sourceOriginally Posted by San Jose Mercury News
WARNING: Opinions ahead. You may disagree. I mean no offense. I certainly don't derive any pleasure from criticizing Disney, but I also see the benefit of approaching these issues with an honest and critical eye.
Although this attitude is hardly a surprise or wholly without merit, I still find it disheartening to see it so plainly and openly stated by Disney through a reputable news source. Reduce risk it does, but taking risks is necessary for success of truly astronomical proportions. If not for some rather large risks Disney made in the past (e.g. Disneyland itself), the brand would be far weaker and MiceChat wouldn't exist. Naturally, once you've amassed a huge corporation with a clear status as an industry leader (and industry creator), the risk-taking has to decrease, since there's so much more at stake. But I can't help feeling rather sad that the execs are willing to so matter-of-factly explain their belief that the theme parks exist primarily as a lucrative vehicle for cross-promoting brands that they've bought out, even if that means cutting out the sorts of original ideas that constitute a significant chunk of Disney's existing successes in the theme park arena to this day.
The road to hell is paved with quick bucks.
Let the flaming begin. XD
EDIT: Just for clarification, I'm very aware that there are plenty of people at Disney who do not think this way. Unfortunately, all it takes is a scattering of individuals in the right places.
EDIT AGAIN: Whoops! Definitely misread those two key letters in the article - it's Roth, not Ross, who said it. Doesn't mean it's not true, though.