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

[HMF]

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.

You clearly do not remember the Rasulo Years. Heres a little taste.

I do not want the man behind that anywhere near leadership of the company.

 

[lazyboy97o]

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.

Hey look, more deliberate conflating and oversimplifying. A number of the anti-Peltz contingent would not describe Disney as thriving.

Rasulo was not fully supported during his tenure as head of the parks, but his views are the root of a lot of the current claimed issues with the parks. Rasulo was the big proponent of the idea that the parks were a mature business that could not grow and, through his complete dislike and misunderstanding of the business, wanted to push into “blue oceans”. Selling off the parks was seriously explored at this time.

Where Pressler saw theme parks as malls that for some stupid reason had a bunch of rides, Rasulo saw theme parks as hotels that for some stupid reason had rides. There was no future in the parks. Maintenance should be improved because killing people is bad, but Matty’s obsession with show and milestones was too much. Attractions should be small and largely reuse existing facilities. Buzz Lightyear Astro Blasters is the model here, a cheap project pushed into an existing facility and multiple parks.

Rasulo was not an advocate for the Hong Kong Disneyland three land expansion or the Disney’s California Adventure redo. Both of those major projects were pushed far more by other parties pressuring Disney. Rasulo had no issue with opening the severely cut down Hong Kong Disneyland. Iger didn’t either, but realized it was a liability for his prize of Shanghai Disneyland. In California there was growing pressure from the city about the Disneyland Resort not living up to projections. As the project moved forward it was Lasseter who really kept the project safe and on track.

In Florida the New Fantasyland project was to be the shining example of Rasulo’s vision for expansion. Gone was the proposed roller coaster with show scenes and instead was a giant princess meet and greet complex. Guests were going to be amazed by coloring with Princess Aurora. Pixie Hollow would also be built, a flat ride might have been included (although its location probably would have made the required basement a cash sink) and of course, a meet and greet complex.

His big idea though was to really shift all major investment away from the established, tapped out park resorts. Instead, he envisioned pivoting DisneyParks (we all love this branding creation, right?) to regional entertainment. This though wasn’t going in on existing concepts like DisneyQuest and ESPN Zone. Or like what Universal is doing today with Universal Kids or Horror Unleashed. No, we’re talking timeshares and hotels. Aulani, National Harbor and every other major tourist destination or metropolitan area would have its own DisneyParks resort experience available. No need to travel to Walt Disney World or Disneyland Resort and bother with those silly rides, the magic of a Disney hotel stay and its premium prices would be just down the road!

All these guests also have data, data that can be harvested and monetized. All wrapped in the bow of line skipping and personalized experiences. It would be like a Genie just proofing money into the coffers.

Rasulo ultimately left Disney because he finally realized that CFO wasn’t really a promotion and stepping stone to being CEO. He caused a lot of damage in his time at the parks and set a lot of bad things in motion but he also ended up being less and less a guiding voice. Being a board member would now give him legitimacy he had lost and more. He now represents the sacrosanct shareholders. He also wouldn’t be alone and would be with an experienced individual who has a decades long history of personal success in getting board to act as he desires.

 

[Disgruntled Walt]

You clearly do not remember the Rasulo Years. Heres a little taste.
View attachment 776149
View attachment 776150View attachment 776151View attachment 776152



View attachment 776153
I do not want the man behind that anywhere near leadership of the company.

Um, this doesn't seem like much of an indictment. Banners? Pastel frilly stuff?

 

[lazyboy97o]

Um, this doesn't seem like much of an indictment. Banners? Pastel frilly stuff?

That was the big idea of what was needed instead of things like attractions.

 

[lazyboy97o]

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.

Saying one has no issue with Perlmutter’s breaking up the company would be categorized as what then?

 

[Brian]

Hey look, more deliberate conflating and oversimplifying. A number of the anti-Peltz contingent would not describe Disney as thriving.

Rasulo was not fully supported during his tenure as head of the parks, but his views are the root of a lot of the current claimed issues with the parks. Rasulo was the big proponent of the idea that the parks were a mature business that could not grow and, through his complete dislike and misunderstanding of the business, wanted to push into “blue oceans”. Selling off the parks was seriously explored at this time.

Where Pressler saw theme parks as malls that for some stupid reason had a bunch of rides, Rasulo saw theme parks as hotels that for some stupid reason had rides. There was no future in the parks. Maintenance should be improved because killing people is bad, but Matty’s obsession with show and milestones was too much. Attractions should be small and largely reuse existing facilities. Buzz Lightyear Astro Blasters is the model here, a cheap project pushed into an existing facility and multiple parks.

Rasulo was not an advocate for the Hong Kong Disneyland three land expansion or the Disney’s California Adventure redo. Both of those major projects were pushed far more by other parties pressuring Disney. Rasulo had no issue with opening the severely cut down Hong Kong Disneyland. Iger didn’t either, but realized it was a liability for his prize of Shanghai Disneyland. In California there was growing pressure from the city about the Disneyland Resort not living up to projections. As the project moved forward it was Lasseter who really kept the project safe and on track.

In Florida the New Fantasyland project was to be the shining example of Rasulo’s vision for expansion. Gone was the proposed roller coaster with show scenes and instead was a giant princess meet and greet complex. Guests were going to be amazed by coloring with Princess Aurora. Pixie Hollow would also be built, a flat ride might have been included (although its location probably would have made the required basement a cash sink) and of course, a meet and greet complex.

His big idea though was to really shift all major investment away from the established, tapped out park resorts. Instead, he envisioned pivoting DisneyParks (we all love this branding creation, right?) to regional entertainment. This though wasn’t going in on existing concepts like DisneyQuest and ESPN Zone. Or like what Universal is doing today with Universal Kids or Horror Unleashed. No, we’re talking timeshares and hotels. Aulani, National Harbor and every other major tourist destination or metropolitan area would have its own DisneyParks resort experience available. No need to travel to Walt Disney World or Disneyland Resort and bother with those silly rides, the magic of a Disney hotel stay and its premium prices would be just down the road!

All these guests also have data, data that can be harvested and monetized. All wrapped in the bow of line skipping and personalized experiences. It would be like a Genie just proofing money into the coffers.

Rasulo ultimately left Disney because he finally realized that CFO wasn’t really a promotion and stepping stone to being CEO. He caused a lot of damage in his time at the parks and set a lot of bad things in motion but he also ended up being less and less a guiding voice. Being a board member would now give him legitimacy he had lost and more. He now represents the sacrosanct shareholders. He also wouldn’t be alone and would be with an experienced individual who has a decades long history of personal success in getting board to act as he desires.

That's a really long-winded way of not answering the question.

 

[TalkingHead]

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.

Wall Street definitely doesn’t care how individual releases do but there is something of a canary in the coal mine to those things. If MCU continues to fade in popularity and SW wobbles, where’s Disney cultural currency stand with the new CEO taking over? Wall Street might eventually care in a roundabout way.

 

[James Alucobond]

That's a really long-winded way of not answering the question.

The question is ultimately pointless. Most people aren’t saying that they know with absolute certainty what the precise result of putting Peltz and Rasulo on the board would be, just that it is a cosmically bad idea to put them in any sort of position where they might be able to achieve their goals since we absolutely do know what their aim is and how they operate.

 

[Disgruntled Walt]

The question is ultimately pointless. Most people aren’t saying that they know with absolute certainty what the precise result of putting Peltz and Rasulo on the board would be, just that it is a cosmically bad idea to put them in any sort of position where they might be able to achieve their goals since we absolutely do know what their aim is and how they operate.

Tell me absolutely what their aim is.

 

[SamusAranX]

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

Nature Wall Street abhors a vacuum

 

[TalkingHead]

Hey look, more deliberate conflating and oversimplifying. A number of the anti-Peltz contingent would not describe Disney as thriving.

Rasulo was not fully supported during his tenure as head of the parks, but his views are the root of a lot of the current claimed issues with the parks. Rasulo was the big proponent of the idea that the parks were a mature business that could not grow and, through his complete dislike and misunderstanding of the business, wanted to push into “blue oceans”. Selling off the parks was seriously explored at this time.

Where Pressler saw theme parks as malls that for some stupid reason had a bunch of rides, Rasulo saw theme parks as hotels that for some stupid reason had rides. There was no future in the parks. Maintenance should be improved because killing people is bad, but Matty’s obsession with show and milestones was too much. Attractions should be small and largely reuse existing facilities. Buzz Lightyear Astro Blasters is the model here, a cheap project pushed into an existing facility and multiple parks.

Rasulo was not an advocate for the Hong Kong Disneyland three land expansion or the Disney’s California Adventure redo. Both of those major projects were pushed far more by other parties pressuring Disney. Rasulo had no issue with opening the severely cut down Hong Kong Disneyland. Iger didn’t either, but realized it was a liability for his prize of Shanghai Disneyland. In California there was growing pressure from the city about the Disneyland Resort not living up to projections. As the project moved forward it was Lasseter who really kept the project safe and on track.

In Florida the New Fantasyland project was to be the shining example of Rasulo’s vision for expansion. Gone was the proposed roller coaster with show scenes and instead was a giant princess meet and greet complex. Guests were going to be amazed by coloring with Princess Aurora. Pixie Hollow would also be built, a flat ride might have been included (although its location probably would have made the required basement a cash sink) and of course, a meet and greet complex.

