Disney Information Station Logo

Go Back   The DIS Discussion Forums - DISboards.com > Disney Trip Planning Forums > Disney Rumors and News
Find Hotel Specials & DIScounts
 
facebooktwitterpinterestgoogle plusyoutubeDIS Updates
Register Chat FAQ Tickers Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 01-24-2013, 06:27 PM   #211
YoHo
If you have any poo to fling, now is the time.
 
YoHo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Roseville, Ca.
Posts: 3,944

I'm not so much the East German Judge as I am the Olympic committee defining the technical parameters of the Gymnastics competition. You may disagree with my parameters, but I set them and you joined in the competition. It's only rigged if I hide those parameters.
__________________
YoHo, YoHo a Pirates life for me.

Critical thinking about Disney at
www.july171955.com

"That's why I love Walt Disney. It costs $100,000 to build a spire you didn't need. The secret of Disney is doing things you don't need and doing them well and then you realize you needed them all along." - Ray Bradbury
YoHo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 07:49 PM   #212
YoHo
If you have any poo to fling, now is the time.
 
YoHo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Roseville, Ca.
Posts: 3,944

Quote:
Originally Posted by pilferk View Post

See, again, I disagree. The actual storytelling (the music, the art, the dance, a story, itself) + the presentation + the presenters + the method of presentation + the environment of the presentation + all the other factors involved that are fairly numerous...that's what makes the show. The sum total of all of it. The razzle and the dazzle, so to speak. The sizzle with the steak.
Before I go back to agreeing to disagree. This here is an example of the mechanics. Storytelling isn't about mechanics. It's not about how it is about a fundamental part of human civilization.

You cannot be a good storyteller without being a good showman, but you can be a bad storyteller if you're a bad showman.

By the same token, you could not be a showman at all if you weren't being a storyteller, because if you have no story to tell, than you have nothing to present, to Show.

Show is the mechanics, the how. Storytelling is the mental, the what, the why.

Also, I think, because you used the word Story in your description, it becomes very confusing. I studiously have been avoiding the word story, because Story often gets conflated with narrative and plot and those are very much tools of the showman. And as I've said in other posts, some of those tools have been misused or abused.

So I see the chicken and Egg thing in the sense that you mean. I'm refusing to define it that way.

Let me put it a different way, I'm stating my definition of storytelling and explaining why SHOW is subserviant to it. You've stated what SHOW is, but not really addressed my definition of storytelling.

But either way it's all about language and definitions. I could have said show. I chose to be even more abstract in defining what makes Walt tick.

why? Because when you focus on SHOW, you focus on the mechanics. Well, Pirates uses this specific theatrical technique to achieve it's SHOW and so if I apply that to this other attraction it must be just as good.

This is the Disney failing.

And perhaps this is where the HM/SM comparison breaks down, because I am digging into the mechanics. And that's fine, I admit, I can get down into the dirt on this stuff.

I'm discussing this on two levels. The Mechanics of the SHOW and the philosophical/metaphysical nature of Storytelling.

I'm mapping from SHOW to Storytelling by suggesting that an original concept is more compelling than a synergistic one.

It's the classic original Screenplay versus adapted screenplay question.
__________________
YoHo, YoHo a Pirates life for me.

Critical thinking about Disney at
www.july171955.com

"That's why I love Walt Disney. It costs $100,000 to build a spire you didn't need. The secret of Disney is doing things you don't need and doing them well and then you realize you needed them all along." - Ray Bradbury
YoHo is offline   Reply With Quote
|
The DIS
Register to remove

Join Date: 1997
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,000,000
Old 01-24-2013, 08:38 PM   #213
bcrook
DIS Veteran

 
bcrook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Missouri
Posts: 4,014

Quote:
Originally Posted by DVC-Landbaron View Post
And you would be missing the opportunity of a lifetime! NO ONE appreciates Disney like I do! I could show you things that you never knew existed. I could guide you through so that you’d never wait more than ten minutes in a line even in the most crowded times (Except Christmas!! Even I can’t get around the place being that crowded!!) And I could tell you stories about why things were done as they were done, and how they did what they did, and so on, etc. I can take you to little nooks and crannies with tales of why and wherefores, and the stories behind them. I could show you the PERFECT spot to see the fireworks or the parade or even Illuminations!

And the guided tour would be done with pixie dusted eyes and smiles on everybody’s faces!! And why is that? Because NO ONE enjoys Disney like I do!!

Hmmmmm. I suppose that sounds arrogant too!! But, it’s true!! I know an awful lot about the place and I ALWAYS have a wonderful time when I’m there. There is still enough of Walt’s “Magic” about the place!! And the current administration does do some ‘nice’ things every so often. Enough, at least, to keep me going back!

Do you find that hard to understand? That I could come on this Board and RANT & RAVE about the downfall of Disney yet have a wonderful 3-week vacation at OKW and LOVE every minute of it. You shouldn’t be. It is BECAUSE I have a love for Disney that I rant! It is BECAUSE I have a special appreciation for the way Walt did things that I rave! But that doesn’t spoil my good time when I’m there! (Unless I see the vacuums come out or painting going on during the day!! Then my blood pressure does go up a tad!!).
Pure passion! That also sounded pretty darn good as I read that aloud to my son!
__________________
-Barry
  • FP+ original discussions "What we know, what we want to know" can be found at this site.
  • Best WDW insider fact or story thread.
  • WDW Estimated Ride Capacities
bcrook is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 10:47 PM   #214
manning
Just for that I have requested it be left open!!!
We each have a sore spot....My butt and her right foot
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 11,168

Quote:
Originally Posted by bcrook View Post









Exciting:
- Splash Mountain (to me this is one of the great Disney rides - amazing theme, fun ride, and classic connection to music and story) But this had to have been developed before the Disney Decade (I guess that is ok).



You can thank Frank Wells for this ride. It was first shown to Eisner and he said "we can't afford to build this."

It was then shown to Frank Wells and he said "we can't afford not to build this"

so the story goes.
manning is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 06:14 AM   #215
DVC-Landbaron
What Would Walt Do?
 
DVC-Landbaron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,033

akadada

Quote:
I respect the "team of" Eisner, Wells etc because my reality (truth and reality aren't the same as you know, that's why I respect your commitment to truth) was that Eisner assembled (or was the face of) a great team and Wells to me seemed to run the place (The Tangible), while Eisner was a good face for capital markets management which seemed needed (Intangible) at the time whether we liked him or not. Please tell me #1 how I'm wrong and #2 what the solution should have been at that time, not what we know today.
I don’t object to any of the nouns in your paragraph. It’s the adjective with which I have a problem! (You also haven’t spelled his name right even once!!! It’s E-i-$-n-e-r. You should try it! IT’S FUN!!!!!) Anyway…

You say, “Ei$ner assembled a (GREAT) team.” He assembled a team. Great? I don’t know. Katzenberg was there. And he knew some good properties when he saw them and had enough sense to let Ron Miller finish Mermaid. But I don’t think Ei$ner could pick his nose let alone pick a team!! Maybe Wells had more to do with it. And what bugs me about it, is that if it was true and he did pick this GREAT team, well… They weren’t all in that fateful helicopter! What happened to this GREAT team the next day! All of a sudden they turned into brown-nosing yes-men? Every one except Katzenburg, who got the axe!!! Nah! It doesn’t happen that way. They were, for the most part, toadies and yes-men to begin with. NOT a great team!! Katzenberg and Wells made a great team. Not a Disney team perhaps, but a better team than one with Ei$ner in it!

Quote:
I reviewed your thoughts on how Disney would not have allowed the Eisner evolution (which I want to also believe), but respectfully, that's AdHoc. He's dead unfortunately and so we have no idea where he would have gone. We "believe", but we don't know.
You are right. We have no idea what he would have done, EXACTLY. No one does. But we have his legacy, writings, quotes, film clips and other first hand knowledge. And most important we have his examples! His films, his technique and Disneyland!! We have his philosophy in “Traditions” (that used to be a 3 day course for every new Cast Member, until that great team you mentioned cut it down to a half a day orientation!!!!)

So you are right. We don’t know specifically what he would do. But we know the “HOW” he would do something very well. And that doesn’t take belief; it just takes research in how he did similar things. And all of that is very well documented.

Quote:
Would he have been the same running a public company; what pressures would have been put on him? And, he eventually would have died, what succession plan would have been in place?
Again, none of that matters. We have the answers and examples of HOW he’d do something. And that is really all that matters. Some creative guy, and they are all over the place, says, “Boy oh boy!! I want a ride that…. (Fill in the blank)…” and then you apply Walt’s principles to it, or what I call his PHILOSOPHY!! It’s easy!!

Quote:
The worst thing could have been simply Disney going public,
Ah! Wait a minute! You do know that Disney was a publically held company when Walt was alive, don’t you? And he had a harder time with investors than the faceless “wall street” that Ei$ner faced. Another Voice had a post somewhere comparing publically owned companies from the ’50s and ‘60s and those of the 2000s. It was pretty interesting. I’ll see if I can find it. in the mean time:

From "Building a Company: Roy O. Disney and the Creation of an Entertainment Empire" by Bob Thomas:

"Walt had long opposed a public stock offering, fearing that his total autonomy over creative matters might be challenged by investors. At Roy's insistence, Walt agreed to issuance of preferred and common stock in April, 1940."

Quote:
The history we know is the one of Team Eisner "reality" a better place than pre-Eisner for someone my age. Perhaps not your age and reality. Eisner was the face, but I infer it was because Wells was the better man at the job.
Now, here we have a problem. How can you say that? I can understand your praise of them for DEFENDING THE MAGIC KINGDOM from those big bad corporate raiders!! But your personal experience? Really? I don’t know how old you are, but even for the oldest (or youngest) amongst us, I find this unfathomable. Let’s take a walk down memory lane, because I’m confused again!

