Most of you probably know this, but I really have no clue. I have not followed the entire Disney story about who took control after Walt died. If someone has the time to explain what happen, I would be appreciative. I read a lot of negative posts and threads about Eisner, and wonder how did he get to head Disney? Wouldn't Roy Disney be the next in line after Walt passed away? Did Roy ever have control? How did Eisner get in there & is he related? I wouldn't think any of Walt's kids or Roy would want outside people coming in and taking over Walt's dream of Disneyland.

I also read a post about Roy recently selling some of his shares of Disney. Does this mean he is unhappy with the company? How much control does he have over Eisner? Has any of Walt Disney's children spoken about the Disney company or Disneyland? Likes or dislikes?

All of this has probably been discussed before and I am sure people are tired of talking about Eisner. I just would like to understand the history of what happened to Disneyland and the entire Disney Company after Walt's passing. I just don't quite understand why Roy is not the president? Why Eisner?

Thanks to whoever has the time to explain this..or can post a link to the story or explanation. :)

You should go to the library and find a book entitled "Storming the Magic Kingdom". It will take you through the entire story of the change in Disney management, a very lengthy and fascinating tale of politics and business.

Originally posted by shawnarae
All of this has probably been discussed before and I am sure people are tired of talking about Eisner. I just would like to understand the history of what happened to Disneyland and the entire Disney Company after Walt's passing. I just don't quite understand why Roy is not the president? Why Eisner?

This is definitely going to be a "Reader's Digest" version of the events, so I do recommend trying to find the book Merlinjones mentioned (unfortunately it is out of print) if you really want the long version of the story. You can also likely find a lot of on-line histories if you do some web searches. I'm also going somewhat from memory here. While the overall information should be accurate, I might have a few of the smaller details (such as dates) a bit off.

First, it is important to note that there have actually been two people named Roy Disney that have held prominent positions within the company. Roy O. Disney was Walt's brother and original partner in the company. He was widely known as the "money man" with Walt as the creative head of the company. Roy did take control of the company after Walt's death until his own death in 1971. During that short period, his main focus was the construction of Walt Disney World. His death was literally just a couple months after WDW opened.

Roy E. Disney, the current Vice Chairman of the corporation, is the son of Roy O. Disney. For whatever reason (probably some combination of personal choice and his qualifications), Roy E. has never actually run the company. After Walt's death, Roy O. enlisted Card Walker and Donn Tatum, two existing Executive VPs under Walt, to serve as the administrative heads of the company. After Roy O.'s death, Tatum stepped in as CEO and Walker as Chief Operating Officer. Walt's son-in-law, Ron Miller, became head of production at the movie studios. In 1980, Tatum stepped aside as CEO and Walker moved into that role with Miller taking over the COO role. In 1982, Walker retired and Miller took over as CEO.

During the Tatum/Walker/Miller era, Disney did have a number of successes (particularly in the theme parks), but was overall viewed as being a company that was kind of stuck in the past, often looking to the memory of its deceased founder instead of trying to move forward with new ideas. Increasingly, the company was struggling financially to the point where it looked like a prime takeover target by the mid-1980s. It is important to keep in mind that Walt and Roy O. had taken Disney public back in the 1950s. It hasn't been a family-owned business for decades. As a result, the company does have to answer to its stockholders and board of directors, just like any other public corporation.

By 1984, it was very evident that Disney was very close to being bought out, split apart, and sold for parts. At that point, Roy E. asked for the assistance of the Bass brothers, very wealthy investors who had made their fortune largely through the silver business. They agreed to help protect the company from takeover by financing a fairly large stock buy-back. Their condition for this was that a new, experienced executive team be brought in from the outside to take over running of the company.

This was the point when Michael Eisner was brought in to take over the role of CEO. At that time, Eisner was head of Paramount Pictures (which was in a very successful period at the time) after having previously had a very successful stint as head of production at ABC. At those companies, he had been instrumental in green-lighting such major blockbusters as "Happy Days" and "Laverne & Shirley" at ABC and "Raiders of the Lost Ark" and the "Star Trek" movie series at Paramount.

At the recommendation of the Bass brothers, Frank Wells, a very experienced financial executive, was brought in as President of the company. Eisner also brought over Jeffrey Katzenberg, an associate of his from Paramount, to take over as head of the studios. Ron Miller and most of the other previous executive staff left the company at that time, either voluntarily or involuntarily.

Eisner, Wells, and their team shook things up quite a bit at the company, resulting in a fairly major growth spurt. In particular, they quickly ran with Ron Miller's idea of creating a separate label for more adult-oriented film releases (Touchstone Pictures) and built it into a major success, admittedly by producing a lot of films that Walt probably wouldn't have liked very much. They also helped to build an entirely new business by quickly embracing pre-recorded home video tapes.

After initially considering shutting down the animation division (which really hadn't had much success since Walt's death), they instead decided to pour quite a bit of money into it, which resulted in the big revival in the late 80s and early 90s. The company also significantly increased its international business, ranging from increased overseas distribution of movies to the building of the Tokyo and Paris theme parks through licensees.

In recent years, a lot of the early luster of Eisner and his team's operation of the company has started to fade. Many point to the accidental death of Frank Wells in 1994 as a major turning point. Eisner has had a very hard time finding an appropriate replacement partner and has made some very expensive mistakes in the process. A huge settlement with Michael Ovitz, his first choice for a replacement, cost the company a huge amount of money without any real return. Katzenberg also bitterly left the company after being passed over for the job and later won a pretty large settlement of his own.

Of course, Disney was also pretty radically transformed with its 1996 merger with ABC. There still is a lot of debate about whether or not the company really benefited from that merger or if it would be a stronger company without it. Certainly, ESPN has been a hugely positive asset for the company, but it is debatable whether or not it is really a good fit. The ABC network itself has struggled in recent years, but in an industry that does tend to be pretty cyclical. The merger did finally provide Eisner with a pretty solid second-in-command as former ABC CEO Bob Iger moved into the President role previously held by Wells and Ovitz. Iger is now widely seen as Eisner's eventual successor, although there is still debate over whether or not that is a good thing.

Obviously, the history of Disney since Walt's death is pretty complex and there is a lot that is very open to interpretation. I've tried to stick largely to facts rather than evaluation here, although I'm sure I have slipped in a few opinions that some others on these boards might take exception to. I do think the company's last couple decades have been pretty fascinating.

-Jeff

Thank you so much for your time and energy spent on that explanation & brief history lesson. I had no clue about there being 2 different Roy Disneys. I assumed it was Walt's brother when different threads mention Roy Disney. I got confused and started getting more curious about the company's history. Now after reading your post I totally understand how Eisner came into the picture. I assumed he was related or married in to the Disney family. Thank you again. That was a fabulous "Disney History 101" reply you gave me!!!! I appreciate it :)

Thank, Jeff, for the history.


One small note on your .sig.


Any Disneylander will tell you, its the "King Arthur Carrousel".

Not "King Arthur's Carrousel."


Great pictures, though.

Great synopsis, JeffG. I do not know very much about the early history of Disney, at least the business side of it, so thank you. I must not be much of a Disneylander; I wasn't aware that your King Arthur statement was erroneous ......;) I'll work on it, though!:cool: