Bob Iger leaves Trump's advisory council

[Brocktoon]

These advisory councils have always been a joke, no matter the political affiliation. Under Obama's advisory council you had folks like Jeff Immelt who were going to create jobs ... which then led to the famous "shovel ready wasn't quite shovel ready" quote. And then Immelt is right back on Trump's council promising the same thing.

I'm surprised people take stock in what these CEO's do ... the CEOs job to create wealth for the shareholder, they do not care about the planet (unless it makes money and creates value along the way). They will make decisions based what will move the stock price.

 

[Q-man]

This was a terrible, stupid, and short-sighted move for Iger.

By his actions, he's giving up a captive audience with the president of the US, and simultaneously polarizing public opinion about the Walt Disney Company. He's acting as a poor steward of the company just to advance his whole political agenda and narrative.

No good can come out of this. He (and Elon Musk) just look like the fools they are for what they're doing.

This removes my already thin faith in Iger as CEO. Disney needs to dismiss Iger in favor of the co-management model of yesterday. Disney was always a better company that produced better results with a creative talent and a operational talent at the head of the company, working together. (Walt & Roy, Eisner & Wells.) When greed and politics enter Disney management, disaster strikes.

The President doesn't listen to anyone that doesn't confirm his thoughts. Why should they waste their time with him?

 

[adam.adbe]

For those voicing their joy about the fact that he left over this, do you actually know what the Paris agreement said? What about it was good for the country? Just curious.

I've read it, yes.

As for what's good for the country, well that depends on your POV. If humans are responsible for accelerating climate change, leading to an average increase in global temperatures, and warmer seas, there's significant future risk for the US as an economy. Also, as much of the world's economy shifts away from an over-reliance on fossil fuels, the US risks becoming a technological backwater, and subject to damaging trade sanctions.

There is a reason everything has been shorted to just be "carbon" emissions, and it's to confuse us. C02 (carbonDIOXIDE) has very little or no effect on climate change according to the chief of the EPA. I guess he took 8th grade science because that should be obvious to all of us. Animals and plants have had a symbiotic relationship for millions (or however long you want to believe) of years. They give us oxygen, we give them c02. We all know this.

There's salt in the sea. It's been there for as long as our records can tell. Why should we worry about excess salt run-off into our lakes and rivers? After all, all mammals require some level of salt intake, right?

Nature is pretty resilient all things considered, but it takes a while for a balance to be established, and human ingenuity is such that we're messing things up faster than nature can adapt.

The carbon emissions of the Paris deal is at best trimming around the edges.

For sure. A need to work with an unwilling US was largely the reason for that. The likely outcome is that the Paris Accord will be replaced by something with more teeth in a decade or so, and most likely the US will not be at the negotiating table.

 

[adam.adbe]

This was a terrible, stupid, and short-sighted move for Iger.

By his actions, he's giving up a captive audience with the president of the US, and simultaneously polarizing public opinion about the Walt Disney Company. He's acting as a poor steward of the company just to advance his whole political agenda and narrative.

This should not need pointing out, but Disney is an international company, and one whose bottom line is increasingly dependent on foreign markets. For every annoyed American there's at least one other supportive American, and eight other folks across the world who might respond well to this choice.

 

[TwoMisfits]

These advisory councils have always been a joke, no matter the political affiliation. Under Obama's advisory council you had folks like Jeff Immelt who were going to create jobs ... which then led to the famous "shovel ready wasn't quite shovel ready" quote. And then Immelt is right back on Trump's council promising the same thing.

I'm surprised people take stock in what these CEO's do ... the CEOs job to create wealth for the shareholder, they do not care about the planet (unless it makes money and creates value along the way). They will make decisions based what will move the stock price.

Of course...and it should be no surprise most of the CEOs wanted to stay in. For Apple, they could continue their Chinese manufacturing (where China was committing to doing nothing for the environment) while selling in Europe tariff fee...all while Americans picked up the tab. Or, for Tesla, they could guarantee future required customer base. And on and on...anything big business CEOs wanted should be suspect b/c corporate profits seem to be their only interest. They don't care about America's interests...and if they do, it's not the lower and lower middle class' interests that concern them (those are increasingly not their customers)...

