If Florida repeals "The Reedy Creek Improvement Charter", how does that change Disney going forward?

[snappy]

Shares are down 26.5% YTD.

Yikes!

 

[jjb1974]

You didn’t answer the question. Nice dodge.

I’m not your professor, and the answer is right there. Poor retort. You’re swinging and missing a lot here champ.

 

[brightlined]

Shares are down 26.5% YTD.

No - they're down that in the last year, not YTD. And most of that happened prior to December 2021.

They're down 11% YTD.

They're actually up slightly since Chapek came out against the bill on March 9th.

In other words, this isn't really relevant to the topic of the thread.

 

[jjb1974]

Give me a tax break for not sending my kids to public school and I’ll stop complaining.

I don’t drive on 99% of the roads, yet happily pay taxes that upkeep all of them.

 

[jerry557]

100%. And, honestly, I blame Chapek more than anything. Not that it necessarily would have gone perfectly under Iger, but Iger has always shown a gift for reading the room and quietly making things happen. Chapek does not have anything close to that skill.

What I think would have happened under Iger - as soon as this bill came up, I think Iger would have quietly moved behind the scenes and talked to Desantis and other representatives to try and sway them against it. Whether or not it would have worked is anyone's guess - but there were certainly a few amendments (including one put forward by a Republican representative) that might have gotten more play if someone more politically-minded had been working the room. (The best time to sway things is before it gets passed.) If that failed, I think Iger would have started acting more publicly - but, again, long before it was clear that Desantis would sign it.

Chapek, on the other hand, decided to "stay neutral". Politically speaking, neutrality is usually the worst move you can possibly make. For all intents and purposes, it's a support for whatever it is (since you're not actively against it). The added bonus is that you end up looking like a coward.

By the time the employees pointed out that "neutrality" was bullsh*t, there really wasn't another move for Chapek to make. The bill was already destined to be signed. Trying to use public force to get Desantis to veto it wouldn't work - he just would have looked weak if he'd done it. (Kemp's veto in Georgia was comparatively quiet - to the point that people don't remember it even happened.) It was easier at that point for Desantis and Republicans to make Disney part of the "woke".

Just one more notch in Chapek's cluelessness. Disney really can't do anything about it now, especially now that they've made their position public. Chapek managed to piss everyone off - employees, shareholders, and the state government. That feels like a unusual gift in its own right.

Disney has for decades had a lot of sway in the legislature. The company pays literally dozens of lobbyists. Whatever Disney wants from Tallahassee, it gets. And it still did have heavy sway. But like any company, it focuses primarily on legislation that effects the company's main interests. For example, this year the hotel anti-trafficking bill is the one bill Disney wanted to kill....and it did. The parental rights bill, didn't have anything to do with Disney. This was a bill focused on education of K to 3rd graders. Disney is an entertainment and tourism company that doesn't really pay much attention to the specifics of a state's education programs. So Disney's lobbyists paid no attention to this bill. Why would they?

THEN...a few cast members got angry that Disney didn't do anything. Those cast members staged a walk out. And then Chapek, in a panic from the negative headlines, ran and went all in against the state. The problem is this was WAY too late. The bill had already passed the legislature and was sitting on the governor's desk. There was nothing for Disney to lobby. But Chapek was trying to save face with his cast members and the media. And he blew it. He put out that statement that he was holding all campaign donations and that the company would do everything possible to get the law repealed. That's essentially declaring war on the state. And it took a lot of lawmakers by surprise because Disney had no position on this law a month ago. Chapek handled the whole thing horrifically bad from the start.

The backlash though has been building for a long long time. Even lots of longtime Disney fans have had enough for a lot of different reasons. Price hikes, Genie+, disagreements on COVID policies, and yes the ongoing "woke" focus for many years now. That focus has modified old favorite attractions to make them politically correct; made sure to give us warning messages before watching Peter Pan; and even saying "ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls" in the Magic Kingdom greeting is no longer good enough for the advanced society of 2022. It's starting to all come to a head . A lot of enemies have been made. A lot of eyes have been rolling. And people have gotten frustrated. But what's really bad for the company going forward is that all it's political clout its held for a half-century is now virtually gone in only two weeks time. Even if the state doesn't revoke Reedy Creek, Disney has lost a lot of its pull. It's now toxic to be a Florida lawmaker that supports Disney. So I seriously doubt Disney gets much say in legislative matters going forward.

 

[DCLMP]

I’m not your professor, and the answer is right there. Poor retort. You’re swinging and missing a lot here champ.

What's a champ?

 

[brightlined]

The backlash though has been building for a long long time. Even lots of longtime Disney fans have had enough for a lot of different reasons. Price hikes, Genie+, disagreements on COVID policies, and yes the ongoing "woke" focus for many years now. That focus has modified old favorite attractions to make them politically correct; made sure to give us warning messages before watching Peter Pan; and even saying "ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls" in the Magic Kingdom greeting is no longer good enough for the advanced society of 2022. It's starting to all come to a head . A lot of enemies have been made. A lot of eyes have been rolling. And people have gotten frustrated. But what's really bad for the company going forward is that all it's political clout its held for a half-century is now virtually gone in only two weeks time. Even if the state doesn't revoke Reedy Creek, Disney has lost a lot of its pull. It's now toxic to be a Florida lawmaker that supports Disney. So I seriously doubt Disney gets much say in legislative matters going forward.

I agree with the first two paragraphs, but this part is borderline insane.

People are always upset with Disney for one reason or another. But the parks are packed, and people are still spending money. Nothing they've done yet has actually hurt them in any noticeable way, at least not yet.

The "woke" complaining always kills me. Gen Z has made it abundantly clear that they care about "woke" values. If Disney (or any other company) doesn't adjust to at least accommodate the bare minimum, they're not going to have an audience to cater to a decade from now. It can't be 1989 for the rest of our lives.

Complaining about "woke" is the same as the old farts who complained about hippies in the 60s. Society is constantly changing - you can either adapt or spend the rest of your life being angry about it.

The warning message before Peter Pan (and the old cartoons) doesn't hurt anyone and lasts a few seconds. (Seriously, MTV did something similar for Beavis & Butthead 25+ years ago, and it wasn't that big a deal.) And it's certainly better than the option of removing them from Disney+ altogether.

If they alter rides - people eventually have no idea what the old ride was like. I don't particularly care for the Pirates changes, but a lot of people really like Red now. (I'm also old - those changes weren't made for me.) When I was in high school, the administration cancelled our Senior Day tradition, and my class screamed about how the younger generation wouldn't tolerate it. Three years later, nobody remembered there ever was a Senior Day.

And, seriously, do people actually spend time caring about what Disney says over the loudspeakers at rope drop?

Behind the scenes, there are a lot of Republicans that hate all of this. They know how much money Disney brings to the state, and they have no desire to play the virtue politics that the fringier parts of the party (including Desantis) are pushing. (Notice that only a small number of red states are pushing these bills.) But they're nervous that if they don't play ball, they'll get primaried. So here we are.

Did Chapek screw this up? Absolutely. Is Disney ruined forever? Not even close.

 

[DCLMP]

I don’t drive on 99% of the roads, yet happily pay taxes that upkeep all of them.

Road improvements don't indoctrinate kids with values you don't approve of.

 

[DCLMP]

I agree with the first two paragraphs, but this part is borderline insane.

People are always upset with Disney for one reason or another. But the parks are packed, and people are still spending money. Nothing they've done yet has actually hurt them in any noticeable way, at least not yet.

The "woke" complaining always kills me. Gen Z has made it abundantly clear that they care about "woke" values. If Disney (or any other company) doesn't adjust to at least accommodate the bare minimum, they're not going to have an audience to cater to a decade from now. It can't be 1989 for the rest of our lives.

Complaining about "woke" is the same as the old farts who complained about hippies in the 60s. Society is constantly changing - you can either adapt or spend the rest of your life being angry about it.

The warning message before Peter Pan (and the old cartoons) doesn't hurt anyone and lasts a few seconds. (Seriously, MTV did something similar for Beavis & Butthead 25+ years ago, and it wasn't that big a deal.) And it's certainly better than the option of removing them from Disney+ altogether.

If they alter rides - people eventually have no idea what the old ride was like. I don't particularly care for the Pirates changes, but a lot of people really like Red now. (I'm also old - those changes weren't made for me.) When I was in high school, the administration cancelled our Senior Day tradition, and my class screamed about how the younger generation wouldn't tolerate it. Three years later, nobody remembered there ever was a Senior Day.

And, seriously, do people actually spend time caring about what Disney says over the loudspeakers at rope drop?

Behind the scenes, there are a lot of Republicans that hate all of this. They know how much money Disney brings to the state, and they have no desire to play the virtue politics that the fringier parts of the party (including Desantis) are pushing. (Notice that only a small number of red states are pushing these bills.) But they're nervous that if they don't play ball, they'll get primaried. So here we are.

Did Chapek screw this up? Absolutely. Is Disney ruined forever? Not even close.

Polls show that the bill is supported by both parties. Representatives are supposed to represent the people, not corporations This bill will have no impact on Disney's park revenues. If park attendance goes down next year it's because of inflation and the coming recession, and the awful genie, but that's a whole different discussion.

 

[Dis Dragon]

No - they're down that in the last year, not YTD. And most of that happened prior to December 2021.

They're down 11% YTD.

They're actually up slightly since Chapek came out against the bill on March 9th.

In other words, this isn't really relevant to the topic of the thread.

Disney's year begins October 3rd I believe... so this is all in their current year of operations. But that's still only 20.63%

 

[brightlined]

Polls show that the bill is supported by both parties.

That's not true. Polling has been split based on who did the polling and what questions were asked. Example: ABC said they were against it, Fox said they were for it.

The actual truth is that most people have no idea what the bill actually says and does, and simply agree that 5-year-olds shouldn't be taught sex education. Also truth: most of the stuff that the bill is attempting to ban wouldn't have made it past a school board in any district in Florida.

 

[Fishaiden]

Road improvements don't indoctrinate kids with values you don't approve of.

Are you sure there is no secret "woke" road improvement agenda trying to indoctrinate your kids? Highway signs with rainbow flags or billboards showing kids with two dads? I think I saw something about that on Tucker last night.

 

[brightlined]

Disney's year begins October 3rd I believe... so this is all in their current year of operations. But that's still only 20.63%

Not that it matters - the numbers TLSnell1981 posted match the year-to-year number. I think they just confused YTD and YTY.

(In all of those cases, most of the drop happened in November.)

 

[DCLMP]

Are you sure there is no secret "woke" road improvement agenda trying to indoctrinate your kids? Highway signs with rainbow flags or billboards showing kids with two dads? I think I saw something about that on Tucker last night.

I'm not paying for those billboard signs the advertisers are.

 

[DCLMP]

That's not true. Polling has been split based on who did the polling and what questions were asked. Example: ABC said they were against it, Fox said they were for it.

The actual truth is that most people have no idea what the bill actually says and does, and simply agree that 5-year-olds shouldn't be taught sex education. Also truth: most of the stuff that the bill is attempting to ban wouldn't have made it past a school board in any district in Florida.

It still has nothing to do with Disney. The voters can decide at the polls in November and in 2024. Disney should stick to fixing the parks because from all the recent reviews I'm reading people aren't happy.

 

[Jennasis]

There were no schools teaching sex-ed or gender identity stuff to little kids. It's an "answer" to a question nobody asked and a remedy for a problem that doesn't exist. The bill amounts to nothing more than "The alligator rule". Not familiar with the alligator rule?

When I was a kid, my parents didn't have a rule that I couldn't run around the house with an alligator on my head. They didn't need to implicitly say "you can't run around the house with an alligator on your head", and just because they DIDN'T say that specifically didn't mean it was okay for me to do it. Had I decided I might like to try it because I wasn't specifically told I wasn't allowed to I had sense enough to know I would have been in a lot of trouble and nobody would have been on my side in that showdown with my parents.

AFAIC this bill is the same. It wasn't necessary and all it did was widen an already gaping rift.