PDA

View Full Version : Any new family hotels?


andrychowski
05-12-2007, 02:11 PM
Anyone know of any Disney plans for reasonably priced hotels for families of 6? We cannot afford the Disney Vacation resorts or the high-end resorts so we are forced to stay off-site. Is this anything Disney will look into in the future? It seems this is a place they are losing money to the outside resorts (which are growing quickly).

MasterShake
05-12-2007, 02:26 PM
I haven't heard anything, but Disney currently has Suites available at All Star Music that are supposed to sleep up to six, plus a young child. They run $179 - $265 depending on the time of year you go. Also you can get two value resort rooms that are connected by a door for $164 - $240 a night.


I think it's approximately $140+ on average to get a single hotel room that accommodates 6 people off site. Disney hotels will always cost more then off site, unless you get a promotion deal. I think the per person price is probably very close to what a family of 4 pays per person.

andrychowski
05-12-2007, 03:57 PM
Yes, I have read about the new suites at the All Star resorts, but they require 2 people being on fold-out ottomans or chairs and they have limited kitchen facilities. We almost did the 2 rooms (we were traveling with my parents this year), but decided 2 rooms wasn't big enough for 4 kids (8yrs - 22mos). This May we stayed at Windsor Hills Resort. It was 1 miles from park. We got there faster than we could travel to our Fort Wilderness trailer we stayed in 3 1/2 years ago. We had a full kitchen, 3 bedrooms, 3 baths and a private pool (12' x 12' and 5' deep). This resort also has a beautiful clubhouse pool with 2-story waterslide. We paid $89 a night for all of this. You can also pay $69 a night for a 3 bedroom condo (only it doesn't have private pool). I know some will argue you aren't on-site, no extra magic hours, etc. But, for those of us who are on a very tight budget, we will stay offsite everytime. I just think Disney will get hit to some extent with larger families staying offsite instead of in bigger resorts or renting 2 rooms.

EUROPACL
05-12-2007, 04:00 PM
Don't look for hotel rooms that sleep 6 you will always pay too much. You should look at places like Cypress Pointe Grand Villas Two Bedroom Condos go for around 100 a night during May. Some other places include....Blue Tree Resort or Regal Palms Resort. Many of these places are located near the Dowtown Diney entrance. That is unless you have your heart set on staying "onsite" then its a Motel 6 with a giant football or hockey stick which will even come near your price range.

MasterShake
05-12-2007, 04:22 PM
Don't look for hotel rooms that sleep 6 you will always pay too much. You should look at places like Cypress Pointe Grand Villas Two Bedroom Condos go for around 100 a night during May. Some other places include....Blue Tree Resort or Regal Palms Resort. Many of these places are located near the Dowtown Diney entrance. That is unless you have your heart set on staying "onsite" then its a Motel 6 with a giant football or hockey stick which will even come near your price range.

The rooms at the value resorts do have a Motel 6 quality about them, but to be fair you do get more then just an oversized hockey stick.

Most of the values have interesting lobbies, food courts, arcade, and gift shops (if you like that sort of thing). A lot of poeple like the over sized decorations, while some think of them as tacky.

Of course if your staying on site at Disney you get Magical Express, Extra Magic Hours, and free shuttle service (also offered by some offsite hotels) to the parks.

I stayed at Pop Century last year and overall my expierance was good. Last year we also tried the Dinning Plan (only available if you stay on site) and really enjoyed it.

EUROPACL
05-12-2007, 04:38 PM
The rooms at the value resorts do have a Motel 6 quality about them, but to be fair you do get more then just an oversized hockey stick.

Most of the values have interesting lobbies, food courts, arcade, and gift shops (if you like that sort of thing). A lot of poeple like the over sized decorations, while some think of them as tacky.

Of course if your staying on site at Disney you get Magical Express, Extra Magic Hours, and free shuttle service (also offered by some offsite hotels) to the parks.

I stayed at Pop Century last year and overall my expierance was good. Last year we also tried the Dinning Plan (only available if you stay on site) and really enjoyed it.

Yes if over paying for an interesting lobby is what you feel you need to do then by all means go for it. If another place to buy 8.00 chicken strips is really what your looking for then the "Value Resorts" are your ticket. If over paying for a motel 6 room is what you need in order to be 20 yards closer to another Diney Gift shop then go for it...which I hear are really hard to find anywhere on site.

Then of course there is the lovely Extra Magick Hours...wait do customers really want those things a couple of years ago they told us that we didn't want them any more. I get confused on what I'm supposed to like unless Disney tells me. Last time I took part in one of those extra magic hours it was more like an extra 20 minutes.

Yes You do get a "free" bus ride to the parks if you stay at one of the Disney 6 motels....ahhh...the smell..the crowd...the standing up without a seat back and forth between the Motel 6 and magick kingdom...its like heaven on earth.

MasterShake
05-12-2007, 10:21 PM
:confused3 Yes if over paying for an interesting lobby is what you feel you need to do then by all means go for it. If another place to buy 8.00 chicken strips is really what your looking for then the "Value Resorts" are your ticket. If over paying for a motel 6 room is what you need in order to be 20 yards closer to another Diney Gift shop then go for it...which I hear are really hard to find anywhere on site.

Then of course there is the lovely Extra Magick Hours...wait do customers really want those things a couple of years ago they told us that we didn't want them any more. I get confused on what I'm supposed to like unless Disney tells me. Last time I took part in one of those extra magic hours it was more like an extra 20 minutes.

Yes You do get a "free" bus ride to the parks if you stay at one of the Disney 6 motels....ahhh...the smell..the crowd...the standing up without a seat back and forth between the Motel 6 and magick kingdom...its like heaven on earth.

Wow, did you take your meds today? I was just offering some of the benefits to staying on sight. It does cost more and the rooms are not the nicest. However, I disagree that the other amenities are worthless.

Most of the people I have seen/met on the buses do not smell, most are just normal everyday people that take showers.

On my last trip I rode the bus every day and only on two occasions was the bus so crowded that anyone had to stand up.

Extra magic hours lasts 1-3 hours, so the twenty minute thing might be an exaggeration.

You seem to have a real burning hatred for those damn chicken nuggets. I wonder if you freak out when you see them on the menu of most major restaurant chains.... :confused3

EUROPACL
05-13-2007, 07:35 AM
:confused3

Wow, did you take your meds today? I was just offering some of the benefits to staying on sight. It does cost more and the rooms are not the nicest. However, I disagree that the other amenities are worthless.



Ahh so if someone does not see the benfit of overpaying then they are off there meds?


Most of the people I have seen/met on the buses do not smell, most are just normal everyday people that take showers.


Yes after a long hot day in the parks everybody takes a shower before getting back on the bus.


On my last trip I rode the bus every day and only on two occasions was the bus so crowded that anyone had to stand up.

Your the lucky one. I've never been on a Disney bus where people weren't standing.


Extra magic hours lasts 1-3 hours, so the twenty minute thing might be an exaggeration.


YMMV


You seem to have a real burning hatred for those damn chicken nuggets. I wonder if you freak out when you see them on the menu of most major restaurant chains.... :confused3

Ok...how about another place to get the same 6.00 hamburger everywhere else at Disney. How about the same 3.00 coke. See here is where you are confused about Disney...its not a chain ....at least that is not what it was supposed to be. Now it is and you easly except it as such. Some of us miss the days when Disney offered something unique...not the chain.

rodkenrich
05-13-2007, 08:59 AM
The rooms at the value resorts do have a Motel 6 quality about them, but to be fair you do get more then just an oversized hockey stick.

Most of the values have interesting lobbies, food courts, arcade, and gift shops (if you like that sort of thing). A lot of poeple like the over sized decorations, while some think of them as tacky.

Of course if your staying on site at Disney you get Magical Express, Extra Magic Hours, and free shuttle service (also offered by some offsite hotels) to the parks.

I stayed at Pop Century last year and overall my expierance was good. Last year we also tried the Dinning Plan (only available if you stay on site) and really enjoyed it.
The rooms at Disney's All-Stars do not nearly come close to any Motel 6. Motel 6 properties are ridiculoulsy awlful by any standards.

iamalittlegoofy
05-13-2007, 09:02 PM
Of course Euro is right, as attested by the multiple thousands of ignorant guest that love staying at Disney values every year. If only everyone could be as enlightened as Euro, what a great world we could live in.

EUROPACL
05-14-2007, 11:02 AM
Of course Euro is right, as attested by the multiple thousands of ignorant guest that love staying at Disney values every year. If only everyone could be as enlightened as Euro, what a great world we could live in.


Sort of the way that McDonalds must be the best Hamburger place on earth becuase of the billions they sell each year...right?

iamalittlegoofy
05-14-2007, 12:11 PM
Exactly where did I (or anyone on this thread) say that the values were the "best". My only point is that it is worth it to those who like to stay there. It is successful from both the user and owner's point of view. Just like those McDonald's hamburgers.

YoHo
05-14-2007, 12:23 PM
1: The Disney Hamburger is aweful at any price. People who would eat that are incapable of judging quality. McDonalds is better.

2: Motel 6 are not any worse then the values... Depending on which motel 6 you're at. Since it's a franchise, your quality will very. With Disney, your quality is consistant...ly low.

EUROPACL
05-14-2007, 12:35 PM
Exactly where did I (or anyone on this thread) say that the values were the "best". My only point is that it is worth it to those who like to stay there. It is successful from both the user and owner's point of view. Just like those McDonald's hamburgers.

Yes just like millions of people stay at a Motel 6 every day. Are they the best Hotel out there..... or the best they can afford? The "value resorts" did nothing but allow Disney to raise the prices of their other on site Hotels and make it easier for Disney to turn their Hotels into a caste system. I'm sure there are plenty of people that are happy staying at Pop Century...just as there are plenty of people that are happy to eat McDonalds Hamburgers....there is nothing wrong with stepping back and looking at the quality or the real value of either of those things.

iamalittlegoofy
05-14-2007, 12:38 PM
1: The Disney Hamburger is aweful at any price. People who would eat that are incapable of judging quality. McDonalds is better.

Opinion. Dont see how yours is any better than anyone elses.

2: Motel 6 are not any worse then the values... Depending on which motel 6 you're at. Since it's a franchise, your quality will very. With Disney, your quality is consistant...ly low.

See above. And..... dont stay there. There are thousands of people who are perfectly content to stay there, despite your EXPERT opinion.

iamalittlegoofy
05-14-2007, 12:45 PM
Yes just like millions of people stay at a Motel 6 every day. Are they the best Hotel out there..... or the best they can afford? The "value resorts" did nothing but allow Disney to raise the prices of their other on site Hotels and make it easier for Disney to turn their Hotels into a caste system.

And you have an issue with Disney providing affordable rooms for those on a tighter budget?

I'm sure there are plenty of people that are happy staying at Pop Century...just as there are plenty of people that are happy to eat McDonalds Hamburgers....there is nothing wrong with stepping back and looking at the quality or the real value of either of those things.

Quality is based on opinion, when comparing like products. When comparing vastly different products, quality is often related to affordability. I dont see your point.

EUROPACL
05-14-2007, 12:52 PM
And you have an issue with Disney providing affordable rooms for those on a tighter budget?



Don't you see that Disney could have and has in the past offered a vastly better product for the same value. Little by little over the years they picked away at was considered quality and the value of it....until we get to this point people jumping up and down to stay at Pop Century for 109 bucks a night and thinking they are getting value or quality....when in fact its little more then a 49.00 dollar a night Motel 6 room with a giant Yo-Yo out front.

iamalittlegoofy
05-14-2007, 01:00 PM
Don't you see that Disney could have and has in the past offered a vastly better product for the same value.

That my friend is capitalism. Disney is maximizing profits, they are a business, right. No is being forced to stay there.

people jumping up and down to stay at Pop Century for 109 bucks a night and thinking they are getting value or quality

People are smart enough to know exactly what they are getting.

when in fact its little more then a 49.00 dollar a night Motel 6 room with a giant Yo-Yo out front.

Wrong. At motel 6 I dont get EMH, the ease of transportation, or that "Disney Feeling". Now it is up to each individual if those items are "worth" the added cost of the room.

paulh
05-14-2007, 01:10 PM
i`ll stay at pop and a delux in a 2 week vacation.Hell doing that this august
Nowt wrong with a value IMHO
Paulh

EUROPACL
05-14-2007, 01:23 PM
That my friend is capitalism. Disney is maximizing profits, they are a business, right. No is being forced to stay there.


Not forced...but tricked..goated..and pushed down from somethnig that would not have been done in the past.



People are smart enough to know exactly what they are getting.

Based on what you've said I don't think so in this case.



Wrong. At motel 6 I dont get EMH, the ease of transportation, or that "Disney Feeling". Now it is up to each individual if those items are "worth" the added cost of the room.

Yeah I've covered this...it really does come down to what that is worth to you. Outside of that "Disney feeling" you know you can get a much better Hotel room...not Motel for a cheaper price with those same perks of Extra Magical Minutes and crowded buses. But if a Giant Yo-Yo is what scream Disney for you and you willing to pay 60.00 bucks a night for it...then go for it.

I wonder how Disney being a Biz and all was able to operate all of those years giving better value and service at better Hotels (not motels) though?

raidermatt
05-14-2007, 01:31 PM
And you have an issue with Disney providing affordable rooms for those on a tighter budget?


My issue is with the way in which they have provided them.

Anyone know of any Disney plans for reasonably priced hotels for families of 6? We cannot afford the Disney Vacation resorts or the high-end resorts so we are forced to stay off-site. Is this anything Disney will look into in the future? It seems this is a place they are losing money to the outside resorts (which are growing quickly).
There is a rumor that the remainder of Pop Century will be built as suites, but it is just a rumor. Also, if the AS suites aren't working for you, then its a good bet these won't either, if they are actually built.

There is also the Western Beltway project. Its going to be on Disney owned property, but outside the actual WDW gate. There will supposedly be 4000-5000 third party budget rooms there, so I would imagine some will be for families of more than 4. Its not clear what, if any, on-site perks this area will have however. I'm guessing little to none, but that is just a guess.

Not my idea of a good use of the land by Disney, but it will have budget priced rooms.

shanomi4
05-14-2007, 01:45 PM
We do not like the Disney resorts for the money.
We found them to be over priced for what we got.

darlak
05-14-2007, 02:04 PM
I've stayed both onsite and offsite. Both have their benefits. It's each individual's right to choose which of those benefits means the most to them; better value vs. more Disney amenities, etc. We're all fortunate to have so many choices in and near WDW. If you want to stay onsite, then do. If you want to stay offsite, then do that. I am curious though, about why some of you seem to be so harsh with those who don't share your opinion. In a world where we all have to choose our battles, is this one really worth it?

MasterShake
05-14-2007, 03:09 PM
Ok, I've been taking notes so I want to make sure that I have everything.

Disney Transportation: Bad - Cause people are smelly
Disney Value Resort: Bad - Cause they charge too much
Oversized Decorations: Bad - Unk Reason
Lobbies/Gift Shops: Bad - Because we don't care what they look like
Extra Magic Hours: Bad - Because they say its 1-3 hours, but they lie and close early.
Chicken Nuggets: Bad - Unoriginal and too plentiful
Abandoned Buildings: Bad - They should put these building to use, it can't be a Gift Shop (see above), counter service (no nuggets), or pirate theme (played out).
Disney movies: Bad - Cause most of them are cheap and stupid.
Plush Toys: Bad - Signifies corporate greed.
Rides (post 1997): Bad - None are original or fun (Except Indy)
ABC: Bad - Cause Disney owns it.
Higher Net income: Bad - Because it signifies the end of Disney is coming
Liking Disney: Bad - Because that makes you a dumb consumer that doesn't realize that they are getting ripped off. Oh, sure you think you are happy, but youíre wrong.

I read an article in the paper the other day where it stated that Disney was offering toys to ill children at some local hospital. At first I thought it was a nice gesture, but I'm sure they had a sinister motive for this action as well.

mrsR123
05-14-2007, 03:32 PM
Ok, I've been taking notes so I want to make sure that I have everything.

Disney Transportation: Bad - Cause people are smelly
Disney Value Resort: Bad - Cause they charge too much
Oversized Decorations: Bad - Unk Reason
Lobbies/Gift Shops: Bad - Because we don't care what they look like
Extra Magic Hours: Bad - Because they say its 1-3 hours, but they lie and close early.
Chicken Nuggets: Bad - Unoriginal and too plentiful
Abandoned Buildings: Bad - They should put these building to use, it can't be a Gift Shop (see above), counter service (no nuggets), or pirate theme (played out).
Disney movies: Bad - Cause most of them are cheap and stupid.
Plush Toys: Bad - Signifies corporate greed.
Rides (post 1997): Bad - None are original or fun (Except Indy)
ABC: Bad - Cause Disney owns it.
Higher Net income: Bad - Because it signifies the end of Disney is coming
Liking Disney: Bad - Because that makes you a dumb consumer that doesn't realize that they are getting ripped off. Oh, sure you think you are happy, but youíre wrong.

I read an article in the paper the other day where it stated that Disney was offering toys to ill children at some local hospital. At first I thought it was a nice gesture, but I'm sure they had a sinister motive for this action as well.

Doing less than they are capable of= bad
Just sliding by and convincing the consumers that they ought to be grateful= bad
Making decisions solely on the monetary consequence because "it's a business afterall"= heinous

being overly snarky....

MasterShake
05-14-2007, 03:43 PM
Doing less than they are capable of= bad
Just sliding by and convincing the consumers that they ought to be grateful= bad
Making decisions solely on the monetary consequence because "it's a business afterall"= heinous

being overly snarky....

Yes, we wouldn't want anyone on this board getting to snarky.

iamalittlegoofy
05-14-2007, 05:10 PM
Doing less than they are capable of= bad

So when does Disney have to abide by your principles. They are a business. They put out a product. You dont like it, dont go. Those who do will. The consumer decides if a product is successful. If there are more people like you, and the business declines, it is up to Disney to fix it or regain your interest. As long as there are people who enjoy the product, and attendance increases, Disney is doing fine. (as a business)

Just sliding by and convincing the consumers that they ought to be grateful= bad

I guess the average consumer is not smart enough to know if they like it or not.

Making decisions solely on the monetary consequence because "it's a business afterall"= heinous

Heinous. Jump back to reality. All successful businesses are about the bottom line.

iamalittlegoofy
05-14-2007, 05:13 PM
Not forced...but tricked..goated..and pushed down from somethnig that would not have been done in the past.



Based on what you've said I don't think so in this case.




Yeah I've covered this...it really does come down to what that is worth to you. Outside of that "Disney feeling" you know you can get a much better Hotel room...not Motel for a cheaper price with those same perks of Extra Magical Minutes and crowded buses. But if a Giant Yo-Yo is what scream Disney for you and you willing to pay 60.00 bucks a night for it...then go for it.

I wonder how Disney being a Biz and all was able to operate all of those years giving better value and service at better Hotels (not motels) though?

I am a mod and delux man myself. But I have and would again stay in a value if need be.

YoHo
05-14-2007, 05:23 PM
Personally, I only stay at resorts built by imagineers, not Accountineers, but that's being snarky.


Also, is there a good reason why every 6 months, we get a new set of DISers who apparently haven't read this board before and insist on making the same tired excuses?

FYI, Disney is not "Just a business" If Disney were "Just a business" then it would never have had the cultural relevance it has.

iamalittlegoofy
05-14-2007, 05:39 PM
Also, is there a good reason why every 6 months, we get a new set of DISers who apparently haven't read this board before and insist on making the same tired excuses?

Been coming to these boards off on for years. But I can see that you are sooooo Disney savy that I'll cow down to your FACTUAL representation of all things Disney. If only Disney would read these boards and have all their issues settled by the EXPERTS.

FYI, Disney is not "Just a business" If Disney were "Just a business" then it would never have had the cultural relevance it has.

To you. Apparently not to those who count. Oh, I forgot, you are the only one that counts.

mrsR123
05-14-2007, 05:42 PM
So when does Disney have to abide by your principles. They are a business. They put out a product. You dont like it, dont go. Those who do will. The consumer decides if a product is successful. If there are more people like you, and the business declines, it is up to Disney to fix it or regain your interest. As long as there are people who enjoy the product, and attendance increases, Disney is doing fine. (as a business)



I guess the average consumer is not smart enough to know if they like it or not.





Heinous. Jump back to reality. All successful businesses are about the bottom line.
I'm not saying not smart enough-- just ignorant as to what came before and what they should be able to experience. There's a difference.


As for the bottom line;Real Disney used to be different.

mrsR123
05-14-2007, 05:44 PM
Also, is there a good reason why every 6 months, we get a new set of DISers who apparently haven't read this board before and insist on making the same tired excuses?


Amen.

MasterShake
05-14-2007, 06:01 PM
SNARKY

raidermatt
05-14-2007, 06:01 PM
Been coming to these boards off on for years. But I can see that you are sooooo Disney savy that I'll cow down to your FACTUAL representation of all things Disney. If only Disney would read these boards and have all their issues settled by the EXPERTS.



To you. Apparently not to those who count. Oh, I forgot, you are the only one that counts.

You know, there are different styles around here. Yes, some are more "snarky"(that's a new one), some use large amounts hyperbole, etc. But just about every regular on this board, regardless of what side of the fence they are on, offers up valid discussion points.

Yet time and time again, the people who complain the most about styles insist on replying only to those whose styles annoy them most. And of course, they usually do it in the same exact style they were complaining about.

Take what you will from that. Just an observation.

EUROPACL
05-14-2007, 06:13 PM
Been coming to these boards off on for years. But I can see that you are sooooo Disney savy that I'll cow down to your FACTUAL representation of all things Disney. If only Disney would read these boards and have all their issues settled by the EXPERTS.


...would it shock you to find out that Disney pays people to troll boards like these and argue with people who say not so nice things and then praise Disney for every decisions they make?

YoHo
05-14-2007, 06:16 PM
Probably doesn't have a green thumb. His Ficus died.

darlak
05-14-2007, 07:05 PM
...would it shock you to find out that Disney pays people to troll boards like these and argue with people who say not so nice things and then praise Disney for every decisions they make?

It wouldn't shock me. Do you gave any factual basis for this statement?

YoHo
05-14-2007, 07:15 PM
There's a thread on it w/ news article link from a month or 2 ago. Plus rumors.

EUROPACL
05-14-2007, 07:22 PM
There's a thread on it w/ news article link from a month or 2 ago. Plus rumors.

...Plus I work for a large Software company (80% of the Fortune 500 companies use our software...not Disney they went with the other guys and some in-house development) it is common pratice in the industry.


Edit...I should say worked really. Due to a couple of failing kidneys and a shot pancreas I''ve had to give up that job.

NEVERENOUGHWDW
05-14-2007, 08:16 PM
Personally, I only stay at resorts built by imagineers, not Accountineers, but that's being snarky.


Also, is there a good reason why every 6 months, we get a new set of DISers who apparently haven't read this board before and insist on making the same tired excuses?

FYI, Disney is not "Just a business" If Disney were "Just a business" then it would never have had the cultural relevance it has.
IMO every hotel, shop, fortune 500 & Disney are just businesses.....if you collect money for your goods & services you are a business.
All of the changes in recent years so how truly business oriented they are...

raidermatt
05-15-2007, 05:10 AM
Disney has always been a business. What's under discussion is how they run that business.

I think what YoHo means is they weren't always run like so many other businesses. That's what made them into so much more than those other businesses, many of which not only didn't become cultural icons, but fell by the wayside completely.

iamalittlegoofy
05-15-2007, 07:38 AM
There is no disputing that Disney has had some decline in services. But to hear some on here, it is like Disney is a dump and offer no quality or substance. Simply not true, Disney is still the best thing going and THEY know it.

Businesses as a whole, all across America have had a decline. Walmart, once known for their outstanding customer service is pathetic. Service with a smile is pretty much done. Look at the dress codes in established businesses now, pretty much anything goes. Disney is still the best, better than all the rest, and their attendance figures bear that out.

I responded even though I am just a lowly newcomer with the same tired excuses, instead of a veteran with the same tired complaints.;)

shanomi4
05-15-2007, 07:47 AM
FYI, Disney is not "Just a business" If Disney were "Just a business" then it would never have had the cultural relevance it has.
:lmao: I hope the stock holders are aware that it is not a business...:rotfl2:
my sides are hurting!!

If only Disney would read these boards and have all their issues settled by the EXPERTS.
Aint that the truth!!:thumbsup2 10 minutes on Disboards, and they would really know how to Disney!! LOL

This site is just to funny!!

minnie61650
05-15-2007, 09:07 AM
We are an upper income family who enjoys staying at Disney's value resorts.

We travel several times a year for pleasure and to me most
of Disney's deluxe and mod resorts are just another hotel/motel.

I can stay in luxury resorts all over the WORLD!

When I visit Disney I don't want my resort to look like I am staying in another part of the world , our country, or the beach. I want to reminded I am in Disney.

Where else can I find huge Disney Icons?

The only place I have found them is Disney's value resorts.

They are very whimsical to me.
I love watching the smiles on the little ones faces when they see their favorite characters (the icons) larger than life.

I feel that Disney's value resorts are a total bargain. We get so many perks (Disney themeing, A themed pool, quiet pool , kiddie pool, gift shop, & food court at the resort , Disney transportation, and EMH)
Any of Disney's resort guests (even those staying at a value or mod) are allowed to shop, relax in the lobbies, dine, rent boats or surrey bikes, use the transportation or use the spa facilities at any of the Disney Resorts. (Of course pool hopping is not allowed.)

When I stay at a Disney value resort I feel like I have just stepped into a Disney Movie Fantasyland!

When we pull up to All Stars and I see those giant icons I get the biggest smile on my face. I know I am at Disney!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disney does charge a premium price for their Deluxe resorts.
Deluxe guests are paying for location and amenities not for stellar customer service.
Many guests are disappointed because they think the GF is a 5 star hotel.
They expect the service of a 5 star and are disappointed when their expectations are not met.
It is in no way near a 5 star hotel even though it costs as much as many 5 star hotels.
The GF is rated 4 diamonds by AAA but most sites rate it as 3 and a half.
The Poly and CR are usually considered 3 star hotels.

BTW
I also save enough money to go on a few more vacations during the year by staying at a value.

raidermatt
05-15-2007, 09:20 AM
There is no disputing that Disney has had some decline in services. But to hear some on here, it is like Disney is a dump and offer no quality or substance.

Its hyperbole. If you take it literaly you'll miss some valid points, and that goes for both sides of the discussion.

JoeEpcotRocks
05-15-2007, 10:34 AM
I'm going to have to try some of those $8.00 chicken strips. They're on every thread in this Rumors and News section. I don't want to feel left out. :cool2:

MotherofLandon
05-15-2007, 11:54 AM
I can't believe I just wasted 10 minutes of my life reading this useless thread... I mean seriously, someone is a bit obsessed with the whole conspiracy theory and rather ticked off mommy and daddy didn't hug him enough or something. I mean seriously why would you come onto a discussion board of people who love disney and trash the company? Grow up, your not the school bully anymore, get a life. I mean dang, thats like going to a Red Sox forum and cheering for the Yankees... why?

If you don't like it, go to Universal Studios... you have options. Maybe they will have better chicken nuggets and hamburgers... :sad2:

MasterShake
05-15-2007, 12:05 PM
I can't believe I just wasted 10 minutes of my life reading this useless thread... I mean seriously, someone is a bit obsessed with the whole conspiracy theory and rather ticked off mommy and daddy didn't hug him enough or something. I mean seriously why would you come onto a discussion board of people who love disney and trash the company? Grow up, your not the school bully anymore, get a life. I mean dang, thats like going to a Red Sox forum and cheering for the Yankees... why?

If you don't like it, go to Universal Studios... you have options. Maybe they will have better chicken nuggets and hamburgers... :sad2:

Oh No you didn't.......

You best prepare yourself for the storm. :rotfl2:

MasterShake
05-15-2007, 12:12 PM
I'm going to have to try some of those $8.00 chicken strips. They're on every thread in this Rumors and News section. I don't want to feel left out. :cool2:

The chicken nugget argument is ridiculous anyway. I just went on and checked the current price in the Magic Kingdom for a Nugget meal and its $6.69 for nuggets and fries. The kidís version is $3.99 and that one includes a drink. I'll have to check next time I go by a McDonalds, but I think that 3 piece chicken selects and a medium fry probably costs at least $5+ dollars. All things considered I don't think that that is an unreasonable price.

DisOrBust
05-15-2007, 12:34 PM
FYI: The adult chicken strip baskets had 4/basket . Disney yanked one and never reduced the price. A way for creating a 25% mark up for something over priced to begin with. It's used as an example of the decreasing n the value of WDW. It seems crazy but its really the symptom of a deeper disease.

So there IS apoint to all the crazy chicken strips/nuggets threads.

minnie61650
05-15-2007, 12:54 PM
FYI: The adult chicken strip baskets had 4/basket . Disney yanked one and never reduced the price. A way for creating a 25% mark up for something over priced to begin with. It's used as an example of the decreasing n the value of WDW. It seems crazy but its really the symptom of a deeper disease.

So there IS apoint to all the crazy chicken strips/nuggets threads.

When I started going to WDW in the 70's and 80's I would have agreed that the prices were way out of line.

The choices were very limited and Disney did not offer many meals that young children would eat. The pizza served in the parks tasted like cardboard. We searched all over to find a good burger that our children would eat. We finally found some good burgers on the first floor of the CR and I can tell you for a fact those burgers were very pricey.

Disney does charge a little more for a lot of their counter food than a fast food place, but I feel they have many more choices than in the past and the food at their parks is much more affordable than the food that is offered at other theme parks I have visited.

JMHO

MotherofLandon
05-15-2007, 12:54 PM
Oh No you didn't.......

You best prepare yourself for the storm. :rotfl2:

Oh yes I did!! lol

*pulls out mickey mouse shaped umbrella*

raidermatt
05-15-2007, 01:13 PM
MotherofLandon, first, welcome to the boards.

Are you referring to anybody in particular, or is this being thrown out to all who have voiced any criticism?

MotherofLandon
05-15-2007, 01:27 PM
Thank you... and I was mainly referring to Euro.

minnie61650
05-15-2007, 02:44 PM
...would it shock you to find out that Disney pays people to troll boards like these and argue with people who say not so nice things and then praise Disney for every decisions they make?

Hummm

I would think that there are enough Disney fans on these boards to defend Disney's "good name" . I personaly think that Disney would not have to pay people to troll the boards.

I did see a brief newcast that stated some of the execs and employee's do occasionally read the Disney message boards.

The newcast did not make any mention of people being paid by Disney "to troll boards like these and argue with people who say not so nice things and then praise Disney for every decisions they make".

JMHO

disneyfan67
05-15-2007, 02:50 PM
Personally, I only stay at resorts built by imagineers, not Accountineers, but that's being snarky.

Also, is there a good reason why every 6 months, we get a new set of DISers who apparently haven't read this board before and insist on making the same tired excuses?

FYI, Disney is not "Just a business" If Disney were "Just a business" then it would never have had the cultural relevance it has.



I love reading some of yours and Euro's posts because while they might appear to snarky to some, it shows you you two actually care about Disney and what they provide for service. The bolded part of your post is very truthful and packed with common sense, that some don't want to hear. When you look at a resort like AKL or WL, you can see the imagination that must have took place in order to design it, not so with the values. When I look at the values I imagine a bunch of bean counters sitting around a boardroom with Micheal Eisner trying to figure out how to pack more people into cheaper rooms, without spending big bucks to build it. The values aren't themed, they're decorated and take away the giant icons and few Disney decorations, and you have a chain motel that can be found anywhere. You can't say that about AKL or a few other Disney deluxe resorts. I wouldn't pay more than 45 to 50 dollars a night to stay in one. I got a quote from the CRO one time for $109.00 a night and I laughed at the ridiculous notion of it. I had a email offer to stay in the "Ritz Carlton/JW Marriott" property 3 miles down the road for $174. I would have felt like an idiot to pay 109 a night for Pop when the Ritz was only 65 dollars more a night and true 4 to 5 star resort.


I understand why some of you get heated over this and I appreciate it as a fellow Disney fan. The passion of some Disney fans are similar to Harley and die hard Corvette owners in some ways. They have a large base of fans that have a passion for the product, the product is a huge part of American culture, and the fans are critical of changes that don't benefit the product or the company that produces it. That's a good thing and if Disney is smart enough they will listen to it and take it in to consideration. Not everything is wine and roses at WDW and some directions the company takes worries me at times. Look no further than the Year of a Million dreams and the cheap looking banners that hang everywhere. It looks like it was done quickly and almost as a after thought. I appreciate Disney giving extra perks for their guests, but they should do this all the time without the cheap looking promotion. Families spend some big, major bucks to go to WDW and that can't be dismissed and they deserve things done correctly and not on the cheap. I want WDW and Disneyland to be around for generations to come and not be a shell of their former glory, but to be at the top of their game and unique. That's why I understand the snow globe and chicken strips references.

shanomi4
05-15-2007, 03:14 PM
My my my.....
AKL $215 a night
RITZ $209 a night
POP $82 a night
The prices above are all for the same night! You can't take a price quote from a specific time period and then compare that quote to a quote that arrived in your email for a sale at the Ritz!!

You get what you pay for. You want it to scream Disney and imagineers you will pay for it. If you want to be at Disney, have some Disney flavor, and not spend a fortune...Disney has offered the Value resorts. What sense would it make for Disney to offer value resorts at value rates but have the same Disney feel as deluxe accommodations? Common sense. But what do I know, I still live with mom!!:lmao:

HarambeGuy
05-15-2007, 03:20 PM
Disney is still the best thing going and THEY know it.

This is precisely the point. They know they can reduce the quality of their services and still be the best so...they do it. It gives them a pretty little data point on a quarterly report. The problem some of us have is this: Disney has become a company that in the name of balance sheets looks for ways to get away with offering less. They used to - knowing they were far and away the 'best thing going' - look for ways to get even better. This attitude shift is what causes us distress, because at its logical conclusion you get a Disney that is "just as good as anyone else". And that my friend, would be a crying shame.

EUROPACL
05-15-2007, 03:33 PM
I love reading some of yours and Euro's posts because while they might appear to snarky to some, it shows you you two actually care about Disney and what they provide for service. The bolded part of your post is very truthful and packed with common sense, that some don't want to hear. When you look at a resort like AKL or WL, you can see the imagination that must have took place in order to design it, not so with the values. When I look at the values I imagine a bunch of bean counters sitting around a boardroom with Micheal Eisner trying to figure out how to pack more people into cheaper rooms, without spending big bucks to build it. The values aren't themed, they're decorated and take away the giant icons and few Disney decorations, and you have a chain motel that can be found anywhere. You can't say that about AKL or a few other Disney deluxe resorts. I wouldn't pay more than 45 to 50 dollars a night to stay in one. I got a quote from the CRO one time for $109.00 a night and I laughed at the ridiculous notion of it. I had a email offer to stay in the "Ritz Carlton/JW Marriott" property 3 miles down the road for $174. I would have felt like an idiot to pay 109 a night for Pop when the Ritz was only 65 dollars more a night and true 4 to 5 star resort.


I understand why some of you get heated over this and I appreciate it as a fellow Disney fan. The passion of some Disney fans are similar to Harley and die hard Corvette owners in some ways. They have a large base of fans that have a passion for the product, the product is a huge part of American culture, and the fans are critical of changes that don't benefit the product or the company that produces it. That's a good thing and if Disney is smart enough they will listen to it and take it in to consideration. Not everything is wine and roses at WDW and some directions the company takes worries me at times. Look no further than the Year of a Million dreams and the cheap looking banners that hang everywhere. It looks like it was done quickly and almost as a after thought. I appreciate Disney giving extra perks for their guests, but they should do this all the time without the cheap looking promotion. Families spend some big, major bucks to go to WDW and that can't be dismissed and they deserve things done correctly and not on the cheap. I want WDW and Disneyland to be around for generations to come and not be a shell of their former glory, but to be at the top of their game and unique. That's why I understand the snow globe and chicken strips references.

Thanks for getting it. The real problem is that by the time 99% of the other Disney fans like us get it...the Disney we knew and loved will be long gone. I feel the writting my be on the wall already for the parks.

...and as far as some of the new ferns...I mean posters. It really hurts when you don't believe, understand or like what some of us have to say.

shanomi4
05-15-2007, 03:40 PM
Thanks for getting it. The real problem is that by the time 99% of the other Disney fans like us get it

Darn it....I don't get it!!:mad: I must be a fool. So sorry that we/I do not get your perspective. I guess you are one of those "I am right and you are wrong posters":confused3

I should add, If I were a stock holder, I would be happy to hear that "bean counters" were involved in the resorts design phase.

YoHo
05-15-2007, 03:48 PM
Yes, thanks for understanding. I will throw a little gas on the fire and state that while AKL represents a quantum leap up from the Values, it still has it's problems. It's a product of a scared division unwilling or not allowed to truely create a unique experience. It's WL, but with different decorations.

There's nothing wrong with that. It's an awesome resort, but it's a coment more on what could have been.


Also, to echo Euro, it seems like there's been a major influx over the past month or 2.

YoHo
05-15-2007, 03:50 PM
Darn it....I don't get it!!:mad: I must be a fool. So sorry that we/I do not get your perspective. I guess you are one of those "I am right and you are wrong posters":confused3

More like I've done research to form my opinion and you haven't posters, but potato potahto.

shanomi4
05-15-2007, 03:59 PM
More like I've done research to form my opinion and you haven't posters, but potato potahto.
Enlighten me.:worship:

minnie61650
05-15-2007, 04:10 PM
....... When you look at a resort like AKL or WL, you can see the imagination that must have took place in order to design it, not so with the values. When I look at the values I imagine a bunch of bean counters sitting around a boardroom with Micheal Eisner trying to figure out how to pack more people into cheaper rooms, without spending big bucks to build it. The values aren't themed, they're decorated and take away the giant icons and few Disney decorations, and you have a chain motel that can be found anywhere. You can't say that about AKL or a few other Disney deluxe resorts. .......

I think the values are resorts with the unique idea and not the Deluxe resorts.

I have stayed at hotels all over and I have not found any of them more unique than Disney's values.

The Grand Floridian looks too much like the Hotel Del Coronado . It is almost a carbon copy --not too much imagineation used to design GF IMHO.

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a175/minnie61650/2.jpg

Hotel Del

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a175/minnie61650/grandfloridian1b.jpg

Grand Floridian


The Poly looks like the Niki Kia in Kola, Hawaii

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a175/minnie61650/NikiKaiVillaplantation.jpg

Boardwalk reminds me of the Marriott Wentworth in NH

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a175/minnie61650/Merriotwentworthbythesea.jpg

Beach and Yacht Club remind me of the Grand Hotel on Mackinac Island, Michigan

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a175/minnie61650/hotelfromside.jpg

Whyoming has many Log Lodges that look very simular to WL-- nothing special there.

I will admit that the idea of the animals right outside to be viewed from your balcony at AKL was good idea and having the monorail run through the CR was very unique especially for the 1970's.


.......
I understand why some of you get heated over this and I appreciate it as a fellow Disney fan. The passion of some Disney fans are similar to Harley and die hard Corvette owners in some ways. They have a large base of fans that have a passion for the product, the product is a huge part of American culture, and the fans are critical of changes that don't benefit the product or the company that produces it. That's a good thing and if Disney is smart enough they will listen to it and take it in to consideration. Not everything is wine and roses at WDW and some directions the company takes worries me at times. Look no further than the Year of a Million dreams and the cheap looking banners that hang everywhere. It looks like it was done quickly and almost as a after thought. I appreciate Disney giving extra perks for their guests, but they should do this all the time without the cheap looking promotion. Families spend some big, major bucks to go to WDW and that can't be dismissed and they deserve things done correctly and not on the cheap. I want WDW and Disneyland to be around for generations to come and not be a shell of their former glory, but to be at the top of their game and unique. That's why I understand the snow globe and chicken strips references.


I agree with most of what you said above.

EUROPACL
05-15-2007, 04:11 PM
Enlighten me.:worship:

Might as well ask him to convert your religion or change your political party while he is at it. I can count on one hand the people that have jumped sides over the years or at least admitted to it.

disneyfan67
05-15-2007, 04:23 PM
My my my.....
AKL $215 a night
RITZ $209 a night
POP $82 a night
The prices above are all for the same night! You can't take a price quote from a specific time period and then compare that quote to a quote that arrived in your email for a sale at the Ritz!!

You get what you pay for. You want it to scream Disney and imagineers you will pay for it. If you want to be at Disney, have some Disney flavor, and not spend a fortune...Disney has offered the Value resorts. What sense would it make for Disney to offer value resorts at value rates but have the same Disney feel as deluxe accommodations? Common sense. But what do I know, I still live with mom!!:lmao:




Just a little FYI. the prices I got were for the same time period around December. I sign up for various deals from many hotels by just registering on their official site. I have gotten some spectacular deals on some very nice Vegas resorts for example. It pays to do your homework and keep a eye out. So far to date I have only gotten 2 post cards from Disney with pin codes and they were deals for value resorts and for times I wasn't able to go. I won't pay more than 50 bucks or so for a value because of the small room size and I would need two rooms for my family of 4 to be halfway comfortable. $109 A NIGHT isn't my idea of a value and if I can't stay in a deluxe like the Poly with my AAA rate or discounted pin code, then there's plenty of deals to be had. The bus service at Disney can be a crap shoot at times, so if I went the value route, I would get a car, if I have to rent a car then I better look around for some deals. It's a Catch 22 situation.


When I go to WDW, I don't want to drive and I want to leave the real world behind for a little while. Riding a crowded bus, having to stand all the way so I can get back to my two double beds and 260 sq feet room, isn't my idea of escaping reality. That's why I love the monrail and the boat service the Poly has. I'm not being critical of the values because I like the Polynesian and deluxe's, but how Disney built them on the cheap and tries to make them something their not. In all fairness, they're motels with decorations, not something unique that imagineers came up with and it shows. Lower the price down to an acceptable level with out the help of pin codes and I'll reconsider it. I'm not trying to have a deluxe stay at value prices, but I'm not going to brainwashed into thinking that the values are a good deal at 109 a night because it was built by Disney.

You should sign up for the monthly Mouse Savers newsletter that gets emailed in the middle of the month. Mary sometimes has great unpublished deals in that newsletter and some of the hotels are on property inside the main gate. If Disney keeps raising their resort rates, that $170 something a night the Ritz offered me, might come in handy.

shanomi4
05-15-2007, 04:28 PM
Might as well ask him to convert your religion or change your political party while he is at it. I can count on one hand the people that have jumped sides over the years or at least admitted to it.

Don't believe in God or other myths, so no worry about religion. ;) As far as my beliefs about Disney...... I think Disney is over priced:sad2: ...not kept up to date:sad1: ...showing some wear:guilty: ....not as impressive as it once was.....not the icon it once was....and could use some more imagination. I think POP is not where I will ever spend my money ever again. After touring other resorts (deluxe) I wouldn't spend my money there either. Could I do it better? SURE in a heart beat!! Would I like my plan/design better? Heck yea! Would I stay if I had my design and options? Sign me up!! But...would it make money? :confused3

Barbers2005
05-15-2007, 04:30 PM
I agree (somewhat) with the previous poster who said the deluxe resorts show a lack of originality. It doesn't bother me so much that hotel designs have been borrowed from other places, because that helps give a feeling of authenticity. What irks me is that too many of the resorts have the same theme. There are four deluxes with the "turn of the century New England resort" theme. The GF misses that category by only the narrowest of margins (just substitute "Florida" for "New England"). We get it that turn of the century resorts were neat-o, but please come up with something new. With so many places and cultures to choose from, why keep going back to the same old thing?

shanomi4
05-15-2007, 04:37 PM
Fact:
Disney late 70's had no competition. Result- Disney was amazing as it was the only place of its kind.
Disney 00's has lots of competition. Result- Disney isn't so amazing after all.

When you are the only guy in town you will look pretty amazing. Once a few other guys come around..you don't have that same magical/amazing appeal!

disneyfan67
05-15-2007, 04:39 PM
Darn it....I don't get it!!:mad: I must be a fool. So sorry that we/I do not get your perspective. I guess you are one of those "I am right and you are wrong posters":confused3

I should add, If I were a stock holder, I would be happy to hear that "bean counters" were involved in the resorts design phase.



Just remember this. Every accountant and business person told Walt Disney he was insane for tying to build Disneyland and it would lead to his financial downfall and destroy his studios. I'm glad he didn't listen to them and had the courage and the tenacity to push forward. I couldn't imagine America without Disneyland and WDW and the unique experience they have provided for millions. Wall Street and the bean counters are famous for thinking only of pure profit and the bottom line. Disney's California Adventure is living proof to that and what building something on the cheap will do. Disney has a built in fan base and if Disney builds something unique, they will reward you by coming in droves. All we ask for is quality, imagination, and proper upkeep of it, when they build something. In return we gladly hand over large amounts of our hard earned cash and are glad we did it.

shanomi4
05-15-2007, 04:43 PM
the unique experience they have provided for millions. .

