Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why the Imagineers can at any time beat WWohP, but at the same time can't

Collapse

Get Away Today

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Why the Imagineers can at any time beat WWohP, but at the same time can't

    Originally posted by Micoofy Duck View Post
    I just don't see people always choosing Universal Studios over the Magic Kingdom just because of Harry Potter.
    I didn't even get around to asking my girls what they wanted to do this Summer when my oldest said, "Can we PLEASE go check out the new Harry Potter land at Universal Studios?"

    I don't think they will always choose Universal but I believe that WDW's attendance will definitely be affected by the opening of HP. Harry Potter is one of the largest franchises in the world, its crazy to assume that people aren't going to visit a location that recreates that world that a lot of kids grew up with.

    Originally posted by Mr Wiggins View Post
    Yep. That's exactly what WDW execs will do: give Universal a smug smile, chuckle among themselves, and continue on their current course as if they're the only show in town.
    And ultimately, that will be their downfall. That's assuming that's how they view the situation of course.

    Comment


    • Re: Why the Imagineers can at any time beat WWohP, but at the same time can't

      Originally posted by Tonka's Skipper View Post
      Hey there Bystander,

      My point was more that universal had so much material to work with and all they could do is biuld another rollar coaster.?????........Universal just doesn't have to ability to come up with anything unique!...the whole park is rollar coasters
      AKK
      Not to be rude, but have you ever really been to IOA?

      I remember my first time to IOA and USF when I was but a college program CM.... it was a simpler time.

      What i remember doing was running through the park and doing everything in 2 hours (it was January in 04).

      I had bought an AP before going, and after flying through the park i remember feeling it was just a quick side attraction.

      Because I was so used to doing the parks commando style, fighting big crowds etc I didn't allow the wonderful detail of IOA to really wash over me.

      Since that first, rushed visit I have been able to spend hundreds of hours in that park, and it is my favorite non-disney park and a close 2nd to Animal Kingdom for favorite park.

      The rich theming in the Port of Entry, the wonderful little hidden details in Marvel Super Hero Island, the little private areas of retreat in the Toon Lagoon, the seemingly endless areas to explore at Camp Jurassic and the Jurassic Park Discovery Center, the wonderful shows and lagoon overlook at the Lost Continent, and the wonderful quiet areas at Seuss Landing have given me so much to explore and take in.

      This is a park that like DAK if you rush from attraction to attraction you are missing the main attraction. IOA is a park where you have to temper your excitement and SLOW DOWN like DAK. When you slow down and begin to soak in the story telling this is when this park endears itself to you.
      Get the latest and greatest theme park news by

      Comment


      • Re: Why the Imagineers can at any time beat WWohP, but at the same time can't

        Originally posted by wizards8507 View Post
        What do you suggest?
        I am not entirely sure. Blackstone is in the business of owning, not managing, their various ventures. Each of the properties it owns in Florida are part of their own unique brand and identity that is part of its own respective chain.

        One idea may be a new subsidiary that, owned by Blackstone, takes over their share of Universal Orlando Resort and then owns shares of the other properties. This would allow for the parks to have a common ground for working together, while remaining a part of their respective chains.

        I think easier park hopping or transportation between parks and resorts would be a good first step.

        Originally posted by Tonka's Skipper View Post
        While I can surely see how Harry Potter will be popular..............from what I have seen its just a rollar coaster with the popular theming.
        That would the case for Flight of the Hippogriff and Dragon Challenge, but not Harry Potter and the Forbidden Journey. I would argue that the closest analogue to Flight of the Hippogriff would be The Barnstormer at Goofy's Wiseacre Farm, and it is not much more than a coaster. Disney's big thrill coaster, Rock 'n' Rollercoaster is in a dark room with some flats, which is hardly a big step.

        Lately, Disney has been relying on the "popular theming". There is nothing about Toy Story Midway Mania! that makes it dependent on the characters from the Toy Story films. The attraction would have been a better fit at Disney's California Adventure without the characters. Even at the Disney-MGM Studios it could have been something like a game show, instead of this weird amalgamation of being under Andy's bed that is at the Pixar film studio that is, for some odd reason, littered with giant toys, but then what's the point of "shrinking" as we enter Toy Story Midway Mania!?

        Comment


        • Re: Why the Imagineers can at any time beat WWohP, but at the same time can't

          Originally posted by HKDLFAN View Post
          So you're saying that "theme park geeks get frustrated" because the best theme park in the world hasn't been built in the USA?

          I wouldn't also get so frustrated over WDW. Every single person I know who has visited WDW, had the time of their lives even though they swore, bad mouthed and bashed HKDL. WDW as a whole is the best family vacation destination on the planet in my opinion and will never be "pwned" or "kicked in the arse" as many here say so.


          Walt Disney World is Disney's flagship resort. The highest attended and the biggest money maker. And yet... if you go there, you will NOT be able to experience the absolute best Disney has created. There's highlights, sure, but nothing that is entirely impressive beyond belief that is Tokyo Disney Sea.

          yes, you will have a great time, but the quality is lacking. It is frustrating when a company that used to lead by example is taking a back seat to glorified meet & greets and watered-down character attractions.


          Visit my mice chat toy shop!
          http://micechat.com/forums/merchandi...oy-shoppe.html

          Track Disney Animation Presence in the Theme Parks Worldwide!
          http://micechat.com/forums/disneylan...ired-them.html

          Comment


          • Re: Why the Imagineers can at any time beat WWohP, but at the same time can't

            Originally posted by Coheteboy View Post
            Walt Disney World is Disney's flagship resort. The highest attended and the biggest money maker. And yet... if you go there, you will NOT be able to experience the absolute best .
            That is probably the best and most simple argument there for quality of show at WDW.
            Get the latest and greatest theme park news by

            Comment


            • Re: Why the Imagineers can at any time beat WWohP, but at the same time can't

              Originally posted by Coheteboy View Post
              Walt Disney World is Disney's flagship resort. The highest attended and the biggest money maker. And yet... if you go there, you will NOT be able to experience the absolute best Disney has created. There's highlights, sure, but nothing that is entirely impressive beyond belief that is Tokyo Disney Sea.

              yes, you will have a great time, but the quality is lacking. It is frustrating when a company that used to lead by example is taking a back seat to glorified meet & greets and watered-down character attractions.
              It reminds me of when American Ski Company owned the ski resort my family goes to. Mount Snow was probably the only one that was making money for the company, and ASC was pouring it all into the other resorts. Now, ASC is out of business and Mount Snow is thriving.

              Shame on Disney for thinking that they don't have to work hard to bring the crowds in. They think they're going to come anyway. They probably will, but Disney needs to go back to striving to create top-notch entertainment and parks instead of striving for people to get in, eat food, and buy merchandise.
              -Hale (wumbology)

              a.k.a. h2mc, omnimover.mousetalgia, omnimover, wumbology, hogbackmtn, hhmcsharry, Hale M., h2m, h2mc

              (I've never visited Disneyland Resort, Tokyo Disney Resort, Disneyland Resort Paris, nor Hong Kong Disneyland Resort, so don't be fooled when I pretend to know what I'm talking about. [But I'm pretty good with the information, if I do say so myself. And you can hit me all you want with Walt Disney World.])


              Comment


              • Re: Why the Imagineers can at any time beat WWohP, but at the same time can't

                Originally posted by wumbology View Post
                Shame on Disney for thinking that they don't have to work hard to bring the crowds in. They think they're going to come anyway. They probably will, but Disney needs to go back to striving to create top-notch entertainment and parks instead of striving for people to get in, eat food, and buy merchandise.

                Please take a moment to learn something about business*:


                Explanation of fiduciary responsibility from Wikipedia:
                A fiduciary duty is a legal or ethical relationship of confidence or trust between two or more parties, most commonly a fiduciary and a principal. One party holds a fiduciary relation or acts in a fiduciary capacity to another. In a fiduciary relationship, one person, in a position of vulnerability, justifiably reposes confidence, good faith, reliance and trust in another whose aid, advice or protection is sought in some matter. In such a relationship good conscience requires one to act at all times for the sole benefit and interests of another, with loyalty to those interests.

                Applied to Disney and all corporations, the management team (the fiduciary) is required to act in the sole interest of the shareholders (the principal), who are the owners of the company. If delivering a top-notch customer experience will drive profits and shareholder wealth, then investments should be made to do so. If, however, capital expenditures will not be met with at least equal return on investment, then management teams have a legal and ethical responsibility not to make them. This is a basic principle of the corporate form of ownership/management, and is essential to maintain the integrity of the capital markets.

                So, then, what is to be done to ensure higher quality in the parks? Customers must make the decision to cease patronizing these parks if they feel that their needs are not being met by Disney. In this way, it will become the best interest of the company itself to invest more time and capital in their projects, because profits would suffer without these investments. Creating "top notch entertainment and parks" just for the sake of doing so would be irresponsible. It has been said that "quality will out," meaning that people will continue to pay a premium price for a premium product. If, however, you do not feel that you are being given a premim product any longer, the responsibility is on you to begin to refuse to pay the premium price.

                *Didn't mean that to be snotty, but wasn't sure how else to say it.

                Comment


                • Re: Why the Imagineers can at any time beat WWohP, but at the same time can't

                  Originally posted by wizards8507 View Post
                  Please take a moment to learn something about business*:


                  Explanation of fiduciary responsibility from Wikipedia:
                  A fiduciary duty is a legal or ethical relationship of confidence or trust between two or more parties, most commonly a fiduciary and a principal. One party holds a fiduciary relation or acts in a fiduciary capacity to another. In a fiduciary relationship, one person, in a position of vulnerability, justifiably reposes confidence, good faith, reliance and trust in another whose aid, advice or protection is sought in some matter. In such a relationship good conscience requires one to act at all times for the sole benefit and interests of another, with loyalty to those interests.

                  Applied to Disney and all corporations, the management team (the fiduciary) is required to act in the sole interest of the shareholders (the principal), who are the owners of the company. If delivering a top-notch customer experience will drive profits and shareholder wealth, then investments should be made to do so. If, however, capital expenditures will not be met with at least equal return on investment, then management teams have a legal and ethical responsibility not to make them. This is a basic principle of the corporate form of ownership/management, and is essential to maintain the integrity of the capital markets.

                  So, then, what is to be done to ensure higher quality in the parks? Customers must make the decision to cease patronizing these parks if they feel that their needs are not being met by Disney. In this way, it will become the best interest of the company itself to invest more time and capital in their projects, because profits would suffer without these investments. Creating "top notch entertainment and parks" just for the sake of doing so would be irresponsible. It has been said that "quality will out," meaning that people will continue to pay a premium price for a premium product. If, however, you do not feel that you are being given a premim product any longer, the responsibility is on you to begin to refuse to pay the premium price.

                  *Didn't mean that to be snotty, but wasn't sure how else to say it.
                  Meaning no offense to the above post, it's fascinating how Corporate business is perceived by Disney and its defenders as the key consideration in the creation and presentation of the visceral, emotional experience of Disney Magic "product."

                  Comment


                  • Re: Why the Imagineers can at any time beat WWohP, but at the same time can't

                    Originally posted by wizards8507 View Post
                    Please take a moment to learn something about business*:


                    Explanation of fiduciary responsibility from Wikipedia:
                    A fiduciary duty is a legal or ethical relationship of confidence or trust between two or more parties, most commonly a fiduciary and a principal. One party holds a fiduciary relation or acts in a fiduciary capacity to another. In a fiduciary relationship, one person, in a position of vulnerability, justifiably reposes confidence, good faith, reliance and trust in another whose aid, advice or protection is sought in some matter. In such a relationship good conscience requires one to act at all times for the sole benefit and interests of another, with loyalty to those interests.

                    Applied to Disney and all corporations, the management team (the fiduciary) is required to act in the sole interest of the shareholders (the principal), who are the owners of the company. If delivering a top-notch customer experience will drive profits and shareholder wealth, then investments should be made to do so. If, however, capital expenditures will not be met with at least equal return on investment, then management teams have a legal and ethical responsibility not to make them. This is a basic principle of the corporate form of ownership/management, and is essential to maintain the integrity of the capital markets.

                    So, then, what is to be done to ensure higher quality in the parks? Customers must make the decision to cease patronizing these parks if they feel that their needs are not being met by Disney. In this way, it will become the best interest of the company itself to invest more time and capital in their projects, because profits would suffer without these investments. Creating "top notch entertainment and parks" just for the sake of doing so would be irresponsible. It has been said that "quality will out," meaning that people will continue to pay a premium price for a premium product. If, however, you do not feel that you are being given a premim product any longer, the responsibility is on you to begin to refuse to pay the premium price.

                    *Didn't mean that to be snotty, but wasn't sure how else to say it.



                    And all this time, I thought I was a guest - not a customer?

                    And if you didn't know how to not make it snotty, that's because there's no way to do it without sounding snotty. ...which is reason enough that it's bad business.



                    Think of it this way. Walt Disney World is leading the herd not by quality, but by brain-washing the tourists to come because of the name. But what about folks like me that WOULD make frequent return visits if the quality was unparalleled anywhere else? How many other people out there are like me and will skip out on a week at Disney World because it's no longer worth it?

                    If Disney stays ahead of the curve, MORE tourists would come and MORE "disney fans" in general would come and MORE OFTEN.

                    Is that really bad for business? Is it? Of course there is a certain threshold of spending that would be impractical but as far as I'm concerned, when you have four theme parks.... you need to spend a LOT more than they have been.


                    Visit my mice chat toy shop!
                    http://micechat.com/forums/merchandi...oy-shoppe.html

                    Track Disney Animation Presence in the Theme Parks Worldwide!
                    http://micechat.com/forums/disneylan...ired-them.html

                    Comment


                    • Re: Why the Imagineers can at any time beat WWohP, but at the same time can't

                      Originally posted by Mr Wiggins View Post
                      Meaning no offense to the above post, it's fascinating how Corporate business is perceived by Disney and its defenders as the key consideration in the creation and presentation of the visceral, emotional experience of Disney Magic "product."
                      But it's not at all unusual for a business to be acting the way Disney does. In fact, it's somewhat odd for a business to act the way Walt did, providing more than the guests wanted or needed and doing everything to exceed expectations. Of course, we have him to thank that there is a company like Disney today. But they don't act on the same principles, or at least most of them don't. You need a visionary like Lasseter to come along and light a fire under the suits to get some of that corporate money flowing. Perhaps his influence will stretch to the east coast some day. . .

                      Comment


                      • Re: Why the Imagineers can at any time beat WWohP, but at the same time can't

                        Originally posted by Mr Wiggins View Post
                        Meaning no offense to the above post, it's fascinating how Corporate business is perceived by Disney and its defenders as the key consideration in the creation and presentation of the visceral, emotional experience of Disney Magic "product."
                        No offense taken, and none intended when I inquire as to your education in the field of business.

                        I'm not DEFENDING Disney, that's just how it is. It IS a product and the point is to sell the product. Walt was an artist, not a businessman. He created for the joy of creation and for creating joy in others. That all goes out the window with a publicly owned company.

                        How would you feel if you invested all of your money in a company and that company spent all of its capital on frivolous endeavors intended to be creative and beautiful, with those expenditures never resulting in a dividend or capital appreciation of your interest in the firm?

                        Again, I'm not defending anyone but it is what it is. I'm defending the legal and philosophical notion of fiduciary responsibility inherrent in the agent-principal relationship between management and shareholders. I'll say the same thing about Walmart, McDonalds, BP, and the pizza guy down the road.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Why the Imagineers can at any time beat WWohP, but at the same time can't

                          Originally posted by Coheteboy View Post
                          And all this time, I thought I was a guest - not a customer?

                          But what about folks like me that WOULD make frequent return visits if the quality was unparalleled anywhere else? How many other people out there are like me and will skip out on a week at Disney World because it's no longer worth it?

                          If Disney stays ahead of the curve, MORE tourists would come and MORE "disney fans" in general would come and MORE OFTEN.

                          Is that really bad for business? Is it? Of course there is a certain threshold of spending that would be impractical but as far as I'm concerned, when you have four theme parks.... you need to spend a LOT more than they have been.
                          You hit the nail on the head, and I couldn't agree more. I completely agree with you that it would be GOOD for business, the customer, AND the shareholder to be miles ahead of everyone else in terms of quality. The problem I have is people who demonize corporations for acting for profit. The problem that I have with Disney is NOT that they act for their shareholders. I just disagree with what they conclude to BE the best thing for sharholders.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Why the Imagineers can at any time beat WWohP, but at the same time can't

                            Originally posted by wizards8507 View Post
                            How would you feel if you invested all of your money in a company and that company spent all of its capital on frivolous endeavors intended to be creative and beautiful, with those expenditures never resulting in a dividend or capital appreciation of your interest in the firm?

                            If the expenses never amounted to any profit, then sure.. that would be bad. But HAS IT? Look at Disney's history. Even the bombs have become successes.


                            Visit my mice chat toy shop!
                            http://micechat.com/forums/merchandi...oy-shoppe.html

                            Track Disney Animation Presence in the Theme Parks Worldwide!
                            http://micechat.com/forums/disneylan...ired-them.html

                            Comment


                            • Re: Why the Imagineers can at any time beat WWohP, but at the same time can't

                              Originally posted by wizards8507 View Post
                              Again, I'm not defending anyone but it is what it is. I'm defending the legal and philosophical notion of fiduciary responsibility inherrent in the agent-principal relationship between management and shareholders. I'll say the same thing about Walmart, McDonalds, BP, and the pizza guy down the road.
                              The fallacy of the argument is in the assumption of "what it is" -- comparing Disney theme park product with that of Walmart, McDonalds, BP and the pizza guy down the road, without including the unique consumer expectation inherent in its unique heritage. TDO and TDA are filled with executives who make the same assumption.

                              Hence its decline.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Why the Imagineers can at any time beat WWohP, but at the same time can't

                                Originally posted by Coheteboy View Post
                                If the expenses never amounted to any profit, then sure.. that would be bad. But HAS IT? Look at Disney's history. Even the bombs have become successes.
                                I think we're coming the the exact same conclusion but getting there two different ways.

                                You want TDO to focus more on quality and less on the bottom line.

                                I love that TDO is focussing on the bottom line, but I think they're stupid not to realize that quality, not cost cutting, is what drives the bottom line.

                                Comment


                                • Re: Why the Imagineers can at any time beat WWohP, but at the same time can't

                                  Originally posted by wizards8507 View Post
                                  Please take a moment to learn something about business*:


                                  Explanation of fiduciary responsibility from Wikipedia:
                                  A fiduciary duty is a legal or ethical relationship of confidence or trust between two or more parties, most commonly a fiduciary and a principal. One party holds a fiduciary relation or acts in a fiduciary capacity to another. In a fiduciary relationship, one person, in a position of vulnerability, justifiably reposes confidence, good faith, reliance and trust in another whose aid, advice or protection is sought in some matter. In such a relationship good conscience requires one to act at all times for the sole benefit and interests of another, with loyalty to those interests.

                                  Applied to Disney and all corporations, the management team (the fiduciary) is required to act in the sole interest of the shareholders (the principal), who are the owners of the company. If delivering a top-notch customer experience will drive profits and shareholder wealth, then investments should be made to do so. If, however, capital expenditures will not be met with at least equal return on investment, then management teams have a legal and ethical responsibility not to make them. This is a basic principle of the corporate form of ownership/management, and is essential to maintain the integrity of the capital markets.

                                  So, then, what is to be done to ensure higher quality in the parks? Customers must make the decision to cease patronizing these parks if they feel that their needs are not being met by Disney. In this way, it will become the best interest of the company itself to invest more time and capital in their projects, because profits would suffer without these investments. Creating "top notch entertainment and parks" just for the sake of doing so would be irresponsible. It has been said that "quality will out," meaning that people will continue to pay a premium price for a premium product. If, however, you do not feel that you are being given a premim product any longer, the responsibility is on you to begin to refuse to pay the premium price.

                                  *Didn't mean that to be snotty, but wasn't sure how else to say it.
                                  The problem with operations such as theme parks, is that there is no way to easily demonstrate the line between building a multi-million dollar attraction and the return that is provided by guests entering the gates and being pleased enough to purchase food and merchandise. The only way that could be accomplished to return to paying for individual attractions.

                                  Comment


                                  • Re: Why the Imagineers can at any time beat WWohP, but at the same time can't

                                    Originally posted by wizards8507 View Post
                                    I think we're coming the the exact same conclusion but getting there two different ways.

                                    You want TDO to focus more on quality and less on the bottom line.

                                    I love that TDO is focussing on the bottom line, but I think they're stupid not to realize that quality, not cost cutting, is what drives the bottom line.


                                    I don't want them to focus less on the bottom line.... because in my thinking, quality WILL help the bottom line overall.


                                    Visit my mice chat toy shop!
                                    http://micechat.com/forums/merchandi...oy-shoppe.html

                                    Track Disney Animation Presence in the Theme Parks Worldwide!
                                    http://micechat.com/forums/disneylan...ired-them.html

                                    Comment


                                    • Re: Why the Imagineers can at any time beat WWohP, but at the same time can't

                                      Originally posted by Coheteboy View Post
                                      I don't want them to focus less on the bottom line.... because in my thinking, quality WILL help the bottom line overall.
                                      Then we're in agreement. It was the demonization of "profit" that got me all worked up, and you weren't the one who did it.

                                      Disney execs aren't evil for focussing on profit, they're just foolish not to realize that their revenue stream flows FROM the quality experience they give their guests. I'd be curious to see the percentage of return guests versus first-timers at WDW and if that ratio has changed at all in the recent years.

                                      Comment


                                      • Re: Why the Imagineers can at any time beat WWohP, but at the same time can't

                                        Originally posted by wizards8507 View Post
                                        Please take a moment to learn something about business*:


                                        Explanation of fiduciary responsibility from Wikipedia:
                                        A fiduciary duty is a legal or ethical relationship of confidence or trust between two or more parties, most commonly a fiduciary and a principal. One party holds a fiduciary relation or acts in a fiduciary capacity to another. In a fiduciary relationship, one person, in a position of vulnerability, justifiably reposes confidence, good faith, reliance and trust in another whose aid, advice or protection is sought in some matter. In such a relationship good conscience requires one to act at all times for the sole benefit and interests of another, with loyalty to those interests.

                                        Applied to Disney and all corporations, the management team (the fiduciary) is required to act in the sole interest of the shareholders (the principal), who are the owners of the company. If delivering a top-notch customer experience will drive profits and shareholder wealth, then investments should be made to do so. If, however, capital expenditures will not be met with at least equal return on investment, then management teams have a legal and ethical responsibility not to make them. This is a basic principle of the corporate form of ownership/management, and is essential to maintain the integrity of the capital markets.

                                        So, then, what is to be done to ensure higher quality in the parks? Customers must make the decision to cease patronizing these parks if they feel that their needs are not being met by Disney. In this way, it will become the best interest of the company itself to invest more time and capital in their projects, because profits would suffer without these investments. Creating "top notch entertainment and parks" just for the sake of doing so would be irresponsible. It has been said that "quality will out," meaning that people will continue to pay a premium price for a premium product. If, however, you do not feel that you are being given a premim product any longer, the responsibility is on you to begin to refuse to pay the premium price.

                                        *Didn't mean that to be snotty, but wasn't sure how else to say it.
                                        Then you could say that we, as discerning customers, have every right to whine when our expectations are not met.

                                        There's more to life and business than pure pursuit of profit. Not all companies are built with intent of maximizing profit. There are some companies...and Disney was one of them in the past...that sought to make a profit while at the same time, creating a product of the highest quality. That's how Disney created its reputation and got its fan base. That's why forums like this exist.

                                        Even if we stick just to economics, simply maximizing short-term profit without a long-term vision is detrimental to the existence of the company. A pregyofit-maximizing, short-term strat is exactly the philosphy employed by Wall St firms in the past few years. Those CEOs produced marvellous quaterly returns for shareholders (and even nicer bonuses for themselves) for some time. But without government handouts, quite a few of them (and not just Lehman Bros) would not be around today.
                                        Down with the Hat

                                        Comment


                                        • Re: Why the Imagineers can at any time beat WWohP, but at the same time can't

                                          Originally posted by tasman View Post
                                          Then you could say that we, as discerning customers, have every right to whine when our expectations are not met.

                                          Even if we stick just to economics, simply maximizing short-term profit without a long-term vision is detrimental to the existence of the company. A pregyofit-maximizing, short-term strat is exactly the philosphy employed by Wall St firms in the past few years. Those CEOs produced marvellous quaterly returns for shareholders (and even nicer bonuses for themselves) for some time. But without government handouts, quite a few of them (and not just Lehman Bros) would not be around today.
                                          You're exactly right. If I used the term "profit-maximization," then I misspoke. The correct term would be "shareholder wealth maximization." Often, as you illustrated, short-term profit maximization is NOT in the interest of the shareholders. Proper execution of wealth maximization requires something known as the "going concern principle," in which the discounted value of ALL future cash flows is taken into consideration. Disney's motivations are in the right place, but their decision making and forecasting abilities are, IMHO, very flawed.

                                          Comment

                                          Get Away Today Footer

                                          Collapse
                                          Working...
                                          X