Even with all the hate of Eisner, its better to be independent then to be owned by a cable company.. that's about a low as a used car dealer.

Originally posted by Towmod
Even with all the hate of Eisner, its better to be independent then to be owned by a cable company.. that's about a low as a used car dealer.

That's what I read until I did the research.

From http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040212/D80LFJ582.html

In a conference call Wednesday, Comcast's Steve Burke, the head of the company's cable division and a former Disney executive, sounded many of the same notes as dissident shareholders Roy Disney and Stanley Gold.

"We think restoring Disney animation to its rightful place is important," Burke said, echoing a major criticism levied by Roy Disney. "Our goal would be to again place Disney animation in the center of the company."

Analysts agree that Steve Burke, a fromer Disney Exec, would be tapped to head much of the Disney Assets. He seems to really belive that Eisener has totally forgotten that Walt's Vision was always on the cutting edge. For so many years that is what kept Disney in the lead, in all of it's businesses. Today Eisner has gutted the crown Jewels of the company to please Quarterly profits.

WDI, Animation, & Parks are all shells of their former glory. They are no longer industry leaders. Instead they are relegated to a never ending series of catch-up games now.

Eisner is unable to work with others. His relationship with the revolving door at the higest levels of the company is a testament to that.

It is time for some new blood!

I don't know if this has been asked before or what not. But I feel I need to get this question answered for myself. Is this a merger or is Comcast literally buying Disney?

I hope, if it happens, it is only a merger. I really don't like the idea of Disney owned by another company, it just doesn't seem right you know?

He is only saying that stuff about animation to get Roy on his side. If he can get rot to support him there is no stopping comcast.

Sorry I made a mistake: He is only saying that stuff about animation to get Roy on his side. If he can get roy to support him there is no stopping comcast. He just wants to suck up to the fans. and i too would rather have eisner than comcast.

Originally posted by BryanPeek
I don't know if this has been asked before or what not. But I feel I need to get this question answered for myself. Is this a merger or is Comcast literally buying Disney?

I hope, if it happens, it is only a merger. I really don't like the idea of Disney owned by another company, it just doesn't seem right you know?

Very basic answer (these things can get really complicated):

For Comcast to "buy" Disney, Comcast would literally have to be the sole shareholder of all Disney outstanding stock. Disney would still be it's "own" company. "Buying" a company usually refers to a privately held company, not like Disney which has publicly held stock. Currently, thousands of individuals and institutions "own" Disney in the form of outstanding stock.

In a merger, one entity will disappear. That is what Comcast is proposing. Disney could still be the surviving entity with Comcast going away, or vice versa.

I agree with the person who said I'd rather have Eisner own Disney. Disney is its own.

Here's questions I have:

Other than the shareholder activity SaveDisney.com is encouraging, this situation with Comcast, other suitors or white knights is something that is pretty much outside of Disney fans and shareholders ability to influence. Yes? No?

I'd prefer to see The Walt Disney Company remain independent, shed non-core assets, refocus itself under new corporate and Board leadership and composition, and a reformed Board of Directors (staggered terms, reformed governance principles, etc.). How realistic is it to expect any of that preference to actually happen at this point given the news of the last week and what speculation seems to be swirling around out there today?

Originally posted by CarolKoster
Here's questions I have:

Other than the shareholder activity SaveDisney.com is encouraging, this situation with Comcast, other suitors or white knights is something that is pretty much outside of Disney fans and shareholders ability to influence. Yes? No?

I'd prefer to see The Walt Disney Company remain independent, shed non-core assets, refocus itself under new corporate and Board leadership and composition, and a reformed Board of Directors (staggered terms, reformed governance principles, etc.). How realistic is it to expect any of that preference to actually happen at this point given the news of the last week and what speculation seems to be swirling around out there today?


What he said :)

...with every purchase.

Oh, sorry...

Originally posted by CarolKoster
Here's questions I have:

Other than the shareholder activity SaveDisney.com is encouraging, this situation with Comcast, other suitors or white knights is something that is pretty much outside of Disney fans and shareholders ability to influence. Yes? No?

