I was reading an article from Fortune yesterday about Disney (NYSE: DIS) and Bob Iger. When I got to the end of it, I had the biggest feeling of deja vu that I had ever experienced. Yes, I had heard it all before.

You've heard it all before, too, I'm willing to bet. Here's the basic gist of the piece: Bob Iger knows what he's doing. He's a genius. He's a creative powerhouse, a business wunderkind, a man who has studied the Disney brand, knows it inside and out, and is capable of leveraging that brand over multiple platforms to create immense economic value for shareholders. You know the examples,: you've got your Jonas Brothers, your Miley Cyrus, your Zac Efron and the whole High School Musical gang migrating from Disney Channel to concert stages to DVD releases to the silver Iger was the prescient exec who realized that Pixar should be acquired (take that, Michael Eisner!).

Only problem is, none of this seems to be working. I base this statement on the fact that Disney really hasn't broken out of a really long-term range. I honestly have to wonder if shareholders will ever see Disney at better than $50 per share in their lifetime. I can't be the only one wondering this. That's why I get a little annoyed when I read puff pieces like this one on Iger. Is he really that much of a visionary? And is he doing anything that original? Did he invent the concept of synergy? As far as I know, he did not. One of the main points of the article centered on the major franchises that Disney has going for it. Just once, I'd love to hear about Disney's plans to take one of its existing Disney Channel properties that has not hit franchise status and turn it into the next Hannah Montana phenomenon. To be fair, there may have been a few articles here and there on the subject, but none have studied it to my satisfaction, certainly.

Former Disney (NYSE: DIS) chief Michael Eisner has canceled his Conversations with Michael Eisner show on CNBC to devote more time to his business ventures. Through his investment fund Tornante, Eisner has stakes in baseball card icon Topps, along with other start-up type ventures.

The ever prideful Eisner made it clear that he was canceling the show of his volition, but the statistics suggest that he wouldn't have lasted much longer. The show was averaging just 100,000 viewers per episode.

I don't think anyone will miss this one too much. My favorite episode -- for comedic reasons -- was the one where he interviewed former Home Depot (NYSE: HD) CEO Robert Nardelli and the two commiserated about how mean shareholders are to executives and how just because a stock does nothing for years while you're CEO, that doesn't mean that you shouldn't get a nine-figure severance package.

This one looks like a case of Mr. Eisner resigning to avoid being impeached -- just like he did at Disney.

Disney (NYSE: DIS) reported earnings earlier in the week, and once again, Bob Iger pleased Wall Street with the media company's latest results (for a look at the numbers and an options-trading idea for Disney, see Brent Archer's recent piece about the Mouse). They more than beat expectations, but as a Disney shareholder, I'm somewhat blase about the whole affair. Sure, Iger is being feted as a CEO wunderkind who has successfully steered the S.S. Disney into prosperous financial seas after taking the wheel over from failed captain, Michael Eisner. But, you know, I've owned Disney for ten years now, and I just don't like the price action of the stock -- it hasn't gone anywhere since the last split back in 1998. And, I can't say that the stock performed spectacularly this week post the earnings win.

I think Iger needs to start worrying about the stock. Yeah, he'd probably tell me something like "I'm busy leveraging the Disney brand to differentiate its content from other media concerns to drive increases in returns on capital and earnings per share -- the stock will take care of itself." Ha! The stock has done nothing. Iger should pay attention to the sad long-term range that symbol DIS has been in for what seems like an eternity. Here's my suggestion -- double the dividend, Bob. You can do it.

A look at the company's most recent 10Q (for the quarter ended March 2008) shows an interesting cash-flow story. Okay, cash from operations for the last six months came in at $3.3 billion. Capital expenditures and acquisitions together equaled $759 million. Dividends were $664 million. Add $759 million and $664 million together and you get $1.4 billion. I think there's a lot of breathing room there, Bob. In fact, if you brought dividends up to an even $2 billion, you still would have covered cap-ex and acquisition costs. And remember, Disney pays an annual dividend, so that $664 million was for the whole year! Imagine if you spread $2 billion out over four quarters. You could easily double it, Bob. In fact, a check of the most recent 10K shows that cash flow has been excellent the last few years. Disney, by my calculations, could have supported a much higher dividend back in 2005!

Ah, the writer's strike is coming to an end, as Douglas McIntyre discussed over the weekend. Media companies like Viacom (NYSE: VIA), CBS (NYSE: CBS) and News Corp. (NYSE: NWS) are probably happy to put this work stoppage behind them. And as a shareholder of Disney (NYSE: DIS) and the conglomerate behind NBC Universal, General Electric (NYSE: GE), I should be pleased.

Yeah, I suppose I am, for the most part, but there's a side to me that was really ticked off during this whole affair. To be completely blunt, I'm not sure that screenwriters have such a unique talent, and I'm not sure that they deserve residuals at all. Let's be honest -- when a studio puts up capital to generate a filmed entertainment product, the only entity taking on risk is the studio, plus any partner(s) that the studio has lined up to further distribute the risk. Writers aren't taking on any risk -- they're simply getting paid to do a job that a lot of people can do. You, sir or madam, reading this post, probably have the ability to write a script. I just don't buy the notion that studios have to shell out residual payments, above and beyond a flat fee, to screenwriters for their work. The Hollywood movie industry is risky enough as it is -- there's really no way that anyone from Michael Eisner to Bob Iger to Peter Guber to Harvey Weinstein, can predict what will be a hit and what won't. It just can't be done. Millions can be spent on the development of a script, only to see such a sum wasted when it doesn't translate to the big or small screen.

One of my favorite novelists is Robin Cook. He is the pioneer of the medical thriller genre – with perhaps his most well-known title being Coma. In all, he has written 25 NY Times bestsellers.

Now he is moving to the online world. That is, Cook is teaming up with Vuguru, which is Michael Eisner's digital movie studio. Cyber Group Animation is also involved.

Basically, there will be a prequel – on the web and mobile – for Cook's upcoming work, Foreign Body. The debut will be on May 27, 2008. And, yes, I certainly look forward to it.

To get some perspective on all this, I interviewed Chase Norlin, who is the CEO of Pixsy (an online video search company). According to him:

"Perhaps the most notable aspect of this deal is the continued progress of the 'made-for-Internet' programming model, which reflects the inherent cost efficiencies of content production for this medium and the potential for a significant web-wide distribution impact. Tying this into the launch of a new book is a unique Hollywood-esque tie-in that makes a lot of sense."

Tom Taulli is the author of various books, including The Complete M&A Handbook. He also operates DealProfiles.com.

So PetroChina (NYSE:PTR) went public in Shanghai to great fanfare and now the company has a market-cap of over $1 trillion. This gives the company a valuation greater than that of both General Electric (NYSE: GE) and Exxon Mobil (NYSE: XOM) combined. Not bad considering the company has revenues of just 1/4 that of Exxon. With all due respect to the growth of the Chinese economy, this is a bit ridiculous. Can we even believe the numbers they are reporting? We all talk about the lack of transparency in U.S. corporate earnings (see financial stocks of late); it's 100 times worse in China.

The Chinese stock market has had an amazing run, but what comes up must come down. With all the recent IPO's that have skyrocketed, it sure has the feel of NASDAQ 2000 all over again. Then people used to invest if the ticker symbol had 4 letters. Now people will throw money at anything that has to do with China. Irrational exuberance? You bet!

Will the communist government of China allow the stock market to fall before the 2008 Olympics in Beijing? Probably not, but a bubble has been created and investors should better be forewarned.

The bidding war between Michael Eisner's Torante and Upper Deck over Topps Company Inc (NASDAQ: TOPP) has come to an end (for the moment, anyway) but all is not peaceful in baseball-card-land. One of Topps' major shareholders, Mario Gabelli of Gamco Investors, Inc., announced yesterday his support for Torante's $9.75 per share, $385 million offer for the company, which the Topps board voted to accept before Upper Deck ramped up its offer.

Gabelli's support runs counter to the opposition of hedge funds Crescendo Partners and Pembridge Capital Management. Gabelli holds around a 7% share of the company, while Crescendo's is slightly smaller. But, unlike Gabelli, Pembridge and Crescendo hold board positions.

Three proxy firms have recommended nixing the deal, and Wedbush Morgan estimated in June that the appropriate value of the stock purchase should be in the $11.50- 12.00 range, points that are sure to impact today's shareholder vote on the Torante bid. I'm guessing we haven't heard the last of this controversy.

Three proxy advisers have now spoken out against the $9.75 private equity offer for Topps Company Inc (NASDAQ: TOPP). What an ugly mess this has become -- playing out much more like a soap opera than a day at the ballpark. Let's review:

• In March, Topps gets an offer to be acquired for $9.75 a share from an investment group led by Michael Eisner's Tornante Co. and Madison Dearborn Partners.
• Topps agrees to the offer.
• In May, Upper Deck steps to the plate with a $10.75 a share counter offer.
• Yesterday, Upper Deck withdraws its offer based on "flawed" negotiations from Topps.
• Topps files with the SEC today, saying Upper Deck misled the company with its offer.

Topps is now due to vote on the original offer from the investment group, but three proxy adviser firms -- Proxy Governance, Institutional Shareholder Services and Glass Lewis & Co, have all recommended rejecting the deal.

Wedbush Morgan said in June that they believe Topps shares are worth between $11.50 a $12.00. With that in mind, along with the proxy firms' lack of support, the chances of this deal getting done for under $10 a share are not looking realistic.

DealBook reports that a somewhat surprising cast of characters is arriving at the annual Allen & Co. Sun Valley, media investment conference.

Of all the investment conferences I know, due to its beautiful setting, leading players, and inevitable deal doing, this is the one I most regret not being able to attend. Regrettably, BloggingStocks is not sending me there. (Although to be fair, I never asked because I didn't know about it until today.) However, I can join everyone else in the world and follow along with those who are fortunate enough to attend.

Here's the list of some of the notable characters who have arrived so far:

The saga of the Topps (NASDAQ: TOPP) buyout has dragged on far longer than anyone could have predicted. When the trading card company agreed to be acquired by Madison Dearborn Partners and Michael Eisner's The Tornante Company for $9.75 per share, BloggingStocks' Tom Taulli wrote that Topps had hit a single. He wasn't the only one who was less than enthused about the buyout. Several dissident Topps directors voted against the deal, and Topps responded by barring them from the go-shop process. Then Upper Deck made an offer of $10.75, and Topps rejected it, saying that Upper Deck didn't have financing and that the proposal had antitrust concerns. Upper Deck responded with a hostile tender offer.

Given the size of the buyout -- less than $420 million -- the deal has generated a lot of buzz. Perhaps it's that so many of us covering the deal have nostalgic memories of collecting our baseball heroes. But the level of rhetoric and the amount of back and forth has also made the deal interesting.

It's hard to know exactly how this will end -- will Eisner & co. raise their bid? The matter has ended up in court with a judge chastising Eisner and Topps with good reason -- the company forgot to tell shareholders that Eisner had agreed to keep the much-maligned current management team in place after the buyout.

BusinessWeek's Ronald Glover takes an interesting look at Michael Eisner's role in this whole mess, referring to him as the "drive-by victim of what's fast becoming a shareholder circus".

At this point, I would say that Upper Deck looks like the favorite to go home with Topps. The shares are trading at $10.59, indicating that shareholders are confident it won't go for the original $9.75 offer. The small spread between the current price and Upper Deck's offer indicates that investors believe an even higher offer could emerge.

The BusinessWeek piece cites sources who say that Eisner is unlikely to raise his offer, but it might be a mistake to count him out just yet.

As for his show on CNBC, I think you probably can count that one out. He's no Larry King, although King was recently a guest on the show.

Last week, Topps Co. (NASDAQ: TOPPS) agreed to be bought out by Torante, former Disney chief Michael Eisner's private equity firm. The company agreed to be acquired for $9.75 cents per share, but hit $10 in trading today, indicating that many believe that the company may eventually fetch a higher price.

Here's where it gets interesting: Topps directors, including Timothy Brog and Arnaud Ajdler, voted against the deal, and Topps management has responded in an unusual way. The deal included a "go-shop" provision, which means that the company can solicit offers from other companies for a period of time. Topps has taken the unusual step of banning those two directors, plus one other, from any involvement in the go-shop process. The Wall Street Journal's Deal Journal raised and an eyebrow, and I share their sentiments:

The WSJ writer comments, "Why did the board agree to the deal in the first place if 30% of its membership thought it undervalues the company (at $9.75 a share, the bid is below the stock's 52-week high of $10 reached last month)? Why are the three ill-suited to manage the "go-shop" process for a new suitor? Seems to us that people who don't like the deal on the table have the most incentive to ferret out a better one."

After crapping out by placing a billion Walt Disney Co. (NYSE:DIS) dollars to win on the web site Go.com, Michael Eisner is returning to the internet with a much shorter-term vision; 90 seconds, to be exact.

Eisner's new investment company, Tornante Co., has created Vuguru Studio. The studio is partnering with Big Fantastic on their first project, a series of 80 minute-and-a-half episodes of a show titled "Prom Queen". The series will premiere April 2nd on YouTube, Veoh.com and Vuguru.com.

Prom Queen will be a serialized mystery revolving around preparations for a senior high school class prom. It seems to slot in-between the short, user-created content so popular on YouTube and the scripted world of television.

The Walt Disney Company's (NYSE: DIS) former CEO, Michael Eisner, has been busy lately. His personal investment fund, Tornante, has made a variety of investments in the digital media space. The latest venture: Vuguru.

Basically, it's a studio that produces high-quality content for Web and digital media. Each episode is 90 seconds. And, the business model is based on advertising revenues.

In fact, Vuguru already has a show, called "Prom Queen." There are 90 episodes and distribution will be on Veoh.com, YouTube.com, and ELLEgirl.com.

I had a chance to talk to Chase Norlin, who is the CEO of Pixsy, which is an online video site. According to him:

"This is a really great idea, despite the strange name. The web is revolutionary in that it reduces the cost of access and entry. To date, most efforts have been around CGM (consumer generated management), given the obvious opportunities opened up for consumer content creators. However, there hasn't been a ton of activity around producing quality media content at a fraction of the price it would cost to create a TV show. Smart companies like Heavy.com are getting success here, and I belive Vuguru's entry into this category is very promising if the economics are right."

Tom Taulli is the author of various books, including the Complete M&A Handbook and the EDGAR-Online Guide to Decoding Financial Statements.

You might not have traded the stock, but you certainly traded its products. Topps Co. (NASDAQ: TOPP), maker of baseball cards and Bazooka bubble gum, announced on March 6 that it has agreed to be acquired for $385.4 million by the Tornante Company, headed by former Disney CEO Michael Eisner. Private equity investment firm Madison Dearborn Partners will also join in the purchase if the deal is approved by Topps' shareholders.

And that's when the bubble burst. The deal calls for Topps shareholders to receive $9.75 per share in cash. The problem is that the stock is currently trading above that amount. Topps stock closed at $9.89 on March 8, down $.05. The stock has generally been trading right around $10 per share since the start of 2007. So why agree to sell at below market rate? That is precisely the question asked by Arnaud Ajdler, one of Topps' own board members. Investment firm owns 6.6% of Topps' shares. It, too, is opposing the bid, calling the offer an "undervaluation." Ajdler has also asked the bid to be rejected because it did not follow proper procedures.

Topps board of directors, minus Mr. Ajdler, is in favor of the deal and is recommending shareholders accept the offer. The deal is not dependent on securing any funding. Eisner's Tornante Company would like to have the deal close sometime during 3Q 2007. Topps has a 40 day window during which it intends to solicit additional offers. Perhaps Mr. Ajdler can put together a better offer for shareholders.

Today, the legendary baseball card company, Topps Co. Inc. (NYSE: TOPP), agreed to sell out for $9.75 per share or $385.4 million. The buyers include Madison Dearborn Partners and Michael Eisner's The Tornante Company.

Topps got its start in 1938. At first, the company sold chewing gum (such as Bazooka). After World War II, the company moved into other segments, such as trading cards.

However, over the past few years, the company's stock price has gone nowhere. As a result, there has been interest from a variety of activist hedge funds.

Despite the problems, Topps still has a stable of great brands and a strong distribution network. Perhaps Eisner can leverage this with his extensive entertainment contacts. He has also been active in dot-com investments – which could benefit Topps.

The buyout deal has a 40-day go-shop provision, which allows Topps to seek other buyers. But it looks like the valuation is fair.

Although, with the stock price trading at $9.95, investors are betting there may be a rival bid.

Tom Taulli is the author of various books, including the Complete M&A Handbook and the EDGAR-Online Guide to Decoding Financial Statements.