Eisner to step down in 2006!

[PatrickvD]

Yeah, well... when the oil crash comes, and our gluttonous civilization crumbles into ruin, none of this corporate nonsense will matter anyway.

But will our DVDs still have inserts?

they better

[Ludwig Von Drake]

It will be interesting to see what happens but I don't think that anyone can speculate at this point.

[PheR]

But, will Roy come back???

maybe (I just said maybe), traditional animation will return for at least some future classic, I don´t know, we haven´t heard anything of "Antonious", or "snowqueen" anymore.

[Paka]

Yeah, well... when the oil crash comes, and our gluttonous civilization crumbles into ruin, none of this corporate nonsense will matter anyway.

But will our DVDs still have inserts?

Yes, James - yes they will. They'll be sewn out of leaves and junk paper, seeing as we won't have any more energy to make the nice shiny stuff.

[Just Myself]

Eisner's going out?! w00t!!!

Florida's getting pummled with Hurricanes because of lots of tropical activity. *phphphp* Yeah, right. It was EISNER!!!!

[joplin4]

YAY!!!!!!!!!!! *dances around* This is the best news I have received in a long time!!!

[Isidour]

Hi:

ok, then someone really make disney to see his mistake....thats greatfull

[Prince Adam]

I didn't know he was 62!!!!! He's a lot older than I thought!

[TheZue]

I really dont understand your obssesion with Eisner. We may disagree with him, but he's just another executive pressured by the company's shareholders to produce results. I'm sure he is trying his best and that he's commited to the company. This romantic notion of you guys looking for a "Disney" to rule the company is laughable. Everything in life is now based on money oriented decisions, even in most in a business like Disney is. I'd love to see some of you geniuses dealing with that kind of pressure. Some of you need to get a life !!!

I think people get irritated with Eisner because it sucks to have one of your favorite brands run by one of Forbes worst CEO's. I don't think I could do any better, but somebody else could...it's all about the lost potential.

I'm happy he's going, but also recognise he did some great things for Disney. He's just past his prime and it's time to turn it over to somebody else. The only thing I'm really ticked at, is the end of traditional animation at Disney.

[Sir Hawkins]

Like PheR, I also am wondering if this means the return of Roy and Stan? This entire SaveDisney.com cambaign was for Eisner to resign, and the whole reason Roy and Stan resigned was because they didn't like the way Eisner was doing things. Hence, since he's gone, wouldn't they want to "un-resign"? Anybody have any info on this?

[AwallaceUNC]

I wouldn't expect Roy and Stan to make any moves back towards Disney until a successor has been chosen (after all, Iger would be just as bad, though he may not have as sour a relationship with some folks, including the SDers).

-Aaron

[joplin4]

Well, Roy was forced into retirement because of his age. It's highly unlikely he will be returning. Stan might. It all depends on who the new CEO is.

I'm mainly upset with Eisner because he killed traditional animation. I'm also upset in the poor quality of the Disney Channel. So, I'm glad to see him go.

[PheR]

I'm also upset in the poor quality of the Disney Channel. So, I'm glad to see him go.

wo wo wooo, that´s so true! that Raven channel is prety boring these days.

well, Roy may be to old to be a CEO but, since he is a respectful member of the Disney family I think he´s got a place in the company, at least like an advisor or something.

[2099net]

I'm mainly upset with Eisner because he killed traditional animation. I'm also upset in the poor quality of the Disney Channel. So, I'm glad to see him go.

The thing is, the "poor quality" Disney Channel must be making more money now than it was when it showed lots of old Disney programmes and shorts. Nobody at Disney said "Let's scrap all the archive stuff to annoy Roy and his fans". They made the changes to make money. Eisner doesn't sit in his office thinking how he can screw over the great Disney legacy every day; he sits there thinking how can he make more money. Same with traditional animation. No other studio is releasing major "traditional" animation works (and more tellingly Dreamworks bought up PDI, Fox bought up Blue Box - after shutting down the Bluth led Fox Animation Studios - and Sony's even set up its own CGI studio from scratch showing other studios' faith is in CGI too).

I don't disagree that too much emphasis on money is bad. We all know the world and society has standards above just making money - or else corperations would all just be selling us crack cocaine or something! But making money is important, especially at this point in history where shareholders always want more, more, more for their investment.

Likewise most of the stuff I've read on SaveDisney indicates that Roy and his supporters want to swing the balance the otherway. Its a common trusim that "in order to make money you need to spend money", but they seem to have too much faith that the changes they suggest will result in higher revenue at some unspecified point in the future. Running Disney along these lines in the late 70's and early 80's didn't seem to result in higher revenues.

There needs to be a solid, secure middle ground. Disney has a brand name and characters that must be exploited. I know some people won't like that word, but they're the main reason investors support the company. But at the same time, the properties need to be treated with respect. I'll admit that not all of the sequels have done this.

Regarding Eisner's run, like I say, you may not like all of his decisions, but you'll like some. Who was it who invested in the unproven Pixar and gambled on releasing the first all CGI-movie? Who was it who once they had decided to support DVD released such wonderful discs as Snow White and Atlantis? Who was it who okatyed the Disney channel in the first place? Who was it who saw the potential for the Disney stage musicals? Who was it who founded Touchstone and Touchstone TV?

[Artlad]

Regarding Eisner's run, like I say, you may not like all of his decisions, but you'll like some. Who was it who invested in the unproven Pixar and gambled on releasing the first all CGI-movie? Who was it who once they had decided to support DVD released such wonderful discs as Snow White and Atlantis? Who was it who okatyed the Disney channel in the first place? Who was it who saw the potential for the Disney stage musicals? Who was it who founded Touchstone and Touchstone TV?

Actually, the Disney Channel and Touchstone Pictures were both started BEFORE Eisner and Co. came onboard.
In my personal opinion, I trace this back to the death of Frank Wells in 1994. It seems that Eisner and Wells almost had a Walt and Roy thing going on where one could keep the other in check (I know, not a perfect analogy but bear with me). Once Wells died, Eisner pretty much assumed all the control himself. Now I'm not against the company trying to make money, I'm against the fact that Eisner seems to be putting immediate profits ahead of the Quality that is needed to sustain Disney profits in the decades to come. Even Walt made quick, cheap stuff sometimes to get some quick profits, but he never sacrificed the Quality or the integrity of his product. I guess it just seems that Eisner is too focused on profits and he stopped beleiving in Disney.

[reyquila]

I'm also upset in the poor quality of the Disney Channel. So, I'm glad to see him go.

wo wo wooo, that´s so true! that Raven channel is prety boring these days.

well, Roy may be to old to be a CEO but, since he is a respectful member of the Disney family I think he´s got a place in the company, at least like an advisor or something.

I agree with this line of thinking!!!