I'd prefer to see The Walt Disney Company remain independent, shed non-core assets, refocus itself under new corporate and Board leadership and composition, and a reformed Board of Directors (staggered terms, reformed governance principles, etc.). How realistic is it to expect any of that preference to actually happen at this point given the news of the last week and what speculation seems to be swirling around out there today?

It's ultimately up to the shareholders, and larger shareholders at that. It takes a simple majority of the shareholders to vote any changes like Comcast is proposing (or any other company, white knight or otherwise). Sure, Disney fans can voice their opinions, but it's convincing the major shareholders that will make a difference. What Institutional Shareholder Services announced (recommending NOT to vote for Eisner to stay on the board) was a major blow. If major institutions follow that recommendation, then it's likely Eisner may be out. Keep in mind, though, that you'd need quite a few institutions to work together...there are few shareholders who own more than 1%, so basically you'd have to convince at least 50 of those shareholders to act in sync to make any changes at all. How likely? It's hard to say. There's an upswell of opinion against Eisner. We'll have to see how the other Directors react to what's happening. They are each bound to act in the best interests of the company, but often they are swayed by what management tells them...in this case, Eisner. I would say Eisner's days are limited, which would mean many of the other Directors would go with him. Would new directors make a difference...maybe, or maybe not. I truly believe that what's more important is who's running Disney, and what they're telling the Board. The Board doesn't run the company...they oversee what happens, but they have to rely on what management tells them is happening.

Here's an example. Take a look at Enron. Was the Board at fault? Or was it more the people who were running Enron? The Board could only act on in formation given them. If management was lying or the "independent" auditors were "covering up" problems, then what could the Directors really have done? They have to rely on what they're told.

Originally posted by Dlandmom
What Institutional Shareholder Services announced (recommending NOT to vote for Eisner to stay on the board) was a major blow. If major institutions follow that recommendation, then it's likely Eisner may be out. Keep in mind, though, that you'd need quite a few institutions to work together...there are few shareholders who own more than 1%, so basically you'd have to convince at least 50 of those shareholders to act in sync to make any changes at all. How likely? It's hard to say.

I should also add that shareholders usually don't like to rock the boat...it could wreak havoc on the share price. That's why Eisner has stayed in power for so long. For good or for bad, it's good to have continuity at the helm. However, at some point when the investors feel that the captain isn't doing his job, it may be time for a mutiny. In this case, it's a mutiny of at least 50% of the outstanding stock.

I have to agree about keeping Disney Independent, but I was wondering what Savedisney.com had to say as well as what Roy Disney had to say on this take over. I was trying to find information on this and it seems to be rather hard. Anyone have any ideas of what this group as well as person has to say?
Thank

Originally posted by marsmelo
I have to agree about keeping Disney Independent, but I was wondering what Savedisney.com had to say as well as what Roy Disney had to say on this take over. I was trying to find information on this and it seems to be rather hard. Anyone have any ideas of what this group as well as person has to say?
Thank

Based on history from 20 years ago, I would guess that he's making like a duck. Serenely gliding on top of the water, while paddling like heck under water. I'm sure that he's working on something, but if he says anything publicly about it he'll tip his hand, which he wouldn't want to do.

It's funny, some of us, not sure who, but some have dissed Eisner and yet would rather have him stay then Comcast or another company buy out Disney. I was one of those people who dissed Eisner, and now, I would love for him to stay just so another company won't buy Disney.

I kind of feel bad for Eisner and what he's going through, I mean, maybe he is doing the right thing and we just can't see it. Maybe he's trying hard to do the right thing. Most, if not all, things are based on politics and he HAS to base his decisions on money, investor's and of course politics. He can't make everyone happy at once...It's quite impossible.

Like the title of this subject, I hope Disney will remain free. I figure, Disney will remain free, if maybe we try and support Eisner...Like we have been supporting Roy, and as much as I love to, I think Eisner needs support as well from the fans.

Just my two cents.

I find it very difficult to feel sorry for someone who has enriched his personal coffers to the tune of over one-half billion dollars while leading the WDC into a situation where they are so vulnerable. If Eisner remains in control, there will no company to take over, at least not as we know it.

I'm just saying, he needs money to pay the million's of employees and to make new stuff, and so much other stuff that we cannot comprehend. You may be right that Eisner has made WDC vulnerable but ya know...He's under a lot of pressure to make sure that Disney remains Independent and I hope he pulls through.

He's under a lot of pressure to make sure that Disney remains Independent and I hope he pulls through.

Bryan, I can understand how it might look that way, but the reality is that the ONLY thing that motivates Eisner is hanging onto his job and the money and status that goes with it. If he thought Comcast would keep him on as CEO, he'd be pushing for the takeover any way he could. He knows that if he's out, after what he's done to the WDC, his chances of getting another job that lets him feel like a big shot and push people around are zero.

Unless you've worked at Disney (as I have) you have no idea how deeply despised Eisner is within the company, or how much pain he's caused. While he's always been a micromanager and a bully, starting about two years ago he went into "survival mode" when he realized that if he didn't get the stock price up, even his board of hand picked toadies and sycophants couldn't protect him. His solution? Layoffs. Then more layoffs. Followed by layoffs (and yes, I was one of people layed off). All while spending upwards of $400 million on a new accounting system (project Tomorrowland). Brilliant, huh?

CM's all knew that Disney's problem wasn't too many people or the old accounting system - it was lack of great products, all due to exactly the problems Roy has been pointing out. Everything was about cutting costs, and what would let us make the numbers this month. Nothing was about succeeding by doing what used to make TWDC great.

The only hope for Disney in the long run is to dump Eisner. Even then, the company has lost so many good people and has gotten such a bad reputation as a place to work (my old unit was often referred to as "Mousechwitz") that a full recovery may not be possible. My only consolation is that you can stick a fork in Eisner - he's done.

Yes I see what you are saying and I do agree, but I just want Disney to stay independent NO MATTER who the owner is. I wouldn't feel the way I do now about Disney, if another company owned it.

I would rather see Disney remain independent too, and I think it probably will. Comcast's stock is down since the takeover bid, so their shareholders can't be happy. Mergers of media content providers and distributors have a terrible track record, e.g. Disney and ABC, Vivendi and Universal Studios, and the mother of all merger disasters, Time Warner and AOL. I think the bid may drag on for quite a while after the March 3rd shareholders meeting, but I doubt anything will come of it.

Even if Disney was taken over by Comcast, I think that in the long run, with King Michael dethroned, the Disney culture would come to dominate the new entity and probably even return to it's roots, so it might not be such a bad thing.

I'd love for Disney to remain as independent as it can be for as long as possible. We don't need layers piled on top of a company that built itself up by sheer creativity and determination. Disney would get smothered if layers of other corporate culture and bureaucracy via merger or takeover came about. Not every creative entity needs to be a conglomerate. Some businesses are in fact going to function best only at a "certain size" right for it. I think if Disney refocused, shed non-core assets, and invested smartly for technological distribution and anti-piracy, it would be just fine and perpetuate itself nicely. One person's opinion.

Hi Carol - I just wanted to point out that Disney is already smothered in layers of bureaucracy, but I agree. There is certainly no need for another company to get involved.

The problem with shedding non-core assets (like ABC) is that now they're losing so much money that it would be almost impossible to find a buyer, but in the long run, all things are fixable with new leadership at the top.

Disney also needs to be very careful with the anti-piracy technology because it frequently becomes such a pain for consumers that the ill will it creates isn't worth any savings. There are a lot of problems it won't solve either. For example, when Disney publishes a new children's picture book and it gets distributed in Hong Kong, six weeks later cheaply made copies are selling in mainland china for a dollar or two. That's not necessarily all bad either, because it introduces the brand and characters to a new audience.

By the way, I really enjoy reading your posts here. You certain understand a lot about the company. Were you every a CM, or are you just a long time fan?

Richard

richard_f, I was a Disney Store Cast Member for temporary Christmas employment back in '93 or so. Otherwise I'm a long time fan, used to attend Official Disneyana Conventions, used to post a lot on rec.arts.disney when it was a unified single newsgroup on Usenet, used to be in our local National Fantasy Fan Club chapter as a member and an officer one year before it disbanded. Thanks for the kind words. Here's hoping for the best for Disney and Disney fans and shareholders: Cheers!