2 of 3

But we also realize that we have probably the only brand name in the business that means something to the consumer. When you say "Disney," it means something. So, let's stay true to that brand, but let's make broad-based entertainment that's not just for young kids. We have opened our horizons to say that we can make movies for teenagers and young adults—and sometimes we hit it out of the park, like with Enchanted, where it's appropriate for little ones, mom, dad, grandma, and grandpa. Sometimes it all comes together and it's cross-generational, but you can't make every movie like that.

Do the three criteria apply to Touchstone movies, or does anything go?

Zoradi: Not anything goes with Touchstone. I don't think you will see pure exploitation movies, but Touchstone is more adult-oriented. The Disney brand will only make G, PG, and occasionally PG-13 movies, but no R-rated movies. Touchstone is a little broader and will include R-rated movies. But we aren't going to make very many Touchstone movies. Wild Hogs and Dan in Real Life are our most recent Touchstone movies, and Wild Hogs 2 is in development.

When Vice Chairman Roy Disney [Walt's nephew] resigned in 2003, he said that then CEO Michael Eisner had turned Disney into "a rapacious, soul-less" company. Some of the Eisner years were marked by mistrust from the public, and ultimately the shareholders called for his ouster. What can you say about the Eisner years?

Zoradi: I was there when Michael Eisner came [in 1984] and when he left [in 2005]. Michael did a lot of great things for the Walt Disney Company. We were a relatively small company when he came in. He re-invigorated the theme parks both domestically and around the world. He re-invigorated the movie studio. He brought in an energy level. CEOs sometimes get credit for things they don't necessarily deserve, and they sometimes get blamed for things they weren't necessarily responsible for.

I think Michael was very transformational in a positive way for the Disney Company. I personally do not know the ins and outs of what took place in the boardroom and why he chose to leave. But in all the years Michael Eisner ran the company, I never once felt any pressure other than to do the right thing relative to our morals and ethics. He led from an aggressive business position, but from a position of moral and ethical strength. At the end of the day, I think Michael Eisner was very good for the Disney Company. Clearly he had some issues, but clearly he was a good CEO.

Why do you think so many shareholders wanted a change at the top?

Zoradi: I have no idea. For me to speculate on what stockholders thought, well, I just don't think there is any benefit in that, because I just don't know.

Many Christians boycotted Disney for years, most notably led by the American Family Association [which ended in 2005]. What is your understanding of the reason for those boycotts?

Zoradi: I was not directly involved in dealing with the people who were leading the boycott. All I can tell you is what I read in the paper—about us offering medical benefits to same-sex couples and allowing a Gay Day at the theme parks. All I would say to either of those issues is that maybe there were other things you didn't read in the paper.

But what do you think of those issues—the same-sex benefits and Gay Day?

Zoradi: I would say the Walt Disney Company was acting like nearly any other major corporation at the time, in a benevolent way, in offering medical benefits. So I don't take issue with that. With the Gay Days, the company was allowing, not encouraging, those things at our theme parks. I don't take issue with that either. Now, I am speaking from a personal viewpoint not a company viewpoint. But from a personal viewpoint, those things are not bad things.

next page... |  2 of 3