Originally Posted By jonvn "Have you ever seen Paul Pressler or Cynthia Harriss at any Disney or Disneyland event since 2003?" I think they have moved on. Much like some others should. Maybe they just asked not to be? Maybe they got tired of the place, and don't want to be involved anymore? You are talking about people who have been gone from the place for three years now. When you're 90, are you still going to be talking about Paul Pressler? Why don't you talk about Judson Greene? He wasn't any prize, either.
Originally Posted By Westsider Judson is still on the invitation list. Guest Relations maintains his contact information in the file. He usually declines however.
Originally Posted By jonvn That's nice. I wonder what the actual story is, if this is true. My guess is they requested to be taken off. Pressler did not leave under a cloud, rather the opposite. So, I think there is a bit more to the story than you are relaying, again assuming what you are saying is correct.
Originally Posted By GoogieMountain I'm confused as well. While we in the fan community pretty much agree that the Pressler and Harriss reigns were a low point in the park's history, I have never heard Disney admit that. It's simply bad corporate etiquette to badmouth past execs, no matter how enlightened you've become. Admitting that an execs tenure was in any way negative just isn't done, unless the particular exec is having criminal charges filed on them. So to have them snubbed in this way, while perfectly fine in my mind, makes me wonder, what the company's official stand on this is. Are Paul and Cynthia considered disgraced? That seems a bit hard to believe, as the overall Disney philosophy still operates the way it did with Eisner at the helm. Yes there have been some improvements in the micro- Ouimet made it seem like things were turning around- he used his limited power as best he could. However as decisions continue to be handed down from Rasulo and Iger, I'm not so certain that anythings changed. Why would the current Disney Company have anything against Paul and Cynthia, two execs who, in their time, followed the current philosphy to a tee?
Originally Posted By Westsider Pressler was removed in late 2003, after Cynthia left. Neither was invited to Candlelight '03, for example. From Pressler's original departure in September 2002 until late 2003 the DSA office kept contact information for Pressler on file and he was invited to events and received official correspondence. So there was a period of time after Pressler departed when he still recieved those profesional courtesies. It was in late '03 that the change was made and a supervisory CM in that department was told to remove the contact info for those two people and refrain from gathering additional contact info in the event of a move or change of address. Since then it has become kind of a running gag for those CM's whenever a big event shows up... Find the latest addresses for the Lindquist children, the Nunis family, Card Walker's widow, and Matt Ouimet's new address out in New York.... but don't worry about Cynthia, she's not invited. ;-) Now why exactly that change was made, I have no idea. We can all infer a few things, but we'll likely never know. All we do know is that Paul Pressler and Cynthia Harriss have not been seen at any time on Disneyland property at any major event since October, 2003, and formal invitations from the Company have not been extended to them in quite some time. I will say however that this is just the response from the Disneyland office of protocol. There is not a Soviet-like effort to expunge any evidence that Cynthia or Paul existed. Occasionally on Cast TV they will show old episodes from the 1999-2003 era and Cynthia will be featured prominently on those episodes smiling and hugging and gushing sincerity at any Cast Member within camera range. This isn't a situation of airbrushing them out of pictures. They just aren't invited to parties anymore.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>How do you even know what he [Matt Ouimet] was and was not responsible for?<< He was the President of the Disneyland Resort. It doesn't take a mind reader to figure this one out. I have seen Cicely Rigdon at many events over the years, including a fairly recent one. While she is getting a bit frail, she is far from senile. As far as Paul and Cynthia go, I believe their presence at a Resort event would be rather awkward. While others have been retired over the years, these two left under less-than-ideal circumstances.
Originally Posted By avromark ^^^ They also left under more scrutiny. Information is simply easier to access these days, Disney (And others) have more people interested in the "business" side of things. Most guests probably don't follow who is in charge of what. In the old days I think there were probably less people worried about the exec's who ran the place, unless they were doing business with Disney or something. In the old days I doubt that things were reported across the country nearly as fast as they are now. As well with the Disneyland TV show Walt was able to control what was shown, with the various media outlets, Disney can't pick and choose what events get covered.
Originally Posted By jonvn "He was the President of the Disneyland Resort." You know, he doesn't get to SNAP his fingers and make things happen. Some of the things he did may have actually been simply being there during implementation of previous plans. That's what makes me ask, how do you know what he did and did not do? What were his plans, and what were someone elses? "these two left under less-than-ideal circumstances." Pressler left to go be the CEO of the nation's largest clothing retailer. This is not a bad thing for him. Don't know the story behind the chick, but I think she gets a lot of stuff thrown her way that she doesn't really deserve. No one does, really. And I find it very difficult to believe the story being put forth. It simply does not ring true.
Originally Posted By netenyahoo I think the both Paul and Cynthia probably asked to be taken off the list. That just seems like the most likely scenario. Disney would still invite them to things even after all the stuff they did both good and bad. They probably just wanted to move on from Disney.
