Speck, this thread isn't about that...:wave:
I think that Eisner helped the company move in the right direction for years; yet his ego caught up with him and he started believing that he--not the creative people whose imaginations he let loose--had created the magic. He assumed more responsibility over everything, replaced those same people with business-minded ones, and destroyed much of what he had helped develop within a few years.
Now the WDC is moving in the right direction again, but I'm concerned about the
consistency of their new products. Expedition Everest is great; Stitch is awful. Their "flagship" park, the Magic Kingdom, is finally getting the TLC it needs, but why did it take so long? The new "Disney Parks" branding has been a disappointment so far; yet if leadership is determined to "make it work," this generic ploy will weaken each park's identity and the quality will suffer.
Overall, I'm optimistic that the future of the WDC is promising, but only as long as leadership continues to understand that an entertainment company depends on risky creative endeavors to succeed.
Why can't some of the corporate management understand that? It's an entertainment company; it thrives on creative people. MBAs are necessary to keep the company functioning, but business minds simply don't fully understand the creative process. In this industry, MBAs are supposed to find ways of feasibly carrying out the artist's plans, not vice-versa.
Iger's emphasis on multimedia is important for short-term growth, but if the content remains stagnant, people won't care whether or not something is available for immediate downloading on iTunes. Likewise, the theme parks will become boring if Disney doesn't continue to create new, high-quality experiences.
~End of Article~
p.s. Walt probably would have been the driving force behind CGI, just like he made sure his company was at the forefront of talkies, color movies, special effects, color television, transportation systems, theme parks, and urban development.