OK, let’s see. Pre-Ei$ner we had Disneyland open in 1955. It grew steadily, but not greatly until 1964 when the World’s Fair hit and Disney had the big three in it: Small World, Carousel of Progress and Great Moments With Mr. Lincoln. (The birth of human AA figures, Tiki was first.) Then we got Pirates and Haunted Mansion soon after. That brings us to the close of the 60s.

In 1971 we had WDW open!!! WOW!! The Poly, The Contemporary, The Golf Resort, The Market Place and TA-DA!! The Magic kingdom!!! All opened on the same day!! Not bad! Soon after Space Mountain was added. A couple years later Thunder Mountain. Then in 1981 E.P.C.O.T. opened!! The single biggest private construction project EVER!! (There may be another since, but at the time, that was it!!) And three short years, more like two and a half, later Ei$ner entered.

I do not understand how you could say that Disney was a better place after Ei$ner! What happened next? Euro-Disney!! MGM!! AK!! DCA!!! YUCK!!!!!

Quote:
Post Wells, I felt within a few years the spiraling, (symbolic). The parks lost their "magic" whatever reality we each want to call it. Eisner scrambled it seemed, typical Venture Capital flipper mentality.
You know, I had a boss once that was a retired Navy guy. In his history in the navy he was once the Captain of an aircraft carrier. We were working on a project and we were having a hard time having people buy into it. They weren’t overtly resistant, but on some primal level they did not want this change! He told me that this was going to be like turning his ship. Those things are so big, he said, and carried so much momentum that it took a half a day for a 90 degree course correction. And it’s fighting you all the way!! He said that this project, like any corporation would take the same time and effort. We had been rolling ahead in our “mindset” for so long, that this change in course, this change in attitude, would not happen quickly.

So how long after Wells died did you notice the change? I noticed it right away! (Heck! I noticed it before when they priced me out of the Poly by DOUBLING the cost!!) My point, of course, is that it takes time to change the culture of a corporation. And I think it happened too quickly after Well’s death to have started then. What do you think? Make sense?

Quote:
The insult on Disney legacy drove me nuts. I used to think Disney (corporate) mission was to try to create a perfect place in an imperfect world. I felt and lived that when I visited. Reality, maybe not truth.
On this we agree. Wholeheartedly!!! The only bone of contention that I can see is when it started!!!
Quote:
The reality is I had a darn good time in the early to mid 90's in Disney and at that time, I wasn't smart enough to perceive another way that could be better. Post Wells, not grateful. Pissed. Since then, still pissed.
Almost the same here. I always have a good time there. Well, almost always. It’s hard not to notice the UN-Walt things, but for the most part I ignore them until I get back here and VENT!!!!

Quote:
I hope the edits above come out clear (as well as my thoughts). We'll see where this goes.
The edits were HORRIBLE!!! But it came out clear anyway. I think we agree more than disagree.
__________________
"Give the people everything you can give them."
"Disneyland is a work of love. We didn't go into Disneyland just with the idea of making money."

For the best "Disney Education" on the web go to: http://www.july171955.com/

Long live the Pirate!!
DVC-Landbaron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 06:40 AM   #216
MassJester


Have camera -- will travel
 
MassJester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Weymouth, Massachusetts
Posts: 2,725

Quote:
Originally Posted by DVC-Landbaron View Post
So you are right. We don’t know specifically what he would do. But we know the “HOW” he would do something very well. And that doesn’t take belief; it just takes research in how he did similar things. And all of that is very well documented.


Again, none of that matters. We have the answers and examples of HOW he’d do something. And that is really all that matters. Some creative guy, and they are all over the place, says, “Boy oh boy!! I want a ride that…. (Fill in the blank)…” and then you apply Walt’s principles to it, or what I call his PHILOSOPHY!! It’s easy!!
I'm not sure it's all that easy.

Walt was a creature of his time and place. His actions, beliefs and principles were in context. To assume that he would have responded to everything the same way in perpetuity with no evolution of approach and belief doesn't seem reasonable.

We talk a lot about how "modern" hotels don't bring forward theme and story, but there is little evidence that Walt would have done it differently, and some that he wasn't interested in the hotel business at all.

My point is that we do a fair amount of idealized projection that is simply that.
__________________
Paul

A lot of visits to different resorts since 1983 DVC Member - Villas at the Wilderness Lodge
armed and dangerous with a Canon 5D Mark II -- my photo gallery at: http://massjester.zenfolio.com/
MassJester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 07:07 AM   #217
pilferk
Jambo Wildbunch Gang
I feel like Rita Rodney Dangerfield...
 
pilferk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 6,556

Quote:
Originally Posted by YoHo View Post
I'm not so much the East German Judge as I am the Olympic committee defining the technical parameters of the Gymnastics competition. You may disagree with my parameters, but I set them and you joined in the competition. It's only rigged if I hide those parameters.
And so, as it was your right to set your criteria in defining what you base your opinion on (again, as the East German Judge, IMHO)....so it is mine to disagree with them.

Which is why I disagree with the analogy.

So, there you go.
__________________
Disney dreamin'...Somewhere!
11 9 7 (...our little Disney Souvenir)

Last edited by pilferk; 01-25-2013 at 07:28 AM.
pilferk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 07:14 AM   #218
DVC-Landbaron
What Would Walt Do?
 
DVC-Landbaron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,033

Quote:
We talk a lot about how "modern" hotels don't bring forward theme and story, but there is little evidence that Walt would have done it differently, and some that he wasn't interested in the hotel business at all.
No he wasn’t interested in the “Hotel Business” as a business. He was interested in telling a story, creating a theme, evoking an emotion and WOWing his guests!!! And YES!! There is evidence that he would have done it differently. In 1965 the Florida Project was announced. The planning, by Walt himself and his team, was started years before. And what was planned, with Walt’s stamp of approval, if not direct input? Do some exploring on this page and see if that hideous white copy of a California hotel can even hold a candle these WALT created resorts!!

http://www.disneydrawingboard.com/WD...ea/MKArea.html

Quote:
My point is that we do a fair amount of idealized projection that is simply that.
No. No idealized projection here. Just some good old fashioned research!!
__________________
"Give the people everything you can give them."
"Disneyland is a work of love. We didn't go into Disneyland just with the idea of making money."

For the best "Disney Education" on the web go to: http://www.july171955.com/

Long live the Pirate!!
DVC-Landbaron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 07:23 AM   #219
MassJester


Have camera -- will travel
 
MassJester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Weymouth, Massachusetts
Posts: 2,725

Quote:
Originally Posted by DVC-Landbaron View Post
No. No idealized projection here. Just some good old fashioned research!!
You missed, or avoided, the points about context and evolution of approach.
__________________
Paul

A lot of visits to different resorts since 1983 DVC Member - Villas at the Wilderness Lodge
armed and dangerous with a Canon 5D Mark II -- my photo gallery at: http://massjester.zenfolio.com/
MassJester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 07:33 AM   #220
DVC-Landbaron
What Would Walt Do?
 
DVC-Landbaron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,033

Quote:
You missed, or avoided, the points about context and evolution of approach.
I didn't miss it or avoid it. I ignored it. Because I don't see what has changed in context or evolution. People still like theme parks (emphasis on the THEME). And they still need a place to stay when visiting those theme parks. Not much evolution going on here, is there? And the context is EXACTLY the same.

So I ignored it. Do you have another point or am I missing something?
__________________
"Give the people everything you can give them."
"Disneyland is a work of love. We didn't go into Disneyland just with the idea of making money."

For the best "Disney Education" on the web go to: http://www.july171955.com/

Long live the Pirate!!
DVC-Landbaron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 08:50 AM   #221
DRDISNEYMD
*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+* *+*~The Snow Queen~*+* ~A girl should be two things: *+*~Classy & Fabulous~*+* +*+*~Coco Chanel~*+*+*+ *+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*
 
DRDISNEYMD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,483

Smile

~Omg.... I've really got to get caught up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pilferk View Post
The Yeti is definitely a travesty...mostly of engineering.

I'm not sure I would say "care enough"...although I guess it sort of fits.

My understanding is this:

Everest (the coaster/mountain) and the Yeti are two different, completely unrelated (as in, they don't touch each other) structures.

The engineers looked at what the Yeti was going to have to do, in terms of motion, it's weight, etc and figured out exactly what type of footer that structure was going to need in order to anchor it. That's in terms of type of footer, depth, and material to be used.

One of two things happened: The engineers goofed OR substandard materials/techniques were used (I've heard both explanations..that the engineers goofed and/or the construction crew did not use the correct mix of concrete AND did not cure it properly). Within a few months, the footer started to crack. That's bad, as you have a multi ton structure sitting on a cracked footer....and more cracks would destabilize the big guy, threatening the stability of the OTHER structure (the coaster) surrounding it. So they turned him off. By the looks of things, it's safe as is.

They've tried multiple scenarios to "quick fix" the problem...but reportedly none of them have worked. There is a sure fire way to fix it..but it involves de-skinning Everest (the other structture), removing Senor Yeti, drilling out the old footer, installing a new footer, rebuilding the Yeti, and reskinning Everest. That would require big bucks, and equally big down time, in a park that is already low on attractions (see my earlier rambling about AK and "the masses").

So that gives you and idea of just how much they have to "care" to fix it the only way that, for sure, would work.

I suspect they'll keep "thinking" and see if they can come up with an alternate solution. I suspect they won't...and until some larger park expansion (Avatarland?) goes live, we'll get the Yeti in disco mode.


I'll respond to your comments on my post in another reply.
~Wow& thanks for the insight. I dont think the Yeti is worth the hassle & Expedition Everest is still majestic!