I guess I missed that unique experience. :rolleyes1

shanomi4
05-15-2007, 04:50 PM
Just remember this. Every accountant and business person told Walt Disney he was insane for tying to build Disneyland and it would lead to his financial downfall and destroy his studios. I'm glad he didn't listen to them and had the courage and the tenacity to push forward. it.
Cute story. :wizard: But I am sure he just didn't go at it without advisors and bean counters. :teacher:

disneyfan67
05-15-2007, 04:58 PM
I guess I missed that unique experience. :rolleyes1




You want to come here to this board and be disrespectful toward others who have done nothing to you, fine. Don't expect a nice response from others or a response at all in some cases. I don't understand your comment above and I was stating that if Walt Disney had of never built his first theme park, millions upon millions of people would have missed out on a great experience. Disneyland was the first true theme park after all and laid the groundwork for all others. I'm glad I grew up in a country like America where a place like Disneyland and WDW exists. It made being an American even a better experience than it it already was and enriched it, IMO.

DC7800
05-15-2007, 05:01 PM
The Poly looks like the Niki Kia in Kola, Hawaii.

That's the idea - the Polynesian (like Disney's other Deluxe and moderate resorts) is supposed to transport you to a different time and place. Much like the lands in the Magic Kingdom take you from the old west (Frontierland) to the future (Tomorrowland), Disney's original resorts took you to Hawaii or the south Pacific (Polynesian), future (Contemporary), and frontier (Fort Wilderness). That there would be a 'real world' inspiration (or counterpart) for these resorts is not a coincidence. The Wilderness Lodge ought to look a great deal like a lodge from the Pacific Northwest (region) if Disney's designers did their jobs properly. Same for the Boardwalk, Yacht & Beach, and even the moderates such as Port Orleans French Quarter (obvious) and Coronado Springs (southwest).

Had the original plans for the Venetian and Persian resorts (on the Seven Seas Lagoon) been constructed, the resorts would have seemed far more exotic (and unique) than a resort modeled upon a New England yachting club, though it remains a perfectly legitimate concept (theme) for a resort.

But the value resorts do none of these things. Sure, they're unique all right - no style of architecture, region of the world, time period, or other inspiration exists for a theme which proclaims "Do the Funcky Chicken". Which is exactly the problem - the value resorts aren't themed at all - they're decorated.

That doesn't mean people cannot stay there and have the vacation of their dreams. It doesn't mean kids don't love the huge Buzz Lightyear and Woody icons. It certainly does not mean people don't like the price - the primary reason to stay there. But it does mean that the resorts are not up to Disney's own (traditional) standards.

minnie61650
05-15-2007, 05:02 PM
Cute story. :wizard: But I am sure he just didn't go at it without advisors and bean counters. :teacher:

One name comes to mind-- his brother Roy -- he was the banker that helped Walt make Disneyland work.

disneyfan67
05-15-2007, 05:03 PM
Cute story. :wizard: But I am sure he just didn't go at it without advisors and bean counters. :teacher:



Not a cute story, but fact and he even sold his vacation home at the Smoke Tree Ranch and cashed in his life insurance to make it happen. He was able to convince multiple sponsors and a TV network to help finance it. One of the reasons the wonderful world of Disney was on TV and Disneyland was shown to kids in the 50's and 60's on a weekly basis. There's plenty of books and information to back up what I say. If you want to be a troll, fine, at least be an educated one if you're going to come here.

YoHo
05-15-2007, 05:06 PM
I guess I missed that unique experience. :rolleyes1

So why are YOU posting here?


Also, I'd like you to name one competitor in Disney's class that isn't like and entire city?

Universal is nothing like WDW.

MasterShake
05-15-2007, 05:22 PM
I've been on this board for over a year now so I'm not sure that I can be called a "New Fern". I've been visiting Disney World/Disneyland since I was 5 and I am now 29 years old. I have read a lot of articles/books/threads about Disney, but I do not claim to be an all knowing Disney expert.

I tend to disagree a lot with AV, YoHo, and Euro. Some of our conversations have been a little snarky, but I do not think poorly of them. They all seem to be intelligent people that know a lot about Disney.

I have agreed with some of thier points. They have brought up several good issues and Disney can (of course) be a better company. I will not deny that Disney sometimes makes decisions for the bottom line that are not in the best interest of the consumer.

However, (and I mean no offense) you guys focus almost entirely on the negative. I have seen post after post of nothing but criticism. I see your name and I know that you will have something negative to say. Honestly I don't think it matters what Disney does, in your minds it will be negative. I have seen several posts where you guys exaggerate the issue (Sometimes jokingly/ sometimes not) to make it sound worse. Some of you have accused several others on these boards as working for Disney, when sometimes I wonder if some of you work for Universal.

More like I've done research to form my opinion and you haven't posters, but potato potahto.

Just because someone disagrees with your point of view, doesn't mean that they aren't informed.

Back to the topic;

Honestly I do not think that the value resorts are a bad deal. I brought up a search on Hotels.com for Orlando area and the values are rated at 2.5 stars. On there the cheapest 2.5 star hotel was $40 a night (Oct) and some 2.5 star hotels were well over $100 (Oct) a night. Disney Value was running for about $82 a night (Oct). I selected 2 adults and 1 child occupancy for all of these hotels.

The amenities listed on the site were almost identical for all of the Hotels (probably a standard requirement for a similar rating). I didn't see a room size, but from the pictures they all seemed comparable in size. If you look at the range in prices I would say that Disney is probably slightly above average in price. If you averaged the prices it seems like it would come out in the high 60's to low 70's. Disney probably runs about $10-$20dollars more a night.

Now, onsite perks may not interest some, but they are something to consider when choosing a hotel. Disney Value has the benefit of location, free transportation (the bus can be crowded), and Extra Magic Hours (can also be crowded. Also, while it might not be everyone’s cup of tea, the theme-ing (large icons) can be fun for some people. If none of these perks interest you, you can save some money and stay off site. If are going to use one or more of these options then it may be worth it to stay at a value resort.

raidermatt
05-15-2007, 05:33 PM
But...would it make money? :confused3

It did when Disney did it in the past. True, for a long time they poured everything they made back into creating more, which kept the company in a precarious position much of the time. But the public did respond with their wallets. It takes a committment to doing things differently than a "bean counter" says it needs to be done, and that takes some guts and some talent. But when done right, it most certainly makes money.

Disney late 70's had no competition. Result- Disney was amazing as it was the only place of its kind.
Disney 00's has lots of competition. Result- Disney isn't so amazing after all.

People took vacations in the 70's. There was plenty of competition.

And who, exactly, has copied Disney? Universal? Please. Six Flags? Come on. True, Disney isn't quite as amazing as it once was, but that's because they changed from trying to outdo the best, themselves, to trying to do enough to outdo the next guy. Instead of building a park next to Disneyland that was an effort to surpass it, they build a park designed to just be better than what others were doing (and in the eyes of many, failed even at that).

If Disney has lost its sense of wonder among the masses, its their own doing, not the market's.

Cute story. But I am sure he just didn't go at it without advisors and bean counters.
Very true, he didn't. But he also did not let them dictate to him what good entertainment was. Its not a black and situation. The point is that Disney allows the "bean counters" to have too much influence in content creation much of the time.

One name comes to mind-- his brother Roy -- he was the banker that helped Walt make Disneyland work.
Yes, he helped, and helped a lot. But the driving force of the company was the creative vision, not the financial analysis. Roy helped find ways to make Walt's vision work, but he didn't dictate the vision.

DC7800
05-15-2007, 05:36 PM
What sense would it make for Disney to offer value resorts at value rates but have the same Disney feel as deluxe accommodations?

The theme ("story") and overall "feel' of a resort aren't the only distinctions between a value and deluxe Disney resort. Even if a value property looked more like a deluxe, there would still be amenities and other elements to account for the differing price levels: room service, location, interior corridors, valet parking, table-service restaurants, various recreation options, waterfront or landlocked, etc. If you want these amenities, be prepared to pay for them. If you are willing to do without a spa, for instance, then you can certainly save some money on accomodations. At WDW, any resort located where the Contemporary is (nearest the MK) would command a higher price than any resort located where the All-Stars are found.

The Caribbean Beach was the original "value" resort, but today does it look (and feel) more like a value or deluxe? In any event, offering a value accomodation does not require the use of oversized, sometimes tacky fiberglass icons. Disney can do better - and they used to.

A Super 8, Hampton Inn, and Hilton might have a vaguely similar look and feel in that they each offer a clean, comfortable room (some more than others, but you get the idea...). But there are major differences which account for the huge difference in price, even if all three properties exhibit the same architectural style.

EUROPACL
05-15-2007, 06:48 PM
I've been on this board for over a year now so I'm not sure that I can be called a "New Fern". I've been visiting Disney World/Disneyland since I was 5 and I am now 29 years old. I have read a lot of articles/books/threads about Disney, but I do not claim to be an all knowing Disney expert.

I tend to disagree a lot with AV, YoHo, and Euro. Some of our conversations have been a little snarky, but I do not think poorly of them. They all seem to be intelligent people that know a lot about Disney.



You're not a Fern.


I have agreed with some of thier points. They have brought up several good issues and Disney can (of course) be a better company. I will not deny that Disney sometimes makes decisions for the bottom line that are not in the best interest of the consumer.


Kind of still missing the point...we want the old Disney back...will we get it? I doubt it.



However, (and I mean no offense) you guys focus almost entirely on the negative. I have seen post after post of nothing but criticism. I see your name and I know that you will have something negative to say. Honestly I don't think it matters what Disney does, in your minds it will be negative. I have seen several posts where you guys exaggerate the issue (Sometimes jokingly/ sometimes not) to make it sound worse. Some of you have accused several others on these boards as working for Disney, when sometimes I wonder if some of you work for Universal.

Gee if we worked for Universal you would think we would point out how great Universal is and does things so much better than Disney....pssst They don't Universal is in a worse place as far as the parks go than Disney is right now. NBC has even less intrest in putting money into the parks than Disney does.




Back to the topic;

Honestly I do not think that the value resorts are a bad deal.

Trying to talk over the Internet is hard sometimes as my real point does not come across clearly. The "Value Resorts" might be close to just above the same type of room found off site. (For a Family of 6 was really the issue at first...and I still think a 2-bedroom condo at the back gate is a better value) Some people see the "value" in staying on site...I still do it. Mine (and others) issue with the "value" resorts are that they just lowered the bar. Disney could have and has done better. Just Like DCA lowered the bar. MGM/AK opening half finshed lowered the bar. Hong Kong Disney lowered the bar. Disney Pictures have been lowering the bar for years turning out flop after flop and dumbed down picture one after another. Sure everyonce in a while we get a POTC. You've got to wonder how many Country Bear, Haunted Mansion, Bambi II movies people will sit through before that Disney name no longer brings them into the theater anymore.


Sorry if you don't think we are postive enough about Disney right now...but we don't see a lot to be postive about. Be honest with yourself do you really see Disney putting the capital investment back into the parks that they need right now? What do you think is going to happen once that DVC well has run dry and Hotels start needing to be updated? Is the direct to dvd of UnderDog II going to pay for that? Disney views the parks as a cash cow for Movies and TV not the other way around. Eisner tried several times to sell off the parks to pay for more bad movies,TV networks and Power Ranger Cartoons. Who exactly at Disney now would you say is going to ride to the rescue and save the parks from circling the drain?

YoHo
05-15-2007, 07:17 PM
I'm positive about all the things at Disney that were made in the good times.

MasterShake
05-15-2007, 07:21 PM
I'm positive about all the things at Disney that were made in the good times.

Ok, does that mean that nothing can be positive now?

NEVERENOUGHWDW
05-15-2007, 07:30 PM
I love reading some of yours and Euro's posts because while they might appear to snarky to some, it shows you you two actually care about Disney and what they provide for service. The bolded part of your post is very truthful and packed with common sense, that some don't want to hear. When you look at a resort like AKL or WL, you can see the imagination that must have took place in order to design it, not so with the values. When I look at the values I imagine a bunch of bean counters sitting around a boardroom with Micheal Eisner trying to figure out how to pack more people into cheaper rooms, without spending big bucks to build it. The values aren't themed, they're decorated and take away the giant icons and few Disney decorations, and you have a chain motel that can be found anywhere. You can't say that about AKL or a few other Disney deluxe resorts. I wouldn't pay more than 45 to 50 dollars a night to stay in one. I got a quote from the CRO one time for $109.00 a night and I laughed at the ridiculous notion of it. I had a email offer to stay in the "Ritz Carlton/JW Marriott" property 3 miles down the road for $174. I would have felt like an idiot to pay 109 a night for Pop when the Ritz was only 65 dollars more a night and true 4 to 5 star resort.


I understand why some of you get heated over this and I appreciate it as a fellow Disney fan. The passion of some Disney fans are similar to Harley and die hard Corvette owners in some ways. They have a large base of fans that have a passion for the product, the product is a huge part of American culture, and the fans are critical of changes that don't benefit the product or the company that produces it. That's a good thing and if Disney is smart enough they will listen to it and take it in to consideration. Not everything is wine and roses at WDW and some directions the company takes worries me at times. Look no further than the Year of a Million dreams and the cheap looking banners that hang everywhere. It looks like it was done quickly and almost as a after thought. I appreciate Disney giving extra perks for their guests, but they should do this all the time without the cheap looking promotion. Families spend some big, major bucks to go to WDW and that can't be dismissed and they deserve things done correctly and not on the cheap. I want WDW and Disneyland to be around for generations to come and not be a shell of their former glory, but to be at the top of their game and unique. That's why I understand the snow globe and chicken strips references.
Although I don't agree with everything you said...very well stated. IMO the problem is Disney no longer pays attention to those of us that do spend the "big bucks", they are more interested in quantity opposed to quality.
IMO Walt wouldn't have wanted it this way......

YoHo
05-15-2007, 07:33 PM
No, but,

Discussing line item by line item is useless. We're discussing corporate philosophy here. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. The fact that the inept manage to let some good sneak through doesn't really mean I should not be negative about the corporate philosophy that got us here right?
Additionally, each item on that list simply invites subjective critism.

The Value resorts don't meet the goals of the initial resort development for Walt Disney World. That's objective, that's a fact. From that, we can discuss why Disney set those goals, what those goals give the guest and what the Values give the guest.
All of that is true, yet you may still like the Value resorts. The fact that YOU like them means little.

MasterShake
05-15-2007, 07:35 PM
Although I don't agree with everything you said...very well stated. IMO the problem is Disney no longer pays attention to those of us that do spend the "big bucks", they are more interested in quantity opposed to quality.
IMO Walt wouldn't have wanted it this way......

I might be wrong, but I think that Disney was/is meant for everyone.

YoHo
05-15-2007, 07:53 PM
I'm not sure one could even say they're interested in Quantity. Unless you mean quantity of branded Disney experiences. certainly you don't mean quantity of Attractions at any one location. Your statement does work well for films.

And of course Disney is meant for everyone. I don't know too many people that just hate a quality experience and wish they had more half decent experiences.

NEVERENOUGHWDW
05-15-2007, 08:08 PM
I might be wrong, but I think that Disney was/is meant for everyone.
True but IMO a very big mistake is when you forget about a group that yearly spends the most $$$. The masses are not going to continually add to Disney profit in the long run.
The group (i.e. masses) visit maybe once a year while the group I am speaking about visit many times a year, only stay at deluxe hotels and now have to seek out a fair/good meal due to all the promotions such as the DDP & free dining which I believe to be nonsense and is starting to take Disney down a very slippery slope.

