Zebras removed from Kilimanjaro Safaris

[Disco]

Well, with Potter Land 2.0 I thought US could seriously eat into Disney's bottom line. However, now that Disney owns Star Wars, I think they can hold their own. Not to mention the excellent work they did with Cars Land at DCA.
US's biggest limitation is space really. I figured they had enough room for a third gate in Florida but they decided to build a hotel instead. Well I guess they have one more parking lot so maybe they could squeeze in another.
With three gates all the sudden you go from a 2-3 day park to a might as well stay a week park.
I guess it depends if Disney ever does anything good with SW. I can see them blowing that big time though so who knows? Their old plan to add the cantina and move the Jedi Academy to make a miniature land at DS would not be enough.
LOL, I forget how far off topic we’ve gotten in this thread?

 

[Peter Pirate 2]

Well, they didn't have to answer to millions of people that are looking to make money.

I don't think half of the people that go to WDW would be able to afford to go there if they did some of the things that people want, and don't worry about budgets and monetary constraints.

Finally, WDW can go out and put any sort of thrill ride out there, things that would put what Universal does to shame, but at what gain? Their core audience isn't thrill seeking teen boys and men, it is families. The content/theming is what Disneyland/WDW has always been about, not thrill rides.

And let's not act like WWOHP is all new. They repurposed two rides already there, added 1 ride, and some shops/restaurants.

See, you're just cheerleading. What discussion can be had when you just badmouth universal while lumping all negative Disney discussion as being made by people who don't understand budgets and monetary constraints?

Stating that Universal's demographic is thrill seeking teen boys and men is simply wrong and does stating that Disney could "put universal to shame" really make sense? Why? Because all of those imagineers who moved to universal suddenly forgot how to be imaginative?

 

[Disco]

See, you're just cheerleading. What discussion can be had when you just badmouth universal while lumping all negative Disney discussion as being made by people who don't understand budgets and monetary constraints?

Stating that Universal's demographic is thrill seeking teen boys and men is simply wrong and does stating that Disney could "put universal to shame" really make sense? Why? Because all of those imagineers who moved to universal suddenly forgot how to be imaginative?

You confuse the issue with facts then. Disney did all the things that were bad on that list in DCA and it's a huge success.
WDW has been shrinking the last 12 years, not growing. It needs major overhauls and expansion or it will just shrivel and die.

 

[DCTooTall]

Well, they didn't have to answer to millions of people that are looking to make money.

I don't think half of the people that go to WDW would be able to afford to go there if they did some of the things that people want, and don't worry about budgets and monetary constraints.

Finally, WDW can go out and put any sort of thrill ride out there, things that would put what Universal does to shame, but at what gain? Their core audience isn't thrill seeking teen boys and men, it is families. The content/theming is what Disneyland/WDW has always been about, not thrill rides.

And let's not act like WWOHP is all new. They repurposed two rides already there, added 1 ride, and some shops/restaurants.

I never said WWoHP was all new. What I have done however is state that since it opened it has helped give people who never gave Universal a second thought before a reason to give it a shot. WWoHP has a draw for the masses that the Lost Continent never did.

And while 2 rides were repurposed (similar to barnstormer in toontown/Fantasyland), Everything around the rides are new. The Themeing/content of those shops and walkways have done a lot to show everyone that Disney doesn't have an exclusive on actual theming or those small details. (WWoHP had the first "OMG!! THE DETAIL!!" Bathrooms with the Moaning Myrtle audio in the bathrooms).

While the Demographics the parks attract are different (Universal skews a bit older with Disney having more for the little ones and older people who prefer really tame attractions and shows), the universal parks do have a good job at having great theming and content beyond their 4 big coasters. (Hulk, Dualing Dragons, Rip/Ride/Rockit, Mummy).




that all being said.... I don't want to hijack this hijacked thread into a Universal discussion. I was simply using some aspects of Universal's recent actions in direct comparison to Disney's recent actions to show that Disney can't always take the high ground.

And as for saying that "People wouldn't be able to afford Disney if they did what everyone wants them to".... It's quickly getting to the point that People can't afford Disney even without Disney doing anything to really show for the money they are charging. Even their glorified motel 6 values are now over $100/night during the slowest times of year. A burger during non-peak times costs $10. It's $90 for a 1 day ticket.... and even a child's AP is now over $500. Disney's pricing has continued to outpace inflation for YEARS now, without a lot of major new additions to the parks to justify those cost increases and the number of perks/services/quality you got for your money have continued to decline. While there are some things people would like Disney to do that are completely outside the realm of financially sound decisions (Monorail to DTD), it's not fair to say that Disney shouldn't be investing more than they are back into the parks.


Again... The problem is that Disney is so driven for instant gratification for those stockholders, that they are going the cheap way to increase the stock price for those stockholders. Their plan has gone from one where they maybe took $200 per day from a guest (food, ticket, hotel, merchandise), and spent $150 on the overhead to do so (Labor, supplies, etc), so were today they have raised the prices to pull $300 per day from a guest, and still spend only $150 on overhead despite inflation by cutting services and quality.


While that extra $100 in profit may be great for the shareholders who are looking at their share price, It's not so great long-term because it's not sustainable. Disney can't keep driving profit growth by just increasing the cost when they aren't reinvesting back into the park to give people a reason to keep spending the money with them. Already we are seeing more and more people cutting back on merchandise (generic Disney Parks and cheap quality making it harder to justify the purchase. Tightened budgets by increased costs in other parts of the vacation). We are also seeing more people considering staying offsite because of the increasing costs and the lack of extra perks to justify the expense. ($150 a night for glorified motel 6 with 'Disney theming'.... or $150/night for a night in the Waldorph Astoria?)

 

[DCTooTall]

You confuse the issue with facts then. Disney did all the things that were bad on that list in DCA and it's a huge success.
WDW has been shrinking the last 12 years, not growing. It needs major overhauls and expansion or it will just shrivel and die.

Closer to the original topic....

The funny thing? DCA and AK both come from the same era and have/had some of the same major issues.

The Difference is that DCA due to it's location was in the head honcho's back yard where they could actually see it on a regular basis....


and because the WDW resort has a much different guest type than the DLR..... IE... larger numbers in a captive audience that is comprised of a much larger first timer percentage.... AK's guest attendance numbers have done a much better job at masking the issues with the park.


Once they actually invested the money and effort (and had the balls to actually pull the trigger to fix the embarrassment), DCA gets Carsland and almost a complete overhaul to make it a decent and complete park. AK? Still waiting.....

 

[mvk]

Whatever, agree to disagree. There have been tons of upgrades/expansion lately complete and in process all over WDW, including parks, resorts, and DtD. Not to mention what Disney has done elsewhere with Aulani and CarsLand, amongst other things like acquisitions that will continue to help them upgrade/expand in the future.

 

[mvk]

Closer to the original topic....

Once they actually invested the money and effort (and had the balls to actually pull the trigger to fix the embarrassment), DCA gets Carsland and almost a complete overhaul to make it a decent and complete park. AK? Still waiting.....

AvatarLand is still on track, and the plan was always for it to start construction in 2013 to be open 2016/2017. They re-iterated that in December, and that they are still working under the same budget (~$500M).

That seems to fit with how they have always slow-built the parks up. Open, add, add, add, never rush. AK is a great park as is, that will be even better in time.

 

[PAGAS]

We saw the zebras on the KS on Tuesday. They were still there.

 

[DRDISNEYMD]

You better take your time with this one

~I know you're being snarky, but I do feel a little better, now.

You do realize you can't win that argument with LoL, right? Stating that you (and many people) love the park is an invalid argument. Stating that attendance figures exceed DHS and are within about 15 % of Epcot doesn't matter. The park is a "failure".

I think Joe Rhode might have once in a drunken state came to his house and peed on his rose bushes. And he'll never forgive him!

~Yes, I realize that -- give me some credit. I was never going to rip LOL's post to shreds, I just wanted to psych him out a little bit. He was getting on my nerves with "Avatar is this" and "AK is that," lol. LOL knows I love his posts and enjoy reading his perspective on all the issues -- even if I don't agree, I have nothing but respect for him.

I was just joking around with that comment. Just relax, brother.

And you must admit the image of Joe Rhode and his silly feather earring drunk on your lawn brought a little smile to your face, right?

"C'mon out here and say that to my face buddy! Failure my sweet patootie!"

~Awww, skier_pete! You are my hero! Thanks for taking the "friendly fire," that was meant for me!

friendly fire...it happens.

and joe rhode hiding in my bushes is a funny visual...

just hope the "dances with wolves" feather earings don't get caught on the rose bushes.

~Friendly fire??? I don't know, but next time try aiming for the intended target instead of the first innocent person that comes along -- don't take it out on skier_pete. I accept some of the blame because I said he was a comedic genius & I regret it, I just shouldn't have...... But, come on LOL, I was just joking. I would have ripped your incoherent posts apart a long long time ago, if I really felt that way. You FAIL when it comes to AK & Avatar, and that's okay. Your strengths shine in other areas, like business & stuff. So, lets just kiss & make up. ~Until our next critical breakdown in communication -- which will happen soon enough.

Come on People.... Calling AK a "Failure" is just mean and we'll never get some people to see behind the attendence numbers and "pretty details" to admit to it. What you need to realize is that like so many things, This isn't something that a binary Pass/Fail decision will really fit.

So what would fit better? Your standard school-based ABCDF grade curve. D and F are failing grades. A and B are your stronger passing grades.... and a C? That's that grade the jock gets so he can just barely get a passing grade to maintain his eligability. It's also what AK probably deserves.


The Park did some things right. It's got some areas with wonderful details and for those who are fans and like to put in the effort, has plenty that makes it a favorite for many.

BUT..... they also half-assed the park in the beginning with cutting out Beastly Kingdomme and the whole Chester/Hester area, and have continued their half-assed ways since the park opened without putting any real effort into correcting the park's deficiencies. It really says something when one of the biggest draws to the park (beyond the animals) since the start is a show built around recycled parade floats.

Even the one real addition to the park since it opened has a major lack of real effort feel to it thanks to the Disco Yeti since not long after it opened.


So... It's not a complete failure. It helps dilute the crowds from the other parks. It has a couple decent draws to make it interesting for people. It gives Disney some great PR on it's conservation and environmental contributions from the park. And there is the whole AK merchandising side that wouldn't be as large if they didn't have the park. (dino's, and all the safari themed toys/plushes, shirts, etc).

But it also didn't meet all the hopes they had for the park. For a large number of returning 'casual' guests, they may feel they can skip this park. Those who are on a limited budget or time crunch also feel that this park could be skipped. (and with the improvements at the other park north of them drawing people's attention and potential vacation time away, it's more likely to be felt here). Even all the other parks have SOMETHING that attract people to come visit the resort as their primary reason (MK... because it's the MK. EPCOT with F&W and Flower&Garden. MGM with ESPN Weekends, Star Wars Weekends, SOAP Opera Events etc etc).... so even in that regard, AK truly feels like an also ran.

So AK serves a purpose and can't really be deemed a complete failure.... but you can't argue that compared to the hopes and ideas for the park, it's a huge disappointment.


Um... Kali is more than just a little boring. It's a short ride, and it almost feels like 2/3rd of it is spent just setting up and getting you to the actual point of the ride.

As for the Ellen Ride putting Dinoland to shame.... I'd even be willing to say that the entire Universe of Energy (pre-ellen) did a better job at entertaining, educating, and showcasing dino's than that land at the AK does. Kinda sad when an attraction opened in 1982 does a better job than one opened 17yrs later.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hYoGfacCRM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyhAwEFBVkU

~OMG, DCTootall, this post is just fabulous!!! I'm going to have to read this one again! I have never ever -- seen anyone silence LOL. Thanks for answering the call & putting out that fire!

~Wow, I just finished page four, I'll have to get caught up on the rest of this thread later! Great discussion, everyone!

 

[Disco]

We saw the zebras on the KS on Tuesday. They were still there.

There's the original subject! I was shocked to hear the Zebras were causing trouble. I mean WTH, they built a segregated area just for them! Maybe this whole thread is bupkis.
Everyone owes everyone an apology except to the OP (it’s all their fault for spreading such vicious rumors).

 

[Rumors Rocks]

There's the original subject! I was shocked to hear the Zebras were causing trouble. I mean WTH, they built a segregated area just for them! Maybe this whole thread is bupkis.
Everyone owes everyone an apology except to the OP (it’s all their fault for spreading such vicious rumors).

I accept full responsibility.

 

[baler31]

We saw the zebras on the KS on Tuesday. They were still there.

The zebras are still there but they have been moved back to their original location. Basically the OP is right, the zebras were tearing into one another and once it started many would gang up on the wounded animal.

 

[DRDISNEYMD]

Seriously, does anyone around here need to be reminded that Disney is publicly traded?But, if you can prove to me that long term quality thinking couldn't be just as profitable as the current short term dollar at every turn philosophy does, then it'll be a discussion.

Further, No one thinks Universl can "catch" Disney. Size alone precludes that. It doesn't mean they can't do "it" better though. Regardless, the Disney vs. Universal thought process is flawed because anything either does positively, for whatever reason, is good for us, the guests.

It is the people with the us vs them philosophy who are the real letdown as they have been duped to believe they are part of the "Disney them" somehow. Disney does PR best of all it seems.

The biggest problem for Universl and for those of us who prefer quality money grubbing over Walmart is the fanboy attitude you alluded to. There are still so many gullible people who give current Disney credit for what old Disney put in motion. They will buy any garbage, attend any lame celebration, watch terrible sequels, defend the dining fiasco, whatever, in short, cheerlead for this huge multinational conglomerate that just like every other big company, has no soul.

The sad thing is that as a privately held company it actually did seem they had a soul.

~The problem I have with your post, is that it seems to reflect society as whole -- and you've just taken a much larger issue and simply slapped Disney's name on it, instead of our economy. This is why your posts stick out like a sore thumb -- you're not wrong but you're not entirely right, either. Disney is doing what most every company has been doing since the 80's. As the standard of living continues to elevate the gap of what is accessible between rich and poor has diminished by a substantial margin. This post also concerns me because you keep referring to "they" as if you are somehow excluded from this group -- when in truth you are not, you are very much a part of "them" and you continue to enable the "problems" you complain about. In reference to the theme parks Disney may have lost its soul -- I won't argue that -- but, you are a cheerleader just like the rest of us -- accept that. I hope you still like me, lol.

 

[DRDISNEYMD]

See, you're just cheerleading. What discussion can be had when you just badmouth universal while lumping all negative Disney discussion as being made by people who don't understand budgets and monetary constraints?

Stating that Universal's demographic is thrill seeking teen boys and men is simply wrong and does stating that Disney could "put universal to shame" really make sense? Why? Because all of those imagineers who moved to universal suddenly forgot how to be imaginative?

~I missed this one -- but by the same token, you are also cheerleading, you are one of "them" -- simply badmouthing Disney is not enough to excuse your actions -- realize that every time you renew your AP and continue to patronize Disney, that you are in fact a cheerleader. I don't think it's fair to define others as "gullible people -- who buy any garbage," while you enjoy the parks and all there is to offer. What exactly makes you different from "them?"

~You praise Universal -- I do, too. But, I also acknowledge they're a corporation and their new hotel looks just like a deluxe version of Pop Century. Now, all Universal needs is a Hogwarts Express bus to facilitate transport to and from the airport -- ME vs HE.

