Time to stop all this "Eisner is cheap" crap!

[3IdAlienKid]

originally posted by PeterAlt
Eisner trusted that Pressler knew what he was doing, but things could have been worse if Eisner didn't veto a lot of what Pressler wanted to do. In the end, it was Eisner who forced Pressler out because of his (PRESSLER's) cheapness.

This is an interesting arguement, but if you follow it to it's logical conclusion, those in leadership are responsible for the actions of those under them. This means Eisner is every bit responsible for Pressler's mistakes as Pressler should be.

Perhaps if Eisner had just hired Pressler for one or two years for a big project and then got rid of him after seeing Pressler's shortcomings in the theme park business, fine. But no, Eisner is the one who continued to approve of Pressler's promotions through the years to where he finally ended up. After years of working with Pressler, Eisner actually put Pressler in charge of DCA. Isn't Eisner every bit as responsible for making this blunder? What in the world was Eisner thinking to trust Pressler in the first place? Really, I want to know.

Remember what got Pressler noticed by Eisner in the first place? Innoventions at WDW. Why? Because it was an attraction where Disney only had to pay for the building. What actually went inside was shouldered exclusively by sponsors, who incidentally don't pay that much for their attractions anyway. Some of you local to Orlando (who get to go to WDW regularly) undoubtedly still visit this place when you go to Epcot, but I bet the vast majority of locals never force a repeat visit. It's cheap, and it shows. Out here at DL, Innoventions is deserted.

No one is blasting Eisner for what he did for Disney from '84 to '92 (or '94 depending on your take). He did fantastic things during that time. But since then, the quality has diminished with each passing year. Seriously, how many things on people's list of good stuff has been built in the last five years? One, two maybe? Then compare it to the number of things he did earlier. Twenty five, thirty, forty? There's no comparison.

 

[imagineer boy]

Too late.

Originally posted by imagineer99
First, I would like to say that I really admire the way people are responding to this thread. At first, I was really fearful of this turning into a flame fest. So far there has been no childish name calling--simply a rational posting of opinions. WELL DONE!

flame! flame!
:fork: childish name calling! flame!!!!:fork: :goodnevil :fork: :fork: :lol: :lol: Sorry, I couldn't resist.:lol:

 

[MrDisney16]

I'm gonna be one of the people in this forum that praises Eisner for his work and contributions in the early year (from 1995 and lower). Without him the Disney company would have been sold off and we would now be calling it Universal.

I also have to say that my dad is a plant manager at a major automotive factory here in canada and just had to come up with over 28 million dollars US a year in savings ad you know what, he did it with out making any cutbacks like the ones Eisner is making such as shorter hours, etc. How he ended up doing it is beyond me, but he did. So why can't Eisner do the same thing is my question? You can save money with out cutbacks you just have to find ways around it. Maybe my dad should become CEO of the Disney company I'm sure he can find ways of doing it and he doesn't need a what was it again, like 6.5 million dollar bonus!!!! to do it.

 

[brisem]

Well Done Peteralt!!

Pixar is very good at what they do. But Disney has no choice but to let them go based on what Jobs is asking. Disney would lose money if Disney went with the new contract.

Can anyone tell me who is a perfect CEO that never made a mistake.

Reading the comments on this and other threads it's clear to see that everyone holds Eisner to an incredible high standard. The question is why.

It seems that most of you are looking reason to bash Eisner. You focus on the negatives and won't give him his due for the good.

Yes, what I would like to see from Eisner this year is:
1) a defined chain of command.
2) complete the selling off of the Mighty Ducks and Disney Stores.
3) Take some of the capital from the above sales and put it into refurb the parks.
4) Develop a 3-D Studio to compete against Pixar.


I apoligize, I forgot who made to comment regarding Treasure Planet and Atlantis, but wasn't Roy overseeing one of them or both?


PeterAlt, as you are I'm voting yes with my shares.

 

[dizpins14]

No offense to you PeterAlt.....but I'm just wondering where you received all this information about Eisner from? I've been around these Disney chat boards and rumor sites for a while and I have never heard of the rumors of Eisner wanting DisneySea in Cali....which doesn't really make too much sense since DisneySea was designed for Japan having its history of the sea, and DCA opened the same year as DisneySea. It just seems like you know an awful lot of stuff about Eisner that we've never heard.

 

[imagineer boy]

Originally posted by MrDisney16
Without him the Disney company would have been sold off and we would now be calling it Universal.

Ahem... without Frank Wells we'd be on Universalmagic.com right now.

 

[Blake]

Plus what about all the new/future attractions?

ToT at DCA- huge budget
Mission:Space-huge budget
E:E- big budget

Soarin/Motor Stunt show/Philarmagic/new Space Mountain/Buzz Lightyear etc.

None of these come across to me as being cheap...

 

[imagineer boy]

Originally posted by Blake
Plus what about all the new/future attractions?

ToT at DCA- huge budget
Mission:Space-huge budget
E:E- big budget

Soarin/Motor Stunt show/Philarmagic/new Space Mountain/Buzz Lightyear etc.

None of these come across to me as being cheap...

All thanks to Jay Rasulo! Let's give him a hand folks.:sohappy:

 

[no2apprentice]

I don't follow the exact details of who did what or when, but being a long time fan of Disney animated and non-animated films, as well as a fan of DL and WDW, I cannot forgive Eisner for two main things:
- Aquisition of soft- pay-per-view.
- Aquisition of another studio merely to tap into the money from R rated films.

These decisions, to me, are reprehensible and a smear on the quality of entertainment that I have always looked for in Disney. Yes, I know that business is business, and business is war, and money talks and everything else walks, blah blah, yadda yadda. But Eisner will only hurt Disney, and his precious bottom line, when people get tired of the Disney name being lowered and the parks suffering because Eisner chooses other priorities.

Eisner did a great deal of good for Disney in the beginning of his leadership, and some years after, no doubt about it. But I fear, with many others, that he is now going in the wrong direction, and doesn't appear to be willing to change course.

 

[KevinPage]

Eisner is like Darth Vader, but with no hope of redemption. He was good once, but his time is past, he has become entrenched and thinks he knows it all (when Frank Wells knew more).

If you look at Eisner's statement over the past few years, he makes it a point, every chance he gets to talk about how "cost conscious" they are and how well they have done making things "cheaply". Don't you see a HUGE problem in that?

When you are selling ENTERTAINMENT to people, they don't want to hear how cheap it is, they want to know how special it is. You aren't making widgets, where you should be focusing on production of scales, etc.

I enjoyed my visit to DCA last year. but let's face it, it doesn't hold a candle to DL and we expect MUCH more from Disney.

Disney is about EXCEEDING expectations, not just "enough to get by". That is the way of current management these days and it HAS TO CHANGE.

And the Disney named has been "whored" out by Eisner and his cronies. It took alot of work to build trust in that name and it's easy to damage and more work to repair.

 

[Blake]

Originally posted by imagineer boy
All thanks to Jay Rasulo! Let's give him a hand folks.:sohappy:

I don't care who they're from- the fact is that not everything that is coming from Disney is cheap.

 

[KevinPage]

To be brutally honest, I don't know how much power Jay Raluso really has? He is given a budget and has to make due what is given to him by the "powers that be".

Yeah, we are getting the Motors Stunt Show, but the only positive I see coming from that is hopefully getting rid of the Indy Stunt show and putting in the Indy "ride". Otherwise, we are getting a carbon copy "show" from a miserably failing park (that Raluso oversaw). Maybe if we had a TDL executive, we could have had something more special.

But a new show is a new show and it's always nice to have things ADDED to a park as opposed to just replaced, so overall it is a positive addition (just not as exciting as we all could have hoped for).

And for those that think ToT at DCA isn't built on the cheap- why do they not have the 5th dimension and elaborate queue? Cause management doesn't think they need to spend the money on it, as they can 'get by' with a "light" version of ToT. Sorry DCA, you ain't good enough to get an UPGRADE, only a DOWNGRADE.

 

[Blake]

If i remember correctly, DCA's Tower had a cost of 80-110 million dollars...cheap?

 

[andre85]

Originally posted by Blake
If i remember correctly, DCA's Tower had a cost of 80-110 million dollars...cheap?

It is if you don't know what you're talking about.

I heard the reason they altered the 5th dimension is because that's where the MGM version of ToT breaks down most often. Don't judge DCA's ToT until you ride it.

 

[Blake]

Um...no its not. It doesn't matter if the ride is horrible, or excellent, the fact remains Disney spent alot of money on it and it was not "cheap".

 

[Blake]

However on the flip side- i found this interesting

http://www.intercot.com/boards/ultimatebb.php?/topic/8/4570.html

 

[HennieBogan1966]

I'd like to make a couple of comments of my own on this subject:

(1) After having taken a look at the stock reports from the late 80's forward, I see the stock values were much lower then. Now, I'm not sure, but I thought I remembered the Disney Stock being worth much more prior to the arrival of Mr. Eisner than it ever has been under his watch. I'm not positive, just trying to recall. And he is to blame for the tremendous losses in the stores over recent years. After all he is the boss. And the loss of morale is also his responsibility. He has an obligation to respond to the uncertainty that he himself created among the castmembers of the company. He never took the time to address those concerns personally. It appears from the outside looking in, after having read his statement during his latest shareholder meeting/press conference, that his main concern was for the shareholders. Again, he is the boss.

(2) Not to make this a political thing, but it amazes me how people will forgive him the mistakes, losses, layoffs, closings, lost profits, bad movies, bad deal with Pooh and Pixar, but let's fire President Bush, even though under his watch we are a safer nation, more prosperous nation, and prouder nation. Does anyone see a connection in attitudes here?

I love Disney, and Mr. Eisner has been good in many ways. But his time has come and gone. Let's seek new leadership.

 

[Bill]

Bill for CEO!!!!!

 

[brisem]

Originally posted by HennieBogan1966
I'd like to make a couple of comments of my own on this subject:

(1) After having taken a look at the stock reports from the late 80's forward, I see the stock values were much lower then. Now, I'm not sure, but I thought I remembered the Disney Stock being worth much more prior to the arrival of Mr. Eisner than it ever has been under his watch. I'm not positive, just trying to recall. And he is to blame for the tremendous losses in the stores over recent years. After all he is the boss. And the loss of morale is also his responsibility. He has an obligation to respond to the uncertainty that he himself created among the castmembers of the company. He never took the time to address those concerns personally. It appears from the outside looking in, after having read his statement during his latest shareholder meeting/press conference, that his main concern was for the shareholders. Again, he is the boss.

(2) Not to make this a political thing, but it amazes me how people will forgive him the mistakes, losses, layoffs, closings, lost profits, bad movies, bad deal with Pooh and Pixar, but let's fire President Bush, even though under his watch we are a safer nation, more prosperous nation, and prouder nation. Does anyone see a connection in attitudes here?

I love Disney, and Mr. Eisner has been good in many ways. But his time has come and gone. Let's seek new leadership.

If you go back and look closer at those reports, I'll also see a number of stock splits. Which is why the stock is lower.

If you read the economic reports==you'll see the travel industry as a whole being down. You'll see a higher unemployment rate. With those "bad movies" you'll see Disney Studios was the highest grossing studio for 2004. You'll read that everyone is calling what Pixar is looking for is a bad deal for Disney (90-10 split and starting this year not when the contract expires in 2005.)
The Pooh deal is a deal from a while back that's just coming to the courts.

Show me a CEO that hasn't made a mistake.

Coke--introduced new coke
IBM--tried to go after the personal computer market.
There's a list of failure by companies. It happens CEO are human; they make mistakes.

 

[Kopp8699]

i cant agree or disagree with any1 here because i have mixed feelings. I mean some things have been worse at disney since eisner, but some things have been better. Im asking you this, if you were in his shoes, what would u have done.... regarding the company and workers and everything, how might u have handled situations differently. For a majority most likely, the same desisions wouldve been made and people would b spouting the same hate. What would you have done?