Disney Information Station Logo

Go Back   The DIS Discussion Forums - DISboards.com > Disney Trip Planning Forums > Disney Restaurants
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 11-29-2013, 06:58 PM   #31
Marthasor
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,668

Quote:
Originally Posted by monorailmom View Post
Honestly, when they first announced this I wasn't sure how I felt. But really, I've read many books on the history of WDW and Disneyland, and none of it would have happened without corporate sponsors. Walt never had the money to do it all on his own: without sponsorship paying for much it , we wouldn't have the Disneyland and Disney World we all love today.
My thoughts exactly. And the PP's remarks that some corporate sponsorships have simply blended into the Disney landscape - Dole Whip anyone! Nikon is the new official camera of WDW. Siemens, Spaceship Earth. the list goes on and on.

Many people know that in Disneyland there is an exclusive club in New Orleans Square called Club 33. Rumor is, it is named for the 33 corporate sponsors at Disneyland during the time the club was being built in the late '60's.

Perhaps Disney doesn't need the financial help of sponsors anymore, but it is a large part of the parks' history. I don't particularly like the look of the Starbucks on Main St., but it is a nice place to duck into for some good coffee on the way in or out of the park. The sponsorship just doesn't bother me that much. It's all part of the way Disney has done business since Disneyland first opened.
Marthasor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2013, 07:28 PM   #32
nkereina
Wendy Darling
 
nkereina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Niagara Falls, NY
Posts: 6,783

Quote:
Originally Posted by maxiesmom View Post
Granted I have only seen pictures, but I thought the outside of the building still looked like the Main Street Bakery, with only a small Starbucks sign. Is that not true? Or are you referring to the fact that they re-arranged and took out the small seating nook?
That is true. Its tastefully done. I have no affinity for the bakery, so it didn't bother me. I will say that it looked busy every time I passed by it last week. Only time I was cussing Starbucks was when I was craving a cookie ice cream sandwich at Epcot and there was nowhere to go... no more Fountain View
nkereina is offline   Reply With Quote
|
The DIS
Register to remove

Join Date: 1997
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,000,000
Old 11-29-2013, 07:47 PM   #33
JimmyV
Por favor manténganse alejado de las puertas.
 
JimmyV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,202

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marthasor View Post
Perhaps Disney doesn't need the financial help of sponsors anymore, but it is a large part of the parks' history.
To the contrary. Disney needs them more than ever. In order to expand and provide a diverse range of entertainment options, WDW has to partner with outside sources and vendors. Think about how complex and inefficient WDW would be if it raised, produced, packaged and sold all of its own products. Carnation, Sealtest, Nestle, Coca-Cola, Dole, Tropicana, Minute Maid, Oscar-Meyer, PepsiCo, Frito Lay, Orville Redenbacher, etc. have always been an important part of the parks. Why Starbucks has attracted such a high level of scorn is really quite hypocritical and unfair. The only real reason for this is because there is a Starbucks (or two) on every corner in America. But that fact in and of itself is insufficient to differentiate between Starbucks, (a relatively small, local, U.S. company with an admirable record of corporate responsibility) from Nestle, (a huge, multi-national foreign company with a dubious record of corporate responsibility). Sorry. But if you are frowning on Starbucks and pining away for Nestle, your heart and mind are in the wrong place. And if you want neither and expect Disney to grow, pick, roast and grind its own coffee, well, that's just unrealistic. There is going to be, and has to be corporate affiliation in this aspect of the park. You could do a lot worse than Starbucks.
JimmyV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2013, 12:09 AM   #34
MsMagical
Mouseketeer
 
MsMagical's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 114

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaisyD View Post
I must be one of the few that loved having the SB on Main Street. The exterior looked the same to us. The interior looked Victorian but had few tables. There was two huge lines in there so I'm sure many others loved it too. I was surprised the lines moved so fast. My girls and I were thrilled to get some decent icy coffees as the stuff that was sold there before was just nasty to us. There is also one in Epcot we hit one day and it was great!
I love having Starbucks in the parks. The coffee in all of WDW was awful, the worst I have ever had, prior to our last trip in September. I am thankful that there is a Starbucks around. It is not the best coffee (I'm from Seattle so I've had a A LOT of coffee) but it is far from the worst. And, it is a billion times better than what was there before. (I'm aware they have also changed vendors for the rest of the resorts and parks - also better than before.)

Last edited by MsMagical; 11-30-2013 at 12:19 AM.
MsMagical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2013, 12:43 AM   #35
MsMagical
Mouseketeer
 
MsMagical's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 114

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyV View Post
To the contrary. Disney needs them more than ever. In order to expand and provide a diverse range of entertainment options, WDW has to partner with outside sources and vendors. Think about how complex and inefficient WDW would be if it raised, produced, packaged and sold all of its own products. Carnation, Sealtest, Nestle, Coca-Cola, Dole, Tropicana, Minute Maid, Oscar-Meyer, PepsiCo, Frito Lay, Orville Redenbacher, etc. have always been an important part of the parks. Why Starbucks has attracted such a high level of scorn is really quite hypocritical and unfair. The only real reason for this is because there is a Starbucks (or two) on every corner in America. But that fact in and of itself is insufficient to differentiate between Starbucks, (a relatively small, local, U.S. company with an admirable record of corporate responsibility) from Nestle, (a huge, multi-national foreign company with a dubious record of corporate responsibility). Sorry. But if you are frowning on Starbucks and pining away for Nestle, your heart and mind are in the wrong place. And if you want neither and expect Disney to grow, pick, roast and grind its own coffee, well, that's just unrealistic. There is going to be, and has to be corporate affiliation in this aspect of the park. You could do a lot worse than Starbucks.
Yes! This. I believe that Disney really needed a good coffee sponsor. I would have been fine if it had been another company but, really, what other company is big enough to pay whatever fees necessary make that partnership worth it for both sides?
MsMagical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2013, 06:55 AM   #36
Marthasor
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,668

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyV View Post
To the contrary. Disney needs them more than ever. In order to expand and provide a diverse range of entertainment options, WDW has to partner with outside sources and vendors. Think about how complex and inefficient WDW would be if it raised, produced, packaged and sold all of its own products. Carnation, Sealtest, Nestle, Coca-Cola, Dole, Tropicana, Minute Maid, Oscar-Meyer, PepsiCo, Frito Lay, Orville Redenbacher, etc. have always been an important part of the parks. Why Starbucks has attracted such a high level of scorn is really quite hypocritical and unfair. The only real reason for this is because there is a Starbucks (or two) on every corner in America. But that fact in and of itself is insufficient to differentiate between Starbucks, (a relatively small, local, U.S. company with an admirable record of corporate responsibility) from Nestle, (a huge, multi-national foreign company with a dubious record of corporate responsibility). Sorry. But if you are frowning on Starbucks and pining away for Nestle, your heart and mind are in the wrong place. And if you want neither and expect Disney to grow, pick, roast and grind its own coffee, well, that's just unrealistic. There is going to be, and has to be corporate affiliation in this aspect of the park. You could do a lot worse than Starbucks.
Virtually every restaurant in the US has to have partnerships (farmers, food distributors,etc.) to deliver their product - a cooked meal, a cup of coffee. Most other establishments don't, however, tout that partnership or profit off of it the way Disney does. I don't think any one expects Disney to grow and produce all of its own food, but they can still serve chocolate ice cream without referring to Edy's. Fact of the matter, it is lucrative for Disney to take on sponsors and very good advertising for the sponsors Disney decides to take on. But, no, I do not believe it is financially necessary anymore for Disney to have sponsors. You don't need to slap Starbucks logo on a bakery to serve coffee. You can simply order it from a food distributor like any other restaurant would do. I didnt notice massive revenue from park sponsorships in their last annual report.

I am not against Starbucks at all. I'm a Disney history buff and the sponsorship certainly fits in with the sponsorship history of the park. It's how they've done business for the past amost 60 years.

I'm still hoping apple will sponsor Imagination!
Marthasor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2013, 04:38 PM   #37
BEASLYBOO
It's part of the charm
They go through some serious mayo there
 
BEASLYBOO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Wellington, Florida
Posts: 4,754

I think people in general do not like change. I seldom visited the old bakery other than to purchase a croissant and I surely never bought coffee. Now I visit the bakery often, love the coffee and the decor. It's faster to get in and out. I think we've been stuck with Nescafe for far too long, it's Starbucks time to have a go, 10 years from now, who knows who'll be next!
__________________
Summer Aug 2014- Kidani-2bd

February 15th -18th, 2014 - OKW-GV
BEASLYBOO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2013, 04:52 PM   #38
figaromeetsmarie
DIS Veteran
 
figaromeetsmarie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: North Georgia
Posts: 1,200

I don't mind it either way.
__________________

Last edited by figaromeetsmarie; 11-30-2013 at 04:53 PM. Reason: spelling
figaromeetsmarie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2013, 10:29 PM   #39
JimmyV
Por favor manténganse alejado de las puertas.
 
JimmyV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,202

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marthasor View Post
But, no, I do not believe it is financially necessary anymore for Disney to have sponsors. You don't need to slap Starbucks logo on a bakery to serve coffee. You can simply order it from a food distributor like any other restaurant would do.
And a pineapple frosty treat in Adventureland doesn't have to be called a Dole Whip. But it is. You haven't explained why the scorn is reserved for Starbucks while Nestle, Carnation, Coke and Dole get a free pass. As a Disney history buff, surely you know that the original Main Street Bakery was a Sara Lee outpost with large, prominent signage. Was that so different? It, and the other companies mentioned are/were also corporate sponsors who pay/paid Disney a lot of money. Casey's is every bit a commercial for Coke as the MSB is for Starbucks. But for years there has been crickets. Why is now the right time to take a stand?
JimmyV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 12:44 AM   #40
MarieShedsky
Earning My Ears
 
MarieShedsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: MI... but hopefully FL soon!
Posts: 74

Quote:
Originally Posted by nkereina View Post
That is true. Its tastefully done. I have no affinity for the bakery, so it didn't bother me. I will say that it looked busy every time I passed by it last week. Only time I was cussing Starbucks was when I was craving a cookie ice cream sandwich at Epcot and there was nowhere to go... no more Fountain View
Ditto... never got to try the infamous cookie-wich with fresh/warm cookies.
and now Sleepy Hollow's are soft serve.
__________________
If You Can Dream It, You Can Do It ~ Walt Disney
WDW CP 2011
MarieShedsky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 12:48 AM   #41
Disney_Princess83
DIS Veteran
 
Disney_Princess83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,334

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarieShedsky View Post
Ditto... never got to try the infamous cookie-wich with fresh/warm cookies.
and now Sleepy Hollow's are soft serve.
The Ice Cream parlour still have the ice cream sandwiches, warm cookies and all
__________________

Almost 6 Weeks at Disney.... it's Happened! October & November 2013! Trip Report and Food Review to Follow Soon

Starbucks has arrived at WDW! MK, EPCOT and soon the entire World!
Add me on Twitter: @OzGoofyPrincess
Disney_Princess83 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 12:58 AM   #42
momoluvgd
Earning My Ears
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Flo Rida
Posts: 10

I don't think it's that bad! The bakery is still there and it still has the same theme as main street. The only thing that bothers me is that starbucks wasn't around in that time period, and Disney coffee is not THAT bad, but it's just a little shop, I really don't think it's a big deal. You can still get all the same stuff, even if it's at a different location.
momoluvgd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 01:25 AM   #43
TabZ
DFTW Bride October 2014!!
 
TabZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 401

I LOVED being able to get a hand crafted caffeinated beverage (or how ever it is they describe them) in MK and Starbucks. To me - the old Disney coffee really is that bad - I tried one from Starring Rolls and it's too early in the morning to describe how I really felt about it

Was there this uproar when Disney decided to serve coke? It's the same thing - they have selected a well known popular brand then trained their own staff to serve it
__________________

November 2002 - DLC - offsite, April 2005 - WDW - offsite, October 2005 - DLRP - offsite, October 2008 - DLRP - offsite,
July 2011 - WDW - POR, October 2011 - DLRP - Dream Castle Hotel ENGAGED!!! November 2013 - WDW - CSR & Disney Dream

Planning our Disney Fairytale Wedding 21st October, 2014
http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=2847299 Wedding PJ
TabZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 06:06 AM   #44
Marthasor
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,668

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyV View Post
And a pineapple frosty treat in Adventureland doesn't have to be called a Dole Whip. But it is. You haven't explained why the scorn is reserved for Starbucks while Nestle, Carnation, Coke and Dole get a free pass. As a Disney history buff, surely you know that the original Main Street Bakery was a Sara Lee outpost with large, prominent signage. Was that so different? It, and the other companies mentioned are/were also corporate sponsors who pay/paid Disney a lot of money. Casey's is every bit a commercial for Coke as the MSB is for Starbucks. But for years there has been crickets. Why is now the right time to take a stand?
I think you need to ask the people who have scorn against Starbucks on Main St. I have zero scorn and have stated that in my posts. My point is the same as yours. There is historical precedence for Disney bringing in corporate sponsors for restaurants, rides, etc. Based on that precedence, the Starbucks sponsorship makes sense in the Disney parks business model and shouldn't really be a surprise to anyone.

On a purely financial basis, Disney does not need to bring in sponsors the way they did in the early days of the parks.

I'm personally glad they are there. They are very good to their employees and we enjoy going there on our way in and out of the park.

Last edited by Marthasor; 12-01-2013 at 06:19 AM.
Marthasor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 07:47 AM   #45
Allison
- Join date March 2004 -
 
Allison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 11,764

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marthasor View Post
I think you need to ask the people who have scorn against Starbucks on Main St. I have zero scorn and have stated that in my posts. My point is the same as yours. There is historical precedence for Disney bringing in corporate sponsors for restaurants, rides, etc. Based on that precedence, the Starbucks sponsorship makes sense in the Disney parks business model and shouldn't really be a surprise to anyone.

On a purely financial basis, Disney does not need to bring in sponsors the way they did in the early days of the parks.

I'm personally glad they are there. They are very good to their employees and we enjoy going there on our way in and out of the park.
On a purely financial basis, Disney needs to always be thinking about ways to generate revenues or be more efficient with spending to contribute to the bottom line. That's what sponsorships help do. Need goes beyond keeping the doors open.
__________________
LIFE IS GOOD

Last edited by Allison; 12-01-2013 at 08:05 AM.
Allison is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
bakery, cinnamon rolls, coffee, main street bakery, starbucks



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 05:46 AM.

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

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