Speaker 1: It's been almost a year since Bob Iger, the celebrated
Speaker 1: CEO of the Walt Disney Company, came out of retirement
Speaker 1: and took back his spot at the top of the
Speaker 1: entertainment giant. But the company and the business climate had
Speaker 1: begun to change in the eleven months he was away.
Speaker 1: Disney was no longer a money printing machine.
Speaker 2: When I came back, one of the things I discovered
Speaker 2: was that the disruptive forces that have been preying on
Speaker 2: that business for a while greater than I thought.
Speaker 1: Bloomberg's Thomas Buckley reports that Iger, who was revered for
Speaker 1: his golden touch, is now having a rocky time trying
Speaker 1: to turn things around.
Speaker 3: You have to imagine that he either must truly love
Speaker 3: the company and love the brand to put himself through
Speaker 3: this one more time, potentially at the expense of his legacy,
Speaker 3: or it's simply the case, as sources told me during
Speaker 3: his retirement, that he can't imagine himself doing anything else
Speaker 3: than being the CEO of the Walt Disney Company.
Speaker 1: I'm Westcasova today on the big take. Can Bob Iger
Speaker 1: save Disney again? Tomas? Reading your story, it sure sounds
Speaker 1: like a tough time to be Bob Biker.
Speaker 3: I think it's an incredibly tough time to be Bobbiger.
Speaker 3: It's interesting because there was a period of times, so
Speaker 3: the fifteen years during his first tenure, where it was
Speaker 3: necessarily very easy being Barb Biger. It's a very difficult
Speaker 3: job running the Walt Disney Company, but it certainly came
Speaker 3: with a degree of stature and reverence that I think
Speaker 3: he's really missing in his second tenure, because the Walt
Speaker 3: Disney Company is a very very different company today than
Speaker 3: it was back then. During his first tenure, you know,
Speaker 3: he was celebrated for the acquisitions of Pixar Marvel, which
Speaker 3: is arguably one of the smartest acquisitions in the media
Speaker 3: entertainment history, and today I think think that the company
Speaker 3: is in very very different shape. It has a TV
Speaker 3: division that is suffering from a huge degree of cord cutting.
Speaker 3: Its latest run at the box office over the past
Speaker 3: two years has not been particularly successful. A lot of
Speaker 3: Disney's big budget movies are really underperforming. And then its
Speaker 3: parks business is on paper doing fairly well, based on
Speaker 3: the fact that internationally many of the parks were closed
Speaker 3: this time last year. Domestically, it's really having quite a
Speaker 3: tough time attracting customers based on several price increases that
Speaker 3: were put through by Barbiger's predecessor. On top of all
Speaker 3: of that, when Barbaiker left the company in February twenty twenty,
Speaker 3: just before the onset of a global pandemic, he exited
Speaker 3: the company in December twenty twenty one as executive chairman.
Speaker 3: By that time, Disney's stock price was at about two
Speaker 3: hundred dollars, its market capitalization was well over three hundred
Speaker 3: billion dollars, and coincidentally, you had Netflix's stock that went
Speaker 3: from eight hundred to two hundred when the so called
Speaker 3: streaming bubble burst and Wall Street started caring a lot
Speaker 3: more about the profitability of streaming services than they did
Speaker 3: about subscriber growth at all costs. So he has come
Speaker 3: back to a company that is now trading at about
Speaker 3: its lowest level in a decade. And he had long
Speaker 3: prided himself on consistently outperforming the S and P five
Speaker 3: hundred by great measures during his first tenure, And today
Speaker 3: it turns out if you're a shareholder back when he
Speaker 3: first became CEO in October first, two thousand and five,
Speaker 3: you would be worse of investing in Disney than you
Speaker 3: would have been investing in the S and P. Five hundred.
Speaker 3: So it feels like Wall Street has erased all trace
Speaker 3: of his past Laurels.
Speaker 1: Thomas, Let's go back a little bit to talk about
Speaker 1: how Disney found itself in this place, and maybe a
Speaker 1: good way to start is at that moment when Eiger,
Speaker 1: riding high, decides he's going to step aside and hand
Speaker 1: over the company to his success.
Speaker 3: The moment finally came when he anointed Bob Japek his
Speaker 3: hand picked successor. And this was a moment that had
Speaker 3: been postponed serially during his first tenure. He postponed his
Speaker 3: retirement four times before finally agreeing to step down as.
Speaker 1: See or why did he keep hanging on?
Speaker 3: I think that certainly in his first tenure, being Bob
Speaker 3: Eiger was an absolutely phenomenal gig to have. You know,
Speaker 3: on the one hand, you have your sixty five million
Speaker 3: dollars a year compensation package. On the other hand, you
Speaker 3: have unfettered access to Disney's four corporate jets. You're revered
Speaker 3: in town as one of the most powerful figures in
Speaker 3: all of Hollywood. You know, you have a seat at
Speaker 3: the table that is completely unmatched. You have the ear
Speaker 3: of Spielberg, you have the ear of Jim Cameron. You
Speaker 3: have a fan base you know that is so incredibly
Speaker 3: devoted to the parks that you're able to build a
Speaker 3: growing number of attractions and know that people will always
Speaker 3: show up for them and review you for building them.
Speaker 3: I think that he always knew that he was going
Speaker 3: to have to leave that life at some point, but
Speaker 3: was cognizant of how much he would miss it when
Speaker 3: he did, and so he postponed it four times, to
Speaker 3: the extent which colleagues of his ended up gifting him
Speaker 3: custom made license plate in jest, asking is their life
Speaker 3: after Disney.
Speaker 1: And what happened then when he ultimately did decide to
Speaker 1: hand over the company.
Speaker 3: If you look at it from a shareholder perspective, Bob
Speaker 3: Chapek is somewhat of an obvious choice in that he's
Speaker 3: delivered outsize performance at the park's business that used to run.
Speaker 3: He did a phenomenal job in consumer products before that,
Speaker 3: a phenomenal job in home video, and what Eiger has
Speaker 3: been telling his friends and confidants is that he mistook
Speaker 3: those operational chops for leadership qualities. Critics of that assessment
Speaker 3: say that actually, Bobigan knew exactly the kind of person
Speaker 3: and the kind of businessman that Bob Shapeck was, and
Speaker 3: he knew knew that Bob Jaypeck posts absolutely no risk
Speaker 3: outshining him, outshining his legacy when Bob Jaypek set about
Speaker 3: running Disney as he saw fit, which was to basically
Speaker 3: transform the company into a sprawling data aggregator, wherein he
Speaker 3: would track viewing habits of his customers at home on
Speaker 3: Disney Pluss, and he would track spending habits of his
Speaker 3: customers in the parks, you know, so as to better
Speaker 3: market discounts and spending opportunities to them. I think that
Speaker 3: Bob Byger saw a real risk that the vision that
Speaker 3: Bob Jaypeck had would devalue the Disney brand. He was
Speaker 3: also very cognizant of some of the riffs that were
Speaker 3: being created across Hollywood, certainly with Scarlett Jansen when Bob
Speaker 3: Japek disclosed her salary and a dispute over a film
Speaker 3: that she was involved with called Black Widow. Some of
Speaker 3: the fans had started to rebel against what they saw
Speaker 3: as being nickel and dimed in the parks. So it
Speaker 3: used to be that. Bob Bieger during his first tenure, certainly,
Speaker 3: and we've seen this as well in his second, values
Speaker 3: the works of creatives immensely, and when Bob Japek restructured
Speaker 3: the company, many critics of that restructuring argued that it
Speaker 3: actually removed power from creative executives, and so the people
Speaker 3: running those film and TV businesses felt as though they
Speaker 3: were completely disenfranchised, completely disempowered at a time when they
Speaker 3: were seeking to create new franchises for the business released
Speaker 3: new blockbusters both in theaters and on streaming.
Speaker 1: Thomas ultimately, though, it wasn't just the stylistic differences from
Speaker 1: the way things were done before that made life impossible
Speaker 1: for Bob Japek.
Speaker 3: Absolutely. I think there are a couple of, you know,
Speaker 3: moments in time that really point to a question of gosh,
Speaker 3: you know, what is happening at Disney. Certainly one of
Speaker 3: them is when Florida Governor run Desentis drafted a bill
Speaker 3: informally known as the Don't Say Gay Bill that would
Speaker 3: prevent teachers from discussing sexual orientation with students in Florida schools.
Speaker 3: A huge number of Disney employees really insisted that Disney
Speaker 3: come out and condemn that bill. Japek refused to condemn
Speaker 3: the bill initially, which led to wark counts, and then
Speaker 3: he publicly did condemn it.
Speaker 4: I called Governor desantiasis morning to express our disappointment and
Speaker 4: concern that if legislation becomes law, it could be used
Speaker 4: to unfairly target gay, lesbian, non binary and transgender kids
Speaker 4: and families.
