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

[Disgruntled Walt]

This is a breathtakingly selfish point of view.

Disney exists to entertain people. Any opinion of Disney is based on whether they are accomplishing their mission. We judge the effectiveness of their entertainment from a self-centered perspective. Any opinion on Disney is, at some level, "selfish." What would a "selfless" take look like?

 

[Brian]

In the many, many pages dedicated to this topic, I've seen a couple members, one in particular, who have insisted that Peltz supporters justify their support of Peltz, not necessarily their opposition to Iger.

I'd like to flip the script and ask them: why do you support Lagomasino and Froman? Please refrain from bashing Peltz and Rasulo (or Perlmutter, who isn't even running for the board) and focus on the merits of these two rather prosaic candidates, as they are who we are being asked to support instead of Peltz and Rasulo.

 

[Brian]

To those who would ask why support Peltz if he would only be one of 12 directors and can't get a ton done on his own, or with he and Rasulo:

“Adding Peltz and Rasulo would change the dynamic in the boardroom, making the directors more accountable to the shareholders they work for.”

-Paulina Likos
CNBC; January 18, 2024

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

It’s Peltz, Perlmutter, and Rasulo’s fault first and foremost. Secondary fault lies with those who vote for Trian. Iger bares blame, but it comes farther down the list.

If they had an effective board,
Management and succession…the proxy challenge wouldn’t have gotten much traction

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Disney exists to entertain people. Any opinion of Disney is based on whether they are accomplishing their mission. We judge the effectiveness of their entertainment from a self-centered perspective. Any opinion on Disney is, at some level, "selfish." What would a "selfless" take look like?

Apparently…believing Bob Iger’s tired routine of nonsense is “selfless”…

Any other opinion is “self serving”?

Does that scan?
Ironic - because he’s run things in a 100% self serving way. Making moves as part of his own ego centric world

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

To those who would ask why support Peltz if he would only be one of 12 directors and can't get a ton done on his own, or with he and Rasulo:


-Paulina Likos
CNBC; January 18, 2024

That’s been the common refrain for those backing Peltz. There’s no guarantee it will work…but the goals are two things:
1. Break up a board that is colluding with the manager and does not deviate/respond to market conditions
2. Get a new manager

 

[BrianLo]

To those who would ask why support Peltz if he would only be one of 12 directors and can't get a ton done on his own, or with he and Rasulo

Remind me again who was claiming that? It was the Peltz supporters to begin with.

Most of that came from those who were supporting Peltz but trying to downplay he couldn't sway enough power to cause damage. You are just lending more credence to the detractors positioning that he could in fact achieve effective sway.

 

[James Alucobond]

Disney exists to entertain people. Any opinion of Disney is based on whether they are accomplishing their mission. We judge the effectiveness of their entertainment from a self-centered perspective. Any opinion on Disney is, at some level, "selfish." What would a "selfless" take look like?

No one’s looking for selfless, just either a reasonable take based on the facts available or an admission of having an unreasonable take (i.e. not in the genuine best interest of the company), perhaps for good personal reasons but ultimately motivated by your own interest. And reasonable/unreasonable might not be the exact right words there, but I’m struggling to think of more appropriate diction.

The problem is people playing make believe about some of these candidates having anything of value to offer to the long-term health of TWDC.

 

[Jrb1979]

No one’s looking for selfless, just either a reasonable take based on the facts available or an admission of having an unreasonable take (i.e. not in the genuine best interest of the company), perhaps for good personal reasons but ultimately motivated by your own interest. And reasonable/unreasonable might not be the exact right words there, but I’m struggling to think of more appropriate diction.

The problem is people playing make believe about some of these candidates having anything of value to offer to the long-term health of TWDC.

I'm sure they don't offer any value but as I said earlier I don't care anymore. They have moved so far away from what they were known for that it doesn't matter what happens now.

At one time Disney was known for immersive dark rides and parks that had a unique theme. A movies that had great stories with characters you got attached too. Now all parks feel the same with IP shoehorned in and I feel the movies are made for the sole purpose of getting IP out there.

 

[James Alucobond]

I'm sure they don't offer any value but as I said earlier I don't care anymore. They have moved so far away from what they were known for that it doesn't matter what happens now.

… So why chime in to broadcast indifference? Why wish possible ill for the people who do still enjoy it?

 

[BrianLo]

I'll unhappily eat my words in three days, but I really think there continues to be a lot of fluff around this entire affair. The largest shareholder block that has declared for Trian still remains Perlmutter. Trian would be trotting out other supporters to much fanfare if they had them.

I just seriously doubt Vanguard and Blackrock are picking the self-destruct option. They are pretty much deciding the vote anyways.

Calpers seems all "scary" until you realize it's 0.3% of the vote. It also strikes me as not aligning with the ISS recommendation - which means it is strictly a product of Trian sway.

It still does not escape me that there was way more clout behind the Eisner vote and that wasn't even technically effective. I just think you are all setting yourselves up. While an important event, the group on both ends are completely falling for Trian's background noise.

 

[Jrb1979]

… So why chime in to broadcast indifference? Why wish possible ill for the people who do still enjoy it?

