These types of conversation always fascinate me. I think fans should always remember that hindsight is 20/20.
Disney fans herald Eisner as a hero nowadays (saving the company from corporate raiders, massively expanding WDW's offerings, galvanizing the studio, etc...) but often forget he was loathed at the time, especially for the last 5 or so years of his tenure. We quickly forget about the mishaps with
Disneyland Paris, DCA, Pixar/WDAS, and others, because we look at the larger picture ten years after his departure, and see those as ultimately correctable mistakes for the most part (I am and always have been a huge Eisner fan btw).
We now look at someone like Iger with some disdain because of his "caretaker" attitude towards the Disney Parks, specifically WDW. In fact, the term "mature resort" has become a hallmark around the hallways in Burbank these days. His focus is in other places, and the reasons for that probably won't become evident until after he's out the door. I theorize that he'll be looked at as someone who re-galvanized WDAS, shored up domestic park attendance and expansion, and modernized the Disney brand by expanding it to include franchises like Marvel and Star War, which they are making very relevant again.
Of course, this becomes a bit murkier when you go down to the WDP&R level. With Bob Chapek, yes, you have someone who comes from a merchandise background, so of course, he's going to be motivated to look for ways to increase guest spending, but he's also bringing a long-term vision (something that people often forget is critical in retail) to the parks, something I think Staggs was trying to do. He brings a new, fresh attitude and perspective to the parks I think too. If you like Soarin' Around the World, thank him. They want to wait a few years before bringing to the States, but his line of thinking (using a retail comparison of course) was "if I have a popular toy in one store, do I wait a few years to bring it to other stores?" No, of course not. You follow guest demand. The same could be said for Star Wars Land. Bob was the one pushing for something to be done ASAP, because if you have a really popular franchise, you don't want to wait any longer than you have to sell tie-ins for it (i.e. merch, theme parks, etc...). While 2019 still doesn't qualify as "ASAP" in my opinion, I firmly believe that, had it not been for him and some other execs, this would have been delayed to WDW's 50th. He also pushed for the added Star Wars experiences to DHS in an effort to expand that brand in that park ASAP. The same logic could be applied to the ToT overlay in DCA.
Am I trying to tell you the guy's perfect? Not at all. I'm not happy with many of the cuts at WDW and fewer new attraction. But you've got to understand that Disney and the parks aren't run by an autocrat. Every decision, cut, expenditure, and problem is run by many, many people, many of which are in executive positions. And not every executive decision regarding WDW is run by Chapeck. The management at WDW has largely been behind some of the latest cuts and premium pricing (outside of the park ticket increases). Now, some of those cuts are surely being approved by him, and the need for them does come from a climate that is set at the top by Chapek, but it is worth noting that many at Team Disney Orlando are feeling a bit of pressure right now from Chapek particularly to up their service game. He has been apparently quite vocal about his admiration for the way DL, TDL, and
DCL are being run (i.e. making lots of money, not having to make
as many cuts, providing top-notch service) and his desire to see that return to WDW. Talking about is one thing though, but doing it is another thing entirely.
So, ultimately, I think it's hard to characterize an exec as "good" or "bad" or "greedy," despite what we all think. These decisions and cuts are complicated, and while I'm not in love with what has come about because of Chapek, I also look at the other side of the coin as well.