i think Josh is a "safe" choice. He is very well liked by EVERYbody and has been able to avoid and serious public controversy. Dana walden is a MUCH more controversial and polarizing name in the public. She brings unnecessary scrutiny and will she will be a public or political "football" that both teams fight like Hell over. Disney needs to move AWAY form this polarizing mess. This company never had this problem for the first 95 years of it's life,....but now its a REAL problem that needs to be fixed. Dana will just make it worse. If I can't have Joe Rhode as CEO ;-) ,...I'll take Tom Staggs, I guess.
I think Disney’s parks division is the moneymaker, but competing in Hollywood is a brutal battle and you need a CEO who can compete in that tougher arena. While parks makes more money, the tougher business in Hollywood calls for someone who’s already in that Hollywood bubble.
I dunno if he'll fix everything, but I think the fact that he's down on the ground interacting with Park guests really goes a long way in making him come across as more personable and down to earth.
OrangeGrove 55. Lads, the reason Dana Walden is the obvious choice for Disney's next CEO? She's got a much better pair of legs than Josh D'Amaro. Also he does'nt look good in heels. It's a no brainer. Cheers, Chris Perry
if Dana Walden gets the Gig ! She will be let go after 2 years and Bob Iger will come back one last time and have Daddy Josh Groomed to be the CEo in 2030!
Dana Walden would definitely be the superior of the two internal candidates; Disney, whether fans want to admit it or not, is a studio first and foremost. Having said, that even though Disney's just giving fans the obligatory lip service of "we're entertaining external candidates", I think Iger just might take everyone by surprise this time. And also, as much as it might sound like a good idea, trying to get some kind of rotating advisory 'committee' of both fans and historians to advise the CEO and board of directors on how the company should be run from Iger's departure onwards would be a genuinely daunting task, and may lead to too much internal conflict. It looks like an 'Eisner 2.0' era of some kind just might be in the making, and I don't like being the pessimist in situations like this, so I'm holding out my hope. And ofc when you talk about those grifters who just don't seem happy with ANYTHING Disney does at all, we should take into account that some of them (I'm not gonna name any names, of course) are sooooooooooooooooooooo purist, that they probably don't even think the ways of Eisner or even WELLS were truly right for the company. Even if those parties deny it, I'm sure they want one of two things to happen to the Mouse House; either stay frozen in time in either 1966 or 1971, OR just go out of business completely because they don't believe anyone truly has the right values to run it. I think the later years of the Iger/Chapek run just spurred the 'Big Mouse Bad' thing. Some fans who dislike Iger are genuinely concerned for the company and just believe that a fresh pair of eyes is needed, and that's fine, but other's just can't seem to stop complaining and believe not even an EXTERNAL successor can save Dis from here on out. And some fans became SO exceptionally disillusioned that they just want the company to go out of business because they genuinely believe Walt and Roy were the only 2 people on this planet who'd EVER be capable of running it. It does feel like there's a kinda stepped hierarchy to the levels of 'negative sentiment' towards TWDC, and I think the top two levels are starting to become increasingly popular among these grifters, regardless of whether they want to admit it or not (either just mourning the perceived loss of talent industry wide since the final years of the Eisner era, OR just wishing Disney went out of business as soon as Roy bit the dust to 'save the company from itself'). Part of me just fears that while the negative sentiment might die down eventually, it will never truly disappear, as it's always been popular to some degree to hate on the Mouse simply because they're the largest and/or the most unique. And so, all we can do, as passionate Disney fans, is appreciate both the old and the new as best we can, and just try to ignore the grifters. Touch wood, reasonable Disney fans will eventually see these parties for who they truly are and just make up their OWN minds about what they should do with the House of Mouse
The last we need is a woke liberal. We actually need someone that isn't hollywood that will stay away from politics because that is what hollywood is. We need someone that respects Walts vision.