I'm wishing ill on any of you. If you enjoy it still good for you.

 

[James Alucobond]

I'm wishing ill on any of you. If you enjoy it still good for you.

Yet you came into a thread just to say that a thing that actually is quite important isn't really important because the rides Disney builds don't appeal to you all that much anymore.

 

[Casper Gutman]

I'm wishing ill on any of you. If you enjoy it still good for you.

If Disney has alienated you, I’m sorry. It’s wise to disengage - stop giving them cast and attention.

Welcoming the destruction of something millions (if not billions) still love, a company that employs a lot of people, an institution that is incredibly historically and culturally important because you’re mad about line-skipping or a big blue warehouse is selfish.

 

[TalkingHead]

I'll unhappily eat my words in three days, but I really think there continues to be a lot of fluff around this entire affair. The largest shareholder block that has declared for Trian still remains Perlmutter. Trian would be trotting out other supporters to much fanfare if they had them.

I just seriously doubt Vanguard and Blackrock are picking the self-destruct option. They are pretty much deciding the vote anyways.

Calpers seems all "scary" until you realize it's 0.3% of the vote. It also strikes me as not aligning with the ISS recommendation - which means it is strictly a product of Trian sway.

It still does not escape me that there was way more clout behind the Eisner vote and that wasn't even technically effective. I just think you are all setting yourselves up. While an important event, the group on both ends are completely falling for Trian's background noise.

Bigger problem for Iger is what happens once this fight is behind him. It’s had the effect of shoring up his support against an easy villain. What happens if the animated releases this year do mediocre/passable numbers and not, say, $800m? The future of the company doesn’t get any brighter after this week’s vote, so it’s hard to see how either outcome helps Disney in 2025.

 

[Brian]

Welcoming the destruction of something millions (if not billions) still love, a company that employs a lot of people, an institution that is incredibly historically and culturally important because you’re mad about line-skipping or a big blue warehouse is selfish.

I can't speak for the member you're quoting, but it's far more than a big blue warehouse and Genie+ for many.

 

[Brian]

Question for the anti-Peltz contingent: Rasulo was chairman of P&R and then CFO for nearly a decade, two massively influential and powerful positions, yet the company is still standing and, in your view, thriving. How is it that you can then reasonably prognosticate the utter destruction of the company if Peltz gets a seat on the board?

I won't sit here and pretend a board member of the company is powerless, it's not, but it's certainly not a more powerful and influential position than the CFO, or chairman of an entire segment of the company.

 

[BrianLo]

Bigger problem for Iger is what happens once this fight is behind him. It’s had the effect of shoring up his support against an easy villain. What happens if the animated releases this year do mediocre/passable numbers and not, say, $800m? The future of the company doesn’t get any brighter after this week’s vote, so it’s hard to see how either outcome helps Disney in 2025.

It bothers me to say this, but Wall Street doesn't really care about the film division. It cares an awful lot about streaming right now, downstream ESPN/linear and near the bottom is the studio and parks performance. What happens is a D+ price hike in the worst case scenario. I'd hope this years film slate is going to be more successful, it seems to have an opportunity to be, but I'm not sure the proxy fights have anything to do with films. As is 2022 was a generally good year for their slate and that's when this really started.

Membership does not want to hear it, but this achieves exactly the opposite of what they want. Iger leaving earlier than 2026 is extremely unlikely in either scenario. The vote against Iger himself is not recommended by anyone. Peltz's presence, however unlikely, will cause them to want to build even more stability for the successor, less another Chapek is thrown to the wolves. Likewise with Peltz defeated, again it is unwise for him to leave prematurely until they truly know the sharks have gone away.

 

[BrianLo]

Question for the anti-Peltz contingent: Rasulo was chairman of P&R and then CFO for nearly a decade, two massively influential and powerful positions, yet the company is still standing and, in your view, thriving. How is it that you can then reasonably prognosticate the utter destruction of the company if Peltz gets a seat on the board?

I won't sit here and pretend a board member of the company is powerless, it's not, but it's certainly not a more powerful and influential position than the CFO, or chairman of an entire segment of the company.

The parks were certainly not thriving under Rasulo. That's probably the nadir period for them in most people's eyes.

Rasulo also hasn't been CEO and that's clearly what this is pitched to be.

Whether it is complete destruction is pedantic. He will make the company worse... why do we want that? Like I said a while ago, I almost feel like we have come full circle that people will start thinking Chapek for CEO round two is the solution.

Why are you cheering for someone who we know carries all of your least favourite Iger qualities and a few more sprinkled on top? How is that bettering the company?

 

[Disgruntled Walt]

Welcoming the destruction of something millions (if not billions) still love, a company that employs a lot of people, an institution that is incredibly historically and culturally important because you’re mad about line-skipping or a big blue warehouse is selfish.

Oh come on, who is welcoming the destruction of Disney? I want a boardroom shakeup to save Disney, not destroy it. Why else would I be on this forum? I wish Disney didn't stink right now. But hopefully it gets better. If Peltz doesn't win, I hope Iger still learns a lesson from this.