Disney Company Timeline- The Eisner era (1984-2005)

The era of Eisner is a fascinating one. Coming into power in 1984, a definitive low point during the company's tenure, Eisner transformed Walt Disney Productions into a Wall street big wig knows as the modern Walt Disney Company.

At his best, Eisner was creative, a risk taker, pragmatic when he needed to, and a strong evaluator of talent, and vast expansion. He gave us

Wild expansion in films, jumping movie production from an average of four movies per year to ten per year. His movie strategy was also very effective; low budget movies (singles and doubles) live action movies that are family friendly while also overseeing large large action movies such as Pearl Harbor, Pirates of the Caribbean, etc. He oversaw the resurgence of the Disney animated films of Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, and Lion King. He oversaw the first hits with Pixar as Toy Story, Monster Inc., Finding Nemo, Cars, etc. Though much of his tenure had bad animated movies, the strong brand of the company was able to propel the company past the weak films (i.e. Disney animated films 1995-2005)

New attractions at Parks and resorts, such as Splash Mountain and others...but perhaps most strongly he realized that he may have to go outside the company for a good attraction IP, such as Star Tours, etc. He also opened up new parks (Disney MGM studios, Animal Kingdom, and California Adventure). He also saw the opening of the Disneyland Paris resort.

Consumer products was greatly expanded with the Disney Stores and with the advent of the Internet.

Broadcast networks was also greatly expanded with he purchase of Capital Cities, where the company bought ABC and ESPN, what a deal!

Eisner is sometimes a controversial figure. He is a creative businessman who surely saved the company and established it as a dominant media company, however many feel his focus was never on the quality or detail the company once knew. Under Eisner (and now Iger) the company was clearly out to make a profit at all costs. The "upcharge" was established after continually raising prices. No longer was a Disney vacation a cheap expense, now it's an event that must be saved for.

His pragmatism is also worth commending as he avoided any deal with Time Warner when he believed the soaring stock price was not credible.

Eisner's greatest weakness though was his cling to power and lack of a succession plan. He was forced to take Bob Iger as President, but given his heart condition a succession plan was absolutely necessary. He viewed succession as a threat to his power. However, by putting all the power on himself, he got overworked and his ideas got tired. When the company had a bad spell the writing was on the wall, but once he got rid of Roy E. Disney, the namesake of the company, then the Save Disney campaign went to war with Eisner.

Eisner's tenure was necessary, he should be applauded and thanked for his work. He paved the way for where we are today. There was some recovery that had to happen, but he truly made it a modern company.

Disney Company Timeline- The Iger Era (2005-Present)

What is the Iger era known for?

The Iger era can undoubtedly be considered a success through and through. Let's look at the successes, pillars, and shortcomings.

Most notable
  Acquisitions. Iger is adept at purchasing a company or IP when the stakes are high. His most notable purchases include Marvel and Lucasfilm for over $4 Billion each, and Pixar for over $7 Billion.

Studios-
 Disney's studios films have seen a general quality increase (and certain revenue increase) since he took power. Marvel and Lucasfilm films have been strong additions to the studios bottom line. Pixar's films have generally been strong and many have made lots of money. Walt Disney animation studios films have been hit or miss, but the hits have been significant (i.e. Frozen). Walt Disney pictures films have also had a few hits (i.e. Beauty and the Beast) which have helped propel the studios revenue into the black. Iger also is responsible for the creation of Disneynature. The studios also encompasses live theater, music, radio, etc. Good 12 years so far for the studios.

Parks and Resorts- International expansion in Disneyland Hong Kong and Disney Shanghai. Expansion in Magic Kingdom's Fantasyland, Redo of California Adventure. Pandora and of course, Star Wars land is in the mix. Some new attractions and technology. Again, good year for Parks and resorts.

Consumer Products/Broadcast networks- Nothing really exciting here. These divisions have been fairly stable with a few hits. No major investments to speak of, but the current problems with ESPN have been bogging down the company for the past year.

Biggest Weakness- Succession. Iger's contract keeps getting extended time after time. You'd think that the company would have learned their lesson after Eisner that having an all powerful CEO with no clear succession plan is a bad idea. Nope, Disney repeated this very process. The company HAD a succession plan with both Jay Rasulo and Tom Staggs in place. Iger chose Staggs, so Rasulo left. Then Iger got rid of Staggs. This reeks of holding onto power.

Was Staggs not capable? He was a CFO and head of parks and resorts (as was Rasulo). Perhaps Iger should have made Staggs President instead of just COO (just like Eisner was forced to make Iger). It is this type of attitude towards succession that worries many company investors. If Iger was hit by a bus, the company will once again be in turmoil. So what's next? Iger's contract got extended another year until 2019. Rumors continue to swirl that he will eventually run for office...is their a clear successor today? No. There is no President or COO today.

Also, power continues to be consolidated into Iger by making him Chairman and CEO. This too is a dangerous combination that can be separated. Learn the lessons from the Early 2000's!!!

In the future, there will still likely be some great things coming and with certain hits. Hopefully another large acquisition that will spur excitement and cross utilization across the company. Thoughts?

