Robbing Peter to pay "PAUL"

[HorizonsFan]

He doesn't care why. When the ultimate effects of his regimen are finally and disastrously felt, he will be long gone and it will be some other shmuck's headache to try to get us back. If he spends even more than Walt would have (and that's a lot!) it'll still take many, many years, if at all!!

Now Landbaron, don't you think this is a little unfair? Not only are you presuming to know what the man is thinking, you are predicting the future of WDW based on that presumption. I agree with YoHo that neither excessive enthusiasm nor excessive gloom is called for.

As for Peter, his assesment of the way his family feels about AK or MGM is his assesment. (I'm reminded at this point of Jeff H.) It's neither right nor wrong, it just is. This is the point I have always tried to make, most of the magic is not in the park; it's in you! Haven't you known anybody who went to WDW and hated it or worse, was ambivilent? I have and it always mystified me until I realized that they weren't missing the magic, it simply doesn't exist for them. WDW is a place that allows one to forget that the outside world exists and offers an escape. It doesn't produce magic, it allows one to relax and let their own magic come to the surface.



Popping in to keep you honest,

 

[ww52]

Nothing more to add on this one - I sense it is winding down and I just wanted to say I enjoyed my first participation in one of these discussions. I appreciate the chance to see things from other points of view. Obviously, despite some differing views, we are all committed Disney fans - else we wouldn't spend this kind of time on the boards.

Also - I envy those of you who go even once a year. I've only been to WDW five times, the last being '98. Yet I feel almost "homesick" as we think about going back for Walt's 100th. Yes, some people go and never get the magic - I'm glad I'm not one of them.

 

[larworth]

Keep up the good work guys. Still love reading these posts, just no time to contribute much anymore.

Are MGM and AK Disney Parks?

We know AK has flaws, but the park design sure seems Disney pedigree to me. Tree of Life, center and spoke layout, attention to detail, unifying themes, feeling of being in another world, etc. All these seem right out of Walt’s handbook. Too bad they decided a short story was enough.

While my family’s second favorite park, MGM definitely feels different. They started with some of the standard components (a Main street, an icon), but then went off in some kind of a random walk. Many of the attractions are well themed (ToT, RnR, Stours), but they become a bunch of disparate islands instead of large cohesive lands. If you race around the park it is almost like playing with the remote. Zap from one scene, theme, feel, to the next. Maybe, this is what a back-lot is supposed to be like, or maybe there was less long-term vision in play here.

Is the brand in trouble?

I’m on the side of worrying about brand decline. Determining the health of a brand is a tricky thing. A strong brand provides its own momentum. It can carry you forward even if you are standing still. It can sometimes stand many years of abuse, before it shows signs of age.

Eisner has been very adept at leveraging the brand. Moves with merchandizing, and direct to video are two examples. The question is are they doing enough good things to preserve or improve the brand. Are they borrowing or lending?

A positive example might be the success of the Disney channel. This should be extending the brand. On the negative side I think moves with merchandizing and video are currently a drain on the brand.

On the park side Fastpass enhanced the brand. However, things like carnival rides, half parks, idle attractions all detract from the brand.

The brand is strong and not is immediate danger, but I do think they have been borrowing more than lending. This still puts me in with all those other YoHo’s who say that neither excessive enthusiasm nor excessive gloom is called for.

I think this is what worries me most about the current management is that they are perfectly happy with us feeling this way. I'm not sure they are losing any sleep that some us are not excessively enthusiatic (insert sad face here).

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

But, the good Captain makes a good observation, the value of the annual pass not withstanding, why is it the more frequent visitors are seeing fewer holes? Surely logic dictates that the more chances you have to see the crumbling Fascade, the more likely you are to really see it.