YoHo
05-15-2007, 08:19 PM
Honestly, I'd say the yearly big spenders aren't the people Disney's forgetting...
Well, they are, but not to the extent that they're forgetting the every 5 years style vacationer.

The Values afterall, didn't attract new guests who were staying offsite. It convinced already exisiting guests who were staying at a more expensive hotel to move to a cheaper one and come more often.
Similarly, DVC didn't attract new business, it simply locked in the people already going all the time.
The family that is not wealthy, that has to scrimp and save to afford a Walt Disney World trip is being done a diservice.

NEVERENOUGHWDW
05-15-2007, 08:28 PM
Honestly, I'd say the yearly big spenders aren't the people Disney's forgetting...
Well, they are, but not to the extent that they're forgetting the every 5 years style vacationer.

The Values afterall, didn't attract new guests who were staying offsite. It convinced already exisiting guests who were staying at a more expensive hotel to move to a cheaper one and come more often.
Similarly, DVC didn't attract new business, it simply locked in the people already going all the time.
The family that is not wealthy, that has to scrimp and save to afford a Walt Disney World trip is being done a diservice.

I couldn't disagree more! The values have drawn people from all the surrounding motels & low end hotels to stay onsite.
The every 5 year guests are who they are catering to....trying to get them to Disney more often. The winners are the family that does save for a Disney trip......DDP, free dining who do you think that was created for?

Kaler131
05-15-2007, 08:54 PM
[QUOTE=minnie61650;18673261]

"When I stay at a Disney value resort I feel like I have just stepped into a Disney Movie Fantasyland!

When we pull up to All Stars and I see those giant icons I get the biggest smile on my face. I know I am at Disney! "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I completly agree with you! I have stayed at some of the luxury resorts at WDW -but we continue to prefer the values for the same reason....we LOVE the totally "Disney" atmosphere. That's why we go to Disney in the first place isin't it?

raidermatt
05-15-2007, 08:58 PM
The winners are the family that does save for a Disney trip......DDP, free dining who do you think that was created for?

Free dining was created for Disney so they could fill beds in a slow period. Nothing wrong with that, but families saving for a Disney trip ususally schedule around school.

The dining plan in general was created to get people who are already going to spend more while they are there.

YoHo
05-15-2007, 09:02 PM
I couldn't disagree more! The values have drawn people from all the surrounding motels & low end hotels to stay onsite.
The every 5 year guests are who they are catering to....trying to get them to Disney more often. The winners are the family that does save for a Disney trip......DDP, free dining who do you think that was created for?
It was created so the every 3 months crowd would stop being cheapskates and eat at the sitdowns.

Also, You're wrong about where the values pull from. grumblings from the Dark Tower have been upset about it for some time.

Disney used to Cater to the big family vacationer. People who come every 5 years are only going to show up if you create something big and new. Something that makes them willing to get up out of the barcalounger and put off the tirp to the grand canyon.

The regulars are a completely different animal. They are there all the time, so the big changes really don't give you bang for the buck. What the regulars want is incremental changes. New bands and streetmosphere. New Pins, small incremental changes that the 5 years crowd won't even notice hasn't changed.
Disney changed their focus from the 5 year guest to the regular a couple years ago. Disney semi-unintentionally created this class of guess via DVC, the Values and APs.

HOWEVER, I think it's fair to say that DIsney's been pretty bad to both groups. The large additions have been few and far between and the incremental have been either non-existent or weak.

minnie61650
05-15-2007, 09:06 PM
...
Yes, he helped, and helped a lot. But the driving force of the company was the creative vision, not the financial analysis. Roy helped find ways to make Walt's vision work, but he didn't dictate the vision.



I totally agree that it was Walt's vision and his brother Roy helped with the
financial analysis.

Although Roy stepped in after his brother Walt's death to make sure that WDW was built , he delayed the plans for Asian resort and made other cut backs.

I was also very disappointed in the stark concrete look of Tomorrowland when it first opened.
The presentation of the DL version of IASW was much more pleasing to the eyes then hiding the ride in a plain looking building.
Disneyland's versions were so much better.


I think there were a few "bean counters" when WDW first opened.

JMHO

YoHo
05-15-2007, 09:38 PM
Yeah, Walt called them Sharp Pencil guys and he made fun of them.

MasterShake
05-15-2007, 11:24 PM
Although I don't agree with everything you said...very well stated. IMO the problem is Disney no longer pays attention to those of us that do spend the "big bucks", they are more interested in quantity opposed to quality.
IMO Walt wouldn't have wanted it this way......


I don't want to get the wrong impression here, but what do you mean by quantity over quality. It just occurred to me that youíre referring to people and not products. Do you feel that more money makes you a more "quality" person?

I couldn't disagree more! The values have drawn people from all the surrounding motels & low end hotels to stay onsite.
The every 5 year guests are who they are catering to....trying to get them to Disney more often. The winners are the family that does save for a Disney trip......DDP, free dining who do you think that was created for?

I guess I don't understand what youíre trying to say. How is Disney giving you the impression that they do not care for their wealthier patrons?

rantnnravin
05-16-2007, 07:21 AM
the problem with the shaving away at quality is this:
the five-year vacationer is expecting the "Disney" they've heard about. The reputation, the icon. What the bean counters have done by offering less-for-more is that the 5-year visitor will NOT see anything great or special or worth coming back for.
They'll scrimp and save and just be able to afford the room with the hockey-stick view. They don't do research and they don't get the deals and codes that we know to look and ask for. They type their dates into cost-generator on the website and get offered water aprks and more for february, they're automatically offered 10-day hoppers for an 8-day trip and d trip insurance, they overpay for airfare and think, "okay that's what it costs".
But they'll be expecting the monorail and get the MTA. They'll be expecting superior service and attention and get a former DMV employee. They expect to ride big rideas and have fun and they get long lines, shuttered attractions, hal-finished parks, and dinoland carnival rip-off games. They won't understand why those of use who love Disney keep going back. And they won't go back because Disney hasn't offered them anything they can't get at home.
So it becomes a vicious cycle. Those of us who remember Disney's glory days and love Disney and keep going back are going to die eventually. Who will remain to go 3-times a year to the Big-Wheel Inn?
Those who are perceived as "hating" Disney are really the ones who love it the most and don't want to see it wilt and die from bean-counter neglect.

iamalittlegoofy
05-16-2007, 07:23 AM
I've been on this board for over a year now so I'm not sure that I can be called a "New Fern". I've been visiting Disney World/Disneyland since I was 5 and I am now 29 years old. I have read a lot of articles/books/threads about Disney, but I do not claim to be an all knowing Disney expert.

I tend to disagree a lot with AV, YoHo, and Euro. Some of our conversations have been a little snarky, but I do not think poorly of them. They all seem to be intelligent people that know a lot about Disney.

I have agreed with some of thier points. They have brought up several good issues and Disney can (of course) be a better company. I will not deny that Disney sometimes makes decisions for the bottom line that are not in the best interest of the consumer.

However, (and I mean no offense) you guys focus almost entirely on the negative. I have seen post after post of nothing but criticism. I see your name and I know that you will have something negative to say. Honestly I don't think it matters what Disney does, in your minds it will be negative. I have seen several posts where you guys exaggerate the issue (Sometimes jokingly/ sometimes not) to make it sound worse. Some of you have accused several others on these boards as working for Disney, when sometimes I wonder if some of you work for Universal.



Just because someone disagrees with your point of view, doesn't mean that they aren't informed.

Back to the topic;

Honestly I do not think that the value resorts are a bad deal. I brought up a search on Hotels.com for Orlando area and the values are rated at 2.5 stars. On there the cheapest 2.5 star hotel was $40 a night (Oct) and some 2.5 star hotels were well over $100 (Oct) a night. Disney Value was running for about $82 a night (Oct). I selected 2 adults and 1 child occupancy for all of these hotels.

The amenities listed on the site were almost identical for all of the Hotels (probably a standard requirement for a similar rating). I didn't see a room size, but from the pictures they all seemed comparable in size. If you look at the range in prices I would say that Disney is probably slightly above average in price. If you averaged the prices it seems like it would come out in the high 60's to low 70's. Disney probably runs about $10-$20dollars more a night.

Now, onsite perks may not interest some, but they are something to consider when choosing a hotel. Disney Value has the benefit of location, free transportation (the bus can be crowded), and Extra Magic Hours (can also be crowded. Also, while it might not be everyoneís cup of tea, the theme-ing (large icons) can be fun for some people. If none of these perks interest you, you can save some money and stay off site. If are going to use one or more of these options then it may be worth it to stay at a value resort.

Ding, ding, ding! Give this man a prize. He gets it. Most people will not dispute a decline in the Disney resorts and parks. His post deals with thread topic. The overall decline is a product of the times. I seen a decline in society overall, that has made its way through the business, retail, and services world.

rantnnravin
05-16-2007, 07:39 AM
but the "old Disney" never succumbed to the influence of "society overall"
that was the beauty of it. Why do you think they wouldn't allow men with facial/long hair to work onstage in the parks? They wanted a clean-cut wholesomeness DESPITE the beatnik/hippie movement.

same should go for hotels:
"everyone else" is actually offering a better value than Disney. If Disney expects people to pay more, they need to offer the superior Disney quality that those of us who remember the old Disney have become accustomed to. What does the Big-Wheel Inn offer that i can't get a mile down the road?
Superior transportation? - no that's not it . Superior service? - nope. A quiet room to sleep in?- no dice either. (can you say industrial strength toilets, anyone?)

just because "everyone else is doing it" doesn't mean you should.

shanomi4
05-16-2007, 08:06 AM
Ok, so you think I am a troll. Great! Been called far worse by people that actually mean something to me. Sorry that I do not have hours upon hours to do research and then ramble on and on about it. But I do have views. I have some knowledge as well as my personal experience. If it is easier for you to disregard my opinions because they arenít parallel with yours, so be it. No skin off my back. But donít expect me to run and hind nor expect to reel me into your side of the discussion. Here is what I know

Disneyland opened in 1955. with the help of Stanford Research Institute. Obviously this just wasnít some man cashing in his life savings and going on a whim! In fact his dream started about a decade before it opened. Because of the war his ideas were stalled. Now lets look at 1955.Ö..even at 1971 (Walt Disney world opening). I think we can all agree that the foundation for most and if not all of Waltís projects was entertainment. For those who say ďwhat competitionĒ I was speaking about entertainment. Back then there was not a lot of entertainment options. Today there is a ton. We have 100ís of channels on TV to choose from. We have play stations, game boys, ipods, DVDs CDís personal computers, the internet and I could go on and on. All of which is entertainment. There is so much more now then there was back in the early days (1955 and even 1971) Traveling was for the rich. Cruises were for the super wealthy. People did not get the option to go to the Caribbean. Today even the poor have access to much of the entertainment venues mentioned above. If you are middle class, chance are you have been to the Caribbean. You have a computer with internet. We have Theme parks all over the country. Where I sit now there are 3 MAJOR theme parks. It is reasonable to say that back when Walt was building and designing there was not nearly as much entertainment options. It was far easier to wow folks. You add Universal, sea world, six flags and then all the other everyday garbage we get inundated with, it just isnít as magical or as easy to WOW. That is NOT to say that they still canít WOW us. It just takes a lot more imagination and money then it did back when Walt was around. If we truly want to be Wowed then it would take something completely new. Something outside of a theme park ride. Unfortunately I have to agree when Disney says the parks have matured. I would rather Disney do something outside the box. Figuratively and physically. Do I think they should abandon the parks? NO. Should they put more money into them? YES. Should they come up with new attractions? Definitely. But they should come up with something completely different unrelated to the parks. What could that be? The only man that I know who could definitely answer that would be uncle Walt.:sad1:

rantnnravin
05-16-2007, 08:30 AM
all the other everyday garbage we get inundated with, it just isnít as magical or as easy to WOW. That is NOT to say that they still canít WOW us. It just takes a lot more imagination and money... snip... If we truly want to be Wowed then it would take something completely new. Something outside of a theme park ride.... I would rather Disney do something outside the box. Figuratively and physically. Do I think they should abandon the parks? NO. Should they put more money into them? YES. Should they come up with new attractions? Definitely. But they should come up with something completely different unrelated to the parks. What could that be? The only man that I know who could definitely answer that would be uncle Walt.:sad1:

why should it be unrelated to the parks?
and Walt created a legacy in that he taught people how to DREAM BIG. There are plenty of imaginative, innovative, industrious individuals out there.
geez...if Steve Jobs had listened to the sharp-pencil guys at IBM who insisted that "regular people don't want or need a 'personal computer'", where would we all be now?
The bean-counters are good at bean-counting, we need them. But they need to loosen the purse strings so that the imagineers can create something the public doesn't know they want or need yet,
ala Disneyland and the PC.
Good business is in creating demand, not chasing after it. Bean-counters chase, innovators CREATE.

minnie61650
05-16-2007, 08:33 AM
........What does the Big-Wheel Inn offer that i can't get a mile down the road?
Superior transportation? - no that's not it . Superior service? - nope. A quiet room to sleep in?- no dice either. (can you say industrial strength toilets, anyone?)

just because "everyone else is doing it" doesn't mean you should.

Well, I guess I am in the minority because I happen to see the Big Wheel Inn as a fun, whimsical and exciting place to stay.

I will agree that the rooms themselves are a typical standard "motel type" room but so are the rooms at a mod.

The rooms at the deluxe's are typical standard hotel rooms.

It is the themeing of the resorts that makes Disney special and I think when Disney decided to make more affordable rooms for families they were thinking of making these resorts fun and whimsical for children and for the young at heart.

I would love it if Disney would build a deluxe resort that featured the Fab 5 around the grounds. (*note not the huge icons but the smaller statues like these:

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a175/minnie61650/asp2.jpg

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a175/minnie61650/ss71.jpg

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a175/minnie61650/popcent86.jpg

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a175/minnie61650/Donald.jpg

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a175/minnie61650/astar24-1.jpg

*Photos from allearsnet

I would stay there in an instant if the Fab 5 were a big part of the resort.

BTW

I am also big fan of the Swan and Dolphin resorts.

I think they are very whimsical and lots of fun but then I know and understand the theme and story behind the design of those hotels.

For those of you who are unfamiliar with theme here is the story behind the Swan and Dolphin.

http://disboards.com/showthread.php?p=17671231#post17671231

Have fun at Disney!:wizard:

shanomi4
05-16-2007, 08:46 AM
why should it be unrelated to the parks?
and Walt created a legacy in that he taught people how to DREAM BIG.
Wouldn't doing something new outside of the park be "DREAMING BIG"? How is coming up with another attraction "dreaming big"?:confused:
There are plenty of imaginative, innovative, industrious individuals out there. Back when Disney first started he was a pioneer. The "imaginative, innovative, industrious individuals" were not being hired by Universal, Six flags, Sea-world and the like. Now all of the above mentioned are competeing to have these "individuals" to work "dream" for them!
if Steve Jobs had listened to the sharp-pencil guys at IBM who insisted that "regular people don't want or need a 'personal computer'", where would we all be now?
Exactly!! You get my point.:thumbsup2 They need to do something that has never been done before. That is what disney needs. Not another ride/attraction. Like I said they should add new stuff.....but to be "it" again, meaning top of the game, they need to do something completely new and BIG. See what I am saying??:teacher:

rantnnravin
05-16-2007, 09:08 AM
Back when Disney first started he was a pioneer. The "imaginative, innovative, industrious individuals" were not being hired by Universal, Six flags, Sea-world and the like. Now all of the above mentioned are competeing to have these "individuals" to work "dream" for them!

that's because Disney's sharp-pencil guys fired them all in the name of the cost-cutting, bottom-line, "2% rise in profit this quarter" mentality.

