I Was Totally Wrong

[DancingBear]

One question, how do you or any of the other so called experts in this thread know for a fact what is in the best long term interest of Disney?

Of course not. Nobody does, not Bob Iger, or Steve Jobs, or A-V. Does that mean we shouldn't study up, think about and discuss those issues?

 

[DancingBear]

If a business is going to stay in business for the long term, they must continue to change how they do business. Disney is no different. Not all business decisions are sound, and Disney executives make mistakes just like everyone else. Bottom line is this. Disney is still operating, and until it folds or is bought out, your thoughts are just that, your thoughts. Only time will tell. And more than likely you and I will not be around to see what the results will be. One other thought. Disney will more than likely not be around forever, but when will it end, and why? Not even you can predict that. JMO

Does this post contribute anything to this discussion? Is it JYO that we can't discuss these things until Disney folds or (as almost happened in 1984 and more recently with Comcast) is bought out? Should all of the Wall Street analysts who follow Disney just stop?

Also, the discussion here largely is not about whether Disney can survive as just another big media company, but whether Disney can be a meaningful creative force in family entertainment.

 

[crusader]

But a lot of people are here because they're interested in the "behind the scenes" of the company - the real news and rumors. We're interested in the process that makes good or bad shows; we don't view "Disney" as a buffet where we only pick out the tasty bits.

or maybe you guys are just bored.

Funny - I've waded through pages of nonsense and can't find Pirate anywhere anymore!

I've got a few questions - if the internal dynamics of the corporate structure are so flawed beyond contention, how did ABC manage to turn on a dime?

And how come you can't book a deluxe room anywhere on property next week?

And why did Pixar fold????

And how does every darn character breakfast and the whoop de doo review continue to sell out over and over and over!

I think Disney knows how to successfully rule its' industry. Like it or not, that market - riddled with cheap commercialization - is thriving because the general public repeatedly purchases and consumes it on a worldwide scale.

 

[DisneyKidds]

Bottom line is this. Disney is still operating, and until it folds or is bought out, your thoughts are just that, your thoughts.

Thoughts are all any of us have here. Some thoughts focus on the surface (i.e. Disney is still operating, therefore everything must be fine.), while some probe a little deeper (i.e. Is allowing Disney Feature Animation to become a shell of what it once was likely to hurt Disney in the future?).

Of course the Disney ship isn't going to sink tomorrow, or the next day, or next year, or next decade. As Crusader says.....

Disney knows how to successfully rule its' industry.

....which I think they do. However, that was never enough in the past. In the past they were truely leaders in their industry, to the point of creating an industry unto themselves. And by leaders here I don't mean top dog, first place in the quarterly financials, highest theme park attendance, etc. All of that just puts them in the class of being better than the next guy, but should that be good enough? By leaders I mean forging ahead in new techniques of animation that nobody else thought of. Leaders in theme park, attraction and resort design. Stuff like that. Yes, Disney currently rules their industry, but are they truely leading it anywhere, innovating anything, developing animation and entertainment on the cutting edge?

Be it the sad sack state of affairs of Disney animation, or the demise of Imagineering, or the dilution of resources brought about by sprawl of the Disney mega-media goliath.....there are a lot of things that keeping Dinsey from being what it might have been, some say should have been. Disney should pay heed to what Mufasa said to Simba......."You are more than what you have become."

That is what the debate should be about. Not whether Disney is still operating and turning a profit. Not whether Disney is ruling their industry. But is Disney being the leader they once were, the leader they were bred to be, the leader that will develop the things that will allow them to be as successful over the next 50 years as they have been over the last 50 years.

 

[DancingBear]

And why did Pixar fold????

Surely you're not serious. Jobs (and the other shareholders) get billions, Jobs gets a seat on the board, and Pixar execs demand and get primo positions at Disney, and that equals Pixar folds?

As for the rest of your list, so what? Should we make a competing list of Disney Studios Paris, California Adventure, the Alamo, etc.?

 

[crusader]

Surely you're not serious. Jobs (and the other shareholders) get billions, Jobs gets a seat on the board, and Pixar execs demand and get primo positions at Disney, and that equals Pixar folds?

Well it's nice to finally hear whom Disney really has holding those primo positions. And I thought it was just a bunch of mindless suits.

But is Disney being the leader they once were, the leader they were bred to be, the leader that will develop the things that will allow them to be as successful over the next 50 years as they have been over the last 50 years.

Yes.

They continue to demonstrate leadership ability - leadership capability - industry adaptability - and long-term commitment. That includes change. That is why they are one of the VERY FEW publicly held organizations bred 50 years ago still independent today.

What I'd like to know is, if Walt's formula really hasn't been practiced for over the past twenty-five years, what is the secret to this company sustaining itself as an industry leader today?

 

[Another Voice]

Like it or not, that market - riddled with cheap commercialization - is thriving because the general public repeatedly purchases and consumes it on a worldwide scale.

Which is the world of animation in the 1920s - cheap gag reals filled with simple sight gags and the lowest of low brow humor. Disney changed that - he gave animation a voice, he gave it color, he gave it story. And that is why generations have grown up watching Snow White while RKO, MGM, Universal, Columbia and all the others disappeared or were swallowed up.

And its the world of amusement parks in the 1950s - cheap run down lots crammed full of miserable arcade rides. Disney changed that too by turning the parks into stories-in-the-round. And now generations flocked to Disneyland while Coney Island rusts on the shore.

Wave your corporate pom-poms as much as you wish. Pretend that "better than everyone else" is the same as "good". Comfort yourself by saying "things could be worse".

You measure "success" on the cheapest and most narrow scale possible. There are others that want more - or at least what Disney used to deliver as a matter of routine.

what is the secret to this company sustaining itself as an industry leader today?

By stripmining the past

Disneyland brings in the crowd - not California Adventure
Imgaine the crowd Animal Kingdom would draw on International drive instead of a bus ride from Epcot.
The DVD stores are filled with Snow White and Dumbo - not Hot Chicks and Pearl Harbor.

Faux Disney exists only because it's been sucking the life out of past accomplishment.

 

[Peter Pirate 2]

Just kind of feels like we're arguing different topics half the time.

I'll go back to me (and AV's quote again). I was always expecting (hoping) Disney was going at some point step up and once again be the Disney of old. I thought they'd fine tune the operation, do their cost cutting, etc. and eventually see that while manipulation internally and selling crap externally (brand exploitation) will work for awhile it can't be a good long term strategic plan (and don't everyone get all upset because I said "crap"...I mean it generally, not all inclusively). I had more confidence in Eisner (although I know that ticks off AV) than Iger at this point because Eisner at least thought he was creative. Iger knows he's not and his decisions thus far have been of the standard 'business' variety. This doesn't bode well for the creative side, IMO.

I look at the theme parks and what animation was for Disney (and now Pixar) and see truly great things. Imagine if Disney was so creative with ABC? Maybe instead of turning a profit they could turn the industry upside down!

ESPN? Imagine if they used their clout to make things better in sports? What if they really took on the NCAA and its archaic ways? What if they tired of TO's antics and just quit talking about him unless he actually did something. What if they made it NOT alright to break major records that wouldn't have been broken without 'juice'? They could be a force beyond scores and highlights, but it seems easy profits through pandering is easier.

Another point I will rehash is the standard that we expect from Disney. I agree that Disney is the leader in their industry but I agree with Matt in asking how are they leading? Is it that they are just better than the competetion or are they leading by innovation? I believe it's the former and that's just not the Disney way. The competetion shouldn't even be a blimp on their rader, IMO.

What about exceeding guests expectations? Are they doing this? I know many newbies and non disneyphiles are still "wowed" by what they do. Are we dinosaurs wrong in lamenting the loss of "show" as we knew it? The loss of creativity for creativities sake because profit motives point another direction?

Disney is still Disney, especially the Parks. Great things have been added along with duds but is the experimentation, the envelope pushing really happening? It seems like M:S was in this realm but it fell so short with the masses. Was it the cutbacks that hamstrung it?

We all can agree that we love Disney for the escape it allows us but we just can't agree on where they should go from here, I guess.

 

[DisneyKidds]

Yes.

They continue to demonstrate leadership ability - leadership capability - industry adaptability - and long-term commitment. That includes change. That is why they are one of the VERY FEW publicly held organizations bred 50 years ago still independent today.

What I'd like to know is, if Walt's formula really hasn't been practiced for over the past twenty-five years, what is the secret to this company sustaining itself as an industry leader today?

Uhh-uh, you aren't going to get off easy with a quick yes followed by hollow statement and a quick turn of the question back on me. Nice try, though.

Please give some examples things that demponstrate leadership ability, creativity, adaptability...and most of all long term committment. And not examples of decisions that any well educated suit could make. Where are the examples of true innovation. What have they done to assure that Disney will do more than just continue to operate at a profit in the future, as I don't believe that is enough.