~Disney, on the other hand is building a brand new Four Seasons & Grand Floridian DVC.

~So, define that....

~I'm not picking on you because there is so much that I can identify with -- but really, I believe you will start to feel better by acknowledging & accepting some of the responsibility regarding the role you've played in relation to your grievances, it's too simplistic to point the finger at "others" and attempt to portray the complexity a much larger scale issue as just a "Disney" thing.

~But yeah, I hope you still like me & all that other stuff too, lol.

 

[DCTooTall]

~Disney, on the other hand is building a brand new Four Seasons & Grand Floridian DVC.

[/COLOR]

FWIW... Disney isn't building the Four Seasons. They actually removed the property from the rest of the part, and offloaded it to the investors building the Four Seasons. It's on the same plot that the Golden Oaks subdivision is being built on.

Honestly... Between the Waldorf and the Four Seasons, Disney is going to have some TRUE deluxe level accommodations located "on property", so it'll be interesting to see how they are able to justify charging more for their Deluxe hotels for a lower level of service and amenities.


I also hate seeing DVC builds being used as any sort of "see! Disney is Investing" arguement. IMHO, DVC has somehow devolved from a pretty nice idea and compliment when it started as a single resort (The Disney Vacation Club...later renamed Old Key West)... into what could almost be seen as a cancer/parasite.

If Disney has been treating the WDW resort as it's ATM.... then DVC could be considering it's money printing press. They keep building more DVC resorts and space so they can turn around and "sell" it for a huge markup. If you look at the mess with Aulani and the complaints from BLT, they have even been guilty with the latest resorts of doing things on the cheap because "the people don't know any better and will pay for anything". [although admittedly... the combination of those 2 screwups caused the head of DVC to get booted]. To add to my arguement... If you look at the latest DVC trend, They add a new wing or section to an existing hotel for DVC, but they aren't really adding any amenaties to the resort to help absorb the additional capacity of the resort. For example.... BLT removed an existing wing of a Deluxe Level resort. They did give it a small pool, but they use the Monorail as a selling point but aren't doing anything to contribute to the capacity to move those guests from the Contemporary to the other parks. [thankfully with the walking path to the MK, the full impact of this decision is muted].

With the GF DVC, they are adding a whole new wing to the existing Deluxe level monorail resort. This is going to add a lot of potential guests to the resort property who need to get around the property. Once again, We are not seeing any additional food service or major amenties added to the resort to help absorb these guests, and transportation again is taking a big hit without any added capacity. With no walking path, all those DVC guests will be funneled to the existing monorail and watercraft transportation to the MK, however DVC is not contributing ANYTHING to the resort to help fund additional Monorail capacity or improvement, or new watercraft to help guests move to the MK.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

TooTall has already said it...

but disney is in way building a four seasons...nor would they have the stomach to do so.

Disney hotels are more like movie sets (aka "staged story") than they are on "luxury"...because they charge and arm and a leg and "categorize" them doesn't make them anywhere close to world class in terms of construction and the service/staff is laughable in comparison. And this is not opinion...i have real experience specifically in terms of the "grand" floridian. Disney doesn't really put in the kind of materials and features that a Four Seasons must have...because their clientele doesn't put up with imitation stuff.

To address Tootall "competition" point...they sold the land to four seasons to "get rid" of the high end clientele. That was the point. Now their "deluxes" can continue as they have been...really overpriced disney places for the service level.

At four seasons - the concierge is not restricted from providing service that is outside the property lines of WDW (or are unable to get a table at a restaurant inside their own hotel based on "centralized reservations")...and the check-in agents don't make $7.50 an hour and have FOUR DAYS worth of training...

guess which hotels do that?

Speaking of Grand Floridian...the construction of DVC there is - in my eyes - disney's way of "throwing in the towel" on the "luxury hotel" concept. indeed - without the Four Seasons...they probably would have had to wait to build dvc. (that's a complicated scenario...for another day). They need to have an on-site location that caters to the filthy rich...errr...i mean "job creators" and the GF just doesn't cut it.