Bob Iger should be banned from picking his successor. Since he has proved to have chosen the wrong people for the job, in the past. Bob Chapek was a meek, pathetic loser and Jennifer Lee was a complete failure, who destroyed the legacy of Disney Animation. Dana Walden might understand what the adult audience wants to watch, as seen with “Shogun”, and much of Hulu/FX, but she has no experience with the family-friendly demographic. Considering how many issues there are currently at Disney, especially the family-friendly side, the company is better off with an outsider as CEO.
Out of the two, if I was a betting man, (I am not) Dana. A persons politics are their own and should not have any say on their ability to do their job.
Herding cats aside from the subject of the video, yet mentioned, Agatha's current audience RT score is 80%, so feeling hopeful (in regards to the power - lack there of - of review bombing and/or RT tackling it finally for streaming)
What the hell are you guys talking about. The theme parks are single-handedly keeping the entire company of float. It doesn’t matter how many Emmys you win, how much money you make. Her division is not profitable. Tomorrow’s is extremely profitable. I gave you guys a chance, but you clearly have absolutely no ability to logic so I’m out
Neither one should be CEO. Josh was thought of as the guy that was for the fans and old school Disney, but during Iger and Cheap-ek reigns he's shown himself to be who he truly is. A shill for corporate disney DEI/ESG scores for the big 3 AND someone who LOATHES Walt and Roy and all that they stood for. Both would continue down the path of the destruction of this company and legacy. They need to find an outside person, who LOVES Walt and Roy's ideals, understands what Disney is and should be, gets rid of the Big 3 influence and would appoint a stakeholder council that included a rotating group of fans/historians/interested parties, to have recognized and substantial input in the decisions of the company in ALL aspects. Not just verbal, only to be ignored. Don't know who, but Maybe Peltz might have a few candidates.
It is human nature for a CEO to not pick the best, so I suggest asking Iger and select the person he does not select.
Especially since Iger picked Chapek and Lee, and both were complete failures.
i think Josh is a "safe" choice. He is very well liked by EVERYbody and has been able to avoid and serious public controversy. Dana walden is a MUCH more controversial and polarizing name in the public. She brings unnecessary scrutiny and will she will be a public or political "football" that both teams fight like Hell over. Disney needs to move AWAY form this polarizing mess. This company never had this problem for the first 95 years of it's life,....but now its a REAL problem that needs to be fixed. Dana will just make it worse. If I can't have Joe Rhode as CEO ;-) ,...I'll take Tom Staggs, I guess.
Dana Walden would be a catastrophe to the Disney company. If she becomes CEO I will be liquidating my shares in the company.
I think Disney’s parks division is the moneymaker, but competing in Hollywood is a brutal battle and you need a CEO who can compete in that tougher arena. While parks makes more money, the tougher business in Hollywood calls for someone who’s already in that Hollywood bubble.
Trust Josh more. I feel he will fix everything
I dunno if he'll fix everything, but I think the fact that he's down on the ground interacting with Park guests really goes a long way in making him come across as more personable and down to earth.
OrangeGrove 55. Lads, the reason Dana Walden is the obvious choice for Disney's next CEO? She's got a much better pair of legs than Josh D'Amaro. Also he does'nt look good in heels. It's a no brainer. Cheers, Chris Perry
I Love Dana Walden as the CEO of Disney 😍
I feel like Dana Walden will give us more Agatha all along and Disney will be less and less of a kid's brand
But I'm also hopeful that if she becomes CEO she will put politics aside
@@GravityFalloutPinesyou really believe that.. with her we will get more woke garbage.
@@GravityFalloutPines - She would be a Jennifer Lee 2.0. Iger would do best to find someone from outside of Disney.
if Dana Walden gets the Gig ! She will be let go after 2 years and Bob Iger will come back one last time and have Daddy Josh Groomed to be the CEo in 2030!
Dana Walden would definitely be the superior of the two internal candidates; Disney, whether fans want to admit it or not, is a studio first and foremost. Having said, that even though Disney's just giving fans the obligatory lip service of "we're entertaining external candidates", I think Iger just might take everyone by surprise this time. And also, as much as it might sound like a good idea, trying to get some kind of rotating advisory 'committee' of both fans and historians to advise the CEO and board of directors on how the company should be run from Iger's departure onwards would be a genuinely daunting task, and may lead to too much internal conflict. It looks like an 'Eisner 2.0' era of some kind just might be in the making, and I don't like being the pessimist in situations like this, so I'm holding out my hope.
And ofc when you talk about those grifters who just don't seem happy with ANYTHING Disney does at all, we should take into account that some of them (I'm not gonna name any names, of course) are sooooooooooooooooooooo purist, that they probably don't even think the ways of Eisner or even WELLS were truly right for the company. Even if those parties deny it, I'm sure they want one of two things to happen to the Mouse House; either stay frozen in time in either 1966 or 1971, OR just go out of business completely because they don't believe anyone truly has the right values to run it. I think the later years of the Iger/Chapek run just spurred the 'Big Mouse Bad' thing. Some fans who dislike Iger are genuinely concerned for the company and just believe that a fresh pair of eyes is needed, and that's fine, but other's just can't seem to stop complaining and believe not even an EXTERNAL successor can save Dis from here on out. And some fans became SO exceptionally disillusioned that they just want the company to go out of business because they genuinely believe Walt and Roy were the only 2 people on this planet who'd EVER be capable of running it.
It does feel like there's a kinda stepped hierarchy to the levels of 'negative sentiment' towards TWDC, and I think the top two levels are starting to become increasingly popular among these grifters, regardless of whether they want to admit it or not (either just mourning the perceived loss of talent industry wide since the final years of the Eisner era, OR just wishing Disney went out of business as soon as Roy bit the dust to 'save the company from itself'). Part of me just fears that while the negative sentiment might die down eventually, it will never truly disappear, as it's always been popular to some degree to hate on the Mouse simply because they're the largest and/or the most unique. And so, all we can do, as passionate Disney fans, is appreciate both the old and the new as best we can, and just try to ignore the grifters. Touch wood, reasonable Disney fans will eventually see these parties for who they truly are and just make up their OWN minds about what they should do with the House of Mouse
The last we need is a woke liberal. We actually need someone that isn't hollywood that will stay away from politics because that is what hollywood is. We need someone that respects Walts vision.
Bob Iger should be banned from picking his successor. Since he has proved to have chosen the wrong people for the job, in the past. Bob Chapek was a meek, pathetic loser and Jennifer Lee was a complete failure, who destroyed the legacy of Disney Animation. Dana Walden might understand what the adult audience wants to watch, as seen with “Shogun”, and much of Hulu/FX, but she has no experience with the family-friendly demographic. Considering how many issues there are currently at Disney, especially the family-friendly side, the company is better off with an outsider as CEO.
Josh d. Amaro head ceco and distant ceco Dana Walden
Dana will just give us more garbage. I don't know the other guy, but is he woke as well.
Out of the two, if I was a betting man, (I am not) Dana.
A persons politics are their own and should not have any say on their ability to do their job.
Herding cats aside from the subject of the video, yet mentioned, Agatha's current audience RT score is 80%, so feeling hopeful (in regards to the power - lack there of - of review bombing and/or RT tackling it finally for streaming)
What the hell are you guys talking about. The theme parks are single-handedly keeping the entire company of float. It doesn’t matter how many Emmys you win, how much money you make. Her division is not profitable. Tomorrow’s is extremely profitable.
I gave you guys a chance, but you clearly have absolutely no ability to logic so I’m out
Sorry to see you go, you are always welcome back if you change ur mind 🧡
Neither one should be CEO. Josh was thought of as the guy that was for the fans and old school Disney, but during Iger and Cheap-ek reigns he's shown himself to be who he truly is. A shill for corporate disney DEI/ESG scores for the big 3 AND someone who LOATHES Walt and Roy and all that they stood for. Both would continue down the path of the destruction of this company and legacy. They need to find an outside person, who LOVES Walt and Roy's ideals, understands what Disney is and should be, gets rid of the Big 3 influence and would appoint a stakeholder council that included a rotating group of fans/historians/interested parties, to have recognized and substantial input in the decisions of the company in ALL aspects. Not just verbal, only to be ignored. Don't know who, but Maybe Peltz might have a few candidates.