Paul Pressler BACK???!!!

[roymccoy]

Does anyone else think that this would be suicide for Disney??!! (Not that that has ever stopped them before.)

A story from MICEAGE about Eisner's replacement:

"If so, what does this do to Eisner’s situation?

The unanswered questions have made analysts uneasy, and murmurs are returning, perhaps even growing, that Eisner
ought to identify a successor. And if he won’t do it, the Board should do it for him. Analysts chew over various
candidates, but one whispered name worries me more than others: Paul Pressler, current CEO of Gap, Inc and former
chief of Disney’s theme park division.

For many on Wall Street, Pressler is a golden boy. He delivered phenomenal growth at the Disney Stores when he
headed up that division, and then he produced record-breaking profit numbers for the theme parks. Since his jump over
to Gap as their new CEO, the stock at Gap has leapt from $12 to $15, same-store sales have bottomed and then
improved, the Board has been shuffled, and analysts are near uniform in their belief that the company is gaining traction
in its recovery. Plus, he’s still only 48 years old, leaving plenty of time for him to blossom if given the reins at Disney.

The argument in favor of Pressler even takes into consideration what the detractors might say: "So what if the parks
ramped up profit margins by closing rides and cutting costs? On the one hand, this might be seen as just wise business
practices. And if you consider it negative, how can we be sure that the questionable treatment of theme park assets was
really Pressler’s doing and not commands from above? What if Pressler was just Eisner’s golden boy because he cut
costs where Eisner told him? Maybe Pressler would be a totally different kind of man if he were calling the shots
himself!"



I personally think that it was Pressler that got Disney in most of the trouble that they are in today, with his cheap, cost cutting ways. If he came back, any remaining "Disney Magic" would fall off into the sea.

IMHO


Roy

 

[OnWithTheShow]

I don't think he would leave Gap to come back to Disney. Not to mention if Eisner is replaced it won't be one of his lackeys.

 

[DisneyFanGuy]

Don't count him out. He is hated by the purists, but Wall Street likes him. The Disney Board too. He was promoted through the ranks and did many things well at Disney. He got into trouble when he tried to manage the theme parks as primarily a "retail opportunity" (his words), but he understands marketing like nobody else.

It gives me chills.

 

[dcentity2000]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in order to recreate the 'perfect' magic so many people here seem to be so infatuated with, Disney will need free money and confidence from shareholders.

Having this person back and letting him to do his job could incur free equity within the company's accounts and at the same time reinstate confidence in Disney from a financial perspective.

You see: if you were Big plc. and you saw Disney, a company you are heavily invested in, building extremely expensive attractions when a cheaper one could have done amidst registered debt, ABC troubles and recent albeit not ongoing share tumbles, would you be happy?

On the other hand, same situation two years on when Disney has large profits, free cash etc etc etc? Yes, as the company now has the equity with which it may persue a niche market ie. the luxury attraction market based upon fairytales

Furthermore it is not in any way likely that he would fail to consider the post at Disney - the company is large and the role carries with it a large amount of prestige. On top of this, he may have an affinity with the company as it was his role in Disney that gave him the glowing curriculum vitae that he has now.

Cost cutting does not infer an apocaypse. It isn't the greatest of things, but sometimes it is necessary and even common sense. What must happen will happen, either with this man or another, hopefully, just like him.



Rich::

 

[PKS44]

Originally posted by dcentity2000
Correct me if I'm wrong, ...

Yes you are wrong...you do not seem to know Pressler's history of how his philosophy is what put Disneyland in the current mess it is now...from the accidents to the DCA disaster---cost cutting is not always a disaster true..but understanding how Pressler used cost-cutting and how he demonstrated little regard or undertanding for the special showmanship that made Disney theme parks the unparalleled successes that they were--these little bits of knowledge should make one VERY VERY concerned for the LONG TERM health of this company...

 

[DancingBear]

Originally posted by dcentity2000
You see: if you were Big plc...

Over here, that'd be Big Inc.

 

[Luv2Roam]

Paul Pressler BACK???!!!

Words that strike fear into the hearts of many!

