ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
Where did you read these articles...?
"Penny Pincher Weekly", and "Money Grubber Quarterly"?!?!?!
Better known as "Businessweek" and "The Economist"
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Who is Meg?
- Thread starter Pocahontas
- Start date
Better known as "Businessweek" and "The Economist"
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
The problem is they do not understand the business they are in, effective management of a large theme park requires both a creative visionary and a moneyman See Walt/Roy, Eisner/Wells without both counterbalancing each other you have the case where its heading for fiscal or entertainment bankruptcy. Right now WDW is heading for entertainment bankruptcy which will lead to the other kind in turn.
Jimmy Thick
Well-Known Member
A company like TWDC that is currently making cash hand over fist and watching its stock price double in the past year has folks running the show and have no idea how to run the show?
Yes, that's factual.
* Jimmy chuckles while holding his belly Santa Claus style *
Jimmy Thick- Didn't Disney just recently win company of the year awards? Yes, they really have no clue...
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
ENRON
Jimmy Thick
Well-Known Member
Do some research and then compare Enron to Disney. You will find there is absolutely nothing in common, nothing at all.
Please post the comparison.
Jimmy Thick- When in doubt, bring up Enron.
Matt_Black
Well-Known Member
Who is Meg? She is the the Disney "princess" that they seem to never acknowledge the existence of.
I know, right? Of the unofficial Princesses, Megara might possibly be my favorite.
copcarguyp71
Well-Known Member
We were discussing the semantics of Meg Crofton until you said... "Jimmy Thick- Blaming Meg while paying for a Disney vacation you find substandard? Yeah, um, yeah..." There is your belittling statement.
synonyms:disparage, denigrate, run down, deprecate, depreciate, downgrade,play down, trivialize, minimize, make light of, pooh-pooh, treat lightly,scoff at, sneer at;
synonyms:disparage, denigrate, run down, deprecate, depreciate, downgrade,play down, trivialize, minimize, make light of, pooh-pooh, treat lightly,scoff at, sneer at;
copcarguyp71
Well-Known Member
Argue it if you want...I am sure you will
Jimmy Thick
Well-Known Member
I don't find that statement belittling, its a honest observation of what was read in the thread to that point.
How many times was Meg Crofton belittled in this thread for no reason that anyone can actually prove beyond a shadow of the doubt? Just because she's a successful businesswoman?
That's ok because?
Jimmy Thick- ?
unkadug
Follower of "Saget"The Cult
Why does that not surprise me?
copcarguyp71
Well-Known Member
hahaha....Denial isn't just a river in Egypt. If you cannot see your comments as belittling then I can do no more.
Sped2424
Well-Known Member
Guess you skipped the part where I said the place was a nostalgia factory. The parks haven't been adding anything that could be considered a game changer, they haven't done much to prove that they are the best at what they do. Face it the parks are only successful now because of what was established, not what current Execs are doing. Disney is like batman, even when its bad it is still going to make tons of cash, that doesn't mean the material is any good which is what we are arguing, and what you fail to understand.
Sped2424- Some people just don't like to read...Also why am I putting an after thought as a quote from myself?
donaldtoo
Well-Known Member
Hey now! Go easy on poor Jimmy. He's a little.....thick.
Sped2424
Well-Known Member
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
From the Motley Fool - Article is a bit dated but nothing of substance has changed at Disney
Disney surely doesn't seem to be an Enron but recent events cause us to pause and wonder just how creative the auditors and financiers, accountants and executives have become nowadays at any major corporation.
Reading a paragraph about Enron in a recent Orlando Sentinel article, I in fact am reminded of Disney:
Within weeks of Lay's Sept. 26 reassurances to employees, Enron admitted publicly it had kept hundreds of millions of dollars in debt off the company's books in partnerships -- which were paying millions of dollars in fees to the Enron executives who ran them.
Has anyone ever came up with the answers to where the hundreds of millions of dollars Disney has payed out, is shown on the books? I think the answer is that the money isn't shown on the books. In fact, Disney makes no secret about the fact that it keeps secret, money paid out in "settlements", golden parachutes, and other sensitive "partnerships."
Katzenberg, All Star Sports, Ovitz, go.com and other debts that total billions of dollars in losses, seem to mysteriously never make it into financial reports for shareholders.
