I am (probably like a lot of people on this board), a fan of “old school” Disney, meaning the old cartons, movies, TV shows, etc. I would say that my main interests in Disney are from “Steamboat Willie” to “Tarzan”, with a few post-“Tarzan” things thrown in (“Enchanted”, the Pixar films). Now, my question is, what does the Disney company think of consumers like me?
For the first decade of the new millennium, Disney did seem to care a lot about fans of old-time Disney products, as the Platinum Editions and Walt Disney Treasures seemed to prove (although how much of the Treasure line was Disney’s idea, and how much was Leonard Maltin’s idea, I’m not sure). However, since the end of both the Treasures and Platinum Editions, the Disney Company doesn’t seem to be targeting fans of vintage Disney very much. I know they’ve started the Diamond Edition Blu-Rays, but it doesn’t seem like (with the exception of the first two) they’ve really tried to come up with any new bonus material. As far as I can tell, all the Diamond Editions since “Beauty and the Beast” haven’t had much new content on them, and they’re not even recycling all the old content from the Platinum Editions.
The only other releases I can think of would appeal to old school Disney fans are the Disney movie club exclusives, and the Disney Generation Collection, but Disney has done such a poor job of promoting them (or to be more accurate, hasn’t promoted them at all), that most people aren’t going to even know about them. Does the Disney Company not care about making any profits off of those titles?
As far as the Walt Disney Treasures go, no new line has been released (so far) to take that content into the high-def realm. I really hope Disney comes up with a replacement line soon, in order to both fix some of the problems with the Treasures line, and to put some more vintage material on the market (like the second and third seasons of “Spin and Marty”).
I know that, in recent years the Disney Company has been more interested in playing to the tween and teen market than probably any other demographic, but, even from a purely business perspective, it seems like there is a lot of money that could be made by releasing (or re-releasing) more of the old content onto the market. There are still tons of “Disneyland” episodes that haven’t been released yet, probably a lot of live-action movies and TV specials from the 70’s and 80’s, and of course (as noted earlier), re-releases of the Walt Disney Treasures. So why isn’t Disney releasing any of this material? Do they just not care about “old school” Disney fans anymore?
What do other people think?
What does the Disney Company think of old school Disney fans
-
disneyrecordfan
- Member
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2003 6:42 pm
Post subject: What does the Disney Company think of old scho
Candidly? I don't think they think so much about old school Disney fans. It's not necessarily with bad intentions but there are a number of factors I've observed first-hand.
First, Disney's a 90-year-old company. Other than the really big reminders of Disney's yesteryear success - the classic animated features, the still-evolving theme parks - the people who work at Disney are focused on the here and now. Truth be told, it's always been that way --- technicians working on "Mary Poppins" in 1964 were more concerned with that film than they were thinking about "So Dear to My Heart" 15 years earlier.
Second, many of the Disney execs or middle-management studio types are interchangeable with other studios. They directed marketing at Universal for 3 years and were at Paramount 2 years before that and so on. Many of them just want to make it big in Hollywood, and if it's not at Disney, then they intend to springboard to the next opportunity, regardless of the studio. It's disillusioning to accept this reality, but truthfully, Disney's not looking to hire execs who want to nurture Walt's company the way he might have.
Third, a combination of the first and second factors cited above has resulted in an erosion of respect or appreciation for Disney's history beyond the standard "It All Started with a Mouse" lip service homage. Disney once immersed new hires into a comprehensive overview of the company's history, from front-line theme park cast members to studio hands. It's virtually gone or watered down now.
Consequently, there are many key decision-makers throughout Disney who know less about Disney history than many of the fans on this site. When confronted with that reality, most people in this position will result to a defensive posture --- if a non-employee approached you and claimed to know more about YOUR employer, you'd probably be fairly dismissive, too.
Next, consider the consequences of Disney's last decade of neglect toward its older products. Once Disney made a decision to evolve the Disney Channel into a clone of Nickelodeon - and the ratings went up - it became the "correct" decision from a corporate point of view. From 1983-2001, new generations of Disney fans could discover "Moon Pilot" or "Texas John Slaughter" or Annette Funicello on the Disney Channel or from years of home video releases. There aren't many similar opportunities out there now, unless a curious 15-year-old stumbles across an Amazon, YouTube or Hulu-type listing, sees the name Disney and decides to learn more.