His big idea though was to really shift all major investment away from the established, tapped out park resorts. Instead, he envisioned pivoting DisneyParks (we all love this branding creation, right?) to regional entertainment. This though wasn’t going in on existing concepts like DisneyQuest and ESPN Zone. Or like what Universal is doing today with Universal Kids or Horror Unleashed. No, we’re talking timeshares and hotels. Aulani, National Harbor and every other major tourist destination or metropolitan area would have its own DisneyParks resort experience available. No need to travel to Walt Disney World or Disneyland Resort and bother with those silly rides, the magic of a Disney hotel stay and its premium prices would be just down the road!

All these guests also have data, data that can be harvested and monetized. All wrapped in the bow of line skipping and personalized experiences. It would be like a Genie just proofing money into the coffers.

Rasulo ultimately left Disney because he finally realized that CFO wasn’t really a promotion and stepping stone to being CEO. He caused a lot of damage in his time at the parks and set a lot of bad things in motion but he also ended up being less and less a guiding voice. Being a board member would now give him legitimacy he had lost and more. He now represents the sacrosanct shareholders. He also wouldn’t be alone and would be with an experienced individual who has a decades long history of personal success in getting board to act as he desires.

And Iger sees theme parks as a way to further subdivide and sell access and time-saving measures instead of an E-ticket experience that comes with your day ticket. It’s all a racket which is why a lot of people don’t care if Iger gets his way or not. It’s a diminished experience that isn’t worth the hassle for a lot of us.

 

[Brian]

The question is ultimately pointless. Most people aren’t saying that they know with absolute certainty what the precise result of putting Peltz and Rasulo on the board would be, just that it is a cosmically bad idea to put them in any sort of position where they might be able to achieve their goals since we absolutely do know what their aim is and how they operate.

Some members do tend to speak in absolutes, and make it seem like the appraisers would be making their way up Main Street on day one of Peltz's tenure on the board, and by the end of the month, the company we know today would cease to exist.

 

[lazyboy97o]

That's a really long-winded way of not answering the question.

Rasulo being held back doesn’t answer why he wasn’t more destructive?

 

[WaltWiz1901]

He was in charge of Paris long before 9/11.

He also actively prevented some things from getting built in the decade that followed.

He also championed an even more inferior version of new fantasyland.

And while some bad decisions were made based on his views

Besides what happened in Paris (and I'm fairly sure Walt Disney Studios as built owes a lot to his mindset), what about the NextGen initiative, which made going on attractions (and not just the expected "hot" ones) even more of a challenge than it used to and then led to the advent of Genie+? After a decent amount of years of parkgoers lamenting how difficult those systems have made their vacations, why are some of the people here championing for more of that?

 

[James Alucobond]

Tell me absolutely what their aim is.

They put some of it in writing, which has been quoted multiple times and is basically a more extreme version of what people already don’t like (again, assuming we’re talking about the health of Disney and not the dividend). Rasulo and Perlmutter already worked for Disney, and what they pushed for during their tenures has also been discussed at length. Additionally, some of their recent statements have had a retributive tone that I can’t imagine being helpful. Peltz’s record on other boards is well-documented.

Again, I suppose you can imagine they will behave differently for some reason, but there is zero indication they have changed.

 

[Brian]

Rasulo being held back doesn’t answer why he wasn’t more destructive?

He would be even more held back as one member out of 12 on a board. In other words, even less able to effectuate the policies you abhor.

 

[peter11435]

That's a really long-winded way of not answering the question.

Peltz and Rasulo are two different people with two different sets of issues. The concern for the destruction of the company as we know it is regarding Peltz being on the board. Rasulo is being used as a pawn by Peltz to gain your support. Lying and creating a false reality of his time at the parks and misleading people into thinking they care about restoring the Magic.

 

[lazyboy97o]

And Iger sees theme parks as a way to further subdivide and sell access and time-saving measures instead of an E-ticket experience that comes with your day ticket. It’s all a racket which is why a lot of people don’t care if Iger gets his way or not. It’s a diminished experience that isn’t worth the hassle for a lot of us.

Rasulo had bigger plans for NextGen. What we have, as bad as it is, is the watered down version of the DisneyParks experience envisioned by Rasulo.

 

[James Alucobond]

He would be even more held back as one member out of 12 on a board. In other words, even less able to effectuate the policies you abhor.

Why do you think “bring back the guy we know is awful but will maybe give less power this time” is even a slightly compelling position?

 

[mikejs78]

Tell me absolutely what their aim is.

At best, maximizing for short term stock gains to make a hefty profit for themselves, at the expense of long term company health.

At worst, aiding Perlmutter (who is their backer) at his goal of breaking up the company and taking control of a portion of it for himself.