Imagineering R&D Gone?

[manning]

When is the next annual stock holder meeting? I'm going to vote against every current director on Eisner's side. If enough of us vote, it may be enough to boot them out, or at least make them very nervous!!!!

 

[SAKPEG99OKW]

Anybody have the email address for compliants directly to Eisner or the board. I really want to send them my thoughts. I would strongly suggest that we all send our thoughts. If enough of the diehards voice thier views maybe we could bring about some change. Afterall, don't you think disney values the diehards, the people who got 2, 3, 4 times a year and spend their hard earned money on mickey dolls and lillo buttons and pooh flash lights for fantasmic. I am so tired of Eisner screwing things up. He's been their long enough, give him his golden parashoot and push him out the door.



Scott

 

[LarryM]

SAKPEG99OKW Don't even waste your time e-mailing the board. Last year during Nov. I wrote a letter to every member of the board, ME and every managing director for each area I was not even acknowledged just wasted my time and postage!

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

It's nice to know they care isn't it? Scoop, any comment?

 

[UncleKyle]

This is just so sad.....the company is going to go down the tubes

 

[Luv2Roam]

They will make the bottom line look good for awhile, to keep ME in his position --maybe.
But it will soon resurface and probably faster than we (and they) think and worse than we think too.
I think if the keep up at the pace they are now they will be eventually be bought out when they finally hit rock bottom.
And who can you blame? There are a lot of people who know ME and know what he does and who he has as his cronies. But I only see a few trying to stop him.
The pressure is building and seems he will stop at nothing to keep his job. Doesn't matter that the end result is junk.
But I could very well be looking at this wrong from all sides. Hopefully I am.

 

[WEDWAY100]

Originally posted by mjstaceyuofm
Outsourcing is a way of business. Often times, outsourcing leads to joint ventures that work out mutually for both companies involved. [/B]

I understand what you are saying, but I don't think the outsourcing argument applies here. IMHO, outsourcing works best when it's not your core business. Ex: Large long distance company has 4,000 employees on site and 10 cafeterias to feed those employees. Outsourcing the caferterias makes sense, because feeding people is not even close to the core business of telecom.

I would argue that R&D is close enough to Disney's core product that this outsourcing doesn't make sense. I enjoy the Disney parks because they offer amazing attractions that no one else does. Designing and building these attractions requires R&D. Walt's team included people like Bob Gurr and Yale Gracey, who made things happen that people hadn't seen before. I think Disney needs to continue to develop, design and patent new technologies in order to recapture their competitve edge.

Maybe if they will outsorce R&D, they can outsource casting to Kelly Services. Just think of the money they will save.

Guest: Where is Space Mountain?

Kelly Services Cast: I don't know...would you like me to photocopy something for you?

I have never been one to call for Eisner's resignation, but if he has actually closed the R&D side of the company, then I think he has to go. The great Mr. Landbaron was right, Ei$ner "doesn't get it".

 

[Mooobooks]

I know two imagineers, one in Anaheim and the other in Orlando. Both got fired on the same day along with at least half of the people they know in R&D. My friend in Orlando has worked there for over a decade. His desk has to be cleaned out by next Friday!

 

[mattjs]

We really have no information to go on with this one so it's kind of tough to speculate on it. Too many variables. The change could have been made for any number of resaons, only one of which is cost cutting. One thing's for sure though, Disney is not going to have zero R&D.

 

[DisneyFanGuy]

Let's put this one in perspective. Many companies are outsourcing as a way to cut costs and still remain competitive. WDI (From everything that I have read) STILL employs 1600 people. They simply wish to add folks for specific projects without paying huge year-round salaries and benefits. It sounds like prudent management to me.

In fact, I can't really see how this particular cut back affects finished product, other than perhaps providing fewer patents for Disney in transportation systems.

What they lose is definately the cream of the crop folks. These folks defect to other firms as they begin to see people of similar tenure being let go. Some may become consultants, but the vast majority are gone. What they gain is a more focused approach to design work and the costs associated with each individual project. The vast majority of R&D work ends up being unusable anyway.

My company scrapped most of it's R&D department years ago and is much better for it. Most of their work involved figuring out how to replace labor costs with technology. They now use existing technology developed by outside companies for everything and are much better for it and have saved tons of money.

Disney is saying that they are willing to give up some more of their competitive advantage in cutting edge design in return for a better bottom line. Most of their attractions are built on standard industry technology anyway, so why spend so much cash inventing stuff that won't ever be used? The real difference in Disney attractions vs. the competition is (IMHO) the back story and immersive theming, which are still doable with current staff and resources.

I would bet that R&D remains at the level that new ideas can be farmed out to outside vendors for development.

Their recent design flubs, DR, DCA, multi-spinners, are much more a result of unwillingness to spend on the final product than a result of internal cuts in the design itself. That silly spinning coaster at AK smacks to me of budget cuts, not of a lack of R&D. If Disney wants to again build immersive, full blown story focused attractions, then they can again do so at any time. It has nothing to do with WDI cuts. It has to do with a decision logic that says that they can attract the same number of guests with lower cost attractions. Time will tell if they can. Most griping on this board revolves about our concern with what actually appears, not what could have been built.

In the meantime, we will still get great theming in new restaurants, shops, hotels, and anything that directly generates revenue. That current direction is the real issue, not the reduced number of folks at WDI.

Mission Space is a big key. It was developed using outside techology and internal design work. It is expensive, big, and is being placed into a theme park that needs a big jump in attendance. If it increases attendance without carving it out of the other parks, then I think more new stuff will be approved. If it shifts attendance from other parks without attracting additional business, then it will be another ten years before anything like it comes our way again.

Much of WDIs fate rests with this as well.

 

[daannzzz]

Disney is saying that they are willing to give up some more of their competitive advantage in cutting edge design in return for a better bottom line.

Certainly tightening the belt and streamlineing can help any company. But when your company has been build on imagination, experimentation and R&D AND you make your main focus on giving up the competative edge for bottom line... year after year, you will no longer be competative you will be equal and possible fall behind you previous competitors. All for the bottom line.