 

[roymccoy]

Here's just a little overview of what happened at Disneyland under Pressler.

1) When he took over at DLR, he tried to kill the Indiana Jones ride because it cost too much. Thank God that it was already far enough ahead in construction that it was too late for him to "Presslerize" that one.

2) He took away the Main Street Electrical Parade and put in Light Magic. Light Magic ran for a couple of months and was shelved.

3) He over saw the "redo" of Tomorrowland, which is now known as the ghost town of Disneyland.

4) His cutting of park maintenance hurt many rides, some irrepairably. Poor maintenance has been faulted for the Columbia guest death, the Big Thunder Railroad guest death and many more ride breakdowns that, thank God, did not result in anymore deaths. Poor maintenance has also quashed any ideas of bringing the Submarines back. Poor routine maintenance has also resulted in much more money needed to be spent at a later date. The Carousel in Fantasyland had to be totally rebuilt because of the lack of routine maintenance. This cost in excess of 3 million dollars when a few hundred thousand in routine maintenance would have done the trick.

5) The Submarine ride was shut down on Presslers watch and now submarine lagoon remains empty.

6) and of course, the big one, he was a major player in the DCA fiasco. Everything done on the cheap.


He also, through cost cuts, reduced the quality of the food products at DLR. From pot roast that tastes like dog food to chicken strips that taste like cardboard, he took away one of Disney's strengths which was always gourmet food at theme park prices.

He, along with his partner in crime Cynthia Harris, did a lot to ruin the morale of the cast members who up until then, had been some of the most loyal employees in the corporate world.

His last "contribution" was the cheapened down Pooh Ride that exited into a giant Pooh store. It was so underwhelming that after the new boss came in and rode it before it opened, he pulled a lot of the advertising for it because he didn't think that it could live up to any kind of hype.


Is this Walmart or is this Disney? Disney is a highline name brand, not a Six Flags roller coaster park. If the current board and president can't see that, then they're missing the big picture. Could Godiva Chocolates use imitation cocoa and cheaper sugar and not so pretty packaging and save money? Yes, they could, but then they would be Russell Stover and not Godiva. Disney has forgotten their niche and they have abandoned what got them to the top...Disney "magic".


Roy

 

[DancingBear]

Originally posted by roymccoy
Here's just a little overview of what happened at Disneyland under Pressler.
The Carousel in Fantasyland had to be totally rebuilt because of the lack of routine maintenance. This cost in excess of 3 million dollars when a few hundred thousand in routine maintenance would have done the trick.

What's your source for this?

He also, through cost cuts, reduced the quality of the food products at DLR. From pot roast that tastes like dog food to chicken strips that taste like cardboard, he took away one of Disney's strengths which was always gourmet food at theme park prices.

Are you serious? Gourmet food? That's not the Disneyland I remember.

 

[KNWVIKING]

***" the Big Thunder Railroad guest death "***

So I guess the investigation finds that the failure was caused by a mainenance worker now following published procedures is Pressler's fault also.

 

[dcentity2000]

Originally posted by PKS44
Yes you are wrong

Let's put this into easy squeezy words, shall we?

We have a bit of a two choice scenario:

1) Disney is in financial struggles and needs cost cuts to ensure long term viability
2) Disney isn't really in financial struggles and is in profit

Given the nice profits made by Disney in the last two years (over 1,200 million dollars in each) the answer is currently two.

General consensus is that there has been a degradation in company quality (though from what I've seen the parks are still nice and the company is making an effort with the CG trend ); now, given the acceptable finances it should be relatively read: relatively easy to revert the company to its former state: use the financial health to bring this about

Now for the hard bit:
TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS YOU NEED LOTS AND LOTS OF MONEY

You can fantasise about winging it or blagging it, but if you really want gold leaf paint and rides that look as good backwards as they do forwards as well as hundreds of creative staff, you need a large lump of cash to start with - more, I believe, than Disney currently have if the company is to satiate your cries for quality!

Now this man can give you that. Sometimes you need to sacrifice the arm to save the patient, but in this case 'damage' that would be done is nothing that couldn't be undone with the future money to be earnt. And if anyone dare mention those poor people who fell foul to accidents on rides I am sure that the man feels awful about it and will take steps to make sure it doesn't happen again - a death, no matter how displaced from you, is never a nice thing to have on the mind. Any reports to the theme of "I'm sure he doesn't care" will be taking fanatical hatred to a new level and I'm sure is entirely uncalled for and unjust as well as being appallingly insultive.

You don't have to keep him forever. Short contracts could be drafted as well as escape clauses for his employer, but for heaven's sake don't bash him just because you, despite never having met him, never having spoken to him, have still in the midst of all of this excitement, decided to hate distrust and otherwise fix negative qualities to him.

This isn't called looking at the big picture folks. It's called not looking at a tiny part of a picture that, love it or loathe it, is already a tad on the large side. It's called not letting your dreams interfere with reality and in turn preventing your dreams from becoming reality.

I feel that a razor blade approach to the company's soft hearted attitude towards business is once again needed and if Eisner cannot incur it then someone else must.

It's time for another revival.



Rich::

 

[barreloflaughs]

It's time for another revival.

uh....are you suggesting that Paul Pressler be brought back to revive The Walt Disney Company?

If so, please allow me to respond by saying:

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

If not.....well....never mind!


carl
barrel

 

[BRERALEX]

It's time for another revival.

If you mean by bringing Paul Pressler back wouldnt that be like Making ME chairman of the board again and calling that a revival

 

[dcentity2000]

Originally posted by BRERALEX
If you mean by bringing Paul Pressler back wouldnt that be like Making ME chairman of the board again and calling that a revival

Nope, as you have yet to prove yourself influential enough to leave footprints in the FTSE every time you make a decision (probably )



Rich::

 

[dcentity2000]

Originally posted by barreloflaughs
uh....are you suggesting that Paul Pressler be brought back to revive The Walt Disney Company?

Yup Pressler or someone of that ilk; there is, you see, no reason why more money couldn't lead to a revival... um... again...



Rich::

 

[BRERALEX]

lost me. I think im done speculating for now. I'll chat it up when something actually happens. Right now nothing is happening.

 

[ShadowWind]

Disney sells an intangible and everlasting product, magic, a tradition that is passed down from generation to generation. In some countries, it's even a right of passage. Mickey, unlike the many mice that have come before him, stands alone in being known throughout the world, that his very face can bring a smile to a child in Japan or somewhere else. It's a legacy that is unmatched in the corporate world, which is why it is so difficult to find a CEO that can do this job, because they are not trained for it. No one is trained for it, certainly no one from the corporate world.

Walt cared little for corporate finance. He was often at odds with Roy, his brother and the financial wiz of the family. Creativity couldn't be stifled by cost, because by doing so, you didn't give the people what they wanted, and by failing that, you lose in the end. Walt often said he didn't do it for the money, and maybe he didn't, but he was an intelligent man who also knew that if you give the people what they want, they will come in droves, and drive the financial future of the company.

In recent years, Disney has turned away from both theories. They no longer worry about what the people want, but rather what they think they can get away with. And by doing so, they chip away at the legacy that has built their empire, causing them to lose more and more ground as they go along. They are in a death spiral. They cut costs because the empire doesn't make enough, but the reason it's not making enough is because they are cutting costs.

The way out is not Paul Pressler, because he lacks the creative vision that Disney so desperately needs to maintain that side. What Disney needs in my opinion is a CEO that is a creative person, someone like John Lassiter at Pixar and then a CFO that is a financial wizard who's job is to find the cash, even if it's a bad for the stockholders in the short term, the long term benefits will bring the company back into balance. As they are going now, flopping about like a dead fish, put millions or cut costs is still going to be a disaster for them, because they've lost the vision and the legacy that got them there.

 

[Goofyposter]

Not to mention if Eisner is replaced it won't be one of his lackeys.

untill, we the owners of the company replace a majority of the Board members.....I wouldn't put much money on this!

 

[Captain Crook]

Unfortuneately "we" are not the majority owners of the Company, the institutional investors are and they are more like Eisner than they are more like us...The calvery isn't likely to be coming from that direction either...