Parks and Resorts- Competition spurs creativity

The rivalry between Disney and Universal is probably the best its ever been, which is great news for customers (though it will likely take its toll on the wallet). This was not always the case; for much of the last 30 years, the rivalry was nearly non-existent. Universal would try something, if it was a success, Disney might copy it, etc. However, they really operated in different genres; Disney as a family friendly immersive THEME park while Universal was a movie studio with rides tailored to older patrons. This all changed once Comcast bought out Universal and decided to compete in a new type of attraction; the fully immersive themed land. Wizarding World of Harry Potter was a game changer for the industry, becoming the new standard of top notch attractions, stores, and restaurants in a FULLY IMMERSIVE environment. This also drove the cost up considerably for new developments.

Universal did not stop there. Universal made a master plan where they are coming out with a Major attraction every year for the foreseeable future. This is ambitious. How did Disney respond? They tried to match it with Pandora: the world of Avatar. Not quite Harry Potter, but it does create a vivid environment.

More importantly though we need to understand what this represents...it's an arms race. Disney is going to struggle to keep up, but Disney's pace is must slower (5-7 year avg by my calculations). Will this give Universal a distinct advantage?

Additionally, this arms race of themed environments has created a new type of expansion. I call it the Billion Dollar land. It is these improvements which cost anywhere between $800M-$1.2B, (a lot of money), but which actually don't offer much. Examples include

DISNEY

Fantasyland expansion- Two terrible attractions, repurposed Dumbo, One nice restaurant, one quick service restaurant

Cars land- Two attractions, One large one, counter service food

Pandora- Two attractions, one restaurant

Star Wars land- Two attractions, likely some restaurant

Toy Story land- Likely two attractions

UNIVERSAL

Harry Potter- Several attractions across two parks, two restaurants

Simpsons- two attractions, one major, restaurant

Nintendo land- ???


The cost of the themed environment is so high that the actual land provides little to do. The companies need to plan for this. A new land should be all encompassing and be able to pass a LOT of time, i.e. 5-7 attractions (good ones too, not repurposed ones), 1-2 restaurants, shops, etc. Take star wars land; there should be a hoth planet with an attraction, a death star, and several more. The land should take up considerable size, not only a few acres. This SHOULD cost a lot of money to do it well, so the companies should allocate that a new redevelopment should get at least $1.5B if they are trying to go all in. Disney cannot compete with Universal if they try to do this on the cheap; i.e California adventure. If it is too much money then they should not try to engage.

Many will read this and say something like "that's easy for you to say, etc." I agree, spending $2B is a tough call, but that's the business their in.

For Disney, Star Wars and Marvel should get their own theme park (or at least a substantial part of a park) if done right. These are game changer IP's.

For Universal, Harry Potter is making them a FORTUNE. Why is the Lost continent still there? Get rid of it and expand Harry Potter. Get rid of MIB or other dated attractions in USF. For Nintendo, the options are plentiful and could really do some damage.

Unless a company chooses to bow out, the arms race will continue and we should be happy about it! Thoughts?

Parks and Resorts- EPCOT Roundup

What should happen with EPCOT?

EPCOT is a unique and amazing park, but where should the future be. Is it now relegated to the role of a "traditional" theme park or is it still a unique mixture of education and entertainment? I believe the latter and that this distinction should still be idealized. How should this be done?


WORLD SHOWCASE-

The World showcase. The best food at WDW in my opinion, this is an amazing mixture of culture, food, alcohol, and a few weak attractions.

Where can it go from here? Expansion is necessary. New countries? Spain, Australia, Russia, etc.
Also, each country needs at least one TOP quality full service restaurant. Each country should also have some "attraction", whether it be a video or actual ride. Currently, only China, Mexico, Norway, America, Canada, and France have actual attractions. Italy needs something to do, Germany is essentially a shopping center, UK/Japan/Morocco are interesting to look at, but still need something more.

What needs work- Disney should not continue to force current IP into countries unnecessarily. Maelstrom may be been boring, but it was based off of fact. Arrendelle "looks" like Norway, so that's good enough. This is slippery slope if this trend continues. Now, this does not apply to princesses appearing in representative countries, but don't change wholesale attractions that no longer represent the host country.

FUTURE WORLD- 

Future world needs some help, but there are still some great attractions. The land is a small, yet very sustainable little area. The Seas is a great site and with Turtle Talk & Nemo, this is a great site. Mission Space is a unique attraction with great theming. Test Track is a top notch attractions etc.


What needs work-

Journey into imagination- Where Should Disney take this land? How about putting Inside Out into here? This IP seems to fit this one perfectly.

Innovations- This is a tired concept (IMHO), but it could be regenerated...but along with new technologies, I would move the Carousel of progress from MK to here (with a modern update as well).

Ellen's energy adventure- Love the concept, shorten the ride and update it.