These factors also coincide with media/cable fragmentation, cultural shifts (if it's 2 weeks old, it might as well be 20 years old), technology changes, etc. Disney's home video division - if not torn between moving to digital downloads vs. Blu-Ray - can crunch the number and see more job security in marketing/selling 8 million copies of "Brave" vs. 30,000 copies of the second season of "Spin and Marty."
Finally, because life is busy and complex for most of us, the same sort of apathy sets in just as as it does elsewhere in society, from politics to religion. Just as most people rarely write our member of Congress, I imagine most of us rarely contact networks to express our satisfaction/displeasure with shows we watch or movies we see. Consequently, just as politicians are governed by polls/election results, Disney looks at the sales receipts. "The Avengers" did quite nicely this year, so if you're Bob Iger or a Disney shareholder, things seem pretty good, right? Between most of us being either too busy --- or newer generations not even being aware of older Disney products because Disney cut off access years ago - the result is that Disney doesn't perceive that great of a demand for the older products. In the end, there's not so much love for old school Disney.
I'd be in the group who would love to see this change --- perhaps the digital download era will allow us access to Mickey Mouse Club episodes or the Sunday night anthology series on demand. Some of us had hoped that D23 could fill this demand, but they seem more prone of late to marketing "The Avengers" more than than the older product. It's extremely disappointing that you can count on one hand the number of Walt-era Blu-Rays available - "Babes in Toyland" is virtually impossible to find in stores, so unless you know or care about the film to begin with, I'm not sure how casual Disney fans or film buffs will ever find it.
If you follow Disney's recently launched "Disney" Facebook brand, you'll see more of this conundrum. One day they post a bit of news about ESPN (one of the company's most profitable divisions), while another day brings news about an ABC sitcom, with theme park news or "Star Wars" acquisition tidbits in the mix. The "Disney" name lulled many of us into thinking it was the same old company, when in reality, the "Disney brand" that we knew and loved really co-exists alongside ABC, ESPN and other "brands" under the company's umbrella.
If you accept that premise, though, surely it could be feasible to start a smaller, boutique "Disney Archive" brand, similar to how Warner Archive operates within the same corporate behemoth responsible for contemporary fare such as Harry Potter. A "Disney Archive" brand could then solely focus on developing vintage movie, TV show, or music releases, as well as celebrating old school Disney without having to compete with the "Lone Ranger" or "Wreck-It Ralph" for promotion, marketing and distribution.
Until then, I don't know how 50-year-old anthology episodes or Spin and Marty will ever have a chance to compete when the company is focused on the billions to be made from "Star Wars," "The Avengers" or ESPN. Getting someone at Disney to help champion ideas such as these is the challenge, again, because "Star Wars" and "The Avengers" is where Disney is living today. If it weren't for the theme parks having direct ties to Walt and continuing to thrive because people enjoy them so much in the here and now, there would be very little resemblance between Walt's "Disney" and today's Corporate Disney. It's a difficult pill to swallow for anyone who has loved Disney for a lifetime, but accepting this reality and looking for ways to challenge the company to cater to fans such as us is probably the only glimmer of hope we have for seeing more of the classic Disney we love. I don't think it will organically ever originate from the modern version of The Walt Disney Company until they perceive a way for it be profitable to them.
First, Disney's a 90-year-old company. Other than the really big reminders of Disney's yesteryear success - the classic animated features, the still-evolving theme parks - the people who work at Disney are focused on the here and now. Truth be told, it's always been that way --- technicians working on "Mary Poppins" in 1964 were more concerned with that film than they were thinking about "So Dear to My Heart" 15 years earlier.
Second, many of the Disney execs or middle-management studio types are interchangeable with other studios. They directed marketing at Universal for 3 years and were at Paramount 2 years before that and so on. Many of them just want to make it big in Hollywood, and if it's not at Disney, then they intend to springboard to the next opportunity, regardless of the studio. It's disillusioning to accept this reality, but truthfully, Disney's not looking to hire execs who want to nurture Walt's company the way he might have.
Third, a combination of the first and second factors cited above has resulted in an erosion of respect or appreciation for Disney's history beyond the standard "It All Started with a Mouse" lip service homage. Disney once immersed new hires into a comprehensive overview of the company's history, from front-line theme park cast members to studio hands. It's virtually gone or watered down now.
Consequently, there are many key decision-makers throughout Disney who know less about Disney history than many of the fans on this site. When confronted with that reality, most people in this position will result to a defensive posture --- if a non-employee approached you and claimed to know more about YOUR employer, you'd probably be fairly dismissive, too.
Next, consider the consequences of Disney's last decade of neglect toward its older products. Once Disney made a decision to evolve the Disney Channel into a clone of Nickelodeon - and the ratings went up - it became the "correct" decision from a corporate point of view. From 1983-2001, new generations of Disney fans could discover "Moon Pilot" or "Texas John Slaughter" or Annette Funicello on the Disney Channel or from years of home video releases. There aren't many similar opportunities out there now, unless a curious 15-year-old stumbles across an Amazon, YouTube or Hulu-type listing, sees the name Disney and decides to learn more.
These factors also coincide with media/cable fragmentation, cultural shifts (if it's 2 weeks old, it might as well be 20 years old), technology changes, etc. Disney's home video division - if not torn between moving to digital downloads vs. Blu-Ray - can crunch the number and see more job security in marketing/selling 8 million copies of "Brave" vs. 30,000 copies of the second season of "Spin and Marty."
Finally, because life is busy and complex for most of us, the same sort of apathy sets in just as as it does elsewhere in society, from politics to religion. Just as most people rarely write our member of Congress, I imagine most of us rarely contact networks to express our satisfaction/displeasure with shows we watch or movies we see. Consequently, just as politicians are governed by polls/election results, Disney looks at the sales receipts. "The Avengers" did quite nicely this year, so if you're Bob Iger or a Disney shareholder, things seem pretty good, right? Between most of us being either too busy --- or newer generations not even being aware of older Disney products because Disney cut off access years ago - the result is that Disney doesn't perceive that great of a demand for the older products. In the end, there's not so much love for old school Disney.
I'd be in the group who would love to see this change --- perhaps the digital download era will allow us access to Mickey Mouse Club episodes or the Sunday night anthology series on demand. Some of us had hoped that D23 could fill this demand, but they seem more prone of late to marketing "The Avengers" more than than the older product. It's extremely disappointing that you can count on one hand the number of Walt-era Blu-Rays available - "Babes in Toyland" is virtually impossible to find in stores, so unless you know or care about the film to begin with, I'm not sure how casual Disney fans or film buffs will ever find it.
If you follow Disney's recently launched "Disney" Facebook brand, you'll see more of this conundrum. One day they post a bit of news about ESPN (one of the company's most profitable divisions), while another day brings news about an ABC sitcom, with theme park news or "Star Wars" acquisition tidbits in the mix. The "Disney" name lulled many of us into thinking it was the same old company, when in reality, the "Disney brand" that we knew and loved really co-exists alongside ABC, ESPN and other "brands" under the company's umbrella.
If you accept that premise, though, surely it could be feasible to start a smaller, boutique "Disney Archive" brand, similar to how Warner Archive operates within the same corporate behemoth responsible for contemporary fare such as Harry Potter. A "Disney Archive" brand could then solely focus on developing vintage movie, TV show, or music releases, as well as celebrating old school Disney without having to compete with the "Lone Ranger" or "Wreck-It Ralph" for promotion, marketing and distribution.
Until then, I don't know how 50-year-old anthology episodes or Spin and Marty will ever have a chance to compete when the company is focused on the billions to be made from "Star Wars," "The Avengers" or ESPN. Getting someone at Disney to help champion ideas such as these is the challenge, again, because "Star Wars" and "The Avengers" is where Disney is living today. If it weren't for the theme parks having direct ties to Walt and continuing to thrive because people enjoy them so much in the here and now, there would be very little resemblance between Walt's "Disney" and today's Corporate Disney. It's a difficult pill to swallow for anyone who has loved Disney for a lifetime, but accepting this reality and looking for ways to challenge the company to cater to fans such as us is probably the only glimmer of hope we have for seeing more of the classic Disney we love. I don't think it will organically ever originate from the modern version of The Walt Disney Company until they perceive a way for it be profitable to them.
-
PatrickvD
- Signature Collection
- Posts: 5207
- Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 11:34 am
- Location: The Netherlands
Re: Post subject: What does the Disney Company think of old
I think these franchises live to expand Disney's market share in the film industry.disneyrecordfan wrote:Getting someone at Disney to help champion ideas such as these is the challenge, again, because "Star Wars" and "The Avengers" is where Disney is living today.
Disney is still keen to develop franchises for their own film-label. The next two Pirates films are going to be shot back-to-back and Disney is going ahead with a third Tron film. A live action remaining of 20,000 leagues by David Fincher is also in active development. Not to mention the ridiculous amount of cash that they have pumped into next years The Lone Ranger.
While I agree that Marvel and Star Wars are under Disney's umbrella to bring in the big bucks now, none of this has affected the slate of animated features or their expanding live action slate. I think what describes Disney best nowadays is simply franchise-happy. Everything is made with sequel possibilities in mind.
To stay on topic, do they care about fans like us? Not really. They care to the extent that they enjoy cashing in on us. D23 is an example. It's a nice magazine, but for those four issues a year it's WAY overpriced, so Disney gets the last laugh.
-
milojthatch
- Collector's Edition
- Posts: 2646
- Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:34 am
Re: Post subject: What does the Disney Company think of old
I think you are spot on. I don't want to agree with you, but anyone with even a slight understanding of how a major corporation works today would have a hard time not agreeing with your points. Which is another reason why I started Open Vault Disney. I don't know how much new stuff will ever be made again in the future that "feels" like traditional Disney, and that may be a fight too big for any of us.disneyrecordfan wrote:Candidly? I don't think they think so much about old school Disney fans. It's not necessarily with bad intentions but there are a number of factors I've observed first-hand.
But I suspect it is possible to save (and enjoy!) the old stuff that has been made if we work together as a united fan base. I don't have a lot of faith in digital, and feel our best chance is still DVD. I know a lot of customers are sore on DVD-on-Demand (and to be fair I agree with some points made on why it is not the best way to see things released), but it right now is how we'll see a lot of things that we may never see ever again without it. I've talked with folks who work at Disney Home Entertainment, I have an idea what the views many seem to have back there on vintage titles are, and they are not good. If we don't get the DVD-on-Demand thing stronger, its game over for many of these titles for at least a long time, if not forever.
We have a phone campaign event today, it would be great to get some support for it. Let them know Open Vault Disney sent you and help show that old school fans still matter. Thanks.
http://openvaultdisney.com/2012/12/29/j ... all-event/
____________________________________________________________
All the adversity I've had in my life, all my troubles and obstacles, have strengthened me... You may not realize it when it happens, but a kick in the teeth may be the best thing in the world for you.
-Walt Disney
All the adversity I've had in my life, all my troubles and obstacles, have strengthened me... You may not realize it when it happens, but a kick in the teeth may be the best thing in the world for you.
-Walt Disney
-
Disneyphile
- Special Edition
- Posts: 734
- Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 2:27 am
- Location: San Jose CA
-
disneyboy20022
- Signature Collection
- Posts: 6868
- Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:17 pm
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/v0due39C-XM" frameborder="0"></iframe>
Want to Hear How I met Roy E. Disney in 2003? Click the link Below
http://fromscreentotheme.com/ThursdayTr ... isney.aspx
http://fromscreentotheme.com/ThursdayTr ... isney.aspx
Oh sure. I''l give them some money......WITH MY FALCON PUNCH!disneyboy20022 wrote:<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/v0due39C-XM" frameborder="0"></iframe>
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/nSAL5VyQTMQ?rel=0" frameborder="0"></iframe>
While watching this clip, pretend the business man is Bob Iger and pretend that Captain Falcon is me.
-
disneyboy20022
- Signature Collection
- Posts: 6868
- Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:17 pm
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/_eOCXS_APlc" frameborder="0"></iframe>TsWade2 wrote:Oh sure. I''l give them some money......WITH MY FALCON PUNCH!disneyboy20022 wrote:<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/v0due39C-XM" frameborder="0"></iframe>
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/nSAL5VyQTMQ?rel=0" frameborder="0"></iframe>
While watching this clip, pretend the business man is Bob Iger and pretend that Captain Falcon is me.
Want to Hear How I met Roy E. Disney in 2003? Click the link Below
http://fromscreentotheme.com/ThursdayTr ... isney.aspx
http://fromscreentotheme.com/ThursdayTr ... isney.aspx
-
milojthatch
- Collector's Edition
- Posts: 2646
- Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:34 am
I second that! Till that day comes sadly, it is business as usual.Disneyphile wrote:Here's hoping that Congress someday grows some balls and stops expanding copyright protection into eternity. If that happened, Disney couldn't legally stop people from selling unauthorized DVDs of movies and shows that are in the public domain.
____________________________________________________________
All the adversity I've had in my life, all my troubles and obstacles, have strengthened me... You may not realize it when it happens, but a kick in the teeth may be the best thing in the world for you.
-Walt Disney
All the adversity I've had in my life, all my troubles and obstacles, have strengthened me... You may not realize it when it happens, but a kick in the teeth may be the best thing in the world for you.
-Walt Disney
-
Disney Guru
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3294
- Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 5:31 pm
- Location: Utah
This reminds me of years back with the whole SaveDisney.com, trying to oust Michael Eisner. But something you need to realize is when Eisner was president for a few years Disney was releasing the old Live Action catalog right and left on DVD. After Eisner was out though that came to a halt, an occasional release on the Disney Movie Club line, the short lived Amazon DVD-R on demand line and a few rarities available on demand on a few websites but that's about it.
I think that Disney is targeting the younger audience now, as the majority of people that buy are parents for their young kids. They have done a nice idea with packaging some of the old classics in 4 packs so people can get a sampling of some of the old classics for low prices.
I know a lot of young kids that have been introduced to Disney through the original Herbie movies for example by their parents. Things like Herbie, Old Yeller, Pollyanna will never die and Disney has been smart enough to know that and has always seemed to keep those titles in print in one format or another.
And of course the Animated Classics will always be remembered they are constantly being re released what young child hasn't seen Cinderella, Lady and The Tramp, Beauty and The Beast, Snow White at least once.
The way to keep Disney actively releasing the old stuff keeping it available is to show that we want it, keep buying it.
I think that Disney is targeting the younger audience now, as the majority of people that buy are parents for their young kids. They have done a nice idea with packaging some of the old classics in 4 packs so people can get a sampling of some of the old classics for low prices.
I know a lot of young kids that have been introduced to Disney through the original Herbie movies for example by their parents. Things like Herbie, Old Yeller, Pollyanna will never die and Disney has been smart enough to know that and has always seemed to keep those titles in print in one format or another.
And of course the Animated Classics will always be remembered they are constantly being re released what young child hasn't seen Cinderella, Lady and The Tramp, Beauty and The Beast, Snow White at least once.
The way to keep Disney actively releasing the old stuff keeping it available is to show that we want it, keep buying it.
"I have this tremendous energy. I just loved and love life. I love it today. I never want to die."
~Jayne Meadows Allen~
~Jayne Meadows Allen~
-
Big Disney Fan
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3110
- Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 11:28 pm
- Location: Any Disney park you choose
Yet, you also said that the live action titles were kept in print mainly during the Eisner era, but stopped after Eisner was gone. Doesn't that sound a bit contradictory? I don't know, I'm just trying to make sense of what you're saying.Disney Guru wrote:I know a lot of young kids that have been introduced to Disney through the original Herbie movies for example by their parents. Things like Herbie, Old Yeller, Pollyanna will never die and Disney has been smart enough to know that and has always seemed to keep those titles in print in one format or another.
LOL! I thought you might find that amusing.disneyboy20022 wrote:<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/_eOCXS_APlc" frameborder="0"></iframe>TsWade2 wrote: Oh sure. I''l give them some money......WITH MY FALCON PUNCH!
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/nSAL5VyQTMQ?rel=0" frameborder="0"></iframe>
While watching this clip, pretend the business man is Bob Iger and pretend that Captain Falcon is me.
-
Disney Guru
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3294
- Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 5:31 pm
- Location: Utah
I had said "But something you need to realize is when Eisner was president for a few years Disney was releasing the old Live Action catalog right and left on DVD. After Eisner was out though that came to a halt." not that they went out of print but that they stopped releasing new releases of the old live action classics on the mainstream market for the most part.
"I have this tremendous energy. I just loved and love life. I love it today. I never want to die."
~Jayne Meadows Allen~
~Jayne Meadows Allen~
-
DisneyJedi
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3737
- Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 2:53 pm
- Gender: Male
-
JustOneBite87
- Gold Classic Collection
- Posts: 227
- Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 10:09 pm
As awful as Eisner was in some respects, he at least had a respect for the legacy of company and through his chain of command employed people who had similar views. After Iger assumed power that all went away and people have been laid off right and left as a way of trimming fat for the last few, if not several years.DisneyJedi wrote:Only question is....
Are we better off with Iger and without Eisner or the other way around?
You want to know why we have only a smattering of documentaries and unique DVD/blu ray features compared to what we once had? Iger's people dissolved the production company that had been producing them.