Speaker 3: Which led to a high profile war with descentis that
Speaker 3: is ongoing to this day, both the company and the
Speaker 3: Governor that are embroad in illegal battle that shows no
Speaker 3: signs of winding down anytime soon. The second test of
Speaker 3: his leadership is his devotion to growing streaming subscribers at
Speaker 3: a time when Wall Street was really favoring that. It
Speaker 3: was favoring unbridled growth over profitability. I suppose the past
Speaker 3: year or so, a number of banks, in fact, all
Speaker 3: banks are much more focused on the profitable growth of
Speaker 3: those streaming services versus just attracting subscriber numbers. When Chapek
Speaker 3: disclosed back in November of last year a one point
Speaker 3: four to seven billion dollar loss in Disney's streaming service,
Speaker 3: it caught Wall Street entirely by surprise. It sent the
Speaker 3: shares down by the most in years and ultimately made
Speaker 3: Chapex's vision for the company untenable. After that enormous loss
Speaker 3: in the market value of the company, the board convened
Speaker 3: and decided that the company should really be run by
Speaker 3: somebody who would be able to return it to its
Speaker 3: past form. And I suppose the issue critics would say
Speaker 3: with the board is that none of the members really
Speaker 3: have experience in media entertainment, so the only person they
Speaker 3: could think to return to the company's helm was the Baiger.
Speaker 1: When we come back, Eiger returns triumphant, but the cheers
Speaker 1: don't last long. Thomas, I don't think anyone who was
Speaker 1: close to Eiger was at all surprised that he came
Speaker 1: back to the company.
Speaker 3: Then, I think that's a great way of putting it.
Speaker 3: I mean, certainly, not only because everybody got a heads
Speaker 3: up before he took the job back, but also because
Speaker 3: he hadn't been telling his friends and confidence and honestly
Speaker 3: some of Hollywod's most important figures. He feared that Jaypek
Speaker 3: was squandering the company's soul. He had suggested that Bob
Speaker 3: Chaypek was not the right fit for that role, and
Speaker 3: then the question became well, who would be the right
Speaker 3: fit for that role, and I think that Bobb Iger
Speaker 3: sincerely believes that he is the best possible fit for
Speaker 3: that role at this point in time.
Speaker 1: Thomas, What did Bob Chapek have to say about all
Speaker 1: of this?
Speaker 3: Bob Chaypek has declined to comment on every item in
Speaker 3: our story that concerns him, that concerns the company, that
Speaker 3: concerns Bob Iger's return, and I haven't seen him quote
Speaker 3: or interviewed anywhere else. So I think that since leaving
Speaker 3: Disney in November of last year, he has stayed very
Speaker 3: quiet on this whole state of affairs. When I Go
Speaker 3: returned to the company, he was very vocal that Shapek's
Speaker 3: silence on don't say gay was a matter of right
Speaker 3: or wrong. I think that that certainly ranklled Shapek to
Speaker 3: an enormous degree. I think that he felt as though
Speaker 3: he didn't need to be coached from the sidelines.
Speaker 1: Broadly. What was the reaction to the news that Eiger
Speaker 1: was returning to Disney.
Speaker 3: Well, it's interesting because while it wouldn't have been a
Speaker 3: surprise to his friends and confidants, who really had a
Speaker 3: sense that he wanted his job back, to outsiders, looking in.
Speaker 3: It really felt like an episode of succession. And I
Speaker 3: think there was enormous elation across the Disney employee base
Speaker 3: because at that point in time, there was no inkling
Speaker 3: of the fact that Barbiger would be carrying out seven
Speaker 3: thousand job cuts across the company. So when his return
Speaker 3: was first announced, which I think was in an email
Speaker 3: to employee at nine forty two pm in late November,
Speaker 3: it was a state of unbridled joy. I mean, I
Speaker 3: have heard from sources familiar that employees already at their
Speaker 3: desks in Asia leapt for joy. And so one indication
Speaker 3: that came very quickly after Eiger's return was that Disney
Speaker 3: has a private island that it owns in the Bahamas
Speaker 3: called Castawiki. A sign on the pump house there that
Speaker 3: had been painted with Bob Chapek Mastershipbuilder was quickly replaced
Speaker 3: and painted over by one with Bob Ayger's name.
Speaker 1: So Igery does return to the company and where did
Speaker 1: he find?
