edcrbnsoul
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2003
- Messages
- 7,554
I found this story funny mostly because of the final quote, Mike where you in Philadelphia last year?
GEORGETOWN, Del. (Reuters) - Walt Disney Co. Chief Executive Michael Eisner on Tuesday described a year in which his main job was to control Michael Ovitz, the company's president who aggravated other staff, became depressed and finally refused to leave the company.
Eisner used his second day of testimony in a shareholder court case over Ovitz's $140 million severance package to strike at the shortcomings of a president who lasted just 14 months with the company.
Ovitz, he said, was unable to adjust to Disney's corporate culture, which was far different from the workings of the talent agency Ovitz had founded, Creative Artists Agency, Eisner said.
"He seemed to be unfocused," Eisner told the court. "He also came in famous. Everyone expected him to hit it out of the park every time he came to bat. But it wasn't the same park. I had sympathy for him. I still do."
What's more, Eisner said, other senior executives resented Ovitz, once dubbed The Most Powerful Man in Hollywood.
"He started to rub people the wrong way," Eisner said. "He was controversial and it got worse as things went on."
One instance cited by Eisner was a corporate retreat at Florida's Walt Disney World in January 1996, just months after Ovitz had been hired as president.
At the retreat, there were "embarrassing, difficult moments that became the beginning of a cycle," he said.
"We'd all take a bus and he had a limousine, a special driver," Eisner recalled. "Everybody had a walkie-talkie -- and you heard walkie-talkies around this 30,000 acres saying, 'Who was this guy and why was he demanding this?"'
Eisner said: "The perception was that Michael Ovitz was a little elitist for the egalitarian Walt Disney World employees in Florida. It was a bad vibe, let's put it that way."
Relations between Ovitz and Disney deteriorated from there. Eisner said the president he hired in 1995 began going behind the backs of other executives to strike deals; complained about not being top dog; and chased after fruitless deals.
Managing Ovitz soon became a full time job, said Eisner, testifying in the fifth week of a shareholder lawsuit that charges that the board and Eisner should have fired Ovitz rather than allow him to leave the company with a no-fault termination and the severance package.
Eight months into his job as president, "Michael Ovitz was aggravating a lot of employees," Eisner said. "Every day I was trying to manage Michael Ovitz. I did little else."
Meanwhile, Eisner took pains to distance himself from memos he'd written that showed he harbored concerns about Ovitz much earlier -- in the days immediately after he was hired.
He called his statements in those memos "silly," saying he had exaggerated.
But Eisner stuck by some of the writing in those memos, including one passage in which he said that if he were to be hit by a bus he did not want Ovitz running the company.
"I just thought I had to inform somebody that this cannot be my replacement."
Yet firing Ovitz for cause -- as shareholders say he should have -- was out of the question, the chief executive said.
"I checked with almost anyone I could find that had a legal degree and there was just no light in that possibility. That was a dead end from day one."
Still, Eisner said: "I didn't think he had done the job that would warrant that payment. It was aggravating, and annoying and upsetting."
Convincing Ovitz that he needed to depart the company was another battle, according to the testimony. In a series of conversations that Eisner described as "unimaginable," he said Ovitz repeatedly refused to acknowledge it was time to leave.
"If someone ever said to me they didn't want me around, I would be out of there after half of the sentence," he said. "I was talking to Michael Ovitz about him leaving and he was acting as if I was talking about the weather."
GEORGETOWN, Del. (Reuters) - Walt Disney Co. Chief Executive Michael Eisner on Tuesday described a year in which his main job was to control Michael Ovitz, the company's president who aggravated other staff, became depressed and finally refused to leave the company.
Eisner used his second day of testimony in a shareholder court case over Ovitz's $140 million severance package to strike at the shortcomings of a president who lasted just 14 months with the company.
Ovitz, he said, was unable to adjust to Disney's corporate culture, which was far different from the workings of the talent agency Ovitz had founded, Creative Artists Agency, Eisner said.
"He seemed to be unfocused," Eisner told the court. "He also came in famous. Everyone expected him to hit it out of the park every time he came to bat. But it wasn't the same park. I had sympathy for him. I still do."
What's more, Eisner said, other senior executives resented Ovitz, once dubbed The Most Powerful Man in Hollywood.
"He started to rub people the wrong way," Eisner said. "He was controversial and it got worse as things went on."
One instance cited by Eisner was a corporate retreat at Florida's Walt Disney World in January 1996, just months after Ovitz had been hired as president.
At the retreat, there were "embarrassing, difficult moments that became the beginning of a cycle," he said.
"We'd all take a bus and he had a limousine, a special driver," Eisner recalled. "Everybody had a walkie-talkie -- and you heard walkie-talkies around this 30,000 acres saying, 'Who was this guy and why was he demanding this?"'
Eisner said: "The perception was that Michael Ovitz was a little elitist for the egalitarian Walt Disney World employees in Florida. It was a bad vibe, let's put it that way."
Relations between Ovitz and Disney deteriorated from there. Eisner said the president he hired in 1995 began going behind the backs of other executives to strike deals; complained about not being top dog; and chased after fruitless deals.
Managing Ovitz soon became a full time job, said Eisner, testifying in the fifth week of a shareholder lawsuit that charges that the board and Eisner should have fired Ovitz rather than allow him to leave the company with a no-fault termination and the severance package.
Eight months into his job as president, "Michael Ovitz was aggravating a lot of employees," Eisner said. "Every day I was trying to manage Michael Ovitz. I did little else."
Meanwhile, Eisner took pains to distance himself from memos he'd written that showed he harbored concerns about Ovitz much earlier -- in the days immediately after he was hired.
He called his statements in those memos "silly," saying he had exaggerated.
But Eisner stuck by some of the writing in those memos, including one passage in which he said that if he were to be hit by a bus he did not want Ovitz running the company.
"I just thought I had to inform somebody that this cannot be my replacement."
Yet firing Ovitz for cause -- as shareholders say he should have -- was out of the question, the chief executive said.
"I checked with almost anyone I could find that had a legal degree and there was just no light in that possibility. That was a dead end from day one."
Still, Eisner said: "I didn't think he had done the job that would warrant that payment. It was aggravating, and annoying and upsetting."
Convincing Ovitz that he needed to depart the company was another battle, according to the testimony. In a series of conversations that Eisner described as "unimaginable," he said Ovitz repeatedly refused to acknowledge it was time to leave.
"If someone ever said to me they didn't want me around, I would be out of there after half of the sentence," he said. "I was talking to Michael Ovitz about him leaving and he was acting as if I was talking about the weather."
