Recently, some of the financial news out of Disney has been pretty positive. This is what matters most to investors. Most investors (especially institutional investors) could care less about whether or not the Tiki Room's roof has new thatch on it or not. Most investors probably feel that the Micahel Moore thing was a good decision on Eisner's part.

Is Eisner's strategy of holding on no matter what going to win out? Does Roy Disney and Stanley Gold has the capacity to keep up the campaign? Is it already running out of steam?

As you can see from the Investment Fund managers angry meetings today with the Disney Board (except Eisner, who skipped town), the shareholders and dedicated followers of the Walt Disney Company remain committed to restoring the legacy and ideals of the Walt Disney Company - - as well as its bottom line.

Selling off assets, slashing budgets and laying off entire divisions for outsourcing can only buy Eisner and his strategic planners so much time in inflated profit margins. What happens when all the nails are pulled from the walls to fill Eisner's bucket? Soon the walls will collapse.

Read all the latest at:

http://www.savedisney.com

As Roy and Stan promise, the battle will continue until there is substantial change at the company. :) :fez: :D

As you can see from the Investment Fund managers angry meetings today with the Disney Board (except Eisner, who skipped town)
A little misleading. Actually, only six board members met with the fund managers. George Mitchell, Bob Iger, Judith Estrin, Monica Lozano, Robert Matschullat and Aylwin Lewis attended the meeting. Personally, Matschullat and maybe Lewis are the only ones that I really think of as independent thinkers on the Eisner issue.

I think the fact that major institutional investors are asking for, and getting, meetings with the Disney Board indicates that nothing has cooled off since the March 3rd shareholder's meeting. It is telling who shows up to these and what they say afterwards. Obviously, the institutional investors do indeed care about the performance of Disney beyond short-term solutions the company may come up with. Institutional investors have members who have their retirement and college fund savings for their children tied up in these plans which include Disney stock. The money for their retirement or their children starting college must be there when those life events happen. Prudent management of those funds means that institutional plan managers must grow the funds in their care. Lately institutional plan managers have been outspoken against Disney and other stock performance (like Safeway supermarkets) that lags or is stagnant over longer term periods (5-10 years), and they are in increasing activism to get change at the top. This dovetails into SaveDisney's activities. SaveDisney has always been about the performance of the stock over the past ten years. The shoddy condition of the parks maintanance and safety ties into that, but what is motivating the folks at SaveDisney is the performance of the stock since 1994 in terms of dollars adjusted for inflation.

There is nothing anyone can do about Disney at this point except to apply pressure to the Board to monitor the activities of the CEO. Deals that are made, changes that are made, must grow the stock in a solid growth way longer term and not in short-term bursts that look good in press releases. So other than keeping the Board's feet to the fire there is nothing more can be done except to plan for the next shareholder's meeting in Spring 2005. To that end institutional shareholders continue to seek meetings to present concerns to the Disney Board and everyone is taking notes to be used in planning strategies at the next shareholder's meeting. Even SaveDisney has announced intentions of presenting an alternative slate of officers and management at the 2005 shareholder's meeting. That is not passive or static or running-out-of-steam activity. It is highly in activism mode, it's just not very visual or exciting yet. Any missteps the Disney Board or CEO do between now and the next shareholder's meeting will be noted by institutional investors and SaveDisney for use at the 2005 shareholder's meeting. If SaveDisney is actively seeking a slate of new officers to nominate, then those potential nominees need to begin extricating themselves out of existing business and contractual relationships now in order to be free to accept placement at Disney if things come down to it next year. To publicly announce all this would disrupt the stocks of both Disney and where these potential nominees now work, so it's being done quietly and low-profile in the background, but it is going on.

Michael Eisner's contract at Disney runs out in 2006. 2005 is the next shareholder's meeting and the year after that renegotiation may go on with Michael Eisner. Pressure on the Board now can anticipate the next two years and determine whether Eisner stays or goes and under what conditions, and determine characteristics of what a new CEO should be like. Shareholders and institutional investors are in fact pursuing these aspirations now. It doesn't happen overnight. In fact, we're now seeing at other shareholder meetings that shareholder activism doesn't always acheive the desired result (ouster of disagreed with CEOs or Board members by shareholder vote) . It is a matter of patience and experienced strategy by those who understand the business of shareholding. Be patient and informed and stay the course. It might be that nothing can be done until the next time shareholders have a chance to vote, in early 2005 unless something can be instigated earlier.

My feeling is that Eisner and the Board's strategy is to hang on as long as possible and hope that the media gets board with Roy's press releases.