about roy vs eisner

[bambii]

who agrees with roy

and who agrees with eisner.


just wondering

 

[always quiet]

I'm defintely not saying that when Eisner took over he did not to some wonderful things for Disney....he did. It just seems that in recent years, he has lost 'focus' and the Disney quality has really gone down....not only in their merchandise, but in the way the company is run. There have been some movie hits, but more misses. Quite frankly, I am tired of sequels!! They are NEVER even in the same league as the originals. And don't even get me started on the cartoon series based upon hit movies. Ugh!!!

I don't know if Roy will be able to pull this off. I only hope that he does. If he doesn't, maybe Eisner will get a wake up call and realize things have to shape up!!

 

[WDWHound]

I already ponitificated to excess on this topic on another thread, so I'll just say that I support Roy and leave it at that.

 

[meeko_33785]

I would say while I definalty agree with some of Roy's points, I side with neither of them. I think it's time for some new blood in the company.

 

[honeywolf7]

I side with Roy.

 

[Raysplus1]

I believe in Roy. It is time for Michael to step down.

 

[Lewski709]

we see it, why can't "THEY"?

 

[palmtreegirl]

Neither. As with most everything, I think the truth lies somehwere in between.

 

[Micca]

I think Palmtreegirl has a valid observation, but because of the family attachment and reputation, I think Roy is a better choice for leading, or finding a partner who can lead the company.

 

[GeorgeG]

I've got to side with Roy. In the 17 years we've been going to WDW we have seen a subtle, but real, change in quality and attitudes. Don't get me wrong, it's still the best place to go, but the door is ajar for the competition.

Most people I know have no regrets paying the Disney prices as long as everything is truly special in every aspect of the Disney tradition. When that slips, you really have to wonder if you're getting what you pay for.

I think Eisner has "robbed from Peter to pay Paul" in too many of his pet schemes and he doesn't care who gets hurt in the end as long as it's not him.

I'm sure those who are more recent patrons will disagree to some extent because they simply didn't know what it was like back when.