Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Disney To Slash Miramax Films Staff To 20, Reduce Releases To 3 A Year [70% Staff Reduction]
LATimes ^ | October 02nd 2009

Posted on 10/02/2009 9:50:39 PM PDT by Steelfish

Disney To Slash Miramax Films Staff To 20, Reduce Releases To 3 A Year

By Claudia Eller October 3, 2009

Walt Disney Co., looking to rein in costs at its Hollywood studio as it focuses on mainstream movies, is slashing staff by 70% at its Miramax Films specialty label and is substantially reducing the number of pictures it releases.

The retrenchment, which has been foreshadowed in Disney Chief Executive Robert Iger's strategy to emphasize family and "branded" films, comes quickly on the heels of the recent ouster of former Disney Studios Chairman Dick Cook. The former movie chief left abruptly last month under pressure from Iger, who had been unhappy with the studio's direction and performance.

Under the plan disclosed after Disney's board meeting Friday, Miramax is being forced to eliminate 50 of the division's 70 jobs and cut in half the number of films it releases to just three a year. The label's marketing, distribution and administrative functions, which had operated independently, will be folded into the parent studio in Burbank. The move becomes effective in January.

Daniel Battsek, president of Miramax, will continue to oversee the label, but with a drastically reduced staff: The New York-based company, which at its peak four years ago had more than 500 employees and was once the premier distributor of independent films, will now have about 20.

"This restructuring maximizes operating efficiencies and provides significant cost savings while allowing Miramax to focus on its greatest strength: the creation of high-quality entertainment," Walt Disney Studios President Alan Bergman said in a statement.

(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: disney; hollywood; layoffs; miramax
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last

1 posted on 10/02/2009 9:50:39 PM PDT by Steelfish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Steelfish
This restructuring maximizes operating efficiencies and provides significant cost savings while allowing Miramax to focus on its greatest strength

This guy sounds right out of Dilbert. He could be any executive from any company selling anything. I hate corporate executives. The exception to that rule is when they also happen to be the founder of the company. Founders are always at least interesting and genuine. The rest are just BS suits.

2 posted on 10/02/2009 9:52:49 PM PDT by Huck ("He that lives on hope will die fasting"- Ben Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanac)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Huck

You hit the nail on the head there!


3 posted on 10/02/2009 10:00:59 PM PDT by divine_moment_of_facts (“Cap and Trade bill tells us how to live.. Health Care bill tells us how to die.” Bauer and Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Huck

Couldn’t agree more.. it’s just a canned “bla bla bla” way of saying “I fired your asses, and got a bonus for it! suckers”


4 posted on 10/02/2009 10:05:49 PM PDT by kamikaze2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: divine_moment_of_facts; Huck
Any executive announcing massive cuts should be summarily FIRED, together with the level of management immediately below them, for gross incompetence.

"That's NOT RIGHT," the chorus shills, "you can't attract or retain qualified candidates that way! And the cuts are an economic necessity, due to the external environment!"

Ah, right. The executives were SUPPOSED to have EARNED that large salary and the perks by being "proactive" and "visionary" -- which by definition should have included foreseeing the risks and positioning the company to rise above them.

You know, like they're always telling fired employees to do in management-suck-up propaganda like "Who Moved My Cheese".

And if you're going to allow the external environment to act as a factor in pay -- how about LOWERING the pay when times are good, since it doesn't take a genius to make money when the economy is booming...

Cheers!

5 posted on 10/02/2009 10:06:20 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Family films have always made more money, bucket loads, from what I’ve read.


6 posted on 10/02/2009 10:08:23 PM PDT by catbertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: kamikaze2000

Yup. Total boilerplate, probably cut and pasted by his admin.


7 posted on 10/02/2009 10:11:02 PM PDT by Huck ("He that lives on hope will die fasting"- Ben Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanac)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Bet 100% of these people voted Obama. :)


8 posted on 10/02/2009 10:51:36 PM PDT by Tzimisce (No thanks. We have enough government already. - The Tick)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tzimisce

Yes- I’d love to see a 100% reduction in staff.


