Eisner on CNN tonight @ 6pm et

Discussion in 'Disney Rumors and News' started by space42, Oct 21, 2002.

  1. space42

    space42 WDW Addict

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2001
    Messages:
    225
  2. Avatar

    Google AdSense Guest Advertisement


    to hide this advert.
  3. Luv2Roam

    Luv2Roam Dexter: Takes Life. Seriously.

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2000
    Messages:
    15,479
    Monday, October 21, 2002
    Lou Dobbs Moneyline

    Michael Eisner, chief executive of Disney, talks to Lou about the future of the company and recent reports that ABC News and CNN might join forces. We'll also discuss how the business of Hollywood plays out on Wall Street.

    (5 pm Central on CNN)
     
  4. Figmentrocks

    Figmentrocks Earning My Ears

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2002
    Messages:
    69
    I'm watching Mr. Eisner on Dobbs..... He's most certainly had a facelift.. Geez, he doesn't look 60, 61...
     
  5. Luv2Roam

    Luv2Roam Dexter: Takes Life. Seriously.

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2000
    Messages:
    15,479
    And darn it! I missed it! So what was said?
     
  6. manning

    manning <font color=blue>Just for that I have requested it

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2002
    Messages:
    11,296
    Replay at 11:30 PM ET and 8:30 PM PT
     
  7. JeffH

    JeffH Mouseketeer

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 1999
    Messages:
    317
    check out the 11:30 rebroadcast
     
  8. manning

    manning <font color=blue>Just for that I have requested it

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2002
    Messages:
    11,296
    Any mention about him leaving or selling ABC ???:jester:


    Just wishing upon a star!!!
     
  9. JeffH

    JeffH Mouseketeer

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 1999
    Messages:
    317
    Then again at 2am.
    Then a few days later the transcripts.
     
  10. RyMickey

    RyMickey <font color=green>Disney Freak<br><font color=blue

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2000
    Messages:
    3,071
    No news at all about them selling ABC. In fact, he brought up the fact that they are consistently #1 or #2 in the coveted 18-49 bracket for 5 nights a week this season (which is true...sure the Thursday and Friday nights are dismal, but it's gotta be given a little time to grow in my opinion). He commented that they were #2 at the summer box office with the hits "Signs" and "Lilo and Stitch." ("Everyone counted us out, but we came in second," he said). He admitted that theme parks were lagging. And then they talked for an extended period of time about the possibility of Disney's acquisition of CNN. Eisner really wants to, he said. I personally think that Disney doesn't need another loser on its roster (CNN is second and falling compared to FoxNews' first place and rising position).

    Anyway, that's a rough idea of what he said.

    RyMickey
     
  11. Figmentrocks

    Figmentrocks Earning My Ears

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2002
    Messages:
    69
    CNN certainly isn't a loser and you have to factor in the International weight that CNN has, as it has broad International viewership with CNNi. The truth be told, Fox News will continue to grow, as it accompanies conservative radio, and the hardcore conservative audience now has a growing home to the conservative viewpoint. CNN's ratings continue to climb, but no one will now catch Fox News unless the public tires of conservative ramblings.

    My concern is yet another media merger and even more control. It also is another shortsighted corporate move on behalf of Parsons and Eisner (if it happens) to shore-up their bottom lines and to continue their hold on power.

    CNN brings in $200 million in PROFIT, ABC News $50 million in PROFIT. It's so sad to see these numbers. So sad that nothing is ever enough for these business titans.
     
  12. Another Voice

    Another Voice Charter Member of The Element

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2000
    Messages:
    3,191
    It’s getting increasing more and more difficult to be concerned about a company that so obviously lacks the ideas or the will to succeed.

    Saying one has a great brand does nothing to sustain the public’s perception of the brand. Reaping the returns on past investments does nothing to create the future. Blaming woes on outside factors evades the responsibility to solve problems. Pleading that one is successful in spite of the evidence is either delusional or self-serving, and often both when money is concerned.

    Eisner’s lackluster and defensive performance on CNN is exactly the state that he has put Disney in these days. The Company simply no longer dreams. Every move is a risk-free calculation to produce the highest return for the least amount of effort.

    There is no joy in what the company does anymore. ‘Santa Claus 2’ is soulless, just another product churned out by uncaring and indifferent people passing time until something else happens. It’s only purpose for existing is simply to make money.

    Yea, that’s business. That’s the soap business, that’s the aluminum siding business, that’s the cigarette business. But it’s not Disney’s business.

    There was not a single child that sat in a movie theater in the 1930’s because of a Happy Meal deal. There was not a single child in the 1950’s that rushed to finish her homework on a Sunday night because ‘The Wonderful World of Disney’ was a way of repurposing old films. There was not a single child that excitedly tugged his parents down Main Street in the 1970’s because of the margins on soft drink sales.

    Spark the imagination and the financial results will follow. But perfecting a return on investment calculation does not cause a child to dream.

    I see the people clicking on the reply button now. “Walt had it easy”, “Wall Street demands”, “short term profits”, and “today’s economics makes it impossible”. What garbage. Nothing but the bayings of the unimaginative and the lazy. Things have always been tough. And they will always be tough. Wall Street or banks; bubble economy or Great Depression – it’s all the same.

    An idea starts with nothing more than someone sitting down in front of a blank piece of paper. From there it’s hard work and creativity that brings it life. A novel, a film, a theme park – the same beginning and the same process that hasn’t changed in a hundred years. The exact same resources that were wasted to make ‘Inspector Gadget 2’ could have gone into making a movie that could be shown for generations. All it takes is the will to try.

    And it’s a will that Michael Eisner does not have.
     
  13. CaipiraBob

    CaipiraBob "Perfectly content to be an absolute caveman"

    Joined:
    May 5, 2002
    Messages:
    586
    Another voice, that was so very well said.

    Once eisner crushed all the dissenting voices out of upper management, he found he was only capable of producing pathetic retreads of their former genius. Disney should be shedding their wasted investments and focus on producing specifically family oriented entertainment per Walt's original vision. Perhaps then they'll start seeing the money flow.

    Who wants to bet this is the last thing on eisner's twisted mind?
     
  14. lrodk

    lrodk <font color=009900>No one is immune to the TF's in

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 1999
    Messages:
    850
    Very well said AV. It's sad but I have to agrre with much of what you said.

    This is exactly the reason why I stopped watching his interviews a couple of years ago. It's always about the "Brand". They have the "Brand". Blah, blah blah. His apperances are always the same. He'll dance around the questions and constantly harp about how he's sure things will turn around. How the company is in an excellent position to reap the rewards once the economy improves. It's nonsense. He's been saying this for over two years while the company has been deteriorating all around him. These old rah rah speeches, which have lacked results, have become old and meaningless and will ultimately serve to bolster the argument for his dismissal.
     
  15. DisneyKidds

    DisneyKidds <font color=green>The TF thanks DisneyKidds for mo

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2001
    Messages:
    4,437
    Clap............clap...................clap................clap.............. (get that slow, pronounced clapping as I stand after AV's eloquent speech? ;))

    Sadly, some of what you say is true, but anything taken to the extreme (in either direction) won't get you far.

    Shades of...............ah, to heck with it. Abandon ship :rolleyes:.

    I'll lazily crawl back in my unimaginitive hole now..............................
     
  16. Black, white, grey...Are there really other colors?:rolleyes:

    Great rebuttal Scoop & Kidds.

    Certainly all things Mr. Voice gives us is littered with the truth but as Scoop points out where's the new Walt? Who's showing that spunk? All I see are Disney-clones or wanna-be's.

    If the demand or ability to produce the 'next generation' were out there, wouldn't somebody be doing it?

    :smooth: :smooth: :bounce: :smooth: :smooth:
     
  17. raidermatt

    raidermatt Beware of the dark side. Anger...fear...aggression

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2000
    Messages:
    6,464
    Why not?

    BECAUSE ITS NOT EASY...

    But, as AV says, IT NEVER WAS.

    Why is that so hard to grasp?

    Yes, Disney can plod along and probably survive just fine with management just trying to milk the brand for everything they can get.

    And eventually, the public's perception of Disney will have completely changed to the point that they are viewed no differently than any other company.

    But Disney IS in a different situation than just about any other company on the face of the planet. They have the reputation for doing all of the things you are questioning. They have a loyal following that isn't even remotely challenged by any other company that ever existed. They have fan sites, such as this one, where people discuss and debate every decision the company makes.

    Why? Because Disney was always DIFFERENT.

    That difference gives Disney a built in advantage over everyone else. They can afford to be creative and focus on servicing their guests because its been proven that their guests WANT this and are willing to pay large sums of money for it.

    Disney doesn't have to have another Walt. They don't have to start from scratch. They just have to build on an incredible foundation of public fondness and trust, the likes of which does not exist anywhere else in corporate America.

    Is that easy? Heck no. It requires an understanding that Disney is different than everyone else in many ways, and needs to be handled as such.

    But impossible? Please.

    It all depends on what you want Disney to be. Do you want them to be just like everybody else, or do you want them to remain the unquestioned leader in providing Magical forms of family entertainment?
     
