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

[MisterPenguin]

It matters more if Perlmutter sells his stock. His was the majority of shares that Peltz controlled.

 

[el_super]

Peltz will probably be back, guessing he'll bring Elon as his second candidate this time.

Why?

If the company is struggling next year, if there isn't a new CEO waiting in the wings, or D+ doesn't become profitable or some other calamity manifests in the next 12 months that necessitates taking some kind of action against Disney, why would Wall Street want to go with Peltz again? Why wouldn't the big investment firms actually look for someone they like, that also coincidentally knows what they are doing?

He's done.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Why?

If the company is struggling next year, if there isn't a new CEO waiting in the wings, or D+ doesn't become profitable or some other calamity manifests in the next 12 months that necessitates taking some kind of action against Disney, why would Wall Street want to go with Peltz again? Why wouldn't the big investment firms actually look for someone they like, that also coincidentally knows what they are doing?

He's done.

I agree he’s probably done

But they didn’t say “Wall Street will bring Peltz back”
He said Peltz will be back. Wall
Street rejected him…but with a pretty clear message for little man. The next six months will be interesting. Let’s see if the dwarf house tries to roll out the same ole hits or if there is a noticeable, needed change?

 

[BrianLo]

Peltz will probably be back, guessing he'll bring Elon as his second candidate this time. Musk is talking way too much about disney to not think he's going to do something like that.

I think it’s over. Peltz isn’t getting younger and isn’t sticking his neck out a third year in a row unless the victory is assured. He’ll collect his winnings and shift them to a new target.

I said before a 40% win would cause him to stick around. 30’s is a maybe and 20’s would be a really sound defeat.

I think what we got was an extremely harsh rejection of Rasulo and a meagre underperformance for Peltz historically, but I am opened to the maybe with the underside being Rasulo dragging him down so much.

The vast majority of Peltz’s support came from the ISS recommendation. The recommendation that was made prior to the Financial Times Interview and was a barely passable ‘maybe’ for succession. That All goes away if the board actually sticks to succession. The final Hail Mary they actually weren’t willing to compromise on for whatever reason, but the timing supports they damn well better have a very, very public timeline and roadmap by this time next year. If not the name, the date and the transitional period and the exit date for Iger firmed up. The company would be truly clueless if they leave this space for a third attempt.

Then we’d also need some cataclysmic change, where the stock underperforms peers and the broader market both by a significant margin in the next 6-8 months. By at least 25-30%. The window has otherwise been closed and unfortunately for Peltz the window has twice been the Fall and never the actual spring when the vote goes down.

He isn’t coming back on another maybe, he’s coming back on an assured victory. So ya, if the company completely derails, D+ can’t hit profitability Q4, a parks or cruise ship protracted closure occurs, something really unexpected. Even then he still might not bother unless a legitimate ally from Iger’s camp defects. Lucas/The Disneys, which seems unlikely due to the social disagreements.

 

[Lilofan]

Why?

If the company is struggling next year, if there isn't a new CEO waiting in the wings, or D+ doesn't become profitable or some other calamity manifests in the next 12 months that necessitates taking some kind of action against Disney, why would Wall Street want to go with Peltz again? Why wouldn't the big investment firms actually look for someone they like, that also coincidentally knows what they are doing?

He's done.

Peltz is 81 and is worth $1.6 billion dollars. I'd be giving up on Disney and " blow that dough ".

 

[WoundedDreamer]

I wouldn't put it past him but even he must know that there is a limit to how much of his personal grievances people are going to put up with while his companies are losing money by the truck load. He may be rich enough to not care but he is messing with other people's money at this point.

I honestly wouldn't be the least bit surprised if we see movement to remove him from Tesla before we see an attempt against Iger.

Tesla up 800% over 5 years. Disney is essentially flat over 5 years. Are you serious?

 

[Dan Deesnee]

Do you believe everything anyone says (like a politician)?

Just because you say something doesn't make it true. He was never going to support if his platform was 'cut everything and then take profits'. But since it was 'cut everything except the parks and restore magic by looking at parks spending', you're all in on him.

Yeah actually cutting all their garbage spending and focusing on the parks does sound pretty great.

 

[Stripes]

Not every board of directors operates like Disney's board. Some actually do care about return on investment.

Apparently, Tesla’s board doesn’t care. In fact, I think I care more about the ant crawling outside my front door than Tesla’s board cares about the company’s return on investment. Which is to say, not at all.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/judge-rules-favor-plaintiffs-challenging-musks-tesla-pay-package-2024-01-30/

 

[Stripes]

I honestly wouldn't be the least bit surprised if we see movement to remove him from Tesla before we see an attempt against Iger.

The entire Tesla board should be voted out and replaced with a truly independent board. Every single one of those board members are friends of Elon and if it weren’t for that fact, he would already be gone.

 

[Kamikaze]

Yeah actually cutting all their garbage spending and focusing on the parks does sound pretty great.

You're not getting it. He would cut the parks spending too. It was just a lie to fool people like you.

 

[Dranth]

Tesla up 800% over 5 years. Disney is essentially flat over 5 years. Are you serious?
View attachment 777422

It has lost 60% of its value since the high in 2021 and has been losing market share, cutting guidance, had massive misses on EPS and revenue the last two quarters and likely another here in a few weeks.

Yes, it had an amazing run and that is great for people who got in low and got out already but Tesla already came out and warned stockholders that 2024 was going to be rough and with increased competition, a cooling EV market, and some questionable behavior by Musk, things aren’t looking good. Throw all that together and is it really surprising there are already rumblings of investors moving to oust him? They already stepped in and got his ridiculous pay package overturned in court.

 

[Eric Graham]

Why?

If the company is struggling next year, if there isn't a new CEO waiting in the wings, or D+ doesn't become profitable or some other calamity manifests in the next 12 months that necessitates taking some kind of action against Disney, why would Wall Street want to go with Peltz again? Why wouldn't the big investment firms actually look for someone they like, that also coincidentally knows what they are doing?

He's done.

Most companies groom a successor behind the scenes. I'm sure it isn't public at all.

 

[Dan Deesnee]

You're not getting it. He would cut the parks spending too. It was just a lie to fool people like you.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I think it’s over. Peltz isn’t getting younger and isn’t sticking his neck out a third year in a row unless the victory is assured. He’ll collect his winnings and shift them to a new target.

I said before a 40% win would cause him to stick around. 30’s is a maybe and 20’s would be a really sound defeat.

I think what we got was an extremely harsh rejection of Rasulo and a meagre underperformance for Peltz historically, but I am opened to the maybe with the underside being Rasulo dragging him down so much.

The vast majority of Peltz’s support came from the ISS recommendation. The recommendation that was made prior to the Financial Times Interview and was a barely passable ‘maybe’ for succession. That All goes away if the board actually sticks to succession. The final Hail Mary they actually weren’t willing to compromise on for whatever reason, but the timing supports they damn well better have a very, very public timeline and roadmap by this time next year. If not the name, the date and the transitional period and the exit date for Iger firmed up. The company would be truly clueless if they leave this space for a third attempt.

Then we’d also need some cataclysmic change, where the stock underperforms peers and the broader market both by a significant margin in the next 6-8 months. By at least 25-30%. The window has otherwise been closed and unfortunately for Peltz the window has twice been the Fall and never the actual spring when the vote goes down.

He isn’t coming back on another maybe, he’s coming back on an assured victory. So ya, if the company completely derails, D+ can’t hit profitability Q4, a parks or cruise ship protracted closure occurs, something really unexpected. Even then he still might not bother unless a legitimate ally from Iger’s camp defects. Lucas/The Disneys, which seems unlikely due to the social disagreements.

It would probably take less…

More box office disasters, declining park attendance and no succession leading to stock dip would change the attitudes of the funds that did back the current board this time

And that’s a good thing…because what theyre doing isn’t working.

At the end of the day…what they have chose to do is what’s underperforming

There’s a subtle myth around here that somehow Disney is a “victim” and that’s why they’ve slid.
It’s just really bad management.

So now we see if they will fix it?

The word is “hubris”

We have been watching it unfold.

Hopefully they’re “scared straight” now

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Not if there's a cult of personality and buddyism and group-think and sunk-cost amongst the Board. Especially if the chief imagines himself as chief-for-life and squashes any attempts at succession.

…wait…what?!?

Did we just enter the twilight zone?

Bravo

 

[Kamikaze]

Please find one instance. Only one. Any one. Of Nelson Peltz encouraging a company he was an active investor and/or on the Board of to increase spending on any part of that company's business.

You won't. Because it doesn't exist.

You can try to label it as an opinion, but its fact based on existing information.

 

[peter11435]

Nah. It’s a fact. You just fell for his lies.

 

[Dan Deesnee]

Please find one instance. Only one. Any one. Of Nelson Peltz encouraging a company he was an active investor and/or on the Board of to increase spending on any part of that company's business.

You won't. Because it doesn't exist.

You can try to label it as an opinion, but its fact based on existing information.

Okay, the save the magic website he created. He's an investor in Disney so that meeets your requirement, and he wants them to increase spending on the parks.

That was easy.

 

[James Alucobond]

Okay, the save the magic website he created. He's an investor in Disney so that meeets your requirement, and he wants them to increase spending on the parks.

That was easy.

With his perfect 20/20 hindsight, he retroactively said they should've spent more in the past after Disney already admitted they should have done so and committed to doing so. On top of that, he said what they committed to spending should be further scrutinized, meaning that he wanted to trim their commitment where possible. He also teamed up with Rasulo, so yeah. Please try again.

 

[Dan Deesnee]

With his perfect 20/20 hindsight, he retroactively said they should've spent more in the past after Disney already admitted they should have done so and committed to doing so. On top of that, he said what they committed to spending should be further scrutinized, meaning that he wanted to trim their commitment where possible. He also teamed up with Rasulo, so yeah. Please try again.

And he's absolutely right, what they've committed to spending the money ON should be scrutinized.

Are you saying you want more live action remakes, animated sequels, and IP shoved into every corner of the parks? More classic attractions destroyed? More 5+ year build timelines on rides while Universal pumps out an entire new park in 5 years.

Peltz notably said that Disney is over earning on the parks (Nickle and dining guests and cast members at the expense of the brand) in order to make up for it's losses on Disney+ and other areas of the company (terrible box office performance). Do you really disagree with that?

I find it very odd that so many on here want change, and hate the direction Disney has taken with so many things. Yet change comes along, echoing their concerns, and everyone suddenly wants things to stay the same.

I know the response already "Peltz is the wrong change." Understand this, if Peltz got a seat it doesn't mean he's suddenly running the company.

"Perfection is the enemy of progress"

So Peltz is out. What now? We'll get low budget, half baked "lands" and attractions, more over promising and under delivering, and many who opposed Peltz will be back to complaining about Disney and wishing something would change...