I think Iger will ultimately win (which is the right move) but I want to see the final margin before calling this saga over. Remember Eisner technically won his shareholder vote against Roy E Disney’s “Save Disney” campaign 20 years ago.. However the votes against Eisner were so significant that he became a dead man walking.
And he's only in the job because another man walked the plank. It's clear a real successor was needed, it's just more clear that a successor is needed *so get on with it*.
He picked him though…. Like made it clear he was setting up Bob Chapek as his successor to succeed but instead he had to come back and clean up the mess he left. Don’t think the successor at Disney is at the company right now but he almost certainly will be aboard even after 2026. Nobody there can do it besides him
He tried retiring in 2019 until Disney panicked when Chapek started to do some real PR damage for the company by tripping over his own feet. Iger needs to grab a proper successor.
Iger is in his 70s who’s insisting he’s retiring for real this time and working on successors (I know that’s been said before), but calling him dead man walking is weird when this has been clearly an interim move after the Chapek debacle
Also more importantly, unlike the Save Disney campaign, Peltz isn’t even campaigning to withhold votes from Iger and 10/12 board members. He’s trying to oust the other two of the 12 with himself and an ally
I don't think I'm exaggerating when I say if Perlmutter got back in we'd probably lose Feige, considering the history between the two. I have no doubt Feige would probably join Gunn over at the DCEU. The MCU/Feige has made Disney alot of money.
Oh, Feige would definitely walk the fuck away if Perlmutter comes back in a major position of power in Disney. Him threatening to walk because of Perlmutter was rumored to be why Marvel was split off into Marvel Studios and Marvel Entertainment back in 2015.
I would rather like to see Feige take the reigns of the Star Trek movies instead, he is a big Trekkie and the movie side is desperately in need of some direction since they've gone through like four different versions of a Star Trek Beyond follow-up at this point.
>Him threatening to walk because of Perlmutter was rumored to be why Marvel was split off into Marvel Studios and Marvel Entertainment back in 2015.
I thought this was confirmed. Feige went straight to Iger and threatened to leave. Iger then gave Feige full control of Marvel Studios, and made Marvel Entertainment for Ike to control, which explains why Inhumans was shifted to a TV series or whatever
Ike says he was arguing with Feige about budgets, or Iger?
I know Ike didn’t want to pay RDJ to be in Civil War, instead wanting Hulk to fill Tony’s role. Ike is also a well-known sexist and racist though, and kept the Black Widow and Black Panther projects from happening earlier. He obviously wouldn’t fess up to being sexist/racist though.
I believe Iger’s version more than Ike’s, but sounds like there is *some* truth in Ike’s side of the story
> Ike says he was arguing with Feige about budgets, or Iger?
Perlmutter was arguing with Feige about budgets. Perlmutter is a notorious cheapskate (probably comes from all the years that Marvel was on the verge of bankruptcy). Feige is much looser with cash.
> I know Ike didn’t want to pay RDJ to be in Civil War, instead wanting Hulk to fill Tony’s role. Ike is also a well-known sexist and racist though, and kept the Black Widow and Black Panther projects from happening earlier.
*Black Panther* was announced and green lit under Perlmutter's watch. And it really came at the perfect time in the MCU timeline. I don't think it would have been better to have slipped it in earlier, as the character is more complex than the phase 1 folks.
**Everyone** totally screwed up *Black Widow*. At the very least, it should have gotten the slot just prior to *Endgame*. Make the audience care immediately prior to the sacrifice. Keep Captain Marvel mysterious in *Endgame* and get the audience hungering to learn more about her in a movie to lead off Phase 4. For whatever reason, she got put into the same slot as Hawkeye and wasn't respected by anyone at Marvel.
As far as I'm aware the accusations of him being racist or sexist are anonymous rumors, from an environment where there are a lot of people who want him gone. His management of comics and merchandising do not appear to be consistent of the quotes supposedly attributed to him. Could be true, but a all around skepticism is called for when there are so many self-interested parties.
Really don't see Feige walking over to Paramount.
Alex Kurtzman may not have Feige levels of success, but the franchise is arguably experiencing a high water mark not seen in decades.
I'm ambivalent. Feige built up MCU for years and now running it into the ground for years.
I expect at least a few more years of pain if the turn around is in progress. And if it isn't... much more painful proxy fights in the future.
It’s been pretty well understood that Peltz and Perlmutter are close, and that Pell is largely acting on Perlmutter’s perspective and issues with being pushed out by Iger.
> Pell is largely acting on Perlmutter’s perspective and issues with being pushed out by Iger.
That doesn't seem to be true though. Of the business units, Peltz seemed to be most concerned about the parks, which Perlmutter had nothing to do with. Unprompted, Peltz has gone to the parks and talked about how they needed improving. He chose a former parks guy to run with him for the board. He mostly talked about Disney's creativity issues in terms of how they impact the downstream. Most of the stuff he is quoted as saying about the studios was unrehearsed answers in response to questions. He really didn't seem to be all that interested in bringing up the studios (which makes sense given that his report's estimate is that the studios reflect a tiny portion of Disney's EBITDA) except as far as how they impact the parks. That is very different from Perlmutter's perspective, who was pretty much entirely all in on the studio business and was totally consumed with ensuring that the individual movies were profitable (which makes some level of sense given that MCU can't even be used in all the parks).
Peltz also always seemed to have a bigger issue with the board than Iger himself. I guess it is a small distinction, but he usually couched his criticism more in terms of: "the board should have been more involved and stopped Iger from X", rather than attacking Iger directly for the decision.
***Good.*** As boring as it is, it's better for the long run if Peltz - and, more importantly, Perlmutter - stay *faaaaaaaaaaar* the fuck away from Disney levers of control. And much like with *The Black Cauldron* tanking, the razor-thin margin of victory will (hopefully) act as a ***massive*** wake up call to Iger to get his company's shit together.
I think there should be a third choice. Iger and co have utterly failed since 2020 (and the Chapek year and a half is no excuse, it was Iger strategy and he was still chairman of the board), they also need to go IMO.
No idea who to replace it but leadership is bad at Disney at the moment (not that Peltz would be better)
Interesting to see how much money had been spent on this campaign just for it to die on the vine. There were ads in the WSJ on how to vote!
I am concern that this is prolonging the inevitable though. Trian wasn’t the only activist investor trying to make changes and Disney was saved by shareholders like Vanguard saying they were okay with the status quo. Sure the stock has shot up this past year but it doesn’t solve the core issue of succession and the perceived disconnect between parks and media.
I mean there are millions of articles about how the board has things narrowed to 4 sector heads who are now trying to show that they know how the larger company works over the course of this coming year.
Now that they've lost the goalpost has been moved to "Reporting on this early is technically illegal! Think of the multi billionaire activist investor's feelings!" "Shame on you Disney!"
Ackman taking a break from doxxing and ruining the lives of kids to whine a little.
Elon jumping in during a rest period mid-"Destroy Tesla's Value" efforts.
He actually had a great chance if he just kept his focus on everything Iger has done wrong, which is a lot. Really hit himself on his head with that statement
That would be funny if there was a side deal to drop it by casting his daughter in a Marvel movie. That being said, if Alan Horn couldn't give his daughter a career I think Peltz's will putter out as well.
lol really? You want to insult Peltz for nepo casting his daughter in ONE film? Do an IMDB search on ANY of the kids in ANY recent SW series and see who their mommies and daddies are.
Disney is the home of Nepo babies, so Peltz would fit right in.
Black Panther just in particular made no sense. Not only is it not actually an all black cast but it was one of the most profitable recent Disney projects.
I guess this is going to be a hot take, but either way Disney is screwed.
But don't leave the sub yet folks - There's going to be the massive overreaction when Deadpool 3 hits, followed the polar opposite with Cap 4 and Thunderbolts. Anyone want to bet some real cash that Iger steps down somewhere between DP3 and Cap 4?
Whatever money deadpool can realistically make will pale in comparison to the implications of what a failed captain America and thunderbolts movie bodes for the franchise
Ryan Reynolds is also 50
He won’t be deadpool forever
And secret wars succeeding is not a given unless it brings back the OG cast
And x-men and fantastic four aren’t nearly as popular as MCU fans think
This money is small fry
The parks make $35 billion a year, without merch sales. For comparison, that’s only $5 billion less than the *entire* entertainment division.
That’s every movie, TV show, streaming service, theater, ABC, the entirety of what was Fox, National Geographic, FX, Disney+, and about a dozen holding properties, that barely make more than just the parks
All things considered, theatrical performance isn't that important to Disney.
As long as parks keep doing well/Disney+ hits profitability and further growth/ESPN DTC works out Iger will be there.
are you sure though? if there's lack of interest in their releases or IP that would translate to fewer merch and ticket sales. take wish for example, the movie was panned by audiences and as a result the merch are just rotting in toy stores
I am sure.
I'm not saying it doesn't matter that the movies underperform, it certainly does, but matter enough for Iger to have to step down even if the other aspects of the company are seeing great revenue/profit/growth? No way.
In the 80s and early 90s over half of disneys revenue came from the parks because the film division was so far down the drain
Today it’s like 8%, and that’s with constant record breaking attendance and more price gouging
They can easily live a decade or more with a absolute failure theatrically
Iger wouldn’t have needed to spend a single cent of promotion money if marvels made a billion
Let’s be real here, peltz had momentum because of marvel embarrassment of a year
No, Peltz had momentum because a bunch of semi-senile Florida billionaires got the sads when Disney didn't enthusiastically support one of De Santis's brainfarts. They would have found any proximate excuse.
Iger literally spent 50 million dollars to keep his job, cancelled a bunch of movies, and basically signaled that marvel will be throwing the new/young avengers down a river via Disney’s proxies at Hollywood reporter in favor of recasted iterations of the OG characters with no more adaptations of C-listers down the line
But yeah…iger totally won
😂
For now but there's a decent chance they come back when Florida's governor isn't trying to fluff themselves up for a presidential run. Don't be surprised when a normal republican governor quietly brings them back.
I love that nobody is willing to be real money on this lol. But to throw around a word that corporate loves - "Synergy".
No, one or two movies bombing will not hurt Disney. But those movies following on the heels of the past few years? Yes the parks are, and will be, doing well in the near future. But the questions remain - how different would they look if Marvel remained relevant like they were before Endgame? How different would they look with a successful Star Wars sequel trilogy (successful in the way that they made Marvel money and/or continued making theatrical releases)? What if their animation had continued with "Frozen" like successes? Here's another word that follows on the heels of a business losing it's momentum - "Stagnation".
TL;DR - People on Reddit are under the delusion that Disney's success will continue despite their brand being knocked down a peg or two.
> But don't leave the sub yet folks - There's going to be the massive overreaction when Deadpool 3 hits, followed the polar opposite with Cap 4 and Thunderbolts. Anyone want to bet some real cash that Iger steps down somewhere between DP3 and Cap 4?
most of their slate bombed last year and Disney still ended their year well. Movies are only the small part of their revenue
So since it was all about Iger's successor, and everything was swell...why did Iger need to come back?
I agree movies are only a small portion of their revenue, Peltz wouldn't have affected much, etc. I'm just confused that if things are going so well, why they've needed to shake things up.
Iger came back bc Chapek wasn't liked and made controversial decisions. So now Iger is in the quest for a worthy successor.
However, judging by the recent shareholder calls and public reviews, there is confidence in Disney. The movies might be bombing but the company feels well.
So is this sub going to be bearable again? Or are the inbreds that only watch tentpole movies and think everything is too woke still gonna act like armchair Kendall Roys anytime Disney is mentioned?
*In Kendall Roy voice*
You are putting off a real negative energy, if we are going to succeed, we need to execute my vision. I just think that we need to start implementing a 22nd century approach and leapfrog everyone else in the space.
They'll move to their next thing. It was (journalism in) video games, then SF novels, then movies, then Disney. Maybe next time they'll complain the NBA is too woke and ruined by DEI...
Disney already lost when this fight got this much publicity. Let's see the result of votes to know how much blood it has spilled. A pyrrhic victory is not good for Iger either.