The gems of EPCOT however are the restaurants. This park is meant to entertain while educating and is where you are supposed to get great food and alcohol. Therefore adults are the primary customer here...this is a GOOD thing. I suggest the following

1. An expansion of Living with the land (Actually seeing food being grown is a fascinating lesson)

2. The creation of at least three new countries in WS over the next few years (get rid of that outpost area also).

3. AVOID ANY Marvel or Star Wars IP

4. Update Nemo attraction to add Finding Dory characters

5. Update Spaceship earth attraction

6. Make parts of future world a second "shopping district". Currently, the art of Disney store there dominates, but that area could house several more high quality stores

7. Update Club cool with the soda flavors

8. COCO attraction in Mexico?

9. Canada needs some real stores

Thoughts?

Become a Disney T & T Follower today!

If you like what you're seeing, sign up to become a regular follower!

Disney Studios- The Sad Saga of Marvel Villains

   The Sad Saga of Marvel Villains

 A good comic book movie always has its competing forces; the hero and a villain. Alas, the strength of Marvel movies has never helped build up the latter. Most of the villains in the MCU are forgettable and are therefore unusable.

Iron Man (Obediah Stain)-  weak and useless

Incredible Hulk (Abomination)- Personally I think he's a good villain, but they didn't use him as well as they could, and they killed him off

Iron Man 2 (Whiplash)- They edited too much of him, made him boring and nonsensical.

Thor (Loki)- Obviously, Marvel has done well by Loki, but they've basically taken him out of the villain role altogether.

Captain America (Red Skull)- A good villain, a little boring, but again, killing him off doesn't do any good. Bring him back and build him up!

Avengers- (Thanks)- A great villain, who hopefully they will show the twisted titan for what he is.

Iron Man 3 (Mandarin)- Boy did they ruin this one...sigh.

Thor 2 (Malakith) Whatever his name is, it could have been good, but they didn't dive into him nearly deep enough.

Captain America 2 (Winter Soldier)- Once again, a good villain get transformed into a hero.

Guardians of the Galaxy (Nebula)- She could be interesting, but GOTG2 is also using her as a villain.

Avengers 2 (Ultron)- Personally I think they did him well, but where can you take him from here.

Antman (Yellow Jacket)- Weak villain. Can't even use him elsewhere.

Captain America 3 (Whatever the conniving guy's name is, boy did they ruin that one)

Doctor Strange (Mads Mikkelson's character)- Another weak endeavor


How do you make a strong villain? Here are some rules

1. There must be a back story to the villain
2. Hero and villain cannot just immediately start fighting, need a complicated relationship
3. Do not kill the villain or even allude to it
4. Do not use successful villains as heroes.
5. The villain should be a real threat to the hero (i.e. obediah stain against iron man is weak)
6. Do not make up villains or totally change the villain, but them call them a classic villain's name

Thoughts?

Disney Studios- All about Pixar

Well Disney has now owned Pixar for 11 years and IMHO both companies have benefited from the relationship. Obviously, Disney has benefited from the fresh ideas and name recognition that Pixar brings in (especially during the stale disney animation decade of 2000-2010). Pixar benefits from deep pockets, better marketing, and cross promotion leverage. Pixar's hits have been massive, but their occasional misses have been very weak. Let's go over them by time period

The Disney/Pixar Contractual period

Toy Story- A buddy pic that was fresh and opened up new possibilities. Grade- A-

A Bug's life- A bit sloppy and dull. Grade B

Toy Story 2- More clever and fun than the original. Grade A

Monsters Inc.- Another clever hit filled with humor. Grade A-

Finding Nemo- A smash hit, near perfection. Grade A+

The Break off period

The Incredibles- Clever, but still lacking. Grade B

The still contractually obligated to work with you period

Cars- Eisner's pet project, well overrated. Grade C+

The Buyout period (i.e. the renaissance of fresh ideas)

Ratatouille- Clever, fun, heartwarming. Grade A

Wall-E- Innovative and charming. Grade A

Up- Visually spellbinding, weird plot, but amazing first 20 minutes. Grade A-

Toy Story 3- Funny and fitting with the other Toy Story movies. Grade A-

Cars 2- An unnecessary sequel that suffered greatly. Unwatchable. Grade F

Brave- Should have been better, but watchable. Grade B-

Monsters University- Another unnecessary sequel, but did have charming moments. Grade B

Inside Out- A fresh idea with great execution. Grade A

The Good Dinosaur- Too many rewrites with no strong plot. Unwatchable. Grade F

Finding Dory- A tough sequel, but charming moments.


What should Pixar's future be? Clearly they have a good plan of releasing an original film every year with a sequel every other year, unfortunately their not sticking to this plan because there are three sequels planned in the next three years (Cars 3, Incredibles 2, Toy Story 4).

I am not against sequels per se. I think Incredibles and Toy Story might warrant them, I also believe Inside Out could warrant one, but let's not go crazy here. There needs to be another fresh 15 ideas they work on.

Additionally, when it comes to the parks, I believe there needs to be a stronger organization of Pixar properties in the parks. At WDW, if there is a pixar place then clearly they should go there, however, Wall-E is easily doable in tomorrowland, Inside out at Journey into imagination, etc.

Thoughts?