Don't expect anything earth shattering when the GF DVC opens either. it will be "nice" but basically the same kinda look and features as all DVC. It will just be white and red fiberglass on the outside.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

I also hate seeing DVC builds being used as any sort of "see! Disney is Investing" arguement. IMHO, DVC has somehow devolved from a pretty nice idea and compliment when it started as a single resort (The Disney Vacation Club...later renamed Old Key West)... into what could almost be seen as a cancer/parasite.

Agree...DVC construction can't be credited to TWDC as "investment". I just did the numbers last week and they have reasonable collected close to a BILLION dollars in upfront fees to finance the construction. You can't really be given credit for building when daddy's paying the bill.

But as to your point about a "cancer"...it might be. it gives them what they want and give the owner what they want. In star trek terms...its a "trill".

I'm staying at BLT for 8 nights next month...if i divide it out and figure out a little algorithm to estimate my real costs for that stay based on my 2005 purchase price...and then compare it to rack...all i can think of to say to everyone not in DVC is "HHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHA!!! "

If Disney has been treating the WDW resort as it's ATM.... then DVC could be considering it's money printing press. They keep building more DVC resorts and space so they can turn around and "sell" it for a huge markup. If you look at the mess with Aulani and the complaints from BLT, they have even been guilty with the latest resorts of doing things on the cheap because "the people don't know any better and will pay for anything". [although admittedly... the combination of those 2 screwups caused the head of DVC to get booted]. To add to my arguement... If you look at the latest DVC trend, They add a new wing or section to an existing hotel for DVC, but they aren't really adding any amenaties to the resort to help absorb the additional capacity of the resort. For example.... BLT removed an existing wing of a Deluxe Level resort. They did give it a small pool, but they use the Monorail as a selling point but aren't doing anything to contribute to the capacity to move those guests from the Contemporary to the other parks. [thankfully with the walking path to the MK, the full impact of this decision is muted].

SSSSHHHHHHHHHHH!

You're giving away the secret...and if you keep doing that...anyone who actually switches their brain on when talking about Disney (instead of hearts in their eyes like a Pepe Le Pew cartoon ) might catch on.

With the GF DVC, they are adding a whole new wing to the existing Deluxe level monorail resort. This is going to add a lot of potential guests to the resort property who need to get around the property. Once again, We are not seeing any additional food service or major amenties added to the resort to help absorb these guests, and transportation again is taking a big hit without any added capacity. With no walking path, all those DVC guests will be funneled to the existing monorail and watercraft transportation to the MK, however DVC is not contributing ANYTHING to the resort to help fund additional Monorail capacity or improvement, or new watercraft to help guests move to the MK.

The bold: that's the point.
The italics: they don't care.

 

[Josh Hendy]

The zebras are still there but they have been moved back to their original location. Basically the OP is right, the zebras were tearing into one another and once it started many would gang up on the wounded animal.

Good news! I mean, that the zebras are still there. Too bad their idea for mixing them in with the buses near the end of the ride didn't work out, but I'm not inclined to be disappointed or angry at Disney management over this.

We got a couple of dogs recently and DW did her homework by watching a couple of seasons of the Cesar Milan dog training series. The biggest lesson that I got out of watching some of these shows is that animals are first of all and primarily ... animals. They think differently and act differently from humans and if we try too hard to treat them like "furry friends" it can cause problems. He said that we tend to identify our dog first by it's name, then as a breed, then as a dog and finally as an animal. But the dog's mental priorities are exactly opposite. He's an animal first, a dog, a breed, and least important of all to the dog (in the scheme of things) is the name you gave him, the little coat you want him to wear, etc. It doesn't mean that they won't answer to their name and want to cuddle with you, but overall the dog has bigger priorities that you have to acknowledge and accommodate.

I think that Disney just realized that it had to accommodate first of all the essential animal/species behavior of zebras and put aside their dreams of using them as a kind of close-up, cute and cuddly ride finale.

 

[DRDISNEYMD]

FWIW... Disney isn't building the Four Seasons. They actually removed the property from the rest of the part, and offloaded it to the investors building the Four Seasons. It's on the same plot that the Golden Oaks subdivision is being built on.

Honestly... Between the Waldorf and the Four Seasons, Disney is going to have some TRUE deluxe level accommodations located "on property", so it'll be interesting to see how they are able to justify charging more for their Deluxe hotels for a lower level of service and amenities.

~I know, I'm hoping this will be just like the Swan & Dolphin arrangement or like the Loews & Hard Rock hotels featured at Universal -- and not like the Downtown Disney Hilton set up. I agree this should be "true" deluxe & I really hope this Four Season's doesn't succumb to Disney's bad ways, lol.

I also hate seeing DVC builds being used as any sort of "see! Disney is Investing" arguement. IMHO, DVC has somehow devolved from a pretty nice idea and compliment when it started as a single resort (The Disney Vacation Club...later renamed Old Key West)... into what could almost be seen as a cancer/parasite.

If Disney has been treating the WDW resort as it's ATM.... then DVC could be considering it's money printing press. They keep building more DVC resorts and space so they can turn around and "sell" it for a huge markup. If you look at the mess with Aulani and the complaints from BLT, they have even been guilty with the latest resorts of doing things on the cheap because "the people don't know any better and will pay for anything". [although admittedly... the combination of those 2 screwups caused the head of DVC to get booted]. To add to my arguement... If you look at the latest DVC trend, They add a new wing or section to an existing hotel for DVC, but they aren't really adding any amenaties to the resort to help absorb the additional capacity of the resort. For example.... BLT removed an existing wing of a Deluxe Level resort. They did give it a small pool, but they use the Monorail as a selling point but aren't doing anything to contribute to the capacity to move those guests from the Contemporary to the other parks. [thankfully with the walking path to the MK, the full impact of this decision is muted].

With the GF DVC, they are adding a whole new wing to the existing Deluxe level monorail resort. This is going to add a lot of potential guests to the resort property who need to get around the property. Once again, We are not seeing any additional food service or major amenties added to the resort to help absorb these guests, and transportation again is taking a big hit without any added capacity. With no walking path, all those DVC guests will be funneled to the existing monorail and watercraft transportation to the MK, however DVC is not contributing ANYTHING to the resort to help fund additional Monorail capacity or improvement, or new watercraft to help guests move to the MK.

~Okay, this is my fault. The message I was hoping to convey is not one of how Disney is "investing" because I don't believe that for one second -- just based on what I've read here and my personal experience with a timeshare "tour" I took years ago in Vegas, I can't see myself ever investing in a timeshare, it's just too limiting for my tastes. I should have placed more emphasis on the "Grand Floridian" aspect and the demographic Disney is seeking to target with this addition. The pirate's argument was that Disney only wants to cater to the people of Walmart, and I don't know if that's entirely accurate with the addition of a New Four Seasons, Grand Floridian DVC and possible Poly DVC.

 

[DCTooTall]

~I know, I'm hoping this will be just like the Swan & Dolphin arrangement or like the Loews & Hard Rock hotels featured at Universal -- and not like the Downtown Disney Hilton set up. I agree this should be "true" deluxe & I really hope this Four Season's doesn't succumb to Disney's bad ways, lol.

Not likely..... Just because of the history of those Disney deals.

When the parks first opened in 1971, There wasn't a lot of hotel rooms in the area for people coming into Central Florida to visit the parks. Disney leased out the land for the hotels on Hotel Blvd with the understanding that at time the Poly, Contemporary, and Disney Inn wouldn't meet the demand for beds at the park, and they weren't in a place or have the desire to build more hotel rooms themselves.


