Pop Century

[airlarry!]

Just Great. I am usually in the Baron Bunch...but I need some help here...it seems like I'm on the wrong side. Let me work this out...

I like the All-stars, especially the Movies.

I like them because:

They are cheaper--sometimes you don't want to break the bank just to visit.

They have a cool pool.

Err. Umm.

I guess that's it.

I sure don't have fun walking around the place, like I did exploring Dixie Landings, or Caribbean Beach this past Mardi Gras. My kids loved walking through Parrot Cay. My feet didn't.

I sure can't have a nice meal like we've done at the Contemp, or check out the awesome scenery like at the Wilderness.

Hmm...

Maybe I am being selfish here. Let's face it. The only real reason to like the AS is cause of the price and you can stay at Buzz's place. But Yoho! hit the nail on the head--wouldn't you rather have slept on Hollywood Blvd, in a giant mockup of a Western Town or Buzz Lightyear Star Command or whatever instead of just giant Coke cups and Huge Saxophones?

 

[JeffJewell]

...the only clarification I'd want to make about your assessment of my definition of "theming" is that the "place" the theme takes you need not be a specific geographical location. The obvious examples to compare, the other resorts at Disney, do generally bring to mind a specific place in the world, but other aspects of Disney, say, the Buzz Lightyear ride and Universe of Energy, take you to a different place in time; yet others, like Pooh or It's a Small World, take you to a different place in imagination. In a way, I suppose we're getting back to that thread where "story" was being related to theme; I go to the Wilderness Lodge and it feels like I'm in a movie. I go to ASM and it feels like I'm in a hotel with movie posters.

I could possibly accept "sports" (or "music" or "movies," although I'd suggest that all those categories are rather broad, undifferentiated themes that lead to a decor about as cohesive as that stuff on the walls at TGIFriday's. I'd much prefer a "Mighty Ducks" resort, with the movie building and the cartoon building and the pro sports team building) as a theme but to YoHo's point, for Disney style theming, I'd expect things along the lines of furniture that looks like football benches, or stadium-style urinal troughs in the restrooms (hey, I never said it was a _good_ theme) parquet basketball floors in the rooms... I don't know, something that places you _in_ the theme, rather than icons intended to remind you of what the theme is supposed to be.

That last sentence describes something that, to me, is an integral aspect of what Disney has historically done differently from (and better than) similar vacation destinations.

Jeff

 

[Planogirl]

Actually, I personally think that most Holiday Inns are more attractive than the Allstars. The big icons are cute but if you take those away, you just have a rather drab hotel IMO. And I totally dislike the front with the big garish star! But that's just my TASTE.

By the way, I guess that my beloved Disney Marketplace would be considered decorated rather than themed. I think that it's MUCH more attractive than the Allstars not that I'm biased by the shopping or anything. But again, that's just my TASTE.

Interesting discussion. Carry on.

 

[JeffJewell]

...actually, the theme of the Marketplace is "It's a Mall World, After All."

Jeff

 

[Eeyore2U]

Touche' Jeff!!!

 

[DVCDAVE]

I agree 100% with JEFFJEWEL, the cheap resorts are nothing but motels with cheap, tacky decorations with gaudy colors, I can almost invision the day when they start putting in trailer homes on some of the empty lots and call them home away from homes (decorated with black velvet Elvis paintings and Dogs playing Poker). The delux preferred views will have driveways with a delapodated pickup truck, Confederate Flag front plate, up on cinder blocks with a shotgun rack mounted in the back.

I guess you get what you pay for.

 

[All Aboard]

And I failed to mention that the All Stars also provide folks who couldn't otherwise afford to stay on-site that opportunity. No doubt, many hundreds of thousands of families are thankful for that.

Perhaps when I ascend to the Bourgeoisie elite one day, my opinion of the All Stars will change. But for now, I think they are absolutely wonderful and so does my daughter.

I would rather stay at the All Star Movies than at any offsite hotel. That includes the Peabody, MOWC, Grand Cypress, any of them. When going to Walt Disney World, staying on-site is a must for us. It's very much a part of the experience. We're so happy that we have the All Stars.

Back to theming resorts. Actually that seems to be a rather new concept at Walt Disney World. Let's take a look at the resorts that were around during the first 16 years of Walt Disney World:

Contemporary - unthemed
Polynesian - themed
Disney Village - unthemed
Disney Inn - unthemed

It wasn't until 1988 that theming resorts became the standard practice for Disney.

 

[YoHo]

Based on my understanding of the responses, I'd have to say the most important factor of staying at the allstars is the money. 34% of respondents said that they'd stay at a Moderate or Deluxe if money were no object. Plus 20% said money and only money was their reason for choosing it.. (I had some convoluted options. I really wish you could do multiple polls in one thread.)
A number of people mentioned that they didn't care about themeing as they only sleep there, but the transportation and resort hopping was good.

17% actually thought it was Top notch themeing and would stay their even if the price was higher. Some comentators said that they chose this, because of their kids and that they themselves didn't really agree.

24% don't like them and would never stay in them.


17% is actually a little higher then I expected, but with the exception of JeffH, Most of us here rarely discuss our children's opinions. (oh it happens every now and then, but Certainly not often) I'm tempted to dismiss it using JeffJewell's old Shooping Cart down the escalator themed as pooh (Personally, I want to see that ride ) BUT, I stop myself, because really, in a resort meant for the entire family, keeping the kids happy is a top priority. If the Kids like 50 ft guitars and the parents don't care, then is it bad? Nobody said they had a miserable time there, but their kids loved it. At the same time, I can't imagine a Child not loving the polynesian, especially with its new pool.



Anyway, I understand that the landscaping is the big expense with the poly and other resorts, but even without the landscaping, wouldn't an All-star movies resort be better if the Buzz Lighter building was mocked up like Al's Toy barn? 101 Dalmnations like Cruella's House?

How about a french Chateu for Cinderella, or the Dwarve's house for Snow white?

You could do this relativley cheaply by avoiding too much landscaping. maybe leaving some of the natural florida landscape?
Certainly other things were possible here.

 

[YoHo]

gcurling, the Contemorary is themed. It is a contemporary, even futuristic theme meant to blend into tomorrowland. It has gotten a little long in the tooth.

 

[All Aboard]

YoHo, those things you describe sound great, but they're not value resorts. You won't get the economy of scale that you do with the values. And in order to get return on investment, you'll have to charge more. Much more, I would suspect.

Yes, the "value" is an intregal part of the value resorts. I estimate that we spend no more than 3 hours of "awake time" in our resort room each day. Heck, we rarely take advantage of the pool or other amenities. For us it's "all theme parks, all the time." The thought of spending $200 a night gives me stomach aches. I spend some 30-40 nights a year in WDW resorts. The All Stars make it possible.

The inescapable fact is that WDW is able to fill 5,700 All Star rooms nearly each and every night of the year. The on-site resort that is the most difficult to book is the All Star Movies.

Clearly not everyone shares the opinion that the All Stars are cheap and tacky.

I'm interested to see what the reception of Pop Century will be, though. I have no problem with the choice of theme, or the "motel" design in general. My concern is that the theming elements are not as well done as the All Stars. I'm aware that I'm about the only person on this board that thinks WDW did a good job with the All Stars, but it's my honest opinion. I'll wait to make a final judgement on Pop until after I've stayed there. We were booked for opening night, but that of course has been moved.

Anyhow, "Motel" was not a bad word to Walt. I have seen several of his hand drawn master plans that include areas labeled "Hotels" as well as areas labeled "Motels."

 

[YoHo]

Oh, I agree, Walt fully intended for there to be motels on property, BUT I would have preferd they look like the Disneyland hotel. With little to no external themeing then what they are. I agree the biggest draw is cost.

I may be going out on a limb here, but I'd have preferred they just built a plain Jane motel and left it at that. Then the cost would be even lower.

I understand the thoughts of people who are all parks all the time. Ironically on the resorts board, a person who goes relativly often said that because he goes so often he stays at the other resorts, because he isn't all parks all the time.


So certainly yes, Motel like resorts should provided, but why do they have to look like that when they could have looked better and been done cheaper. I'd stay in the Disneyland hotel any day of the week over any of the allstars.

 

[Eeyore2U]

Nice to see you two kissed and made up. Or at least found common ground.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Seems that Jeff has joined Landbaron in deciding that "theming" means taking you to a geographic location when it is applied to a WDW resort.

No! That's not it. It's only a small aspect of a "Disney" theme. And because it's convenient to make the analogy (an easy frame of reference so to speak) we sometimes stop short of making the entire point. "Disney" theming is much, much more. It certainly can include the geographical location bit, and most of the more (or easily) well defined themes in Disney do carry the guest away, but it is not imperative. What is crucial is the way "Disney" themes differ from the rest of the world's themes.

I recently had a seventh birthday party for my son. We had a Mickey Mouse theme. No one can argue that the party wasn't 'themed' in Mickey! We had a dozen Mickey Mouse balloons and a four foot stuffed Mickey at the head of the table!! The cake had a Mickey on it and we even had Mickey napkins! My son was elated. So was I. It came off very well. But I would have been sorely disappointed if "Disney" offered me such tripe! "Disney" themes have to be so much more. Detailed. Subtle. Almost a story within themselves. Exotic helps. Carried to a different location helps. Immersive. Engaging. Involving. All inclusive. Encompassing. Intricate. Complex. Elaborate. Elegant. Refined.

Maybe it would help to think of just what Walt started out to create. And in the same way the complexities of the SHOW can be boiled down to a fairly simple philosophy so can theme. What it is, of course, is a movie. A film. In 3-D!! A living movie set. A movie set that transports the viewer (guest) to a different place and/or time. Let's face it, Walt only did what he had done all his life. And for him, walking through a movie set was an everyday occurrence. But he knew that for us (the guests) it was special. Just walk down Main Street. Nothing but a movie set! Now try Adventureland. A movie set. Add a little music or native drums, as the case calls for, let the people touch and move, three dimensionally, through the facades, pay very careful attention to every little detail you can possibly think of and you sudden have a "Disney" theme. Rich in every single aspect and all encompassing.

Buzz Lightyear is not ugly, Pongo is not ugly, surfboards are not ugly.

Greg, those things may not be ugly, but at the same time they are not even close to a "Disney" theme!!

Theming is firmly in place at AS & PC. Whether you like the concept is irrelevant. Whether you think they went far enough is irrelevant. Whether they're "cheap" is ...You got it, irrelevant. Webster says "theme" is "the topic or subject of something". Pretty straightforward and the AS & PC Resorts are certainly themed.

Captain!!!! Or was it Peter this time?! How can theme possibly be irrelevant?!?! It is what makes Disney, Disney!!!! I'm afraid you've been brainwashed by the "Large Icon King"!! That's right!! It's nothing but Ei$ner-speak! We need to de-program you. And quickly! He's got you believing that a forty foot guitar is "Disney" theming! How sad.

By building the AS, Ei$ner has effectively created a class system of "Disney" themes and has dumbed down the "Disney" experience to the lowest common denominator. He threw their long standing and much revered "standards" right out the window for the sake of a couple of bucks. Again, how sad!

Back to Greg:

The Ramada Inn has no theme, the Holiday Inn has no theme.

I beg to differ!! It does indeed have a theme. It has a mid-level hotel theme. One that is easily recognized. And one that can be recreated in a movie set with little effort. It can also be disguised (although not very well) by placing a few primary colored icons in front of the building!

Back to theming resorts. Actually that seems to be a rather new concept at Walt Disney World. Let's take a look at the resorts that were around during the first 16 years of Walt Disney World:

Contemporary - unthemed
Polynesian - themed
Disney Village - unthemed
Disney Inn - unthemed

It wasn't until 1988 that theming resorts became the standard practice for Disney

NO!!!!!! Absolutely not!!!! The Contemporary was themed "futuristic"! Or at the very least "Contemporary". The monorail through the lobby takes care of that, if nothing else. The Marketplace was themed as a quaint little, peaceful village (huts instead of building) from no where in particular, yet evoking a certain 'feel'. The same holds true of the Golf Resort. Sort of themed as a giant Pro-shop. Again evoking a pastoral, out of the way, peaceful feeling. A feeling intricately tied to golf!!

But let's go a little farther. Look at the first five year plan. What was called for? A Persian, an Asian, a Venetian!! WOW!!! Talk about exotic!! You mention 1988 as the year theming took place and I look at it as just the opposite. It's when the theming aspect of Disney took a hit. Instead of exotic, as in other countries and/or times, we got "American-made" (i.e. Floridian, Port Orleans, Dixie Landings, Old Key West, Wilderness Lodge, Beach and Yacht Club, etc.) I, for one, was extremely disappointed. While I like some of them, I would have given anything to see what Disney could have done to a Mediterranean theme! Wouldn't you?

And so as not to exclude the 'value' bit I offer:

Oh, I agree, Walt fully intended for there to be motels on property, BUT I would have preferred they look like the Disneyland hotel. With little to no external theming then what they are.

YoHo! I couldn't agree more. They took the cheap and easy route. They could have answered the 'motel' and 'value' question a thousand different ways. And they chose a way that my seven year old could have thought of. "I know!! It'd be way cool to have the biggest and best Pongo ever in front of the building!!!! Way cool!! Awesome!!"

They should have handled it the way they did Fort Wilderness or the Golf Resort or the Marketplace. Evoke a feeling, if not a location. And they really should have tried to keep up the original concept of theming. That of a 3-D movie set. They had an obligation to either do it right, or not do it at all. They chose, instead, to do it cheap and easy. Which, it turns out, was simply wrong.

 

[All Aboard]

Could they have done the All Stars better? Yes. Could they have done them better and still offered them at the current price? I don't know. I doubt it, but I don't know. And that's a big part of my point. Offering something that most everyone can afford.

I hate to keep going back to this but, the vast majority of folks staying at the All Stars enjoy them!

Landbaron, seems you believe that there should only be one category of WDW resorts. That's where we disagree. Remember my ticket analogy when we were sitting at the Dolphin. I believe the same way that the Mad Tea Party peacefully coexists with the E ticket attractions... the All Stars peacefully coexist with the Grand Floridian.

And in the case of resorts I think it's very necessary to have something for all tastes and all income levels.

YoHo, I couldn't disagree with you more about the plain motel v. the All Stars. That's why I really dislike most of the Disney Institute offerings. The townhouse I still own in Tallahassee looks almost exactly like the townhouses along the golf course at DI. What's special about that?

Part of what makes Disney special is cases where they do it like nobody else has. To me the All Stars are a marvelous example of this. I guess I haven't travelled enough yet, but I sure haven't seen anything like them anywhere else.

PS - eeyore2u, don't worry about YoHo and I, we are pretty good buds. Two of the more open minded folks on this board in my opinion . In fact we've been imortalized together in the avator of a fellow poster. Whom I haven't seen in a little while....hmmmm.

 

[JeffJewell]

The inescapable fact is that WDW is able to fill 5,700 All Star rooms nearly each and every night of the year. The on-site resort that is the most difficult to book is the All Star Movies.
Clearly not everyone shares the opinion that the All Stars are cheap and tacky.

...does the fact that someone booked an All Star room necessarily imply that they _don't_ consider them tacky? There seem to be a couple different reasons folks choose the All Stars (hey, I've slept there, myself, actually), and some of those reasons are compelling enough such that folks would stay there even if they _do_ consider them tacky.

Yes, the "value" is an intregal part of the value resorts.

And here's where I have to start treading pretty lightly.

Not everyone considers the lowest priced option to automatically offer the best value. Disney was able to pack resorts before the All Stars existed because there are actually many people who felt Disney, although pricier than some other vacation options, offered so much more "meat" for the extra money that it was a better way to spend that money: a better value.

It's disappointing to me that Disney seems to have largely abandoned that approach to value, an approach that made them unique in their industry. By equating "value" with "cheaper," it seems to me they've chosen to play on the home field of the competition, rather than on their own historical turf.

Economies of scale are most valuable to businesses in commodity markets. If you can offer the same product for less money, you will sell more than your competition. If, on the other hand, you offer a product that your competition cannot offer at any price, you might very well become a household name around the world.

Is it a good thing that Disney no longer makes the unique product, even though they can still be competitive in the commodity market?

Not if you're looking for more of the unique product with which the brand was once synonymous.

Jeff

PS: Maybe it's the way I read it, but it seemed as though you were on the defensive somewhat, and it was not my intention to put you in that position. For good or ill, the All Stars ain't going anywhere, so it's just as well that someone appreciates them for what they are. Actually, if I was a couple hours drive away, I'm relatively certain that I'd be in a low-priced hotel several week-ends a year, too. If the money is the biggest question, the All Stars are certainly a valid answer. So go, have a good time, and enjoy the All Stars all you want... see if I care.

But does my position that the type of theming exhibited by the All Stars is a clearly different _type_ of theming than that of Animal Kingdom Lodge strike any chord in you at all?

 

[DisDuck]

Hi. guys.

The Disney Inn.. How much more themed then AllStars is/was that 'motel'. Since Walt himself invisioned motels not just hotels at WDW unless there is concept art hanging around how do we know (100%) that they would not look like AllStars.

I am with gcurling.. I have stayed at Contemp & Coronado when on-site (since I own a timeshare off-site, I rarely stay on-site). After our last on-site visit at AllStar Movie 2 years ago, my families opinion is why stay more expensive. We liked the 'themeing' very much, thank you and did not have to pay a small fortune.

Those who want to pay top dollar.... I say go for it but for us value seekers give me the AllStars anyday.

 

[YoHo]

gcurling, have a stay at the Disneyland Hotel and I think you'd disagree. I've never been to a more magical hotel that for all practical purposes LOOKED like a ramada inn. It's a very different feeling from that of walking into the lobby of the polynesian, BUT at the same time uniquley Disney. If they could have built that in Florida only with external doors (which some people prefer) and Value service levels I'd probably stay there.

I don't think that bed spreads with mickey on them, Armore's with the Original Disneyland conceptual art and Goofy wallpaper cost any more then 50ft tall Dogs. And yet I felt at home as if I were at Disneyworld (that changes once you leave the resort, but that's because Anaheim is a pit.) So in that case, More is emphatically Less.

 

[All Aboard]

Jeff, I stay in defensive mode here on the Rumors board all the time. It's just my nature. Even with my recent car #2 defection, there are still so many more threebies (or is it threeophytes?) here on the RB.

Just one point. I didn't say that "everyone" staying at the All Stars loved them. That's certainly not the case. But I would assume that the majority do really enjoy them.

Yes, WDW filled it's few deluxe resorts in the early years. But, I seriously doubt they could build as many rooms as they have now, make them all deluxes and charge deluxes prices for all of them. Perhaps they could, but I seriously doubt it.

Clearly the business side to the decision is - why lose business to the outside? But the other side is that the offering be well received. Which I think it is, just not here.

Like YoHo, I'll post a poll on the resorts board. Mine will be more simple, aimed at a specific set of responses.

 

[Baileymouse]

I don't think I'd want to stay at PC, and I've never wanted to stay at AS. My sister did and I wasn't impressed. PO was just too pretty to pass up.

However, I do want to sneak over to PC when they complete the giant Monopoly board and take pictures of my Scottie Dog.

I couldn't resist.

 

[YoHo]

My Only concern gcurling is that your Poll targets a specific subset of guests. Everyone who has seen the place can have an opinion on its themeing even if they haven't stayed there.

I tell you this right now, If the All Stars Didn't make my Eyes bleed when looking at them, I'd stay there.

I love the polynesian, but I'd love it if I could get a cheaper hotel room that didn't disgust me at every turn.

I KNOW I'm an extremist in this sense. I love the concept of a "Disney" Motel. I just think that given the amount of money spent. ALl stars could have been better. Sometimes less is more.