Will Iger welcome back Roy Disney?

[King Triton]

Here's a thought....will Bob Iger welcome back Roy Disney? I sure hope so. Roy was smart enough to point out what needs to be improved on. Disney needs Roy back on board.

:dancer: :dancer: :dancer: :dancer: :dancer:

[DancingBear]

Roy isn't going to be welcomed back anytime soon.

Steve Jobs, though, sent Iger a congratulations note.

[peter11435]

Here's a thought....will Bob Iger welcome back Roy Disney? I sure hope so. Roy was smart enough to point out what needs to be improved on. Disney needs Roy back on board.

:dancer: :dancer: :dancer: :dancer: :dancer:
I hope not. I think Eisner needed to go, but Roy is not much better. Walt never liked Roy much, Roy almost ruined the company in the late 70's early 80's, and now he is just money hungry and jealous. Don't fall for all of his talk, because that’s all it is.

[Peter Pirate]

I agree with Bear & Peter11435. Roy's gone, Eisner's gone and Iger's not about to pull more controversey back in.
pirate:

[GrimGhost]

......Roy almost ruined the company in the late 70's early 80's, and now he is just money hungry and jealous. Don't fall for all of his talk, because that’s all it is.
This being the Roy that brought in the Eisner/Wells team in 1984 and kept the company from being carved into a million peices?????

[DVCconvert]

Walt never liked Roy much, Roy almost ruined the company in the late 70's early 80's,


Yes, talk is 'just talk' isn't it? Perhaps if you did your research you'd understand that this is misinformed 'talk' too.
The often wrongly atrributed "walt quote" calling Roy the 'idiot nephew' was never uttered by Walt, rather it was made by an advisor to Ron Miller.

[Horace Horsecollar]

I hope not. I think Eisner needed to go, but Roy is not much better. Walt never liked Roy much, Roy almost ruined the company in the late 70's early 80's, and now he is just money hungry and jealous. Don't fall for all of his talk, because that’s all it is.
If you have something to back up that "Roy almost ruined the company in the late 70's early 80's," please provide more information. Walt's nephew Roy was a major shareholder and a board member, but he never ran the company.

Are you perhaps thinking of Ron Miller, Walt's son-in-law, who was the head of Disney prior to when Wells and Eisner were brought in?

Although the company's financial performance under Ron Miller was disappointing to shareholders, Ron Miller was instrumental in many of the business decisions that Wells and Eisner were able to exploit, such as the opening of Epcot Center (now Epcot), the launch of the Disney Channel, and the creation of the Touchstone Pictures brand (with the successful movie "Splash" as Touchstone's first release).

[WDSearcher]

Here's a thought....will Bob Iger welcome back Roy Disney? I sure hope so. Roy was smart enough to point out what needs to be improved on. Disney needs Roy back on board. Well ... first off ... to bring Roy back on the board, the by-laws would have to be changed. Isn't he currently too old to be on the board, based on those recent changes? Granted, they were likely designed specifically to force him to retire / resign, but they were still voted on and approved by a board majority, so they'd have to be changed to allow Roy to return.

Secondly ... why would Iger want him back? Roy's done nothing but insult and criticize Iger. Roy has never wanted to see Iger in the CEO position, and he's not shy about telling people that the board made the wrong decision and that Iger will be ineffectual in the job. Why would Iger then turn around and invite him back?

I don't know that Disney needs Roy back on the board. I notice you didn't wonder of Iger would invite Stanley to return, and presumably Stanley was also "smart enough to point out what needs to be improved on." I don't think Disney needs Roy back on the board if the only reason you think he should be there is because his last name is Disney. And honestly, if I were one of the current board members, I don't know that I'd want someone back who had spent so much time being critical of me, continually grousing about what I was doing wrong, and so obviously following his own agenda. Why would bringing him back on the board be a good thing?

:earsboy:

[King Triton]

Roy at least pointed out where Disney made some big mistakes. I still haven't seen that from Bob Iger. Was Bob a "yes man" for Michael Eisner? Why didn't Bob Iger speak up when all these bad decisions were being made by Michael Eisner? A true leader speaks out and not hide in the background. Hey, if you are on the Disney board, you make some NOISE! Give Roy credit for trying to restore the missing MAGIC. I salute Roy for that. Roy did give Michael Eisner his job and then Michael ends up stabbing him in the back. Again, a true leader sticks his neck out for the love of the company not to go with the flow so no one upsets Michael Eisner. Maybe the board needs Roy back..someone with True Grit!

:hyper2: :drinking:

[BriarRabbit]

Maybe Iger could bring Roy back as a "face" character...Walt Disney!!! Lots of photo ops, autographs, and a character meal when he goes to dinner in the park! ;)

[Horace Horsecollar]

Was Bob a "yes man" for Michael Eisner? Why didn't Bob Iger speak up when all these bad decisions were being made by Michael Eisner? A true leader speaks out and not hide in the background.
Michael Eisner and Bob Iger are the two top executives of The Walt Disney Compnay. So I wouldn't expect Bob Iger to criticize Michael Eisner in public.

Michael Eisner is the Chief Executive Officer. Robert Iger is the President and Chief Operating Officer of The Walt Disney Company.

I have no idea what discussions Iger and Eisner have in private. But I would not expect the President and Chief Operating Officer to "speak up" in public "when all these bad decisions were being made" by the Chief Executive Officer. That's not how corporations operate, nor should they.

I'm not saying Bob Iger is wonderful. I'm just saying that this is not a valid criticism of Iger.

[DVCconvert]

"Bob" may well have the idea in the back of his head, that once Ei$ner is history, to ask Roy if he'd like to play a role in the company.
It's hard to argue against the fact that most "fans" of "Disney" would disagree that if the nephew of the founder wanted to play a role, that he should not.

[grumpydawg]

Eisner has alienated everyone he has ever worked with at one point or another. Roy will not return, although he probably should in some capacity. Iger will not make any moves until Eisner is completely out of the picture, and then it wont be much. "Imagineering" may soon just be a memory...

[DVCconvert]

Eisner has alienated everyone he has ever worked with at one point or another. Roy will not return, although he probably should in some capacity. Iger will not make any moves until Eisner is completely out of the picture, and then it wont be much.

I think You're EXACTLY right about Ei$sner!....

"Imagineering" may soon just be a memory...

If you're right, I have seriously worries about the future of the company :(:(:(:(

[Peter Pirate]

Hogwash!

It's a new day with a new guy. Be thankful he understands how important it is to keep Disney independent. Be thankful he was able to learn (right and wrong) from Eisner (careful with your evaluation of this statement). Be thankful he has a history of taking BIG chances.

Roy's gone and IMO good riddance, I'm sorry that you (Convert) feel this makes me less of a fan but I still see years and years of Mr. Roy Disney sitting on his hands, doing his little job, allowing the fifedom to become Eisners' until his own future was in jeopardy. This isn't a guy who gets it, it's a guy born with a silver spoon in is mouth.

Iger doesn't need Roy and Roy doesn't need Disney (the Company). It's over and it WILL work out fine.
pirate:

[DVCconvert]

I still see years and years of Mr. Roy Disney sitting on his hands, doing his little job, allowing the fifedom to become Eisners' until his own future was in jeopardy. This isn't a guy who gets it, it's a guy born with a silver spoon in is mouth.

Peter,
You really don't have a clue do you.
I'm sorry (Peter) that you have such a short sighted, and limited, view of the the over-all picture of TWDC!

[raidermatt]

From the LA Times:

Roy and Stan's Commentary (http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-disney17mar17,1,3608275.story)


March 17, 2005

COMMENTARY
The Mice on Disney's Board

By Roy E. Disney and Stanley P. Gold, Roy E. Disney and Stanley P. Gold are former board members of the Walt Disney Co. Disney is chairman and Gold is president and CEO of Shamrock Holdings Inc.


Are terms like "accountability," "transparency" and "independence" merely trendy buzzwords in corporate America, or do they actually stand for something?

These days, it seems to depend on the company. At blue-chip corporations with boards of directors that understand the meaning of good corporate governance, these words are real and translate into action. Take Boeing Co., for example, whose board earlier this month fired an otherwise celebrated CEO because it would not tolerate even the appearance of unethical or inappropriate behavior on his part.

Or Hewlett-Packard Co., where directors showed the door to an equally well-known CEO because her multibillion-dollar acquisition strategy had fallen short of projected results.

Or American International Group Inc., where just this week, amid allegations of questionable business practices, the longtime CEO was forced out of the job by a board acting in what one member described as "the best interest of [company] shareholders, customers and employees."

Then there is the board of the Walt Disney Co.

For all of Disney Chairman George Mitchell's bleating about his board's dedication to transparency and good corporate governance, his conduct and that of his colleagues in the just-concluded search for a new Disney CEO have been nothing short of disgraceful. Their evasions, cover-ups and distortions set a new standard for how a corporate board ought not to act.

When Michael Eisner announced last September that he intended to step down as CEO, Disney directors promised shareholders "a thorough, careful and reasoned process to select as the next CEO the best person for the company" — a process, they added, that "should include full consideration of external candidates." And when doubts were raised about how objective and inclusive the search really was, Mitchell piously insisted that he and his fellow directors were conducting it "in good faith, with open minds and without any prior determination or preconditions."

Of course, we've since learned that the search involved only one real candidate — Eisner's handpicked heir apparent, Disney President Robert Iger. By caving in to Eisner's demand that he be allowed to sit in on interviews of potential successors, by not even attempting to interview a single outside candidate until after its annual meeting in February, by refusing to insist that Eisner commit to leaving the company as soon as the new CEO was named, and by not objecting to the aggressive public relations campaign Eisner had his minions wage on Iger's behalf, the board effectively endorsed the notion that "the fix was in" and virtually guaranteed that no serious outside executive would be willing to be considered for the job.

And when it was confronted by one serious outside candidate (EBay's Meg Whitman), Mitchell and his fellow directors made sure to drive her away by refusing to respond to her reasonable request for a prompt decision and not even bothering to try to keep her interested when she decided to bail out of the process.

To add insult to injury, when this search for a CEO finally reached its predictable end, Mitchell and his colleagues proceeded to obfuscate and dissemble about what they had done. Mitchell's comments were particularly reprehensible. Not only did he make a big deal of emphasizing that Eisner had sat in on only part of only one outside candidate's interview, he also refused to disclose how many outside candidates the board had interviewed. In fact, it's been widely reported that the entire board interviewed only one outside candidate, Whitman, and Eisner was there for virtually all of that exchange. So much for transparency and accountability, not to mention candor.

This is hardly the first time that Eisner manipulated and cowed Disney directors into doing precisely what he wanted them to do. Their willingness to be led around by the nose would be amusing if there weren't so much at stake. To be sure, we are pleased that our campaign succeeded in forcing Eisner's imminent departure as both CEO and company director — an event that on its own will immeasurably improve Disney's future prospects. Yet at the same time, we are deeply troubled by the utter lack of respect for shareholders displayed by the rest of the board — in particular, its chairman.

[raidermatt]

Portraying Roy as a villain in this is way off-base.

There is some truth to the accusations that he waited too long to really do anything.

Its true he had been trying to work from within over the last few years, but really, he did wait too long.

Still, nobody else on the board did anything, and in fact most are still apparently under Eisner's control.

[Plus4206]

Now there's a word that would get challenged in a Scrabble tourny.

[manning]

obfuscate

1. To make so confused or opaque as to be difficult to perceive or understand: “A great effort was made... to obscure or obfuscate the truth” (Robert Conquest).

2. To render indistinct or dim; darken: The fog obfuscated the shore.

[Plus4206]

Thank you Mr Webster ;-)

[Lord Fantasius]

Are terms like "accountability," "transparency" and "independence" merely trendy buzzwords in corporate America, or do they actually stand for something?

These days, it seems to depend on the company. At blue-chip corporations with boards of directors that understand the meaning of good corporate governance, these words are real and translate into action. Take Boeing Co., for example, whose board earlier this month fired an otherwise celebrated CEO because it would not tolerate even the appearance of unethical or inappropriate behavior on his part.

Or Hewlett-Packard Co., where directors showed the door to an equally well-known CEO because her multibillion-dollar acquisition strategy had fallen short of projected results.

Or American International Group Inc., where just this week, amid allegations of questionable business practices, the longtime CEO was forced out of the job by a board acting in what one member described as "the best interest of [company] shareholders, customers and employees."

Which Boeing are you referring to? The Boeing that allowed bid-rigging and under-the-table agreements with the US Air Force as long as it made them money, or the Beoing that only just recently fired its CEO as a PR-stunt?

And H-P? Remember, acquisitions have to be approved by the Board. She would have been a hero if they were successful, now she's merely a scapegoat for the decisions of the rest of the Board.

And AIG!!! Don't even talk about them to us...Greenberg was not forced out by the Board due to any "best interest" of its shareholders, customers, and employees. Far from it, the NY Attorney General's Spitzer probes were getting just a little to close for them to feel comfortable anymore. He was praised by the Board when he entered into the agreements as they made the co's financial statements appear so much better. The agreements entered into by Greenberg have been going on for decades with the full support of AIG's Board; their only regret is finally getting caught out in the light of day.

Disney is not unique in the way it runs its business (unfortunately)...very few Board of Directors truly are independent of the CEO, they all got into their position due to politics...you think they are going to stop the behind-the-scenes-political-maneuvering once they're on the board? Yeah, right!

Haven't quite made of my mind yet on Iger, seems like someone who as the "quieter-type," will let the stronger, more forceful VP's run their respective departments and the corporation as a whole. I don't really think it's going to benefit the theme parks overall as each VP creates his own little fiefdom. Ergo, you won't necessarily see a stronger "unified" company, rather one of disparate entities fighting for the attention of the Board.

-R

[crusader]

Well said Lord Fantasius.

Which Boeing are you referring to? The Boeing that allowed bid-rigging and under-the-table agreements with the US Air Force as long as it made them money, or the Beoing that only just recently fired its CEO as a PR-stunt?

yeah. I'm afraid that's what we do know on the outside. These days the fleecing is completely out of control.

I'm hearing of salaries and consultants deals the likes of the dot.com era.

[yalegracey]

:sad2: without roy eisner would still be ceo. some people don't understand that

[Horace Horsecollar]

This thread from almost 18 months ago magically reappeared because yalegracey posted a reply.

However, there has actually been some news on this subject — in July 2005 (over a year ago). See Roy Disney, Company Resolve Their Disputes (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/08/AR2005070801789.html), By Gary Gentile, Associated Press, Saturday, July 9, 2005. Here are the first three paragraphs:
LOS ANGELES, July 8 -- The Walt Disney Co. and two former directors who fought for two years have agreed to a truce, including dropping a shareholder lawsuit challenging the selection of the company's new chief executive.

The company said Friday it has named former director Roy E. Disney, nephew of the late Walt Disney, as a director emeritus and a consultant.

In exchange, Roy Disney and former board member Stanley P. Gold agreed not to run a challenge slate of directors or submit shareholder resolutions for the next five years. The two also pledged to back the leadership of Robert A. Iger, who will succeed longtime chief executive Michael D. Eisner in September.

Roy E. Disney was born January 10, 1930, so on his next birthday, he'll be 77. Being named "director emeritus and a consultant" was a nice honor for Roy, and it brought closure to the rift between Roy E. Disney and The Walt Disney Company. But nobody should think this means he has an active role in running the company (nor that he wants an active role).

[manning]

Yes, talk is 'just talk' isn't it? Perhaps if you did your research you'd understand that this is misinformed 'talk' too.
The often wrongly atrributed "walt quote" calling Roy the 'idiot nephew' was never uttered by Walt, rather it was made by an advisor to Ron Miller.

Never mind didn't notice this was back in March of 2005.