Is it Eisner's Fault?

[larworth]

Too bad the BOD in addition to calling for a faster turnaround of ABC, didn’t call for some sort of moratorium on the milking of the parks division. It’s bad enough when depth, richness, and ambition are reduced to save a buck, but you know they’re pulling way too hard on the tit when people start ignoring basic design practices in order to deliver a budget. If the division was failing to earn it’s cost of capital you almost might understand, but these stories really are depressing.

given ABC, the failed revamp of the stores, the Pooh lawsuit, lack of franchise picture and all the other problems – the fate of a roller coaster ain’t even a footnote

Ohh, the joys of being a cog in a big wheel. With reduced management attention learning can be a slow process along with the urgency to correct a faulty strategy. Unfortunately, we don’t have anything that tells us they have learned anything about their new approach. Going to get less and less agenda time.


I've read several different opinions on whether there is any real danger of the Pooh license being revoked. Disney is clearly best positioned to continue to grow the Pooh franchise and should be the estates’ best partner. However, there is probably plenty of margin here for someone else to significantly up the estates' royalty rate even if they might have a smaller overall total take. Hey, you and I would be willing to net 3-5% and give the rest back (the opposite of today). It would all be gravy to a new party.

Having to pay a lot more for something you have been getting cheap sometimes clouds the thinking and effects the emotions. Relations already sound pretty stained. Let’s hope the license is never voided!! Can’t afford another revenue hit, or plastic trash cans from Wal-mart might be the next park standard.

 

[Another Voice]

Ninety-five percent of what happens at Disney is exactly the same thing that happens at every other large corporation. When a project fails, there is an earnest attempt to punish those people who are already on the outs due to other politics. For ‘Rocket Rods’, it was all blamed on WDI since they were already in trouble for ‘Test Track’. It was used as even more justification to keep the Imagineers out of California Adventure and to further dismantle the organization. No one really cared about the true causes of the failures; everyone had already moved on to the next battle. The battles being fought over Paradise Pier are between Disney and the manufacturer; the “solution” on the inside is that Disney’s process wasn’t flawed, they will just have to pick a better vendor next time. CYA.

The issue with the Schlesingers has gotten very personal now. Money isn’t the object – the line of media companies willing to sign deals for the reissued Pooh rights starts in Hollywood and ends somewhere in Idaho. They feel they were stuck by Disney and now want to stick it right back. It’s hard not to blame them. Ask Robin Williams about his on-off-on-off relationship with the Mouse and how they’ve treated the issue of rights.

 

[DisDuck]

Boy am I glad I leave for WDW in 18 days. I can see for myself where things are going. Of course, my rose-colored glasses may get in the way But I will take them from time to time.

 

[larworth]

Whether from a clear perception of reality or from CYA explanations an organization develops an outlook based on a series of events. I sit here wondering what learning's are being institutionalized today based on recent events.

Here is the picture I have heard:

Some parts of the organization had grown distrustful of WDI. Weren’t sure they even knew how to spell value engineering. A reputation for clinging to old design practices that often added unneeded complexity (delays in opening) and scope (overruns in budget) to projects. Been portrayed as a ME perception, but not sure how broadly this vision was shared across the organization. What were the perceptions of the resort managers who most clearly felt the impact of WDI’s work? Of course, if the top had little interest in supporting a dialogue it probably wouldn’t matter that much what they thought.

WDI had some very respected and vocal personalities (a bunch of people who worked for Walt and knew how things should be done). Instead of trying to correct these perceived deficiencies head-on, it was much easier to go-around them and neuter them through down-sizing and organizational hierarchies.

The new power brokers played off this perception to reinforce their new positions. They found outsiders who bolstered their story. Industry experts(?) who probably told them they were giving money away by providing more than the customer really needed or was willing to pay for. Some combination of the power of the brand and customer ambivalence to over the top design practices.

Management had also become intoxicated with high growth. Annual growth targets were being set in the 15-20% range (pretty tough to maintain), while the natural life cycle of some thrusts (think the stores) was running it’s course and could no longer justify these ambitions. They convinced themselves that getting by offering less was not only prudent, but now necessary. Damn the future consequences we have a market valuation (even if it is overvalued) to maintain as long as we can.

It seems clear to me that the pendulum has swung too far in one direction. I can only hope new learning’s are now occurring that will shape the next approach.

However, with the way the organization is structured can this occur without ME either being a player or a catalyst. With his attention and interests now clearly elsewhere, is there a scenario where this can happen in his absence (mentally not physically) as I’m resigned to 2005, before we hear about a successor?

 

[Another Voice]

Mr. Larworth – you got it exactly right.

 

[Bstanley]

It seems clear to me that the pendulum has swung too far in one direction. I can only hope new learning’s are now occurring that will shape the next approach.

Indeed. Mistakes are much more educational than successes. Let us hope that lessons have been learned and are being learned.

It's a pleasant distraction to refer back to how 'Walt' or the people 'who worked for Walt' would do something, but those folks are not in charge now. The lessons, techniques and mantras they passed down should have their superior efficiency and efficacy demonstrated to a new generation of management (this one - or the next) so the new folks can be 'converted'.

I believe that the simple math required in comparing spending $1M on a coaster upfront and $2M on it every year after that in maintenance versus spending $2M on it upfront and $1M on it every year after that in maintenance is something even PP and the big ME can do (even if you include the Present Value of Money calculation). Based on the discussions here the data would appear to be available in large piles - what is needed is an evangelist! Convert the heathen to the true path! If you build it the old way - they will come. And they will bring their checkbooks!

 

[Another Voice]

A preacher requires a choir to preach to. Lessons from the past and from the present could (and should) be learned, but the senior management of the company just really isn’t interested. The parks are not being operated as long term businesses right now – they are simply cash machines for Burbank to take money. Arguments about spending $2 million now vs. spending only $1 million but more later don’t hold much power.

The bright spot in this situation is many other people still do remember the lessons from the past. And these people are taking every opportunity they can find to minimize the damage. Michael Eisner has a wonderful habit of never letting failure soil his hands. He doesn’t do this by striving for success, but by simply dropping anything that has problems and running, screaming as fast as the limo driver can carry him away.

His sudden departure from the scene leaves a nice vacuum for a while and smart people can use it. This is how ‘Lilo and Stitch’ came into being. And it’s been put to use now to a degree at California Adventure. Every single design and business model bullet point for the entire project has been scrapped. The Eisner/Pressler/Braverman ski-trip plan for the Disneyland Resort is completely gone. Nothing much has been put in its place yet, but even taking two steps forward and 1.99995 steps back is still progress.

I am still optimistic that things will work out. A century’s worth of good work can’t be wiped over even by people as “talented” as ME and his cronies. Still, the sooner The Company stops hurting itself the sooner it can go about fixing the damage and growing again.

 

[Bstanley]

AMEN Brother!

 

[YoHo]

What's this?
AV is making me Feel good about the future of Disney in some infantismally small way?

Are you sure that the UV rays of the Warm California sun that pierce the smog haven't muddled your thinking?
Maybe you need a trip to the Seattle Rain Festival (Held annually from August 1 to July 31 to clear your addled thinking.
Rain always does wonders for a doom and Gloom attitude.