Disney Shareholders: Why Can’t You Be More Like Netflix?


It’s not an easy undertaking to make me laugh nowadays. Most of the time I’m just FINE (as in Frustrated [duh!], Insecure, Nervous, and Exhausted); the rest of the time I am severely distraught… And, of course, I meditate and do my best to cheer the fuck up… The vast music library helps; so does the good literature, quality entertainment… But, laughing – that’s rare, very rare… Except for the news – some news snippets make me burst out laughing! And incidentally this particular hilarious bit also had to do with Entertainment… Or rather the business of it.

You see, Disney is in trouble… I don’t need to regurgitate to you the whole stock-market mumbo-jumbo everyone else and their mothers write about, primarily focusing on the share prices, which are now below the level they were 10 years ago. Because the bottom line is fairly simple: The original Walt Disney Pictures isn’t pumping out winners annually as they used to do. All those astronomical investments into hoarding the big-name franchises like Stars Wars (Lucasfilm) and Marvel  – in spite of the high profits per hit, don’t really turn themselves into returns fast enough… And – most painfully in terms of the contemporary state of the entertainment marketing – the streaming arm Disney+ is not profitable at all.

Or, as I prefer to define it: Netflix it ain’t.

What to do? What to do? In a typical far-removed-from-reality only-in-corporate-boardrooms turn of events, the self-proclaimed “activist” investor billionaire Nelson Peltz (who started his “business-building” career – and this is very important – by inheriting his grandfather wholesale food company and then turning himself into a prominent private-equity mogul by buying and selling such fully-fledged companies as Snapple and Quaker Oats) challenged Disney’s BOD to commence the corrective actions by dismissing the company’s current CEO Bob (Why Bob, god dammit?! The man is 71! Time to grow up into your full name!) Iger (not a businessman at all – a career media executive, aka glorified mountain-top administrator with an outrageous compensation package of nearly $30 mil per year). In his haste for coup d’état, Peltz forgot to do his homework – he came into the fight empty-handed: no constructive plan, no corrective suggestions, no panoramic view of Disney’s new and improved future… Just the hope that, without Iger in the picture and with him on the board, things will get better… How? By Disney Magic? (If you didn’t hear: Peltz’s coup failed and Iger is still up there – on Disney’s very top, I mean).        

You get why this is so funny to me, don’t you?

The very idea of two people with no entrepreneurial experience in their respective portfolios fighting over who’s better fit to shake up the conglomerated mastodon (in case you forgot your primary-school lessons: mastodons were prehistoric, extinct cousins of the contemporary elephants – very large creatures) and expediently reshape it into an agile operational gazelle able to conquer the most difficult, most contemporary, most innovative trails – it seems inconceivable to me. Moreover, it’s so desperately naive to believe (assuming, of course, that anyone actually believes it) that changing one (or ten! or all!) person sitting on the head of the mastodon – very far away from its vital organs and moving limbs – would trigger the company’s rejuvenation. 

Do you think that the OG business-builders Walt and Roy Disney, if faced with a similar situation, would be concerning themselves with the BOD changes? I don’t think so. They would dig deep into the causes of the business’s slowdown, think outside of all boxes, and try to come up with absolutely new, never-explored-before solutions. Because they were the trailblazers and truly good fathers to their corporate child.  The current executive foster parents, on the other hand, are the worst: all they do is measure their child’s failures against their peers’ successes.        

You see, aspiring to someone else’s model that happens to work for them for the time being is nothing but a short-term bandaid. The key is in the entrepreneurial intuition, the managerial flexibility and the structural mobility; the integral ability to adapt, to change fast – with every single shift of the market demand and technological leap. And can we expect that from a giant who cannot be anything but rigid and slow simply because its too large for its own good? Pure fantasy, of course (who’s going to stop me, though? it’s my blog!), but the best thing for Disney’s Jenga-tower now would be to disassemble into individual blocks and let them operate as separate business units, without the burden of the astronomical executive packages. Let them compete within their own enterprising markets, against their specific peers – not against the fickle stock-market trends. I wonder what would happen then?   

And since commentators keep bringing it up as a benchmark, let me note this: Netflix Inc., God bless them – in spite of their global presence, publicly trading stock, and nineteen subsidiaries – is still a very much agile, 27-year-old (the most beautiful age) baby. With one of its shrewd co-founders still serving as an Executive Chairman of the board. 

I was a member of Blockbuster when my then pre-teen daughter first told me about Netflix DVD subscription. On my way to work I would drop the red envelopes into the mailbox and get the new ones shipped to us as soon as they were scanned into the USPS system at our local P.O. By the standards of those times: extraordinary expediency and incomparable efficiency of the entertainment-delivery operations. And that is still their main focus. Now, by means of what David Foster Wallace predicted (a few years before Netflix DVD was born, actually) would be the main form of delivering content into people’s screens – the dissemination into “teleputers” as he defined it, which we now known as streaming. In between, all of their transitions, developments, enhancements, and additions have been seamless precisely because they keep to their core, pursuing their mission.

And I hope they continue being spry, fluid, and easy to adapt. To whatever the future brings. I don’t know about the rest of you, but I owe them so much! No, for real, I have no clue how I would manage without them…   

Off the Cutting Room Floor of I Built This Prison: Clip #1: Authorship Under Employment


It’s not just your basic human rights that get clipped. You know the inherent copyright rule that everything you create is yours? Not if you created it within your employment framework. As hired help, we lose any and all forms of authorship. Whatever we develop, design, formulate, innovate, write in a normal course of our paid work responsibilities belongs to the compensator. The re-using or duplicating your own prior achievements in any other business can be subject to litigations, which, at best, is throwing money into the wind and, at worst, will ruin your life.

Here’s a classic pop-culture example that can make it clear for everyone. In 1982, Tim Burton, then employed by Walt Disney Feature Animation (a subsidiary of Walt Disney Studios), wrote a poem titled The Nightmare Before Christmas. Being who he is – I mean, an incredibly talented visual storyteller – he considered various possibilities of translating it into images: a TV special, a children book… He created the concept art, the storyboards, and even got Rick Heinrichs (a production designer on many subsequent Tim Burton’s projects, as well as both Ghostbusters, all Pirates of the Caribbeans, etc.) to sculpt the character models… But Disney of the time (CEO E. Cardon Walker) deemed the project too “weird” and stalled it… Then, in his two-year stint as Disney’s CEO (1983-1984), Ron Miller was more interested in creating the Touchstone, which allowed Disney to develop “grown-up” movies, than in Tim Burton’s beautifully morbid ideas – he fired the auteur in 1984.

Thank God for that, because in the next eight years, Tim Burton went on creating Pee Wee’s Big Adventure, Beetlejuice, Batman (all for WB), and Edward Scissorhands (for 20th Century Fox). Yet, the quasi-autobiographical turmoil and conflict between the strangeness of character and the desire to fit into the spirit of a “happy holiday” (never mind that it’s Halloween) that he conceptualize for Jack Skellington have never really left Burton’s creative horizons. Around 1990 he checked… And guess what? Disney still owned it. And by then it was already a Michael Eisner and Jeffrey Katzenberg’s domain with the turf fertile for producing a full-feature Nightmare.

Oh, of course, they gave Tim Burton the creative credit – as the story and characters’ developer. And they listed him as a producer… Why wouldn’t they? His movies were already commercial and critical successes – the instant cult classics that, nevertheless, generated box office numbers in multiples of their budgets. Who wouldn’t want to smack Tim Burton’s name on a billboard? But it’s not like he could take this child he conceived and labored to birth – his creation, and take it away to some place where he could nurture it. No… It was fostered now by people with no blood relations. They even didn’t want to wait until the birth parent was free to play with it (he was committed now to Batman Returns at WB)…. They hired their own nannies from within – a screen writer (Caroline Thompson) and a director (Henry Selick)…  

Don’t get me wrong: I love The Nightmare Before Christmas the way it ended up to be – the stop-motion animated musical with genius music and voice of Danny Elfman. Still, for 30 years now, I’ve been wondering: What it might’ve been if Tim Burton’s parental rights were not terminated by the fact that he was paid a salary by Disney at the time of the authorship…

And as I said, the same rules apply to all achievements attained by a paid employee under the constriction of employment. Whether it’s a product – either creative or physical, a formula, a solution, a process, a recipe, a construct, a logarithm, a program, an optimization matrix, an analytical macro, or a KPI dashboard – it does not belong to you just because you created it. It’s in the possession of the people who paid you your wages. They are the ones who get to use and reuse it, whether you are still attached or separated from them.”

                    Deleted from I Built This Prison, Chapter 4 – Bucket of Tears… and Blood