Bob Iger Returns/Disney CEO Thread (2022)

[Nick]

More like a boss (Iger) who micromanaged and didn't work on developing his staff and the consequences of that. As much as everyone screams Iger, dude undermined those underneath him a lot....Tom Staggs, Kevin Mayers, and even clearly in this piece that is not kind to Chapek at all, Bob Chapek.

Chapek issue is he was didn't have three things to be Disney CEO: Charisma, Creativity, or Imagination. As much as I disagree with politics and 100% LGBTQIA+ rights, Chapek looking back before the backlash did the right thing by staying out of it. Everyone screams about performative allyship and unless Disney actively lobbied the state against the Don't Say Gay bill, it wouldn't change anything. The bill passed despite the press and helped a certain person's political career even more going against "woke" Disney.

When it came to creative decisionmaking, he chose an awful deputy to lead it. Kareem definitely sent some films that wouldn't have succeeded in theatres rightly to Disney+/Hulu such as Disenchanted, Rosaline, and even I would argue Luca, however one of the biggest issues Disney is facing actually is quality control which is why someone who worked Direct to Video should have never been CEO as none of Disney straight to DVD films with the exception of Lion King 1 1/2 was considered substantially good But the lack of quality control also leads itself to its previous history. DIsney had the same problems now back in the early 90s when people complain they were too "inappropriate"....Disney got around that by making content that was undeniably the best and quality so that those who complained had no room to talk except politics. Good content is good content even if you don't agree with the subject matter. Disney was making and putting out content that were universally recognized on the awards scene outside of best animated film. If you are going to make a film with a LGBT lead or a minority lead, you need to ensure you quality check because there are always things riding on it.

Chapek didn't understand that. While we are getting the most diverse lineup of characters, there is a huge level of heart and magic that is lacking and quality as well. The things that drove films like Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Lion King, Aladdin, and other late 80s/ early 90s film in the renaissance. At the core, Disney was selling no matter the journey you take in life may be hard, the journey will take you to where you need to go.

I will also argue that's probably even more a big issue in the parks and disaster created by Eisner every since he wanted to beat Universal and create his own version of Universal Studios. While IPs were always part of Disney parks, bringing in a park focused on IP and IP based rides when your other parks focused on original attractions for the most part, the gate was opened to where we are now. When your parks were created by making a sense of magic and wonder, all these IP based rides are not going to create that sense on wonder and amazement. The rides are great for what they are but when you look at the rides people really love...its the classics. Chapek's blue sky ideas for the parks were overly IP based, however, it something that Iger would probably continue and want to do. But just to show you...people really like the classics.

Latest Survey Ranks the Most Popular Rides at Walt Disney World, Across Every State

/PRNewswire/ -- A recent study from Upgraded Points (https://upgradedpoints.com/each-states-favorite-disney-world-ride-2021-survey/), was conducted in March...

www.prnewswire.com

The BEST Rides in Disney World, Ranked

What are the best rides in Walt Disney World? These are the top 10 according to our readers!

allears.net

Walt Disney World rides ranked: Here’s what Floridians like the best

Disney rides ranked: Do you agree with this new survey?

www.clickorlando.com

Even when it came to the newer rides...the non Disney IP rides based on survey results were more enjoyed than the Disney IP based rides.

Overall, Iger will have a hard path before him. I don't think he has the skill set to handle what will go on moving forward and we will definitely see how much his old team protected him.
Overall, Disney in the future

Not sure what you’re talking about but Chapek was the micromanager. Iger let every division do their thing.

 

[belloq87]

Bob Iger vs. Bob Chapek: Inside the Disney Coup

The former Walt Disney Co. chief executive undermined and then succeeded the man he had handpicked to lead the entertainment giant. Mr. Chapek told friends that Mr. Iger’s attitude seemed to be: “They work for me, not for you.”

www.wsj.com

A comprehensive look at the disastrous Chapek run including Scarlet Johanson's contract dispute, Don't Say Gay, and even some gossip that Josh was looking to QUIT in October as it became evident Chapek was out of his depths and blaming others for his faults.

I think this piece is almost just as damning towards Iger (and McCarthy, to a lesser extent) if you read between the lines.

There's nobody I'm comfortable with the thought of leading the company at this moment.

 

[quinnmac000]

Not sure what you’re talking about but Chapek was the micromanager. Iger let every division do their thing.

The former Disney chairman and CEO, who ran the company for 15 years, stuck around long after Mr. Chapek assumed the top job in February 2020. That Mr. Iger was unhappy with Mr. Chapek is well established. Less well known is the depth of his antipathy and the lengths he went to deflate Mr. Chapek behind the scenes.

Mr. Iger, then still under contract as executive chairman, didn’t move out of the office he kept at Disney’s headquarters in Burbank, Calif. He called strategy meetings with Mr. Chapek’s underlings without inviting the new CEO.

Mr. Chapek told friends that Mr. Iger’s attitude seemed to be: “They work for me, not for you.”

Mr. Iger, 71 years old, felt slighted that Mr. Chapek didn’t lean on him for advice. He told confidants that Mr. Chapek, 63, was doing a terrible job and that he was incompetent. As Mr. Chapek struggled to find his footing, Mr. Iger hovered in the wings. In a podcast interview, he said the Disney character he would most like to be was Thor, the Norse god who is coaxed out of retirement to help the superheroes conquer the villain Thanos in “Avengers: Endgame.”

If you having meetings with my subordinates without me and going around me every which way...you are micromanaging me.

 

[Nick]

If you having meetings with my subordinates without me and going around me every which way...you are micromanaging me.

Okay, they both did. Who probably did LESS based on the enthusiastic response on his return by creatives and people within Disney?

 

[Parkscope Joe]

I think this piece is almost just as damning towards Iger (and McCarthy, to a lesser extent) if you read between the lines.

There's nobody I'm comfortable with the thought of leading the company at this moment.

It's something that a lot of us have noticed for years now, that behind the success of the huge film franchises and animation the company was a leadership mess. Disney basically had no lifers that could make their way up management, everyone basically had to leave for years and then come back (with higher pay of course) and at that point, Disney is a stepping stone to Nike or something. The fact Chapek was looking at THE METAVERSE as an investment opportunity and not the parks is WILD. There needs to be some long soul searching going on in management.

 

[Mad Dog]

It's something that a lot of us have noticed for years now, that behind the success of the huge film franchises and animation the company was a leadership mess. Disney basically had no lifers that could make their way up management, everyone basically had to leave for years and then come back (with higher pay of course) and at that point, Disney is a stepping stone to Nike or something. The fact Chapek was looking at THE METAVERSE as an investment opportunity and not the parks is WILD. There needs to be some long soul searching going on in management.

Yes, it has been a crazy strategy. They basically bleed and ignore the highly profitable parks and place their bets on media, which is historically a roll of the dice with boom and bust cycles throughout it's history with
all companies.

 

[OrlandoGuy]

I think this piece is almost just as damning towards Iger (and McCarthy, to a lesser extent) if you read between the lines.

There's nobody I'm comfortable with the thought of leading the company at this moment.

Agreed. I read this less as an indictment of Chapek and more as a profile of a man who was being undermined from the jump by someone with severe control issues. Chapek obviously handled things poorly and made a lot of incorrect decisions (maybe out of spite?) but he clearly wasn’t set up for success.

Either way, really interesting read. Anyone else jonesing for the next season of Succession all of a sudden?

 

[Parkscope Joe]

FYI Len Testa is teasing on Mastodon that there is still more to this story.

 

[JoeCamel]

FYI Len Testa is teasing on Mastodon that there is still more to this story.

It's Disney - 3 sequels and a live action remake is the norm. The story is evergreen

 

[Nick]

Two moves that honestly should just happen already. ESPN is a big time drag on Disney's bottom line, ABC isn't much better, and tbh, if they go ahead and sell Hulu, they'd make out pretty well and they could just replace Hulu in the US with their Star brand, which they use on Disney+ internationally. This would get Disney out of the Network TV business, stop being forced to pay extortion pricing for live sports, get rid of two streaming services and allow them to better spend their money.

Also, if they *really* wanted to do live sports still, no one would be stopping them for bidding on rights still for a league and then putting games on Disney+. Prime Video, Apple+, Peacock, and Paramount+ all have live sports, Google just bought the rights to NFL Sunday Ticket, and Netflix is even talking about adding live sports.

Disney Analyst: Spinning Off ESPN, ABC Is “Best Path Forward”

"We see it as a reasonably probable late-'23 event," writes Wells Fargo's Steven Cahall.

www.hollywoodreporter.com

 

[Parkscope Joe]

Two moves that honestly should just happen already. ESPN is a big time drag on Disney's bottom line, ABC isn't much better, and tbh, if they go ahead and sell Hulu, they'd make out pretty well and they could just replace Hulu in the US with their Star brand, which they use on Disney+ internationally. This would get Disney out of the Network TV business, stop being forced to pay extortion pricing for live sports, get rid of two streaming services and allow them to better spend their money.

Also, if they *really* wanted to do live sports still, no one would be stopping them for bidding on rights still for a league and then putting games on Disney+. Prime Video, Apple+, Peacock, and Paramount+ all have live sports, Google just bought the rights to NFL Sunday Ticket, and Netflix is even talking about adding live sports.

Disney Analyst: Spinning Off ESPN, ABC Is “Best Path Forward”

"We see it as a reasonably probable late-'23 event," writes Wells Fargo's Steven Cahall.

www.hollywoodreporter.com

They still own FOX broadcasting right? WHy not sell that off first AT LEAST?

 

[Nick]

They still own FOX broadcasting right? WHy not sell that off first AT LEAST?

Disney? They never owned FOX. They do own FX, but that provides them with a lot of quality content.They were forced to sell off Fox Regional Sports as a part of the deal, which honestly was probably saving Disney from themselves anyway.

 

[rageofthegods]

Two moves that honestly should just happen already. ESPN is a big time drag on Disney's bottom line, ABC isn't much better, and tbh, if they go ahead and sell Hulu, they'd make out pretty well and they could just replace Hulu in the US with their Star brand, which they use on Disney+ internationally. This would get Disney out of the Network TV business, stop being forced to pay extortion pricing for live sports, get rid of two streaming services and allow them to better spend their money.

Also, if they *really* wanted to do live sports still, no one would be stopping them for bidding on rights still for a league and then putting games on Disney+. Prime Video, Apple+, Peacock, and Paramount+ all have live sports, Google just bought the rights to NFL Sunday Ticket, and Netflix is even talking about adding live sports.

Disney Analyst: Spinning Off ESPN, ABC Is “Best Path Forward”

"We see it as a reasonably probable late-'23 event," writes Wells Fargo's Steven Cahall.

www.hollywoodreporter.com

There's maybe a logic here to eventually spinning off ESPN given how bad Disney's balance sheet is rn (thanks, Fox merger!) but this is kind of the opposite of the case. ESPN is a huge contributor to Disney's earnings right now, like their division is literally the highest or second-highest contributor outside of Parks. We'll see how that shakes out with the continued rise of sports costs and declining linear earnings but any ESPN spinoff would be painful and have to be carefully considered.

Hulu... I don't see a world where Comcast buys Hulu anymore. Yeah yeah, Peacock needs scale or whatever, but they won't own the content, which is what matters, so why not just fleece Disney and saddle up a big competitor with even more debt right as a bunch of other attractive acquisition targets (Roku, potentially Activision) which could actually be transformative go cheap?

