Surely, this isn't a minute fraction of the argument against this undeniably hostile takeover, but just to put things initially in perspective, let's analyze your reasons for it being cool (knowing well, of course, that the first one was in jest):
(1) collisions will officially be my "Co-Worker". Joke, I hope to all things (un)holy...
(2) My stock options for Comcast kicked in at somewhere around $30 a share... I'm sure that owning Disney would make it jump at least a little bit, right?
Of course. Comcast could benefit greatly, but please tell me where Disney's benefit would come from, taking in mind the recent start of Disney's financial recovery? Source hunt, research, and you'll find evidence of this.
But let's say Comcast fails (as many many market analysts are predicting): What lies in store for Disney? Or let's think of it this way: Disney as a solitary, personal, creatively-driven company, absorbed into a massive, soulless conglomerate. I'm not about to crack open champagne over the current state of affairs in the company, but NO GOOD will come out of a loss of independence... reform needs to come from within. Why?
Internal reform will bring about a return to financial stability, with adherence to the principles and values that the company represents as is. Think of it this way: People are deriding Eisner for straying from the Disney philosophy, and he is a part of the company... do you really think that it is profitable for Comcast to adhere to this philosophy? External "white knights" will support the company's philosophy as long as it is profitable.
(3) There would finally be some competition for the "AOL/Time/Warner" behemoth, giving people at least *two* choices for their entertainment instead of just the one.
So what is Disney now, chopped liver? This is totally irrelevant to the state of affairs... Disney is an entity that is ingrained in American culture, and is a known company around the world. It has total character, and undeniable appeal. The four parks in Walt Disney World occupy the top four spots in terms of amusement park attendence. Why the hell would they need Comcast's help in terms of distribution?
no subject
(1) collisions will officially be my "Co-Worker".
Joke, I hope to all things (un)holy...
(2) My stock options for Comcast kicked in at somewhere around $30 a share... I'm sure that owning Disney would make it jump at least a little bit, right?
Of course. Comcast could benefit greatly, but please tell me where Disney's benefit would come from, taking in mind the recent start of Disney's financial recovery? Source hunt, research, and you'll find evidence of this.
But let's say Comcast fails (as many many market analysts are predicting): What lies in store for Disney? Or let's think of it this way: Disney as a solitary, personal, creatively-driven company, absorbed into a massive, soulless conglomerate. I'm not about to crack open champagne over the current state of affairs in the company, but NO GOOD will come out of a loss of independence... reform needs to come from within. Why?
Internal reform will bring about a return to financial stability, with adherence to the principles and values that the company represents as is. Think of it this way: People are deriding Eisner for straying from the Disney philosophy, and he is a part of the company... do you really think that it is profitable for Comcast to adhere to this philosophy? External "white knights" will support the company's philosophy as long as it is profitable.
(3) There would finally be some competition for the "AOL/Time/Warner" behemoth, giving people at least *two* choices for their entertainment instead of just the one.
So what is Disney now, chopped liver? This is totally irrelevant to the state of affairs... Disney is an entity that is ingrained in American culture, and is a known company around the world. It has total character, and undeniable appeal. The four parks in Walt Disney World occupy the top four spots in terms of amusement park attendence. Why the hell would they need Comcast's help in terms of distribution?
- Adam