  18. KNWVIKING

    KNWVIKING DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2001
    Messages:
    4,157
    There will never be another Walt, just like there will never be another Elvis or The Babe. They are unreplaceable icons that we will always try to measure others by. I don't know enough about ME to like or dislike him.Apperantly he's gone from hero to heel in the eyes of people on this board. But I feel it is unrealistic to try and compare him to Walt-it just can't be done. Someone mentioned how kids flocked to see "The WWoD". Well, what other tv choices did they have. What were there-three channels. What about theme parks ? There was nothing like DL to Walt built it. Today there are numerous choices. Look at all the great old movies, back then writers told the story with words,not special effects. People today are bombardied with so many more choices then back in the good ol' days of Walt. Has talent really dried up,or is it almost impossible to come up with something new in this day and age when everything has been done to death. I think Walt would be hard pressed to "WOW" us today. And if he could,I think he'd need a printing press that was pumping out real $$$ and not just the stuff with Mickeys face on it.
     
  19. raidermatt

    raidermatt Beware of the dark side. Anger...fear...aggression

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2000
    Messages:
    6,464
    You know, Viking, you are pretty much saying the same thing many people have been saying pretty much forever. "It can't be done."

    Of course he would be. Its always difficult to "WOW" people. Do you think that when Walt came out West with something like $50 and two pair of underwear that he wasn't "hard pressed" to "WOW" anyone?

    Something tells me he would find a way today, just as he did then.

    But putting this focus on what Walt would or would not have done is really irrelevant to Disney today. The formula and philosophy is there. Somebody just needs to embrace it.
     
  20. Another Voice

    Another Voice Charter Member of The Element

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2000
    Messages:
    3,191
    “I have to believe if this was truly possible today somebody, somewhere would have tried this if not only because this level of quality could make them a ton of money in theory”

    Pixar.

    They really haven’t done too poorly for themselves have they? Go back and listen the commentary track on ‘Monsters, Inc.’ You’ll hear lots of talk about story and overcoming budget and time restrictions. And it ALWAYS comes back to what’s best for the movie. That’s caring about quality. And it works*.

    Who decreed that entertainment is anything but a niche market. Movies are not industrial products that get stamped out on an assembly. You can’t manufacture joy and excitement on the same assembly line that turns out refrigerators. Anyone who tries the industrial approach is doomed to failure (like all the Mega Media Giants). As Mr. Scoop points out, all the people making $100 million mass-marketed movies these days are struggling because economics of mass production do not work when applied to entertainment. EVERY attempt to do so has failed miserably.

    And that’s what I find most interesting about the whole argument. Those people who say “it can’t be done these days” and constantly screech that economics demand certain behaviors…Well my friends – where are your economic results?

    Where are the flocks of eager patrons tossing down their credit cards for small generic theme parks? Where are the armored cars returning with the box office receipts from the latest focus group created movie sequel? Where are crowds around the water cooler re-laughing over the jokes from last night’s bland family sitcom?

    If Walt’s “quality” philosophy is not profitable, then Eisner’s “money” approach sure isn’t working any better.

    Creating entertainment is nothing but a gamble. There are no laws, no objective criteria that determine “good” or “bad”, “success” or “failure”. Anyone in the business is betting on capturing the public’s interest. It’s been shown time and time again that the public prefers quality. It’s not a sure thing and often dreck can be financially successful too. But in the long term quality and good products win out and poorly made get-rich-quick schemes fail.

    P.S. – “Why not simply move on to another company and encourage change there?” That’s exactly what a lot of people have done. And it’s another reason why Disney is in the toilet. It’s takes people to create quality products. Without those people, all the boasts about “brand image” mean absolutely nothing.



    * - and before we get the “they wouldn’t be anywhere without Disney’s marketing line”, how come the Pixar movies are all smash hits, yet the very same marketing effort couldn’t prevent Disney films like ‘Dinosaur’ and ‘Atlantis’ from producing big fat craters in the bottom line? And both ‘Shrek’ and ‘Ice Age’ did very well without Disney’s involvement at all. Objectively looking at the situation, what does Disney marketing do after all?
     
  21. Bstanley

    Bstanley DisNoid

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2001
    Messages:
    1,231
    Scoop - I'm not sure I'm getting the point you are trying to make.

    Let me make a proposal and you clarify it, ok?


    Proposed statement:

    A film, TV and Theme park entertainment company today cannot be operated with the same focus on quality - at the expense of quantity - that was present 50 years ago. Market forces today require that a company produce more 'things' of lesser expense per 'thing', and generate a higher return per invested dollar than in the past.


    Ok, your turn.
     

Share This Page