The Swan/Dolphin story is a little different, and there is some conflicting information/stories out there when it comes to the details. But in essense, it's part of the holdover from the earlier Disney thought process of their not wanting to be in the hotel business (ala, hotel Blvd.).

The 2 most popular stories I've heard are that a developer/contractor involved in the EPCOT construction, as part of their deal/compensation also received the ability to build hotels on Disney property...... OR.... As part of the Original deal that brought us the hotels on hotel BLVD, The developer involved in those hotels believed they had the exclusive rights to further Disney hotels.

In either version, It was Eisner's coming to the company in the mid 80's which ended up changing things on the hotel front. Basically.... He saw all the money the company was losing by not being more involved in lodging the visitors to the resort, and wanted to become much more involved in becoming a one-stop-shop [the precurser to the Disney Decade]. I've also read where he wanted to build a convention hotel to attract non-theme park guests to the resort during the offpeak times (and that this convention part was what prompted the disagreement between Disney and the Developer).

Ultimately, As either part of the previous Grandfathered deal prior to a buy-out [allowing Disney to develop their own onsite hotels].... Or a settlement with the developer [allowing him to build/own 2 hotels in a prime location in the center of the property in exchange for reliquishing the rights to allow Disney to build/control their own hotels onsite]... The Swan and Dolphin came to be. Disney still owns the property, but the hotels are owned independantly and have a 99yr lease of the property they sit upon.

You need to remember, the Swan/Dolphin are some of the oldest properties onsite.... With only the Poly, Contemporary, Shade of Green (The Disney Inn/The Golf Resort), and Ft. Wilderness predating them. I believe the Grand Floridian opened shortly after them, although GF may have been opened around the same time or shortly before. I remember GF was late 80s, but i'm bit fuzzy off the top of my head on the exact timeframe of the hotel openings.



For Universal/Lowes, It's much closer to the original Hotel Blvd deal. When Universal expanded from a single park to the 2 parks, citywalk, and onsite hotels in the late 90's, They were not interested in also getting into the hotel business. So their onsite hotels were built from scratch in a deal with the outside company. It's a partnership that both companies actively partipate in and benefit from.


The Four Seasons is like none of these previous deals. Disney sold off the land so the Four Seasons can build their own hotel. For all intents and purposes, the partnership between the Four Seasons and Disney is no deeper than Disney's existing VIP sales/tour channels. There might be a few extra "perks" which the Four Seasons guests may get compared to other offsite location guests ( such as emh or room package delivery), But this would be because the Four Seasons would be paying Disney large amounts of $$$ on a regular basis to secure these deals. Not because they are considered a Disney resort guest.

~Okay, this is my fault. The message I was hoping to convey is not one of how Disney is "investing" because I don't believe that for one second -- just based on what I've read here and my personal experience with a timeshare "tour" I took years ago in Vegas, I can't see myself ever investing in a timeshare, it's just too limiting for my tastes. I should have placed more emphasis on the "Grand Floridian" aspect and the demographic Disney is seeking to target with this addition. The pirate's argument was that Disney only wants to cater to the people of Walmart, and I don't know if that's entirely accurate with the addition of a New Four Seasons, Grand Floridian DVC and possible Poly DVC.

But Disney isn't really catering to the affluent "sophisticated" type that the Four Seasons is servicing. The four Seasons are the ones catering to them and their needs and desires. Those people just want to experience Disney, just like everyone else.

With the GF and Poly DVC.... I'm also not entirely sure you can say they are successfully catering outside of the "people of Walmart". they are both "more of the same" when it comes to what they are offering.... DVC membership. Compared to rack rates, DVC is a pretty good deal.....think of it as the Sam's Club version..... You are still dealing with Walmart, but you are buying the same items you get with Walmart, only in bulk. More Expensive than the cheaper walmart stuff.... put a cheaper "per unit" cost.

Even then... DVC is starting to potentially price itself out of being able to get new retail sales using their existing tactics to all but the ignorant masses (which... well... people of walmart . com . ).