O-Meon's Disney War Article

[Indy95]

In case anyone is interested, C.W. Oberleitner has given an insightful commentary on the new "Disney War" book.

Here's the link:

http://www.o-meon.com/pages/business_of_show/bos_02-22-05.html

Enjoy.

[quasimodo1384]

Wow...the more I read about it the more I want the book...great link, thanks!

[PirateMunkee]

I just started reading the book and I'm scared. I mean I already hate Eisner and think he is the Anti-Christ but just starting this books makes me want to climb some clocktower near TDA with a sniper rifle and unlimited amount of ammo. Damn, the more I read, the more I think that Prez Bush has to worry about me getting a nuke. BTW, how does one hook up a nuclear car bomb on Eisner's car?

[Cousin Orville]

That was really great. Thanks for pointing it out Pirate. It saves me some needed cash too.

[PirateMunkee]

That was really great. Thanks for pointing it out Pirate. It saves me some needed cash too.

The book is pretty cool though. Who knew Roy Disney's love was his 1999 Red Ferrarri? Damn, Roy is sooooooo damn cool. Whe Roy found out that the board didn't want him to rerun for his seat on the directors, he just looked them straight in the face and basically declared war, nice and smooth like, saying, "You just made your biggest mistake!" ROY IS DA" MAN!!!

[IndyJn511]

I hope I'm getting mine tomorrow in the mail...cant wait!!!

[Cousin Orville]

Pirate, Michael isn't a bad guy, by Hollywood standards he's average. The issue is that he was on all those Sunday nite Disney shows and we expected more, that's all.
No need to get angry at him. He actually wants to be immortal and do the right thing creatively so he can transcend the evil Hollywood thug image.

[Retlaw Yensid]

I bought the book saturday, I think the store I went to broke the street date. Ah well....

[PirateMunkee]

Pirate, Michael isn't a bad guy, by Hollywood standards he's average. The issue is that he was on all those Sunday nite Disney shows and we expected more, that's all.
No need to get angry at him. He actually wants to be immortal and do the right thing creatively so he can transcend the evil Hollywood thug image.

No, he wants to take credit for other people's hard work. Also he's angry that the company's name is DISNEY. When Roy's mother and Aunt were honored at a Disney celebration, Eisner never showed up to the celebration even though he hasn't missed one of the yearly event. He just doesn't like Disney. Walt EARNED EVERYTHING...Eisner born with silver spoon in mouth. Eisner is the bad one. Read the book.

[PirateMunkee]

He actually wants to be immortal and do the right thing creatively so he can transcend the evil Hollywood thug image.

He already transcended the Evil Thug image and evovled it into pure unadulterated satanic evil. He loves destroying what he didn't even build. Granted he made some right decisions to save the company but let his own ego get in the way of what the whole premise that the Walt Disney Company was founded on.

[Darkbeer]

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_09/b3922031_mz005.htm?chan=db

Along the way, Stewart suggests, Eisner's hubris harmed the company. Out of pique, he refused to negotiate the terms of Katzenberg's severance deal -- and partly as a result, the settlement ballooned from $60 million to $280 million. He overruled his theme park staff and built a European park outside Paris, in large part because of his college fascination with France, writes Stewart. Lagging attendance and French public resistance to anything Disney have hobbled the park ever since, nearly forcing it into bankruptcy at one point. Eisner thwarted efforts by Miramax co-founder Harvey Weinstein to buy potential bargains such as Bravo! and Independent Film Channel from Cablevision Systems Corp., then wildly overpaid for the ABC Family Channel. His largest mistake: buying ABC, which saddled the company with losses and years of internal management turmoil (CVC ). Meanwhile, Eisner's golden gut was tarnished: The company turned away such hits as The Apprentice, CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, and Survivor.

For all of its copious detail, Stewart's book raises as many questions as it answers. How will the negative publicity affect the chances of Robert Iger -- the only internal candidate -- to succeed Eisner, who has said he will retire in late 2006? ("He can never succeed me," Stewart quotes Eisner as saying.) And what about Eisner? He tells Stewart the board "might come to me" with an offer of the chairmanship. Stewart's charges of Eisner's mismanagement won't help the CEO stick around. Of course, in Hollywood, nothing ever ends until the curtain comes down.

[merlinjones]

Cousin Orville, this DisneyWar isn't about "image" it's about the reality of today's Walt Disney Company. The decimation of Feature Animation and Imagineering... the of shareholder assets... the poisonous corporate culture... the downgrading of the Disney experience... the neglect of the theme park infrastructure... the egos that put personal gain over tradition and legacy, short-term over long. Spin as you will, we are stuck with the reality this management created for their own pathetic personal gain - - and its a joy to see someone of Stewart's stature in the financial community call them on it so publicly.

[Darkbeer]

http://www.fool.com/news/commentary/2005/commentary05022206.htm

James Stewart: Well, the problem, simply put, is that the stock reached a peak of about $42 as recently as the year 2000 and is now at $28 or $29. If you look at those numbers, it is a remarkable record, and he deserves tremendous credit for that, but it almost all occurred during the first 10 to 12 years of his reign, when he did not wield absolute power at the company.

To me it is fascinating that Disney, as many corporations are today, they kind of are the equivalent of medieval kingdoms. The problems at Disney really came when the people who acted as checks on Eisner's power, the president, Frank Wells; the head of the studio, Jeffrey Katzenberg; and head of animation, Roy Disney, one by one were dispatched until Eisner had consolidated absolute power in his own hands, and you can watch the stock begin to go down as a result.

[bizbuzzbear]

[Darkbeer]

I love this description...

http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/books/02/23/ew.books.disneywar/index.html

Disneyland doesn't have a ride simulating what it's like to work for Walt Disney Co. CEO Michael Eisner.

But if it did -- at least judging from "DisneyWar," a 534-page vivisection of Eisner's conflict-ridden tenure -- it might go like this:

You step into a faux limo while an animatronic Eisner holds forth on Disney's proud creative tradition. But as the vehicle takes off, other Disney execs try to derail you. An angry Eisner periodically reappears, admonishing you to do things faster, cheaper, better. Finally, you're dumped at the exit in a burst of pink-slip confetti.

Imagine watching that ride go around, say, a dozen more times, and you've got the exhausting vibe of "DisneyWar."

[PirateMunkee]

Pirate, Michael isn't a bad guy, by Hollywood standards he's average. The issue is that he was on all those Sunday nite Disney shows and we expected more, that's all.
No need to get angry at him. He actually wants to be immortal and do the right thing creatively so he can transcend the evil Hollywood thug image.

Reading the book reminded me of how creative Eisner WAS when he first started as CEO. I will be the first to admit that Eisner was the greatest thing to happen to the company since Walt's Death but he has steadily gone downhill and started to think more about the money than the creativity that this company was founded on. Walt was also into money BUT he also pumped alot of it right back into keeping the dream alive and evolving. When Eisner started to do away with the animation and artists, is where the animosity started. REMEMBER WALT WAS AN ARTIST AND HELD ARTIST ALL IN HIGH REGARD Eisner. Sorry for ranting but if Eisner went back to the creativeness and love of making Disney stand out above everything else, I wouldn't mind if he stayed but he stabbed in the back the ones who got him his job in the first place, Roy Disney and Stanley Gold.

[Darkbeer]

http://www.fool.com/news/commentary/2005/commentary05022303.htm

All these are good qualities, but they were coupled with some very bad qualities as well. Impulsiveness, hastiness, a paranoia about people around him, an inability to choose a successor. What I think is the most serious flaw is a persistent dishonesty that led to serious problems with the company. Had he left a few years ago and created a third act in his life, as he liked to say it, I think he would be remembered in an unvarnished sense as one of the great CEOs in Hollywood history. Now there will always be this shadow of the last years of his reign.

[Darkbeer]

http://www.usatoday.com/money/books/2005-02-24-disney-book-usat_x.htm

Still, Stewart's thorough research is evident in the wealth of material he amassed to support his withering conclusion: Eisner's "management failures," he says, "include an inability to delegate, a frequent mistrust of subordinates, impulsive and uncritical judgments, his pitting of one executive against another, his disrespect for any hierarchy or authority other than his own, his encouragement of a culture of spying and back-channeling, his frequent failure to acknowledge the achievements of others, and above all, his inability to groom a successor."