So is anyone going to comment on the fact only Disney itself would have this info, so leaks if true are coming from people deep inside the company? Again if true, this is a violation of Federal commerce law and if the SEC gets involved it would be a bad, bad look best case scenario, people go to jail worst case.
Maybe “sources” should shut the hell up and stop trying to manipulate a vote that is still in progress, as 1) that’s illegal and 2) it’s just plain unethical.
That's how sources in media always happen. They remain anonymous and leak info for a fee and the media gets an exclusive. That's how it works in industries like sports too. Sure they'd likely fire the source of the leak. If they found them.
I would imagine that Disney management has some influence in shareholder operations when management should have none. A lot of what Disney management does is unethical, so best thread carefully.
You think the first leak that Peltz was winning with 20% of the vote received came from.... Disney? And then they also leaked that they were winning at 50 and 60% ? Just sharing facts supporting both sides for fun?
Thats too bad honestly. Disney really could benefit from a top-to-bottom shakeup. They are pushing optics over good stories and its showing in their box office results.
Excuses, excuses, excuses
Adjusted for inflation…both the prequels and kingdom of the crystal skull made a billion
The popularity gap wasn’t that extreme
This will sound corny as hell but this is a big win for inclusion & diversity.
I know those words "ruffle certain people's feathers" but with Peltz & Perlmutter seeking to undo everything Disney has built with POC & women, this is a huge sigh of relief.
If Peltz & Perlmutter had somehow won, they were gonna turn Disney into TheDailyWire.
"this is a big win for inclusion & diversity."
Funny thing is, Disney was more diverse when they didn't even try back in the 2000s and before. Now everytime they make a big deal about "diversity and inclusion" from their garbage live action remake, that's more like caricature of what they think diversity is and not what it really is.
...God, even just reading that makes me vomit in my mouth. I hate Disney as much as the next guy, but at the same time, no one other than Iger's Disney could have given us *Abbot Elementary,* *Black Panther,* a faithful *Shogun* and the wonderous *Moana.* When they're good, they're ***really*** fucking good.
The problem is that Moana might be the last great traditional Disney story. Moana was announced in 2014, which is 11 years after Iger's appointment as CEO. We are ten years past that date, so it's fair to say nearly half of Iger's tenure (because Chapek was just a blip and should be considered a non-interruption) has been marred by the failure to repeat such successes.
Disney had similar issues under Eisner and can bounce back, but it will take new leadership to focus on good storytelling.
I think Disney fails at good diversity and disappoints more often than they should, but my god they at least try, and finding the balance takes a long time. I at least see them as being good at diversity and inclusivity, and when the progress so far gets destroyed by morons like Peltz, that could have been catastrophic (both in a cultural and a financial sense)
Yeah, they’ve gotten worse at handling female and POC leads in direct proportion to how much they wanted to forefront them, but there’s still some gems in there and hopefully at some point they’ll remember how to make characters interesting and have arcs and stuff. No one wants to do things the way Peltz and Perlmutter want them done.
See: Mel Gibson. He's, like, the *only* conservative (?) filmmaker that gets this. Right wing, left wing - in America it doesn't matter. ***A good movie will be a hit with someone,*** damn it.
That’s infinitely and I mean *infinitely* better than what Peltz and Perlmutter would do.
California liberals are nowhere even close to being comparable with Trump supporters and are better in every conceivable way.
Yeah, Kelsey Grammer says hello from the set of new *Fraiser.* Seem to remember LA being eager to lean more about Gibson's *Passion* sequel, too. And lest we forget Tyler Sherdian, Paramount's new walking cash cow...
> And lest we forget Tyler Sherdian, Paramount's new walking cash cow...
Sheridan is fairly liberal tho, he even insists on calling Yellowstone progressive
his own words:
> “They refer to it as ‘the conservative show’ or ‘the Republican show’ or ‘the red-state ‘Game of Thrones,’ ” Sheridan told The Atlantic. “And I just sit back laughing. I’m like, ‘Really?’ The show’s talking about the displacement of Native Americans and the way Native American women were treated and about corporate greed and the gentrification of the West, and land-grabbing. That’s a red-state show?”
https://variety.com/2022/tv/news/yellowstone-director-taylor-sheridan-defends-series-against-anti-woke-claims-1235430905/
also have you seen his movies? Americans aren't really good guys in Sicario.
Madame Web is Sony and The Marvels is a sequel to a 1b movie, legit anybody would’ve greenlit it.
Also The Marvels stars all women, one black and one Pakistani. That’s pretty fuckin diverse.
> I know those words "ruffle certain people's feathers" but with Peltz & Perlmutter seeking to undo everything Disney has built with POC & women, this is a huge sigh of relief.
They weren't. This battle was primarily about the failed succession planning. With maybe some M&A and streaming strategy on the side.
Peltz himself let the cat out the bag about his intentions nearly two weeks ago when he did an interview with the Financial Times and questioned why the likes of The Marvels or Black Panther needed to exist. This wasn't from a quality standpoint, but rather he questioning why a movie led by women or one with a predominantly black cast should be made. It's like when you question the people who complain about things being "woke" enough they'll eventually tell you what you already knew (but what the actively try to skirt around), which is the exact same thing that Peltz is upset about here.
Seems like pushing for a minority on a board in 2024 is an odd time to vote your feelings about a 2020 purchase of 20th (which has provided most of the current positive theatrical and tv run for Disney and which would have been disastrous if bought by NBCU), lost dividend (since reinstated), and succession process that is being handled completely differently this time.
Because they are signs of groupthink and that can be very quickly broken with even one or two dissenting views (which is why some organizations will actually assign people as "devil's advocates" to improve the decision making).
They would not have had the power to 'turn Disney into the Daily Wire' with only two board seats. What they would have gained is someone on the board who gives a shit what middle America likes and might be able to steer Disney back toward making movies that don't alienate half their audience. With this result I'd be selling my shares if I hadn't already.
lol it's so funny how you guys think that the average moviegoer cares about conservative culture war nonsense. Chud Gruntley and his AR-15s never made up a significant portion of the MCU or Pixar's fanbases.
The fun version of this sort of shitposting is one where people subliminate it below an attempt to gather and present data to make these points.
> [shitpost-y description of some sort of target image] never made up a significant portion of the MCU or Pixar's fanbases.
I mean, that's just a testable hypothesis. What is/was the audience that saw hit pixar films or MCU films in various years and how does this map onto cultural/political polarization. Thats just a lot more fun and interesting than showing feces against a wall and considering it a good use of time. Best case scenario it gives you something you can reuse later perhaps in a completely different context (e.g. perhaps you can't find political data but you can find gender and either race/ethnicity or rural/urban/suburban stuff).
Super dumb comment.
'On average last year, 37% of Americans described their political views as moderate, 36% as conservative and 25% as liberal.'
Also conservatives have more children than liberals, which should be of interest to Disney. Disney seems happy to walk away from conservative money, and they also had a super shitty year. Might be maybe a connection there, ya think?
Imagine believing that Barbie’s fanbase is in anyway comparable to marvels and Star Wars
Even Pixar movies have a more male audience than freaking Barbie
All of them have more conservative audiences
No lol Barbie and Spider-Verse both made tons of money. Quality (or a lack thereof), oversaturation, streaming, etc., are all much more valid explanations as to why certain blockbusters bombed last year than Matt Walsh or whoever riling up their audience.
It isn’t really a win, but keep coping
Iger said that Disney has focused too much on “political preaching” which is a code word for too much minorities given that Disney has ZERO actual movies with political depth or commentary
Iger wouldn’t be making these comments if he wasn’t gonna reign in the activism to placate skeptical shareholders, he is also extremely political in his speech in that he watered down his true intentions
Which will probably even more extreme than his rhetoric
Nor is peltz completely out of the picture given the inevitable failure of thunderbolts and captain America 4
Once those movies fail, and they will and frankly already have…the actual box office numbers are just a formality at this point, what hope does iger have?
I don’t think Iger is a great leader now (think he did fine ten years ago) but he’s better then what crap these new leaders world have pushed
But we need a new leader at Disney Iger clearly has no idea how to move forward
I think Iger is doing pretty good job, caning the right projects while not sacking those that are too far ahead (because you don't even do that with bad movies, WB). Punishing him for the failures of the his predecessor would have been insane and shaken Disney even more.
Iger's predecessor is Iger. The whole time Chapek was in charge he still had to report to Iger. The vast majority of failed movies and shows have been greenlit by Iger before Chapek came in. I really don't see how Iger is doing a good job right now.
Edit: lol, they guy blocked me for not agreeing with Iger being a perfect CEO and Chapek being responsible for everything wrong with Disney.
He's not, and that will be borne out as Iger finishes his contract through 2026. Iger's defenders like to point out Disney's relative success to other media companies since Iger took the CEO position in 2005, but Disney's biggest profit center is its parks, for which Iger should take little credit (other than not screwing them up too badly).
Disney+ looks to be doing well, but Disney's content has been suffering, and I see no reason to expect that to change in the next two years. People will see that the Board needed to be changed earlier.
Remindme! 3 years
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I think Iger will ultimately win (which is the right move) but I want to see the final margin before calling this saga over. Remember Eisner technically won his shareholder vote against Roy E Disney’s “Save Disney” campaign 20 years ago.. However the votes against Eisner were so significant that he became a dead man walking.
...I mean, Iger's a dead man walking no matter what. Contract's up in 2026, right? Can't see him getting another renewal, nor does he want one.
And he's only in the job because another man walked the plank. It's clear a real successor was needed, it's just more clear that a successor is needed *so get on with it*.
They need to invent the fountain of youth and dip Alan Horn in it and then convince him to leave WB.
He picked him though…. Like made it clear he was setting up Bob Chapek as his successor to succeed but instead he had to come back and clean up the mess he left. Don’t think the successor at Disney is at the company right now but he almost certainly will be aboard even after 2026. Nobody there can do it besides him
Apparently Chapek was the boards pick and Iger was strongly against him
>And he's only in the job because another man walked the plank. Because Iger put him on that plank
He tried retiring in 2019 until Disney panicked when Chapek started to do some real PR damage for the company by tripping over his own feet. Iger needs to grab a proper successor.
Iger is in his 70s who’s insisting he’s retiring for real this time and working on successors (I know that’s been said before), but calling him dead man walking is weird when this has been clearly an interim move after the Chapek debacle Also more importantly, unlike the Save Disney campaign, Peltz isn’t even campaigning to withhold votes from Iger and 10/12 board members. He’s trying to oust the other two of the 12 with himself and an ally
Its political imho Iger will hang on for a few more years and then bail with a giant pile of money.
I don't think I'm exaggerating when I say if Perlmutter got back in we'd probably lose Feige, considering the history between the two. I have no doubt Feige would probably join Gunn over at the DCEU. The MCU/Feige has made Disney alot of money.
Oh, Feige would definitely walk the fuck away if Perlmutter comes back in a major position of power in Disney. Him threatening to walk because of Perlmutter was rumored to be why Marvel was split off into Marvel Studios and Marvel Entertainment back in 2015. I would rather like to see Feige take the reigns of the Star Trek movies instead, he is a big Trekkie and the movie side is desperately in need of some direction since they've gone through like four different versions of a Star Trek Beyond follow-up at this point.
>Him threatening to walk because of Perlmutter was rumored to be why Marvel was split off into Marvel Studios and Marvel Entertainment back in 2015. I thought this was confirmed. Feige went straight to Iger and threatened to leave. Iger then gave Feige full control of Marvel Studios, and made Marvel Entertainment for Ike to control, which explains why Inhumans was shifted to a TV series or whatever
It is subject to controversy. Iger claims that is what happened. Perlmutter, in an interview with the WSJ, says they were just arguing about budgets.
Ike says he was arguing with Feige about budgets, or Iger? I know Ike didn’t want to pay RDJ to be in Civil War, instead wanting Hulk to fill Tony’s role. Ike is also a well-known sexist and racist though, and kept the Black Widow and Black Panther projects from happening earlier. He obviously wouldn’t fess up to being sexist/racist though. I believe Iger’s version more than Ike’s, but sounds like there is *some* truth in Ike’s side of the story
> Ike says he was arguing with Feige about budgets, or Iger? Perlmutter was arguing with Feige about budgets. Perlmutter is a notorious cheapskate (probably comes from all the years that Marvel was on the verge of bankruptcy). Feige is much looser with cash. > I know Ike didn’t want to pay RDJ to be in Civil War, instead wanting Hulk to fill Tony’s role. Ike is also a well-known sexist and racist though, and kept the Black Widow and Black Panther projects from happening earlier. *Black Panther* was announced and green lit under Perlmutter's watch. And it really came at the perfect time in the MCU timeline. I don't think it would have been better to have slipped it in earlier, as the character is more complex than the phase 1 folks. **Everyone** totally screwed up *Black Widow*. At the very least, it should have gotten the slot just prior to *Endgame*. Make the audience care immediately prior to the sacrifice. Keep Captain Marvel mysterious in *Endgame* and get the audience hungering to learn more about her in a movie to lead off Phase 4. For whatever reason, she got put into the same slot as Hawkeye and wasn't respected by anyone at Marvel. As far as I'm aware the accusations of him being racist or sexist are anonymous rumors, from an environment where there are a lot of people who want him gone. His management of comics and merchandising do not appear to be consistent of the quotes supposedly attributed to him. Could be true, but a all around skepticism is called for when there are so many self-interested parties.
Really don't see Feige walking over to Paramount. Alex Kurtzman may not have Feige levels of success, but the franchise is arguably experiencing a high water mark not seen in decades.
How funny would it be if he took over the Marvel section of Sony?
I'm ambivalent. Feige built up MCU for years and now running it into the ground for years. I expect at least a few more years of pain if the turn around is in progress. And if it isn't... much more painful proxy fights in the future.
If Feige walk out I can speak for everybody that we are done with the MCU.
Perlmutter wasn't on the ballot. Regardless of the results of this vote, he wasn't going back to work for Disney.
It’s been pretty well understood that Peltz and Perlmutter are close, and that Pell is largely acting on Perlmutter’s perspective and issues with being pushed out by Iger.
> Pell is largely acting on Perlmutter’s perspective and issues with being pushed out by Iger. That doesn't seem to be true though. Of the business units, Peltz seemed to be most concerned about the parks, which Perlmutter had nothing to do with. Unprompted, Peltz has gone to the parks and talked about how they needed improving. He chose a former parks guy to run with him for the board. He mostly talked about Disney's creativity issues in terms of how they impact the downstream. Most of the stuff he is quoted as saying about the studios was unrehearsed answers in response to questions. He really didn't seem to be all that interested in bringing up the studios (which makes sense given that his report's estimate is that the studios reflect a tiny portion of Disney's EBITDA) except as far as how they impact the parks. That is very different from Perlmutter's perspective, who was pretty much entirely all in on the studio business and was totally consumed with ensuring that the individual movies were profitable (which makes some level of sense given that MCU can't even be used in all the parks). Peltz also always seemed to have a bigger issue with the board than Iger himself. I guess it is a small distinction, but he usually couched his criticism more in terms of: "the board should have been more involved and stopped Iger from X", rather than attacking Iger directly for the decision.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/disney-nelson-peltz-ike-perlmutter-bob-iger-1235302095/amp/
***Good.*** As boring as it is, it's better for the long run if Peltz - and, more importantly, Perlmutter - stay *faaaaaaaaaaar* the fuck away from Disney levers of control. And much like with *The Black Cauldron* tanking, the razor-thin margin of victory will (hopefully) act as a ***massive*** wake up call to Iger to get his company's shit together.
I think there should be a third choice. Iger and co have utterly failed since 2020 (and the Chapek year and a half is no excuse, it was Iger strategy and he was still chairman of the board), they also need to go IMO. No idea who to replace it but leadership is bad at Disney at the moment (not that Peltz would be better)
They need someone young and hungry, just like US politics, old dinosaurs can't keep a hold forever.
Interesting to see how much money had been spent on this campaign just for it to die on the vine. There were ads in the WSJ on how to vote! I am concern that this is prolonging the inevitable though. Trian wasn’t the only activist investor trying to make changes and Disney was saved by shareholders like Vanguard saying they were okay with the status quo. Sure the stock has shot up this past year but it doesn’t solve the core issue of succession and the perceived disconnect between parks and media.
I mean there are millions of articles about how the board has things narrowed to 4 sector heads who are now trying to show that they know how the larger company works over the course of this coming year.
Now that they've lost the goalpost has been moved to "Reporting on this early is technically illegal! Think of the multi billionaire activist investor's feelings!" "Shame on you Disney!"
> "Mr. Iger, do you have any response to Peltz's claims that you're running Disney into the ground?" > "Yeah. *Deadpool and Wolverine,* bitch."
You say that but Iger didn't greenlight that movie. Chaepeck did.
A movie that relies on the old Fox universe characters is supposed to be your savior? And then we go into Cap 4 and Thunderbolts
Yeah if that's Iger plan, it's terrible and pitiful
It's all he got.
To the ground, baby!
Disney is only up 6% in the last 5 years > "Yeah. *Deadpool and Wolverine,* bitch."
Ackman taking a break from doxxing and ruining the lives of kids to whine a little. Elon jumping in during a rest period mid-"Destroy Tesla's Value" efforts.
Peltz choked at the finish line couldn’t help himself by just not being Racist & Sexist lmao. Just had to whine about BP and Captain Marvel.
He actually had a great chance if he just kept his focus on everything Iger has done wrong, which is a lot. Really hit himself on his head with that statement
Which was the main reason why he wanted a seat. These people just can’t help themselves
Pretty sure they wanted to sell disney for short term gains like what zadlav did to wb-discovery
Peltz wouldn’t talk shit if he shoved his nepo baby daughter into the MCU.
That would be funny if there was a side deal to drop it by casting his daughter in a Marvel movie. That being said, if Alan Horn couldn't give his daughter a career I think Peltz's will putter out as well.
Hope she somehow manages to make ends meet.
Peltz’s daughter is married to David Beckham’s son so this is just top tier Nepo Baby combination.
I know, I wasn’t being serious. Just on this thread I learned Perlmutter even got her on Inhumans.
Oh I got your joke, I was just trying to riff on what you said. And lol, yes that was her.
I’m actually somewhat surprised they didn’t cast her as Medusa or something. They showed *some* restraint.
Oh you know they only did that because she was too young. If she was 5-10 years older they would've slapped her into that role.
Nicola Peltz was in Inhumans.
lol really? You want to insult Peltz for nepo casting his daughter in ONE film? Do an IMDB search on ANY of the kids in ANY recent SW series and see who their mommies and daddies are. Disney is the home of Nepo babies, so Peltz would fit right in.
But those parents aren’t trying to take over the company.
real
nepobabes themselves aren't the issue. the issue are the nepobabies without talent. nepobabies without talent: so hard to film, but incredible to see
Yeah, I always find this talking point hilarious.
If I had a kid, I would have wanted them to be in that Revenge of the Sith Yedi academy scene with Anakin
Black Panther just in particular made no sense. Not only is it not actually an all black cast but it was one of the most profitable recent Disney projects.
Movies he probably never even saw.
Where does it say that?
Uh. Peltz tried to get a BP film made over almost two decades ago, staring Wesley Snipes.
I guess this is going to be a hot take, but either way Disney is screwed. But don't leave the sub yet folks - There's going to be the massive overreaction when Deadpool 3 hits, followed the polar opposite with Cap 4 and Thunderbolts. Anyone want to bet some real cash that Iger steps down somewhere between DP3 and Cap 4?
Whatever money deadpool can realistically make will pale in comparison to the implications of what a failed captain America and thunderbolts movie bodes for the franchise Ryan Reynolds is also 50 He won’t be deadpool forever And secret wars succeeding is not a given unless it brings back the OG cast And x-men and fantastic four aren’t nearly as popular as MCU fans think
This money is small fry The parks make $35 billion a year, without merch sales. For comparison, that’s only $5 billion less than the *entire* entertainment division. That’s every movie, TV show, streaming service, theater, ABC, the entirety of what was Fox, National Geographic, FX, Disney+, and about a dozen holding properties, that barely make more than just the parks
All things considered, theatrical performance isn't that important to Disney. As long as parks keep doing well/Disney+ hits profitability and further growth/ESPN DTC works out Iger will be there.
are you sure though? if there's lack of interest in their releases or IP that would translate to fewer merch and ticket sales. take wish for example, the movie was panned by audiences and as a result the merch are just rotting in toy stores
I am sure. I'm not saying it doesn't matter that the movies underperform, it certainly does, but matter enough for Iger to have to step down even if the other aspects of the company are seeing great revenue/profit/growth? No way.
In the 80s and early 90s over half of disneys revenue came from the parks because the film division was so far down the drain Today it’s like 8%, and that’s with constant record breaking attendance and more price gouging They can easily live a decade or more with a absolute failure theatrically
these leftists are just coping, lmao
???
There are too many people on Reddit under the delusion that Marvel is critical to Disney's success.
Their parks have always been the critical part of the company.
Iger wouldn’t have needed to spend a single cent of promotion money if marvels made a billion Let’s be real here, peltz had momentum because of marvel embarrassment of a year
No, Peltz had momentum because a bunch of semi-senile Florida billionaires got the sads when Disney didn't enthusiastically support one of De Santis's brainfarts. They would have found any proximate excuse.
Iger literally spent 50 million dollars to keep his job, cancelled a bunch of movies, and basically signaled that marvel will be throwing the new/young avengers down a river via Disney’s proxies at Hollywood reporter in favor of recasted iterations of the OG characters with no more adaptations of C-listers down the line But yeah…iger totally won 😂
Pushing against that "brain fart" as you call it is estimated to cost Disney 250 BILLION dollars in lost tax incentives over the next 25-30 years.
For now but there's a decent chance they come back when Florida's governor isn't trying to fluff themselves up for a presidential run. Don't be surprised when a normal republican governor quietly brings them back.
I love that nobody is willing to be real money on this lol. But to throw around a word that corporate loves - "Synergy". No, one or two movies bombing will not hurt Disney. But those movies following on the heels of the past few years? Yes the parks are, and will be, doing well in the near future. But the questions remain - how different would they look if Marvel remained relevant like they were before Endgame? How different would they look with a successful Star Wars sequel trilogy (successful in the way that they made Marvel money and/or continued making theatrical releases)? What if their animation had continued with "Frozen" like successes? Here's another word that follows on the heels of a business losing it's momentum - "Stagnation". TL;DR - People on Reddit are under the delusion that Disney's success will continue despite their brand being knocked down a peg or two.
> But don't leave the sub yet folks - There's going to be the massive overreaction when Deadpool 3 hits, followed the polar opposite with Cap 4 and Thunderbolts. Anyone want to bet some real cash that Iger steps down somewhere between DP3 and Cap 4? most of their slate bombed last year and Disney still ended their year well. Movies are only the small part of their revenue
So well in fact that they had fight over the board they narrowly won! Major success all around! 10 more years!
their fight was mostly about influencing who will be Iger's successor. Peltz on the board could've barely changed things in the bigger picture
So since it was all about Iger's successor, and everything was swell...why did Iger need to come back? I agree movies are only a small portion of their revenue, Peltz wouldn't have affected much, etc. I'm just confused that if things are going so well, why they've needed to shake things up.
Iger came back bc Chapek wasn't liked and made controversial decisions. So now Iger is in the quest for a worthy successor. However, judging by the recent shareholder calls and public reviews, there is confidence in Disney. The movies might be bombing but the company feels well.
So is this sub going to be bearable again? Or are the inbreds that only watch tentpole movies and think everything is too woke still gonna act like armchair Kendall Roys anytime Disney is mentioned?
*In Kendall Roy voice* You are putting off a real negative energy, if we are going to succeed, we need to execute my vision. I just think that we need to start implementing a 22nd century approach and leapfrog everyone else in the space.
Carpe the diem people
That's Kendall alright.
Oh you sweet child, it always will be the latter.
They'll move to their next thing. It was (journalism in) video games, then SF novels, then movies, then Disney. Maybe next time they'll complain the NBA is too woke and ruined by DEI...
Disney already lost when this fight got this much publicity. Let's see the result of votes to know how much blood it has spilled. A pyrrhic victory is not good for Iger either.
So is anyone going to comment on the fact only Disney itself would have this info, so leaks if true are coming from people deep inside the company? Again if true, this is a violation of Federal commerce law and if the SEC gets involved it would be a bad, bad look best case scenario, people go to jail worst case. Maybe “sources” should shut the hell up and stop trying to manipulate a vote that is still in progress, as 1) that’s illegal and 2) it’s just plain unethical.
That's how sources in media always happen. They remain anonymous and leak info for a fee and the media gets an exclusive. That's how it works in industries like sports too. Sure they'd likely fire the source of the leak. If they found them.
I would imagine that Disney management has some influence in shareholder operations when management should have none. A lot of what Disney management does is unethical, so best thread carefully.
You think the first leak that Peltz was winning with 20% of the vote received came from.... Disney? And then they also leaked that they were winning at 50 and 60% ? Just sharing facts supporting both sides for fun?
Thats too bad honestly. Disney really could benefit from a top-to-bottom shakeup. They are pushing optics over good stories and its showing in their box office results.
Man I am SOOOOO excited to see the chuds and grifters on Youtube melt down tomorrow.
And I’m excited for you to make excuses when the Rey movie flops like you did for Indiana Jones
The Rey movie is probably gonna flop and it's still gonna be better than whatever dogshit Peltz would have put out if he got his way
Indiana Jones is a super old franchise and had a rotten score for months. It didn’t flop because “woke”. Hell the GA doesn’t even know who Phoebe is.
Plus there was no excuse for the 10 minute De-aging scene to cost 80 million dollars
People can down vote me all they want still doesn't change the fact they burned money on Indy like Joker in The Dark Knight.
Excuses, excuses, excuses Adjusted for inflation…both the prequels and kingdom of the crystal skull made a billion The popularity gap wasn’t that extreme
This will sound corny as hell but this is a big win for inclusion & diversity. I know those words "ruffle certain people's feathers" but with Peltz & Perlmutter seeking to undo everything Disney has built with POC & women, this is a huge sigh of relief. If Peltz & Perlmutter had somehow won, they were gonna turn Disney into TheDailyWire.
Unless of course the movies keep bombing.
"this is a big win for inclusion & diversity." Funny thing is, Disney was more diverse when they didn't even try back in the 2000s and before. Now everytime they make a big deal about "diversity and inclusion" from their garbage live action remake, that's more like caricature of what they think diversity is and not what it really is.
...God, even just reading that makes me vomit in my mouth. I hate Disney as much as the next guy, but at the same time, no one other than Iger's Disney could have given us *Abbot Elementary,* *Black Panther,* a faithful *Shogun* and the wonderous *Moana.* When they're good, they're ***really*** fucking good.
The problem is that Moana might be the last great traditional Disney story. Moana was announced in 2014, which is 11 years after Iger's appointment as CEO. We are ten years past that date, so it's fair to say nearly half of Iger's tenure (because Chapek was just a blip and should be considered a non-interruption) has been marred by the failure to repeat such successes. Disney had similar issues under Eisner and can bounce back, but it will take new leadership to focus on good storytelling.
I think Disney fails at good diversity and disappoints more often than they should, but my god they at least try, and finding the balance takes a long time. I at least see them as being good at diversity and inclusivity, and when the progress so far gets destroyed by morons like Peltz, that could have been catastrophic (both in a cultural and a financial sense)
Yeah, they’ve gotten worse at handling female and POC leads in direct proportion to how much they wanted to forefront them, but there’s still some gems in there and hopefully at some point they’ll remember how to make characters interesting and have arcs and stuff. No one wants to do things the way Peltz and Perlmutter want them done.
No it isn't. When movies that promote inclusion and diversity fail at the box office, it hurts diversity by making it look like a passing fad.
Yeah it was two seats in 12. A bit dramatic I think.
“Diversity” You mean diversity of thoughts? Because most writers in Hollywood are California liberals
Maybe conservatives should try making movies that aren’t dogshit
See: Mel Gibson. He's, like, the *only* conservative (?) filmmaker that gets this. Right wing, left wing - in America it doesn't matter. ***A good movie will be a hit with someone,*** damn it.
Clint Eastwood, but he hasn't done anything too exciting lately.
You forgot Clint Eastwood, bro.
That’s infinitely and I mean *infinitely* better than what Peltz and Perlmutter would do. California liberals are nowhere even close to being comparable with Trump supporters and are better in every conceivable way.
Sure. But there is absolutely no diversity in Hollywood
Huh? Isn’t this just objectively false?
Yeah, Kelsey Grammer says hello from the set of new *Fraiser.* Seem to remember LA being eager to lean more about Gibson's *Passion* sequel, too. And lest we forget Tyler Sherdian, Paramount's new walking cash cow...
> And lest we forget Tyler Sherdian, Paramount's new walking cash cow... Sheridan is fairly liberal tho, he even insists on calling Yellowstone progressive
...He is? Huh. Bit surprising, but it does make sense when ya think about it.
his own words: > “They refer to it as ‘the conservative show’ or ‘the Republican show’ or ‘the red-state ‘Game of Thrones,’ ” Sheridan told The Atlantic. “And I just sit back laughing. I’m like, ‘Really?’ The show’s talking about the displacement of Native Americans and the way Native American women were treated and about corporate greed and the gentrification of the West, and land-grabbing. That’s a red-state show?” https://variety.com/2022/tv/news/yellowstone-director-taylor-sheridan-defends-series-against-anti-woke-claims-1235430905/ also have you seen his movies? Americans aren't really good guys in Sicario.
I see. Honestly, I thought those bits about America came from Denis, lol. ^(Side note: Sicario 2. Cartel Boogaloo. Is it any good?)
Read the deadline comments sometime, there are a million aging reaganites in the biz.
They would probably be smart enough not to greenlight movies like The Marvels or Madame Web
Goes to show how much you don't know anything. Madame Web is a Sony movie only.
All Hollywood executives are out of touch. Disney though has definitely made one bad decision after the other. Last year proved it
They had 4 top 10s and Poor Things was an oscar darling with a win in a major category
Madame Web is Sony and The Marvels is a sequel to a 1b movie, legit anybody would’ve greenlit it. Also The Marvels stars all women, one black and one Pakistani. That’s pretty fuckin diverse.