Quote:
Originally Posted by pilferk View Post
I think most folks would like both (have the cake and eat it, too) but would accept less (but not zero) quantitative to get more qualitative.

I suspect, with Eisner, we got not quite either...at least on a more micro level.

Take DHS, for example.

When it opened, you had the Backlot tour and the Great Movie ride. That's it.

http://www.yesterland.com/mgm-beginning.html

I wouldn't call that much of substance. Now, has it grown? Absolutely it has. But it still doesn't hold a candle to MK or Epcot (and I'll not argue the fact there are pure greed business reasons for keeping it that way..different discussion). And yet, day guest are still paying full price to enter.

And that's what I mean to demonstrate: Eisner was a lot less worried about the quality of the products he slapped the Disney name on. Now, not to the extent the Kodak execs were..but still. I think it's easy to see that..you're right...Eisner was a lot more concerned with having the Disney name on the park (and opening it before Universal opened) than he was in ensuring a Disney EXPERIENCE in the park.

Look at DCA, too. That was put together on Eisner's watch (and fixed, largely, on Iger's).

Look at the Disney stores (which are a little more plus and minus during Eisner's terms). When they started, they offered a high end boutique experience and merch to customers/guests. Granted, started on Eisners watch..but also EARLY on, and while he still had a more "disney-fied" executive structure. Once he really entered his megalomaniac days, and had changed the corporate culture and embraced the sharp pencil suited Yes men...he almost killed them. By insisting on a more homogenized (and cheaply made, to be blunt) merch selection and a "good enough for the Gap, good enough for us" guest experience.

THATS what I mean when I say "brand over substance".



By "past quality", I mean the projects before Eisner, or that were greenlit and largely developed before his fingers touched them.

Agree on the powerhouse comment, to some extent. At least to the point that they would be a very different company. And I'll not debate that what he did had positive effects on their bottom line. They did.

But there was an alternate course which COULD HAVE HAD (and we'll never know, which is why this is all a big game of "what if") similar effects on their bottom line, but radically different effects on the quality of the products that had their name on them.



I disagree, here. I think Disney was already pretty ingrained in the social consciousness of the masses. In fact, I think Eisner played OFF of that, actually, to make his big bucks.

3 new gates? Epcot was really not his. Disney MGM (which we covered) was. AK (which we've covered and I'm not sure I would count as much of a success story, all things considered) was. So was DCA. And Disneyland:Paris.

Notice that, of those parks, almost every one needed massive "fixes", after they opened, to actually make them appealing to guests. I would argue that DHS still isn't fully fixed and AK isn't "theme-parky" enough for the masses. That's because Eisner was very much a "Field of Dreams" guy: Build it and they will come (because we're Disney and they HAVE to). He's not altogether wrong, either.

He built (or had built) some (SOME) very nice resorts and some that are...just OK. I agree with many here who say the values are decorated, not themed...but that's just MHO. They do fill rooms, so that's good for their bottom line. And they obviously have not reached saturation point, yet. One wonders, again, though.....what might have been.

I would not count ABC as an unmitigated win for Eisner. During his actual tenure, it was more of an albatross (ditto ABC Family...I have no idea what those execs were smoking, given their business model/plans, and the fact they were impossible to implement). It has been more successful, lately...but that's because they've had better management (and, I'd suggest, less micro-managing from Eisner).

Pixar...again, he gets mixed marks. He prayed on a small start up company, giving them TERRIBLE terms, and won the lottery. He had ZERO input on the quality of the Pixar product, too (or, rather, only as much input as Pixar decided to give him, to play nice). Remember, Disney just distributed what Pixar gave them. Lassiter might have been the one guy, on earth, who got to tell Eisner to "go scratch", on occasion, when Eisner sent his notes along.

Eisner also relied on Pixar, letting the Disney animation quality tank (and trying to shutter the division, remember), and then practically ran them out of town with his ego and unwillingness to actually share in their own success. Yes, Iger deserves some credit for being more human and being able to make a reasonable deal to purchase them. But, at that point, Pixar had Disney basically over a barrel.

Disney Cruise line...I can't disagree. It's a bright spot, for sure. I don't know a lot about the business side history of that concept...so can't comment much on the development or impetus for that move. Maybe someone else might disagree....

DVC....again, it's hard to disagree. It's provided a decent product for an (arguably) reasonable price. And it's made the company boatloads. I'd argue the expansion of DVC was a bit of a no-brainer, given the way OKW sold (probably WAY under what the market would have borne)..but he did greenlight OKW, so...there you go.



The frail position is an easy excuse, EARLY. But the fact is: If Disney had the capital to invest.....that time was past. Especially by the late 80's. You can excuse missing the boat early, I guess. But the funny part is: Exactly the opposite happened. The quality/substance was noticeably better early, in pretty much every business unit, and got worse as they got stronger.

That's a tell tale side that "branding" is taking a front seat to substance.

The funny aside is: Disney was never in trouble because of the quality or substance of the products they offered. They were markedly different from other brands (who faded because they either lost quality, share, or failed to keep up with changing trends/technology) because they still had a quality product to offer. They had quite valuable assets to use, that consumers WANTED.

They just didn't want to sell them.



Eisner had to use the assets he had. Yes, the brand was one of them. But there are different ways to harness a brand. One is easy..short term..and potentially harmful long term. The other is hard, short term, and can end up making the brand stronger (and more valuable) long term.

Eisner went one way. It made them scads of money, which is good for shareholders and, hopefully, the company long term. I'm hoping we're seeing SOME signs (certainly at DLR...but not only there, and not ONLY in resorts) they're abandoning that for a "brand re-strenghtening"..meaning offerings of greater substance.

I'll grant you: It's a great big game of "what if" and monday morning quarterbacking.

Eisner didn't need quick cash. Once he was installed as CEO, and the family bickering stopped, he was OK. He had assets that he could use to generate revenue, and the stockholders knew it. Largely, the share price was tanking because the execs refused to open the vault...to ANYONE (broadcast, home video, whatever) and develop their other assets. Eisner came in, with the backers vocal support and (really) insistence) saying he was going to do all that. Stability hit when Eisner's name was announced, really. HIS brand was the big stabilizing force (funny how quickly ornery investors calm down).



He didn't take the easiest path...because he probably would have destroyed the company he was working for. He didn't do that. He could have started out, right away, slapping the Disney name on everything and anything that showed the faintest interest. He was a bit more discerning...a bit more than a bit early in his tenure and ONLY a bit, later.

But he took an easier path than the one being suggested.
~Great post pilferk. You gave me a lot to think about!

~I see. So, if I build a brand new house with only two furnishings  a couch & bed, knowing I will eventually add more quality pieces as time progresses -- this by your account, is a "failure" citing lack of substance. By this logic, youre suggesting its best to wait until I collect all of the furnishings, decor and artwork before I begin construction  even if it will take years to fully acquire all of the pieces and plans to construct are put at a severe disadvantage, remaining vulnerable to life being any unforeseen event that can disrupt or delay construction  financing, weather (natural disaster), war, unemployment, labor disputes, litigation, civil unrest, shortages in raw material(s), etc. In contrast, there are no conditions that could prevent me acquiring furniture and art.

~There was a time when no one desired to travel. Disney cancelled construction right in the middle of completing Pop Centurys Legendary Years, abandoning the project altogether! It was quite odd; given the framework was already established! It must have been awful for Pop guests to look that unsightly blight everyday on vacation! It took twelve years for Disney to finally complete what is now Art of Animation.

~Disney Hollywood Studios, Typhoon Lagoon & Pleasure Island all opened in 1989. Later that year, DHS adds the Indiana Jones show & Star Tours! You see DHS as a "shell" of a park; I see DHS as huge accomplishment and a platform for growth, innovation and expansion.

~I went to Animal Kingdom the first year it opened and I can only remember seeing"Its A Bugs Life" and the safari. But, the park was so beautiful and so new; everyone was excited for the unique experiences! Likewise, with DHS; I rode ToT, The Great Movie Ride and Star Tours. There was no Rock n Roller Coaster, Toy Story Mania, or night show; but we had so much fun!

~I see your point. If you were to judge the parks by their own individual merits then DHS & AK may appear to fall short, in contrast to MK, but collectively they exceed expectations. My vacation is at Disney World. I dont view my experiences at DHS, independent of Magic Kingdom. I view my experiences as an "addition to" or as an "extension of" MK. Honestly, Epcot is my least favorite park, but still a favorite.

~You see DCA as fixed, I see it as enhanced." There would be no Carsland if there were no DCA. The would be no "Carsland" if there were no "Cars" (the release date was pushed back but the project began with Eisner). Iger built four rides - test track on steroids and three lackluster kiddie rides. Eisner built three theme parks and Disney cruise line. Not even close.

~Im not sure Eisner insisted on homogenized merchandise, maybe he was sold on it by an exec. I dont know if the Disney stores were profitable, but selling retail in a mall setting is super competitive. Retail is a very hard business, and if Disney went the way of Wal-mart, then I would imagine their core demographic being turned off. Ive never shopped at a Disney store, ever. I would walk right by them, so I see your point. If you say Eisner botched the Disney stores, Ill have to take your word for it. Have the stores fared any better with Iger? What was the alternate course.

~Disney wasnt all that prelevant for me, prior to The Disney Renaissance speared by Eisner. The three new gates under Eisner are DHS, AK, and DCA (I didn't say Epcot). I think DHS & AK are a wonderful additions to Disney World. The parks need to be continually plussed, that was Walts philosophy.

~I stayed at Pop Century for one night & it was just awful. The room was tiny, run down and filthy(pre-refurb). We had a car waiting first thing in the morning to drive us straight to the Poly. With that said, Ive never had a properly clean room at Disney, I bring items to properly prep the room before settling in. I only stay Deluxe CL, the majority of my stays are at the Poly with lagoon/theme park views. Its not a big deal; its just meh, to me. The Poly pool is just okay, I love the volcano, but it gets overcrowded very quickly, too small for a resort of that size. The cabanas are a nice addition, though. But, I like AKLs pool way better. I will say, that I love the lit torches, tiki music and lush grounds. It annoys me to no end that the monorail is so unreliable, and there are chunks of concrete that fall from the beams. CR is so cold and sterile, with one of the worst pool layouts I have ever seen. The monorail going through the lobby is the magic at this resort for me. The Grand Floridian is beautiful but the rooms dont appeal to me. I just cant get worked up over the existence of the values. Theyre bright, colorful, & fun for many people. I spend very little time at the resorts. the deluxes are all that, they're just a little more tolerable, imo. The CMs are great, I have to give them credit. So, I guess the values serve their purpose. I dont know about the decorations vs themes comment. I havent thought of it in that way. Ill have to think about that comment.

What did consumers want  specifically? How does a brand become stronger and successful with no substance? I would like to know specifically, the kind of products you are referencing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by YoHo View Post
This has already been commented on, but I'll reiterate, because it bothers me.



What past quality?
Well Disneyland and WDW for one. Obviously them.
How about every single animated film made by Walt Disney? That was Disney's other big revenue stream. Rereleasing past films to theaters.
And how did Eisner and Wells resurect the company? By releasing those old films to Video. How in the good lord's name would Eisner and Wells have resurrected Disney if they couldn't have rented or sold copies of Snow White, Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty?
All I can think is that what you really mean is that Disney spent a decade making Herbie sequels instead of good films, but then it was Ron Miller that made Splash and Tron, not Eisner and those were the films that restarted the motion picture division.

And for the record, the Theme parks are still where the company derives most of their money.

This has been addressed also, but What?

I'm not even sure how to address this? Mickey Mouse Club? Wonderful World of Color? Davy Crocket? DISNEYLAND!!!!
Disney was a household name for the entire baby boomer generation and those that followed. All Eisner did was capitalize on the growing credit and housing market to encourage people to take more Vacations and buy Timeshares. He didn't bring Disney to the Masses. Disney was already a household name. He just gave you more ways to give him your money.
~The majority of Disneys revenue comes from media like (ESPN), but the theme parks are performing very well.

~Fair enough. Im not suggest that Disney was never introduced to the masses prior to Eisner . I guess that came out wrong, so I apologize. Im not a "Boomer" so it could be a generational thing. I know Disney was a household name long before Eisner. Growing up, Disneys marketing was geared more toward my parents and grandparents. I remember the campaigns and they all had this message, that the new Disney was just not for kids anymore, then they would show grandparents dining and dancing all night.

~Disney didn't become relevant for me until The Little Mermaid was released, which was the start of the Disney Renaissance. Thats when I started to notice Disney in a big way. I couldn't wait for the next new Disney movie to be released and once the Lion King hit the cinema, I was hooked. Then, just when I thought Disney was done, they released Toy Story and I was hooked again!

~When Disney turned the castle into a cake, I thought it was so awesome! Today, I look back at the castle cake in horror, lol. I just had to get to Disney World -- I couldn't wait to see DHS, AK, Disney Cruise Line, Typhoon Lagoon, Blizzard Beach and the new resorts. Disney was everywhere, so I might be just a tad bit guilty of jumping on Eisners bandwagon.
__________________

DRDISNEYMD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 09:19 AM   #222
DVC-Landbaron
What Would Walt Do?
 
DVC-Landbaron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,033

I really haven’t been involved in the conversation that YoHo, DRDISNEYMD and pilfer have been engaged in. But I do read everything. And this caught my eye.

Quote:
~I see. So, if I build a brand new house with only two furnishings – a couch & bed, knowing I will eventually add more quality pieces as time progresses -- this by your account, is a "failure" citing lack of “substance”. By this logic, you’re suggesting it’s best to wait until I collect all of the furnishings, decor and artwork before I begin construction – even if it will take years to fully acquire all of the pieces and plans to construct are put at a severe disadvantage, remaining vulnerable to life being any unforeseen event that can disrupt or delay construction – financing, weather (natural disaster), war, unemployment, labor disputes, litigation, civil unrest, shortages in raw material(s), etc. In contrast, there are no conditions that could prevent me acquiring furniture and art.
Now let me see if I have this straight. We’re using this analogy for Disney and how they have a recent propensity for building half-day parks, right? And you couldn’t furnish your house completely because – WHY? You couldn’t afford? You couldn’t think of what else to put in there? You kept searching for that Louis the 14th end table but just can’t find it yet? What reason is it unfurnished? Why didn’t you get some art?

Now. Do you really think that Disney couldn’t afford it? Do you really think that the idea factory ran dry and they just didn’t know what else to put in there? Do you think they’re waiting for someone to invent the next state-of-the-art ride mechanism and then they will install it?

