Disney+ News

Status
Not open for further replies.
I was at Xfinity yesterday to return a cable box and swap out a remote and asked the clerk about Disney+ and said I assumed that it would never be available on their X1 Platform and he said they have been told it will be in Q2 2020. interesting if it happens.
 
I liked the ambitious and interested in creativity Eisner of the previous episode, who worked with Frank Wells. Then I saw this episode and was reminded of this post-partner-death, post-heart surgery version of himself who comes across as skeezy. It's a shame. I'm guessing Wells' death had a large ripple effect. Some of his comments in this episode were just dumb.

Wells' death and the failure of Euro Disneyland and just how over budget that got and basically made them scared to spend so much on a park .... and like a lot of things in most corporations the pendulum swung too far the other way and they overreacted and cut the budget too much
 
Wells' death and the failure of Euro Disneyland and just how over budget that got and basically made them scared to spend so much on a park .... and like a lot of things in most corporations the pendulum swung too far the other way and they overreacted and cut the budget too much

Yes, the loss of Frank Wells had a huge impact on Eisner and it really showed in the episode. I'm not sure Frank would have let things progress like that. It was definitely tough.
 
Yes, the loss of Frank Wells had a huge impact on Eisner and it really showed in the episode. I'm not sure Frank would have let things progress like that. It was definitely tough.

Absolutely. And I think having a partnership of that nature keeps each other in check and is a big help. I wish Iger had a partnership type thing going on honestly.
 


Absolutely. And I think having a partnership of that nature keeps each other in check and is a big help. I wish Iger had a partnership type thing going on honestly.

I think Iger tries to straddle the line between the sides, having come in under Eisner, and then have people under him that can bring their own expertise. I think when John Lasseter was there and has influence that was more of the creative side, but obviously that has changed. I agree that for Disney I think the best is a CEO that is creative and pushes things and then a 2nd they trust that makes the numbers work and tries to keep them in check
 
I changed my password on D+ because I read that you should have different passwords for different sites. But when I went to My Disney Experience the password had changed to the D+ password.
 


I actually thought Eisner came across pretty good. While the Imagineers may have considered EPCOT a triumph, there is a reason EPCOT's opening also marked the most financially dangerous period of time for Disney as a company since Walt just about mortgaged everything he had to finish Disneyland. Yes they talked about Disney forcing a buyout of the corporate raiders, and that it was a dangerous time, but you have to look to realize how close Disney came to being completely split apart at that moment. Miller just about lost the company as we know it. The massive investment in EPCOT, as well as a lull in movie magic in the late 70s and into the 80s, just about ended Disney.

So it made sense to change how things were being done. And Eisner and Wells did that. Mistakes were made. The financing and placement of Euro Disney was a huge one. But overall, the company entered the Eisner era with an Imagineering triumph and a whisker from being destroyed with 3 theme parks, it exited the Eisner era with 10 or so theme parks, a much larger global presence, and on ridiculously strong financial footing. A true entertainment giant and well positioned to get even stronger.

Give the man his due. His job wasn't just the parks. But he did a lot for the parks with Wells and after Wells. I doubt we'd have had the decade long drought of park improvement under him. But we also never got the ground shaking Imagineering astonishment of EPCOT. In other words, he did something all the previous CEOs, including Walt, struggled to do. He built parks without pushing the company to the edge of a cliff. Maybe he could have pushed a little more and gotten a better end product. Maybe he shouldn't have built as many and made the ones he did better. But regardless, pre and post Wells, Eisner did more for the Parks than anyone but Walt. And that still holds true today.

I liked his quotes that other people didn't. They ring very true.
 
Yes, the loss of Frank Wells had a huge impact on Eisner and it really showed in the episode. I'm not sure Frank would have let things progress like that. It was definitely tough.
I think the biggest issue when it came to money for new and existing parks was that Disney had to pay off $10 billion in debt they had from the ABC/Capital Cities purchase. That is where all the money went. While history likes to say Eisner lost his fastball, he was actually just paying the price at the time for what really set up Disney for the next two decades. The profits that ESPN generated were what allowed Iger to buy the companies he bought. Everybody acts like Iger is some kind of business savant, but none of what he did would have happened without Eisner buying ABC and then having to pinch pennies to pay off the debt from that purchase.
 
I think the biggest issue when it came to money for new and existing parks was that Disney had to pay off $10 billion in debt they had from the ABC/Capital Cities purchase. That is where all the money went. While history likes to say Eisner lost his fastball, he was actually just paying the price at the time for what really set up Disney for the next two decades. The profits that ESPN generated were what allowed Iger to buy the companies he bought. Everybody acts like Iger is some kind of business savant, but none of what he did would have happened without Eisner buying ABC and then having to pinch pennies to pay off the debt from that purchase.

Well, certainly they had to cut costs to repay the debt, but I think Frank would have rather not moved forward with he projects at all instead of launching with lackluster product to begin with. I don't think he would have greenlit DCA in it's original form. Of course, everything worked out in the end.
 
I actually thought Eisner came across pretty good. While the Imagineers may have considered EPCOT a triumph, there is a reason EPCOT's opening also marked the most financially dangerous period of time for Disney as a company since Walt just about mortgaged everything he had to finish Disneyland. Yes they talked about Disney forcing a buyout of the corporate raiders, and that it was a dangerous time, but you have to look to realize how close Disney came to being completely split apart at that moment. Miller just about lost the company as we know it. The massive investment in EPCOT, as well as a lull in movie magic in the late 70s and into the 80s, just about ended Disney.

So it made sense to change how things were being done. And Eisner and Wells did that. Mistakes were made. The financing and placement of Euro Disney was a huge one. But overall, the company entered the Eisner era with an Imagineering triumph and a whisker from being destroyed with 3 theme parks, it exited the Eisner era with 10 or so theme parks, a much larger global presence, and on ridiculously strong financial footing. A true entertainment giant and well positioned to get even stronger.

Give the man his due. His job wasn't just the parks. But he did a lot for the parks with Wells and after Wells. I doubt we'd have had the decade long drought of park improvement under him. But we also never got the ground shaking Imagineering astonishment of EPCOT. In other words, he did something all the previous CEOs, including Walt, struggled to do. He built parks without pushing the company to the edge of a cliff. Maybe he could have pushed a little more and gotten a better end product. Maybe he shouldn't have built as many and made the ones he did better. But regardless, pre and post Wells, Eisner did more for the Parks than anyone but Walt. And that still holds true today.

I liked his quotes that other people didn't. They ring very true.

Overall I think Eisner was great for the company and certainly left the company more financial secure than when he came in ... but like I said, I think the pendulum swung too far the other way, and that instead of opening 7 new parks, many of which weren't great/complete - they should have done less and done those things better. He also tried to launch Disney Quest and put time and effort into Disney America, etc. I think more than quantity, Disney was about quality and that got lost a bit.

Definitely ways to do that while being financially sound - I think he just went too far the other way
 
Well, certainly they had to cut costs to repay the debt, but I think Frank would have rather not moved forward with he projects at all instead of launching with lackluster product to begin with. I don't think he would have greenlit DCA in it's original form. Of course, everything worked out in the end.
Wells greenlit MGM. MGM opened with much less than DCA. The Great Movie Ride and Backlot Tour were it, with Star Tours and Indy opening soon after. DCA opened with California Screamin, Grizzly River Run, and Soarin plus kids stuff like the Golden Zephyr and Orange Stinger and a few shows like Tough to be a Bug. While DCA may have violated some long standing Disney ideas, it opened WAY bigger than MGM. So I think people often give Wells imaginary credit for stopping things that ended up happening but personally I doubt it. Wells was in on the smaller, cheaper park concept. It's just most of it came to fruition after his untimely passing and it was exacerbated by Euro Disney. MGM was the start of that concept, Euro Disney was just the biggest flop. MGM was saved by being part of WDW with all the ancillary visitors willing to accept a half-baked park. Stand alone Euro Disney and HK Disneyland didn't have that carryover.
 
Wells greenlit MGM. MGM opened with much less than DCA. The Great Movie Ride and Backlot Tour were it, with Star Tours and Indy opening soon after. DCA opened with California Screamin, Grizzly River Run, and Soarin plus kids stuff like the Golden Zephyr and Orange Stinger and a few shows like Tough to be a Bug. While DCA may have violated some long standing Disney ideas, it opened WAY bigger than MGM. So I think people often give Wells imaginary credit for stopping things that ended up happening but personally I doubt it. Wells was in on the smaller, cheaper park concept. It's just most of it came to fruition after his untimely passing and it was exacerbated by Euro Disney. MGM was the start of that concept, Euro Disney was just the biggest flop. MGM was saved by being part of WDW with all the ancillary visitors willing to accept a half-baked park. Stand alone Euro Disney and HK Disneyland didn't have that carryover.

Yeah, but the quality at MGM was much higher - remember it was intended to be a half-day park at the beginning though it quickly grew. DCA was a mess, despite a couple of decent rides. Certainly it had good enough bones to build upon, but stuff like Superstar Limo should never have been made.
 
Yeah, but the quality at MGM was much higher - remember it was intended to be a half-day park at the beginning though it quickly grew. DCA was a mess, despite a couple of decent rides. Certainly it had good enough bones to build upon, but stuff like Superstar Limo should never have been made.

What makes you think DCA wasn't intended as a half-day? I think that's the point. MGM, HK, DCA, even AK were all built to the same limited attraction size at opening. All would be considered half-day parks, even if Disney wouldn't admit it. And MGM didn't grow that quickly. After Star Tours, it was 5 years before another ride attraction opened, Tower of Terror. In that time they built a very cool playground and opened 3 shows. And then 2 more shows basically and 5 years before Rock N Roller Coaster. So it was a decade to add 5 shows and 2 rides. That's not quickly growing.

Euro Disney was the outlier. They thought they built a full day park. Walt Disney Studios is the other outlier. They threw together whatever they could just to put something there. The absolute bottom of the cycle.

Superstar Limo was sad. But worse than the boats to nowhere at AK? Most parks have misses. That was a bad one for DCA. But not so much different from some others.
 
10 dollars off the annual Disney plus. Cyber Monday only.

This deal got me in for a year...and I added the $1.99 Hulu and bought 3 Fire Sticks for $25/each...cable will be canceled by Christmas (aka, after the Eagles are knocked out of the playoffs)...guess I'll be putting the Mandalorian on my weekly viewing list:)...
 
What makes you think DCA wasn't intended as a half-day? I think that's the point. MGM, HK, DCA, even AK were all built to the same limited attraction size at opening. All would be considered half-day parks, even if Disney wouldn't admit it. And MGM didn't grow that quickly. After Star Tours, it was 5 years before another ride attraction opened, Tower of Terror. In that time they built a very cool playground and opened 3 shows. And then 2 more shows basically and 5 years before Rock N Roller Coaster. So it was a decade to add 5 shows and 2 rides. That's not quickly growing.

Euro Disney was the outlier. They thought they built a full day park. Walt Disney Studios is the other outlier. They threw together whatever they could just to put something there. The absolute bottom of the cycle.

Superstar Limo was sad. But worse than the boats to nowhere at AK? Most parks have misses. That was a bad one for DCA. But not so much different from some others.

But it's not the size at DCA, it was the quality that was the issue. I think people would take a high-quality half-day park for sure, but one look at that "Golden Gate Bridge" doesn't really give anybody good feelings about spending potential Disneyland time there. Sure, it had Soarin, but the rest just seemed cheap and not that fun. No Disney characters? A weird, giant orange? Clearly DCA was a huge misfire when it launched. MGM was show heavy, but they were good shows at least (I still love many of them). It was popular enough too. It just doesn't seem comparable to me at all.
 
But it's not the size at DCA, it was the quality that was the issue. I think people would take a high-quality half-day park for sure, but one look at that "Golden Gate Bridge" doesn't really give anybody good feelings about spending potential Disneyland time there. Sure, it had Soarin, but the rest just seemed cheap and not that fun. No Disney characters? A weird, giant orange? Clearly DCA was a huge misfire when it launched. MGM was show heavy, but they were good shows at least (I still love many of them). It was popular enough too. It just doesn't seem comparable to me at all.
But that's what I'm saying. MGM at launch was none of those things. One show, Indy. 2 rides. GMR was great. Right up there with Soarin. The Backlot Tour is hard to compare to anything else. It was such a different experience, long, covering all kinds of things, but it still didn't take half a day. What else was there? Nothing. Over the first 5 years they got to 4 shows and added Star Tours. What people remember about MGM, and what it actually was at launch, are 2 different things. MGM was saved by WDW Resort attendance. It was every bit as limited a park as DCA at launch.
 
This deal got me in for a year...and I added the $1.99 Hulu and bought 3 Fire Sticks for $25/each...cable will be canceled by Christmas (aka, after the Eagles are knocked out of the playoffs)...guess I'll be putting the Mandalorian on my weekly viewing list:)...

Doesn’t matter if we make the playoffs or not we can’t beat anyone. We lost to falcons, lions, dolphins all bad teams. Got killed by the cowboys.

Even with Disney plus and no eagles you still want live tv.
 
Last edited:
I like how they have Ralph Breaks The Internet on there, but you can't watch it until the 11th due to "existing agreements". If it's unavailable to stream, don't have it as an option.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!





Top