was enraged that Fox was adhering to their contractual rights. For the same reason he tried to push The Inhumans, a perpetually marginal property that almost never supported its own ongoing, as a replacement for The X-Men, one of the great artistic and financial juggernauts in comic history..
No creative input at all.
No creative input at all.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Yes it has. Theres no need for board level review if they don’t plan to do anything. He just reiterated the need for the board to be more involved in the past few days.
WoundedDreamer
Well-Known Member
Greater board involvement rarely means going down to the writer's room and making changes. If Peltz was looking to pretend to be a movie director, I wouldn't be in favor of him. Board involvement means asking the CEO and senior executives tough questions about budgets, ROI, strategy, and spending. The CEO is forced to express his longterm strategy and then revise it where the board finds issues. Peltz is busy managing a multi-billion dollar enterprise. He sits on multiple boards. He sits on the board of Unilever. I can guarantee that Peltz isn't down at Dove's HQ personally testing each new scent of shampoo. He's a big picture guy. The same will be true of Disney.
I'm open to being wrong on this, but I really doubt it. Peltz knows where his strengths are. They're not screenplays.
peter11435
Well-Known Member
Good thing he knows what his strengths are… he’s managed to keep it a secret from the rest of us all these years.
He definitely doesn’t have time to test shampoos when he’s too busy pushing them to sell off ben and Jerry’s.
MerlinTheGoat
Well-Known Member
Peltz's "strengths" are lying to the gullible and tricking them into giving him power, and then stripping a company to the bone to enrich himself and leaving a smoking crater behind.
Sad thing is that I don't even think some of the people voting for him are even gullible or "foolish" in the traditional sense. I think they have a chip on their shoulder and just want to watch the company burn out of some twisted retribution and because it's entertaining to them.
Sad thing is that I don't even think some of the people voting for him are even gullible or "foolish" in the traditional sense. I think they have a chip on their shoulder and just want to watch the company burn out of some twisted retribution and because it's entertaining to them.
WoundedDreamer
Well-Known Member
To be fair... What are the synergies between Ben and Jerry's and Dove Shampoo? It could easily be argued that ice cream and shampoo aren't complimentary businesses. Why not create a Unilever that is more focused on what it does best, and a Ben and Jerry's that continues to do what it does best? Bigger company size tends to result in less focus and discipline.
There's an argument to be made that the Fox purchase caused Disney to lose focus. Having so many films, tv shows, and games under one umbrella made it difficult to properly ensure quality. Disney reducing its output to fewer and stronger brands could prove beneficial. That's obviously up to each person to decide, but the timing does fit.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Peltz was complaining about casting decisions just a few days ago. He straight up said the type of process and workflow he wants to review.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
This is like a middle school fight that starts to get heated…do you watch and laugh or get the principal before someone gets hair tossed down the stairs? 
Casper Gutman
Well-Known Member
Which perfectly echoed his ally Perlmutter’s past attempts to interfere in the studio’s creative processes.
I stress again - this desire to limit diversity in the MCU, his demand to keep “politics out of the boardroom” (by encouraging continued business with Russia), his attack on Feige, and his pledge to keep Iger as CEO are pretty much the ONLY ideas for “fixing” Disney he presents in a lengthy puff piece.
So… what part of that will save Disney from the dastardly Iger?
TalkingHead
Well-Known Member
Innocently asking this: Has Feige ever expressed a passion for movies besides MCU content? Reason I ask is because I get the impression he’s a brand manager more than a movie maker, which would explain why the MCU productions seem to be so uneven in the creative arts. He seems more interested in each entry functioning as a commercial for the next thing. That makes him more of a Barnum than a DeMille.