WDW building named after Ei$ner?

[mitros]

BiL told me he was watching the Orlando tv station { WESH, I think} last night, and caught the tail end of a story about them re-naming one of the buildings at WDW after M. Ei$ner. Anyone see or hear anything to that effect?

 

[mitros]

I should investigate a little more before I speak,. {post a new thread} I went to the Orlando sentinel website and discovered that Chairman George Mitchell {next one that needs to leave Disney, he wasn't even a good politician} said that the Walt Disney headquarters building in Burbank was re-named; "Team Disney-- The Michael D. Ei$ner building on Monday by a unanimous vote of the Disney board of directors. What a pity.....

 

[Horace Horsecollar]

BiL told me he was watching the Orlando tv station { WESH, I think} last night, and caught the tail end of a story about them re-naming one of the buildings at WDW after M. Ei$ner. Anyone see or hear anything to that effect?

It seems that the TV station may have misreported, or your BiL misunderstood.

The renamed buidling is The Walt Disney Company headquarters building in Burbank, California. It's now called "Team Disney - The Michael D. Eisner Building."

There's already another thread on this board at http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=1010641

A Google News search does not turn up any news that any building at WDW was also renamed.

 

[jimmytammy]

I think an outhouse with a big moon, or wait, $$s carved into the door might be more appropriate!

 

[Peter Pirate]

While Eisner didn't do as most of would have liked in the last half of his tenure, all in all I do like WDW in particular much better now than the way it was when Eisner took over, so naming a building after him seems like a modest positive legacy, IMO. Let bygones be bygones, I say and for sanity sake try to remember the positive rather than dwell on the negative...Besides it seems we have so much to be hopeful for at this point and Iger was made possible due to Eisner.

 

[jimmytammy]

As much ribbing as Eisner has gotten on these forums, I do agree that he was a part of getting the theme parks to the point they are now.

But, he overstayed his time. And for that, he took a lot of heat.

And in the end, he probably does deserve to be recognized in some way like this. He contributed a lot to help the Disney legacy live on.

But I am like you, I look forward to the future. While he was there the last few years, the future looked bleak. Now, it looks bright!

 

[Another Voice]

...all in all I do like WDW in particular much better now than the way it was when Eisner took over...

Except that had Eisner really gotten his way in the beginning, there would likely not be a WDW today as we know it. His plan (when he first came to the studio) was to sell EPCOT Center to raise capital to make mainstream Hollywood movies. Disney would have leased back parts of the park to run, the rest would have been leased out to who ever wanted to rent space. Fortuently, better business people found a better plan (limited partnerships like Touchstone, Touchstone and Silverwood) and EPCOT was saved.

While Eisner did promote a few good ideas - they often ended with massive problems. His idea to turn WDW into a upscale luxury brand lead to the over development of the deluxe resorts. His desire to get "the right kind of people to WDW" created the Disney Institute fiasco. His "beat the Universal guys at all costs" lead to the truncated Disney/MGM Studios park and abandoned film production studio. His unwillingness to spend on resort infrastructure have left WDW's roads clogged with busses and its lakes too polluted to swim in. It literally took the efforts of thousands of people to straighten out the demadns of this man's ego - better management would have allowed for even more and better growth without the downsides we see today. The real reason behind WDW was to show people how things can be done right. That's hardly the case today.

And there's Eisner real legacy - he sold off 1/3 of WDW. Disney has walked away from all the land roughly south of US 192. After setting up Celebration (because Disney demanded a qucik return on the land but couldn't come up with a resort/vacation concept for the area), Disney sold both the town and the undeveloped land to raise cash. The area has even been removed from the Reedy Creek Improvement District.

So whatever Eisner did yesterday to build WDW, he sold off its future.

 

[Peter Pirate]

OK, OK, it seems he was evil incarnate...Perhaps the building should be renamed the Wells-Eisner Building as a nod to the good things that actually did come about be they intentional or by product, but not giving any large homage to Mikey himself...

 

[mitros]

Except that had Eisner really gotten his way in the beginning, there would likely not be a WDW today as we know it. His plan (when he first came to the studio) was to sell EPCOT Center to raise capital to make mainstream Hollywood movies. Disney would have leased back parts of the park to run, the rest would have been leased out to who ever wanted to rent space. Fortuently, better business people found a better plan (limited partnerships like Touchstone, Touchstone and Silverwood) and EPCOT was saved.

While Eisner did promote a few good ideas - they often ended with massive problems. His idea to turn WDW into a upscale luxury brand lead to the over development of the deluxe resorts. His desire to get "the right kind of people to WDW" created the Disney Institute fiasco. His "beat the Universal guys at all costs" lead to the truncated Disney/MGM Studios park and abandoned film production studio. His unwillingness to spend on resort infrastructure have left WDW's roads clogged with busses and its lakes too polluted to swim in. It literally took the efforts of thousands of people to straighten out the demadns of this man's ego - better management would have allowed for even more and better growth without the downsides we see today. The real reason behind WDW was to show people how things can be done right. That's hardly the case today.

And there's Eisner real legacy - he sold off 1/3 of WDW. Disney has walked away from all the land roughly south of US 192. After setting up Celebration (because Disney demanded a qucik return on the land but couldn't come up with a resort/vacation concept for the area), Disney sold both the town and the undeveloped land to raise cash. The area has even been removed from the Reedy Creek Improvement District.

So whatever Eisner did yesterday to build WDW, he sold off its future.

Thanks! You said it all!

 

[Another Voice]

Perhaps the building should be renamed the Wells-Eisner Building...

The momunements to those who stood in the way of Eisner already exist. You know them Beauty and the Beast, 'Indiana Jones and the Temple of the Forbidden Eye', Lilo and Stich and Toy Story among others. People who care about doing good know their work is there living monument; people will be watching Beauty a hundred years from now.

Eisner needs a building named after him becasue he never created anything that will last.

 

[Peter Pirate]

Well, in that vien isn't Eisner responsible for DCL and Broadway?

Come on Voice, I'm relenting here. Throw me a bone. I'm just being optimistic for a good Disney future. And trying not to bury Mikey as if he were a Ken Lay or something.