Congrats to Magic Kingdom!!

[BuckeyeBama]

But what about when lots of people review a movie? Rotten Tomatoes, for instance .... Do you assign any value to their tomato ratings or popcorn ratings (for lack of knowing the right terms for those)?

And how often do your views align with the numbers? For me, almost never. But I do get value from reading what they write. That actually helps me in my movie watching decisions - not the numbers.

 

[BuckeyeBama]

NM...

 

[BuckeyeBama]

Once we have an *extremely* large sample size, such as the tens of thousands in the TripAdvisor surveys, much of those concerns can be averaged away. With that many respondents, you're going to have a statistically valid cross section, or nearly so.

You are missing my point - what value does this have to an individual making a decision? Are you telling me that your likes and dislikes align with the consensus? Mine almost never do. But I am an odd duck.

 

[BuckeyeBama]

Disney will find satisfaction in the fact that they scored so well if they look into this. They will also snicker at the thought that Dollywood is rated higher than some of their parks (as they should). But if they are looking for meaning, they will have to mine the comments. That is my point. The score is meaningless. The value is in the words describing what is well received and what might need improvement. Knowing that people scored IoA higher will not change anything, nor will the scoring of Dollywood. But you are free to believe what you will. This is my firm opinion.

 

[3DisneyFanz]

Reviews are certainly subjective. That would be true of movie reviews and restaurant reviews or anything else. However if a large percentage of reviewers give high scores to a place then that is useful information IMO. It's even more useful if you can read detailed reviews such as you can on Trip Advisor or the DIS. Plenty of people pay attention so it matters where you fall.

This is very true and many businesses monitor these types of surveys heavily. Most could care less about the positives but pay special attention to the negative ones. No business improves by focussing on the people telling them how great they are.

 

[itchin2go]

And how often do your views align with the numbers? For me, almost never. But I do get value from reading what they write. That actually helps me in my movie watching decisions - not the numbers.

As I said before, things like this are only a tool. They don't make the decision for me. They give me additional information on which I can base a decision.

For me, at least, it is not correct to say it is useless or valueless - in reference to both TripAdvisor and Rotten Tomatoes. I don't look up the restaurants on TripAdvisor or Zomato or anywhere else, point to the #1 restaurant, and say, yup, that's the one for me. But is it valueless to see that something is ranked so high? I don't think so. It's a piece of knowledge I can use to help me make a decision.

I also wonder if some who are arguing that the list is useless or deeply flawed would be arguing the same thing if the WDW parks were 1-4 on the list.

 

[cigar95]

You are missing my point - what value does this have to an individual making a decision? Are you telling me that your likes and dislikes align with the consensus? Mine almost never do. But I am an odd duck.

You're right - I never saw that this was your point. I read it as a broader notion of "this is meaningless", rather than "this is meaningless to me".

 

[BuckeyeBama]

I also wonder if some who are arguing that the list is useless or deeply flawed would be arguing the same thing if the WDW parks were 1-4 on the list.

A good point - IoA would definitely be in my top 2. On some days it would be #1, on others #2 - depending on how nostalgic I feel on that day. IoA is more fun, but MK is "home". Again, IMO.

 

[cakebaker]

I also wonder if some who are arguing that the list is useless or deeply flawed would be arguing the same thing if the WDW parks were 1-4 on the list.

And I wonder if those acting as though this list is the most definitive measure of a park's popularity and is somehow indicative of a downturn at Disney would consider it so accurate if Disney was 1-4.

 

[Planogirl]

Clearly Dollywood has its fans too. It has certainly been open for a while.

I won't judge it though since I've never been there.

 

[Planogirl]

And I wonder if those acting as though this list is the most definitive measure of a park's popularity and is somehow indicative of a downturn at Disney would consider it so accurate if Disney was 1-4.

Who has said that this indicates a downturn at Disney? I've seen a few people mention that Epcot's placement is worrisome but I don't recall anything else.

 

[cakebaker]

Who has said that this indicates a downturn at Disney? I've seen a few people mention that Epcot's placement is worrisome but I don't recall anything else.

No need to go further than pg 1-

No surprise here. Oh how the mighty have fallen. You reap what you sow, Disney has chosen to pluck every dollar they can from its customers instead of building attractions. No surprise universal is now so popular, that is all they have done(built new attractions). Wake up call Disney management!

 

[Planogirl]

No need to go further than pg 1-

A discussion like this will draw all kinds of opinions. And flicx may just be right. Maybe the lack of new attractions has contributed to some of these numbers. It seems like a reasonable viewpoint but who knows?

Personally, I wouldn't have been surprised to see the Florida Disney parks at 1-4. There is a lot of loyalty out there. I am surprised to see Epcot so low even though I dislike the park. Maybe I'm not the only one.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I agree 100% with the first bolded statement. But the second bolded statement is a 180 degree turn. Remember that I am one who is positing that there are more positive reviews than negative ones (at least in social media world). I am refuting the oft-stated but never-supported adage that "people like to complain more than they like to praise". I have never believed that for a moment. And now with social media data, it appears easier and easier to show. So, no. I do not think that there are more negatives out there.

Fair enough. I remain confused by your original statement. So let me seek clarification---

You mentioned negative reviews have a profound impact.

I now suspect you were speaking generally--as in, if a company had a bunch of them they will eventually have a profound impact. Is that what you meant?

I read it as the existing negative reviews were having a proficient impact. At the ratio of negative reviews to positive, that didn't make sense since it lacked the quantity to nudge the barometer significantly as the numbers I posted and you posted showed that it made such a negligible difference.

The former I can agree with. Negative reviews can pummel a reputation.

The latter, if you meant that, we will have to agree to disagree.

 

[cakebaker]

A discussion like this will draw all kinds of opinions. And flicx may just be right. Maybe the lack of new attractions has contributed to some of these numbers. It seems like a reasonable viewpoint but who knows?

Personally, I wouldn't have been surprised to see the Florida Disney parks at 1-4. There is a lot of loyalty out there. I am surprised to see Epcot so low even though I dislike the park. Maybe I'm not the only one.

Whether he's correct or not has nothing to do with the response I gave originally.

Itchin2go called into question the motivation for the opinions some people posted in that if they have questions as to how these results came to be, that it may be because they don't like the results. I'm simply saying that perhaps those who take the results at face value and deem them credible and telling do so perhaps because they do like the results.

I can't speak for everyone, but I can say that as for me- I'd question these results no matter how WDW fared- some of them are just bizarre to me. But if those of us who question the results have our motives called into question, it's fair to go in the other direction as well.

 

[larryz]

I was being sarcastic.

Impossible! That's not allowed on the DISboards...

 

[Planogirl]

Whether he's correct or not has nothing to do with the response I gave originally.

So since you were conjecturing as to what those who saw a downturn might say if the Disney parks were at 1-4 then you meant just the one poster (and probably a few others that I've forgotten)? I guess that I didn't realize that.

In the spirit of discussion I stated my opinion. Sorry if I went off topic.

 

[Kalliope]

I also wonder if some who are arguing that the list is useless or deeply flawed would be arguing the same thing if the WDW parks were 1-4 on the list.

We all know the answer to that musing.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

But what about when lots of people review a movie? Rotten Tomatoes, for instance .... Do you assign any value to their tomato ratings or popcorn ratings (for lack of knowing the right terms for those)?

Using Inside Out---

While I don't ordinarily pay too much attention to Rotten Tomatoes.
The fact that a Disney/Pixar film was rated so highly by them (way high if I recall) made me believe that the movie would be worth seeing is I may not have personally liked it.

To Jimmy's point:

I think this is an incredibly unfair statement. Movie critics who have a strong academic background in cinema and who have seen almost every film from Georges Melies to Brad Bird are certainly not unqualified to predict what the public might like. Being learned in a subject does not make one a "snob" nor does it make one detached from reality.

I pretty much agree on this.

Using Pulp Fiction as an example--I will never ever watch that movie again. No thank you. Uh uh.

However--it was an extremely well made movie, IMO. I could recognize its merit even if I did not like it.

Kingsmen--I hated it. And from my perspective, it was like someone idolized Pulp Fiction. So I am not sure if it was reviewed with that in mind. But I could not see the merit since it rang as a sick and twisted knockoff. (I was expecting it to be like Red.)

Rotten Tomatoes rates Pulp Fiction higher, FWIW.

There are snobby film reviewers or their as there are snobby restaurant reviewers.

But I liken good ol' fashioned film critique as I do fine literary critical analysis. You don't have to love or like something to see the merit in it.

Back to USO--I don't love it. It isn't my favorite place. But I would rate it at a minimum comparable with WDW on execution. In some ways better. And I am okay with that.

Within the industry, I suspect that there are reviewers capable of viewing things not through their personal bias, but not through mine or anyone else's either. How does it stand on its own.

I won't be running to Hershey Park any time soon. But we are quite impressed with the execution. It is done very well. Now their entrance that floods in a monsoon--they will need to work on that. (Pics last year after we went, totally flooded. What is up with that?)

 

[JimmyV]

I think the word "profound" is throwing you. When #1 is 4.6 in approval and #3 is 4.55 (or whatever), a single (or very small number of) negative review(s) can have a significant (profound) impact on ordinal ranking. So all it takes is a few disgruntled dads who are peeved that they have to drag their kids around to a place they'd rather not be without the ability to get a beer and all of a sudden our favorite place slips behind a place we enjoy less. But if that other place escapes the wrath of the disgruntled dads, it wins. And I maintain that the dad I describe exists more at WDW than at IOA or Discovery Cove. And of course I am using "dads" broadly. Could be moms. Grandparents. Teens. Again, using wild generalizations here, picture a family coming to Florida and meeting up with the grandparents. Mom and dad pay for grandma and grandpa to hang out with them at a theme park for the day. Grandma and grandpa aren't in love with theme parks but decide to play along. Whose park is this family most likely to visit? Disney's or Universal's? And if grandma or grandpa decide to post a review on TA, whose park is going to get the 2 or 3 star review? When the results are this close, it doesn't take much to shift them. And I maintain that Disney is the unfortunate recipient of some people who are there under protest than any of its competitors.