What is Roy Disney's plan for the company?

[katerkat]

Perhaps this would be better suited for the Rumors Board, but... I spent some time on Roy's website this afternoon, and I get that he wants the shareholders to vote Michael and a couple other board members off the board. However, I couldn't find any evidence of a plan for the Disney Company should Roy take it over. Who will be in charge, what changes will be made, etc, etc? Is there any plan beyond getting rid of Eisner?

 

[SugarBear]

Why don't you email Roy (or Stanley) and ask him?

 

[always quiet]

Here's an email from savedisney.com that showed up in my email last week. It explains in detail what their grievences are with Eisner and the current board. It also clearly states that Roy has no intention of taking over the company. Rather, they want to find people who can bring Disney back to the way it once was, when the dollar signs weren't as important as people.


http://130.94.75.33/showthread.php?s=&threadid=500088

I posted this last week, but I think it's good that it gets as much attention as it can!!

 

[CarolA]

Roy wants to run the company the way "Walt" would. There is just one problem. That is the way it was being run before Eisner and company and if you do some research you see that the old way did not work at ALL. The company was very nearly bought and sold as pieces.... While Roy may have the right idea regarding managment change he has not presented a case that he could do better. Right now he has given me no good reason to vote no on the proxy. He has not presented a clear alternative. Just vote no and things will get better.... How???


Like it or not, dollar signs will be important. Disney is a for profit company, not a charity.

 

[Feralpeg]

CarolA, I totally agree. Nobody seems to remember what Disney was like prior to Eisner. For those of us who love WDW, we can thank Eisner and his drive. Although he has made some mistakes, what CEO of a large company hasn't? He has tried to diversify and make the company stronger for the sake of the shareholders, the board and himself. Some things have turned out well. Some have not been that great. Gee, that happens! Whether we like it or not, Disney is a company. The main goal of any company is to make money. Not everybody is going to be happy about the way things go. Look at how many companies have let people go over the past couple of years. Disney can't protect the travel industry from outside forces. They can't be sure that every movie will be a hit. I've yet to see a film company that can. No matter how hard they try, they can't ensure that none of us will ever come in contact with a grumpy CM. It happens! Sure, Eisner gets paid a great deal. Most CEOs do. It is always hard for the little guys to understand why they big guys get paid so well. You couldn't pay me enough to be in their shoes. Too much pressure! I have nothing against Roy Disney, but it seems a bit like sour grapes. He and Eisner didn't agree. Roy was not happy with having to leave (even though he was at their mandatory retirement age). Very sad!

 

[Planogirl]

Many people don't seem to feel that Eisner was the one actually responsible for Disney's successes. They feel that it was a group effort which included Frank Wells, Jeffrey Katzenberg, many imagineers that have been fired and so on. Some also don't seem too pleased with the current stock value while Eisner has earned tremendous amounts. Some seem to be bothered by the gradual gutting of the animation areas, the rumored run-down condition of the parks, the CM layoffs, the rumored failure of the Disney Stores and so on.

But of course, it's all a matter of opinion. I personally think it's a shame that Roy didn't take action sooner if he was so disturbed by how things were going.

 

[WDWHound]

Roy's plan is simple, replace Eisner with someone with the creative vision the company lost when Frank Wells died.

The Company was failing before Eisner AND Wells took over because it had lost it ability to take creative risks. It was turning out mediocore products (though Marty Sklar managed to hold Imagineering on track). Roy was part of a group that got Eisner AND Wells placed in charge to turn it around. They were a good team, but Wells died in 94. It was not long after that that Eisner began to show that he did not have the creative vision required to run a company like Disney. He needed Wells to balance his more bottom line orientation, just like Walt needed Roy to balance his more creative orientation. The problem is, Eisner doesn't see it that way. He is slowly but surely destroying the company in the name of short term profits. Layoffs have left Imagineering a shell of its former self. The animation groups in France and Orlando have been closed. Most of the animators in Burbank have been layed off. Some say this is because Eisners sees computer animation as the wave of the future, but then why did Eisner shut down the Sercret Lab (the advanced computer animation facility he had set up for Dinosaur)? Oops, guess his long term vision was a tad lacking.

A quick visit to California Adventure will give you an idea of Eisner's creative powers. Its an OK park, but nowhere near up to Disney standards. Eisner was atually proud of the park with its "lightly themed" attractions. He stated several times that he felt buying off the shelf carnival rides and adding a minimal amount of theming was wave of the future. Problem is, people expected more from a Disney park and they stayed away in droves.

I am sorry if I am being a bit harsh and sarcastic here, but Eisner is systematically destroying something I love. I used to dream of being an Imagineer, but the Imagineering department at Disney has been decimated by cutbacks. Its not dead yet, we may be able to pull it back from the brink, but it will require someone with Vision who values Imagineering. Eisner is not that man.

 

[JoeThaNo1Stunna]

Eisner was great until about 1995. You can see the quality in everything Disney related start to drop right around then. Everything turned into plans for quick cheap profits. Theme parks constantly recycled ideas and clamps were put on imagineers. You saw pathetic parks such as California Adventure open that really take luster off of the Disney name. Cheap direct-to-video sequels were part of the downfall of Disney animation. Disney got involved in areas that were not for them. Everything went bad.