Discussion in 'Disney Rumors and News' started by crazy4wdw, Jan 29, 2013.
OK..you really have me LOL here! I bow to you comment.......and the letter that could have been!
Log in or Sign up to hide this advert.
1) It is nice to see people taking Ogre's (I mean Iger's) position.
2) But, did you actually read his statements?
3) Did you actually see the individual denials?
4) Let's look a few statements.
"We use creativity, innovation and technology to create memorable moments and experiences for our hundreds of millions of customers and guests."
. . . yes
. . . but, Disney does nothing "free"
. . . any benefit to the guest has a benefit for Disney
. . . a company does not invest $1-billion for the guest
. . . the new system has major dollar returns for Disney/ABC
"We are offended by the ludicrous and utterly ill-informed assertion in your letter dated January 24, 2013, that we would in any way haphazardly or recklessly introduce a program that manipulates children, or wantonly puts their safety at risk."
. . . Disney does not "haphazardly" introduce programs
. . . the programs are well designed to manipulate people
"It is truly unfortunate and extremely disappointing that you chose to publicly attack us before taking the time to review our policies and/or contact us for information"
. . . in other words, we didn't want the publicity
"which would have obviated the need for your letter. Had you or your staff made the slightest effort, you would have found most of the answers to your questions already existed and were publicly available online at http://corporate.disney.go.com/corporate/pp.html and https://disneyworld.disney.go.com/fa...rivacy-policy/."
. . . there are no specific answers to the technical questions
. . . there are policy statements
. . . but, as lawsuits have already determined, Disney violates its own policies
. . . they misappropriate ideas, plans, designs, etc
"In the enclosed attachment, we address the questions in your letter about our new, yet-to-be launched program, MyMagic+."
. . . in a separate letter, but not in this release
"MyMagic+ is a completely optional program that was designed with privacy controls from the outset."
. . . might be optional
. . . but, guests are pressured by advertising and person-to-person sales
. . . or, they are just shoved a piece of paper and asked to "sign here"
. . . do you know what you signed when you checked-in
. . . or, did you just "sign by the x"
"Disney does not use personal information to market to children under age 13"
. . . but, it does use the family information to market to kids under 13
. . . a fine line between individual info and family info
. . . and a fine line between family marketing and kid marketing
"does not personalize or target advertisements to an individual child"
. . . no, but the family gets targeted based upon the data
. . . plus, they CAN target groups/calsses of kids under-13 based upon the collected data
"and never shares childrens personal information with any third party for their marketing purposes."
. . . Disney is a wide-ranging company
. . . personal info to its subsidiaries is not considered "third party"
. . . shared for marketing purposes, then do they share for other purposes?
"Additionally, parents have full control over their childs participation in MyMagic+."
. . . yep
. . . but, when one signs a form, do you read ALL the fine print?
. . . did you read all the print on the resort registration form?
. . . do you read the fine print on computer software (where you "Agree")?
"We have transparent privacy practices, guests can control and limit the amount of information they provide to us"
. . . same as above
. . . when you sign, do you know what and how much info WDW gathers?
. . . where does it specify what info is being gathered?
and how their information is used.
. . . where does it specifically say how the info is being used?
. . . are there just some general terms, or specific examples?
. . . or, are there no info as to "how" anywhere listed?
NOTE: Does this seem cynical? Yes, and it is intended to be so.
As an ex-CEO, I know how info is gathered on customers/employees,
and how it can be used. AND WE USED IT. I also know how customers
and employees sign away their information rights without knowing the
forms and terms they approved. Also, by just looking at the info on the
computer "folio" of WDW guests, one would not believe what info is
already there, in addition to the spaces allowed for further info. And,
once in the computer, it is there forever. Now, WDW gets to track you
throughout the parks, view all your purchases, determine which stores
you like to visit, check your rides and target sales based upon favorite
rides, track any other record or activity and predict future sales to you
of merchandise and services.
RustyScupper, as a former CEO would you answer every query from the public honestly and openly? Would you put out your accounting numbers and marketing plans for everyone to see? How about plans to a new system that you spent millions setting up? Any good CEO will answer no to this. So why should Disney be any different?
I loved the response. Another poster said his response wasn't professional but the CEOs that I have dealt with were cut throat and to the point. They only used their manners when it was necessary.
As for being pressured by advertising to use the new system, doesn't all advertising pressure you? Should Disney not market at all because kids might see the ads and want to go?
Agree fully. Should I apologize to everyone now for being from MA? I really hope this clown doesn't replace Kerry.
Just spit my water all over my computer screen when I read that.
Soooooo.....What your saying is as an ex-CEO you did everything that they are doing? Sounds like you expected Iger to do something different than every other company in America.
1) Not everything, but at times, yes.
2) When questioned from the press/govt/shareholders, you put on your best face.
3) WE DID NOT LIE OR TELL BLATANT FALSEHOODS.
4) Cover-ups are almost always worse than the issue (ref: Nixon, Clinton)
5) But, you deflect or "spin" the questions.
. . . you answered questions cautiously
. . . you commented on issues delicately
. . . you delfect the question
. . . you assail or assault or call names of the questioner
. . . but, you never told everything if possible
6) Spinning isn't illegal - just watch any politician/President news conference.
7) If every company answered every question and admitted everything,
. . . many businesses could not operate
. . . it would be permanent employment for lawyers
8) One needs to protect the company and stock value.
9) Plus, Disney needs to protect the $1-billion investment in the new program.
NOTE: If you ever want to see "spin" from a corporation, including ABC/DIZ,
try to read their Annual Report. Annual Reports are designed to confuse and
obfuscate. They are not meant to make deciphering the financial easy for
even the best of experts. Sure, they are mean tot be a sales tool, but they
are also meant to not explain things well. I have seen 5-6 revisions of an
Annual report before it was released. And each revision was more complicated
than the previous revision.
Perhaps I missed it but i do not recall seeing how the letter ended up being out in the general public. Did Markey release it or did Disney?
I only ask because this seems like a stunt (the orignal statements by Markey) from a politician angling for higher office.
As someone who lives in a state where "angling for high office" occurs a lot (probably will have folks campaigning here for 2016 prez by this summer) it just really smacks of being a political move. Go figure, a politician playing politics.
I have reviewed the 10Q's and annual reports. I am in finance so know what to look for and we do have some Disney stock in our portfolio (personal). Mainly because of the movie and animation potential to keep the company profitable. Of course the jump in attendance and spending has been a bonus. I am involved in completing said reports and I was never disagreeing, only pointing out that what Iger and the Disney executives are doing is pretty common as you know.
I have never gotten the impression that they were blatantly lying. As a company where consumer confidence and emotional attachment are critical to it's success, I understand why they do what they do. It is also clear to me that with all the competition for the golden vacation dollar, any new technology or IP cannot be communicated publicly until it is ready for implementation. As far as privacy and securing information, nothing is 100% safe in today's environment. It has been proven time and time again that if someone wants it bad enough, they'll find a way. Good discussion.
I agree Rusty in fact all Companies do just what you listed in your first post and congress does alot worse,......however where id Iger lie?
What alot of people here are forgeting is they have not made a full posting of the program and how it will work, in detail.
1) Exactly my points.
2) No one "lied".
3) That would be bad, very bad if uncovered.
4) But, not one single point was dismissed by Iger facts.
5) Ogre seemed irate and disgusted, just like a politician in a debate.
6) But, evaded presenting facts.
7) I think the public discussion will get bigger as more is known about the program.
8) People will start to become insulted by the intrusion into their activities.
9) Who wants WDW to know
. . . every ride you took, and when?
. . . every character you visited, and when
. . . every sandwich you ate, where, and when?
. . . every souvenir you or your kiddies bought?
. . . every penny you spent on vacation?
. . . every store you entered, even if you bought nothing?
. . . if you spoke with someone in the queue line?
. . . if you spoke to someone near the end of a ride?
. . . if you used the potty in Epcot near Morocco?
. . . if you stopped to watch the drummers in Japan?
. . . what everything above was done by every child or adult of the family
. . . etc
. . . etc
. . . etc
NOTE: Most of the above was already stated in the public statement
made by WDW in the NY Times story of January 7, 2013.
I stand corrected then , I miss understood your posting!
As a side note
1) I attended a seminar in 1987 in New York City.
2) It was populated by about 40 folks --- CEO's and other senior execs.
3) It was titled
. . . "Executive Public Communications", but subtitled
. . . "What to do if ambushed by Mike Wallace with a mic & camera for 60-Minutes"
4) Ogre is following the exact path.
. . . say as little as possible about the actual topic
. . . do not get into facts, as they can be debated/disproved later
. . . evade, but do not lie, as cover-ups are worse than the truth
. . . seem irate/insulted, but NEVER angry, as you seem too defensive
. . . once defended, add something positive about the issue and company
. . . always remember the public has a short memory, and the issue will pass
. . . leave the public remembering last statements, thus forgetting early ones
Rusty, you have my respect.
It's all spin just like I thought. Both sides must be quite dizzy by now.
I've learned over the years that you have to work hard to build a solid reputation. You have to work even harder to keep it, and you have to strike full force at even the slightest threat to compromise it.
Kudos to Iger.
Ditto!! Well said!!
No doubt that plays a factor. I don't agree with his response. Iger got political which unfortunately is the only way it reads. He should have represented the company, not himself.
~I don't deserve all of this affection, you've spared no amount of hyperbole! Walmart is a terrible company!!! And, I don't feel like defending Disney right now! Disney might be considered a tad "Walmart-ish," that *may* be a better description!
~I totally agree with this! I LOVED the response!!! When I first heard news about the inquiry, I got upset. I thought Disney sunk to a new low. After all, this is Congress, so I just knew Disney did something extremely wrong! Times have changed, news like this becomes vicious & viral, and the old formal but polite cookie cutter response doesn't cut it anymore! Iger's response was perfect! Just look at how quickly the story dissolved, right afterwards! It was a success!
He didn't like being asked legitimate questions..
Separate names with a comma.