 

[DisBabe94]

Of course...and it should be no surprise most of the CEOs wanted to stay in. For Apple, they could continue their Chinese manufacturing (where China was committing to doing nothing for the environment) while selling in Europe tariff fee...all while Americans picked up the tab. Or, for Tesla, they could guarantee future required customer base. And on and on...anything big business CEOs wanted should be suspect b/c corporate profits seem to be their only interest. They don't care about America's interests...and if they do, it's not the lower and lower middle class' interests that concern them (those are increasingly not their customers)...

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...-dominance-of-renewable-energy-and-technology

China has really changed their tone on renewable energy and fighting climate change.



I think Bob Iger did the right thing. The Paris agreement took around a decade to finally reach. The countries involved WILL NOT renegotiate. America is among only two other countries to not participate, the other two being Nicaragua and Syria. It is a show of solidarity.

This may be slightly off topic but, as individuals, the most important thing is to do what you can to reduce your carbon footprint. This includes doing things such as :

Cutting out or at least significantly reducing the consumption of meat and animal products.

Drive less, walk and cycle more, drive a hybrid or electric car if you can.

Be conscious of water and energy usage in the home. Minimize use of air conditioning, lights, appliances, an unplug those when not in use.

Be conscious of the products you are buying: don't buy more than you need. Try to buy products with minimal packaging. Try to minimize the amount of processed foods you are buying.



Don't be discouraged - do your part. Don't give up. Every little bit absolutely does help!!

 

[Tonyz]

Right now I'm prouder to be a Disney fan than an American.

Walt was very passionate about environmentalism. He'd be proud of ya, Bob.

 

[Jaybrad]

I am a very Proud American and have been for 74 years!!!!!

 

[Jaybrad]

These advisory councils have always been a joke, no matter the political affiliation. Under Obama's advisory council you had folks like Jeff Immelt who were going to create jobs ... which then led to the famous "shovel ready wasn't quite shovel ready" quote. And then Immelt is right back on Trump's council promising the same thing.

I'm surprised people take stock in what these CEO's do ... the CEOs job to create wealth for the shareholder, they do not care about the planet (unless it makes money and creates value along the way). They will make decisions based what will move the stock price.

Well Stated!!!

 

[dlavender]

I don't really get why people are upset that he is leaving the council.

He and the company obviously care about environmentalism, disagree with this shift in policy, so they cut ties.

Don't be mad because you see it as a slight against your guy.

You shouldn't need Iger's approval or disapproval by association.

If you do, you are standing on shaky ground, at best.

 

[rteetz]

Just a reminder we have a policy against discussing politics. We can discuss Iger and him leaving the council but we cannot discuss the current administration and whether or not you agree with what they are doing.

 

[Planogirl]

Iger has to do what he thinks is right. Obviously many of us don't agree but if he feels a certain way and doesn't see much point in being on this council then I can't fault him for leaving. And I'm no Iger fan!

 

[Spridell]

From what I read Iger never really wanted to be on the council. Was invited and he accepted. This was probably his way out.

 

[jkiszka]

...Iger's actions are hypocritical.

Yes they are. And Iger's making a lot of the same mistakes that Eisner did before his forced departure from Disney.

Iger should not have messed with politics in the first place. I hope this is a learning experience for Disney co.

This is exactly the problem. He joined and then left before they could even meet. This polarizes Disney's potential audience, making the company and brand LESS valuable, overall. That's a big part of the CEO's job of a company--protect the brand and the strategy of a company. He just showed the public that he has no strategy.

The President doesn't listen to anyone that doesn't confirm his thoughts. Why should they waste their time with him?

Okay, let's suppose you're right. Should all protesters protesting Trump go home because they're not being listened to also? Why would they waste their time protesting?

My point is, regardless of Trump's opinion, if he's listening, or whatever--this looks incredibly stupid and indecisive of Iger. He would have been better off not getting involved in the first place. And when he did, there's no way he should have quit as a protest for something politically motivated.