Sorry. None of those make sense to me. Does it to you? Or is there another reason other than being downright cheap and greedy.

Look at my signature. Walt always used to say, ”Give the people everything you can give them.”

Ever since Ei$ner the company line seems to be, “Give the people only what we can get away with – and nothing more!!”
__________________
"Give the people everything you can give them."
"Disneyland is a work of love. We didn't go into Disneyland just with the idea of making money."

For the best "Disney Education" on the web go to: http://www.july171955.com/

Long live the Pirate!!

Last edited by DVC-Landbaron; 01-25-2013 at 09:33 AM.
DVC-Landbaron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 09:26 AM   #223
DVC-Landbaron
What Would Walt Do?
 
DVC-Landbaron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,033

OK. I finally finished your post.

Quote:
~The majority of Disneys revenue comes from media like (ESPN), but the theme parks are performing very well.
NO!!!!! That is exactly opposite of what YoHo said! He said:

Quote:
And for the record, the Theme parks are still where the company derives most of their money.
__________________
"Give the people everything you can give them."
"Disneyland is a work of love. We didn't go into Disneyland just with the idea of making money."

For the best "Disney Education" on the web go to: http://www.july171955.com/

Long live the Pirate!!
DVC-Landbaron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 09:37 AM   #224
Peter Pirate 2
I may be a Disney curmudgeon but I still have Disney hope
What happened to Peter Pirate?
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,839

Quote:
Originally Posted by MassJester View Post
I'm not sure it's all that easy.

Walt was a creature of his time and place. His actions, beliefs and principles were in context. To assume that he would have responded to everything the same way in perpetuity with no evolution of approach and belief doesn't seem reasonable.

We talk a lot about how "modern" hotels don't bring forward theme and story, but there is little evidence that Walt would have done it differently, and some that he wasn't interested in the hotel business at all.

My point is that we do a fair amount of idealized projection that is simply that.
I agree with this train of thought. The response is to Landbaron's response though.

Although Walt did give his stamp of approval to MK he was not too thrilled with the idea as much more than a cash cow, which isn't very "Disney" now was it? But much as folks want to ignore it, Walt was not adverse to using this tact.

Walt was stoked for his version of EPCOT, which as you know was going to be more Celebration than the Epcot we received, oh to be sure my use of Celebration is only to install the real world vision Walt was going to go for. Certainly EPCOT was going to be much, much more than a development.

My point is that Walt had already distanced himself from cartoons, feature films, tv and theme parks. His time was being consumed by urban planning (EPCOT). I will try to get my hands on the source for this theory.

I am as sure as I can be that Walt would continue to acquiesce to Roy for money making projects to finance his newest dreams. I also think AK most probably would have been built at some point under Walt as animals were a true love of his, but Nahtazu would not have been in his plans. I'm sure it would have been spectacular!

The key to my ramblings is, was Walt smart or capable enough to pull off his EPCOT? I don't know but I'd like to think so and I revel in dreaming of the possibilities!
Peter Pirate 2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 10:41 AM   #225
DVC-Landbaron
What Would Walt Do?
 
DVC-Landbaron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,033

Just when I had things going in the general direction of the theme of this thread, in comes my friend the Pirate, out of left field somewhere, to muddy the waters!! Instead of talking about Walts philosophy of HOW to do something, he brings up what Walt would want to do!! VERY FRUSTRATING!!!

I already conceded the point that I have no idea what Walt would have wanted to do. I said that in my response. Yes. YES!! YES!!!!! He WANTED to build EPCOT. Not what we have but the whole bleeding city!! Yes! We understand that.

But that wasnt the question. The question was, if (and I dont care what the reason was. It could be Roy needing financing, it could be his daughter mentioned a place she stayed, or it could be he dreamed a dream that a place called Pop Century would blight his precious land (how about that for a futuristic nightmare!!) It doesnt matter). But IF he got it into his head to build a resort HOW would he do it? Some say we will never know. But I think we have a pretty good idea. Would it be like the Floridian or like the Asian? Like The Beach Club or like the Persian? Like a value (take your pick) or like the Venetian?

And the funny thing is you agreed with me (unless that was your intention). You said:

Quote:
I also think AK most probably would have been built at some point under Walt as animals were a true love of his, but Nahtazu would not have been in his plans. I'm sure it would have been spectacular!
Yes! You see it too! It would have been built under Walts philosophy. And that would indeed have been SPECTACULAR!!! Certainly NOT what we have.
__________________
"Give the people everything you can give them."
"Disneyland is a work of love. We didn't go into Disneyland just with the idea of making money."

For the best "Disney Education" on the web go to: http://www.july171955.com/

Long live the Pirate!!
DVC-Landbaron is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

facebooktwitterpinterestgoogle plusyoutubeDIS Updates
GET OUR DIS UPDATES DELIVERED BY EMAIL



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:48 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Copyright © 1997-2014, Werner Technologies, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

You Rated this Thread: