Robbing Peter to pay "PAUL"

[DisneyFanGuy]

Al's editorial sarcasm drives me crazy, yet he does usually seem to have the inside track. And everything in that update seemed to strike home with me.

I'm a late player at the whole "Watching Disney" party. I have always been a big fan of the parks, but never gave any thought as to their business logic until the past few years. I have to hang out with Landbaron though.......because nearly everything that they have done in the past few years seems to be turning me off as a consumer.

As a business person managing multiple retail locations for a big company, I have always been very sensitive to the fact that NEW customers are drawn in by the Brand. Disney seems to me to be really screwing up their brand. We still LOVE the parks, but anything that they have done in the past 3 years has dissappointed us. AK, JIYI, many of the film attractions, etc. We love the rides, yet end up defaulting to the older attractions. I mean, how long can they go between offering up classic attractions? I just don't get it.

I mean, what the HELL are they thinking?

Now there is the whole DCA deal. I haven't been there, but here's the thing. Nobody in my family wants to go. Nothing about the place intrigues my kids, my wife, or myself. It's not the marketing.....it's the product.

Years ago in the fast food industry, new leadership took over Burger King. The new CEO gave a very famous speach. When wondering how to turn around sales, he said that "It's the Whopper, Stupid". Meaning that if you want to win the war, your signature product had better be the absolute best. They improved the quality of the Wopper, and sales increased that year 20%.

Disney's NEW product is not leading the industry anymore. And that is a BIG problem. And until they have a major change in their sales trends, they are not about to change that strategy.

I always enjoy listening to the debates on why it's happening, yet in the end only one thing really matters to my family. If the product no longer interests us then we won't spend our money there. I still LOVE the magic of the parks (We drop by once a year at least), but there seems to be very little of the new stuff that we enjoy.

I mean some of this stuff is just plain bad......

JIYI.....It is terrible. Never should have been built.
The new area that they are building at the AK.....Come on. AK is great if you are park hopping, but it needs more capital than a spinner, some games, and a couple of very small coasters.

If you look at DCA......... OH my GOD! It is one giant compromise.

The closing of attractions:

20,000, the Skyway, Keel boats (we rode them), Time Keeper, Etc. And we get the magic carpets? I have no objection to spinners for the kids, but ..... Can we please have a big new butt-kickin reason to come back please?


Beyond the parks.....My 12 year old daughter and my 14 year old son were debating the other day as to why Disney is putting out sequels to it's animated classics. As my son says.....They are crap. He says it cheapens the brand. (This is my 14 year old!) Even my 7 year old says that they are stupid and dull.

I used to love shopping in the Disney Stores. Now all I find is baby clothes and toys. Yuck. I used to buy corporate gifts for people in my company. They have lost a ton of my business.

Landbaron, I am totally with you on the hours of the parks. I can't take a break anymore and come back. I can't hop from park to park as easily because I don't have the time at the end of the day. I now stick to one park a day unless I want to hit a specific restaurant.

The bottom line is that Disney has lost the drive to be the best. They seem to be happy to be competitive.

I sold all of my stock. I have lost faith in the "vision" of the company. I will still probably go to the parks every year until I die (hopefully a LONG time?) But I am not quite as happy as I used to be when I go.

And where is the person who drives the company?

I was always taught that true leaders create vision, communicate it well, and can allign their team behind it. Whenever a company loses the vision they flounder. I always used to think of Disney as the "Best" in many areas. I no longer think of them that way. I will STILL BE THEIR CUSTOMER. I won't be there as frequently though. And it makes me sad.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

DisneyFanGuy,

I'm a late player at the whole "Watching Disney" party.

Well, it's quite a party, too. Pull up a chair, mix a drink (it's self serve I'm afraid) and start pounding on the keyboard. I'm hoping that when we switched over you lost all your previous posts. Cause it says you signed up in June of 2000 but you only have 9 posts. And from someone who is clearly in the genius category that is a shame!! It doesn't matter at all that you happen to agree with me. We need your input!! Right Captain Peter, et al?

I have to hang out with Landbaron though.......because nearly everything that they have done in the past few years seems to be turning me off as a consumer.

I'm sorry. I just thought this was a wonderful quote and it needed repeating!! (lol)

Disney seems to me to be really screwing up their brand.

With every move they make!!!

