Agree to Disagree! DISUnplugged Show March 22!

[DisneyKevin]

regarding FP+ : I think, because of the Value Resorts on property which are priced more comparable to non-property hotels, you could still get the advantage of booking FP+ early AND still have a more comparably priced room rate to the non-property AND you receive the same benefit as those staying in the POLY Bungalows, so the size of your wallet doesn't change the 'accessibility'. That's an even playing field.

Like I said, I'm a hypocrite. I can argue both sides of this issue, but to this point, I've been willing to open my wallet and pay to receive perks. Shame on me

A family of 10 can rent a four bedroom / three bath home off site for about the same cost (or less) as a four person hotel room at a value resort. (DreamsVillas.com)

On property, the same sized family would require two rooms....more likely 3.

When cost is an issue this is a huge difference.

 

[pontikes67]

A family of 10 can rent a four bedroom / three bath home off site for about the same cost of a four person hotel room at a value resort. (DreamsVillas.com)

On property, the same sized family would require two rooms....more likely 3.

When cost is an issue this is a huge difference.

Point taken. I was debating from the family of 4 perspective

Incidentally, thanks for weighing in. As most here, I'm sure, while we watched we wished we could interact directly in the conversation as well. Appreciate you joining in on the boards.

 

[KingLlama]

@DisneyKevin This is a barely-related question, but did you receive any feedback(viewers/listeners or otherwise) from you sharing your experience a few weeks back on taking a photo of Mary Poppins at Epcot and being scolded by the PhotoPass photographer?

 

[DisneyKevin]

@DisneyKevin This is a barely-related question, but did you receive any feedback(viewers/listeners or otherwise) from you sharing your experience a few weeks back on taking a photo of Mary Poppins at Epcot and being scolded by the PhotoPass photographer?

We've heard from many folks relating similar stories.

Not sure what that's about.

I imagine this will be a topic of conversation on a future podcast.

 

[KingLlama]

Gracias.

 

[DisneyKevin]

Kevin had beef!

Also he quoted that he read an article where someone said that orca live longer in captivity then the wild. This is incorrect.

There is an wild orca called Granny who is 103 and lives in the Washington State area.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/opin...d-for-conservation-032016-20160319-story.html

From the article:

The fact is that SeaWorld's killer whales live as long as the most studied wild populations. When you look carefully at the science, trends indicate that in the next decade SeaWorld's whales will outlive those same wild populations by a significant margin. They are not suffering; they are not mistreated; they are, in fact, thriving. But perception is reality, and the business side of SeaWorld is responding to perception.

 

[rteetz]

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/opin...d-for-conservation-032016-20160319-story.html

From the article:

The fact is that SeaWorld's killer whales live as long as the most studied wild populations. When you look carefully at the science, trends indicate that in the next decade SeaWorld's whales will outlive those same wild populations by a significant margin. They are not suffering; they are not mistreated; they are, in fact, thriving. But perception is reality, and the business side of SeaWorld is responding to perception.

I think it comes from blackfish. I believe in the documentary they say that orcas live longer in the wild than in captivity. I personally haven't done research into that though.

 

[sunshine1]

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/opin...d-for-conservation-032016-20160319-story.html

From the article:

The fact is that SeaWorld's killer whales live as long as the most studied wild populations. When you look carefully at the science, trends indicate that in the next decade SeaWorld's whales will outlive those same wild populations by a significant margin. They are not suffering; they are not mistreated; they are, in fact, thriving. But perception is reality, and the business side of SeaWorld is responding to perception.

We will have to disagree Kevin.

SeaWorld decimated the southern resident population with their captures in the 1970s. Now there are only 83 southern residents.

I am a fan of Disney but do not agree with the poor dolphins at Epcot. I dont think they have access to fresh air or natural daylight. Those dolphins look like the floating dead.

A concrete tank can never replicate the ocean.

P.S. Pleased that you mentioned Yulin dog and cat festival in China. I was outside the Chinese Embassy last year in London protesting against that.

We need to spread the word about the plight of what humans to do animals.