I'll tell you one of my biggest problems with Disney. Animation. That is where it all started. That is what everything was built upon. Disney hasn't created a film in 4 years that has netted any real enduring characters, and that was marginal at Lilo & Stitch. You really have to go back more than 10 years to hit a film that has made a lasting impression the likes of Snow White, et. al. Now the capabilites of Feature Animation have been decimated. Disney seems to have no interest in the next great breakthrough in animated films. All that leads to the answer to your question which AV already provided. They have survived by relying on that which was created in the past. But how long can they, should they, do that.

 

[MJMcBride]

ESPN? Imagine if they used their clout to make things better in sports? What if they really took on the NCAA and its archaic ways?

Absolutely nothing would happen. There is just little chance ABC could anything about the NCAA or TO even if they wanted to. Thats wishfull thinking to nth power.

 

[crusader]

Faux Disney exists only because it's been sucking the life out of past accomplishment

Not true. ABC is on top because of today's programming. Pirates broke records having been produced in today's motion picture industry. Disney on Broadway is completely attributable to today's art in theatre. The cruise lines aren't remotely connected to any past business segment of Disney.

Not to mention the weddings; conventions; timeshare; group divisions and great shows and restaurants throughout the parks and resorts.

The list goes on.

Please give some examples things that demponstrate leadership ability, creativity, adaptability...and most of all long term committment.

hopefully I just did.

I get tired of hearing about the lack of innovation while Walt gets a complete pass for building the Magic Kingdom in the first place. I've grown tired of being told the business model doesn't work. That's a crock!

Yes, animation took a backseat while the company was content to outsource to Pixar. So what? Show me how this has hurt the company in any way right now.

One could counterargue that the strategic plan to own the competitor's product outright which put Pixar in play was genius. It enabled the company to restructure that long-term investment as a full purchase.

The difference is their animation investment wasn't in-house but again, so what?

The bottom line is - they own everything. So, they have zero problems with animation today. Doesn't Disney now have the absolute best talent the industry has to offer? Geez. How the heck did that happen?

Pirate - I hear you with respect to ESPN. But we're not going to get away from the tabloid mentality driving our media airwaves and sports is no exception. If Disney tries to set an example - they lose their market share.

What about exceeding guests expectations? Are they doing this? I know many newbies and non disneyphiles are still "wowed" by what they do. Are we dinosaurs wrong in lamenting the loss of "show" as we knew it? The loss of creativity for creativities sake because profit motives point another direction?

Tough question. The bar is pretty high for long time patrons. Exceeding it becomes extremely judgemental. I don't believe the company should focus on what you or I personally expect. They have to appeal to the masses.

In the 70's all it took was Space Mountain, Pirates and the Haunted Mansion to forgive attractions like 20,000 leagues and Snow White. Today - that philosophy continues to hold true. Tower of Terror; Turtle Talk; Soarin and Festival of the Lion King are prime examples of Disney generating enough of a wow factor to keep the audience begging for more.

 

[DancingBear]

Yes, animation took a backseat while the company was content to outsource to Pixar. So what? Show me how this has hurt the company in any way right now.

Disney's out $7.4 billion.

We're all hopeful that Lasseter and Catmull will be able to turn around Disney animation. If they do, it'll be because they are bringing to Disney exactly the philosophy that you are excoriating--bringing the focus on cultivating creativity. If they can't, it'll likely be because the entrenched empty suit barriers which Eisner built up chase the creators away again.

One could counterargue that the strategic plan to own the competitor's product outright which put Pixar in play was genius. It enabled the company to restructure that long-term investment as a full purchase.

Yeah. It takes real genius to exchange a $1 billion long-term investment for a $7 billion acquisition.

Seriously, I've argued before that the Pixar co-Production Agreement could have been played to great advantage. Allow Pixar to be your production arm while the competitive technologies advanced, then build up your own creative team so you didn't need Pixar when the Production Agreement expired. That ain't what happened, eh?

 

[Another Voice]

Tower of Terror; Turtle Talk; Soarin and Festival of the Lion King are prime examples of Disney generating enough of a wow factor to keep the audience begging for more.

Exactly - look at the hordes of people lined up outside California Adventure to see 'Soaring' and 'Tower' and 'Turtle Talk' and the Pixar Parade (okay, we don't have 'Lion King', but it's about the same thing).

Notice the thoudsands of wow'd faces - all anxious to explore the glories and and wonders that Disney is giving them. Listen to the traffic reports every morning about all the people clammoring to get into the park that offers all the wonders you describe!!

Ah...what...oh - they want to into Disneyland? The run down park that has all those stupid and lame rides like 'Jungle Cruise' and 'Snow White'. What - don't the masses KNOW that Disney makes the best. Why are they wasting their time on that cr*p!?!

THEY SHOULD BE ON THEIR KNEES BEGGING FOR MORE 'STITCH'!!! THEY'RE JUST STUPID I TELL YOU - STUPID GUESTS THAT DON'T GET IT!

 

[rantnnravin]

What I'd like to know is, if Walt's formula really hasn't been practiced for over the past twenty-five years, what is the secret to this company sustaining itself as an industry leader today?

they are sustaining themselves on the emotional investment of those who remember what the business model of the past was able to produce.
Mickey is still popular not because of mass merchandising, but because of those of us who remember sitting in front of our TVs watching him and Uncle Walt talke about the great things that were being imagined and made reality.
Those of us who remember the Disney "brand" as a symbol of outstanding quality and commitment to excellence in production are disappointed when the "blow up princess pool" that we buy for our child is riddled with holes right out of the box. The Disney name brings with it certain expectations of quality and innovation to use "old timers". We expect greatness beyond simply being better than the guy down I-Drive. New experiences that haven't been considered before. A "show". Tell me walking through the backstage area to get to/from Fantasmic brings the same warm fuzzies that walking down main street brings? Walt's business model would NEVER have allowed that! I don't want to see the dumpsters. I don't want to see a CM grumbling about "policies" "procedures" and "poor paychecks" I want to see people who truly enjoy working for the company with Walt's ideals.

And, POC the movie would never have been made without POC the ride. How is that not sucking the life out of past accomplishments?
How is building a boat innovative? Cruises already existed before DCL. Feature length animation did not exist before Snow White.
How is buying an established media outlet innovative? What has the Disney Company done to make the network a family-friendly, trend-setting entertainment outlet? I wouldn't consider "The Bachelor" a cutting-edge show (it's been done -- ever seen elimidate?) and we won't even go into how UN family-friendly the programming is - how can you expect to generate loyalty if the younger generation can't watch the channel?
I remember watching the Mickey Mouse Club and The Wonderful World of Disney. Will my 7 year old child develop the same fond memories of desperate housewives?
The problem is that what may prove profitable in the short term will not generate the same type of loyalty the iconic Disney brand that Walt created has. The well will run-dry, my friends. When those who remember Walt are but a memory themselves, who will be there to tell the younger generations who Mickey is?

 

[crusader]

Ah...what...oh - they want to into Disneyland? The run down park that has all those stupid and lame rides like 'Jungle Cruise' and 'Snow White'. What - don't the masses KNOW that Disney makes the best. Why are they wasting their time on that cr*p!?!

Voice - you need to head East. CA doesn't make the Disney Corporation a complete failed enterprise. But I do admire your persistence.

they are sustaining themselves on the emotional investment of those who remember what the business model of the past was able to produce.

What?

 

[crusader]

deleted

 

[DisneyKidds]

they are sustaining themselves on the emotional investment of those who remember what the business model of the past was able to produce.

This is somewhat true, but a difficult argument to make to the crusaders of the World. Afterall, there are still millions upon millions of new visitors coming every year. And, warts and all, the Disney experience is a wonderful one. If one doesn't know how things were they wouldn't even be aware of many of the warts. The parks are great, the entertainment wonderful, etc., etc. However, something is missing, and it relates to what you mention above. I don't believe the Disney of today is creating a new generation that has that same emotional attachment as those of us who remember the magic as it was developed in the past. The new "classic" rides aren't there, the new characters for people to fall in love with aren't there. Disney isn't seen today the same way it was back in the 70's, now being a somewhat colder corporate media giant that people don't fall in love with the same way. While none of that is going to put Disney out of business, that loss of emotional attachment will limit Disney in the future, IMHO.

 

[raidermatt]

While none of that is going to put Disney out of business, that loss of emotional attachment will limit Disney in the future, IMHO.

I agree, except to say that it limits them now, and has for years. The challenge is being able to look beyond what WAS accomplished and at the very least understand how much more COULD, and SHOULD have been accomplished.

 

[MJMcBride]

I can't believe I'm defending you yahoos.

http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=1268140

 

[BRERALEX]

Perhaps you too will come to the dark side of the force. Search your feelings....you know it be true.