I've thought about this long and hard. Hours pondering this very question. And once again I'm on new ground so it may take a couple posts, rebuttals and re-posts before I'm quite clear on it. I think it all boils down to money. Florida residents especially receive benefits that we don't. Their cost/magic ratio is much different from ours. Also, they have the added benefit of more frequent trips, off-season visits and generally NOT having to cram all of WDW into a week (or two if you're lucky) every other year. AND I think most importantly they get a healthy dose of PIXIE DUST spread over the year to keep the cynicism at bay. My God! I was there for a day, JUST ONE SINGLE DAY, in April and I gained a whole new perspective!! I was so enthralled by the experience that I wrote to this board saying that the MAGIC was alive and well and living in central Florida!! Fortunately, the PIXIE DUST fades over time and that rosy colored outlook is replaced by reality. And we can once again judge Ei$ner, for what he is. And our thoughts are not clouded and distorted by Small World or Pirates playing in our brains. Ei$ner is very good at keeping the MAGIC just above the threshold level. I've got to give him that!! Just look at your own posts YoHo, after you returned from Disneyland. It took a while for you to get the pixie dust out of your eyes and see Ei$ner in the cold light of day.

As for the cost/magic ratio, I have some rather unclear feelings I will try to put down in writing. First I think that many people refuse to equate money with magic. And to a certain extent it's true. There must be a modicum of magic available, provided by Disney, in order to have any worthwhile experience at all. In other words there is a minimum they must maintain. You could get into Six Flags for free, every day of the year, and the experience will still fall short of the Disney experience. But once that threshold is met, then the cost/Magic ratio goes into effect. Perhaps this is a singular experience to folks within my economic group. I cannot be certain for I belong exclusively to my group and haven't tried the Bill Gates group (yet) or the poverty level group. But I contend that if I had to pay an outrageous amount of money for admission into the Magic Kingdom my magical experience goes down proportionally. Conversely, if it cost next to nothing, magic will be on the rise beyond belief!! And I really don't think it's even a conscious thing. It all works on a deeper level.

Out of YoHo's ramblings came some very insightful things. Three or four of which revolved around money!! Value. Cost/magic ratio. E-ticket nights, Pleasure Island, etc. It's out there. I don't think we're even cognizant of it at times. But the nickel and diming chips away at the magic, subliminally. Until it hurts!!! And so, when we are back in our offices, lurking on the DIS and NOT in WDW, we sometimes stop to think, "How the hell am I going to finance the next trip to Disney without taking out a second mortgage!" And that's when I start to look for threads that praise Ei$ner. And I just gotta jump in!!!

Thus we get into these little squabbles until someone (landbaron more than likely) says SEE, SEE, Look at all this complaining, it must be all bad. When really he doesn't feel the same way about half of the comments.

Now I don't mean to quibble my good YoHo, but I don't think that's accurate. And even if it is accurate (WHICH IT ISN'T) it sure isn't fair!! I sat here, after reading this, and really tried to think of an instance where I disagreed with the esteemed JeffJewel, or our resident sage from the west Another Voice. And I couldn't think of an example. If anything they don't agree enough with me!! I think I have far more complaints than they do.

And it is true that I say "SEE, SEE, Look at all of the complaining", but you misinterpreted the rest of the sentence. It is NOT, "it must be all bad." No indeed. Certainly not all bad. The parks are still wonderfully magical. The rest of the sentence should read, "You see where this management philosophy will lead us in the future!!"

I hope I was somewhat clear. These feeling have been rumbling for a while now, but I haven't really verbalized them before. Ask questions. Maybe we can fine tune it a bit!!!

HorizonsFan:

Now Landbaron, don't you think this is a little unfair? Not only are you presuming to know what the man is thinking, you are predicting the future of WDW based on that presumption.

No. I don't think it is unfair at all. I am making predictions based on his track record and philosophy. His track record is abysmal (even Peter, The Captain and DisDuck are questioning) and his philosophy is diametrically opposed to Walt's. The company will survive. But not the one I (we) fell in love with!!

This is the point I have always tried to make, most of the magic is not in the park; it's in you!

NOT TRUE!!!! If that were the case I could spin just as much magic in Universal or Six Flags. And I can't!! NO! It is ONLY in Disney that I feel the MAGIC. They must be doing something that the others aren't. And I don't want that 'something' to be traded in for short term profits!

ww52

Nothing more to add on this one - I sense it is winding down

LOL!! LOL!! LOL!! I can tell you're new. Stick with me. We can make this sucker turn into a 12 pager in no time!!!

Obviously, despite some differing views, we are all committed Disney fans - else we wouldn't spend this kind of time on the boards.

You will be surprised how many people DON'T see this. Your commitment to Disney will be questions constantly.

I've only been to WDW five times, the last being '98.

AHHHHHHHH!!!!! You poor soul!!!

 

[ww52]

Ok - I withdraw my comment about this thread winding down. (However, I will continue to accept pity for only having been to WDW five times!)

 

[DisDuck]

My turn..

Let's the first time I went to Studios was not overlay impressed (must have been a year or 2 after opening) but now it ranks above EpCot and second only to MK. Universal Florida just does not have the innate appeal as Studios does. I go to Uni just about every trip but it is the first one I cut when on a more stringent budget. I feel like I am at Disney when at Studios, my subjective Magic feel kicks in.

Then there is AK.. well call me a 'tree hugger' but the feel (subjective) and look is just Magical. My daughter would rather start our tour here then at MK even.

Eisner is good; Eisner is bad. Actually, I don't care. What I care is that the Magic remains and where in the present or future do you see it disappearing. DCA may not be complete. Someone wants Beastly at AK but even if nothing happens. Even if no new rides or lands added, if the Magic is there now why should it not be there in the future (given that maintenance takes place).

Think about this Landbaron, you bought into DVC which is a right to use timeshare. What do you think is going to happen at the end of your use period? Are they going to tear it down? What are your thoughts of the future of DVC? After your use period is up are they going to tear down MK.

The parks are here for the long, long, long term. Even if nothing is added, the Magic will be there for the next generation of DisDucks, Landbarons, Captains, YoHo's, etc.

Of course, I would like to see more built (all kinds, kiddie rides, thriller rides, shows, etc). but that does not take away from the current Magic.

So I have now come to the middle on Eisner but no one is perfect and sometimes decisions are made that look good on paper but may not translate into reality well. That does not mean that he will always make the same mistakes. The future will get here soon enought. I am willing to wait (have no choice as I do not run Disney, yet) and see what happens.

 

[YoHo]

Landbaron, I won't go searching for instances where you've disagreed, because I have to at least pretend like I'm working, but suffice it to say that their are subtle differences in all of our viewpoints that we tend to ignore in the midst of trying to prove a point.

It isn't so blatant, quite subtle.
An example that comes immediatly to mind (please lets not debate the ride I'm about to bring up.)
The many adventures of Winnie the Pooh.
As I recall, the thrust of your problem with the ride was the exit right into the store. The thrust of JeffJ was that the ride was crappy. Each of you complained about the ride as an example, yet neither was talking about the same thing. Oh sure, you agreed with each other, but it came off as very superficial. It seemed obvious to me that the ride itself didn't bother you so much. Whereas Jeff really didn't mind the exit, if the ride hadn't sucked.

So which is it? Is it both? obviously it can't be both, because you weren't bothered by the ride.


Of course, that's just a side issue, I just wanted to point out the sense that I get from these discussions is like a political party, desperate groups uniting under a common cause and the minute one or more of these groups becomes satisfied, the group will fall apart.


On to another topic

My God! I was there for a day, in April and I gained a whole new perspective!!

What does that tell you?
It tells me that the magic is alive and well and that more then anything, your time away was eating at you. I don't think you were wearing Rosecolored glasses when you were there Landbaron, I think you took your blueblockers off (Yes, I will use that to death). Its so easy when your not there to worry and fret and be upset and look at all these things and wonder what will happen with it all, but in the end, when your there, if the magic hasn't changed, then there you are, all your fretting was superfluous. Of course we know that in the past, this has not been the way. Its interesting that you pulled the nickel and dime mentality out of my Ramblings, since my point was not that we are being nickled and dimed, but that given my lack of expireance with the past late night activities, I had only positive opnions about E-nights and Pleasure Island. AND, given that on multiday hoppers and LOS passes, Pleasure ISland is included... AND, those passes are cheaper
7 single day single gate passes for 1 adult =$336
Pleasure Island = $20
Water parks = $30
so your looking $383

A seven day hopper plus = $307

So not only are the parks cheaper, but you get pleasure Island and the water parks for free. How is this nickle and diming?

SO in essence, (assuming you buy the multiday ticket, which is what DIsney wants to sell you yadda yadda) you don't pay more and get less. You just don't get the same things. And given our previous conclusions about park pricing, we are getting a better value in certain ways.


What all this requires is that you find these new values magical. I find them so, you do not, because you expect and want something else.


I don't know, I'm rambling again, but I stand by my original assertion that having pixie dust in your eyes is the only valid way to look at Disney. WDW is a mgical place designed to wisk you away from the real world, it seems to me that looking at things without that pixie dust distorts things.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Eisner is good; Eisner is bad.

You see. I think this is really our basic disagreement. You are passionate about WDW. So am I. I am concerned about the future. I think you are too. I think that you believe that Ei$ner makes very little difference in the big picture (may not be exact, but the gist is you don't worry much about him, good or bad) as long as the magic doesn't diminish too much. (do I have that right?) I believe that if Ei$ner continues on his present course we can kiss WDW goodbye as we know it today.

The parks are here for the long, long, long term. Even if nothing is added, the Magic will be there for the next generation of DisDucks, Landbarons, Captains, YoHo's, etc.

Yes I agree. They will not sell off the property for condos. HOWEVER, will it be the same place that we all fell in LOVE with? Or will it be a shadow of it's former self? A mirror image of Universal or worse yet Six Flags!!??

I am willing to wait (have no choice as I do not run Disney, yet) and see what happens.

I hope to see you up there very soon!!! You will do much better that Ei$ner!! As for the future (until you get there) I don't agree. I think that with enough grumbling from the hard core fans, and a reduction in the attendance figures (if they keep things the way they're going, attendance WILL drop), and a few more disasters like DCA and we may yet see a change. Whether that change will be for the better or not, only time will tell. But at least the course will have been altered!!! That will make me very happy indeed!!!!!!!!!!

YoHo:
The example you used (even though you didn't want to get bogged down in it) was 100% wrong. It was JeffJewel that had a BIG problem with the plush toys and myself that was disappointed with the ride. HOWEVER, if you have read my other posts, you will have noted that I also have a HUGE problem with gift shops in general. And I think I said so on that thread. So I was in lockstep with JeffJewel, only more so. As I think I indicated in my previous post.

if the magic hasn't changed, then there you are, all your fretting was superfluous.

ABSOLUTLY NOT!!!! It means that you have temporarily forgotten about:
ABC, The Disney Store, The Institute, The Sports Whatever, The Caste System, GO.COM, DCA, The half park AK, Sequels spurring sequels, Paint Companies, Magazine Companies, Mismanaged synergy, etc, etc, etc!!!!!

In fact, all that Ei$ner related anti-magic that really effect you when you're there are the ridiculously high prices (MUCH, MUCH HIGHER THAN IN THE SEVENTIES!!!! We can certainly reopen debate on this, but please start another thread.) and the ridiculously shorter hours. So, you're right. At that particular moment everything else is superfluous. Unfortunately it doesn't go away!!!

but I stand by my original assertion that having pixie dust in your eyes is the only valid way to look at Disney.

Man YoHo!!! You're all over the map lately!! Who's car pool are you in anyway? (lol) I couldn't disagree with this any more strongly. I find the very concept, mind boggling!! If you examine Dinsey, especially Ei$ner, with pixie dust in your eye, you'll never find anything wrong!! Is that what you want??

 

[YoHo]

I want Disneyworld to be Disneyworld and Real life to be real life. Perhaps you misunderstand, Having Pixie dust in your eyes doesn't blind you to mistakes, it makes see the correct answers. I don't go ride Star tours and think "Wow, I'm really glad Mike saw fit to build this ride. I also don't go on Dumbo and Say Gee, isn't it great that Walt built this ride, So whywould I look to nitpick? Nitpicking and complaining are for the real world. If somethings so bad that I feel like I must complain, then the pixiedust goes away. I know you've expireanced that. I haven't. If I can go my whole trip with pixie dust in my eyes, then any complaining I do out here either is meaningless, or misguided, or at least not truely relevent.

What I do is revel in the moment.. And for me, that reveling hasn't diminished. You can say that its because I wasn't there, but even that's subjective, assuming I would see what you see yadda yadda.


Anyway, I'm not in the Carpool, I don't do Car Pools I drive a Ford F150 Lightening, I speed and when in Cities with Carpool lanes I use them when I'm the only passenger. I'm just unpredictable


Also, I must apologize, based on the post I was thinking of, you never made a comment positive or negative about the pooh ride, only emptying into a gift shop in general.
Still, I believe I make a valid point that the solidarity is based on differing root feelings and goals and is expressed quite subtly. Obviously I don't have a good example, so I won't attempt to find one again. Its something subtle I see in all our posts.

n fact, all that Ei$ner related anti-magic that really effect you when you're there are the ridiculously high prices (MUCH, MUCH HIGHER THAN IN THE SEVENTIES!!!! We can certainly reopen debate on this, but please start
another thread.) and the ridiculously shorter hours. So, you're right. At that particular moment everything else is superfluous. Unfortunately it doesn't go away!!!

I will not reopen the cost debate, because I am 100% satisfied with the previous conclusions. If you are not, that's your thread to open.


Let me explain a little about my all over the placeness lately.

I am very worried that the Disney Company is making a number of mistakes in their general buisness plan, further, I firmly believe that this is because Eisner is not as compitent a financial guy as Wells or Roy Disney was (leave me alone here Cap'n )
However, I also feel that E$sner has made positive moves in the Themepark area in the past. I also believe that inadequacies not withstanding there are certain things E$sner won't do to ruin the parks that you believe he could. Its a belief, yes, but its mine and I've yet to have it dislodged.

Further and most importantly, I have fundimentally different opinions about specific aspects of WDW as it exists today. Combined with my conclusion about the finances, suggests that on a Parks level, you and I will disagree much. I simply see something different. So, I'm not really all over the place, I'm calmly driving down the middle of the 2-lane highway with my left turn signal on.


And that my friend, is an analogy for my No irrational exhuberance, no irrational dismay comment.

 

[Neville]

OK, let's get to page 7....

YoHo you raise some great points in your post. I too believe that it is your own personal perspective that matters when at Disney. I too get caught up in the moment many times, and tend to forget about who is responsible for which rides, etc. However, when I am in Studios/AK and I am leaving after 4-5 hours because I have done everything, I feel cheated and can't help but compare that experience to the full day I spent in MK/Epcot. One naturally starts to ask, what is different about these 4 parks? The last two were built on Eisner's watch.

The only thing I would take exception with is your following quote:

I firmly believe that this is because Eisner is not as compitent a financial guy as Wells or Roy Disney was (leave me alone here Cap'n

I believe he is just as good if not better. He appears to see everything in terms of dollars and cents. I get the sense most of the decisions are driven by what makes the most financial sense (open half a park to save cost and increase revenues as opposed to doing it right). Walt and Roy had a natural tension between getting it right and making it finanically viable (as an aside Pirates empties into a gift shop, which I have no problem with). Unfortunately, I feel the Company is lacking in the getting it right category.

Also, since I live in Detroit, I'm glad to hear that you drive an F150....

 

[HorizonsFan]

NOT TRUE!!!! If that were the case I could spin just as much magic in Universal or Six Flags. And I can't!! NO! It is ONLY in Disney that I feel the MAGIC. They must be doing something that the others aren't.

Of course they are. I didn't mean to imply that they weren't. Disney is the best at providing a place to make magic. I'm being esoteric again but I stand by my opinion that we supply the greatest part of a magical experience. For example, I know very well how they do the "Kiss Goodnight". It's a very simple use of light and sound. I could program it into my lightboard in about 20 minutes. So why does it make me tear up every time I see it? It's not anything Disney did special. It's the combination of the simple tech effect, the castle, and most of all my memories of special times spent with family and friends while sheilded from the real world.
And who's to say that families aren't building those kind of magical memories at IOA/USF and Portifino Bay? They're sheilded from the real world and are surrounded by some pretty beloved cartoon characters too. Give them 20 years and they may have a fanatical following like Disney. I won't be part of it but it could happen...
Is WDW a magical place? Yes. Does it make my vacation magical? No, only I can do that.

And I don't want that 'something' to be traded in for short term profits!

I don't think that's the case. "Traded in" implies that any cutbacks we see today will never be reversed in the future. I don't think we can confidently say that. The money from any of the current cutbacks only becomes profit when it is not re-invested in the company.

At any rate, I can't wait! 11 more days until me and Mickey make some magic!

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

I don't go ride Star tours and think "Wow, I'm really glad Mike saw fit to build this ride. I also don't go on Dumbo and Say Gee, isn't it great that Walt built this ride, So why would I look to nitpick?

YoHo. I really can’t even try to guess where you picked up this kind of idea from me. I like to think I’m a little more cogent than that. I don’t even come close o doing anything of the sort. Even at home (or work) I rarely think about whom did what and when. I really have to think hard (and sometime hit a reference book) to know under what regime a certain something was built. And as I said before, I really don’t care as long as it is in keeping with Walt’s philosophy (only for want of a better term). And other than the shorter hours and major transportation problems at times (which really stick a guy in the gut) I hardly ever have a complaint. If I do as CM, which are all GREAT, takes care of my minor inconvenience within a wink of an eye. That is not what I’m on about!!!! How could I have missed my mark by sooooo much??!!

What I find easy to separate, and what you evidently find hard to separate, is the Disney experience from the current Disney philosophy. Philosophically I KNOW that Disney is out for my very last dime. Experience wise it doesn’t matter (yet). I’m still havin’ fun!!! Philosophically Ei$ner doesn’t really care about me, or my take of the SHOW or any of the thrilling thoughts I have about our (Ei$ner’s and mine) company. Experience wise the CMs make me feel as though I’m the most important person on the planet!! And when I get home and have time to ponder the greater issues of Disney I can see where their philosophy in subverting, damaging and tarnishing the good Disney name. And it HAS crept into the parks somewhat, as evidenced by the myriad of complaints received on these boards. And it has the real potential to actually interfere with my experience in the future. It has started already with the shorter hours, e-ticket nights, fastpass (to a point), no casual character meetings anymore, soaring prices and rotten transportation. It was really bad when the maintenance issue were so prevalent. And sometime the rides make me think of it (imagination anyone?). Hmmm. Seems by the previous sentence that there is much wrong. And there is. But, you know, it’s funny. When I’m there it never (or almost never) bothers me.

What I do is revel in the moment.. And for me, that reveling hasn't diminished.

Me too. As evidence I offer exhibit #1: My state of the parks address. Your honor, the defense rests!!

Still, I believe I make a valid point that the solidarity is based on differing root feelings and goals and is expressed quite subtly.

I agree. But that’s life in general. All our goals are little different and we all see different shades of gray (although I often wonder what color the sky is in Peter Pirate’s world). And it’s only by discussing these differences, and expressing our goals can we reach any form of consensus. Or at the very least understand where each other is coming from.

I will not reopen the cost debate, because I am 100% satisfied with the previous conclusions.

As am I. While there is a certain question as to actually doubling inflation, I feel confident in saying it has NEARLY doubled the rate of inflation since the late seventies, early eighties. YoHo, for the resort we used your calculations alone, from the Poly, remember? Doubled!! And for the ticket media we used your calculations, along with others, to show a DRASTIC rise in the mid-eighties. Hmmm. Kind of like about the time Ei$ner took over!!!!

So, I'm not really all over the place, I'm calmly driving down the middle of the 2-lane highway with my left turn signal on.

Great Line!!!!! LOL

However, when I am in Studios/AK and I am leaving after 4-5 hours because I have done everything, I feel cheated and can't help but compare that experience to the full day I spent in MK/Epcot.

Ditto!!

(as an aside Pirates empties into a gift shop, which I have no problem with)

Hmmmm. I see I need to have a word with you. This is one example that I try to sweep under the rug whenever I can. And if I do mention it (as I am forced to once in a while) I always add that this is the ONLY gift shop that a pre-Ei$ner ride empties into. And it is so airy and has so many ways out, it almost doesn’t count!! In other words they don’t FORCE you to walk through aisles of merchandise just to gain the exit!! Anyway that’s the OFFICIAL political party (the What Would Walt Want party) stance on the subject of gift shops.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Horizonsfan:

I don't think that's the case. "Traded in" implies that any cutbacks we see today will never be reversed in the future.

Same question for you, Dave. What evidence do you offer to back this up? So far they've been bleeding the parks dry. NO profits are being returned at all. In fact, quite the opposite is occurring. Profits from the parks are being used to prop up failing divisions within the rest of the corporation!! So give me something to hang my hat on and I'll join the dark side with you (You know,I'll lead the cheer: Eisner, Eisner he's our man!!). Name it!! What makes you think this will EVER happen?

At any rate, I can't wait! 11 more days until me and Mickey make some magic!

GOD!!! I wish I was you!!!!

 

[HorizonsFan]

The money from any of the current cutbacks only becomes profit when it is not re-invested in the company.

I made this statement and I'm sticking to it. I think where you and I disagree, Landbaron is that you would like for the company to consist of only theme parks. The money made by WDC may not be re-invested into the theme parks, but it only becomes profit if it doesn't go back into WDC.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

The money made by WDC may not be re-invested into the theme parks, but it only becomes profit if it doesn't go back into WDC.

I think that is way too fine a hair to split. So, for clarification's sake, and maybe even to agree on a rather "fine" point, let me modify my original statement a bit. The one that this particular piece of minutia, mired in semantics, centers on.

Original Statement:

And I don't want that 'something' to be traded in for short term profits!

Modified Statement:

And I don't want that 'something' to be traded in for short term profits, or utilized as financing for under performing and/or failing ventures and/or divisions within the Walt Disney Corporation (or subsidiaries therein)!

My goodness!! A fairly straightforward sentence (with a little flare) is suddenly turned into legalspeak!! But I think I've got enough CYA in that sentence to release it. Are we on the same page now?

 

[YoHo]

and I don't want that 'something' to be traded in for short term profits, or utilized as financing for under performing and/or failing ventures and/or divisions within the Walt Disney Corp. (or subsidiaries therein)!

Uh, I realize the Walt Disney Company is a heck of a lot bigger now then in 1955, but as I love to point out to you, DIsneyland's financial goal was exactly what you don't want. to shore up failing or more specifically, the underperforming motion picture division. to allow the company to stabalize profits. In that sense, what you so wish to avoid was the founding fiscal tenent of the parks.

Now I suppose we could pick nits about whether or not the disney company shouldn't just cut back on some of the less profitable ventures. That's a seperate, but related debate.



Aside, I haven't quite formed a full opinion on the the numbers for the resorts, but based on gate prices, company history and the discussion on the subject that took place while you were at DisneyWorld, I am satisfied. Those conclusions are quite different from your own. I will try my best to make that the last thing I say about the matter in this thread. Yeah right


FIanlly, Neville, sounds like you need to side with that Cap'n on that topic, I won't debate it anymore same as I won't talk about the suggested Caste system anymore. Its just not worth it to offend people I consider respected friends.

 

[HorizonsFan]

I think that is way too fine a hair to split. So, for clarification's sake, and maybe even to agree on a rather "fine" point, let me modify my original statement a bit. The one that this particular piece of minutia, mired in semantics, centers on.

My point is neither minutae or mired in semantics. It goes to the very heart of all your arguments. You look at WDW and see a magical place that is being dragged down by other failing enterprises. I look at WDW and see a magical place that is a group of subsidiaries which produces a large amount of the revenue of the WDC.

As evidenced by your modified statement:

And I don't want that 'something' to be traded in for short term profits, or utilized as financing for under performing and/or failing ventures and/or divisions within the Walt Disney Corporation (or subsidiaries therein)!

We have a fundamental difference of opinion as to how Disney should proceed. I believe that Disney needs to explore ventures other than theme parks to diversify their sources of revenue so that they are not as vulnerable to economic ups and downs and to stay large enough to make a takeover difficult.

You asked me why I think that Disney will reinvest in the theme parks. I think that when the cash cow gets hungry you feed her. And I think competition will make the cow hungry. USF/IOA is not there yet, but they're attempting to build the same type of sheltered atomosphere of fun as Disney. I think that everyone expected IOA to force Disney to build alot of new rides over the last two years. That didn't happen, but as they build more hotel rooms and shops and restraunts and are able to keep people in thier parks longer and to return, Disney will notice the loss. I think USF/IOA has the potential to become a four day destination. If too many of Disney's anticipated 10 day reservations turn into 6 day reservations, you'll see reinvestment and E ticket attractions. They don't need them yet, but I bet they will over the next 5 years.

I guess all of this is going to my point that one can't seperate WDW revenue from WDC revenue unless seriously advocating the total divestiture of all WDC properties except the theme parks.
I don't think that's minutae...

 

[JeffJewell]

I believe that Disney needs to explore ventures other than theme parks to diversify their sources of revenue so that they are not as vulnerable to economic ups and downs and to stay large enough to make a takeover difficult.

...the sad part of all of this is that the heart of the Disney Company, the animated features and the theme parks, have been suffering a lack of funds and re-investment in quality for the sake of "covering" these alledged diversified sources of income.

"Disney" being a unit or a company or whatever doesn't mean much to me if the company isn't producing animated features and theme parks of the highest quality. And for several years now, Disney is simply not producing high quality products on those fronts. To a large extent, Disney isn't producing anything at all, they are renting the services of outside vendors and shops instead of using their own Imagineering department.

This is the crux of the disagreement for some of us. To me, "Disney" means high quality animation and theme parks. To you, "Disney" apparently means a particular batch of income sources. I think the distinction is important because I feel it was the unparalleled quality Disney used to create that led to the enormous popularity.

From a business standpoint, with that quality no longer being produced, why should we assume the popularity among customers will continue? The attendance numbers on AK and DCA suggest that the general population is, in fact, not nearly as excited about seeing the creations of this new Disney than they were about seeing the old stuff (The facts that DCA's next door neighbor Disneyland _is_ hitting its expected numbers, and AK was the _only_ WDW park to see its numbers fall last year, kinda puts the "slow economy" argument in perspective).

What if Disney sold the animation and theme park businesses? If I understand your stated position, it follows that as long as Eisner was able to keep renting and repackaging the creations of third parties well enough to show the shareholders a profit, this would be fine with you and good for the Disney Company, no?

That's just not Disney to me.

The real Disney created high-quality products, which in turn created revenue and customer satisfaction and loyalty. Eisner eliminated the (to him) unnecessary step of creating "quality products," and at the moment is still able to cut budgets enough to appear to "profit," but I see no reason to believe that wide-spread customer satisfaction and loyalty is being generated by the new Disney.

To bring it back to something you said, I would dance with glee if Eisner went off with his completely-unrelated-to-Disney's-core-business empire and left the animation and theme parks divisions with someone who cared about creating quality productions. Unfortunately, the parks are about the only remaining consistent money-maker in the company, and even Eisner can do that math. I expect Eisner to use WDW like a corporate ATM until he retires.

Jeff

 

[DisDuck]

JJ, we have been done this road before. I think it needs to be repaved from so much travel. If Disney spun off animation and theme parks into a separate entity (so as to not drain it for other 'failing' ventures) who will run it and protect it from an AOL/Turner type takeover.

I believe it would be very vunerable to a takeover and that takeover could be just for profit/bottom-line sake only. Which to me translates no differently then your take on Eisner. Profit before quality.

As long as WDC is too big then there is hope that the future will be bright. That's where I ride with Horizons Fan.

 

[larworth]

To bring it back to something you said, I would dance with glee if Eisner went off with his completely-unrelated-to-Disney's-core-business empire and left the animation and theme parks divisions with someone who cared about creating quality productions.

That is about the only silver lining I can see for the parks as the company grows bigger. At some point Eisner will come to the realization that he doesn't have the time, or his attention is better spent trying to fix the broken parts, to be creative oversight for the parks anymore. He will turn it over to someone who can at least counter, if not totally return us from, the Presslerite era.

I think the corporate raider fear is way overblown. Maybe, if we were back in the 80's when the Ichan's were running amok and grabbing headlines, but I don't see this happening much today. Most companies are out looking for ways to build value.

I think there is a very high probability that if someone could get the park/animation and the Disney name it would be because of the great brand recognition it brings. Something almost impossible to recreate. I think their first inclination would be how can we protect and preserve the brand, rather than to rape and plunder.

I think there are plenty of companies who understand the formula that made the company great and would want to continue it. Why, one of the reasons they may even buy it is to bring Disney's old-time customer and quality focus to the rest of their organization (see below).

The bigger WDC gets the less voice/importance the unique philosophy the parks was built on has. Whether Disney buys someone or vice versa, I thing either is unlikely to have a positive impact on the old core business. I would not fear it being spun off.

In a recent statement Eisner commented that one of the benefits of the ABC acquisition was their discipline around costs. A discipline that they have exported to other areas of the company. I'd rather have heard him say how excited he it to be able to import the Disney philosophy into ABC to make it a better run company.