Originally Posted By Park Hopper Okay, maybe the management needs to take some responsibility. But the stockholders put them in that position. They demand an increase in share value every year. Let’s face it, Year of a Million Dreams is not going to pull in the guests that Happiest Celebration on Earth did. Therefore they are not going to be able to generate the revenue next year that they did last year. The stockholders won’t stand for that. They demand increases in the share value. The only recourse Disney has is to raise prices and drop spending – which you might notice is currently happening across the board. I’m sure, given the option, they would rather spend millions on maintenance and new attractions to pull in more guests and that may or may not work. But the constant demand for higher stock values won’t allow them to take that risk. If it doesn’t work out, stock prices drop, shareholders become unhappy and sell their stock, which causes the stock price to drop even lower. This is Disney’s worst nightmare. So they take the “safe route†and cut spending and raise prices. This is an unfortunate reality of corporate America. No sense in getting mad about it. I just think it’s funny that with one breath you demand an increase in share value and an increase in quality in the parks. To get one, you almost have to sacrifice the other. (And I’m not just talking about Bush’s America. It’s been this way for years.)
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <They demand an increase in share value every year. < You can actually say this when stock price is down 20% from 8 years ago ? Maybe you think one demands an increase every year, but we haven't had them in so long, what's the point ? Do you not expect an increase in your salary every year. So if you didn't get an increase in the last 8 years, and in fact they took money away from you in that period, you would call yourself over demanding ? I don't think so. <If it doesn’t work out, stock prices drop, shareholders become unhappy and sell their stock, which causes the stock price to drop even lower. This is Disney’s worst nightmare.< If this was true there would be NO stockholders today...it is the worst performing stock still in the DOW over the last 8 years.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <I just think it’s funny that with one breath you demand an increase in share value and an increase in quality in the parks. To get one, you almost have to sacrifice the other.< this is the same defeatist attitude bad management has.....what drew people to Disney parks to begin with ? Quality - that's what. You don't need to cut to increase park traffic, you need to add attractions and maintain quality...just the opposite of what you are suggesting. Anyone who takes the easy way out as you are suggesting is part of the bad management team...donot blame shareholders for this....they have been FAR more than patient.
Originally Posted By TDLFAN >>Let’s face it, Year of a Million Dreams is not going to pull in the guests that Happiest Celebration on Earth did.<< Of course not, but a 35th anniversary of WDW probably would have, just like the 25th did, and just like DL's 35th did 15 yrs ago!! >>Therefore they are not going to be able to generate the revenue next year that they did last year.<< I guess we'll never know, will we?
Originally Posted By TDLFAN >>this is the same defeatist attitude bad management has.....what drew people to Disney parks to begin with ? Quality - that's what.<< Sorry, but you will have to go to Tokyo for that (and for cheaper ticket prices as well, when compared to the current Magic their Way ticket structure.)
Originally Posted By Park Hopper vbdad55, my guess is that you are a lot more patient than most of the other stockholders. I'm sure none of them hold on to their stock for very long especially if it is doing as badly as you say. What serious investor would? And just for the record, I don't endorse the cut spending raise prices strategy. I merely understand it. I believe that it is never a bad idea to reinvest in your assets. It will always lead to increased profits eventually. Unfortunately, it can take years to realize profits with this philosophy. Most stockholders, and I can see that you, vbdad55, are an exception, will not wait years for their returns.
Originally Posted By Park Hopper Oh and TDLFan, 1990, Disneyland's 35th anniversary was a very bad year for the park attendance wise. That always baffled me because I remember it as my favorite year at Disneyland.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<I hope you realize that stockholders' relentless demands for an increase in share value is the main reason for Disney's decline.>> I hope you realize that Disney's stock has been flailing for many years due to watering down 'the brand' in stupid, shortsighted attempts to raise the stock in the next quarter. ~the spirit knows~ Does Bob Iger get it that Jay Rasulo doesn't?
Originally Posted By Park Hopper Spirit of 74 you pretty much restated what you quoted, except I wouldn't call their attempts stupid. Desperate is more like it.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<I take it personally because I know dozens of Cast Members, from top execs to front line CMs, and they all work to hard to have someone trash their hard work. I do not know any CM that deliberately makes a decision that would be bad for the MK.>> Please, Goof. I am not trashing front-line CMs. As a matter of fact, the ones I have had contact this week with have all been exceptional. Something that amazes me considering how abused they are by both management and the guests they serve. But execs? WDW's current crop has to be one of its worst groups ever ... and seeing and knowing some of their predecessors that really says so much. If you believe folks like Phil Holmes are truly doing what's best for the MK, I can only say you're flat out wrong. But believe what you choose. <<I am trying to figure out who you work for Spirit.>> I have no intention of telling you anything about myself, suffice to say I a a free spirit and I tend to travel in many circles. <<Do you work for the competition up the street? >> Competition? That's just sad. It shows the fallacy of all you post if you believe Disney has fallen to the point it has competition. You lose. <<You definitely have an agenda with all the negitive drivel that you post.>> I know my posts aren't drivel, so do the folks who read me all over the world. As for an agenda, you're right. Oops, you caught me. I do indeed have one. A big one. I want Disney to live up to its amazing legacy and standards for quality and be the unquestioned leader in theme parks, family resorts and animation. It hasn't been doing so every since Eisner got gunshy after Euro Disney's disasterous start and Frank Wells' passing. <<I visit the MK on a weekly basis and talk to a lot of guest and very seldom hear a complaint. Most it is praise of how magical the Mk is and how much fun they had that day.>> Blah, blah, blah ... sure, I believe that. I really do. Because on most visits if you asked me, I'd say the same thing. It proves nothing at all. <<And you know this how...because you did not get promoted. The most creative people working in the entertainment industry work for Disney. I know because I know some of them.>> You know nothing about me, Goof. So stop trolling for personal info. Hell, Disney has information on me ... plenty. They just lack the knowledge to make any sense of it. I'm just a bunch of puzzle pieces. And I can tell you that more talent has walked out the doors of TWDC over the past decade than has walked in. <<BusinessWeek and Fortune Magazine are not popularity contest to be won. They are serious magazines. Being ranked number one by either means a lot.>> Again, I don't know what they actually said about Disney. But it doesn't matter. WalMart and Southwest Airlines are always ranked highly, so I take these things as popularity contests. ~the spirit knows~ Does Bob Iger get it that Jay Rasulo doesn't?
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Spirit of 74 you pretty much restated what you quoted, except I wouldn't call their attempts stupid. Desperate is more like it.>> Disney has consistently shown incredibly poor management over the past decade by making one huge mistake after another and often repeating the mistakes. Cutting quality and watering down 'the brand' HAS NOT RESULTED IN BETTER ROE!!! So the answer is obviously not to continue down the same path. The Pixar acquisition was a good start, but that's all it is. ~the spirit knows~ Does Bob Iger get it that Jay Rasulo doesn't?
Originally Posted By Park Hopper Spirit of 74 maybe you can clear something up for me. If Jay Rasulo is so bad, why did he send the WDW executives to Disneyland to look at attraction improvements so they could consider doing the same at WDW? It doesn't sound like an action someone who "doesn't get it" would take.
Originally Posted By Park Hopper >>So the answer is obviously not to continue down the same path.<< Obvious to you and me but somehow it escapes the MBAs. The stockholders are the headlights the MBAs are the deer.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Spirit of 74 maybe you can clear something up for me.>> That's what I'm here for ... that and to spread smiles through laughter. <<If Jay Rasulo is so bad, why did he send the WDW executives to Disneyland to look at attraction improvements so they could consider doing the same at WDW?>> He didn't. There was a corporate retreat at DL. The WDW execs were there. They saw what would be obvious to anyone -- the attractions there are far superior and far better taken care of than their WDW counterparts. <<It doesn't sound like an action someone who "doesn't get it" would take.>> I'll stand on the man's track record and how much he is loved by Glendale. Thanks. <<Obvious to you and me but somehow it escapes the MBAs. The stockholders are the headlights the MBAs are the deer.>> And that is why MBA's should never be given ultimate control over creative enterprises. They can't chart it. They can't project it. They can't count it. And you better believe they sure can't understand it. ~the spirit knows~ Does Bob Iger get it that Jay Rasulo doesn't?
Originally Posted By oc_dean >>Oh and TDLFan, 1990, Disneyland's 35th anniversary was a very bad year for the park attendance wise. That always baffled me because I remember it as my favorite year at Disneyland.<< Didn't we also have a recession back in 1990 & 1991? I remember all the plans for DL's Tomorrowland:2055 .. which was to begin construction in Jan. 1992 ... and in the summer of '91 .. it all got shelved. Coincidence due to the economy?
Originally Posted By Park Hopper The thing about recessions is that entertainment enterprises usually do better during them -- escapism and all that. But don't tell the MBAs that. They don't want to hear it. Recession is one of their best excuses.
Originally Posted By Park Hopper If Jay Rasulo had nothing to do with the WDW execs attending the corporate retreat and riding those attractions than the incongruity is explained. Thanks.
Originally Posted By oc_dean I find all the defense of the stockholder world fascinating ... for the company sold stock during Walt's years. The difference though ..... He didn't let stockholders/financial community bully him around about what was necessary for his empire - Quality! Today though ....OH ... do I need to explain anything?!!!! The clear defining moment was Well's death, Eisner's heart surgery, and Euro Disney. That time period IS the defining period that divides the golden years .. from whatever anyone wants to call these years.
Originally Posted By Park Hopper oc dean, the stockholders have changed over the years. They do not have the same attitude toward invsesting that they had during Walt's day.
Originally Posted By oc_dean If the company doesn't stand some sort of ground though ... it's going to eventually see itself driven *into* the ground.