A new attraction CAN be innovative. It's up to the dreamer's to make that a reality. The "Living Seas with Nemo" (that they closed down the aquarium for over a year to produce) is nothing but a black-light carnival ride. NOTHING innovative except for the last 15 seconds because that's all the budget would allow. "Imagine" if they had allowed the DREAMERS to do it right!
For what they did, they should've just left the aquarium the way it was, instead of creating a cheesy carny ride. The queue was better-conceived.

Unfortunately, Disney is chasing after what the other guy has done. Why is it that Great Wolf and Nick Hotels came up with indoor year-round water park instead of Disney? NOOOW, disney is "going after" that market.
People are renting suites for their families, so noooow disney is going after that market. People want a high-end experience, so nooow disney goes after that market. Instead of creating the demand and convincing people that they needed this, they just didn't know it yet.

But that's what Disney USED TO do. Walt's dream was to buy enough land so that all of the innovation could take place at the site of the Florida Project. Why? Becuase it truly can become it's own little world, AWAY from REAL life.
If i take the sardine-packed M34 to work everyday, why in all of God's creation would i want to do that on vacation??
If i can go to Toys R Us Plaza at Times Square and ride some carny rides and shop, why spend $5,000-$10,000 to go to WDW to do the same thing?
Or, why pay Disney a premium to do it in my own back yard? I want to GET AWAY from my own back yard. (literally and figuratively)

rantnnravin
05-16-2007, 09:17 AM
Well, I guess I am in the minority because I happen to see the Big Wheel Inn as a fun, whimsical and exciting place to stay.
I will agree that the rooms themselves are a typical standard "motel type" room but so are the rooms at a mod.
The rooms at the deluxe's are typical standard hotel rooms.
It is the themeing of the resorts that makes Disney special and I think when Disney decided to make more affordable rooms for families they were thinking of making these resorts fun and whimsical for children and for the young at heart.
I would love it if Disney would build a deluxe resort that featured the Fab 5 around the grounds. (*note not the huge icons but the smaller statues like these:

Yes the DECORATIONS are fun and whimsical, but what kept them from developing fun and whimsical architecture and interior design?
that's the difference.


oh, and as far as the swolphin "theming": sorry Mr. Graves, but if you have to explain your design that much, then it's not speaking for itself.

shanomi4
05-16-2007, 09:22 AM
that's because Disney's sharp-pencil guys fired them all in the name of the cost-cutting, bottom-line, "2% rise in profit this quarter" mentality.

A new attraction CAN be innovative. It's up to the dreamer's to make that a reality. The "Living Seas with Nemo" (that they closed down the aquarium for over a year to produce) is nothing but a black-light carnival ride. NOTHING innovative except for the last 15 seconds because that's all the budget would allow. "Imagine" if they had allowed the DREAMERS to do it right!
For what they did, they should've just left the aquarium the way it was, instead of creating a cheesy carny ride. The queue was better-conceived.

Unfortunately, Disney is chasing after what the other guy has done. Why is it that Great Wolf and Nick Hotels came up with indoor year-round water park instead of Disney? NOOOW, disney is "going after" that market.
People are renting suites for their families, so noooow disney is going after that market. People want a high-end experience, so nooow disney goes after that market. Instead of creating the demand and convincing people that they needed this, they just didn't know it yet.

But that's what Disney USED TO do. Walt's dream was to buy enough land so that all of the innovation could take place at the site of the Florida Project. Why? Becuase it truly can become it's own little world, AWAY from REAL life.
If i take the sardine-packed M34 to work everyday, why in all of God's creation would i want to do that on vacation??
If i can go to Toys R Us Plaza at Times Square and ride some carny rides and shop, why spend $5,000-$10,000 to go to WDW to do the same thing?
Or, why pay Disney a premium to do it in my own back yard? I want to GET AWAY from my own back yard. (literally and figuratively)
No doubt some great points!!:thumbsup2
My feeling is that in this day in age, it is far harder to dream. To many others dreaming too. Not a problem in the 50's. Even harder to dream big when you have stock holders to keep happy. There is a happy balance between dreamers and bean counters. Does Disney have that balance? I think not. But, I do agree that the parks are just that..parks that have matured. In order to really bring in the big bucks, they need to do something innovative. Another ride will be just that..another ride. Sure they will get a spike in attendance if they so build a truly unique attraction. But how long before the guys down the street top that?:confused3
I will stick to what I said....the parks is not where Disney needs to look. AK is a great example. Just another park. Just because they feel that the parks are mature, does not excuse the fact that they are not dreaming and inventing.

If it were me.....I would build on Epcot. Make Epcot what Walt had envisioned. Now you have something far different then, Bob down the street.

rantnnravin
05-16-2007, 09:34 AM
If it were me.....I would build on Epcot. Make Epcot what Walt had envisioned. Now you have something far different then, Bob down the street.

as long as it's not a room full of video games, but instead, a true hall of "Innoventions" there's so much potential for Epcot, but it requires the investment to continue evolving.
Evolution is what keeps families coming back. They see something spectacular EVERY time they come.
Why can't that translate to tomorrowland at the MK? Or (dare i say it?) a beastly kingdom at AK or an interactive "movie making" experience at MGM?
why are MGM and AK ho-hum to some? because they are HALF-FINISHED - the bean-counters closed the checkbooks!
MK is dangerously close to becoming stagnant - especially if they keep shuttering attractions and unique shops, ruining classics with annoying birds, and opening things like Stitch.:scared:

minnie61650
05-16-2007, 09:39 AM
If it were me.....I would build on Epcot. Make Epcot what Walt had envisioned. Now you have something far different then, Bob down the street.

I agree I would have loved to see the Environmental Community (and community was a carefully chosen word) of Tomorrow that Walt envisioned come to life instead of just another theme park.

EPCOT as Walt envisioned it.........

Excerpts

From Walt's Last Film about EPCOT

http://www.waltopia.com/last_film.html


"Everything in EPCOT will be dedicated to the happiness of the people who live, work and play here and those that come here from around the world to visit our living showcase.".............

EPCOT's dynamic urban center will offer the excitement and variety of activities found only in the metropolitan cities. Cultural, social, business and entertainment.

Among its major features will be a cosmopolitan hotel and convention center towering 30 or more stories. Shopping areas where stores and whole streets recreate the character and adventure of places around the world............

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a175/minnie61650/city_center.jpg
EPCOT's city center

But most important, this entire 50 acres of city streets and buildings will be completely enclosed.

In this kind of controlled environment, shoppers, theatergoers, and people just out for a stroll will enjoy ideal weather conditions protected day and night from rain, heat and cold and humidity.

Here the pedestrian will be king free to walk and browse without fear of motorized vehicles. Only electric powered vehicles will travel above the streets of EPCOT's central city...................

----------------------------------------------------------------
WOW!

The world lost a great envisionary the day Walt died.

shanomi4
05-16-2007, 09:42 AM
Don't even mention Stitch....yuck. Not good at all.
Glad to see you are onboard with the Epcot thing. I am sure had Walt been there for Epcot it would be far far far different then what it is today!

minnie61650
05-16-2007, 09:43 AM
as long as it's not a room full of video games, but instead, a true hall of "Innoventions" there's so much potential for Epcot, but it requires the investment to continue evolving.
Evolution is what keeps families coming back. They see something spectacular EVERY time they come.
Why can't that translate to tomorrowland at the MK? Or (dare i say it?) a beastly kingdom at AK or an interactive "movie making" experience at MGM?
why are MGM and AK ho-hum to some? because they are HALF-FINISHED - the bean-counters closed the checkbooks!
MK is dangerously close to becoming stagnant - especially if they keep shuttering attractions and unique shops, ruining classics with annoying birds, and opening things like Stitch.:scared:


I agree.

I would love it if Disney would add Beastlie Kingdomme to AK.

Before AK was built one of the lands was supposed to be Beastlie Kingdomme. Because of budget cuts Disney delayed the building of Beastly Kingdomme and built Camp Mickey and Minnie and put the show Lion King in that area to keep the area ready for Beastlie Kingdom.
My understanding is that because Lion King and Camp Mickey and Minnie are so well liked that Disney scraped the whole idea of Beastlie Kingdomme.
They really had some great ideas on the drawing board and many people would like to see them become reality but I fear the chances of that happening are slim.
We can always hope.

Here is an article about some Disney attractions that were designed but never built. The Dragon Tower attraction was originally slated for Beastlie Kingdomme land planned for Disney's Animal Kingdom park in Florida. This article gives one a virtual walk-through of Beastlie Kingdomme and the ride Dragon Tower.
http://www.mouseplanet.com/mark/mg041027.htm

rantnnravin
05-16-2007, 09:45 AM
because Lion King and Camp Mickey and Minnie are so well liked that Disney scraped the whole idea of Beastlie Kingdomme.


gotta love that PR spin!

shanomi4
05-16-2007, 09:46 AM
It could or at least could of been done. They have a huge work force that Disney could of used as the founding fathers of the community. It would of been a win win. A) the employees could have a nice, stable place to live close to work, while at the same time adding to a entirely different way of life. B) Disney would have "gerbils" so to speak as well as income coming back from their employees. I had a rental property. For 1 year I rented the house to one of my employees. It was great for both of us. Now, I am not saying that all the employees should or even would want to live there, but I am sure they could of gotten a lot of them to do it. A good base to start with!!:wizard:

YoHo
05-16-2007, 10:59 AM
Wow, I better call Google and The Woz and the guys that built Space Ship 1, J.K. Rowling, Peter Jackson, Pixar and every other innovative dreamer from the last twenty years and tell them to stop dreaming. It's too hard to excite the jaded masses.


Disney is a multibillion dollar entertainment conglomerate whose reason for existance is to create experiences that excite the imagination. Saying it's too hard in this day and age to truely excite people is ridiculous and laughable.
People do it all the time. People whose first goal isn't their golden parachute or their "industry clout."

But by all means, continue to make excuses for why Disney can't be what it used to be, why we should come to expect Mission: Space to have it's budget slashed and any actual learning removed and The Seas to get nothing innovative, but a weak Nemo overlay. How dare we expect more from them?


Of course, Even Disney sneaks one through. Soarin Over California is really amayzing. Too bad they couldn't afford to finish of the theming.
Oh and lets not forget Indy in 1996. Didn't have any problems wowing guests. Still doesn't have any problems wowing guests. And that's to say nothing of Spiderman, it's protege' over at Universal. Even Pirates and Haunted Mansion still spark the imagination after 40 years.

YoHo
05-16-2007, 11:03 AM
Also, we just recently talked about Epcot in a couple other threads. WDW and E.P.C.O.T. Center are more like what Walt wanted then you understand. E.P.C.O.T. was never supposed to be a normal community. It was always suppose to be a resort community. Disney employees would make up the bulk of the permanent residents and other companies would have employees rotate in. With the exception of the outside companies, Walt Disney World by say 1985 had almost every other aspect of the plan. Obviously not the city itself, but the innovation, the permanent residence. The entertainment, the shopping.

Yes, the Disney Company was too scared after Walt's Death to make that level of commitment, but they made some level of commitment. After Walt's family lost control, the entire idea died completely.

shanomi4
05-16-2007, 11:07 AM
Wow, I better call Google and The Woz and the guys that built Space Ship 1, J.K. Rowling, Peter Jackson, Pixar and every other innovative dreamer from the last twenty years and tell them to stop dreaming. It's too hard to excite the jaded masses.


Disney is a multibillion dollar entertainment conglomerate whose reason for existance is to create experiences that excite the imagination. Saying it's too hard in this day and age to truely excite people is ridiculous and laughable.
People do it all the time. People whose first goal isn't their golden parachute or their "industry clout."

But by all means, continue to make excuses for why Disney can't be what it used to be, why we should come to expect Mission: Space to have it's budget slashed and any actual learning removed and The Seas to get nothing innovative, but a weak Nemo overlay. How dare we expect more from them?


Of course, Even Disney sneaks one through. Soarin Over California is really amayzing. Too bad they couldn't afford to finish of the theming.
Oh and lets not forget Indy in 1996. Didn't have any problems wowing guests. Still doesn't have any problems wowing guests. And that's to say nothing of Spiderman, it's protege' over at Universal. Even Pirates and Haunted Mansion still spark the imagination after 40 years.
Yoho...are you sipping the old rum? never said it was impossible. in fact it is very possible. Just more difficult. And with imagineers being enticed over to Universal and the like it becomes even more difficult. When you are the only cat in town, you product stands out. Now we have more cats to play with. Thus my reasoning they need to do something completely different. But I am sure you will argue that. :woohoo:

shanomi4
05-16-2007, 11:13 AM
Even if they built Beastlie Kingdomme would that be so amazing? I don't think so. Would i like it...yea, but all in all you still have just another atraction that you will wait hours to see and walk away saying "is that all?":confused:

EUROPACL
05-16-2007, 12:01 PM
And with imagineers being enticed over to Universal and the like it becomes even more difficult. :

"Enticed" that is not what happened at all.

minnie61650
05-16-2007, 12:02 PM
Even if they built Beastlie Kingdomme would that be so amazing? I don't think so. Would i like it...yea, but all in all you still have just another atraction that you will wait hours to see and walk away saying "is that all?":confused:

Beastlie Kingdomme may in itself not be so amazing (I do think the Dragon coaster would have amazed many if it had been built at the same time AK opened) but it seems a lot of good ideas have been scraped in the name of saving money.


EPCOT the community--
Beastlie Kingdomme---

And the resorts that Disney just dropped to name a few.
----------------------------------------------------------------

Resorts that were dropped-

Asian Resort Hotel
Venetian Resort
Persian Resort



Before the MK was even built plans were in place for 4 hotels to be on the monorail line.The Grand Floridian hotel is on the land that was set aside and dedicated to be the "Future" Asian Resort Hotel (A). The "Future"
Venetian (B) Resort was going to located between the Poly (5) and the Contemporary (8). A fifth hotel was going to build on a monorail spur which ended at the "Future" Persian Resort (C). That resort would be located just to east of the Mk and North of the Contemorary and would built with much of the hotel being on /over the water of Bay Lake. So even though the GF was not built until 18 years later a hotel was planned for that area at the same time the monorail was planned.

I got this picture and my info from my"The story of Walt Disney World"
Commemory Edition Book 1971.



http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a175/minnie61650/YGP32D4disneyfuture.jpg

---------------------------------------------------------------

I agree that Disney needs to put more money and innovation into it's attractions and theme parks -- it seems that lately Disney is more concered with the cost of an attraction instead of it's WOW factor.

I also agree there are other ways that Disney could be innovative in the future if they bought back the imagineers and let them imagine the way Walt let them when he first formed the imagineer team.

JMHO

YoHo
05-16-2007, 12:03 PM
Yoho...are you sipping the old rum? never said it was impossible. in fact it is very possible. Just more difficult. And with imagineers being enticed over to Universal and the like it becomes even more difficult. When you are the only cat in town, you product stands out. Now we have more cats to play with. Thus my reasoning they need to do something completely different. But I am sure you will argue that. :woohoo:

Given the shear amount of money Disney has now versus what they had to beg and borrow in the old days, I'd say your nuts to think it's harder.

Human beings are still the same people and there are still parts of our world that excite the imagination.

And you keep trying to insinuate that Disney has a competitor, that others do what they traditionally have done that is so unique. You are so unequivocably wrong that I'm sitting here laughing. I asked you before and I'll ask you again. Who? Who else does what they do with the park? NOBODY, that's who.

Which conversly is why they've been so cheap. A little competition would envigorate things. For a while there when IOA first opened up, it looked like Disney would have to spend a little money, but then IOA floundered, because it isn't WDW. It doesn't embody EPCOT, there is no Pirates, no HM.

If anything, Disney has stopped being Disney and become another Universal Studios where every ride is riding the movies. Maybe, if they went back to their old model, They'd be different and they would wow people again.

JoeEpcotRocks
05-16-2007, 12:04 PM
Even if they built Beastlie Kingdomme would that be so amazing? I don't think so. Would i like it...yea, but all in all you still have just another atraction that you will wait hours to see and walk away saying "is that all?":confused:

It could be amazing :) Why don't you think so?

Look at how amazing Everest turned out. :thumbsup2

JoeEpcotRocks
05-16-2007, 12:07 PM
Beastlie Kingdomme may in itself not be so amazing (I do think the Dragon coaster would have amazed many if it had been built at the same time AK opened) but it seems a lot of good ideas have been scraped in the name of saving money.


EPCOT the community--
Beastlie Kingdomme---

And the resorts that Disney just dropped to name a few.
----------------------------------------------------------------

Resorts that were dropped-

Asian Resort Hotel
Venetian Resort
Persian Resort



Before the MK was even built plans were in place for 4 hotels to be on the monorail line.The Grand Floridian hotel is on the land that was set aside and dedicated to be the "Future" Asian Resort Hotel (A). The "Future"
Venetian (B) Resort was going to located between the Poly (5) and the Contemporary (8). A fifth hotel was going to build on a monorail spur which ended at the "Future" Persian Resort (C). That resort would be located just to east of the Mk and North of the Contemorary and would built with much of the hotel being on /over the water of Bay Lake. So even though the GF was not built until 18 years later a hotel was planned for that area at the same time the monorail was planned.

I got this picture and my info from my"The story of Walt Disney World"
Commemory Edition Book 1971.




I have that book, too. Very interesting read and historical prospective.

shanomi4
05-16-2007, 12:20 PM
If anything, Disney has stopped being Disney and become another Universal Studios where every ride is riding the movies. Maybe, if they went back to their old model, They'd be different and they would wow people again.
So what are you saying? I thought Disney had no competition? Above you write that Disney has become another US. Can't have it both ways! Either they are like US and are competitors, or they are not like US and have no competitors. I can tell you that we spent time at US. Had US not been there we would of spent that time and money at Disney. When we go back to Orlando we will spend even more time at US and less time at Disney. so as far as my $'s are concerned US is a competitor. Competing for my dollars and I will have no problem giving some to both parks. Laugh all you like but you are the fool if you do not think US is a competitor! Definition of competitor:
one selling or buying goods or services in the same market as another
They both are selling entertainment in Orlando. Period! But I guess I am the only one who split their time and money between DW and US.:thumbsup2

shanomi4
05-16-2007, 12:28 PM
It could be amazing :) Why don't you think so?

Look at how amazing Everest turned out. :thumbsup2
Would it be great? Yea! Would I want to go? Yea! Would I pay to see it? yea! But would it make enough money and draw enough people to justify the expense? I am not sure. I do not know the numbers. One would need to know how much EE cost and how much increase in ticket sales and merchandising dollar has gone up to determine if even that can be justified. Don't think we have those numbers. And those numbers do tell a story that the "bean counters" look at!!

And I guess I am one of the fools that liked the lion king show. In fact, when we decide to go to a park we look at what they offer. That show, along with EE and tough to be a bug, would influence me to go to AK again. Fun show that didn’t cost much. Great business decision!

YoHo
05-16-2007, 12:53 PM
So what are you saying? I thought Disney had no competition? Above you write that Disney has become another US. Can't have it both ways! Either they are like US and are competitors, or they are not like US and have no competitors. I can tell you that we spent time at US. Had US not been there we would of spent that time and money at Disney. When we go back to Orlando we will spend even more time at US and less time at Disney. so as far as my $'s are concerned US is a competitor. Competing for my dollars and I will have no problem giving some to both parks. Laugh all you like but you are the fool if you do not think US is a competitor! Definition of competitor:
one selling or buying goods or services in the same market as another
They both are selling entertainment in Orlando. Period! But I guess I am the only one who split their time and money between DW and US.:thumbsup2

Sigh, yes, they are a competitor for your dollars, but no they don't offer the same type of entertainment. And Disney's scale is orders of magnitude greater.

And I can have it both ways, because I'm drawing a distinction between "Old Disney" The corporate philosophy, the methodology by which WDW was built and "New Disney©" The mega media conglomerate whose sole corporate philosophy is "double digit earnings every quarter."
WDW has no competition, because of what was built in the 70s and early 80s. New additions to Walt Disney World of today have been "dumbed down" to Universal levels. Taken as a whole though, they're still more, because of what went in to the place in the beginning.




And don't mistake my comments for suggesting that Universals attractions aren't in some ways good. I'm not talking about the specifics of any one attraction. I'm talking about the overall philosophy that drives the whys and the whats of the park. With Universal, it has always been 100% corporate synergy. With Disney, yes, synergy was important, but it was also so so much more. (MJMcbride, if you're reading, this is why I dislike character additions)

shanomi4
05-16-2007, 12:57 PM
Sigh, yes, they are a competitor for your dollars, but no they don't offer the same type of entertainment. And Disney's scale is orders of magnitude greater.)
Never said they offer the exact same entertainment.:confused: But they are competitors.

disneyfan67
05-16-2007, 01:02 PM
as long as it's not a room full of video games, but instead, a true hall of "Innoventions" there's so much potential for Epcot, but it requires the investment to continue evolving.
Evolution is what keeps families coming back. They see something spectacular EVERY time they come.
Why can't that translate to tomorrowland at the MK? Or (dare i say it?) a beastly kingdom at AK or an interactive "movie making" experience at MGM?
why are MGM and AK ho-hum to some? because they are HALF-FINISHED - the bean-counters closed the checkbooks!
MK is dangerously close to becoming stagnant - especially if they keep shuttering attractions and unique shops, ruining classics with annoying birds, and opening things like Stitch.:scared:



Disney is a multibillion dollar entertainment conglomerate whose reason for existance is to create experiences that excite the imagination. Saying it's too hard in this day and age to truely excite people is ridiculous and laughable.
People do it all the time. People whose first goal isn't their golden parachute or their "industry clout."

But by all means, continue to make excuses for why Disney can't be what it used to be, why we should come to expect Mission: Space to have it's budget slashed and any actual learning removed and The Seas to get nothing innovative, but a weak Nemo overlay. How dare we expect more from them?


Of course, Even Disney sneaks one through. Soarin Over California is really amayzing. Too bad they couldn't afford to finish of the theming.
Oh and lets not forget Indy in 1996. Didn't have any problems wowing guests. Still doesn't have any problems wowing guests. And that's to say nothing of Spiderman, it's protege' over at Universal. Even Pirates and Haunted Mansion still spark the imagination after 40 years.




Good points made by all here and some don't want to admit or realise that Disney is starting to make the same mistakes that is currently dooming the Six Flags company. Also a reason why attendance figures are down at Universal Orlando. I understand you have to please the shareholders more than ever in this day and age, but Disney is in danger of becoming stale and just another theme park that you can find anywhere in America. I don't scrimp and save and pay a small fortune to find that at WDW, I go because there's nothing else quite like it. When I go to MK and see more attractions being removed than being built and older ones becoming stale like Indy Speedway, then I worry. Kevin Yee of Mice Age writes a great column named "Declining by Degrees" and points a lot of this out in his regular columns. I understand some attractions come and go and cost too much to be maintained, but you just don't remove them and let the buildings just sit there. The Sky way ride for example, I understand some of the reasoning for removing it, but are you telling me Disney can't come up with a newer, high tech version of it? Same with the area that held the "20,000 Leagues under the Sea" ride, that is now a cheap looking Winnie the Pooh play area for little kids. That's not imagination or wowing your guests, that's becoming scared, cheap and running you product into the ground for the quick, short term profit. Why can't WDW have the Hunny Pot ride that Toyko Disneyland does? It's an awesome ride from what I've seen and here's a video of it below. When I look at that ride it makes me mad that we can't have that here in America, where the Disney theme parks were invented.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K01-kPT4t8I&mode=related&search=


Nothing would be cooler than to go to MK and see the version of the HKDL Autopia that is state of the art compared to the noisy, smelly Indy Speedway we currently have. I've seen pictures of their version of Autopia and it's futuristic and environmentally friendly. They use quiet, basically pollution free electric cars and it's one of the few good things people write about concerning that park. The track lay out is pleasant and the landscaping is unique. Here is video that I found on You Tube and I think that ride looks a lot better than the version currently in Florida. Just ignore the people talking in the video though.:goodvibes

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIOYcGhgcrU&mode=related&search=



Or how about an updated, high tech version of the Sky way ride that would make people look up and be amazed at the beauty and design of it. Disney could easily build it, but I think is happier with keeping the costs down and staying with the status quo. They probably figure the guests have enough to do, why spend more and throw in a "Stitch's Great Escape" type of attraction here and there to fill the void. I understand a park getting mature, but that doesn't mean if has to get cheap and stale.


In the Chicago land area in the mid 70's Marriott built a theme park near my hometown and for the most part, they copied Disney's design in a lot of it. My sister and I worked in that park for many summers when Marriott owned it and while it wasn't Disney world, it still was a fairly nice place to go. Marriott sold the park in the mid 80's to the Six Flags group and it's been down hill ever since. I bought season passes a couple of years ago for my kids and was shocked at the condition of that place. It looks like a dirty Walmart with giant roller coasters that most family members can't go onto together. I see Papa Johns pizza places selling food in the park and employees don't wear themed outfits anymore, but blue shirts and tennis shoes, plus have bad attitudes to match it. The food isn't good anymore, it's all the same, but just as expensive and there's nothing special or unique to the place. Sound Familur? The park looks run down in many places and they cut back on so many of the services the used to provide. I don't want Disney becoming another version of Six Flags and they risk doing so, if they allow the prospect of making a quick buck over the ideas that got the Disney theme parks popular in the first place. I'm a big fan of Disney and it's theme parks, but no way am I blinded by my loyalty to see that changes need to be made

YoHo
05-16-2007, 02:27 PM
Never said they offer the exact same entertainment.:confused: But they are competitors.

So is my Television set and the Box of Legos and My Digital camera. All entertainments that compete for my time. Doesn't mean that I can draw useful information by comparing them to WDW.

YoHo
05-16-2007, 02:37 PM
I understand you have to please the shareholders more than ever in this day and age

You do have to please the shareholders, but most companies please the shareholders by creating products and services at the highest level possible.

The shareholder excuse is a misnomer anyway. Shareholders will only express their discontent when things are so very bad that they have to. Further, Disney is held largely by institutional investors who can afford the long view. They aren't daytraders trying to make a quick buck. It's Disney itself that can't see past the quarterly report. It's not Wall Street's fault. Maybe if Disney went back to long term growth strategies, people like Warren Buffet would become Bullish on the stock again.

JoeEpcotRocks
05-16-2007, 03:30 PM
Would it be great? Yea! Would I want to go? Yea! Would I pay to see it? yea! But would it make enough money and draw enough people to justify the expense? I am not sure. I do not know the numbers. One would need to know how much EE cost and how much increase in ticket sales and merchandising dollar has gone up to determine if even that can be justified. Don't think we have those numbers. And those numbers do tell a story that the "bean counters" look at!!

And I guess I am one of the fools that liked the lion king show. In fact, when we decide to go to a park we look at what they offer. That show, along with EE and tough to be a bug, would influence me to go to AK again. Fun show that didnít cost much. Great business decision!

We love the Lion King show and Tough to be a Bug, too! :thumbsup2

shanomi4
05-16-2007, 03:59 PM
So is my Television set and the Box of Legos and My Digital camera. All entertainments that compete for my time. Doesn't mean that I can draw useful information by comparing them to WDW.

Universal and Disney are both theme parks. :thumbsup2 They both promote there parks to families. :yay: They are both in Orlando. :cool2: They both have themed rides. :woohoo: They both have roller coasters.:cool1: Logically, no matter what the vision was in the past, they are competitors. I am sorry that you can not see that. They can both be vastly different, but they are going after the same dollar. The dollar that people set aside for a vacation. But you can't seem to understand that. Thanks for playing and sorry to say I do not have a consolation prize for you. Better luck next time!!:wave:

disneyfan67
05-16-2007, 04:02 PM
We love the Lion King show and Tough to be a Bug, too! :thumbsup2




I have nothing against those shows and I like them. Disney does need to add more attractions though to AK and they certainly have enough room to do so. AK is the largest of all the theme parks, yet has the least amount of E ticket rides. They shouldn't have to take out any current attractions they currently have to add a new one. According to the Modern Marvels program on the Discovery Channel, AK has enough land to house MK, Epcot, and MGM all inside the property AK sits on, with room left over. I have no problem with the park except for that Dinoland area which looks like a cheesy carnival area and that same spinning roller coaster that Six Flags has and calls the Ragin Cagin. Expedition Everest is a top notch attraction and more similar, is needed to make it an all day park. As it sits right now, my family and I can go through it and be done by 2 or 3 pm. I hope Disney has more on the drawing boards for it, because the park is a neat concept and deserves more.

shanomi4
05-16-2007, 04:03 PM
We love the Lion King show and Tough to be a Bug, too! :thumbsup2

I thought I was the only one from what I read here!

Funny.....I think I see a pattern. Universal is sliding...Six flags...Disney...and other themed parks....Maybe people are just finding other things to do for vacations:confused3 Cruises for one:confused3
But I guess I would be pulling at strings if I suggest that cruises are competing for vacationers dollars?

shanomi4
05-16-2007, 04:06 PM
So is my .........Box of Legos .

ahhh look who's been a good boy....yes you have, you good boy you!!:cloud9: Make sure you eat all your vegetables too!! :thumbsup2

YoHo
05-16-2007, 04:09 PM
Cruises didn't exist in the 1970s?

WDW is not a Theme Park, for HEaven's sake. It's a multipark resort with Golf Courses, spas, horseback riding, fishing etc, etc, etc. It's comparable to going to Hawaii or Going to Vegas. People choose between going to Disney and Going to Hawaii. People choose between going to Orlando and Going to Hawaii. Nobody chooses between going to Disney World and going to Universal. They choose between going to Disney World or Going to Orlando. Disney World is it's own destination seperate from Orlando in many ways. Universal is absolutly not.
They aren't comparable.

I'm not saying that people that "Go to Disney World" don't also see other things in Orlando, only that most don't or don't spend much time and effort on it. A Universal guest is orders of magnitude more likely to visit other attractions in Orlando compared to a Disney guest.

YoHo
05-16-2007, 04:10 PM
ahhh look who's been a good boy....yes you have, you good boy you!!:cloud9: Make sure you eat all your vegetables too!! :thumbsup2


Look whose being insulting. I guess when you're out of ideas, or just here to troll, that's what happens.

disneyfan67
05-16-2007, 04:12 PM
Universal and Disney are both theme parks. :thumbsup2 They both promote there parks to families. :yay: They are both in Orlando. :cool2: They both have themed rides. :woohoo: They both have roller coasters.:cool1: Logically, no matter what the vision was in the past, they are competitors. I am sorry that you can not see that. They can both be vastly different, but they are going after the same dollar. The dollar that people set aside for a vacation. But you can't seem to understand that. Thanks for playing and sorry to say I do not have a consolation prize for you. Better luck next time!!:wave:




This was the point I made in my last post to you and why I think your behavior is troll like. Your new to this board, yet are insulting to everyone who disagrees with you. I've been a member for 3 years and lurked for 2 before that. I don't recall just jumping in with my first post and trying to cause trouble and unrest. Look what you posted above and it's rude and condescending. There's no call for how you conduct yourself. Everyone on this thread has made valid points, including you a times, yet you're the only one being rude. I just don't understand how you get off being that way on a board that you just started posting on. Either you have been here before and have been banned because of the behavior you're currently displaying. Or you don't work well with people IRL and enjoy being another Internet tough guy who hides behind the anonymity the Internet provides.

shanomi4
05-16-2007, 04:13 PM
I I have no problem with the park except for that Dinoland area which looks like a cheesy carnival area and that same .

:lmao: :lmao: Well I guess the imagineers did their job great!! That was the objective..to make it look like a "cheesy carnival" ! Did you notice that it was built on asphalt ..even with the white paint...kind of like a parking lot? You do know that it wasn't built on an old parking lot, right?:confused: You may not like the theme, but obviously they did a good job as you stated just what it was suppose to be like!!! I for one liked it. I like the feeling of a Carnival, but certainly wouldn’t let my kids ride at a real Carnival. It was kind of nostalgic.:hippie: I even pointed it out to the kids. To each their own!!

shanomi4
05-16-2007, 04:19 PM
This was the point I made in my last post to you and why I think your behavior is troll like. Your new to this board, yet are insulting to everyone who disagrees with you. I've been a member for 3 years and lurked for 2 before that. I don't recall just jumping in with my first post and trying to cause trouble and unrest. Look what you posted above and it's rude and condescending. There's no call for how you conduct yourself. Everyone on this thread has made valid points, including you a times, yet you're the only one being rude. I just don't understand how you get off being that way on a board that you just started posting on. Either you have been here before and have been banned because of the behavior you're currently displaying. Or you don't work well with people IRL and enjoy being another Internet tough guy who hides behind the anonymity the Internet provides.

Nope, never been banned. May be on that road though. I am very sarcastic in real life. Life is to short to be so uptight. I have a sense of humor that is a little grayish, but that is just my way. I have been talked down to here in a intellectual way, but I don't write that way. Sorry you feel as though I have offended. Chow!:upsidedow

YoHo
05-16-2007, 04:23 PM
You have offended. It's not a feeling.

shanomi4
05-16-2007, 04:25 PM
Look whose being insulting. I guess when you're out of ideas, or just here to troll, that's what happens.
I was trying to be funny. Sorry if you take an anonymous persons words and take them to heart. I will use restraint when it comes to responding to you in the future. My apologies!!
:thumbsup2

shanomi4
05-16-2007, 04:30 PM
Cruises didn't exist in the 1970s?

.
Are we being condescending? Sarcastic? Great!! Of course they did. They just didn't have rock climbing walls...kids club....surfing.....ice-skating......bowling.....and so on. They also cost a lot less today then they did in the 70's. You may want to read up on cruises!!

You go and believe that they are not in competition. A little ironic that they even have boards for US on disboards! Go and read about how many people split their time between the 2. Bye bye and have a nice night!!
:hug:

shanomi4
05-16-2007, 04:37 PM
You have offended. It's not a feeling.
then sorry that I have offended. Just wanted to say, in case I get banned, That I have learned a lot, even feel a little different towards Disney and the executives. Disney could and should do more. That said it has been fun playing in the playpen. Mom is calling, and it looks like she has signed me up in another play group!! Chow everyone!! :wave:

mrsR123
05-16-2007, 05:11 PM
Universal and Disney are both theme parks. :thumbsup2 They both promote there parks to families. :yay: They are both in Orlando. :cool2: They both have themed rides. :woohoo: They both have roller coasters.:cool1: Logically, no matter what the vision was in the past, they are competitors. I am sorry that you can not see that. They can both be vastly different, but they are going after the same dollar. The dollar that people set aside for a vacation. But you can't seem to understand that. Thanks for playing and sorry to say I do not have a consolation prize for you. Better luck next time!!:wave:

By this thinking, then the local AAA ball club is a competitor with Major League Baseball as well since they're both playing games and charging admission.

There's a reason for the expression "not in the same league" when referring to quality.

G8RFAN
05-16-2007, 06:38 PM
In the Chicago land area in the mid 70's Marriott built a theme park near my hometown and for the most part, they copied Disney's design in a lot of it. My sister and I worked in that park for many summers when Marriott owned it and while it wasn't Disney world, it still was a fairly nice place to go. Marriott sold the park in the mid 80's to the Six Flags group and it's been down hill ever since.......
Marriott's Great America... too bad about the decline. I grew up in Libertyville and loved going to that park. My favorite ride was Willard's Wizzer (a name I'm sure must have changed by now if it is still there).

I must have written at least two long responses in this thread that I decided to just not post in the end. Trips to WDW in the late 70's for our family involved staying offsite. I can not draw my experiences from that time and compare them to now because in the eyes of kid, I never had to think in terms of value of the dollar like I do now. I was more into what was "wow" and what was "boring". My guess is that a 2000 Leagues under the sea ride today would probably not wow a lot of today's kids. I remember as a kid thinking how bogus it was that I could still see the surface of the water from my little porthole. Anyway, I do remember a thriving cottage industry surrounding WDW and now see that has evolved into major corporate entities thriving and the small entrepreneurs dying out. The expansion of onsite resorts had everything to do with this. Some of you business grads remember most of the companies in Tom Peters "In Search of Excellence" being eventual busts. A quick scan of the Fortune 100 tells me that there are no more storybook companies. GE, Disney, Citigroup, JP Morgan are all much better off split up for the shareholders in terms of value. There is nothing good to say about Walmart, except stuff is cheap for us consumers. Home Depot was a darling but its stock price has stagnated and employees are no longer happy to work there. Microsoft is like any other mega corporation to work for. Chrysler is now owned by a private equity group that owns a significant portion of other auto industry companies. Retirees with benefits watch out. Maybe the best thing is for Disney to split up and become small again because they will never escape the bean counters otherwise. I'm sure most critics here would love to see the Media Networks segment to go away as they seem to be the ones that don't grasp the original Disney mission statement. What else would you do? Tear down the Values and start over? Cancel any future DVC projects? Would you allow the spin off of park operations from the Studio Entertainment side? If not, how would you prevent that from happening? Anyway I am this close to hitting the backspace button.....

YoHo
05-16-2007, 06:44 PM
Last time I was there, it was still the Wizzer, though not Willards.

G8RFAN
05-16-2007, 06:58 PM
Last time I was there, it was still the Wizzer, though not Willards.
:rotfl2: Makes sense! :rotfl2:

YoHo
05-16-2007, 07:03 PM
What else would you do? Tear down the Values and start over? Cancel any future DVC projects? Would you allow the spin off of park operations from the Studio Entertainment side? If not, how would you prevent that from happening? Anyway I am this close to hitting the backspace button.....

I don't know how you could have a Parks division without at least the Studio's catalogue. Though I'm sure you could set something up like OLC. The problem is I'm not sure there's an OLC equivelent around to buy the place.

G8RFAN
05-16-2007, 08:06 PM
I don't know how you could have a Parks division without at least the Studio's catalogue. Though I'm sure you could set something up like OLC. The problem is I'm not sure there's an OLC equivelent around to buy the place.
I think the Parks division would be the easiest to spin off. There are so many capital groups out there looking for a nice investment and it would be an easy capital raise in the public sector. Hard assets, not a ton of goodwill, producing excellent income and a reasonable licensing agreement with the Studios assuming they would maintain control of the intellectual properties could really make it attractive.

minnie61650
05-16-2007, 11:46 PM
I have nothing against those shows and I like them. Disney does need to add more attractions though to AK and they certainly have enough room to do so. AK is the largest of all the theme parks, yet has the least amount of E ticket rides. They shouldn't have to take out any current attractions they currently have to add a new one. According to the Modern Marvels program on the Discovery Channel, AK has enough land to house MK, Epcot, and MGM all inside the property AK sits on, with room left over. I have no problem with the park except for that Dinoland area which looks like a cheesy carnival area and that same spinning roller coaster that Six Flags has and calls the Ragin Cagin. Expedition Everest is a top notch attraction and more similar, is needed to make it an all day park. As it sits right now, my family and I can go through it and be done by 2 or 3 pm. I hope Disney has more on the drawing boards for it, because the park is a neat concept and deserves more.

I agree.

When I first read about the plans for Animal Kingdom I was so excited.
AK was going to have the real animals, ancient animals and mythological animals all in the same park! What a great concept and something my sons especially would really enjoy. My boys were so into dinosaurs and dragons. I though this definitely would be a park that young boys would enjoy and would want to return to time and again! It had so much potential .
If only it had been created with the wow factor I knew Disney was capable of.

When we went in 1999 all I can say is how disappointed my whole family was with this park. Yes, some of the areas of the AK are well presented but we just felt like AK was major letdown.

I do understand Dinoland is supposed to look a "cheesy carnival"--But I also was very surprised and disappointed this was added. It just seemed to cheapen the whole park. My son who was looking forward to AK but was so dissapointed in Dinoland also. He felt this area would not appeal to young boys. ( Of course this is the son who grew up loving Epcot and from the ripe old age of 5 proclaimed it to be his favorite park in all of the world --not just WDW.)

By the way he is 25 now and he still says Epcot (the Epcot before Test Track and MS) is his favorite theme park and that River Country was his favorite water park.

minnie61650
05-17-2007, 12:31 AM
:lmao: :lmao: Well I guess the imagineers did their job great!! That was the objective..to make it look like a "cheesy carnival" ! Did you notice that it was built on asphalt ..even with the white paint...kind of like a parking lot? You do know that it wasn't built on an old parking lot, right?:confused: You may not like the theme, but obviously they did a good job as you stated just what it was suppose to be like!!! I for one liked it. I like the feeling of a Carnival, but certainly wouldnít let my kids ride at a real Carnival. It was kind of nostalgic.:hippie: I even pointed it out to the kids. To each their own!!

Yes, it is a cute carnival idea and I think it would have been a hit if it were a mini park located near the BoardWalk Inn. The Atlantic coast had lots of little carnival areas by the board walk in the 50's and 60's.

I just fail to see why Disney located it in a section of AK that was supposed to be donated to animals who roamed the Earth in the ancient past?:confused3


Just my 2 cents

disneyfan67
05-17-2007, 12:55 AM
Marriott's Great America... too bad about the decline. I grew up in Libertyville and loved going to that park. My favorite ride was Willard's Wizzer (a name I'm sure must have changed by now if it is still there).

I must have written at least two long responses in this thread that I decided to just not post in the end. Trips to WDW in the late 70's for our family involved staying offsite. I can not draw my experiences from that time and compare them to now because in the eyes of kid, I never had to think in terms of value of the dollar like I do now. I was more into what was "wow" and what was "boring". My guess is that a 2000 Leagues under the sea ride today would probably not wow a lot of today's kids. I remember as a kid thinking how bogus it was that I could still see the surface of the water from my little porthole.





I'm glad to be addressing a former Lake County resident and yes, the Wizzer is still there, but they dropped the Willards name years ago. The current owners of Six Flags were going to get rid of it and put in another high tech, super fast roller coaster that wouldn't be popular with families and cater only to teens and young adults. There actually was a outcry of support for the Wizzer and it's still there today and just as good. It's one of the few things my family can do together when we used to go there. I let my season passes expire last spring and have no desire to go back. It's become better in the last year or so, but you can see the neglect in areas and at times it's just a haven for thugs and un supervised teenagers, especially during the Fright Fest weekends around Halloween.:scared1:

My dislike for what has become of the former Marriott's Great America park, is one of the reasons why I'm so outspoken about the direction Disney is headed in some areas. I really do love going to WDW and have for a long time. It's one of the few things my family and I can do together and everybody have a genuine good time. I normally would get so wound up about things, but I really care about the parks and the company and don't want my children to not have the Disney World experience I did, growing up. I know Disney can do better and most die hard fans like me agree. Disney fans/fanatics/follower's, etc, are just like Harley and Corvette owners. They love their product, consider it their hobby and means of relaxing, and are passionate about where the company is going and what that company is doing to the theme parks they love. Disney is part of American culture and a icon. You don't mess with something that special, IMO. Everyone of a certain age knows who Uncle Walt is and what other company can say that about their founder and creator?


As for your experience on the 20,000 Leagues ride, sure it was kind of hoky, but I would rather have it there instead of what's currently in place now. That ride has it's legion of fans and the Internet buzz surrounding the new version opening in Disneyland in June. I haven't seen such excitement for a new Disney ride, ever. The Nemo sub ride really looks good and I would love to try it out, but the lines for it are going to be enormous. I wish WDW would get the same version of it. You should check out sites like Miceage and see what all the buzz is about. They been covering the construction of it, for almost two years. To me that speaks volumes about how passionate Disney fans really are and I'm glad to be part of it.

JoeEpcotRocks
05-17-2007, 12:05 PM
I agree.

When I first read about the plans for Animal Kingdom I was so excited.
AK was going to have the real animals, ancient animals and mythological animals all in the same park! What a great concept and something my sons especially would really enjoy. My boys were so into dinosaurs and dragons. I though this definitely would be a park that young boys would enjoy and would want to return to time and again! It had so much potential .
If only it had been created with the wow factor I knew Disney was capable of.

When we went in 1999 all I can say is how disappointed my whole family was with this park. Yes, some of the areas of the AK are well presented but we just felt like AK was major letdown.

I do understand Dinoland is supposed to look a "cheesy carnival"--But I also was very surprised and disappointed this was added. It just seemed to cheapen the whole park. My son who was looking forward to AK but was so dissapointed in Dinoland also. He felt this area would not appeal to young boys. ( Of course this is the son who grew up loving Epcot and from the ripe old age of 5 proclaimed it to be his favorite park in all of the world --not just WDW.)

By the way he is 25 now and he still says Epcot (the Epcot before Test Track and MS) is his favorite theme park and that River Country was his favorite water park.

I can't help but wonder if Disney didn't outsmart themeselves on Dinoland. Yeah, they did a good job making it "cheesy," but it's so non-Disneyesque as if they were playing a joke on themselves. I would have preferred a "wow" to "cheeze-wiz."