Iger needs moment of clarity

[cellarhound]

New York Times headline says it all: "Studio profits fall 93%."

http://tinyurl.com/c8pl49

I have been saying this now for sometime... Iger the strategy to turn TV properties to film alone does not a top grosing film studio make.

It isn't just the market, you are underperforming peer to peer.

I just don't think you guys are interested in making top grossing films... prove me wrong, please... Lets just hope that the Dreamworks deal saves Disney's bacon.

[RandySavage]

Ouch. This summer looks dismal for Disney: Touchstone, Miramax and Disney could not produce one live-action, big budget spectacular to compete with Transformers, Wolverine, Star Trek, Harry Potty and the like. Their tentpoles are Up (commercial?) and G-force.

Bob Cook may be out of job come the fall. That's a shame because he seems like a nice guy and very solid film executive.

[cellarhound]

Bob Cook is a nice guy... But he can't pick winning films to save his life... He is a great guy who throws money to top producers and doesn't hold them accountable for providing him with a script before they begin shooting.

Iger is a TV guy... He has little interest in Films because he knows how Network TV can be an economic media power house more potent than film.

I am not saying that Eisner was better at picking films, but he did read screenplays before he bought something. I disagreed with the singles and doubles and let the Disney brand alone equate to premium price-point mantra.

And Walt would read scripts before he made a film too.

All the Disney Live Actions Studios are now de-facto comatose... A fraction of their former glory. No one wants to talk about it... They point to Pixar, ABC, ESPN, Disney Parks... But the actual Studios? They are a disaster area now - a marketing machine for other segments of the company.

[whitealexander]

Originally Posted by cellarhound

Bob Cook is a nice guy... But he can't pick winning films to save his life... He is a great guy who throws money to top producers and doesn't hold them accountable for providing him with a script before they begin shooting.

Iger is a TV guy... He has little interest in Films because he knows how Network TV can be an economic media power house more potent than film.

I am not saying that Eisner was better at picking films, but he did read screenplays before he bought something. I disagreed with the singles and doubles and let the Disney brand alone equate to premium price-point mantra.

And Walt would read scripts before he made a film too.

All the Disney Live Actions Studios are now de-facto comatose... A fraction of their former glory. No one wants to talk about it... They point to Pixar, ABC, ESPN, Disney Parks... But the actual Studios? They are a disaster area now - a marketing machine for other segments of the company.

bravo.. very well said mate..

[RandySavage]

^ Apparently so. It's one thing to pick winning films, but this summer, the Studio isn't even throwing it's hat in the game. Right now they are last in grosses among the majors, barely above Lionsgate.

[Sosai X]

It's more of the Burbank monkey horde in action. This level of stupidity and mediocrity has become their SOP.

You might remember the old adage that if you have an infinite number of monkeys, typing on an infinite amount of typewriters for an infinite amount of time, they will eventually type out the whole of the works of Shakespeare. It leaves one to wonder how long the monkey horde has been banging away at their typewriters, to come up with some of their recent theatrical projects. If it takes infinity or longer for a monkey to type out a Shakespearean masterpiece like Macbeth or Romeo and Juliet, Beverly Hills Chihuahua must have taken, well, about as long as it takes a monkey to eat a banana.

[Mr Wiggins]

Originally Posted by cellarhound

They are a disaster area now - a marketing machine for other segments of the company.

The problem with WDC is that every segment of the company is a marketing machine for another segment of the company.

[cellarhound]

Originally Posted by Mr Wiggins

The problem with WDC is that every segment of the company is a marketing machine for another segment of the company.

That is partially true, mind you.

However the Live Action Studio is not developing fresh high quality new content. For the longest time it was dependant on the carry over of deals made in the Eisner Era - POTC and Narnia... Narnia (i.e. Walden Media) is now abandoned to Fox and POTC's legacy is about throwing cash to Buchenhiemer without any accountablity regarding script production. (At least Verbinski is on the record of not being on board with out a screen play first.)


The importance of the DreamWorks deal is noted, as Dick Cook is NOT any where nearly as talented as the the SKG team in regards to methology, creativity, and talent. Dick Cook is a movie marketing machine. That is how he got where he is now... But he can't pick a good film from a mediocre one... This is why the DreamWorks deal may work out.

And Iger is disinterested in micromanaging the unit as he gutted the budgets of Miramax, Touchstone, Hollywood - yet left behind managers commited to the Singles and Double's mantra.

As a movie fan and a shareholder this is absolutely shameful. Iger could have matched last years earnings had the unit been more on the ball and performed peer to peer.

[sediment]

Originally Posted by cellarhound

New York Times headline says it all: "Studio profits fall 93%."

http://tinyurl.com/c8pl49

I have been saying this now for sometime... Iger the strategy to turn TV properties to film alone does not a top grosing film studio make.

It isn't just the market, you are underperforming peer to peer.

I just don't think you guys are interested in making top grossing films... prove me wrong, please... Lets just hope that the Dreamworks deal saves Disney's bacon.

What "Dreamworks deal"?

Also, "profits drop" could also be tied to whatever made so much money the year before. First calendar quarter of the year is not the big film release quarter.
Also interesting is that although the quarter's theme park attendances were flat, the discounting (via free hotels or via pre-paid attendance scheme) did not help keep the revenues up.

[disneytim]

In related news, Disney stock rose nearly three bucks today because their financials were still better than what Wall Street expected. Profits may have sucked, but they didn't suck as much as they could have.

Originally Posted by cellarhound

And Walt would read scripts before he made a film too.

. . . which resulted in a library of films made during his lifetime that are mostly forgotten today. Let's face it, live-action was never Walt's forte. With the exception of "Mary Poppins," "20,000 Leagues," and maybe "Treasure Island" (without Robert Newton, there's no "Talk Like a Pirate Day" ), there aren't a whole lot of "timeless classics" to be found . . . except in the collective minds of Disney geeks.

The live-action films of Walt's day were serviceable stories produced to turn a fast profit. With few exceptions, they were made cheaply and boasted no A-list stars and no visionary directors. Say what you will about "Beverly Hills Chihuahua," it was no worse than "Monkeys Go Home" or "That Darn Cat"--and it turned a nice profit for Disney.

And as far as whining about Hannah Montana and the Jonas Brothers being transplanted from TV to the big screen, don't forget that Davy Crockett, Zorro and Dr. Syn/The Scarecrow were all edited and repackaged for movie theaters after successful runs on TV. At least "Hannah Montana: The Movie" was original material.

Disney will definitely be perceived as being in a slump this year, but not every year can boast a "POTC" or "Enchanted" or "Wall*E." "Up" and "G-Force," although they probably won't have stellar returns, will almost certainly be profitable. In this economy, I don't think it's entirely a bad idea to play small ball. That's exactly what Eisner did when he first took over Disney, and it brought the studio back to prominence after being pronounced DOA.

2009 may be a soft year, but somehow, I think Disney will manage just fine.

[merlinjones]

I think the fact that the Disney Channel tween properties have replaced classic Walt Disney animation as the brand flagship is hurting the legacy outside the franchise demos. While those things may be popular now, they will age more like The Brady Bunch and Saved by the Bell than Snow White, Sleeping Beauty and Mary Poppins. Disney's lifestyle marketing is forgetting who they are - - and so are the masses.

[Another Voice]

don't forget that Davy Crockett, Zorro and Dr. Syn/The Scarecrow were all edited and repackaged for movie theaters after successful runs on TV.

It always strikes me as pathetic when someone attempts to justify today's horrible performance by pointing to business practices from more than half a century ago.

How many households even had television sets in 1954? What coverage did ABC have back when where first starting out (as opposed today when people simply choose to avoid the network)? How many cable channels where there broadcasting reruns 24 hours a day? And a box you could have at home that would show television programs whenever you wanted...that was pure science fiction. If you have a TV show that less than half the country can see, how else do you get it infront of an audience?

Things are very different today. Starting with Disney itself. In the past, Disney was a creative organization that knew growth could only come from new materials and new properties. That is risky.

Today's Disney can not create - all they can do is exploit.

Today's management can not accept the risk. They lack the confidence in themselves (and in Bob Iger's case, cowardice is certainly justifed) nor do they have any creative desire. All they want is to keep the trough filled with cash and all the hogs fat. 'Hanna Montana' movies and Jonas Brothers DVDs for sale in Adventureland are nothing but stripmining properties by management to is without talent, ability, or a sense to know they are WAY to over their heads.

[Aladdin]

UP has been another success for Pixar, so at least that is keeping Disney from an entirely dry summer.

However if ANYONE has ANY hopes for G-force. . . . . well, you have higher expectations for the guinea pigs, than I ever would.