Iger on Kudlow and Kramer

[manning]

Listening to cnbc Kudlow and Kramer now 10:20 cdt chicago and having Igar on about Disney.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Thanks! I'm watching it now!

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Iger:

We've successfully reduced spending at our theme parks

I beg to differ, Mr. Iger!!

All the businesses fit together.

HA!!!!


And if he mentioned "brand" one more time I was gonna reach inside the TV and slap him upside the head!!




PS: BOY!! I wish he had an "S" in his name!!!

 

[manning]

Kind of liked that part about cutting at the parks and maintaining the high quality of entertainment. I'm beginning to feel like a mushroom.

 

[manning]

Didn't Kudlow mention that revenue was going down even when the economy was good?

 

[HB2K]

We've successfully reduced spending at our theme parks

Yeah, consumer spending...

 

[Bstanley]

Sorry Scoop,

But Eyegrr is not the Master.

The Big ME is the Master.

That's why everything that Eyegrr said sounded so familiar.

 

[Lesley]

manning, a mushroom?

As in....sitting in a pile of, well, you know...?

Sounds pretty appropriate.

Successfully cut spending....successfully cut attendance....Nope, no relation to the two at all, is there?

Glad I didn't watch...though with the intensity of all our feelings on the matter, perhaps we could have pulled off a Darth Vader-like punishment if all our minds were thinking the same thing at once!

 

[larworth]

It was interesting to hear Kudlow "go off" on the whole ABC synergy issue. Since I've never been convinced it is all that great, I was glad to hear Kudlow say the same thing. I don’t know what he expected Iger to say when he asked "can you now admit that buying ABC was a mistake". He trotted out the “well it is all entertainment”, the growth of the Disney channel, and the need to have scale in consumer reach as justification (yawn). Kudlow ended by suggesting that some de-conglomeration should be in their future.

I give Iger decent marks on damage control. He doesn't lose his cool and knows the art of side-stepping. He was able to completely avoid the question about Stanley Gold and board unrest. Quickly jumped on ME recent stock purchase. However, I didn’t think he did much to make people want to buy the stock. When Kudlow’s said the tourism outlook was bad, he countered by saying “no, it is just uncertain”. It was either a things outside our control or check back with us next year message.

Last year I wanted a nickel for every time they said the word “content”. This year we’d be rich if we had royalties on the word “brand”. Let's get back to talking about the content! I thought if we take care of this stronger brands will follow.

I keep waiting for the time when one of these interviewers is actually a student of the parks. Kudlow kept referring to all that investment in hotels. Made it sound almost like a negative to be associated with a capital intensive business. They counter with “we have reduced capital spending” and everyone seems appeased? They should be asking what are they doing to be better positioned to deliver on their business model; of earning exceptional returns, by providing exceptional guest experiences.

 

[PKS44]

Originally posted by larworth
They should be asking what are they doing to be better positioned to deliver on their business model; of earning exceptional returns, by providing exceptional guest experiences.

How can you ask this question to someone who has just told you that they believe they "successfully" reduced spending....that means he does not recognize that the cuts have had any significant impact on the guest experience? The cuts are SUCCESSFUL!??!!!???

One can conclude from such remarks that butter and coffee and A/C and EE and longer hours will not be coming back under this management's current philosophy.

I agree with the earlier post by HB2K- they have reduced spending-consumer spending...

Paul

 

[Bstanley]

It's interesting how different people in different industries manage to make the exact same short-sighted, penny-wise, pound-foolish mistakes...

I worked at a computer company that shall remain nameless (except that it's name lives on at M:S ;-) during a time when it was basically doubling it's sales every year, going from $100M to over $2B in 6 years. During that time our goal was to design the BEST (fastest, most reliable, most feature rich) computers we could - period.

There were many of those products that were sold at a 35% NET margin. That's right boys and girls, if you bought a Portable III, or SLT/386 out of every $1000 you paid, $350 was pure gravy...

And people lined up around the block to buy those products...

Then the company brought in new management, cost-reduced the stuffin's out of the products (to make them more profitable?!), stopped making things in Houston and bought a bunch of products from 3rd world manufacturers (to be more competitive?!), used up billions of dollars to buy Tandem, DEC, and other 'who cares' companies that were 'full of synergy'.

And the result?

Well they basically went out of business - being bought out, becoming the poor stepchild of another punch-drunk company on the ropes trying to figure out what to do to make ends meet...

Sigh...

It is so VERY disappointing to see companies making the same mistakes over, and over, and over again. I guess that's why there are so many business consultants making a handsome living.

 

[manning]

Our company was doing OK, then they brought in consultants. The only ones that made money where the consultants. Destroyed the company.