Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 46
  1. #1

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Chicago. Illinois
    Posts
    133

    What is your opinion of Michael Eisner and his legacy for WDW?

    I'm a grad student in marketing and Disney comes up a lot in our classes (along with Coke and other longstanding brands). Today in one of my classes we were having a discussion about really terrible CEOs and the damages they do to brands when they let egos get in the way. One lady in my class went on about Michael Eisner for a while and how he made a lot of terribel decisions for WDW.

    I thought I would post a question here and ask what others thought of Michael Eisner and what they think of his legacy.

    Personally, I was a kid in the 90s and I remember on ABC there were a lot of Disney specials on Sunday nights and Michael Eisner always introduced them -- I thought he had a giant ego to do that. It always seemed to me like he was pushing and shoving to get in front of the camera. There were times when Mickey and Minnie would be with him and he'd almost shove Mickey down to get in front. I never liked him because I don't like self-promoters.

    I've heard through the years that he was responsible for a lot of the weird choices that Disney made during his reign...like the Swan and Dolphin hotels that are too tall and destroy sightlines to attractions. I also heard that he was responsible for killing the Beastly Kingdom at AK. I actually remember being so excited for a park where real, extinct, and imaginary animals could be see all at once...and I heard later that Eisner was who killed a lot of great ideas there. I've also heard he was responsible for HS and how badly it turned out...and for Euro Disney which was a mini disaster.

    Did Eisner do anything right?

    Does anyone know any good articles or books I could read about him and his time at Disney?

    It would be really helpful to me if you voice your opinions on this because I am sure we'll talk about him in classes again and I want to have something intelligent to say.

  2. #2

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Morva in the Land of Prydain
    Posts
    4,440

    Re: What is your opinion of Michael Eisner and his legacy for WDW?

    ORGOCH: Ya don't wanna' know my opinion a Mikey Ei$ner 'cause it ain't purdy. I'll just let the rest a the folks 'round here speak their minds instead.

  3. #3

    • враг народа
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    14,060
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: What is your opinion of Michael Eisner and his legacy for WDW?

    I actually somewhat miss Eisner when compared to Iger. I liked that there was a personality and face to the media empire he created.

    I think Keys to the Kingdom: The Rise of Michael Eisner and the Fall of Everybody Else by Kim Masters and DisneyWar by James Stewart.

  4. #4

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    146

    Re: What is your opinion of Michael Eisner and his legacy for WDW?

    I also recommend DisneyWar. I also want to point out a favorite Cast Member story... Aparently once he realized he was going to get the boot, he made a trip to Brazil and apologized for the banning of tour groups in WDW and officially invited them all back. The thing is, they were banned for rampant shoplifting and other behaviors. Anyone who has encountered a Brazilian Tour Group while in the parks understands what a terrifying thing Eisner intentionally unleashed on the parks. That and all the sequels in classic Disney films *shudder*
    WDW Cast Member August 2009 - November 2011

  5. #5

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    62

    Re: What is your opinion of Michael Eisner and his legacy for WDW?

    Well I really do not remember Eisner but have heard of what he did, all I can say is look at WDW and all the other "Eisner" projects and see where they stand, DCA is getting a billion dollar makeover, I am sure HWS and WDS are in for it as well and Fantasy Land has that huge expansion too. So all in all almost everything Eisner made is be re-imagined.

  6. #6

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Chicago. Illinois
    Posts
    133

    Re: What is your opinion of Michael Eisner and his legacy for WDW?

    Can you talk more about the Tour Groups issue? I had never heard of that before.

  7. #7

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Paper St
    Posts
    1,346

    Re: What is your opinion of Michael Eisner and his legacy for WDW?

    Michael Eisner did a lot wrong, but he did a lot more right. With a CEO as dynamic as him how could you not have a few failures?

    It seems that people criticize Eisner for being money-hungry. What kind of criticism is that? A company's main goal is to make profit, sorry if that ruins the Disney image for you. Before Dismey is the happiest place on earth, it's a company that was created for the sole purpose of making money. Eisner definitely succeeded there. He expanded the Disney empire vastly. The only major failure he had was Euro Disney but to his fairness, that was a beautifully-themed and thought-out project it just had unexpectedly disappointing results. But it's not like building it was an ignorant decision--look at the park now, it's relatively successful. ESPN, ABC, Touchstone, etc. all gave Disney some very inspired creations (Roger Rabbit comes to mind). He was in charge during the Disney Renaissance. He funded some great projects in the parks in his day. He started the Disney Cruise Line, my personal favorite aspect of the Disney company.

    People always focus on the negative aspects of things because usually they're easier to pinpoint than the positives, especially if there were several positives. And it's not really fair. Sorry if you don't like that Eisner set out to make money...if he didn't, Disney wouldn't be what it is today, so people should thank him for that.

  8. #8

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Chicago. Illinois
    Posts
    133

    Re: What is your opinion of Michael Eisner and his legacy for WDW?

    I didn't know he was behind the cruise line.

    That was one of the smartest investments...and one of the coolest things I could have imagined Disney doing. If he was behind that then that does improve my opinion of him!

  9. #9

    • Closed Account
    • Offline

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    211

    Re: What is your opinion of Michael Eisner and his legacy for WDW?

    Eisner was great as long as Frank Wells was around to reign him in. As soon as Wells died, Eisner had nobody to tell him "No" he made terrible decisions.

  10. #10

    • New Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    The big easy
    Posts
    31

    Re: What is your opinion of Michael Eisner and his legacy for WDW?

    Quote Originally Posted by Krack View Post
    Eisner was great as long as Frank Wells was around to reign him in. As soon as Wells died, Eisner had nobody to tell him "No" he made terrible decisions.
    I think that Mr. Eisner was the best thing that ever happened to Disney.

  11. #11

    • WDW will always be home.
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    697

    Re: What is your opinion of Michael Eisner and his legacy for WDW?

    Whoo boy. Way to open the powder keg.

    I am no fan of Eisner's, but I think that he has unfairly been labeled the bogeyman of Disney. There are a lot of things to complain about, true. But people forget a lot of the good things he did, as well as the fact that he wasn't necessarily personally and directly responsible for everything bad that happened during his tenure.

    Quote Originally Posted by DragoHarley View Post
    Does anyone know any good articles or books I could read about him and his time at Disney?
    I'm answering this first because it's where a lot of my info will be coming from. The most exhaustive and thoroughly researched work on Michael Eisner's time at TWDC is undoubtedly Disney War by James B. Stewart; some would probably say that it is unfairly biased against Eisner, but I think it's fairly objective. If you want something that's biased in favor of Eisner, to balance things out, you can read his autobiography, Work In Progress. If you're interested primarily or exclusively in Eisner's impact on WDW, I'd highly recommend Realityland by David Koenig, which is one of the best books on WDW history in general, and devotes significant time to the impact that Eisner had on WDW (warning: if you have a fondness for old school WDW, or care about Walt's legacy, this book will probably leave you feeling very depressed).

    Quote Originally Posted by DragoHarley View Post
    Did Eisner do anything right?
    I'm answering this question second because I think it's appropriate to give Eisner his due before I proceed to eviscerate him.

    Yes. Eisner did a lot of things right. Eisner oversaw the revitalization of the creativity of TWDC at a time when things seemed to be stale and stagnant. While Eisner was CEO:
    • The Disney Animation "renaissance" occurred which made animated films relevant and hugely financial successful again thanks to The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, and The Lion King
    • Walt Disney World underwent a period of enormous expansion where Downtown Disney grew, Disney MGM Studios and Animal Kingdom were built, and tons of hotels were added
    • The variety and quality of food offerings at Walt Disney World was improved tremendously
    • Euro Disney was built, which despite the resort's financial troubles (I'll get to that) contains the most beautiful, extravagant, and detailed Magic Kingdom style park, ever
    • The Disney Cruise Line was launched, which is still one of the best, most immersive, and most enjoyable Disney vacation experiences one can have IMHO
    • Disney became a major media company with the purchase of ABC/Capital Cities, which could be good or bad depending on your perspective, but was (eventually) extremely valuable from the shareholders' perspective


    Quote Originally Posted by DragoHarley View Post
    Personally, I was a kid in the 90s and I remember on ABC there were a lot of Disney specials on Sunday nights and Michael Eisner always introduced them -- I thought he had a giant ego to do that. It always seemed to me like he was pushing and shoving to get in front of the camera. There were times when Mickey and Minnie would be with him and he'd almost shove Mickey down to get in front. I never liked him because I don't like self-promoters.
    It's interesting you should mention this. Disney War insinuates, not so subtly, that Eisner saw himself as Walt's rightful heir and successor, and thus wanted to be the public face of the company and introduce the TV specials as Walt had done. Regardless of what you think of Eisner, I think pretty much everyone would agree - he's not Walt and never was.

    Quote Originally Posted by DragoHarley View Post
    I've heard through the years that he was responsible for a lot of the weird choices that Disney made during his reign...like the Swan and Dolphin hotels that are too tall and destroy sightlines to attractions.
    Yes, see my post from another thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by DragoHarley View Post
    I also heard that he was responsible for killing the Beastly Kingdom at AK. I actually remember being so excited for a park where real, extinct, and imaginary animals could be see all at once...and I heard later that Eisner was who killed a lot of great ideas there. I've also heard he was responsible for HS and how badly it turned out...and for Euro Disney which was a mini disaster.
    I'd like to answer these in chronological order.

    DHS
    Eisner's original vision for DHS was actually pretty awesome, IMHO. (How the plans for it were kind of stolen from Universal is probably pretty unethical, but that's another story.) Walt Disney Productions had always been, as a studio, outside of the Hollywood mainstream. Eisner came from Paramount, and was very much within the Hollywood mainstream. Eisner wanted to build a park that would not only head off competition from Universal, but also leave his mark on WDW - something that only he could bring to the table in the "Hollywoodness" of it. Thus we got DHS, which as it was originally conceived - a real, working studio that also had a theme park "front end" was pretty awesome. The tram tour was relevant because you could see real things being filmed. The animation tour had a point because you could watch real Disney animators at work. And most of all, the theming of the place - as it was originally constructed/planned - was actually coherent. DHS was a good park when it opened, albeit a "half day" park that was knowingly and intentionally constructed as a half day park.

    Two things then happened - (1) guests were understandably unhappy about paying a full day's price for a park that offered half the experience and twice the wait as the MK or Epcot, and (2) the "real working studio concept" started to fizzle out and eventually died. As a result of these two things, multiple expansion efforts were put in place to give the park more to offer and distract from the fact that it was no longer a real working studio. Over the last 23 years, that's led to what we have today, which is a mishmash of concepts - some of which are awesome and some of which suck - thrown together in a single park without a coherent identity or purpose for being. It's not too unlike DCA pre-refurb, except that DCA was built that way, whereas DHS has slowly, painfully devolved into that.

    So how much is Eisner to blame for it? Well, DHS is his park - it reflects his personality and approach to Disney theme parks, but it's important to remember that DHS as it exists today was not what he intended it to be, and some of what it is today is due to forces beyond his control. That doesn't excuse him from all the blame though, because he did oversee a good portion of its slide into mediocrity.

    Euro Disney
    One thing you can't accuse Eisner of regarding Euro Disney, was approaching it without enthusiasm. Eisner was excited by the potential of creating a Disney World Europe, and went at the project with everything he had. That, ultimately, led to its downfall. Eisner essentially gave WDI carte blanche to do what they wanted in building the Euro Disney park - even today, you can walk through Disneyland Paris park and see that no expense was spared in its construction. It truly is one of the most gorgeous and magnificent parks ever built; second only, perhaps, to Tokyo DisneySea. Credit for that has to at least partially go to Eisner for giving the Imagineers the necessary funds to reach their potential.

    Eisner, however, made two crucial mistakes. Most of the business analysis said that Madrid or Barcelona would be a preferable host city for Euro Disney as opposed to Paris, as there would be less cultural aversion to Disney in Spain, and the climate would be much warmer and less given to precipitation. Eisner ignored this advice as he thought it would be more prestigious to locate the park near Paris. In addition, Eisner was enamored with how he had increased profits at WDW through a massive hotel build up in the last few years, and wanted Euro Disney to open with seven hotels. This was done without any concern for the fact that as a resort with only one park near a city that is itself a major tourist destination, most guests would be day trippers living or staying in Paris. Additionally, Europeans in general prefer smaller bed and breakfasts to big, boxy hotels.

    The above two mistakes, primarily the latter, led to Euro Disney being a complete financial disaster. The park, expensive as it was, was tremendously successful - and has been since day 1 one of the most visited tourist destinations in Europe. The resort, however, could not recover from the debt caused by all those empty hotel rooms, and went on to be extremely financially troubled to this day.

    Animal Kingdom
    Animal Kingdom is another park that similar to DHS, had an awesome original concept (IMHO) and suffers from lack of adequate follow-up. Yes, Beastly Kingdom got the axe, but I honestly think that has more to do with the system that Eisner put in place rather than Eisner directly.