I was always taught that true leaders create vision, communicate it well, and can align their team behind it. Whenever a company loses the vision they flounder. I always used to think of Disney as the "Best" in many areas. I no longer think of them that way.

You hit the nail on the head. I've been asking my debating friends since I got here, "Who has the vision?" I certainly isn't Ei$ner. We've clearly lost our focus. Bicker is right. The focus of THIS company, like any other company, is to make MONEY. Which isn't entirely a bad thing. And for any other company it would be the smart thing. The only thing.

But Disney is different. At least to us it is. And we are their biggest fans!! We are certifiable Disney "NUTS". We have history, loyalty and we frankly ooze with devotion. For all of us, at one time or another, "Disney could do no wrong". (Yes, even your friendly neighborhood LandBaron.) And because we are such fans we are the first to see the changes that occur. We are the first to feel the impact of both a good and bad SHOW.

I will STILL BE THEIR CUSTOMER. I won't be there as frequently though. And it makes me sad.

It makes me sad as well. And I think that this is something that the strict business justifiers don't fully understand. Contrary to popular belief I can comprehend most of the business tenets that spew forth from the "justifiers". I can see the logic. I can understand the principles. And yet, I still feel sad. Why? Because Disney, while being a business and turning a handsome profit, NEVER held to ALL the doctrines of PROFIT. It seemed they marched to their own drummer. And a strange drummer it was. They were never satisfied with being competitive, mundane or ordinary. They made gobs of money sometimes (lets face it, it was never cheap!) but at other times gave it back to it's customers through attractions, pricing, attention to detail, and most important guest satisfaction. Exceeding expectations. Every time!!!

So today I'm frustrated, and more than a little saddened that this benevolent (albeit capricious) company has turned into a competitive, mundane and ordinary corporation. And I think that everyone loses because of it. Especially Disney.

You say finally that you will still be their customer. And I agree. That is why you don't see the declining numbers that you'd expect to see with so much negative commentary going on. Even I'm nearly jumping out of my skin with the thought of my August trip!! But one day, if they continue on this road, the thrill won't be there any more. The party will be over. And it'll be time to go home. And by the time we Disney-holics get that feeling, it will be far, far too late!!!

 

[DisDuck]

A question for Land or any other party to this subject.

Does Disney rely on or go after the repeat business or is their concentration on the first/one timer?

I think it makes a world of difference when deciding what to do. We are repeaters and fanatics here but are only what 20,000+ strong. That is a small pitence in the overall attendence numbers. I don't even think we spend more than our numbers indicate. Those who own DVC (while can say spend more) are a captive audience. Your investment shows Disney that you plan to return and return and return. So to be cynical, they don't need to please you. They need to make sure that first timers continue to come and hopefully in increasing numbers.

As I am want to repeat, it is all subjective. Bottom line for me is that I miss WDW (saw a commercial last night and got all teary eyed) but am going to DL this November and will have to wait until next April for my next visit.

 

[ww52]

I'm kind of new to this angle of Disney as well, but find it fascinating. I agree with the sentiments that over time even strong Disney fans will find themselves finally saying "I guess I've done Disney enough - time to see more of the world". Yet it could all change for the better almost overnight - they have a chance to do it right with whatever the 3rd gate at DL ends up being. I know it will wind up being a waterpark or something on a smaller scale than DCA was supposed to be. But at least they might find their vision again by letting the public know (without outright admitting DCA was a mistake) that every new project will be grand in concept (the "Disney" image that most people hopefully still associate with).

It would do them good to remember not just Walt but also the words of Daniel Burnham ("make no small plans"). DCA seems more like P.T. Barnum than Daniel Burnham.

 

[YoHo]

DisDuck, it has to be far more subtle.

The goals for each resort MUST be different.

Disneyland in Anahiem is 90% repeat buisness. Disneyland and DCA MUST cater to repeat buisness.
WDW on the otherhand has entirely different demographics. The average length between visits is on the order of Years, not months or Days as it is in California. Whereas, in Thialand, apparently, you could stick mouse ears on a pile of Yak Dung and charge $50.

I think the big concern about DCA was that DIsney tried to force a change in Demographics, and failed. OR more preciesly, misjudged the repeat customer's tolerance for the new out of state visitor centric ideas.

 

[Sarangel]

So... Has anyone but me noticed that all of you complaining about DCA aren't out here where you can go and check out the park for yourselves? I, naturally, except Another Voice. No, it's not Disneyland, but it's not supposed to be! I realize that the park numbers aren't where they were targeted, but some of that has to be attributed to the softening of the economy - California isn't the best place in the country to live right now.

I happen to have been to DCA 4 or 5 times now, and I love it. Yes, it's a new park & has some very rough edges, but these will eventually be softened up as rides are added & replaced (Superstar Limo has to be the lamest ride in existance) and bugs are worked out. The main problem is that Disney didn't have any expectation of having to adjust the public's expectation of the park. The phrase 'instant hit' shows up again and again in the discussions of what the execs thought DCA would be. Mind you, the commercials that they're running now (cartoon characters running over from DL) don't help promote the image of a park for grown-ups, which is what DCA really is.

I will now step aside & let the naysayers continue their rant.

Sarangel

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

I think the big concern about DCA was that DIsney tried to force a change in Demographics, and failed. OR more preciesly, misjudged the repeat customer's tolerance for the new out of state visitor centric ideas.

YoHo. Lately we have been agreeing more than disagreeing. However, on this I think you're wrong. Or at least partially wrong. The reason DCA is failing certainly has to with Disney's poor judgement regarding demographics. But the main reason is because they did it on the cheap! It's an overpriced Universal or Six Flags with more lights. And there's nothing wrong with that in and of itself. But it just ain't Disney!!!

I guess you really CAN'T fool all the people all of the time!!!!!!!

 

[larry_poppins]

It does not seem to me that Disney is even interested in being in the theme park business anymore.
Look at some of there recent decisions:
They built an elaborate themed zoo: Animal Kingdom
They built a community college: Disney Institute
They built a sports complex: Wide WOrld of Sports (does anyone here fly to WDW for sports?)
They built thousands of hotel rooms: In fact the Grand Californian Hotel is the best part of the Disney
expansion.
Let's not even discuss DCA.


I can foresee a day when I, a DVC member, will check into a DVC resort and spend most of my time visiting
Islands of Adventure, Busch Gardens Tampa (check out Rhino Rally! It looks great!), and Universal.
These companies are proud to be in the theme park business. Of course the Oriental Land Company
considers theme parks to be the holy grail! But that is another story.

Disney used to be in the business of exceeding our expectations. They have dummed down their product.
They are now in the business of meeting our expectations. Universal and Busch Gardens have improved their
product. Disney, particularly in Florida, has real competition for the first time. I will no longer be spending all of my days in a Disney park.

Just my personal thoughts,

Larry Poppins

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Yes, it's a new park & has some very rough edges, but these will eventually be softened up as rides are added & replaced (Superstar Limo has to be the lamest ride in existence) and bugs are worked out.

You know, I see this from ardent Disney fans all the time and I'm always baffled by it. I would expect Universal, Six Flags or other minor, struggling companies to open a park the way you describe. But not the KING of amusement parks. Not the leader in the field. Not the company that invented the very concept! Not Disney!! Certainly not MY Disney!! Not the Disney I fell in love with. Why is this OK with you? Why do you cut them so much slack? I really don't understand it at all.

 

[YoHo]

See Landbaron, now we're getting into the kind of discussion where we'll break. A fake wooden Rollercoaster and a ferris wheel do not make it undisney. I'll say it again, if the asspoused idea behind Paradise pier, a throughback to the boradwalks of yesteryear is in fact what really brought the idea about, then it is 100% disney. After all, Mainstreet USA in DIsneyland is a near exact miniature replica of Walt's boyhood home in Missouri. What's so wrong with rose colored memories of Santa Cruz (regardless of that boardwalk's superiority)

The reason Mainstreet USA works, is because of the memories it evokes, even in people born 5 years ago. The flaw in the execution is, that Anahiem is a little to close to Santa Cruz for it to be effective with the local population.

If you took Paradise peir and stuck it in downtown DIsney Orlando next to Pleasure Island. I would be far more popular, because the closest example would be Jersey. TO me, DInsey isn't about negatives and nots, as in they will not have a midway. Its about presentation. IE, they will not have a crooked midway run by Illiterate mute Carnies.
Thus a Faux wooden coaster blends brilliantly if done right and it only works when your "theme" isn't sitting a couple hundred miles away.

 

[larworth]

I think most of the rant is not directed at the park itself, but of management's perspective on what would or would not be successful. I they build a better mouse trap (pardon the pun) and nobody comes they have still failed.

From everything I read the shortfall goes way beyond a soft economy. They appear to have totally misread their target customer base. Disney is supposedly a company that gets high marks for being in touch with their customers. There is a problem here somewhere. I do know that not understanding your customers is a pretty big "no no" are far as the stock analysts are concerned.

OK, so they took a calculated risk and as risks go it doesn't look so good in hindsight. Ah, but knowing it had some risk they surely were ready with Plan B. Oops, no contingency plan. You mean they were so sure they knew what customers wanted (in our company we call this arrogance) that they didn't even think they might be wrong. Not a good sign.

I think the debate is whether it is fair to use DCA projected results (or lack thereof) as one barometer of how well the company is being managed.

 

[Peter Pirate]

It doesn't matter at all that you happen to agree with me. We need your input!! Right Captain Peter, et al?

It doesn't matter? Oh, well since you said such nice things about my post yesterday I'll have to let that one go...Are you a used car salesman?

But, yes Disney Fan Guy & WW52 are certainly going to be welcome additions IMO. Captain Crook may not agree but who am I to speak for him?

Contrary to popular belief I can comprehend most of the business tenets that spew forth from the "justifiers.

Who am I Linda Blair?...What with all of this spewing, you still don't understand that Eisners job forces him to answer to stockholders not passholders...Or do you think he can do both? (boy what a 'fat pitch' that was ).

I've been asking my debating frineds since I got here, who has the vision?

Now Landbaron, we've discussed the vision Eisner has and even you must admit that he has done many wonderful things for Disney (and I know you'll follow up by saying "not enough wonderful things"). But putting that oft used quite un-definable topic 'Magic" on the side for a moment, he has brought us additional gates, water parks and wonderful Resorts & restaurants and has maintained the ability for adults to escape and become 'little' again, just as Walt wanted...Certainly, there has to be credit given here, doesn't there?

Even I'm nearly jumping out of my skin thinking of that August trip.

Sounds like you need to consult a dermatologist for that skin problem...But how can you be sooo excited about going to a Park owned by a Company Eisner has directed for 17 years! 17 years! And not feel that he has been responsible for more good things (as in simple preservation) than bad?

WW52 had a great comment:

Yet it could all change for the better overnight.

It's true! To us Disney fanatics Disney always looks like it has just done something stupid when Wahmmo, it turns around (or is turned around). Optimism is wonderful, doubly so with rose colored glasses!

Thank you Sarangel! I try to put great creedence in the comments of those who have done, versus my highly biased opinions. I think AV has been very insightful, but I knew there had to be another side of that particular coin and you brought it to the table.

Just because DCA is a dud so far means little. It just makes step two or three (whichever step it is) that much more important. I disagree with AV & Yoho who think the Eisner led Management team has no contingency plans and are flying willy nilly. I don't believe the Company could have survived this long with that much lack of foreskin...sight...

 

[Peter Pirate]

Or does eveyone notice that we seem to jam up about 2pm each day? Try & try we're always two or three posts behind (I can't type any faster!). But, thats better than the alternative, I guess!

 

[JeffJewell]

I happen to have been to DCA 4 or 5 times now, and I love it. Yes, it's a new park & has some very rough edges, but these will eventually be softened up as rides are added & replaced (Superstar Limo has to be the lamest ride in existance) and bugs are worked out.

And I love Animal Kingdom. Which makes absolutely zero difference in the big picture... even Disney has publicly referenced guest surveys that indicate the overwhelming opinion is that AK is too small and there's not enough to do.

My point is this. If DCA was a one time anomaly, I'd agree with you completely. But given AK's history, given the history of Journey Into Your Imagination, given the recent history of the Imagineering budgets... I have absolutely _no_ faith that the current management has either the inclination or the talent to work out these bugs.

Your position seems similar to my friend Peter Pirate's, at least as far as the topic of DCA goes: "don't worry so much, they're going to fix it." My response to that is to ask, in desperation (because I love Disney, I truly would like to believe it), what have you seen in the past five or ten years that suggests they'll fix this? From what I've seen (and from the changes already announced for DCA for this summer), it looks like they'll continue to do the cheapest and easiest things possible, which is precisely what caused this train wreck to begin with.

Jeff

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

From YoHo

A fake wooden Rollercoaster and a ferris wheel do not make it undisney.

Would it surprise you if I said I agree!? Well, prepare yourself. I agree!! I didn't mean to infer that a Coney Island (Read: Riverview for you Chicago fans) would be a bad idea. I was thrilled 10 or 12 years ago when I heard that the Boardwalk would be a separate gate themed in just this way. I thought it was a great idea. And I still had my blinders on, so that made it doubly cool. When I said cheap I meant those edges that Sarangel talked about. The "nothing to do" and "only half a park" complaint. The lameness of some of the rides. The cardboard cutouts and no attention to engulfing the guest in the experience. And that's not to even mention your complaint regarding choice of theme in the first place.

Look at EPCOT, opening day. Sure it's been added to since (not enough) but look at what was there on opening day. WOW! Even if you didn't like half of it, the half you did like - blew you away. It was truly overwhelming. I guess what I would expect from Disney is something like Westcot. What we got is DCA. You tell me if it wasn't done "on the cheap".

From Larworth

I they build a better mouse trap (pardon the pun) and nobody comes they have still failed.

And

I think the debate is whether it is fair to use DCA projected results (or lack thereof) as one barometer of how well the company is being managed

EXACTLY!!!!

And now from my good friend Peter Pirate:

Who am I Linda Blair?...What with all of this spewing, you still don't understand that Eisners job forces him to answer to stockholders not passholders...Or do you think he can do both? (boy what a 'fat pitch' that was ).

Captain Linda Pirate!! I like the sound of that!!

WOW! You're not kidding it's a fat pitch!!! He should most definitely do both. But if he is that inept, and can only do one, then go with the passholder. And not for purely selfish reasons. If he takes care of the passholder, the stocks take care of themselves. The parks aspect of the business can be put on auto-pilot and he can concentrate on fixing ABC (an impossible task if ever there was one!)

But, not everything I write is marked for you specifically, my favorite Pirate. Even you are a liberal business minded person compared to say… some of the more vocal (hard core business) on RADP. I've been following some of their posts on RADP and I tell you, they fascinate me and infuriate me all at the same time. At times you do remind me of them though. I swear they won't be happy until they prove that Disney is a profit motivated (in other words, non-creative, mundane, ordinary, run-of-the-mill, survey taking, out-of-touch, Universal carbon copy, equal with Six Flags) company. Well, they've convinced me. Disney is PROFIT motivated like never before. But they don't stop there. They want you to agree that it should be. NEVER!!!! RISE UP ME HARDIES!!! TO ARMS!!!! (sorry - got carried away.)

Now Landbaron, we've discussed the vision Eisner has and even you must admit that he has done many wonderful things for Disney (and I know you'll follow up by saying "not enough wonderful things").

No I won't. I'll ask instead "WHAT ARE TALKING ABOUT!!??" Name one. Any one. He preserves. But only if there is profit involved. He has NEVER created like Walt did. For the joy of it. (Of course it didn't hurt that he (Walt) made a pretty penny at it to boot!)

You mentioned other gates. HAH!! Dismal half parks at first. MGM is still a hodge podge, poorly designed and hemmed in from future expansion (good planning Ei$ner)! AK, well, to each his own, I guess. I just can't help thinking what it could have been with a couple extra bucks. Kind of the way Walt would have done it. (Hmmm. I may have to cave as to the water parks. Well, we'll ignore it for a moment and hope he forgets about them.) And "wonderful Resorts & restaurants". Well, I have only three words: money - Money - MONEY!!!

I disagree with AV & Yoho who think the Eisner led Management team has no contingency plans and are flying willy nilly

Peter!! What in the world leads you to this absurd conclusion? MSEP? Millionaire? Please give me one shred of evidence to hang my hat on and I'll switch side right now!!!!

It's true! To us Disney fanatics Disney always looks like it has just done something stupid when Wahmmo, it turns around (or is turned around). Optimism is wonderful, doubly so with rose colored glasses!

Again, my dear Pirate! An example please!!! I can't think of any!!!

 

[Peter Pirate]

Jeff writes:

My point is this. If DCA was a one time anomoly, I'd agree with you completely.

But Jeff, can't this be an anomoly of the times? The business climate we are in allows for very little risk taking. ..None of the networks will do anything other than carbon copies of each others semi-decent programming, all of the theme Parks are buildiing up to a full Park instead of just building it (leave DL Tokyo out, not very relevent without opening so many other sub-topics). Now, perhaps Disney shouldn't fall into that mold, I agree that I wish they's set the trends - all of the trends and never (or hardly ever follow), but I think 'multi billion dollar conglomeration Disney' finds itself in (again, in order to remain independent) a situation where it has fears from so many different fronts than 'just' the theme Parks.

Still, my personal hope is that the economy will not fall further and that Disney will respond by really attacking areas that have been somewhat negleted (our Parks).

Now LandBaron, you stun me by asking for examples of the good things Eisner has done. Come on now! The new Parks...I love MGM and I love AK. I'd like one more E ride at MGM and certainly BK needs to be built, but I love those Parks. Thanks for giving me the Water Parks, but as for the Resorts, I know they make money, money, money but you can't tell me that this makes them any less fun, can you? Staying on-site is truely one of the things we look forward to and I think others do as well.

I guess I am like Sarangel in this regard, because I don't mind waiting for the Park to take shape as long as it stays fluid. I like the DCA theme, but hey I'm a Floridian (we can't even vote). I just think it's ok to take the good stuff and fun to watch the lame stuff disappear, disappear back ovet the falls...Whoops, off to Norway for a second! Can you guys agree that if you were ASSURED that the 'good fix' was coming that this would be a pretty sound way to build a Park?

Lastly you asked (in regard to ww52's comment) where is the proof that things could turn around in a heartbeat? Well, we were talking about the film division and certainly if Pearl Harbor and Atlantis turn out to be blockbusters, the movie divisions will be sitting very pretty ideed. It may be a stretch for these two things to happen, but certainly stranger things have taken place in the movies!

Theres more, but who needs to be verbose???

 

[YoHo]

can't this be an anomoly of the times? The business climate we are in allows for very little risk taking. .

Okay, 10 years ago, we were in a recession and economic climate far worse then this one. lets see what Disney did.

Opened Studios
Opened Euro Disney (eventually a success)
Greenlighted, planned and executed the beginning of animal Kingdom
Greenlighted planned and executed the beginnings of ANahiem second gate.



Lets see what they did during the economic expansion

Buy ABC (good theoretically)
Institute slashes in operating budgets that for a while risked maintainence.
Slashed beastly kingdom from AK
Turned any number of good Idea's into DCA which might be an okay Idea, except they.......
tore DCA to shreds.
Planned cheap spinner for MK and cheap spinner, coaster and Midway for AK.


Remember, the economic slump is only about 6 month's old, very few of the CApital expenditures for the parks take less then six months, so most of them were put in place before there was significant trouble.



So lets see, During the recession of the early 90s, Disney built built built, expanded expanded expanded and dripped magic as best as Eisner could (he after all is no Walt)
Then, during the good times, they cut cut cut and cheap cheap cheaped.


Hmmm, am I wrong, or is this 100% opposit of what your suggesting they are doing now?

Granted, they may have seen some of this coming and were trying to prepare for it (more likely, they were trying to eck every last penny out of the parks to pay for go.com, ABC and the Disney Stores.)


In other words, why after 17 years of growth at least half of which occured during a recession, do they have to "Hunker down" now?


What's different? THis economic downturn isn't even a recession yet.

SOmebody, please explain why it was easy then and hard now?

 

[Peter Pirate]

Yoho, seems to me I was proposing another possiblity to my friend Jeff in opposition to his thinking. I don't believe my attempt to further discussion warrants such sarcasam.

But if it will help the lovefest, I guess I can just jump in that carpool, again...

 

[YoHo]

I apologize for the level of sarcasm, as I actually want an answer. Obviously it is harder, or Disney managment precieves it as harder, so why is that? is it, because DIsney managment has lost some focus?
Is it due to failures elsewhere?
Is it some unseen outside force?

I'm really curious as to why.


I think I need some time off from work, Having the Axe held above my head has made me far less fun to be with.

 

[ww52]

My comment about how things could change overnight really was referring to learning from their mistakes before they announce what the 3rd gate at DL will be. The 2nd gate went from the wonderful vision of Westcot to the reality of DCA - hence my reference to Daniel Burnham vs. P.T. Barnum. I'm just saying that they ought to vow to "make no small plans". DCA sounds like it was a small plan - the third gate doesn't have to be - even if it is just a waterpark.

And no - I've not been to DCA, and I doubt that I ever will, nor probably will any of my kids (teenagers now and adults in just a few quick years). I think that's the point - nobody really has a burning desire to go there.