9 posted on 10/02/2009 10:52:28 PM PDT by Steelfish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

How is that 100% massive support for Obama and the insane democrat party working out for you Hollywood guys?


10 posted on 10/02/2009 10:54:37 PM PDT by FormerACLUmember (When the past no longer illuminates the future, the spirit walks in darkness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Tears by me out the heart.


11 posted on 10/02/2009 10:55:31 PM PDT by YHAOS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Miramax put out one good film a year and 6 pieces of manure of the most gutter dwelling moral decay it could muster.

In their favor they were good to put out lots of period pieces that the wife and I fancy (time frame speaking). But sometimes we just had to cut their movies off and send it back unviewed because it was just &%#*~(see first paragraph for description)


12 posted on 10/02/2009 10:59:13 PM PDT by LowOiL (Tagline: Optional, printed after your name on post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish
The democrat party created Great Depression II bites close ally Hollywood in the butt. And the pain is just beginning for Hollywood (and all of us).


13 posted on 10/02/2009 11:00:19 PM PDT by FormerACLUmember (When the past no longer illuminates the future, the spirit walks in darkness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abb
Get out your crying towel and then check out this thread.
14 posted on 10/02/2009 11:06:07 PM PDT by Zakeet (Central Park Zoo vs. White House -- one has African Lion -- other has lying African)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: catbertz

That is because our country is a center-RIGHT one and not the nirvana of the loony left. No one in his or her right mind would take their children to a remake of Myra Breckinridge or something else this studio would like to rub our noses in. Mainstream America flocks to family films just as the WWII generation flocked to films to get their minds OFF what was happening at the time.


15 posted on 10/02/2009 11:21:46 PM PDT by Semperfiwife (Where is Patrick Henry when we need him most? Liberty or Death!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Huck
Founders are always at least interesting and genuine.

And generally enthused about what they make/do. Matthias Baldwin and Samuel Colt may have been characters, but they were devoted to the product as well as the profits. Both men had their Vauclains and Roots that continued to give a damn once the founders slipped their mortal coils, and the firms remained in good hands. At some point, the finance and/or legal people who care little for the product itself take over or are relied on too heavily, and the company either dies or morphs into something that I suspect the original proprietors would not find lovable (whether their descendants still benefitted or not).

I still recall the first time I heard an executive say, "I don't have to know what the company makes, because I know how to run people." He eventually managed to pick up a bit about the former, but not in time to conceal the fact that his assessment of the latter was somewhat overstated. He and his ilk killed that particular golden goose, and they went off to other pastures that still had enough green to attract overgrazers.

Mr. niteowl77

16 posted on 10/02/2009 11:23:38 PM PDT by niteowl77 (You wanted him, and now you have got him. I say, "Good day to you," America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Sorry Hollywood - our movie budget now goes to preparing our household for “the World Obama Made”.


17 posted on 10/03/2009 12:28:26 AM PDT by The Duke ("Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Democrat Party?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Actually this is a smart move on their part.

Anyone who has a firing synapse can see that Hollywood is dying. When times were fat for them the gushers of money covered up alot of bad decision making. Now the money is drying up on all fronts and they are discovering that they are indeed a business and the goal of business is to make money.

Disney knows that there still is an audience out there for movies and in order to make money they need to get us “bitter Klingons” to go see them. I think it is beginning to sink into their heads that they will not make money by insulting and berating half of their potential audience.


18 posted on 10/03/2009 12:51:05 AM PDT by Nahanni
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

time for a cash for cartoons bailout?


19 posted on 10/03/2009 1:24:04 AM PDT by TexasFreeper2009 (Obama lied, the economy died)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LowOiL
But sometimes we just had to cut their movies off and send it back unviewed because it was just &%#*~(see first paragraph for description)

Well there's a reason it's called Hollyweird, so I'm happy to see that not everybody here is deeply saddened by the cutbacks at Miramax.

Sheeeeesh.... Disney hasn't made a good family-oriented film since Walt passed away...

20 posted on 10/03/2009 4:05:38 AM PDT by Willie Green (Go Pat Go!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson