PDA

View Full Version : Some questions for the smart ones



Pages : [1] 2

DisneylandBoy
07-03-2001, 10:43 AM
Okay, I have a couple of questions:

1. What are the titles of the positions that Eisner, Pressler, and Harris hold?

2. What do they do, specifically?

3. Who can hire them?

4. Who can fire them?

5. Are they like the President of the USA, they can only hold office for a certain amount of years?

6. If yes, when do their terms run out/If no, when can they be fired?

I was just wondering.

Thanks

splbound
07-03-2001, 11:14 AM
1. I don't know the exact Titles of Pressler & Hariss, Something to the effect of President, Resorts and parks, bla bla bla.....The exact wording can be obtained at their Corporate web site, probably in the investor area. Michael Eisner is the CEO (or Cheif Executive Officer) of the Walt Disney Company.

2. Eisner oversees the entire operation of the Disney Company, being the final word for the parks, movies, tv, retail, etc. Pressler reports to him as president of the parks division, as does Hariss, however she probably reports directly to Pressler. Hariss, and Pressler in a bigger way, control all aspects of the park, from cost of payroll to maintenaince, budgets, marketing, attractions etc.

3. I'm sure Eisner hired them, or at least put them in their respective positions, Eisner was hired by the board of directors of the company.

4. Same in reverse to fire, however, eisner will be a little tricky to remove, since he owns a major chunk of the stock. Still if there was a shareholder revolt, or the stock tumbled as a result of his actions, he could be removed for the good of the company.

5. Whatever the contracts stipulate. Probably not a term limit. Probably on a performance/goal tier.

6. See above. He will probably not be fired. If he is asked to step down they would need a darn good cause, as I said, he is a major stockholder, and with a parachute, the payoff could really devalue the company. Don't expect it. I think if he does go, it will be because HE wants to go.

I know that's not all the answers but hopefully that helps some....

Mandrake Linux
07-03-2001, 02:29 PM
Originally posted by splbound
1. I don't know the exact Titles of Pressler & Hariss, Something to the effect of President, Resorts and parks, bla bla bla.....The exact wording can be obtained at their Corporate web site, probably in the investor area. Michael Eisner is the CEO (or Cheif Executive Officer) of the Walt Disney Company.

2. Eisner oversees the entire operation of the Disney Company, being the final word for the parks, movies, tv, retail, etc. Pressler reports to him as president of the parks division, as does Hariss, however she probably reports directly to Pressler. Hariss, and Pressler in a bigger way, control all aspects of the park, from cost of payroll to maintenaince, budgets, marketing, attractions etc.

3. I'm sure Eisner hired them, or at least put them in their respective positions, Eisner was hired by the board of directors of the company.

4. Same in reverse to fire, however, eisner will be a little tricky to remove, since he owns a major chunk of the stock. Still if there was a shareholder revolt, or the stock tumbled as a result of his actions, he could be removed for the good of the company.

5. Whatever the contracts stipulate. Probably not a term limit. Probably on a performance/goal tier.

6. See above. He will probably not be fired. If he is asked to step down they would need a darn good cause, as I said, he is a major stockholder, and with a parachute, the payoff could really devalue the company. Don't expect it. I think if he does go, it will be because HE wants to go.

I know that's not all the answers but hopefully that helps some....

How can the resort have two presidents?
As for Eisner, we'll just wait a couple hours he'll die of old age.

Ralph Wiggum
07-03-2001, 02:41 PM
Originally posted by ACDC Therapy
As for Eisner, we'll just wait a couple hours he'll die of old age.

He's 59 from what i understand. That hardly leaves any reason to believe that he will die anytime soon unless I am missing something.

Ralph Wiggum
07-03-2001, 02:41 PM
Originally posted by ACDC Therapy
As for Eisner, we'll just wait a couple hours he'll die of old age.

He's 59 from what i understand. That hardly leaves any reason to believe that he will die anytime soon unless I am missing something.

59 is old but not that old.

lisap
07-03-2001, 02:58 PM
Let me get this straight, Dave. Is he 59??
:p :p

lisap
07-03-2001, 02:59 PM
He's 59??
:D

Ralph Wiggum
07-03-2001, 03:03 PM
double post....that's why i named myself "Rezadint ideot"

lisap
07-03-2001, 03:09 PM
It's ok--you should see some of the idiotic things I do to my computer when the man of the house is not home.

Ralph Wiggum
07-03-2001, 03:16 PM
Yeah, but yours were not done in a thread called "Some questions for the SMART ONES"

lisap
07-03-2001, 03:35 PM
True, very true. You are hereby restricted to posting on threads entitled "Questions for idiots"
I'm right behind ya.

merlinjones
07-03-2001, 04:02 PM
>>6. See above. He will probably not be fired. If he is asked to step down they would need a darn good cause, as I said, he is a major stockholder, and with a parachute, the payoff could really devalue the company. Don't expect it. I think if he does go, it will be because HE wants to go. <<

The same could have been said of Ron Miller twnenty years ago. We can only hope that certain powerful mice are once again working between the walls of Stepmother's chateau to set things right...

Alex S.
07-03-2001, 04:31 PM
Eisner owns a lot of Disney stock, but he isn't a major stock holder. If Eisner exercised everyting he could right now he would have about 13.5 million shares of Disney stock. That is a lot, but there are almost 2.1 billion shares of Disney outstanding. Eisner hold about 0.5%. If there was a serious push to oust Eisner, he couldn't do much about it on his own.

EandCDad
07-03-2001, 04:47 PM
Originally posted by ACDC Therapy


How can the resort have two presidents?
As for Eisner, we'll just wait a couple hours he'll die of old age.

I believe Cynthia Harriss is the President of Disneyland Resort (DL, DCA, and the hotels). Pressler is the President of Walt Disney Attractions (Disneyland Resort, WDW, Tokyo Disney, WDI, and some other stuff). Pressler is Harriss' boss, Eisner is both their bosses.

As far as Eisner being fired. Believe me, if company results were not to the Board and shareholders liking, he would be out. However, by this point he probably has allies on the Board (who have the power to hire and fire the CEO) and it would take some major stock movements to build up the pressure to take him out.

splbound
07-03-2001, 05:18 PM
Alex Stroup,

No disrespect, but were you quoting unrealized stock options, cashable options or straight stock purchased?

Regardless, take into consideration the salary, perks and bonus scale for all his years at the helm, then give his lawyer about an hour to prepare a golden parachute based on aggregate earnings, and I disagree with you. I think the company would be in a world of hurt. - Not to the tune of bringing it down...that as we know couldn't happen, but it would hurt enough to make the board think twice....

Also, with the yellow light that most of the brokerage companies have thrown out Disney's way lately, ousting Eisner (in the near future) could very well trigger a massive sell, don't you agree?

Alex S.
07-03-2001, 06:08 PM
The numbers were from the 2001 proxy statement. He currently owns 13 million shares and has another 500,000 in options that can be executed within 60 days (of the proxy). I didn't read the entire proxy again, so there may be others, but it would have to be another 50 million or so shares before he even began to realize a small power simply from owning shares.

As for your other points, you are absolutely correct. If Eisner fought being fired he could cause a world of hurt.

My point was simply that his position of power does not derive from the number of shares he owns.

However, if Eisner is fired he wouldn't need to negotiate a golden parachute, he already has one. If he were fired tomorrow, without cause, he would be entitled to annual payments until the year 2008. The annual payments would be equal to the average of the top three bonuses in the four years prior to termination. Currently, that would be about $8.8 million a year for doing NOTHING. (His 2000 bonus was $11.5 million, he received no bonus in 1999, $5 million in 1998, and $9.9 million in 1997). Additionally he currently has about $250 million in unexcersided stock options that would become exercisable upon termination.

And you can't just move Eisner out of the way and keep paying him his annual salary ($1 million). If Eisner quits for "good reason" the above compensation plan is triggered. "Good reason" means he can quit and collect if he is not elected chairman of the company, is not retained as CEO, has his duties reduced, or is forced to move from Los Angeles.

Getting fired is probably the best thing that could happen to him.

merlinjones
07-03-2001, 07:43 PM
>> Also, with the yellow light that most of the brokerage companies have thrown out Disney's way lately, ousting Eisner (in the near future) could very well trigger a massive sell, don't you agree?<<

Not necessarily. If you track recent financial press, there more concern that Eisner has been forcing out key executives. The tone has been changing (see the NYTimes articles earlier this week) to one of acceptance that he is way past peak.

The key to keeping the market from panic would be his successor. If it were someone internal like Iger, sure - - there would likely be no confidence and a sell off. If a Lucas or a Jobs were recruited, I think the reaction from Wall Street would be quite positive.

Despite heavy PR forces, the media is on to this game and everyone is just marking time until the inevitable change happens. My biggest concern is that more damage will be done in the meantime (to the parks and to Feature Animation particularly).

EandCDad
07-04-2001, 05:47 AM
Originally posted by merlinjones
>>

Despite heavy PR forces, the media is on to this game and everyone is just marking time until the inevitable change happens. My biggest concern is that more damage will be done in the meantime (to the parks and to Feature Animation particularly).

I would say most CEOs are in for an "inevitable change." It takes longer in some cases than in others . If Eisner is 59 (I think I heard that number somewhere;) ), he probably has only a few more years anyway. Not due to incompetence and being past his prime, but just because he is older and it may be time for him to enjoy his grandkids or go sailing or whatever he likes.

When Eisner took over Disney in 1984 the stock was trading at what is the equivalent of $1.20 today (adjusted for spits, dividends, blah, blah (my source on this is yahoo)), currently it is at $28. That's an annual return of 140%, every year for 17 years (my math may be off but its 5am so give me a freakin' break).

Yeah, blips happen in corporations, but the Board and the shareholders (who mostly care about results and profits not quality) are not going to want to move out a guy with a proven track record until the numbers take a big, big tumble. For the reasons that Merlin, Alex, and splbnd all listed. Cost, reputation, problems on wall street.

A bad movie and a stumbling theme park could probably unseat some, but not Eisner. Next year there will be some new blockbuster that will do just great, DCA will pick up, maybe the Ducks will win the cup. The stock will do ok, or the company will say it is an overall dip in the market. In the long haul Eisner is doing what shareholders and the Board want.

If they do "force" him out, it will be spun as a "mutual parting" (allowing Eisner to save face and ego) in exchange for a reduction in his parachute.

Alex S.
07-04-2001, 10:46 AM
The points are valid, but the math was way off. $1.20 in 1984 to $28 today is an annual return of about 19.5%. But that is still a damn good return.

It beats the DJIA (13.1% return) by a healthy margin.

EandCDad
07-04-2001, 11:30 AM
Well, I guess I was more tired than I thought. I'm not sure what I did or didn't do, but since the price is not currently $790,000 per share (what it would be if the annualized return were 140% were correct), all I can say is whoops!

TheMur
07-06-2001, 10:27 AM
I read all these posts and one thing strikes me.......

I miss Frank Wells!

Lani
07-06-2001, 11:37 AM
Originally posted by lisap
He's 59??
:D A previously published company capsule quotes him as being 58, so I wouldn't be surprised if a recent birthday bumped him up to 59.

Gauchograd99
07-06-2001, 09:27 PM
A tad off topic here, but in order for the company to continue it's growth would take a whole lot of profit this fiscal year. The money spent on DCA and the "Resort" is not being covered by income from those areas I would think. Pearl Harbour just might hit $200 million... not exactly the blockbuster they wanted compared to other movies (see Shrek and the "Disney abuse" within). There has been a TON of bad press, lawsuits, and even the little "swearing incident" (I still wanna hear that tape!!). A judge has been angered (never lie to a judge!), locals have been angered, and I am pretty sure the Ducks fans are pretty PO'd (No Selanne and you traded him for an UNRESTRICTED FREE AGENT!!!??) as are the Angels fans (no chance of a winner... the always fold). How could the stockholders NOT want him gone? Bad decisions continue to fester like open wounds... sooner or later you have to fix them.

EandCDad
07-07-2001, 07:23 AM
Originally posted by Gauchograd99
A tad off topic here, but in order for the company to continue it's growth would take a whole lot of profit this fiscal year. The money spent on DCA and the "Resort" is not being covered by income from those areas I would think. Pearl Harbour just might hit $200 million... not exactly the blockbuster they wanted compared to other movies (see Shrek and the "Disney abuse" within). There has been a TON of bad press, lawsuits, and even the little "swearing incident" (I still wanna hear that tape!!). A judge has been angered (never lie to a judge!), locals have been angered, and I am pretty sure the Ducks fans are pretty PO'd (No Selanne and you traded him for an UNRESTRICTED FREE AGENT!!!??) as are the Angels fans (no chance of a winner... the always fold). How could the stockholders NOT want him gone? Bad decisions continue to fester like open wounds... sooner or later you have to fix them.

Don't disagree with anything you say Gaucho (did you go to UCSB) but if you based it on the performance of the Ducks and the Angles then Eisner would have been up for termination awhile ago. The movies are good and bad over the years and the studio has had some winners in recent years. Besides, someone else has already taken the fall for that.

Corporations with Billions in assets always have legal problems, always. DCA and resort expansion may be working (or may eventually work) financially, I think this will be a wait and see type thing.

Stockholders want the price of the stock to stay high and regular dividends. As long as they are getting that, they will stay with what works. Rumblings will continue to rumble, but until the pitch gets a little higher, I say the guy stays for at least a couple more years, then off to a comfortable retirement.

Gauchograd99
07-07-2001, 02:32 PM
First, yes... I am a graduate of UC Santa Barbara... 1999 hence the name I chose.

As for my point I was trying to make I guess I should have finished my thought better than I did. It seems to me that there has been an increase in poor judgement in recent years and it is shown in what I stated. The legal problems have either really had an increase or they are just coming out more, but the cash cow of the Disney Corp. in my eyes is the parks and they are being sued over unjuries. I am not sure about many people but injuries tend to keep me away from a place. I am not one of those "if it hurts people, then it must be more exciting" people so seeing a person injured and suing Disney would tend to keep me from the park. This is just more bad press.
I am a stockholder with a different company (Disney is too volatile for me) and the only thing I want is a solid company. A solid company will be complemented with solid stock prices. Flash-in-the-pan increases from a new movie or a new attraction are nice, but companies that keep to the promise of QUALITY and not to cutting costs and cutting corners to look better are what catch my eye. I have checked the Disney stock numbers for the past 52 weeks and it just seems like the downward trend might be due to recent actions (job losses, injuries, etc), and I would not feel comfortable with my money invested in a company doing what Disney is doing.
Any stockholders out there able to explain to me what is the plus of owning Disney stock these days, or why they have kept their stock when the high was about $47.00 and the price now is $27 and change? Is it the Disney name on the stock or are their dividends nice? I am only asking to see why people have not sold out with all the problems and job losses.