    Go back to 1992 - Euro Disney is a complete financial disaster. As a public company, someone at Disney has to be responsible to the shareholders for the failure. Despite the fact that a lot (if not most) of the blame should have been shouldered by Eisner for the aforementioned reasons, he sure as hell wasn't going to take responsibility for it publicly. Eisner decided to blame the Imagineers who had "recklessly" spent so much in the construction of the park. He then made two decisions that have forever altered Disney theme parks, and not for the better. Whereas before WDI had had ultimate responsibility for/ownership over the parks and could build/modify them as they wished; Eisner gave Park Ops executive responsibility for the parks and WDI essentially became an outside contractor. Yes, WDI was still owned by TWDC, but they could only build attractions/hotels/restaurants as contracted by Park Ops Management, and would sometimes have to compete against other contractors for the job. Additionally, Eisner created the Strategic Planning department, which had the ability to alter budgets and cancel projects at will if a dollars and sense business case couldn't be made for them. Over the next decade, Strategic Planning began to squeeze the life out of the parks - eliminating anything and everything without a direct connection to profit.

    This is all going on while DAK is being conceptualized. A lot of aspects of DAK as originally planned would fall victim to Strategic Planning. Or Park Ops, after DAK was opened, would decide that they really didn't Beastly Kingdom... yet. Possibly ever. Did Eisner himself make those cutbacks? Doubtful. But he put the Parks & Resorts division on a trajectory that made those kinds of decisions common place.

    Quote Originally Posted by DragoHarley View Post
    I thought I would post a question here and ask what others thought of Michael Eisner and what they think of his legacy.
    I'm answering this last because it's the most comprehensive question, and I think deserves a more thoughtful answer.

    Eisner himself said that his primary legacy at the Disney Company would be culinary (improved food at the parks/resorts) and entertainment architecture (imaginative architectural styles for the hotels at resorts and corporate buildings). I believe that's right. I think he undoubtedly left his mark and improved the company in both of those areas.

    I think that the first half of the Eisner era was tremendously successful and exciting. I also think some of the praise for that has to go to Ron Miller. Ron Miller gets unfairly denigrated quite a bit, IMHO, but a lot of Eisner's early successes came from initiatives started by Ron Miller - Touchtone and The Disney Channel were both Ron Miller ideas that Eisner ended up taking the credit for. I believe that a lot of the creativity that Eisner is praised for, could have been handled just as well if not better by Ron Miller, after the controlling and overly conservative Card Walker retired. I can't substantiate that beyond my own opinion, but neither can those who say that Eisner saved Walt Disney Productions from the bankruptcy that would have ensued under Miller.

    I think the key to understanding the Eisner legacy - and how there seem to be two different Eisners (one from 1984-1994, and one from 1994-2005) - is understanding the supporting characters. Eisner was CEO when the animation department was revitalized, but how much of that was his doing? Informed observers would tell you that the success of the animation division in the early '90s was due more to Howard Ashman and Jeffrey Katzenberg than Eisner. The Parks & Resorts, particularly WDW, experienced a "boom" period during the first part of Eisner's tenure, but how much of that was Eisner and how much of that was Frank Wells and "the old guard" who were hanging around until 1994 and saw themselves as "protecting" the parks from Eisner? Is it a coincidence that the parks started to go downhill after Wells' untimely death and the retirement of Dick Nunis? Even if that is the case, and Eisner happened to benefit from those he had around him, he still was the one who actually enabled those around him to achieve their potential, so he still deserves some of the credit.

    If I had to sum up Eisner's impact and legacy succinctly, I think I'd say his tenure was characterized by a lot of flash and excitement, with little long-term vision. Eisner knew what he wanted to do, but he didn't know where he wanted the company (in particular Parks & Resorts) to go in the long term; and he failed to see the long-term effects of his short-term decisions. Notably, this is the biggest thing that has been lacking at the company ever since Eisner took over. I'll defer to Michael Crawford on this who sums it up in his blog post, Ten Wishes for the New Year: #1:

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Crawford
    Vision didn’t used to be a problem with Disney. Walt obviously had a singular vision that no one would dare question. And, arguably, modern management has a vision too. Michael Eisner seemed to have a clear agenda when he arrived, and I assume Bob Iger knows where he wants things to go. But the scope of the company’s vision has become increasingly narrow, just as it has been cluttered by the exponential diversification of the company itself...

    The prime example for me of this ideology is Walt Disney World, as originally built and up to around 1988. There’s something that has always appealed to me about the resort in those early days; pieced together like gears in a clock, all its parts seemed to work in unison and thus in harmony. This could be seen onstage, with the lack of what John Hench would call “visual contradictions,” but also backstage...

    That’s what I want. I want someone at the top looking at the big picture and really thinking about what the company is doing and why. That goes into every other point I’ve made on this list. Why are there cartoon monsters in Tomorrowland? Why is transportation at Walt Disney World such a mess? Why is Walt Disney Studios Paris such a disaster? Why has it been 15 years since Disneyland Paris received a major new attraction; why is it 23 years since there has been a World Showcase pavilion? Why did Eisner build the Dolphin and Swan so that they destroyed the view of World Showcase, and can anything ever be done about that? Why is it so hard to find themed merchandise to buy in the parks? Does “The Seas with Nemo and Friends” adequately serve the purpose of an EPCOT attraction? Do “Balzac” kiosks?
    For all of the good Eisner did for the company, and all of the big spending he engaged in when he initially arrived, his lack of vision, IMHO, is his cardinal fault, and is one that sadly, TWDC (in particular Parks & Resorts) is still unable to fully recover from.
    Last edited by PSUMark; 04-12-2012 at 05:13 PM.
    I knew if this business was ever to get anywhere, if this business was ever to grow, it could never do it by having to answer to someone unsympathetic to its possibilities, by having to answer to someone with only one thought or interest, namely profits. For my idea of how to make profits has differed greatly from those who generally control businesses such as ours. I have blind faith in the policy that quality, tempered with good judgment and showmanship, will win against all odds.
    -Walt Disney



  12. #12

    • враг народа
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    14,060
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: What is your opinion of Michael Eisner and his legacy for WDW?

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerDurden View Post
    It seems that people criticize Eisner for being money-hungry. What kind of criticism is that? A company's main goal is to make profit, sorry if that ruins the Disney image for you. Before Dismey is the happiest place on earth, it's a company that was created for the sole purpose of making money.
    Yes, but how one seeks to calculate that profit has been made is a big part of the game. Before Pressler, the Resorts were measured more in the big picture. The goal was for the entire complex to make money. This allowed for smaller attractions and shops and other specialties, as their breaking even and maybe even losses were made up for elsewhere. This was a bit of a problem when it came to Disneyland Paris as it was all brought down by the hotels. Under Pressler's leadership Disneyland and then Walt Disney Parks and Resorts switched to a retail business model in which the individual components are all measured for their profitability. This killed any room for the little things that made the experience and played a role in creating the so-called "Disney magic." Terms like Disneyland or Walt Disney World are now more labels for a variety of businesses within a geographic proximity. The top selling items became the only items and the situation devolved into a glorified mall filled with only variations on the same store.

  13. #13

    • WDW will always be home.
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    697

    Re: What is your opinion of Michael Eisner and his legacy for WDW?

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerDurden View Post
    Before Dismey is the happiest place on earth, it's a company that was created for the sole purpose of making money.
    I think I agree with the gist of your point, which is that Disney is a for-profit company, but...

    Quote Originally Posted by Walt Disney
    I knew if this business was ever to get anywhere, if this business was ever to grow, it could never do it by having to answer to someone unsympathetic to its possibilities, by having to answer to someone with only one thought or interest, namely profits.
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt Disney
    When we opened Disneyland, a lot of people got the impressions that it was a get-rich-quick thing, but they didn't realize that behind Disneyland was this great organization that I built here at the Studio, and they all got into it and we were doing it because we loved to do it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt Disney
    Disneyland is a work of love. We didn't go into Disneyland just with the idea of making money.
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt Disney
    Disneyland is not just another amusement park. It's unique, and I want it kept that way. Besides, you don't work for a dollar - you work to create and have fun.
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt Disney
    I have never been interested in personal gain or profit. This business and this studio have been my entire life.
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt Disney
    People look at me in many ways. They've said, 'The guy has no regard for money.' That is not true. I have had regard for money. It depends on who's saying that. Some people worship money as something you've got to have piled up in a big pile somewhere. I've only thought about money in one way, and that is to do something with it. I don't think there's a thing I own that I will ever get the benefit of except through doing things with it. I don't even want the dividends from the stock in the studio, because the government's going to take it away. I'd rather have that in (the company) working.
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt Disney
    We grew to our present size almost against ourselves. It was not a deliberately planned commercial venture in the sense that I sat down and said that we were going to make ourselves into a huge financial octopus. We evolved by necessity. We did not sit down and say to ourselves, 'How can we make a big pile of dough?' It just happened.
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt Disney
    I've always been bored with just making money. I've wanted to do things; I wanted to build things, to get something going.
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt Disney
    I don't make pictures just to make money. I make money to make more pictures.


    ---------- Post added 04-12-2012 at 09:29 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by lazyboy97O View Post
    Yes, but how one seeks to calculate that profit has been made is a big part of the game. Before Pressler, the Resorts were measured more in the big picture. The goal was for the entire complex to make money. This allowed for smaller attractions and shops and other specialties, as their breaking even and maybe even losses were made up for elsewhere. This was a bit of a problem when it came to Disneyland Paris as it was all brought down by the hotels. Under Pressler's leadership Disneyland and then Walt Disney Parks and Resorts switched to a retail business model in which the individual components are all measured for their profitability. This killed any room for the little things that made the experience and played a role in creating the so-called "Disney magic." Terms like Disneyland or Walt Disney World are now more labels for a variety of businesses within a geographic proximity. The top selling items became the only items and the situation devolved into a glorified mall filled with only variations on the same store.
    This. 100% this.
    I knew if this business was ever to get anywhere, if this business was ever to grow, it could never do it by having to answer to someone unsympathetic to its possibilities, by having to answer to someone with only one thought or interest, namely profits. For my idea of how to make profits has differed greatly from those who generally control businesses such as ours. I have blind faith in the policy that quality, tempered with good judgment and showmanship, will win against all odds.
    -Walt Disney



  14. #14

    • Senior Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    8,890

    Re: What is your opinion of Michael Eisner and his legacy for WDW?

    PSUMark's excellent post nails it.

    I can only add that Michael had a personal penchant for playing people against people within the Company. He created and fueled a culture of political viciousness that was horrendously destructive to the Company in general, and particularly damaging to the creative process at WDFA and WDI.

    Senior management personnel whom Michael hired and promoted did incalculable damage to Disney's personnel and Disney's heritage. Paul Pressler was no fluke; like many less publicly known managers in other Disney divisions, he was the result of a corporate culture, philosophy and value system that came directly from Michael -- a culture which still has not entirely left the Company.

    It became much worse after Frank died and Jeffrey left, but make no mistake, Michael was doing it from the first day he drove onto the lot.
    "With the acquisition of Marvel and now of Lucasfilm,
    Disney may have finally found the grail. You don't need
    imagination or art. All you need is a brand."

    - Neil Gabler


  15. #15

    • WDW will always be home.
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    697

    Re: What is your opinion of Michael Eisner and his legacy for WDW?

    Quote Originally Posted by lazyboy97O View Post
    I actually somewhat miss Eisner when compared to Iger. I liked that there was a personality and face to the media empire he created.
    I'm sympathetic to this point of view. While some of Eisner's decisions were tremendously destructive to the company in the long and short term, at least when he failed, he failed big. When Eisner did something, he really went after it, and was willing to take risks. Iger is arguably the most conservative, risk averse executive that Disney has had since Card Walker. You don't know where Iger stands or what his direction is because he only plays the sure bet.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Wiggins View Post
    PSUMark's excellent post nails it.

    I can only add that Michael had a personal penchant for playing people against people within the Company. He created and fueled a culture of political viciousness that was horrendously destructive to the Company in general, and particularly damaging to the creative process at WDFA and WDI.

    Senior management personnel whom Michael hired and promoted did incalculable damage to Disney's personnel and Disney's heritage. Paul Pressler was no fluke; like many less publicly known managers in other Disney divisions, he was the result of a corporate culture, philosophy and value system that came directly from Michael -- a culture which still has not entirely left the Company.

    It became much worse after Frank died and Jeffrey left, but make no mistake, Michael was doing it from the first day he drove onto the lot.
    Thanks for the kind words, and yes, this is also a very important point and one that I left out. The culture at Disney pre-Eisner has been maligned for being too lax and unconcerned with profits. Fair enough, but the culture during Eisner's tenure became absolutely toxic and still is.
    I knew if this business was ever to get anywhere, if this business was ever to grow, it could never do it by having to answer to someone unsympathetic to its possibilities, by having to answer to someone with only one thought or interest, namely profits. For my idea of how to make profits has differed greatly from those who generally control businesses such as ours. I have blind faith in the policy that quality, tempered with good judgment and showmanship, will win against all odds.
    -Walt Disney



Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

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
  •