Was Eisner better for parks?

[Gator]

I know a lot of people have been hating on him for a long time, but when it came to the theme parks, I think he did a good job. On Eisner's watch, DS and AK were built and both are great parks. Each park has received several great rides like ToT, RnRCoaster, and ExEv (started before his departure). He created a new (and improved) icon for DS. He added a new waterpark.

In comparison, the new kid Iger has done little more than rip down the wand from SSE. I'm sure there are plenty here on Intercot who thought he did good by this demolition, but the rest of us Mickey Lovers hate what he did.

So should we call for Eisner's return as president of the park division?

[jenperich]

I completely agree with you. He did a fantastic job for the parks. Is it possible that he could return as the Parks guy? That would be really great. I totally don't agree with them taking down the iconic Epcot wand, but that's just my opinion. For much of my childhood, Eisner was on the job and he changed WDW much for the better and he SHOULD come back. Thanks for starting this post. :mickey:

[snifflesmcg]

I really don't know the reasons why people hated Eisner like they did. :confused: So if anyone can give reasons why he was so bad, I'd actually love to hear it. I thought he did wonderful things for WDW.

[Speedy1998]

Eisner was one of the best things that ever happened to the Disney company. He took a company that had lost it's way after it's founders had died and completely reinvigorated it. However, by 2004 Eisner had and team had lost their focus. From an outsiders point of view he seem to forget one important thing that Walgt had built the company on in the first place "That quality will win out." By the end of Eisner term as President and CEO the Disney Company was turning out some real junk. Both at the parks, in the Theaters, and on DVD. Things that came out near the end were Dinosaur (the movie), Cinderella 2, 3 , 4, Or how about those Princess Sign along DVDs that were rushed out just to make a quick buck. (For those of you lucky enough not to see them the animation looked like it was done with cut outs of the princess's.)

Basically it came down to a loss of focus on a quality product that got the shareholders to band together and vote no confidence in Eisner in 2004, which eventually lead to his resignation a year later.

[mttafire]

Mr. Eisner imho was VERY GOOD for Disney.

[DisneyLuver91]

I think people hate on Eisner because he wasn't Uncle Walt himself. Poor guy just doing his job.

[baldburke]

I agree. Eisner was CEO for about 20 years. Everyone will have their ups and downs over 20 years. And these days, 20 years is very good for a CEO.

And I would also agree that he did an excellent job fo expanding the parks. And we shouldn't forget about the global scale. EuroDisney, California Adventure, DisneySea, Disneyland Hong Kong and the Disney Cruise Line all started under Einser's watch. Not too shabby.

[Ian]

This has got to be the first time in history that six people posted in a row supporting Michael Eisner.

If you haven't already, read the book Disney War and then come back and tell us if you feel the same way.

Eisner was never good for Disney. In the beginning, he surrounded himself with some good people (Frank Wells, Jeffrey Katzenberg, etc.) and kept his nose out of things long enough for some good to come out of it.

But once his collossal ego took over, he chased off all the talent and ran the company into the ground.

[LoriMistress]

Around the 90's Eisner was Anikan Skywalker (sp?), and before his departure he was Darth Vadar.

[Toad]

Eisner was alright until Frank Wells died. After that, things went wrong.

[Polynesian Dweller]

Let's give Iger a chance before judging him. You don't plan, budget, get approval from the board etc. and build a new theme park that quickly. He's just starting to show what his plans will be.

I also agree with other posters about Eisner not being that good for Disney. When he forced out Katzenberg the animation department went downhill quickly. Not surprisingly animation at Dreamworks took off with Katzenberg. Frank Wells was the money and practical man and he kept things going. You could see and feel the noticeable difference in the company when Wells died. Things started to deteriorate quickly without his steady hand.

[GhostHost999]

just to clarify...wasn't it on Eisner's watch that a lot of the attractions tat we love and miss got plowed under or gutted?

Journey into Imagination
Horizons
World of Motion
Mr. Toad
20,000 Leagues...etc

[Horizon93]

This has got to be the first time in history that six people posted in a row supporting Michael Eisner.

If you haven't already, read the book Disney War and then come back and tell us if you feel the same way.


Ian, you are so right. The book will open anyone's eyes to the truth. 10 years of success, and 10 years going down the wrong road. Iger has only been on the job a short while. I never liked the wand on SE and I really dislike the hat! AS far as plowing down some of our old favorites, it is Walt Disney World. Walt said that the parks always had to grow and change.

Iger not only patched up the Pixar relationship, he acquired the company, bringing back former Disney creative forces like John Lassiter. I am not saying that Iger is the answer. He may be. Only time will tell. But from what I can see so far, the company and the parks are heading in a very positive direction.

Once again, I highly recommend the book. And after you read that, read Walt Disney, The Triumph of an American Imagination.

[TheRustyScupper]

1) I had a discussion with several folks last week about Eisner.
2) Four of them thought Eisner was good for Disney.
3) Of course, they were on drugs at the time.

4) Eisner did do good things for about 10-yrs.
5) Then, he did bad things for 10-yrs.
6) He should have been gone LONG before he left.
7) Sure, early on
. . . he got Disney money by releasing movies in the vault
. . . he helped focus the company direction
8) Then,
. . . he rushed MGM, and put it up partially built
. . . he rushed AK, and put it up partially built
. . . he rushed Studios-Paris and put it up partially built
. . . he rushed Hong Kong and put it up partially built
. . . he made cash, not quality the key and reduced maintenance
. . . he allowed the closure of rides, reducing capacity
. . . he bought ABC and made the parks a cash cow and less important

9) But, the worst is he changed the culture
. . . he brought in young people without experience
. . . he didn't have the young managers trained
. . . he fostered a culture of Don't Make Waves
. . . he allowed creativity to die due to the culture

[garymacd]

I think people hate on Eisner because he wasn't Uncle Walt himself. Poor guy just doing his job.

Yes, I think he was just doing his job, but he was also trying to do everyone else's job, too. Micro-managing is never effective use of resources. He did turn the company around, he did re-introduce Mickey, but when a top level bureaucrat gets involved in the creative process, the creative minds balk. Correct me if I am wrong, isn't that what started Dreamworks, and what almost led to the breaking away of Pixar? Pixar calls an end to their ten year relationship with Disney, Eisner leaves, Pixar is back with bells on! Hmm. Love them or hate them, those two companies have shown more creativity than Disney recently.

My opinion, anyway.

Let the bureacrats run the company, but don't let them get in the way of the creative process. There will never be another Walt, but maybe two or three people working together can carry on the work of one genius. Remember, even Walt had his brother Roy to help him with the business side of the business.

[skylardad]

Well, here is another topic that has me feeling another two cents of opinion can't hurt.

Like many CEOs, Eisner had some flashes of brilliance. He spearheaded the concept of keeping guests on property and the value of investing in hotels and ultimately two additional theme parks, water parks, and entertainment district.

However, he is directly responsible for driving away the majority of the creative talents that built Disneyland and WDW along with the animation division.

I understand that the position of a CEO is to satisfy shareholders and bring profitability to a company; however, when you feel profitabilty is more important than the legendary creative forces that built the company, you begin writing a recipe for disaster.

While Eisner was good for business sense, he ultimately became the downfall for the creative proces that company was all about.

Bob Iger is off to a wonderful start (IMO). While he may not yet have his feet completely "wet" in the parks, he is rebuilding a vital part of the company and restoring faith among the creative forces of the company. And before you can get things to trickle down into the parks you have to rebuild the creative infrastructure first.

Regarding the removal of the wand, I am for it. While I enjoyed the wand as a landmark for the Millenium Celebration, it should have just been that - a temporary landmark for a special occasion like the MK25 pink cake and the golden adornments for the HCOE last year. Keeping the wand beyond the celebration was overstaying its welcome and uniqueness for the celebration.

Spaceship Earth was the original (and already recognizable) icon for Epcot from day one. It should be allowed to stand on its own as it did for the first 18 years. Spaceship Earth is a one-of-its-kind architectural feat. To read about the history of its developement is amazing (which is partly why so many are adimant about the wand's removal).

Now, the wand and Epcot signage could be modified and re-used for a re-imagined Epcot parking entrance. Afterall, the current one is very bland and unexciting in comparison to the fun MK or unique sculpturing of the AK parking entrance. This way both parties of the argument could be satisfied.

Back to the original topic posted. In closing, I think Eisner left the company later than he should have. The reason you do not see many companies that have a CEO with a 20 year tenure is because they want the company to have new visions and direction to keep them fresh and exciting. This philosophy also contributes to one of the reasons why we do not allow our own country to be run by the same President for more than 8 consecutive years.

Bottom line, Eisner made some wonderful decisions for the company. Now, Iger (along with Lasseter) are building upon them and correcting many of the creative mistakes Eisner made. I think The Walt Disney Company is heading in the right direction under its current leadership. No doubt, if they keep making progress the parks will share in the strides to be made.

[LoriMistress]

1) I had a discussion with several folks last week about Eisner.
2) Four of them thought Eisner was good for Disney.
3) Of course, they were on drugs at the time.


What kind of drugs are we talking about? Legal drugs? Depending on what it is, may I have some? J/K. :cool:

[Morpheous]

Actually, Eisner was good for the company he did save it from ruin in the 80s. But as many others have said in his last 10 years he put creativity on the back burner to everything else.

Lets not forget the fact that it was due to Eisner that the Former President of Disney Stores ended up becomming the President of Disney Theme parks. Who decided it would be a great idea to sacrifice maintenance for the sake of increasing product placement. In effect his goal was to turn the Theme Parks into giant Disney Stores with rides. Which is why if I remember correctly is why the Sub Rides in both parks got shut down and never really came back (Till now). I've heard that the structures for the WDW Submarine ride is beyond being able to easily salvage due to absolutly no attention for many years. Plus the Tragic Accident on Big Thunder due to lack of Maintenance.

Eisner just put sales before Creativity or the Parks in general at the end of his tenure. From everything Ive read and heard of Iger he is rectifying many of these problems. Park Maintenance and Safety is on its way back up. I dunno I think its good that Eisner is gone. Especially Considering Roy Disney was crusading against him for years before he was finally removed.

[GrumpyFan]

He seemed to have done very well in his first 10 years with the help of Frank Wells. But after Wells died, things just started going downhill. He seemed more interested in the bottom line than actually trying to live up to the Disney standard.

Don't get me started on DCA. What a debacle! Now they're going to spend a BILLION DOLLARS :eek: to fix the mess that was created there!

So, while he had a good run in the beginning, he didn't finish that well.