Disney cutbacks...

[Mouseaholic!!!]

I'd rather they cut Fantasmic! than my job

Sorry.

Oh boy, I agree 1,000% - DH is a castmember and the staffing cuts have been brutal where he works.

Good luck to you!

 

[lugnut33]

You're missing the point. The impact of violating their fiduciary responsibility to investors is much more immediate and catastrophic. Just look back at the last 25 years, how many times they've ebbed and flowed with regard to operations, but they've never ignored the investor.

I think some folks think the people who run companies are idiots. Generally, they're not!

yes, but is fiduciary responsibility only about generating maximum profits for the shareholders? Is that the only reason a business exists? Is shareholder value > customer happiness?

Mouseaholic brings up a good point. Let's say the parks are packed to the gills this summer, which is great for shareholder value. Also great for shareholder value is having those packed parks with little to no cast members because you save a ton on employee expenses. Also, why it's packed be sure to cut to the barebones all the extra magic services people expect. Yup, the shareholder is going to do great.

However, what happens in this scenario when the customer at the park does not feel they are getting value for what the are paying? What happens when a Magic Kingdom experience is no better than a Six Flags experience? The custome goes away and now Disney will be forced to cut even more for shareholder value. What kind of fiduciary responsibility is there when you have customers that might not come back?

And yes, some CEO's are bliterhing idiots. Not saying Iger is one of them, but we need to be careful.

 

[DisFlan]

I'd rather see them cut back whatever they can (F!, Wishes, whatever) if it keeps people in jobs. But what's more likely to happen is the more things they scale back on, the fewer people they'll need. I'm sure they're trying to hit a middle ground - and trying not to overly alienate guests in the process. Guests who are still paying as much for a ticket as they did when everything was running at full tilt. That's a fine line to walk.

DisFlan

 

[doubletrouble_vb]

Being a shareholder and having seen my value get cut in half since August I have to say my expectation is for the company to make money so they can keep paying my dividend.

In order to keep me happy the company has to strike a balance between providing services that keep enough (enough not all) customers coming back and bleeding so much cash that my investment gets cut in half yet again or goes to zero. The company is there to provide me a return...and it does this by providing customers a decent vacation. It need not provide them a wonderful magical vacation.

I'm a lucky shareholder I'm still in positive territory on my investment. Most people who purchased post 9/11 aren't.

 

[doubletrouble_vb]

yes, but is fiduciary responsibility only about generating maximum profits for the shareholders? Is that the only reason a business exists? Is shareholder value > customer happiness?

YES ...if an unhappy customer is still a customer

 

[bicker]

yes, but is fiduciary responsibility only about generating maximum profits for the shareholders?

By law, unless the corporate charter explicitly says otherwise, directors of corporations are not allow to have decisions made based on any considerations other that (1) what's legal, and (2) what's best for the owners of the company.

Violate #1, and you'll face criminal prosecution. Violate #2, and you'll face civil lawsuit.

Violate #1, and you could lose your personal freedom. Violate #2, and you actually could lose your personal assets.

 

[lugnut33]

Being a shareholder and having seen my value get cut in half since August I have to say my expectation is for the company to make money so they can keep paying my dividend.

In order to keep me happy the company has to strike a balance between providing services that keep enough (enough not all) customers coming back and bleeding so much cash that my investment gets cut in half yet again or goes to zero. The company is there to provide me a return...and it does this by providing customers a decent vacation. It need not provide them a wonderful magical vacation.

I'm a lucky shareholder I'm still in positive territory on my investment. Most people who purchased post 9/11 aren't.

If people don't come to Disney parks how's your investment then? Look at K-Mart as a great example of what can happen when you lose customers. Sure, there were lots of shareholders, but what did that matter in the end?

 

[lugnut33]

By law, unless the corporate charter explicitly says otherwise, directors of corporations are not allow to have decisions made based on any considerations other that (1) what's legal, and (2) what's best for the owners of the company.

Violate #1, and you'll face criminal prosecution. Violate #2, and you'll face civil lawsuit.

Violate #1, and you could lose your personal freedom. Violate #2, and you actually could lose your personal assets.

So running a business into the ground might be the best option. Giving customers less for their money is a good thing. Using your logic a company should never re-invest in the company or outlay money for better customer satisfaction. Customer satisfaction costs money and that is not what's best for the owners of the company.

Look, I don't think I'm saying there should be no cuts, what I'm saying is they are taking them too far and that will directly affect future business.

I'm sorry, your line of thought is not registering with me.

 

[Stittsville]

The company is there to provide me a return...and it does this by providing customers a decent vacation. It need not provide them a wonderful magical vacation.

Sorry, this is just plain wrong. Why do you think WDW attracts so many long-term customers. It's by giving them a "wonderful magical vacation". They can get a "decent" vacation anywhere.

 

[Stittsville]

By law, unless the corporate charter explicitly says otherwise, directors of corporations are not allow to have decisions made based on any considerations other that (1) what's legal, and (2) what's best for the owners of the company.

Violate #1, and you'll face criminal prosecution. Violate #2, and you'll face civil lawsuit.

Violate #1, and you could lose your personal freedom. Violate #2, and you actually could lose your personal assets.

You cannot sue for your #2, because it is far too vague. What's best, short-term gain? Long-term gain?

 

[Peter Pirate 2]

Looking at Disney and actually most companies, I am appalled that they did not / do not anticipate hard times. Did they (Disney) think double digit growth could go on forever?

Disney, as large as they are, still include many niche industries at their core. Why should the movie division struggle right now? Maybe blockbusters aren't the way to go but a good story done well will still get people in the theatres. Why should ABC struggle? Are people turning off their tv's? Are advertisors not advertising? And about the Parks, yes slow times can be expected here but shouldn't they be able to look upon slow times to improve and prepare for the future boom times? But sadly the greedy bassfishermen had NO RESPONSE for hard times. Think of the gobs of loyalty they would garner from their CM's if they were still able to take care of them even during hard times??? The future would sure like bright in that department wouldn't it? Yeah Iger and Eisner before him really earned their money. LOL.

Saying they have to serve their master, fiduciary responsibility, just doesn't cut it. How can this Board of Directors be considered fiscally responsible when they allowed themselves to be in such desperate straits so soon into a recession?

When we were kids we were ALWAYS taught to 'save for a rainy day.' Guess these clowns and virtually all of the Country's financial muckity mucks thought it more prudent to pile up those quarterly numbers over sound strategic planning.

I'm very happy I remembered my parents teaching me to look at the big picture.

 

[lugnut33]

Sorry, this is just plain wrong. Why do you think WDW attracts so many long-term customers. It's by giving them a "wonderful magical vacation". They can get a "decent" vacation anywhere.

Yup, I can get a decent vacation at any resort in Wisconsin, so why do I go to Disney and spend a lot lot more money?

 

[Mouseaholic!!!]

Yup, I can get a decent vacation at any resort in Wisconsin, so why do I go to Disney and spend a lot lot more money?

My worry for Disney is too many of us will realize we can go on a truly FABULOUS vacation for much less elsewhere.

DH and I spent Valentines weekend on the concierge floor of the Hamilton in downtown Washington, DC....for pennies of a Disney vacation. Ok, we used Holiday Inn reward points and were upgraded to the conceirge floor....but still....it was a GREAT long weekend and soooooooooo much more affordable...AND we had a wonderful time.

We used to spend long weekends at WDW but when it began to look shabby around the edges, we discovered we could also vacation elsewhere for much less $$ ..... see more things and still have unforgetable memories. Our country is a WONDERFUL place to visit and the travel deals out there are out of this world now!

Our next trip will be a mountain cabin steps away from Shenandoah National Park. We will fill up the car...grab the dog and head out. Hiking, museums, Luray Caverns, Skyline drive, wildlife, great books and music, time to read and....nothing matches Mother Nature's splendor.....and a fraction of a Disney trip.

Once again, I have already taken a 25% paycut and we are facing another at my company. My DH is a castmember in NYC....how safe is HIS job right now.

We travel now - "pennies on the Disney dollar" and have a great time.

What will happen to Disney if too many of us discover this?

 

[bicker]

So running a business into the ground might be the best option.

That's a Straw Man. There is nothing here about "running a business into the ground".

Giving customers less for their money is a good thing.

No one has suggested that either.

Using your logic a company should never re-invest in the company or outlay money for better customer satisfaction.

No, that has nothing to do with what I wrote.
Please stick to the topic. Thanks.

I'm sorry, your line of thought is not registering with me.

With respect, that's because you've decided to infer something utterly unrelated to what I wrote.

 

[bicker]

You cannot sue for your #2, because it is far too vague. What's best, short-term gain? Long-term gain?

This will come as news to the myriad law firms that make loads of money on shareholder lawsuits.

 

[bicker]

My worry for Disney is too many of us will realize we can go on a truly FABULOUS vacation for much less elsewhere.

Folks have been saying the same thing, online, for over twenty years. Hasn't happened yet.

 

[jimmymac]

]Being a shareholder and having seen my value get cut in half since August I have to say my expectation is for the company to make money so they can keep paying my dividend. [/COLOR]
In order to keep me happy the company has to strike a balance between providing services that keep enough (enough not all) customers coming back and bleeding so much cash that my investment gets cut in half yet again or goes to zero. The company is there to provide me a return...and it does this by providing customers a decent vacation. It need not provide them a wonderful magical vacation.

Dickens' Blue Period still lives. Screw humanity - corporate profits trumps all

The differerence between Disney and other companies used to that this was not their corporate strategy. Disney grew generations of uber loyal fans who saw Disney as a link to their childhood and all the magic of being a kid. The Disney treatment of guests (as we used to be) instead of customers (which we are now) had us coming back again and again. Now, Disney is sacrificing its unique heritage and brand name on the altar of cost cutting and customer return. Shame on them.

Oh, by the way. I am also a Disney stockholder. And a castmember. I used to be proud of that

 

[jfinke]

Folks have been saying the same thing, online, for over twenty years. Hasn't happened yet.

We also take cruises. We would probably do more if we weren't DVC members. However, if you go to someplace like cruisecritic.com, you will see the same complaints about the cruise industry. Things just aren't like they were back in "the good old days".

I am trying to figure out what vacation experience is getting better because everything I seem to do people complain about them getting worse.

 

[Mouseaholic!!!]

Folks have been saying the same thing, online, for over twenty years. Hasn't happened yet.

A tidal wave begins slowly too.

I was once a Rose-Colored Glasses Disney Cool Aid freak. We each have our moment when the bubble bursts and reality steps in. My DH was about a year behind me when we stayed at the Beach Club and there were so many maintenance problems you couldn't help but notice....like when he crashed to the floor after sitting in our broken balcony chair.....that was never replaced in our 10-day stay.

We all have our moment when we stop drinking the Cool Aid.

I have a friend....once more rabid than myself at my most rabid Disney times. He now owns too much DVC. He is giving us DVC points for our birthdays this fall to stay at the Grand Cali. This friend used to run out of his points before the year was over....banked some last year.

Don't get me wrong, my DH and I can go to Disney and we still find magic....because our magic now is sharing together...both the good AND the bad.

At the moment, the cutbacks, menus and food and reduced maintenance is simply too much for us. We will do one DL trip this year...forgo WDW all together (that's the first time in 14 years for me) and take our travel dollars somewhere else. Hey - we have CASTMEMBER travel dollars and free tickets and we are taking our travel dollars elsewhere.

Bob Iger is taking the company - all cost centers - to a place we are not comfotable with. SURE the company MUST make $$$. The last few years, however, we have watched the grownups strip every penny of profit and not maintain the service necessary.

Ok, the "cliff notes" bottom line of this ramble is ....... everyone - EVERYONE has their breaking point where reality comes crashing in and you can no longer wear the Rose Colored glasses....no matter how hard you try to keep them on your nose.

I was not uncommon for me to be at WDW 4 or 5 times in a year. This year....I'm passing it alltogether. I'm not alone and the number will grow if Bob Iger doesn't learn to respect what made Disney parks magical.

 

[lugnut33]

Folks have been saying the same thing, online, for over twenty years. Hasn't happened yet.

In the 50's America's #1 beer maker Blatz saw a never ending stream of profits in their beer, what happened to them?

Pabst Blue Ribbon was once the #1 selling beer in America. How'd that turn out for them.

In the 70's there were over 40 snomobile manufacturers in the US. Now there are 5 worldwide.

K-Mart used to be the #1 retailer in the US.

How many aircraft manufacturers are left?

Wasn't Banff supposed to be a great airline? What about PanAm?

Let's look at General Motors today, how are they surviving?

The list goes on and on. Sometimes the consumer is right no matter what the brilliant CEO's and shareholders say about a company. Investor value is zero without paying customers.

I'm not saying that Disney is going bye bye tomorrow, but the above companies should be a warning to Disney that there is more to it than just being there for shareholder value.