What If joe rhode were CEO?

POLY LOVER

POLY LOVER

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
SunsetLament said:
Animal Kingdom - It's the worst of the four Orlando parks. It was a 1/4 day park on the day it opened. The park has also never recovered from the decision to scrap Beastly Kingdom (yes, I know that was supposedly Eisner's decision; however I put part of the blame on Imagineering for not impressing upon him that Dinoland over BK would be a monumental error).

Expedition Everest - Terrific ride. It broke instantly and they've never seriously approached repairing it.

Aulani - I've never been there. I'm sure it's nice. As themed hotels go, I feel like the architecture does not stand up against any of the moderate or deluxe resorts at WDW and the Polynesian Resort architecture (which is similarly themed) shames it.

Pandora - $500 million, 12 acres, 6 years to build ... 2 attractions. The land has nothing to do with the original theme of the park and Rohde's defense of how it fits probably is the thing that annoys me the most about him. It's also centered on an IP that nobody cares about on the day the land opened (again, I know this decision was made over his head, but I provide him with partial blame for not making sure his superiors were well aware that this would happen).

Mission Breakout - It's a skin on an already-popular attraction that relies on video screens. Again, the new attraction does not fit, at all, with the park or land in which it resides. They just shoved it in and then jerry-rigged an explanation of why it fits (with Rohde, again, serving as Apologist-In-Chief"). The original attraction fit perfectly in theme where it resided. The Rocket AA is excellent.
Click to expand...

You miss the point, the thread is IF he had total control as CEO. iF he did then I would agree, BUT he is not. The idea is IF he were in total control would the decisions have been different, would the ride quality be better, would the feel for the parks be more present in the decision making, have more creativity, less rush to open, less penny pinching. If the handcuffs were off, he is an employee and takes his orders from the top.

How many times do we see and hear about a new ride and how great it sounds only to find out the end product eliminated some of the key wows.
 
AdventureHasAName

AdventureHasAName

Well-Known Member
POLY LOVER said:
You miss the point, the thread is IF he had total control as CEO. iF he did then I would agree, BUT he is not. The idea is IF he were in total control would the decisions have been different, would the ride quality be better, would the feel for the parks be more present in the decision making, have more creativity, less rush to open, less penny pinching. If the handcuffs were off, he is an employee and takes his orders from the top.

How many times do we see and hear about a new ride and how great it sounds only to find out the end product eliminated some of the key wows.
Click to expand...

I've never met the man (and neither has 98% of the people who utilize this message board). We can only judge him on his body of work. And in the last 25 years, his body of work has been unimpressive.
 
AdventureHasAName

AdventureHasAName

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
Yes, but the Submarine Voyage was based on a different Nautilus.
Click to expand...

... and how did that Nautilus tie-in to "the future" in 1959? Remind me. And while we're at it, let's discuss the other 20,000 Leagues attraction in Tomorrowland (that was there on opening day). I'm fairly certain that one was based on the exact same Nautilus as the one in the Magic Kingdom; the 1860s version.
 
AdventureHasAName

AdventureHasAName

Well-Known Member
POLY LOVER said:
Expedition Everest, unimpressed? Really.
Click to expand...

It broke immediately and they've never even come close to repairing it. The ride, when fully-functional, I'm sure is excellent. I couldn't tell you because I've never seen it fully-functional. In fact the one time I got to experience it, it wasn't even in strobe-light mode (B Mode). Instead, the part with the Yeti was completely pitch black as if it didn't exist (which my family labeled FU Mode).
 
World_Showcase_Lover007

World_Showcase_Lover007

Well-Known Member
I think it would be great. Joe has no experience as a CEO or operations manager. But he could no doubt rise to the occasion and actually encourage growth and creativity and worrying about things other than the quarterly profit reports. Walt used to throw people around once they became comfortable in their previous role.

I understand how a business model operates, but Iger’s Regime has become ridiculous. Star Wars and marvel are not Disney IPs to me. Build from the ground up yourself.
 
Pixieish

Pixieish

Well-Known Member
To oversee the entire parks department, they need someone who appreciates and encourages creativity, with a passion for their work and who also understands the disney "magic", but is also able to think about efficiency and productivity.
 
POLY LOVER

POLY LOVER

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
You need a non bean counter for a few years to inject some Disney magic back into the park unhandcuffed. Disney is now in full catch up mode. They need someone who can carry them through this phase and not spend a bunch of money unwisely and rush projects that turn out to be big nothing burgers! This is a critical time for Disney. If their goal is just to create some rides just to say they have some new content they will have spent millions and missed the mark.
 
LAKid53

LAKid53

Official Member of the Girly Girl Fan Club
Premium Member
The Empress Lilly said:
Yes, Joe always struck me too as more of a DC man...

All kidding aside, control does not mean independence. More, autonomy and a hands-off approach. Iger has no creative ambition, unlike his predecessor. Iger does realise he runs a creative enterprise and tries to create the conditions for creatives to bloom.
The running of the parks Iger seems to consider less a creative endeavor than an operational one, this might be a mistake. Akin to letting the creative direction of a movie be decided by the movie producer rather than the director. Also, I don't really know what I am talking about and handn't noticed anybody who does had already posted in this thread and
Click to expand...

Eisner had creative ambition? :confused:
 
LAKid53

LAKid53

Official Member of the Girly Girl Fan Club
Premium Member
Lands of Wonder said:
I say they just houseclean the board and all of upper management and hand it to real creative dreamers.
Click to expand...

Who will know little about the practical side of running the world's largest entertainment company. As several others have stated, the company needs both. Usually difficult to find in one person.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom