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 UpdatesDIS email updates
Register Chat FAQ Tickers Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read





Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 08-22-2002, 12:00 PM   #76
DisneyKidds
The TF thanks DisneyKidds for mouse-ing out his friend!
But in reality...
Member of car "X" - And proud of it!!
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Beautiful Hudson River Valley
Posts: 4,682

Yoho - thanks for the info.

Maybe someone else is paying rack rate - but myself and many others have gotten/are getting the Contemporary for less than that $154. I would still like to know what the Contemporary was going for in 1972. Anyone know?

Just for yucks - if the Contemporary cost $50 in 1972 it would be $210 in 2001. Tools like this are interesting but they need to be used carefully.
DisneyKidds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2002, 12:12 PM   #77
YoHo
If you have any poo to fling, now is the time.
 
YoHo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Roseville, Ca.
Posts: 3,944

True, there are other variables to look at. I don't have the price in 1972, but one thing to think about is that in 1981 there were no discounts. you paid $75 or $75 bucks. Imagine 2002 and everyone paid rack rate.

The neat thing about that tool is that you can use it the other way too. $75 in 1981 would translate to $36.79

I doubt that's what the poly cost in 1972. IF I'm right and the Poly in fact cost more, in 72 then $37, then that's even more interesting, because that means they grew the price at a rate lower then inflation. which opens up a whole new can of worms, cause Eisner and company 3 times in the 80's raised single day addmission prices at a rate higher then inflation, because they claimed prices were not at market value.

perhaps the same was done with the hotels. of course, to me, pricing a hotel below market value SCREAMS value.
__________________
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 08-22-2002, 12:44 PM   #78
DisneyKidds
The TF thanks DisneyKidds for mouse-ing out his friend!
But in reality...
Member of car "X" - And proud of it!!
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Beautiful Hudson River Valley
Posts: 4,682

Quote:
I doubt that's what the poly cost in 1972. IF I'm right and the Poly in fact cost more, in 72 then $37, then that's even more interesting, because that means they grew the price at a rate lower then inflation. which opens up a whole new can of worms
Sure does. However, I would imagine there are more variables involved than we could ever imagine. Another thing to note, most models out there use the general CPI. However, different industries and sectors might have widely differing inflation rates. I do know for a fact that there were years that the lodging rate of inflation was higher than the general CPI. How much higher over the course of 30 years I don't know.
DisneyKidds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2002, 02:07 PM   #79
hopemax
Note to Self: Please remember to bring your brain with you this time
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 5,630

I did a search on the internet for Polynesian price 1972 and I found a site that is selling a rate card which listed prices for the Contemporary, Polynesian and the "affiliated" hotels which were Howard Johnson (now Courtyard by Marriot), Royal Inn, Dutch Inn (now the Grosvenor) and the Travelodge.

In the description it says "rates listed at $32, $38 or $46."

http://www.geocities.com/paperdisney/cat10.htm

The scan isn't clear enough to read, but it may be a starting point.
__________________
Hope

Last edited by hopemax; 08-22-2002 at 02:24 PM.
hopemax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2002, 02:17 PM   #80
hopemax
Note to Self: Please remember to bring your brain with you this time
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 5,630

And I searched the newsgroups side, and someone from RADP a few years back, that his pack-rat mom saved their receipts from 1972 and they paid $38 a night for the Polnesian.
__________________
Hope
hopemax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2002, 05:24 PM   #81
DVC-Landbaron
What Would Walt Do?
 
DVC-Landbaron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,033

Mr. Kidds. You are interesting. And tenacious. But you are also wrong! Or it could be we are talking about two separate things (and maybe as many as a half of dozen different things!). From my perspective, I keep trying to clarify the question, define it and work it into something we both can live with, and you seem to muddy the works. You probably see things differently.

So, maybe I haven't done a good job defining things. I think that, as Scoop and I do sometimes, we need to stipulate. We need to be talking about the same things. And because this is pure conjecture, we need to define the boundaries of the "what if" scenarios in order to stave off the wild tangents on both parts. Fair enough? So, first a couple of questions, if you don't mind.

In your very first post you wrote:
Quote:
There is so much talk of the failure to maintain the Walt Disney 'standards' having led to the erosion of the Disney Magic and the ungluing of the Disney empire. Failure to put the Show above all else. Failure to 'do it right or not do it at all'. Failure to 'give the guest everything you can'.
Now to me, you are saying that the current regime is in question because of these alleged failures. And you want to know, through supposition, reasoning and conjecture if this is indeed the case. You ask further, in an implied effort to draw a comparison, "Failure to ask the question 'what would Walt do'?"

So your very first paragraph postulates the so-called failures of the current administration and begins to ask the question about how Walt would have done things. Furthermore, although secondary and somewhat implied in this context, is the issue of comparing what we have with what Walt would do. At least that's the way I read it. But then, in your most recent post, in response to my allegations regarding motivations and the comparison between Walt and Ei$ner, you write:
Quote:
Get off it pal . This has nothing to do with what the current regime has done - why does it always turn into that?
I thought that was the basic premise of the issue at hand. Seeing IF there has been a "Failure" that has led to the current erosion of Disney Magic. Sort of, "What would Walt do" DIFFERENTLY than EI$ner has done? So, the first question:

1- Are we to draw comparisons between Walt's Philosophy and EI$ner's Philosophy?

I'll play it anyway you want. I just want to be clear on the ground rules so I don't get another, "Get off it pal!" .

Next! We need to clarify your intent. Walt was good at giving people what they wanted even before they knew they wanted it. Almost everything he did had some of that in it, and his greatest accomplishments were almost completely made up of that element. Now, if you want me to crawl inside that frozen head, and innovate on his level, stating categorically what "Walt would do", then the game is over and you win. I cannot play. No one can. That is exactly the type of "what if" games in which I will not participate. I'm not good enough. I'm not Walt!!

But if you want to talk about his philosophy and his "business" approach. Well!! Then deal me in partner and anti up!! I'll play that game all day long!! You see, I DO understand his way of thinking. I DO understand his methodology. And while I cannot even come close to creating, dreaming or innovating anywhere near his level, I DO know how he would implement it. And it's all based on past performance. We simply look at the record. And you know what? It's pretty darn consistent!! Yeah, I'll grant you that there were a few anomalies. A few bumps on the chart. But you have to take that for what they are. Anomalies!! Plain and simple. And that's what I meant by playing a "What If" game. Sure, you could build a set of circumstances that would guarantee that the moderates get built! You could "What If" the philosophy until you successfully beat it into submission and form it into anything you want!! Is this what this exercise is supposed to do? Is that the answer you want?

It's like a guy that's 60 years old. And he never, ever exceeded the speed limit by even one mile an hour. He is the 'car pool' joke. No one wants to drive with him!! And one day the other guys are talking about good old "Slow-Joe" and one of them says that Joe would NEVER go faster that the speed limit!!! But the other guys offer scenarios where he'd be forced into it. "He's going so slow that a guy in the mustang pulls a gun and flashes it. Bet that'd get Slow-Joe moving past the limit!!" The other chimes in with, "You're right!! Remember when his daughter went into labor six miles from the hospital!! He sure found the gas pedal that day!!" Do you see what I mean by, "if pigs had wings"? There's always an exception to the rule. But I really thought we were trying to define the rule. Not the exception to it!

So that's the next question:

2- Are we going to go with one scenario, as in "the same set of circumstances that Ei$ner had? Or are we going to pull any wild and hair-brained supposition into the mix in order to force the conclusion you'd like achieve?

Now, I think you know which way I'd like to play it. We have to have some clear rules if we want to play the game fairly. So if you want to define your circumstances to one, and only one, crystal clear scenario, then I'll play. If not, find yourself another sucker!! Cause that's a losin' proposition! I'll only play if the "All things being equal" rule is applied to both of us. And if I break it, please call me on it. You know I won't hesitate to call you on it!!

That is why I pulled the EPCOT thing out of the mix. Who knows how it would go? I don't, that's for sure. It may have led to the utter destruction of the company. It may have led to the revitalization of urban areas across the globe with so much money pouring in it would make Bill Gates look like a pauper!! I don't know! That's way too big a "What If" to bring into a conversation regarding Walt's philosophy regarding moderate and economy hotel accommodations!! You want to do some speculation about that, that's fine. Just count me out! I haven't a clue!!!

Next! I'm afraid more of the same but I need to be sure you understand. And from the sound of the next paragraph you don't. So let's be very clear on it. You said:
Quote:
Hate to say it my good Baron.... you have as many pork bellies flying out your sphincter as anyone else around here. As you had agreed earlier, all this is speculation - even what you take as a given. IF Walt never deviated from or added to the Master Plan, IF Walt never had another original thought, idea, or concept for the parks business, IF we excise Epcot from the equation (which I never agreed to - it would have driven things in very different directions as Walt would have tirelessly pursued an Epcot that is nothing like what we have today). IF nothing came into the picture to 'force' him to compromise. IF the cubs, aliens, Mars, whatever........IF IF IF. See, my friend - you are just as good at the "what if" game as anyone else.
I'm afraid you have it backwards, my friend!! I don't want any "ifs". You are the one bringing them into the question. For example, I said that he approved the master plan. They did not include moderates! His plan for moderates was striking a deal with hotel chains, allowing them on the grounds and providing limited "Disney" services. This insured that the DISNEY resorts retained all the magic he could give them and it provided the masses with semi-Disney 'moderates' under someone else's brand in order to strictly maintain his STANDARD in his resorts!!! AV also said the same thing.

That didn't seem to please you. So you added a couple of "What Ifs". Such as,
Quote:
IF Walt never deviated from or added to the Master Plan", IF Walt never had another original thought, idea, or concept for the parks business, IF we excise Epcot from the equation (which I never agreed to - it would have driven things in very different directions as Walt would have tirelessly pursued an Epcot that is nothing like what we have today). IF nothing came into the picture to 'force' him to compromise.
That doesn't make any sense to me. Again, sure we could speculate and find reasons WHY he would be FORCED to do it. And I might even agree with some (although to be honest, I can't think of a single reason off hand). But that's not what we were trying to find out, was it? So that leads us to question number 3:

3- Did we want to come up with outlandish scenarios that would have forced Walt to build moderates? Or did we want to explore his Philosophy and decide if moderates fit anywhere within it?

I think that's all for now. A whole bunch of explaining, but really only three simple questions. Answer those and hopefully we can continue talking.

Your turn...




PS: You asked for book recommendations. When I first became involved with Disney I asked the same question to a person very much like AV on another site. His reply follows (keep in mind that this was a couple or three years ago. There may be newer ones I'm not aware of:
Quote:
I might be able to shed some light on this... Because I have a tremendous amount of original documentation - I always enjoy reading some of these biographies written about Disney.. and I love to pick out the things which are wrong In some instances I can actually see where an author pulled a story from another biography.. (which often was wrong in the first place..) But I will submit my list:

First - The two biographies written Bob Thomas - are legend among Disney historians.. They stand as a guidepost to all of us who come after, and I have yet to find anything "wrong" in them. Thomas knew both Walt and Roy - Interviewed them - and was asked by the Disney Company to do the official biography on Walt. His works are well worth owning.

Second - for a very warm biography try Katherine & Richard Greene's "The man behind the magic". They had a lot of access to the family, and it shows.. Although the book is too short.

Third - Amy & Howard Green - who worked on "Remembering Walt" - It is an excellent book - filled with memories of those who knew Walt.

Fourth - Although this is currently out of print - "The Magic Kingdom" by Stephen Watts - does deal in quite a bit of detail about Disney, and Walt.. (Some of his opinions are a little ??? but then he did a GREAT job of documenting his sources.. YAY!! )

Fifth - Try - Hollywood Hoosier - which is actually not a biography of Walt - but rather gives a great insider view of the studio in the 1950's.. (By Charles R. Grizzle)

Sixth - Walt's Time - by the Sherman Brothers

Seventh - Walt's Railroad Story - by Michael Broggie

Eighth - If you can find a copy - try Walt Disney and Europe - for an interesting analysis of the influence of European Culture on Walt Disney.

Ninth - Another EXCELLENT book on Walt's Early years is "Walt in Wonderland.." by Russell Merritt and J.B. Kaufman, Great Stuff on the very early Films.. and some neat pics and letters from Walt.

Tenth - For theme park history - you can't beat Bruce Gordon & David Mumford's - The nickel tour.. Great history in there - currently on it's second printing..
I would add "Windows on Main Street". Informative and insightful, but a little fluffy.

Hope this helps!!!




ps: Mr. Kidds? Comments?
Quote:
In the description it says "rates listed at $32, $38 or $46."
Thanks Hopemax!!! This seems pretty much the way I remember it as well. In 1978 (I think, it may have been 1977) I paid $45.00 (give or take a dollar or two) for a room at the Poly. Pool view (which is the middle)!

__________________
"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 08-22-2002, 09:33 PM   #82
DisneyKidds
The TF thanks DisneyKidds for mouse-ing out his friend!
But in reality...
Member of car "X" - And proud of it!!
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Beautiful Hudson River Valley
Posts: 4,682

No.

No.

Maybe.

Irrelevant.

Nuff said .
DisneyKidds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2002, 09:47 PM   #83
DVC-Landbaron
What Would Walt Do?
 
DVC-Landbaron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,033

Quote:
Nuff said
Ahhhh! How sad!

I always hate it when a good thread comes to an end! But when everyone agrees with the LandBaron (and Walt) take on things, what more is there to say!!!

Thanks for the conversation!


Take care, Mr. Kidds!!

DVC-LandBaron
__________________
"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 08-22-2002, 10:58 PM   #84
DisneyKidds
The TF thanks DisneyKidds for mouse-ing out his friend!
But in reality...
Member of car "X" - And proud of it!!
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Beautiful Hudson River Valley
Posts: 4,682

I love the conversation, too - but I fear we can't talk about this subject any further, can we? After all, as far as you are concerned, anything that was not in the Master Plan represents a pork with flight certification, right? To say that represents the biggest 'IF' of all if youask me .

I guess I really am getting at 'What was Walt capable of doing while still maintaining his standards?' You don't want to go there and that is ok. You want to look at things in a vacuum and that is ok. However, the world does not exist in a vacuum .

BTW - I was GIVING YOU the mistakes and shortfalls of the current regime, so there is no need to compare philosophies. I just want to look at what possibilities existed under Walts philosophy alone. However, you limit the discussion because all we can talk about is what was in the Master Plan and we are forbidden from asking what Walt might have done from there. What fun is that? How realistic is it to assume he would have done nothing from there?

Oh, and then you cavalierly throw such things as this around....

Quote:
So, if you're vacationing on a budget, you may not be able to afford a Disney resort.
and......

Quote:
If you find you will lose your shirt, you have to forgo the concept!!
saying that that is how Walt viewed things, without any rationale or anecdotal evidence to show that Walt was even capable of such thoughts...............

So, the answer to question number 1 is no. Forget ME's philosophy. Assume Walt would have completed the Master Plan. Assume that an Epcot would exist. Those aren't flying pigs. Well, where did Walt go from there? You seem to be telling me we can't ask that because all we could do from there is watch the porker dogfight. So the discussion ends, does it not? I hope the answer is no, it doesn't - but that is up to you.

The answer to number 2 - I really don't know. What are the 'circumstances Ei$ner had'? Furthermore - once a single decision is made that is contrary to ME, the rest of the ME circumsatnces go out the window, do they not? So how do we handle that. I would suggest we do this. We may not be able to crawl inside that head. However, we do know a bit about the consumer. As you point out - you completely understand Walts business philosophy and way of thinking. Well, how would you - I mean Walt - apply that way of thinking to the consumer. But you see - to do that requires tossing a few pigs in the air. To not do that - well, that ends the discussion, does it not? I hope the answer is no, but......

Quote:
So if you want to define your circumstances to one, and only one, crystal clear scenario
If only the world were that simple my friend .

The answer to number 3 - well, yes - I want to see where the moderates fit within Walts philosophy. However, to you that philosophy ends at the Master Plan. Well, Walts standards may have been static, but his philosophy wasn't. I guess that is something you and I have to agree to disagree on. I believe that as things changed Walt would have examined things that went beyond his Master Plan, and I think his original philosophy, applied to conditions that would have been likely to exist would, have made the moderates fit within his philosophy, or his evolving philosophies that would hold true to his standards. But we can't discuss that because there are already enough pigs in the clouds.

As to the whole WDW hotel cost/value thing - there are way too many variables to say that the rate you would pay tomorrow for a WDW resort is overpriced and 10x inflation. I think they still represent a great value, you don't. Another agree to disagree item.

So, what cha think my good Baron?
DisneyKidds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2002, 05:06 PM   #85
DVC-Landbaron
What Would Walt Do?
 
DVC-Landbaron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,033

Mr. Kidds!! You had me worried! All those words and hardly a response. Anyway, welcome back. And let's see where we stand.

Quote:
After all, as far as you are concerned, anything that was not in the Master Plan represents a "pork with flight certification", right?
No! I really think you are misunderstanding. The way I interpret Walt's philosophy on things "Disney" is really pretty simple. I look at what he did while he was alive. In animation it's pretty easy. He made a TON of them. We can pretty much pick any film he made and look at the process. See the way he built a team. And then badgered the team into producing greatness. We can look at the way he used technology. Cutting edge stuff. Most of the time he was leading the pack. Then you look at other films he made. Was this one you examined just a fluke? Or did he, by and large, use the same techniques and methods throughout all of his films? And you know what? He did!!!

But then you discover those compilations! So you examine them, in context with the rest of his life, and you find that it turns out they were mere shadows on the radar screen. True anomalies that were absolutely the exception to the rule.

And you find, after looking at his life's work in animation that you are fairly comfortable knowing Walt's thinking or better yet, you can answer the famous question here, "What would Walt do?" So that when the Captain or the Pirate starts raising issues with the Pixar fare or slamming Shrek-like films, I can comfortably say that Walt would have loved it!!! New technology!! A new way to tell a story!! Innovative methods of putting on a SHOW!! Cause that's what I think he's all about!! His record backs me up!!

Is it for sure? Can anyone argue the counterpoint? Sure they could!! (And Lord knows they do!! ) And for all I know they may be right. Walt might have HATED the new stuff. But somehow, given his track record, I kinda doubt it! And I would ask for some backup if that argument was posed, other that a few, very minor, bumps in the road.

The same process can be used when we discuss the "What would Walt do?" pertaining to theme parks and resorts. We look at the record. We examine what he actually did, so we can draw a reasonable conclusion as to what he may have done in the future or at least how things should be maintained. He has a record and set a pretty good precedent in this area. Heck!! He invented it!!

So, Where can we find a reasonable answer? Well, I'm kinda thinkin' that Disneyland would be a good place to start, followed by the ole Master Plan for WDW. How did he build his park and how was he planning to do WDW? Wouldn't that seem logical? Doesn't that make sense?

And I find, regarding 'moderates' that, lo and behold, he did indeed address that issue!! He deliberately chose NOT to include them under his brand! He provided for them. But made sure, categorically, that they were NOT Disney!! Very telling stuff, in and of itself, wouldn't you say?

So it seems to me that if the "all things being equal' rule is invoked, Walt would NEVER have allowed the moderates to be built under his brand and he would not have ever even considered the economy motels, no matter how big the icons were or how gaudy the decorations. It's just that simple. You look at what he did in the past, how he built things and the way he thought and it's not too much of a jump, and hardly any speculation at all, to reach a reasonable conclusion.

Now, if you want to set up some scenario that would force him to include highly decorated Motel 6 type accommodations, I'm sure we can dream up some set of circumstances that would work. Unfortunately, that's where I leave the game. Because you're looking for the exception. The abnormality. In essence you're asking, "What would Walt not normally do, but would have to do, as a deviation from his regular way of operating, if he was given no other alternative?" Is that what you want to do? I don't.

Quote:
I guess I really am getting at 'What was Walt capable of doing while still maintaining his standards?'
I don't know. Really!! I'm not being flip. I really don't know!! Great things I imagine, given his track record. But I really couldn't begin to guess!!!

So let's separate the question and really dive in. What was he capable of? Anything he wanted, I suppose. He proved that time and time again. "While still maintaining his standards?" Well, on this I can be reasonably sure that he would maintain his standards absolutely to the letter unless, on that very, very rare occasion he was forced, against every fiber in his being, to deviate from them, due to fate, miscalculation or the planets not aligning quite right. I can reasonably speculate that he would not willingly or capriciously stray from those standards. And I think we can all be sure that, even if it cost him a ton, those standards would be reinstated as soon as possible! Do you agree with that?

Quote:
How realistic is it to assume he would have done nothing from there?
Not realistic at all! But I'm really at a loss here. I haven't the slightest idea what he would have done. I couldn't begin to speculate as to what marvels he would have experimented with. But I do know how he would implement them. With his standards! Using his philosophy!! PERIOD!!

So bring it on. Speculate away. You come up with the proposals and I'll tell you how I think they would be implemented. A theme park on the moon? Fine!! Sounds in keeping with Walt. And if any private enterprise could have done that it would have been his company. It fits perfectly with the way that Walt thought. But would he have built the All-"STARS" (pardon the pun) there? Or even the moderates (Spaceport Orleans)? NO!! ABSOLUTELY NOT!! Why? Because they would have deviated from the standard!! That's why! It really is that simple.

Quote:
Oh, and then you cavalierly throw such things as this around....
Quote:
So, if you're vacationing on a budget, you may not be able to afford a Disney resort.
Nothing cavalier about it. It's a fact! It still is! Do you really think that EVERYONE in the country can afford a Disney vacation? That's a little naive. Or if you believe they should it's a little communistic!! Did you know, and I know you'll find it hard to believe, that there are some folks in America right now, TODAY, that cannot afford the luxurious accommodations provided by the All-Stars Resort? And they have to save their pennies for FIVE YEARS in order to stay at the campgrounds? My sister-in-law is just such a person. Last trip: 1998. Next trip: 2003. (If everything goes right!!) And you call my statement cavalier!?!?!

All that has changed is where you draw the line. Walt drew it at about 35 bucks a night (probably closer to $32.00) for accommodations in a full-fledged "Magical Experience", overflowing with the "Disney Standard" resort, back in 1972. Where is that line today? And how far have they deviated from that standard to achieve that outrageous price? And you think it's still a good "value"??!!?? Man, oh man!! Maybe we have to start back further than I thought. Forget Walt. Forget Ei$ner. Forget philosophy. And forget Standards! Maybe we need to discuss the definition of "value" in order to have any meaningful dialogue!!

Quote:
If you find you will lose your shirt, you have to forgo the concept!!
We were specifically talking about AKL and the price the guest would reasonably be expected to pay under the Walt Standard. In my mind there could be no difference. So, the Roy side would have to take over for a moment. If it cost a $100 an hour to keep the animals and you were only making fifty dollars an hour off the resort. YOU CAN'T DO IT WALT!! Go back to the drawing board and come up with a different plan (which he probably would have done. Mind blowing, isn't it?). But Roy would have to win that one. (He did win some you know.) However, if it cost $100 an hour and you were making $100 an hour off the resort, it's a no brainer (and a giver of ulcers to Roy). You do it!! Period!! Cause it's a good SHOW!!

OK!! So my prelude is over and some ground rules are now in place. Now, to the meat of the discussion!! Fire away!! You want to talk accommodations!! Fine! Let's talk. Deluxe, moderate, Motel 6. Anything you want. How does it fit in the philosophy? Or do we have to start down that slippery slope of changing the philosophy in order to adjust to the "new" notions? You want to talk EPCOT? Walt's EPCOT? Fine again!! Shoot! Let's have the concepts! And we'll see how those ideas, when implemented, fit into the standard!

You see, it's really simple. The philosophy, which created the Standard, is resolute, unyielding and indomitable! You can bend, twist, expand and broaden the concepts to fit the philosophy. You cannot (YOU MUST NOT) bend the philosophy (and thereby standard) to fit the concept! The tail must NEVER wag the dog! Especially for the sake of a couple of bucks!!


Your turn...
__________________
"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 08-24-2002, 12:57 AM   #86
DisneyKidds
The TF thanks DisneyKidds for mouse-ing out his friend!
But in reality...
Member of car "X" - And proud of it!!
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Beautiful Hudson River Valley
Posts: 4,682

Baron, you have a way with words and you do know a lot about what Walt did in his time - I'll give you that . I still disagree with you regarding what Walt would have deemed appropriate and acceptable, within the confines of his philosophies and standards, as WDW grew beyond anything he ever could have imagined.

We will discuss this more, be assured of that. However, I have layed before the court most of my evidence at this point. I will scour my notes for more on point indicators. However, if there is a period of silence regarding this particular thread, read it as nothing more than me taking the time to read up more and develop more evidence. I'm asking the court for a continuance, if you will.

I told you I would take the time to read up and become more Disney educated - I have not, and will not let you down in that regard. However, as I do I will become more tenacious .

I'll be back...............................
DisneyKidds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2002, 01:10 AM   #87
DVC-Landbaron
What Would Walt Do?
 
DVC-Landbaron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,033

Fair enough, my friend!!
Quote:
I'll be back...............................
I'll be here waiting!!
__________________
"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 05:00 AM.

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

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