Originally Posted By ArchtMig To me, Pressler just seemed to have been promoted up and out of the company, culminating with him finding a more attractive gig with The Gap, that took him out of Disney completely. It doesn't seem that he left under any (known) controversy or cloud. The company was still denying that all the bad things that Pressler started and promoted were "bad". Everything was hunky-dory as far as the company was concerned, when Pressler left. Different story for Harriss. She left under the stain of a recent death of a guest (the Big Thunder accident), which was under her watch, as well as a growing realization that the fast approaching 50th Anniversary had absolutely nothing going for it, under her watch, and was destined to be a huge disaster. They waited long enough for the heat of the Big Thunder accident to simmer down a bit, and then they gave her the boot. I think that most of the stuff that we blame Harriss for was actually holdover from the Pressler regime. Sure, she was the boss, and maybe if she had been more suited to the job (as Ouimett was), then she would have been better able to handle things. But she was miscast in her role. And she was only capable of playing the cards she was dealt, rather than pushing for a shuffling of the deck. Harriss left under a serious dark cloud, not entirely of her making, and for that at least I have a bit of sympathy. She was really just in over her head. Pressler, on the other hand, left under relatively good terms. But he really still is the primary villain in my eyes, and his influence still haunts us to this day, and will still be a stain on the Anaheim resort for years, if not decades, to come.
Originally Posted By GoogieMountain <<From Pressler's original departure in September 2002 until late 2003 the DSA office kept contact information for Pressler on file and he was invited to events and received official correspondence. So there was a period of time after Pressler departed when he still recieved those profesional courtesies.>> Um, by his initial departure I think you mean his promotion out of Disneyland, to head of Walt Disney Attractions. So of course he would still get invited to stuff. You don't throw an office Christmas party and not invite the boss!
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "Different story for Harriss. She left under the stain of a recent death of a guest (the Big Thunder accident), which was under her watch..." But wasn't found at fault for a death at DL while Pressler was managing the place too? "...as well as a growing realization that the fast approaching 50th Anniversary had absolutely nothing going for it, under her watch, and was destined to be a huge disaster." From what I can tell much of the long range plans for the 50th that materialized were assembled during Hariss' tenure. From what I recall all the online predictions that the celebration would be a flop were based on the fact that no major new E ticket attraction was planned. Turned out just the opposite, didn't it?
Originally Posted By jmishica I could have sworn that I saw Pressler at the 05/04/05 Press Event- Good looking guy in a suit with a "Paul" Nametag. He was not on the carpet, but on the east side of main street with a security guard.
Originally Posted By SIR at X-S Tech If he had a Paul nametag on, it doesn't seem too likely that it was Pressler. I can see inviting an ex exec back as a guest, but you don't give him a nametag and pretend that he's still part of the company. An invited guest, yes- an honored retireee, no. Ron Dominguez, Dick Nunis are a different story. They retired as CM's and thus get a nametag.
Originally Posted By SIR at X-S Tech ^^Good looking guy??? Are we talking about the same Paul "Birdface" Pressler? Man I can't believe this thread took a full 35 posts to de evolve to childish namecalling.
Originally Posted By ArchtMig >>>From what I can tell much of the long range plans for the 50th that materialized were assembled during Hariss' tenure. From what I recall all the online predictions that the celebration would be a flop were based on the fact that no major new E ticket attraction was planned. Turned out just the opposite, didn't it?<<< That sounds like the same old claptrap that Marcie and the other apologists put out there to try to justify all the inadequacies that went on during the Pressler/Harriss years. All I know is, there wasn't one square foot of new paint applied to the joint until long after Harriss was gone, and by the time she left, nothing had really begun, and there was barely enough time to get the park "spruced up" before the 50th events commenced. If Harriss was responsible for putting all the 50th stuff into motion, why didn't she start repairing and painting the place a year before she left? Why did she feel that opening Space Mountain some time in the Fall of 2005 was acceptable, leaving nothing for July 17th? Why did it take a big last minute push from Ouimette to get Space Mountain open by 7/17? Why couldn't Harriss have placed the same emphasis on the importance of having something more durable than shows and parades that she could point to and say, "look, here's something we'll have ready in time for the 50th. Space Mountain. Yeah, maybe not exactly a brand new attraction, but at least there's this." No... the 50th wasn't great because of Cynthia Harriss. It was great in spite of her.
Originally Posted By SIR at X-S Tech From what I remember, much of the 50th plans that were talked about during Harriss' tenure were passed on, and it wasn't until Matt came on that some were revived. Were they super spectacular? Maybe not, but they were better than what Harriss had planned. A parade, Space Mountain late in the year, and a gold castle.
Originally Posted By SIR at X-S Tech You're right though it is very hard to say who was responsible for what. It is clear though that when an exec comes in on an existing project, he/she is free to influence it, cut the budget or pad it, and while Buzz or Space Mountain may not have been everyone's idea of a top tier addition to the park, I think they were just about as great as they could have been. There weren't many cut corners in evidence. I think had these things been seen to completion under Cynthia, we would have seen a much less dense, more simple Buzz, and a Space Mountain that was new track with same old effects. Just my opinion.
