Originally Posted By ChiMike Wow, hi Lee! There you are. >Mike waves to Lee< >>Personally I didn't care for the political games that Matt played both publicly and privately whilst at Disney.<< Give me a few minutes to pull myself together after reading that shocker. Okay.. Ready... Yep combine CM Matt's Wall Street cutthroat thuggery with John Lasseter's ruthless media mogul selfishness and sprinkle in a little of Tony Baxter's smack talk and you got quite the poisonous culture, eh? >>It is another example of the direct correlation between fan popularity and internal perception.<< That would be indirect, right? Indirect correlation. I do believe you want a correlation coefficient that is less than 0 on this one Lee. But, hey, what do I know I am bitter hermit who has no idea what it takes to run a business. Anyways, don't want to have to agree with you at this point of the discussion, so let's hope it was an innocent typo and let's move on.... >> I always found Matt to be generous and polite when presented externally as an executive of WDP&R. Internally was a different matter and I know I'm not alone in that opinion.<< So I guess you just further confirmed the rumors circulating around his tenure of the clear battle lines that were drawn. Good that we can look back now and see whose decisions came out ahead for the customer. >>Ed is always in the parks - he may not take the walks that Matt (or even Paul) enjoyed but he is there often and not just for public events. It isn't the President's role to be seen by cast members and the public. That is an Ops role as held by Michael O'Grattan. Ed is there as the business guy for the entire resort - it is about growing the overall footprint of DLR in Anaheim.<< Lee without question you know 103784 times more than I do about what currently occurs within the company. I will say that most of my relationships are with, what is now considered to be longtime, employees in Anaheim and that is simply not the perception conveyed to me. That perception could very well be wrong, but it's STILL the perception held by some. And in this business perception IS reality. I'm sure you would agree that the role of a resort president or park VP is much different than it was 10+ years ago. Doesn't take a PhD to take orders and delegate those orders to the worker bees. Now where I hope we can agree: Good to see you around and good to see that you are stil involved with the company and this underrated website. I have yet to check out your publication but hear nothing but wonderful things. Even saw one from a distance when I was last strolling around CalArts.
Originally Posted By leemac <<As to playing politics, I have to assume you didn't write that with a straight face considering some of the folks you praise up and down are some of the worst that TWDC has.>> In your opinion. In your opinion as a fan. In your opinion as someone that doesn't encounter these cast members on a regular basis. In your opinion as someone that has not conducted business with them. Are those enough caveats for you?
Originally Posted By leemac <<People who work for TWDC and are liked/loved/admired by the lowly commoners aren't generally liked internally according to you. Gee, really how elitist. How contemptful of the visitors.>> Who are lowly commoners? My comment related to the indirect correlation (shout out to ChiMike for correcting me there!) between those celebrity imagineers that are beloved by the fan base and their internal popularity. You mentioned Matt Ouimet - I've pointed out how there are many people that I know and work with that didn't care for him. I also know many people that genuinely liked Paul Pressler but the external perception was completely different. Jay is regarded as the devil incarnate by the fan base but internally his business savviness is well-regarded if nothing else. He has presided over a very successful WDP&R throughout his tenure irrespective of how you perceive his "achievements". I have no contempt for the "visitors" or guests as we like to call them. I have never suggested otherwise. This attempt at immature bear baiting demonstrates someone unable to back up his argument.
Originally Posted By leemac <<I spent more time there than any Disney resort these days (oh and not just using my AP, but with CMs getting me in as I don't want Disney tracking my every move).>> A political answer to a direct question that can be answered quantitatively. I'll ignore the final egotistical comment in that quote. <<Frontline CMs I know have said the same, a few have seen him 'once or twice.'>> There are thousands of "frontline CMs". His role is not to be visible to the Ops CM - that is for their line managers. Everyone has their own style. Matt spent a disportionate amount of time inside the parks - that was not helpful to the expansion of the Resort. That was his role and he preferred to involve himself in Ops decision-making which is not the brief of the President - sounds like you don't know that. If Matt had spent more time inside TDA or up in Burbank there is a possibility that we would be further advanced on the expansion of the Resort.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Okay.. Ready... Yep combine CM Matt's Wall Street cutthroat thuggery with John Lasseter's ruthless media mogul selfishness and sprinkle in a little of Tony Baxter's smack talk and you got quite the poisonous culture, eh?>> I guess that is just typical corporate America. I can honestly say that I have never encountered such transparent political operators before in my entire life than inside Disney. Ultimately I understand the need to protect your own job but it shouldn't be at the detriment to the organization as a whole. I don't get John at all - I am always very concerned when someone receives such a wide-ranging brief without any real accountability. I'm not a fan of his movies (Cars was by far the worst Pixar product of late - and I'd say the worst from WDFA for a long time - personally I think I'd rather watch Home on the Range again before Cars - I don't think there has ever been a Disney feature that I have only ever seen once and don't own on DVD) and it is his story-telling that I don't find appealing and that worries me. I hope that when he does turn his attentions (if he does) to WDI on a more regular and active basis that he is a positive influence. The fact that he already had strong views about certain imagineers demonstrates to me that he isn't the breath of fresh air that we were all promised. You only have to look at this summer's fiasco with Anne Hamburger at WDI-CE to know that the political mindgames are still prevalent. Blame can be apportioned on both sides in many arguments but an unwillingness to resolve it for the greater good scares me immensely. I honestly thought that WDI had made positive progress in moving away from the management style of old. After the last few months I'm not too sure.
Originally Posted By leemac <<So I guess you just further confirmed the rumors circulating around his tenure of the clear battle lines that were drawn. Good that we can look back now and see whose decisions came out ahead for the customer.>> Matt didn't do himself any favors by trying to alienate those that had promoted him through the ranks. He is given undue credit for a lot of the 50th anniversary changes at DLR when many had already been in place by the time he took office and some were driven by the SVP's office in TDA. I just never saw Matt make a dynamic and positive decision about anything substantial for the resort. I personally feel he should have stayed in an Ops role - there are just some people that do that stuff so well - much like Dave Minichiello at HKDL. Using the term "battle lines" makes it sound more dramatic than it actually was. Ultimately he paid the price when his bosses couldn't trust him to act for the greater good in the end. Actively courting your boss's job is not a wise strategy at any company. There are always political issues with executive personnel at any company - it is just part of the stream we swim in.
Originally Posted By leemac <<I will say that most of my relationships are with, what is now considered to be longtime, employees in Anaheim and that is simply not the perception conveyed to me. That perception could very well be wrong, but it's STILL the perception held by some. And in this business perception IS reality.>> Sorry Mike - I think I missed your point. Are you suggesting that your CM friends don't know Ed's role? He is there as the de facto leader for the expansion of the Resort. The President's office has always been about developing the footprint of DLR in Anaheim and that has been the case for many years. When you mention VPs I presume you mean WDW - their roles are different as it is an Ops-driven role. They are involved in future planning for their park (and the whole of WDW as a whole) but it is not in their area of responsibility. Ultimately that rests with the central strategic planning and President's office at WDW.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Now where I hope we can agree: Good to see you around and good to see that you are stil involved with the company and this underrated website. I have yet to check out your publication but hear nothing but wonderful things. Even saw one from a distance when I was last strolling around CalArts.>> Ditto - I'm just not around as much as I used to be. Work has a tendency to get in the middle! Thanks for the comments about Tales. I'm really happy about where we are at the moment with the magazine - it has taken nearly 4 years but I think we are consistently delivering on quality stories. I'm glad that we have such wonderful partners at WDP&R and WDI to make it happen. Naturally if you do decide to check it out I'd be interested to hear your comments - I don't get as much feedback as I'd like (either negative or positive) any more.
Originally Posted By danyoung lee, I just want to thank you on your input in this discussion. You are saying things that I have been led to believe are not true, but then I've only been led by what I read online and not from anyone truly inside the company. I also applaud you on your calmness of expression when facing the nearly rabid responses in this thread. I'm all in favor of more discussion on this issue, if people can keep their heads and quit with the baiting and nastiness. But I do have to strongly disagree with you on one item. I very much feel that John Lasseter is the best storyteller since ... well, since Walt Disney. I've enjoyed every one of the Pixar movies, although I'd have to agree that Cars was my least favorite. And I attribute that to John's lifelong love of cars, which I've never shared. I just didn't go into this movie with a mindset to love these characters simply because they had a shiny fender and a roaring engine. But other than that I think Pixar (under John's considerable influence) has given us some of the best stories in the past 20 years. I know nothing of his position within the Disney parks division other than his title, but I can't help but feel that the parks will come out in much better shape and with some killer E ticket attractions over the next few years. Keep the debate flowing!!!
Originally Posted By ChiMike Quickly... >>Sorry Mike - I think I missed your point. Are you suggesting that your CM friends don't know Ed's role? He is there as the de facto leader for the expansion of the Resort.<< Nope. Suggesting that varied 'levels' of CMs that I interact with have said they always saw Cyn & Matt; with some not even knowing what Ed looks like. I can't validate their perception, only point it out. >>The President's office has always been about developing the footprint of DLR in Anaheim and that has been the case for many years.<< Sure. But not always. And now it appears to be about doing what I just said; taking orders and then delegating said orders out to be executed upon. It appears to me that there is less autonomy at TDA and more direct oversight in Burbank and recently from Orlando.. So, I would argue that the job of resort president has changed multiple times over the last 15 years. >>When you mention VPs I presume you mean WDW - their roles are different as it is an Ops-driven role. They are involved in future planning for their park (and the whole of WDW as a whole) but it is not in their area of responsibility. Ultimately that rests with the central strategic planning and President's office at WDW.<< Yep I was referencing them and understand the dynamic. And that's all my point is, with what you just said, not only has the DLR president's role changed over the last years but the WDW VPs' roles have also been altered/minimized/re-directed. Choose your corporate word. That's all I was saying in #161, that these roles have all changed from what they were traditionally. It is good that you point the dynamic out for others to see, though.
Originally Posted By ChiMike >>I've enjoyed every one of the Pixar movies, although I'd have to agree that Cars was my least favorite.<< I am of the same mind. Huge Pixar fan here but Cars was tough to watch. It's John's Alice In Wonderland. As an animation fan I have enjoyed it slightly more by watching the beauty of it in Blu-Ray. >>But other than that I think Pixar (under John's considerable influence) has given us some of the best stories in the past 20 years.<< Without question. >>I know nothing of his position within the Disney parks division other than his title, but I can't help but feel that the parks will come out in much better shape and with some killer E ticket attractions over the next few years.<< All signs still point to yes for, at the minimum, DLR. Which is great as someone who is only going to DLR for the foreseeable future. John gets it. WDI's recent output makes me belive that as an organization they don't.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo funny, Cars is my fav Pixar, shortly followed by Monsters Inc, then Wall E
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo I never said it raised the bar, I said it was my favorite, as in the most enjoyable for me. I find a lot of the pixars, while good, have some pacing issues. But I must of watched Cars 30-40 times and love it (helps it's my son's fav). Whereas I do not care if I ever watch Finding Nemo or Bugs Life again.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<As to playing politics, I have to assume you didn't write that with a straight face considering some of the folks you praise up and down are some of the worst that TWDC has.>> <<In your opinion. In your opinion as a fan. In your opinion as someone that doesn't encounter these cast members on a regular basis. In your opinion as someone that has not conducted business with them. Are those enough caveats for you?>> Actually ... that should read as my opinion as someone who has close ties to many of those CMs and other CMs who DO work and deal with them regularly ... as someone who may be a fan, but is also a well-educated one who has ties to major media and isn't the average tourist ... and as someone who is a very good observer of human nature ... those caveats all work for me.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Who are lowly commoners? My comment related to the indirect correlation (shout out to ChiMike for correcting me there!) between those celebrity imagineers that are beloved by the fan base and their internal popularity.>> I'm sorry, but I based that response on your typo being what you meant to say. So ... <<You mentioned Matt Ouimet - I've pointed out how there are many people that I know and work with that didn't care for him.>> Yes, now that he isn't at the company you have. You know there are many people who don't care for (instead of naming names, I'll just say) ANY EXEC right now at Disney. <<I also know many people that genuinely liked Paul Pressler but the external perception was completely different.>> That's because he did a godawful job running the parks because it was a business he had no business running. I liked Paul as well. On a personal level, he was one of the nicest Disney execs I have met. But I do think the heat he took from the fan community was largely fair ... heated, yeah ... but fair. <<Jay is regarded as the devil incarnate by the fan base but internally his business savviness is well-regarded if nothing else. He has presided over a very successful WDP&R throughout his tenure irrespective of how you perceive his "achievements".>> I don't doubt Jay is a savvy businessman. But guess what? So was Walt Disney. So were many of his followers that ran DL and later WDW. But Jay doesn't appear to care at all for how the brand is being degraded by shortsighted business decisions, and no one at Disney will say Jay is passionate about the parks and resorts as anything but a driver of income and profit. Does that make him the devil? No. Does that make him a bad choice to run the parks? Hell yeah.
Originally Posted By ChiMike >>Matt spent a disportionate amount of time inside the parks - that was not helpful to the expansion of the Resort<< Yeah so did Walt. And it was helpful to the expansion of the company >>That was his role and he preferred to involve himself in Ops decision-making which is not the brief of the President - sounds like you don't know that.<< I disagree. >>If Matt had spent more time inside TDA or up in Burbank there is a possibility that we would be further advanced on the expansion of the Resort.<< If Michael Eisner had died in 1994 there is a possibility that we would be further advanced in plenty of things. If Frank Wells hadn't been climbing ... The fact is there are two sides to every story especially in a nasty environment like TDA or WDI.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Okay.. Ready... Yep combine CM Matt's Wall Street cutthroat thuggery with John Lasseter's ruthless media mogul selfishness and sprinkle in a little of Tony Baxter's smack talk and you got quite the poisonous culture, eh?>> I'm going to hope that was tongue in cheek, even if Lee is taking it as gospel. <<I guess that is just typical corporate America. I can honestly say that I have never encountered such transparent political operators before in my entire life than inside Disney. Ultimately I understand the need to protect your own job but it shouldn't be at the detriment to the organization as a whole.>> I can certainly agree with the last sentence, but I have to say that it seems as if this is SOP at TWDC, be at in P&R, Studios or Networks. <<I don't get John at all - I am always very concerned when someone receives such a wide-ranging brief without any real accountability. I'm not a fan of his movies (Cars was by far the worst Pixar product of late - and I'd say the worst from WDFA for a long time - personally I think I'd rather watch Home on the Range again before Cars - I don't think there has ever been a Disney feature that I have only ever seen once and don't own on DVD) and it is his story-telling that I don't find appealing and that worries me.>> Well, I would say most folks, this spirit included, wholeheartedly disagree with you. It would also appear as if he has made Bob Iger very happy about buying Pixar. The fact you'd rather watch Home on the Range rather than Cars speaks to your own tastes. I can honestly say I don't know a single individual who would ever say that but more power to you. All I can recall about that dreadfully dull film was that it had cows in it. Really ... that's it. I HATE Nascar. Hate it. Yet I loved Cars. Saw it last week on Blu-Ray for the first time and enjoyed it even more. I felt like I could fall into the background. A beautiful film with great characters and a decent story. I really can't think of a Pixar film that didn't have a great story. I think the BO proves that. If you haven't enjoyed Pixar's films ... I dunno what I can say since they've added so many billions to the Mouse's coffers and so many possibilities for P&R, consumer products and TV. <<I hope that when he does turn his attentions (if he does) to WDI on a more regular and active basis that he is a positive influence. The fact that he already had strong views about certain imagineers demonstrates to me that he isn't the breath of fresh air that we were all promised.>> The man cares about quality. That's damn good start. <<You only have to look at this summer's fiasco with Anne Hamburger at WDI-CE to know that the political mindgames are still prevalent. Blame can be apportioned on both sides in many arguments but an unwillingness to resolve it for the greater good scares me immensely. I honestly thought that WDI had made positive progress in moving away from the management style of old. After the last few months I'm not too sure.>> OK, so let's play the blame game. Who's fault is it? And what needs to be done, in your opinion, to make WDI a better place?
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Matt didn't do himself any favors by trying to alienate those that had promoted him through the ranks. He is given undue credit for a lot of the 50th anniversary changes at DLR when many had already been in place by the time he took office and some were driven by the SVP's office in TDA.>> Some things definitely weren't all his doing. The park, if you may recall, was falling apart after a decade of decay under Paul and Cynthia (all in the name of the bottom line). The 50th was coming as was the media. DL was in no shape for either of them and money had to be spent. Sure, Matt got loads of credit. Maybe he wasn't deserving of all it, but I'll give him most. <<I just never saw Matt make a dynamic and positive decision about anything substantial for the resort. I personally feel he should have stayed in an Ops role - there are just some people that do that stuff so well - much like Dave Minichiello at HKDL.>> You probably feel that folks like Phil Holmes, Erin Wallace and Meg Crofton are great execs too! (to be fair) <<Using the term "battle lines" makes it sound more dramatic than it actually was. Ultimately he paid the price when his bosses couldn't trust him to act for the greater good in the end. Actively courting your boss's job is not a wise strategy at any company.>> Let's be blunt here. There was a groundswell of support for him to replace Jay and that's why he had to go. Jay is like a pit bull with a piece of meat and isn't gonna give it up willingly. Whether Matt should have let it be known he wanted Jay's job ... or whether Matt shouldn't have simply called Bob or John when he had something he wanted to discuss (bypassing Jay) are other issues. But Matt had a passion for his position ... and it would be nice to have someone like that leading Disney's parks instead of simply a businessman.