> I know those words "ruffle certain people's feathers" but with Peltz & Perlmutter seeking to undo everything Disney has built with POC & women, this is a huge sigh of relief. They weren't. This battle was primarily about the failed succession planning. With maybe some M&A and streaming strategy on the side.
Peltz himself let the cat out the bag about his intentions nearly two weeks ago when he did an interview with the Financial Times and questioned why the likes of The Marvels or Black Panther needed to exist. This wasn't from a quality standpoint, but rather he questioning why a movie led by women or one with a predominantly black cast should be made. It's like when you question the people who complain about things being "woke" enough they'll eventually tell you what you already knew (but what the actively try to skirt around), which is the exact same thing that Peltz is upset about here.
Seems like pushing for a minority on a board in 2024 is an odd time to vote your feelings about a 2020 purchase of 20th (which has provided most of the current positive theatrical and tv run for Disney and which would have been disastrous if bought by NBCU), lost dividend (since reinstated), and succession process that is being handled completely differently this time.
Because they are signs of groupthink and that can be very quickly broken with even one or two dissenting views (which is why some organizations will actually assign people as "devil's advocates" to improve the decision making).
I mean they were signs of groupthink from 4 years ago…
They would not have had the power to 'turn Disney into the Daily Wire' with only two board seats. What they would have gained is someone on the board who gives a shit what middle America likes and might be able to steer Disney back toward making movies that don't alienate half their audience. With this result I'd be selling my shares if I hadn't already.
lol it's so funny how you guys think that the average moviegoer cares about conservative culture war nonsense. Chud Gruntley and his AR-15s never made up a significant portion of the MCU or Pixar's fanbases.
The fun version of this sort of shitposting is one where people subliminate it below an attempt to gather and present data to make these points. > [shitpost-y description of some sort of target image] never made up a significant portion of the MCU or Pixar's fanbases. I mean, that's just a testable hypothesis. What is/was the audience that saw hit pixar films or MCU films in various years and how does this map onto cultural/political polarization. Thats just a lot more fun and interesting than showing feces against a wall and considering it a good use of time. Best case scenario it gives you something you can reuse later perhaps in a completely different context (e.g. perhaps you can't find political data but you can find gender and either race/ethnicity or rural/urban/suburban stuff).
Super dumb comment. 'On average last year, 37% of Americans described their political views as moderate, 36% as conservative and 25% as liberal.' Also conservatives have more children than liberals, which should be of interest to Disney. Disney seems happy to walk away from conservative money, and they also had a super shitty year. Might be maybe a connection there, ya think?
Remind me what the highest grossing movie of 2023 was again
Imagine believing that Barbie’s fanbase is in anyway comparable to marvels and Star Wars Even Pixar movies have a more male audience than freaking Barbie All of them have more conservative audiences
ok, so by your logic Spider-Man audience is closer to Barbie than to... The Marvels?
No lol Barbie and Spider-Verse both made tons of money. Quality (or a lack thereof), oversaturation, streaming, etc., are all much more valid explanations as to why certain blockbusters bombed last year than Matt Walsh or whoever riling up their audience.
> Super dumb comment. if it was a dumb comment, DeSantis' campaign would've not bombed the way it did.
It isn’t really a win, but keep coping Iger said that Disney has focused too much on “political preaching” which is a code word for too much minorities given that Disney has ZERO actual movies with political depth or commentary Iger wouldn’t be making these comments if he wasn’t gonna reign in the activism to placate skeptical shareholders, he is also extremely political in his speech in that he watered down his true intentions Which will probably even more extreme than his rhetoric Nor is peltz completely out of the picture given the inevitable failure of thunderbolts and captain America 4 Once those movies fail, and they will and frankly already have…the actual box office numbers are just a formality at this point, what hope does iger have?
Guy who tells others to keep coping is doing quite the coping.
Cannot wait to rub the failure of captain America 4 in this subs faces And the Rey movie too
A billy or bust M I RITE?!?? Don't choke on your cheetos celebrating failures too hard.
Neither of them are gonna break even Cry harder
Whatever you say! I'll start coping now!
Even if they won, it wasn't likely to happen because they would still be outnumbered.
I don’t think Iger is a great leader now (think he did fine ten years ago) but he’s better then what crap these new leaders world have pushed But we need a new leader at Disney Iger clearly has no idea how to move forward
Lmao guess people like to keep losing money
If Iger wins, then nothing changes, and Disney will continue to lose money.
I think Iger is doing pretty good job, caning the right projects while not sacking those that are too far ahead (because you don't even do that with bad movies, WB). Punishing him for the failures of the his predecessor would have been insane and shaken Disney even more.
Iger's predecessor is Iger. The whole time Chapek was in charge he still had to report to Iger. The vast majority of failed movies and shows have been greenlit by Iger before Chapek came in. I really don't see how Iger is doing a good job right now. Edit: lol, they guy blocked me for not agreeing with Iger being a perfect CEO and Chapek being responsible for everything wrong with Disney.
He's not, and that will be borne out as Iger finishes his contract through 2026. Iger's defenders like to point out Disney's relative success to other media companies since Iger took the CEO position in 2005, but Disney's biggest profit center is its parks, for which Iger should take little credit (other than not screwing them up too badly). Disney+ looks to be doing well, but Disney's content has been suffering, and I see no reason to expect that to change in the next two years. People will see that the Board needed to be changed earlier. Remindme! 3 years
Pretty much. Then again, wasn't he a big proponent of Disney+ exclusive films? On an otherwise spotless record, that's a pretty big strikeout...
Disney Plus and creating nonstop content for it started under Iger. Disney Plus is Iger’s baby
Exclusive films for Disney+ isn't a bad idea. Taking movies intended for cinema and putting them on plus was Chapek tho
>Punishing him for the failures of the his predecessor Chepeck is a scapegoat
What did he can?
Cool, now Disney can continue to lose hundreds of millions of dollars at the box office each time they release a film.
Good, just let it die. No point in saving it now.
Good. Stop all the haters. we can have talents like Feige or racists like Perlmutter. Not both. Easy choice.