The Battle for Disney

The latest scuttlebutt is Roy and Stanley's battle to oust Michael Eisner from the company. Change can be good, and I think it is time for Eisner to move on. What worries me is that even though he has had his problems and I think he has lost his direction in the last 5 years or so, Eisner passionately believes in what the Walt Disney Company stands for - premier family entertainment. I worry that in the rush to dump Eisner, no one is looking at the consequences. Who will take over for him? Will that person believe in the ideals that made this company great? Will they, like Eisner, believe that spending should be reduced to make profits greater?

The truth is that the business environment the company operates in is very different than when Walt Disney was the head of the company. To think that we can just dump one person and the next person will magically make everything better is silly. If I were Eisner, I would think about what was wrong with the company back in 1984 when he took over, and how he turned things around. He invested heavily in animation and in theme parks that had been languishing around for years. A re-assessment of the company today might help him regain the perspective of someone who needs to save the company - not just from the outraged shareholders, but Comcast as well.

The biggest hit to theme parks was the opening of Disneyland Paris. It was the best example of what Imagineering could do, but put in one of the worst places possible. As a result all future theme parks were built cautiously and conservatively lending to bad word of mouth and slow openings. One should have taken the example of DL Paris and instead of making new parks on the cheap, how about getting more market research done?

The biggest hit to animation, was the call to produce one movie a year. An incredible time table and as a result the movies have suffered creatively in the rush. Think about Star Trek. In an effort to keep it on the air (now almost 20 years) they have run it into the ground - no effort to let it rest for a bit and then reinvigorate it. Look at the movies from the late '90s and tell me the animators were not stuck into a rut. Also, Lion King pretty much set expectations way to high for other features to follow, add to that the amount of overexposure given to each film created a huge public backlash against the company.

So here is what I would do (and Eisner if you want to stay around, you might want to try some of them):

1. Don't open anymore theme parks for awhile. Let DCA, Animal Kingdom, WDS Paris, and Hong Kong DL mature for a bit.
2. Loosen the purse strings - Let's get people excited about parks again - invest heavily in maintenance and infrastructure. Maybe we need to rip out huge sections of older parks and replace them (Disneyland's Tomorrowland, DCA's Paradise Pier, Epcot's Future World) - Don't be afraid to try something new. If it doesn't work, try something else - Walt was never afraid to fail.
3. Don't make any more sequels to animated movies - it gets old after awhile
4. Watch all of Pixar's movies. Remember when Disney made movies like these? Get some visionary to run the animation studio (not Roy, sorry). Oh and don't re-open those other animation studios around the world, that was a dumb idea anyways. Keep it all together in Burbank. Spread the movies out a bit - with a company well diversified, there is less need to rely on the animated features. With some extra time think about how spectacular they can be.
5. Make up with Lucas. He can help with some new rides and we really need to re-do Star Tours. Ok, if you don't want to make up with him, then close Star Tours and Re-do as a "Black Hole" ride. I am sure the imagineers can handle that.

OK. I feel better. It should be an interesting few months at the company!