Now the comparison to Enron here is that there does seem to be accounting practices designed to present an incomplete picture to investors. A willingness is being demonstrated to pull the curtain on certain financial practices and provide more of a show, than accurate numbers for shareholders.
Just how many hundred-million dollar or quarter-billion dollar screwups can a company keep off of the books while bragging doctored corporate spreadsheets, can an organization withstand? Even the go.com partial-billion dollar debacle was presented as not really affecting the bottom line. "One-time charges" is a term designed to actually make a quarter-billion dollar loss, help boost stock prices. That's how screwy things have gotten. The idea is that when doctored results show less-than-expected losses even though there was a major charge, that it reflects tremendous potential for the next quarter's results that won't include the charge. The result? Favorable market reaction to a half-billion dollar loss. You can't get much more creative than that.
Enron's shares plunged to the pennies range from being right around where Disney's are today. It's a scary thought but it can happen virtually over night when losses are so seamlessly blended...a practice that does seem to have some similarities at Enron & Disney.
We talk about the possibility of a takeover at Disney. I don't think any organization in their right mind would buy Disney right now, struggling as they are. And with what only God and a handful of executives at Disney know in terms of how many billions of dollars in lawsuits and failed financial ventures, has been conveniently kept from the public ledgers.
Is it possible that Disney is the next Enron?
Probably not. But Enron may bring to question just how mainstream some of their accounting practices are. They didn't invent creative financing, they just got caught.
Disney is normally believed to be an upfront company so it would not surprise me if they did something unexpected like came out and showed exactly where they do stand financially, all losses considered. It would probably make for an initial stutter in stock prices but would instill a renewed faith in the company. It would be a sign that Disney intends to confront any weaknesses publicly and head on, in these times when Fortune 500 companies are coming under scrutiny for smoothing over real performance. But eventually, the scandalous practices build a corral around a company's finances and manufactured results reach their limit. It boils down to a time when the only thing that will allow the charade to continue, is arbitrarily writing fictitious numbers down and presenting them as real performance.
Not that what Enron, and other large corporations don't do that every quarter to some extent. But the public, creditors, the media, fans, stockholders and analysts can't be fooled forever. When almost all of them are crying foul, as seems to be the case with Disney and increasingly so, it may be a sign that the proverbial doo-doo is ready to hit the fan.
Disney surely doesn't seem to be an Enron but recent events cause us to pause and wonder just how creative the auditors and financiers, accountants and executives have become nowadays at any major corporation.
Reading a paragraph about Enron in a recent Orlando Sentinel article, I in fact am reminded of Disney:
Within weeks of Lay's Sept. 26 reassurances to employees, Enron admitted publicly it had kept hundreds of millions of dollars in debt off the company's books in partnerships -- which were paying millions of dollars in fees to the Enron executives who ran them.
Has anyone ever came up with the answers to where the hundreds of millions of dollars Disney has payed out, is shown on the books? I think the answer is that the money isn't shown on the books. In fact, Disney makes no secret about the fact that it keeps secret, money paid out in "settlements", golden parachutes, and other sensitive "partnerships."
Katzenberg, All Star Sports, Ovitz, go.com and other debts that total billions of dollars in losses, seem to mysteriously never make it into financial reports for shareholders.
Now the comparison to Enron here is that there does seem to be accounting practices designed to present an incomplete picture to investors. A willingness is being demonstrated to pull the curtain on certain financial practices and provide more of a show, than accurate numbers for shareholders.
Just how many hundred-million dollar or quarter-billion dollar screwups can a company keep off of the books while bragging doctored corporate spreadsheets, can an organization withstand? Even the go.com partial-billion dollar debacle was presented as not really affecting the bottom line. "One-time charges" is a term designed to actually make a quarter-billion dollar loss, help boost stock prices. That's how screwy things have gotten. The idea is that when doctored results show less-than-expected losses even though there was a major charge, that it reflects tremendous potential for the next quarter's results that won't include the charge. The result? Favorable market reaction to a half-billion dollar loss. You can't get much more creative than that.
Enron's shares plunged to the pennies range from being right around where Disney's are today. It's a scary thought but it can happen virtually over night when losses are so seamlessly blended...a practice that does seem to have some similarities at Enron & Disney.
