Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456
Results 76 to 78 of 78

Thread: 12/20: Clubbed

  1. #76

    • Pilot EdForceOne
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    15,642

    Re: 12/20: Clubbed

    Quote Originally Posted by Moviela View Post
    Now Bob has to consider the musings of the Jobs Estate in his running of the company, and the sharp pencil boys working for the Jobs family have peeped that it would be wise to cutail the name use agreements simply because the leverage the Disney folks had has transferred to the Jobs camp. For those that are unaware, Jobs was the largest shareowner since he inked a deal for Pixar.
    While he was the largest individual shareholder... its not like he was in the driver's seat. He was the largest INDIVIDUAL shareholder.. its still less then 8% of the company. His seat on the board now is more influential then the share holdings.

    I mean, does it shock people that the second largest individual shareholder (and was the largest before the Pixar stock swap) was still Michael Eisner? Yet people weren't worried about meddling from his camp.

    The investment banks still own the vast majority of TWDC.
    Check out my blog - Coreplex: Rambling from inside the Grid


    Am I evil? yes, I am
    Am I evil? I am man, yes, I am

    Quote Originally Posted by sleepyjeff View Post
    Disneyland was meant to be sipped not chug-a-lugged

  2. #77

    • Registered Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Albuquerque New Mexico
    Posts
    97

    Re: 12/20: Clubbed

    Quote Originally Posted by Moviela View Post
    Changes in policy at the 33 have been needed for some time to thin the riff-raf that has become all too common in the joint. I feel there sould be only two types of membership. 1.) Sponsored company executives and 2.) Park lessees paying a large amount to associate their message with Disney. This includes their bona fide guests. I think celebrities and others should be allowed exclusive facilites inside existing establishments, like a pass line to the buffet in Vegas. I would really prefer the situation that was used at the Penthouse atop the old animation building. New members were admitted with the consent of old members, and hourly members were not allowed up the steps during working hours. Off the clock you could get a nice meal, a massage, exercise, tan on the roof, and have conversation with your peers.

    I hear lots of talk about "dropping" Walt from the film billboards. None of it is really accurate as to the "why." Simply put the name "Walt Disney" has an owner, and it receives compensation for its use, and the right to restrict the use. The owner has asked for more compensation than the company is willing to pay for certain rights. In some cases, the owner does not want to blur the line of ownership with other parties outside TWDC. The Henson estate comes to mind. Both Eisner and Iger have tried for years to attenuate the influence of the remaining Disney family members on the corporation. It was Bob who met Roy Disney (Walt's nephew) off the lot and told him he was finished. While Roy was at one time the largest shareowner, his estate planning needs reduced his ability to control, but while he hired Eisner, he had to wage a public campain to encourage Eisner to depart. Bob Iger is a compassionate intelligent man, and he saw no reason to exclude the wise council of Roy Disney, and encouraged his direction of feature animation.

    Now Bob has to consider the musings of the Jobs Estate in his running of the company, and the sharp pencil boys working for the Jobs family have peeped that it would be wise to cutail the name use agreements simply because the leverage the Disney folks had has transferred to the Jobs camp. For those that are unaware, Jobs was the largest shareowner since he inked a deal for Pixar.


    Lastly, the RPH for the Buena Vista St trolley is not important. What is important is that people see the trolley. It is movement, it encourges action. It is Walt's well know weenie at the end of the street that draws you down the lane.
    I take exception to the term "riff-raf" that you used. People who can afford the membership dues for Club 33 should be allowed to join if they want to.

    Another thing the company still has to pay Walt's family even if the name Walt is dropped and they just use Disney.
    James

    Once a Disney fan, always a Disney fan.

  3. #78

    • Hiding from the Sheeple
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    591

    Re: 12/20: Clubbed

    Quote Originally Posted by Moviela View Post
    Changes in policy at the 33 have been needed for some time to thin the riff-raf that has become all too common in the joint. I feel there sould be only two types of membership. 1.) Sponsored company executives and 2.) Park lessees paying a large amount to associate their message with Disney. This includes their bona fide guests. I think celebrities and others should be allowed exclusive facilites inside existing establishments, like a pass line to the buffet in Vegas. I would really prefer the situation that was used at the Penthouse atop the old animation building. New members were admitted with the consent of old members, and hourly members were not allowed up the steps during working hours. Off the clock you could get a nice meal, a massage, exercise, tan on the roof, and have conversation with your peers.
    Company execs don't provide revenue to Club 33. Even their memberships are paid through their corporate benefits package. Park lessees for the most part don't have any interest in Club 33. The club had to open itself to individual memberships in the 70's as corporate memberships did not keep it afloat. With so many entertainment options available to large corporations (suites at every stadium, arena and theatre and so many corporate villages at large sporting events) sending a client to a theme park to have a mediocre meal is just not realistic.

    Personally, I think celebrities and riffraff go hand in hand. Have you seen the behavior of some of these people? Drug arrests, drinking binges, poor clothing choices (if they wear anything at all). Half of the celebrities today are famous for nothing more than sex tapes or having a 30 day marriage. I worked for years doing concert tours and I can tell you from first-hand knowledge that a high percentage of these "celebrities" are the worst customers. Despite making a large salary they demand everything for free and have an elitist attitude where everything is to be supplied to them.

    The current system where Guest Relations screens those who wish to come to the park (on a complimentary basis) seems to work fine. I am opposed to rolling out the red carpet for someone simply because they are famous. If the management of Club 33 is tired of the riffraff, they need to implement rules on guest admission and guest behavior and allow a sufficient amount of time to see if a change can be made.

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456

Similar Threads

  1. 2/17: Clubbed & Pinned
    By Al Lutz in forum MiceAge Discussions
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 02-22-2009, 05:03 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •