New Four Seasons Timeshare on Disney Property and Value Oriented West Side

[MassJester]

Underperformaing (not performing to projection) and unprofitable are two different things. If my business unit brings in less than 3 million dollars in profit next year, it will be underperforming, and require work to improve--it will not be unprofitable.

 

[MassJester]

If I have said that I have approved of every decision made by Disney over the past 15 years, allow me to withdraw that remark. The animation business was badly managed, buying Pixar was an solid move to remedy those errors.

My point is, and has been, that the company is moving in the right direction. It is attracting more customers, it is providing more products and services, and it is doing so on firmer financial footing. Further, I think there have been a series of creative improvements, both in the parks and in the broader entertainmnet offering, that have added both value and customer satisfaction.

You don't agree.

Ok.

 

[DancingBear]

I don't agree. Companies, like mine, do it when it's profitable and convenient and supports long term plans. New market or not.

I'm not saying those are the only situations where J-Vs between competitors occur, but there has to be some strategic reason, and generally it's not to bring your competitor right onto your home turf.

Even Eisner tried to get out of or buy out the Swan and Dolphin deal so Disney could build and operate those hotels.

 

[clkelley]

Meaning that as long as there are folks alive that remember Bear Bryant, the University of Alabama will never be able to hire a coach that will live up unless he takes the team undefeated every game.

Is the same thing happening with Disney?? As long as there are folks alive that remember Walt Disney and the "Nine Old Men" will whoever is chosen as CEO ever make the "right" decisions.

I'm just wondering if similar decisions made 50-60 years from now would be villified as much as this one is in some circles??

Comments??

 

[DancingBear]

If I have said that I have approved of every decision made by Disney over the past 15 years, allow me to withdraw that remark. The animation business was badly managed, buying Pixar was an solid move to remedy those errors.

My point is, and has been, that the company is moving in the right direction. It is attracting more customers, it is providing more products and services, and it is doing so on firmer financial footing. Further, I think there have been a series of creative improvements, both in the parks and in the broader entertainmnet offering, that have added both value and customer satisfaction.

You don't agree.

Ok.

Honestly I'd say the jury is out on whether they're really moving in the right direction over all. Some bright spots, like bringing in Catmull and Lasseter, reaquiring Oswald, re-establishing relationship with the Disney family, etc., but some areas of real concern, like the outsourcing of Imagineering, and the Western WDW and Four Seasons projects.

After all, didn't they just release Cinderella III?

 

[DancingBear]

Meaning that as long as there are folks alive that remember Bear Bryant, the University of Alabama will never be able to hire a coach that will live up unless he takes the team undefeated every game.

Is the same thing happening with Disney?? As long as there are folks alive that remember Walt Disney and the "Nine Old Men" will whoever is chosen as CEO ever make the "right" decisions.

I'm just wondering if similar decisions made 50-60 years from now would be villified as much as this one is in some circles??

Comments??

You haven't been paying attention. Only those arguing against the critics keep bringing up Walt.

 

[MassJester]

After all, didn't they just release Cinderella III?

Perhaps Cinderella II sold better than expected?

 

[Another Voice]

As long as there are folks alive that remember Walt Disney and the "Nine Old Men" will whoever is chosen as CEO ever make the "right" decisions.

It doesn't matter who makes the decision - as long as Disney claims to represent one thing and then acts in the completely opposite manner, that's a bad thing.

Disney tells us they create "magic", fullfill "wishes" and drips with "imgaination". Yet they're selling a huge chunk of land to a chain hotel.

Disney tells us that everyone's wish can come true. Yet they're selling off a chunk of land for vacation homes of the mega-rich and leaving the rest of trapped on overcrowded busses.

Disney tells us that service is their highest priority, that everyone is a special guest, that everyone is a VIP. Yet then they tell us they can't create high end hotels - hotels that charge less per night than their current "deluxes".

Disney tells us they'd love to finish their affordable hotel, so that familys can come experience the magic of staying on Disney property, but that the market isn't there. Then they turn around and arrange to have the same number of rooms built by someone else "just out side the gate" - apparently Disney would love to collect the rent but just doesn't want "those kind of people" in the neighborhood.


The trouble isn't with people clinging to the past. It's with people currently clinging to a brand. The people who don't understand the business, only that the brand equals happiness - and that therefore they must be happy with whatever the brand has to offer. It's no different than people who continued to buy Fords and thought Detriot would last forever. It's the people that can't think but who blindly buy that are the real problem.

 

[MassJester]

The trouble isn't with people clinging to the past. It's with people currently clinging to a brand. The people who don't understand the business, only that the brand equals happiness - and that therefore they must be happy with whatever the brand has to offer. It's no different than people who continued to buy Fords and thought Detriot would last forever. It's the people that can't think but who blindly buy that are the real problem.

Is your singular clarity of vision, and superior analytical skill a blessing or a curse?

 

[Another Voice]

Nope - it's just being good at my job.