We talk about the possibility of a takeover at Disney. I don't think any organization in their right mind would buy Disney right now, struggling as they are. And with what only God and a handful of executives at Disney know in terms of how many billions of dollars in lawsuits and failed financial ventures, has been conveniently kept from the public ledgers.
Is it possible that Disney is the next Enron?
Probably not. But Enron may bring to question just how mainstream some of their accounting practices are. They didn't invent creative financing, they just got caught.
Disney is normally believed to be an upfront company so it would not surprise me if they did something unexpected like came out and showed exactly where they do stand financially, all losses considered. It would probably make for an initial stutter in stock prices but would instill a renewed faith in the company. It would be a sign that Disney intends to confront any weaknesses publicly and head on, in these times when Fortune 500 companies are coming under scrutiny for smoothing over real performance. But eventually, the scandalous practices build a corral around a company's finances and manufactured results reach their limit. It boils down to a time when the only thing that will allow the charade to continue, is arbitrarily writing fictitious numbers down and presenting them as real performance.
Not that what Enron, and other large corporations don't do that every quarter to some extent. But the public, creditors, the media, fans, stockholders and analysts can't be fooled forever. When almost all of them are crying foul, as seems to be the case with Disney and increasingly so, it may be a sign that the proverbial doo-doo is ready to hit the fan.
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
Also this,
http://mountainmentorsassociates.com/files/Lesson_IV_-_Assessing_Debt_Capacity.pdf
I'm finding it a bit unsettling that so many academics and others see similarities to ENRON in Disney's day to day operations and how any project which requires CASH like construction of new attractions is dragged out over months and years.
Lets face it that's not how organizations which are flush with cash operate, no they want the new revenue driver online as fast as possible to extract the maximum value from it.
http://mountainmentorsassociates.com/files/Lesson_IV_-_Assessing_Debt_Capacity.pdf
I'm finding it a bit unsettling that so many academics and others see similarities to ENRON in Disney's day to day operations and how any project which requires CASH like construction of new attractions is dragged out over months and years.
Lets face it that's not how organizations which are flush with cash operate, no they want the new revenue driver online as fast as possible to extract the maximum value from it.
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
I need a double order of brain cleanser to get that image out of my head, Ewww...
If we're all done insulting each other, I have a serious query. I have no issues with discussing the management of WDW in a general sense. I don't understand how we can assign blame to particular executives without knowing what is actually going on in meetings and on the ground. I do know a few on this board (@WDW1974 ) claim to have knowledge of these dynamics, but I am loathe to dump on a particular individual without first hand knowledge. Why not just talk about the general direction of the resort and management decisions we agree/disagree with? Are we a few years away from endless George K. threads?
@Jimmy Thick seems to have a thick skin, but this is more directly insulting than anything he was accused of doing. Look, with respect to the general direction of the resort, I suppose I would be a bit of a doom and gloomer. There are posters I agree with more than others. In particular, I agree with @marni1971 , @The Empress Lilly , @RSoxNo1 , and @Master Yoda about 80% of the time and I agree/disagree with them on completely different things. Nonetheless, I don't get this behavior at all. When I joined the board things were generally positive all the time and I got dumped on if noted that the something wasn't A-OK with me anymore. Now things seem to have reversed with respect to attitudes...My point is that it is always easy to dump on the minority. Plus, Jimmy is correct with his views on the overall health of Disney. Me? I just wish they would put a little more quality back in the Florida parks.
@Jimmy Thick seems to have a thick skin, but this is more directly insulting than anything he was accused of doing. Look, with respect to the general direction of the resort, I suppose I would be a bit of a doom and gloomer. There are posters I agree with more than others. In particular, I agree with @marni1971 , @The Empress Lilly , @RSoxNo1 , and @Master Yoda about 80% of the time and I agree/disagree with them on completely different things. Nonetheless, I don't get this behavior at all. When I joined the board things were generally positive all the time and I got dumped on if noted that the something wasn't A-OK with me anymore. Now things seem to have reversed with respect to attitudes...My point is that it is always easy to dump on the minority. Plus, Jimmy is correct with his views on the overall health of Disney. Me? I just wish they would put a little more quality back in the Florida parks.
donaldtoo
Well-Known Member
I was actually just tryin' to interject a little levity in the thread by jokingly inserting part of his user name to lighten things up a little. Should have used a
I guess. Although, it probably wouldn't have made any difference to some.