Speaker 3: I got returned to the company in November of last
Speaker 3: year and says that he found a company in much
Speaker 3: worse shape than he'd imagined it would be in I
Speaker 3: think that's difficult for a number of critics and observers
Speaker 3: to believe because he was only out of the business
Speaker 3: for eleven months, and also he has probably the most
Speaker 3: formed opinion of anybody on Disney's prowess in the industry
Speaker 3: and in the business world. Nonetheless, he says that he
Speaker 3: was really taken aback by the speed at which the
Speaker 3: linear TV business is collapsing. I think what's important to
Speaker 3: remember here is that those linear networks, which include ABC, ESPN, FX,
Speaker 3: free Form and National Geographic, before the pandemic, they contributed
Speaker 3: about a third of Disney's revenue and about half of
Speaker 3: its profit. He says that he's been surprised at the
Speaker 3: speed at which they're collapsing. And this is a pretty
Speaker 3: important point really in the widest state of Disney, because
Speaker 3: the wider state of Disney is the result of a
Speaker 3: huge deal that Bobaya carried out in the twilight of
Speaker 3: his tenure, which was the acquisition of twenty first century
Speaker 3: Fox for seventy one point three billion dollars. And with
Speaker 3: that acquisition he gained a number of networks, including FX
Speaker 3: and National Geographic, that are today contributing to that profit
Speaker 3: the line despite the deal only being four years old,
Speaker 3: and thus relatively fresh.
Speaker 1: So what is Eigernow doing to turn things around at
Speaker 1: the company?
Speaker 3: I think that Bob's priority, certainly in the short term,
Speaker 3: is appeasing Wall Street as best he can and convincing
Speaker 3: investors and analysts that the company can be the growth
Speaker 3: engine that it once was. He has pledged to cut
Speaker 3: five point five billion dollars out of the company's annual costs,
Speaker 3: and the company is set to exceed that. As I mentioned,
Speaker 3: he's moving forward with thousands of layoffs, and he has
Speaker 3: pledged to reinstate a modest dividend at the end of
Speaker 3: the fiscal year. So I think that in the short
Speaker 3: term that that is what he's trying to do. He's
Speaker 3: trying to gain the confidence of investors back, even though
Speaker 3: shares today are low than they were than when Chapek
Speaker 3: was ousted from the company. And he's also moved to
Speaker 3: restore authority to the creatives who had felt marginalize under
Speaker 3: Chapec's tenure. So he pretty much disbanded the structure that
Speaker 3: Chapepek had set up and reformulated the company around three
Speaker 3: pillars Disney Entertainment, which is run by its head of
Speaker 3: TV and its head of Film and they have combined
Speaker 3: oversight over streaming than Disney Parks, experiences and products. And
Speaker 3: he's also broken out ESPN, which is very interesting. We're
Speaker 3: going to be getting access to those financials for the
Speaker 3: first time next month.
Speaker 1: One other thing with ESPN that's been a little controversial
Speaker 1: is that they're getting into sports betting.
Speaker 3: Absolutely so, I think that something that Bob had been
Speaker 3: incredibly reluctant to consider during his first tenure was involving
Speaker 3: ESPN in any sorts of sports betting due to the
Speaker 3: reputational concerns and the reputational impact that it would have
Speaker 3: on the Disney brand. He's been much more amenable in
Speaker 3: recent years to quickly plug holes at a time when
Speaker 3: ESPN's linear business is certainly under a tremendous amount of pressure.
Speaker 1: And Thomas, you also right that one of Disney's fable divisions,
Speaker 1: its movie division, is also under a lodder pressure, and
Speaker 1: he's making moves to cut costs there too.
Speaker 3: The film division at Disney is one of the world's
Speaker 3: most successful historically, if not the most successful. For example,
Speaker 3: of the Guardians three film that grows close to a
Speaker 3: billion dollars.
Speaker 5: Someday, I'm gonna make great machines that fly, and me
Speaker 5: and my friends are gonna go flying together into the
Speaker 5: forever and beautiful sky.
Speaker 3: Lilah the second Avatar film from Jim Cameron that is
Speaker 3: now the third highest grossing film in history.
Speaker 2: So what does her heart be?
Speaker 5: Sound like?
Speaker 1: Mighty?