 

[Nick]

There's maybe a logic here to eventually spinning off ESPN given how bad Disney's balance sheet is rn (thanks, Fox merger!) but this is kind of the opposite of the case. ESPN is a huge contributor to Disney's earnings right now, like their division is literally the highest or second-highest contributor outside of Parks. We'll see how that shakes out with the continued rise of sports costs and declining linear earnings but any ESPN spinoff would be painful and have to be carefully considered.

Hulu... I don't see a world where Comcast buys Hulu anymore. Yeah yeah, Peacock needs scale or whatever, but they won't own the content, which is what matters, so why not just fleece Disney and saddle up a big competitor with even more debt right as a bunch of other attractive acquisition targets (Roku, potentially Activision) which could actually be transformative go cheap?

I just see ESPN as a drag on the company and even if on paper it may be doing okay, my point is, people keep canceling cable which is part of how ESPN makes a chunk of their money, sports rights are through the roof and there are more people in the market to buy rights than ever, and Disney is pricing people out of things like UFC PPV events, especially in a bad economy.

I think if you can just get rid of it for however many billion and not have to deal with that hassle, it'd be a win for the company. ABC as well has the same issue. People continuing to cancel cable, almost all of the content on ABC is Disney produced, so it could just go on Disney+, and decreased ratings for things like the Oscars. It'd be worth far more in a sale than it provides Disney currently imo. Currently it's just sort of there.

Comcast may or may not want Hulu. Hulu has far more brand recognition than Peacock so I think that's the main draw, along with far better quality content that comes with Hulu, but the price would be steep. But what about Murdoch and new Fox? They've quietly started a new television studio and movie studio since they sold to Disney. It wouldn't be surprising to me if they want in again.

 

[rageofthegods]

I just see ESPN as a drag on the company and even if on paper it may be doing okay, my point is, people keep canceling cable which is part of how ESPN makes a chunk of their money, sports rights are through the roof and there are more people in the market to buy rights than ever, and Disney is pricing people out of things like UFC PPV events, especially in a bad economy.

I think if you can just get rid of it for however many billion and not have to deal with that hassle, it'd be a win for the company. ABC as well has the same issue. People continuing to cancel cable, almost all of the content on ABC is Disney produced, so it could just go on Disney+, and decreased ratings for things like the Oscars. It'd be worth far more in a sale than it provides Disney currently imo. Currently it's just sort of there.

Comcast may or may not want Hulu. Hulu has far more brand recognition than Peacock so I think that's the main draw, along with far better quality content that comes with Hulu, but the price would be steep. But what about Murdoch and new Fox? They've quietly started a new television studio and movie studio since they sold to Disney. It wouldn't be surprising to me if they want in again.

Sure, and eventually ESPN won't make sense with the broader company, but right now they need something to fund all that streaming content. Having a big, reliable source of cash flow that means you don't have to take on more debt to fund content is a competitive advantage in a world where basically everyone sans Netflix is losing billions on their streamers. Same thing with ABC: sure, they can send Grey's Anatomy directly to streaming, but despite the collapse in ratings there's still tens of millions of people across the country that watch broadcast, and it still rakes in a ton of dough. It's a big advertising platform for their content and a big source of revenue.

Re: Hulu, dunno who would buy it besides Disney. I doubt Fox Corp would do it, they've basically said in their earnings that they don't want to touch entertainment/scripted anymore, and that company is smaller than Hulu at this point anyway (16b market cap vs Hulu value of 27.3b per agreement between Comcast and Disney). Same problem applies to the other legacy companies, Sony doesn't want a streamer and Paramount would choke trying to buy it. The tech companies are gonna face scrutiny buying an asset that's not even global anyway. Roku might've back when they were worth 60b but not a chance in hell right now. Ditto Verizon, which briefly wanted it but right now is stuck in a fight for its life in its core business.

Who knows. Maybe someone will swoop in and buy it but I think the likeliest outcome right now is Disney grits its teeth and pays the 9b/offers Comcast some asset in return for a reduced fee. It was a deal made in a different time.

 

[Nick]

Sure, and eventually ESPN won't make sense with the broader company, but right now they need something to fund all that streaming content. Having a big, reliable source of cash flow that means you don't have to take on more debt to fund content is a competitive advantage in a world where basically everyone sans Netflix is losing billions on their streamers. Same thing with ABC: sure, they can send Grey's Anatomy directly to streaming, but despite the collapse in ratings there's still tens of millions of people across the country that watch broadcast, and it still rakes in a ton of dough. It's a big advertising platform for their content and a big source of revenue.

Re: Hulu, dunno who would buy it besides Disney. I doubt Fox Corp would do it, they've basically said in their earnings that they don't want to touch entertainment/scripted anymore, and that company is smaller than Hulu at this point anyway (16b market cap vs Hulu value of 27.3b per agreement between Comcast and Disney). Same problem applies to the other legacy companies, Sony doesn't want a streamer and Paramount would choke trying to buy it. The tech companies are gonna face scrutiny buying an asset that's not even global anyway. Roku might've back when they were worth 60b but not a chance in hell right now. Ditto Verizon, which briefly wanted it but right now is stuck in a fight for its life in its core business.

Who knows. Maybe someone will swoop in and buy it but I think the likeliest outcome right now is Disney grits its teeth and pays the 9b/offers Comcast some asset in return for a reduced fee. It was a deal made in a different time.

Fox Corp is putting out scripted content (just not a lot of it) through their Fox Entertainment production company, granted this production house is mostly used for reality competition shows.

If you want to talk about who would buy Hulu aside from Disney... well many may, but it would put Hulu in terrible hands. Blackrock for example. I think there's a number of investment firms who may be interested in buying.

 

[salismetho]

A lotta changes announced for both domestic resorts today (free parking for resort guests and no reservations needed after 2pm at WDW, earlier parkhopping time and official info on when they'll be selling MKs again for DL). Iger effect going strong rn

 

[Jerroddragon]

Disney Is Bringing Employees Back Four Days a Week (Published 2023)

The C.E.O., Robert A. Iger, said in a memo that he thought the move would benefit the company’s culture and creativity.

www.nytimes.com

This is the kinda BS that I hate from old CEO's. You don't need people in the office, some people sure but many jobs do not require being in an office and hate old CEO's who for sure go into the office whenever they hell they want but the people making the company run have to suffer because he's old.

 

[tielo]

Disney Is Bringing Employees Back Four Days a Week (Published 2023)

The C.E.O., Robert A. Iger, said in a memo that he thought the move would benefit the company’s culture and creativity.

www.nytimes.com

This is the kinda BS that I hate from old CEO's. You don't need people in the office, some people sure but many jobs do not require being in an office and hate old CEO's who for sure go into the office whenever they hell they want but the people making the company run have to suffer because he's old.

When I was still working (at Rabobank, the only AAA bank in the world at that time) it was all about the quality of the work you did, they couldn't be bothered if you worked from home, your vacation address or in the office. It makes workers happy, more productive and produce the best quality. Sure for some (aspects) of the job you need to be at an office. I was responsible for the plastic payment process (credit/debit cards). If there was a prio 1 incident I needed to be there (day or night) to make sure everyone was able to do it's job, make sure the right people where there or order in pizza to keep them fed.

 

[JoeCamel]

When I was still working (at Rabobank, the only AAA bank in the world at that time) it was all about the quality of the work you did, they couldn't be bothered if you worked from home, your vacation address or in the office. It makes workers happy, more productive and produce the best quality. Sure for some (aspects) of the job you need to be at an office. I was responsible for the plastic payment process (credit/debit cards). If there was a prio 1 incident I needed to be there (day or night) to make sure everyone was able to do it's job, make sure the right people where there or order in pizza to keep them fed.

I think Europe in general has a value that employees are hard to come by so you treat them well if you can. The US works people longer and harder in many cases to get the same amount of work out of them. I'm not surprised he is calling for this the investors will see it as a positive move.