This should not need pointing out, but Disney is an international company, and one whose bottom line is increasingly dependent on foreign markets. For every annoyed American there's at least one other supportive American, and eight other folks across the world who might respond well to this choice.

Right, but most of Disney's profits and revenue are tied directly to the United States. This kind of controversy is not a risk worth taking.

If Iger had remained neutral and didn't do anything, no further consequences would have happened. He should actively try not to be political and polarizing. Again, this alienates half of the potential audience in the US!

Now, people WILL be outraged and some people will buy different products / go different places for vacation / not consider Disney in the same light. There's no positive upside for Disney to any of Iger's actions.

No one is going to call up their travel agent and say, "Wow! Iger just quit Trump's advisory committee! Just because he did that, I'm brining my family to Disneyland!" People WILL have the opposite reaction, though.

Just a reminder we have a policy against discussing politics. We can discuss Iger and him leaving the council but we cannot discuss the current administration and whether or not you agree with what they are doing.

I saw your response to my post as well.

I'm not discussing politics, whatsoever. I have made no pro- or anti- Trump statement.

I'm discussing the incredible mis-management of the Walt Disney Company right now, as reflected in the news. Here we have a CEO who literally joined the council (and caught negative press for it) and then left it without attending it (and got more negative press for it). This was incredibly stupid and short sighted of Iger. What he did was just polarize half of the US with respect to Disney. Disney IS a brand. Probably, one of the most important, enduring American brands. And, to that note...

Right now I'm prouder to be a Disney fan than an American.

Walt was very passionate about environmentalism. He'd be proud of ya, Bob.

Walt wouldn't be proud of Iger for these (and other) incredibly indecisive and devise moves from a corporate management perspective. Rather, Walt Disney (and especially Roy) would have had VERY little patience for this kind of stuff. Iger's received bi-partisan criticism for quite a while, again, as he's been falling into traps that previous corporate managers of Disney fell into.

Further, Walt would likely be offended by you saying that you're prouder to be a Disney fan than an American. He'd tell you that without America, even with its many flaws, there is no Disney. Not in California, not in Florida, and not anywhere abroad.

If you need proof of this, note the fact that Disney's first animatronic human character was Abraham Lincoln from "Great Moments with Mr. Lincoln." Patriotism was an important thing to Walt Disney.

Edit: Added "Human" Character to Abe, and grammar / etc.

 

[dlavender]

Yes they are. And Iger's making a lot of the same mistakes that Eisner did before his forced departure from Disney.



This is exactly the problem. He joined and then left before they could even meet. This polarizes Disney's potential audience, making the company and brand LESS valuable, overall. That's a big part of the CEO's job of a company--protect the brand and the strategy of a company. He just showed the public that he has no strategy.



Okay, let's suppose you're right. Should all protesters protesting Trump go home because they're not being listened to also? Why would they waste their time protesting?

My point is, regardless of Trump's opinion, if he's listening, or whatever--this looks incredibly stupid and indecisive of Iger. He would have been better off not getting involved in the first place. And when he did, there's no way he should have quit as a protest for something politically motivated.



Right, but most of Disney's profits and revenue are tied directly to the United States. This kind of controversy is not a risk worth taking.

If Iger had remained neutral and didn't do anything, no further consequences would have happened. He should actively try not to be political and polarizing. Again, this alienates half of the potential audience in the US!

Now, people WILL be outraged and some people will buy different products / go different places for vacation / not consider Disney in the same light. There's no positive upside for Disney to any of Iger's actions.

No one is going to call up their travel agent and say, "Wow! Iger just quit Trump's advisory committee! Just because he did that, I'm brining my family to Disneyland!" People WILL have the opposite reaction, though.



I know you're a moderator, and I also saw your response to my post.

I'm not discussing politics, whatsoever. I have made no pro- or anti- Trump statement.

I'm discussing the incredible mis-management of the Walt Disney Company right now, as reflected in the news. Here we have a CEO who literally joined the council (and caught negative press for it) and then left it without attending it (and got more negative press for it). This was incredibly stupid and short sighted of Iger. What he did was just polarize half of the US with respect to Disney. Disney IS a brand. Probably, one of the most important, enduring American brands. And, to that note...



Walt wouldn't be proud of Iger for these (and other) incredibly indecisive and devise moves from a corporate management perspective. Rather, Walt Disney (and especially Roy) would have had VERY little patience for this kind of stuff. Iger's received bi-partisan criticism for quite a while, again, as he's been falling into traps that previous corporate managers of Disney fell into.

Further, Walt would likely be offended by you saying that you're prouder to be a Disney fan than an American. He'd tell you that without America, even with its many flaws, there is no Disney. Not in California, not in Florida, and not anywhere abroad.

If you need proof of this, note the fact that Disney's first animatronic character was Abraham Lincoln from "Great Moments with Mr. Lincoln." Patriotism was an important thing to Walt Disney.

I think you are reading Way too much into this, and putting way too much stock into this.

Alienating half of the US?

I bet if you polled everyone walking into MK today, about 34 people out of 70k even knew that he was on the council. And 6 of those people would even have an opinion on whether they cared about it or not.

It's not like Disney dragged a doctor off of a DME bus or something. This is not a huge PR issue by any measure.

Next week I venture to guess no one even brings it up again.

It's really not a big deal. Unless you are one of those 6 or 7 people.

 

[earfulofmagic]

Right, but most of Disney's profits and revenue are tied directly to the United States. This kind of controversy is not a risk worth taking.

If Iger had remained neutral and didn't do anything, no further consequences would have happened. He should actively try not to be political and polarizing. Again, this alienates half of the potential audience in the US!

Now, people WILL be outraged and some people will buy different products / go different places for vacation / not consider Disney in the same light. There's no positive upside for Disney to any of Iger's actions.

No one is going to call up their travel agent and say, "Wow! Iger just quit Trump's advisory committee! Just because he did that, I'm brining my family to Disneyland!" People WILL have the opposite reaction, though.

Actually, if you read Disney's quarterly reports and financial statements, the overwhelming majority of their billions in revenue and profit is due to their media in terms of their movies, TV (ABC, etc). And those are worldwide ventures.

 

[Spridell]

I think you are reading Way too much into this, and putting way too much stock into this.

Alienating half of the US?

I bet if you polled everyone walking into MK today, about 34 people out of 70k even knew that he was on the council. And 6 of those people would even have an opinion on whether they cared about it or not.

It's not like Disney dragged a doctor off of a DME bus or something. This is not a huge PR issue by any measure.

Next week I venture to guess no one even brings it up again.

It's really not a big deal. Unless you are one of those 6 or 7 people.

I agree.

Now, the way Disney handles the HOP THAT might be a different story and that might cause some outrage.

 

[jkiszka]

I think you are reading Way too much into this, and putting way too much stock into this.

Alienating half of the US?

I bet if you polled everyone walking into MK today, about 34 people out of 70k even knew that he was on the council. And 6 of those people would even have an opinion on whether they cared about it or not.

It's not like Disney dragged a doctor off of a DME bus or something. This is not a huge PR issue by any measure.

Next week I venture to guess no one even brings it up again.

It's really not a big deal. Unless you are one of those 6 or 7 people.

I think your numbers are off. More people than that would know.

But even assuming your numbers are exactly correct, 6 & 7 are both greater than zero. That's a negative effect.

(And that's after the original number of people he ticked off by JOINING in the first place!)

 

[disneyland_is_magic]

I am disappointed in Iger. It's a copout. You made a COMMITMENT, follow through or admit you are a quitter.

 

[dlavender]

I think your numbers are off. More people than that would know.

But even assuming your numbers are exactly correct, 6 & 7 are both greater than zero. That's a negative effect.

(And that's after the original number of people he ticked off by JOINING in the first place!)

Maybe, but I still have 100% doubt that anyone booking a vacation thinks about his time on this counsel.

I do think you are right in the sense that CEO's and public faces of companies need to be careful in their actions because they can have negative financial ramifications.

I just don't think this is a scenario that WDW shareholders should be concerned about.

ETA: Are you going to stop going because of this?