Posted by DVC-Landbaron:
First let me say - LOL - for the following:
(DVC will supply them even though the reporter cannot)
OK. Time to get to it!!
What did Eisner do/didn't do for net income to drop?
We've spent months together, my favorite Duck! Pull out any of my past posts and you will find an example of Ei$ner's ineptness. You see, that's what has been so hard in the first place with my little crusade. Disney is very good on marketing and extremely good at spin. They put a high priced restaurant in DCA and call it an attraction! They shut down 20,000 Leagues, put in a spinning Aladdin and call it square. They drop an entire land from AK, put in cheap carnival games and people pour out of the woodwork defending them! Now these type of examples are MINISCULE and trivial in the big picture of the mega-giant corporation that Disney has become, but it is very telling and extremely indicative of their corporate and managerial philosophy.
So if you want specific examples, pick one. Their management has spun it in every direction. And to be fair, his detractors (your friendly LandBaron included (lol)) have spun it the other way. So pick one for yourself. Let's start with ABC. Is it good or bad? Should we have or shouldn't we have? I don't know, your guess is as good as mine. The Captain as well as others, say it great!! Makes them a "SUPERSTAR"!! I think you know where I stand on it. Without Millionaire the network is fair at best. Not my idea of a stellar investment considering the cost and the debt it incurred.
What about some of the others? How about GO.COM!! Now that one I think we can agree on. It was mismanaged and mis-marketed. And that is being kind!! Or what about the way he handled Katzenburg or Ovitz (sp)? Should we really be buying paint companies and magazines? Again, I don't know. What about the choices and marketing of their recent motion pictures? How about the ridiculous, rather low quality animated features we've been seeing lately. Not a Lion King (or anything close to it) in the bunch!! What about all those sequels! How about the changes (both of them) of the Disney Stores. What about the Sports complex thing (or whatever it is)? Do we need a hockey team? Pixor deal? Hmmm. Well, I'll give him one good move. (You know Voice should really be talking about this. I'm really in alien territory.)
And that brings me to the parks. (ahhh, home again! I can be conversant with this subject!) Do you like the way he builds half parks? Do you like what he did to Disneyland's parking lot (read: DCA)? Do you like him cutting hours? Do you like the lay offs? Do you like all the renovation work in World Showcase? (sarcasm intended!) DO you like 20K, Timekeeper, Keelboats, etc. closing, with no replacements in sight? Do you like tearing out the Horizons Pavilion and replacing it with half a ride? How about The Institute (that was a real money maker!)? What is Magic on Demand and how come we don't have more Monorails!!?? Or peoplemovers!!?? Do you really think Test Track is better that Motion (or should it have been in addition to it)? Etc. Etc. Etc.
All those above things could be answered either way, but that's not really the point. Because for all the examples I could give (and we've argued them time and again) it all comes down to your next point.
It makes no relationship to job performance other than decline.
You don't need any other relation. The question is, 'Is he doing his job?' If you have an employee that is under producing you really don't need to ask if he was late every day. Or if he took three hour (or three martini) lunches. If his he was getting along with his wife or if he was just plain lazy. He under produced!! CONSISTENTLY!! Ei$ner's ultimate job, of course, is to prevent a decline, in the very least, and insure a rise if at all possible. He has not done that!! It has STEADILY declined! He has under produced! Ergo, HE MUST GO!!!!
It begs the question, if net income had increased rather than decreased would Eisner still be worth the money?
At the risk of having this come back and bite me in the you-know-what, YES! I still would not like the way he was running the parks, but I would be hard pressed to call for his ouster. But like I'm always saying, I don't think his dismal performance and his inability to 'get' the Walt thing are mutually exclusive. I think that if he would have paid a bit more attention to the magic end of the business (parks, movies, TV) which is the basic product of Disney, the profit end would have taken care of itself. It's certainly worth a try. Cause his way ain't working!!
Long live the Pirate!!