Speaker 3: There are spots of prowess and brightness within the film division,
Speaker 3: but the majority of Disney's big budget releases have really
Speaker 3: really struggled in recently. For example, light Year, a Toy
Speaker 3: Story prequel, which is very difficult to believe given the
Speaker 3: affinity that people have for that franchise and that people
Speaker 3: used to have for Pixar in general. A number of
Speaker 3: film goers are also increasingly fatigued by the number of
Speaker 3: superhero pictures and TV shows out there that relates specifically
Speaker 3: to the latest and manner wat film, and has led
Speaker 3: Eiger to say publicly that he's questioning the need for
Speaker 3: any second or third film based on any one character,
Speaker 3: and he's seeking to very much refresh the Marvel slate
Speaker 3: in order to fix some of those creative problems. He
Speaker 3: has delayed disney slate of films by as long as
Speaker 3: three years, pushing some films back all the way to
Speaker 3: twenty thirty one, so I think that you can see
Speaker 3: he's seeking to take action now in order to be
Speaker 3: at a much better place five years from now. Nonetheless,
Speaker 3: because that development, production, and release pirit is so long,
Speaker 3: you could certainly argue that some of those problems were
Speaker 3: festering before he even left the company the first time around.
Speaker 1: You've talked about how Eiger has been admired by creatives,
Speaker 1: people who actually make things instead of just executives and accountants,
Speaker 1: and yet during the recent Hollywood strike he came off
Speaker 1: as something almost like a villain.
Speaker 3: That's absolutely right. I mean, it's really interesting because he
Speaker 3: was long held as a champion for creators, and I
Speaker 3: think that the degree to which he empowered those creatives
Speaker 3: during his first tenure, and the degree to which he's
Speaker 3: now restructured the company since his comeback, handing authority back
Speaker 3: to creatives really speaks to that affinity that he has
Speaker 3: for the creative process and for the people leading it.
Speaker 3: He gave an interview to CNBC in which he said
Speaker 3: that the requests of some actors and writers, the very
Speaker 3: creative community he's always sought to empower, those requests were
Speaker 3: simply unrealistic.
Speaker 2: The expectation that they have that is just not realistic,
Speaker 2: and they are adding to a set of challenges that
Speaker 2: this business is already facing that is quite frankly, very disruptive.
Speaker 2: I know they're.
Speaker 3: Not number of people have since attacked him for those
Speaker 3: comments online. Certainly the head of the Actors' Union said
Speaker 3: that Barbiega was completely out of touch and in effect
Speaker 3: said that Disney should muzzle him and never allow him
Speaker 3: to speak on these issues again.
Speaker 6: There he is sitting in his designer clothes, just go
Speaker 6: up his private jet at the billionaire's camp, telling us
Speaker 6: where unrealistic when he's making seventy eight thousand dollars a day.
Speaker 1: That, of course is fran Dresher. She's the Actors' union
Speaker 1: president who led the TV and movie actors strike.
Speaker 3: He has been held up as the villain ever since
Speaker 3: those comments in the wider Hollywood creative community. But I
Speaker 3: think that he's trying his very best now to find
Speaker 3: resolution and seeking to get the creative community back to work,
Speaker 3: largely by offering much of what it was that they
Speaker 3: were seeking in the first place.
Speaker 1: After the break, Will there so called house of Mouse
Speaker 1: remain under one roof What does this company under Bob
Speaker 1: Eiger or his ultimate successor look like five years from now.
Speaker 3: Well, it's very interesting. I think that certainly what he
Speaker 3: said publicly that the linear networks may not be caught
Speaker 3: of the company's future really suggests that the likes of
Speaker 3: ABC FX, free Form, ESPN even will be somehow spun
Speaker 3: off and won't be included in Disney's future going forward.
Speaker 3: He's also said that he's seeking a partner for the
Speaker 3: ESPN business. You're looking at potentially selling a minority stake
Speaker 3: in that business or forming a joint venture in order
Speaker 3: to help its transition to streaming. So I think the
Speaker 3: interesting question, and this has been put to me by
Speaker 3: sources familiar with the matter, is whether Bob's end game
Speaker 3: is ultimately Disney up into two separate companies, one to
Speaker 3: house all of its intellectual properties, so it's films and
Speaker 3: TV shows and streaming assets, and the other to run
Speaker 3: its parks business. The thought of Disney splitting up its
Speaker 3: crown jeols is very difficult to process, but nonetheless it
Speaker 3: can be done quite efficiently if you establish a permanent
Speaker 3: licensing agreement between the two properties. And then the question
Speaker 3: becomes what happens to that content business? Do the two
Speaker 3: companies operate independently and publicly forevermore, or is the content
Speaker 3: piece of it acquired by a larger tech platform that
Speaker 3: is seeking to very rapidly grow its subscription business. Many
Speaker 3: sources that I've spoken to for this story have consistently
Speaker 3: insisted that Bob's endgame is selling that piece of the
Speaker 3: company to Apple. Bob served for a number of years,
Speaker 3: almost a decade on the board of Apple. He suggested
Speaker 3: himself in his memo that had his very good and
Speaker 3: successful friend Steve Jobs still been alive today, he definitely
Speaker 3: would have seen a possibility of merging Apple with Disney,
Speaker 3: or at the very least discussing the proposal.
Speaker 1: And you write in your story that Eiger may or
Speaker 1: may not have given sort of a tantalizing clue about
Speaker 1: his desire to see Apple in Disney in talks.
Speaker 3: So this has been the subject of much speculation among
Speaker 3: the Disney executives that I speak to. Physical copies of
Speaker 3: Steve Jobs's collection of Memoirs and Speeches that was published
Speaker 3: in April was distributed to about thirty thousand Disney employees.
Speaker 3: The inside joke within some executives of the company on
Speaker 3: the day that they received the gift was you know, gosh?
Speaker 3: Is he subtly hinting at talks that could be to
Speaker 3: come or talks that are happening now that would see
Speaker 3: Disney folded into Apple.
Speaker 1: What if anything, as Apple said about this idea of
Speaker 1: disee Disney and Apple becoming partners.
Speaker 3: Apple has never commented publicly on the prospects of an
Speaker 3: acquisition of Disney or any acquisition for that matter. Apple's
Speaker 3: business model is not at all predicated on a merger
Speaker 3: and acquisition strategy, which is very interesting. I mean, its
Speaker 3: largest acquisition to date has been beat to the tune
Speaker 3: of three billion dollars. This would really be a multiple
Speaker 3: of that, and I think that there would certainly be
Speaker 3: a number of cultural integration concerns that the two companies
Speaker 3: would have to address. But I think that much of
Speaker 3: this speculation is more emanating from Eiger's desire to see
Speaker 3: these two companies ultimately matched than it is from any
Speaker 3: strategy that Apple has communicated to either its investors or
Speaker 3: its followers in TAMAS.
Speaker 1: What is Bob Iger said about your reporting?
Speaker 3: Disney has declined to grant me an interview with Bob
Speaker 3: and it's not for lack of trying over the past
Speaker 3: several months in order to be fair to him and
Speaker 3: fed to the company, but he has only done a
Speaker 3: handful of interviews since his return.
Speaker 1: What happens next for Bob Iger and Disney.
Speaker 3: I think that certainly, when he came back, you know,
Speaker 3: both he and the board stated publicly that he had
Speaker 3: come back to both reset the company in the right
Speaker 3: direction and figure out Disney's perennial succession problem. He was
Speaker 3: given a contract of two years with Whin to fix
Speaker 3: those issues. Back in July, the board extended his contract
Speaker 3: all the way through twenty twenty six. Now, on that basis,
Speaker 3: I feel as though the conversation about succession is much
Speaker 3: less urgent today than it felt when he returned, and
Speaker 3: so it's impossible to know today truly who will be
Speaker 3: running Disney come twenty twenty six, or even the shape
Speaker 3: that Disney will have taken in twenty twenty six based
Speaker 3: on what ascid disposals might be available to him. What's
Speaker 3: interesting to consider is that Bob's run so far is
Speaker 3: truly diametrically opposed to his first tenure, and as a
Speaker 3: result of that, you have to imagine that he either
Speaker 3: must truly love the company and love the brand to
Speaker 3: put himself through this one more time, potentially at the
Speaker 3: expense of his legacy, or it's simply the case. As
Speaker 3: sources told me during his retirement that he can't imagine
Speaker 3: himself doing anything else than being the CEO of the
Speaker 3: Walt Disney Company.
Speaker 1: Thomas, this is just fascinating. Thanks so much for taking
Speaker 1: us inside Disney.
Speaker 3: Well, thank you so much for making the time speaks
Speaker 3: to me.
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to us here at The Big Take.
Speaker 1: It's a daily podcast from Bloomberg and iHeartRadio. For more
Speaker 1: shows from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or
Speaker 1: wherever you listen, and we'd love to hear from you.
Speaker 1: Email us questions or comments to Big Take at Bloomberg
Speaker 1: dot net. The supervising producer of The Big Take is
Speaker 1: Vicky Ergolina. Our senior producer is Catherine Fink. Our producers
Speaker 1: are Moberrow and Michael falleerro Hiel de Garcia is our engineer.
Speaker 1: Our original music was composed by Leo Sidrin. I'm west Kesova.
Speaker 1: We'll be back tomorrow with another Big Take.