There are actually people who make movies, you know, and some of us try to understand what we're doing.

 

[YoHo]

Honestly I'd say the jury is out on whether they're really moving in the right direction over all. Some bright spots, like bringing in Catmull and Lasseter, reaquiring Oswald, re-establishing relationship with the Disney family, etc., but some areas of real concern, like the outsourcing of Imagineering, and the Western WDW and Four Seasons projects.

After all, didn't they just release Cinderella III?

Exactly, The best case scenario is that the jury is still out on this management team. Certainly they have yet to justify any sort of trust in them.

 

[raidermatt]

Underperformaing (not performing to projection) and unprofitable are two different things. If my business unit brings in less than 3 million dollars in profit next year, it will be underperforming, and require work to improve--it will not be unprofitable.

Nobody said it was unprofitable.

 

[raidermatt]

Meaning that as long as there are folks alive that remember Bear Bryant, the University of Alabama will never be able to hire a coach that will live up unless he takes the team undefeated every game.

Is the same thing happening with Disney?? As long as there are folks alive that remember Walt Disney and the "Nine Old Men" will whoever is chosen as CEO ever make the "right" decisions.

I'm just wondering if similar decisions made 50-60 years from now would be villified as much as this one is in some circles??

Comments??

On the surface, I can see how somebody might come up with that hypothesis, but like DB said, I think that if you really read the posts around here you'll find that the majority of the discussion points are about business and creative strategies, not about any one person.

Unfortunately, in this thread in particular, the Walt angle is being played as a way to dismiss the arguments that are critical of Disney's management.

On top of that, Walt had already passed before I was born.

 

[MassJester]

Nope - it's just being good at my job.

There are actually people who make movies, you know, and some of us try to understand what we're doing.

well good luck with that.

 

[Another Voice]

It sure beats being a lawyer.

 

[MassJester]

It sure beats being a lawyer.

You've been a lawyer?

And for the record, I'm a business unit manager.

 

[raidermatt]

And for the record, I'm a business unit manager.

Well, good luck to your staff.

 

[MassJester]

Well, good luck to your staff.

Over the last five years they've had very good luck.

What could you possibly understand about my skills as a manager? You don't like the views I express about Disney and so I'm a crappy manager. I think I finally understand how you folks reach the conclusions that you offer up.

Valuable insight.

 

[Another Voice]

Then you're certainly capable of more than "Your statement had no factual basis, and so I saw no need to provide anything else than "you're wrong" in rebuttal."

It would be enjoyable to have a real discussion here, but that requires articulated opinions rather than brush offs, facts and logic rather than "you folks" put downs.

If you understand how difficult it is to run a business, then you understand how difficult it is to run Disney. Layer on "entertainment business" on top of that, and it becomes a mightly hard place to handle. But it's not going to go anywhere with an attitude that "everything will just sort of work itself out". Stronger and larger businesses than Disney have disasppeared.

 

[MassJester]

Then you're certainly capable of more than "Your statement had no factual basis, and so I saw no need to provide anything else than "you're wrong" in rebuttal."

Well of course I'm capable of a better response, but as I found his original remark to be a sloppy personal attack, I didn't think it warranted anything else.

It would be enjoyable to have a real discussion here, but that requires articulated opinions rather than brush offs, facts and logic rather than "you folks" put downs.

I saw that in your oddly placed slam against lawyers.

If you understand how difficult it is to run a business, then you understand how difficult it is to run Disney. Layer on "entertainment business" on top of that, and it becomes a mightly hard place to handle. But it's not going to go anywhere with an attitude that "everything will just sort of work itself out". Stronger and larger businesses than Disney have disasppeared.

Yes, I think I enjoy a very sophisticated and practical understanding of the complexities of managing in a multi-billion dollar business. I have nothing but appreciation and respect for the scope of the challenges that face organizations as large and dynamic as Disney.

Actually, I don't think that "everything will just sort itself out" -- Disney has faced plenty of watershed moments in its history where everything could have gone right down the drain. Some of them were managed well, some horribly and some just got taken care of with dumb luck. I think we disagree over whether or not they are experiencing one now. On balance, I think things are moving in the right direction. I think increases in the number of service points, increases the number of repeat service points, protective diversification (to insulate against downturns in any particular service offering), improvements to revenue and EBITDA are all very positve.

Most importantly to me--the Disney offerings that I enjoy (largely WDW and the film business) continue to engage and entertain me. My family, my friends and I go to WDW and have a marvelous time everytime we go.

So I'm a happy customer, a content stock holder, and an admiring onlooker.

Now, what pleases me need not please everyone else. What I find to be a creative solution, an effective management strategy, or an innovative entertainment need not strike anyone else that way.

Now you can continue to harp on the list of things that haven't gone well, or chuckle as one of your buddies posts a picture of some fellow with his head uncomfortably placed, and take satisfaction in that sort of annecdotal and slogan driven rhettoric--but I don't at all think it gives what you've asked from me.