 

[DisneyKevin]

We will have to disagree Kevin.

I agree with this.

 

[pontikes67]

We will have to disagree Kevin.

SeaWorld decimated the southern resident population with their captures in the 1970s. Now there are only 83 southern residents.

I am a fan of Disney but do not agree with the poor dolphins at Epcot. I dont think they have access to fresh air or natural daylight. Those dolphins look like the floating dead.

A concrete tank can never replicate the ocean.

P.S. Pleased that you mentioned Yulin dog and cat festival in China. I was outside the Chinese Embassy last year in London protesting against that.

We need to spread the word about the plight of what humans to do animals.

I know we're agreeing to disagree but From NOAA:


Although I did read about the Southern Resident Endangerment...which is confusing.

From my reading, the stagnation in population growth has more to do with shipping and vessels in the area that have hurt the environment there. The Chinook (their primary food source) is highly contaminated and there is a short supply of these fish. The impact from vessels and sound are also hurting them, but that's not Sea World doing any of that.

 

[beastlyprince]

The point I was trying to make was I hate all the "new" add-ons. That aren't "new" they are just rehashing old experiences as something you now have to pay extra for now. If Disney holds a special event like Club Villain, Mickey's Very Merry Christmas Party, etc those are additional experiences that provide something extra then what a normal day ticket provides that is completely acceptable, and good for Disney for thinking of new services to provide and make money on. What bothers me is when they take something that was a free/first-come, first-served experience and find ways to charge people for it. Recently we've seen preferred parking, but how close are we to having to pay to meet Mickey? When will a "bronze level" ticket only allow me to watch Hall of Presidents from the back row?

Can Disney charge people extra and label it as providing a service that you don't have to pay for? Sure they are a Fortune 100 company in a capitalist society. But Disney used to be the Happiest Place On Earth for anyone that could afford to walk in the front gates, now I am afraid, and this is speculation that we might see a tiered system where the rich get the full experience while the rest get a shell of the experience unless they pay for the add-ons that used to be free.

If Disney wants more of my money then make the ticket prices more expensive, don't give me some tiered experience where I have to count my dollars every time I want to do something. When will Disney World feel like a carnival where I have pay for every experience?

I agree with you, Kathy, and Teresa. The "nickel and diming" really wears the shine off of Disney's magic. With the cuts and rumored cuts that Disney is in the process of doing it makes a Disney experience much less exciting and much less special.

 

[beastlyprince]

My concern is this. Even though they have had the vip tours etc for a long time. I still could see the fireworks and just had to sit on curb or stay in one spot. What I worry about is what happens if every day the close the parks at 7 so they can start to have hard ticket events. I believe the hard tickets events are greater in number now then they used to be. The other thing I would be interested in is does Disneyland have the same amount of hard ticket events as Disney World.

I agree with you about the "let's close the park(s) early so we can make some additional money with our "exclusive" events."

 

[beastlyprince]

I think that gets to the heart of the argument .. and similar to the argument against Tiered pricing. Disney is "different" and I don't want Disney to be just like everything else and this feels like them moving towards that. And I think there is something to that if you change what makes you different then you don't become the destination or special thing that people save up for and then you aren't attracting the crowds you used to ... and while all signs point to record crowds and sold out resorts - this is something that can erode perception over time. It won't hurt their bottom line this year or next, but will our kids feel the same about Disney as we do if they continue down this path?

I agree. It's the "leaves a bad taste in your mouth" feeling. It's also the feeling that this trip wasn't as good as the last trip.

 

[beastlyprince]

I think it is pretty obvious, at this point, that Disney is purposely trying to shift the demographic of its visitors. They want people with more disposable income. These are the people who will pay for these types of "extras."

I actually see this happening elsewhere in the travel and leisure industry as well. Cruises have gotten way more expensive and the nickel and diming is almost an epidemic at this point on most mass market lines. Hotels left and right are starting to charge exorbitant resort and parking fees. We just stayed at Great Wolf Lodge and the effective "tax" rate was a whopping 25% per night! Restaurants in our area are starting to host more and more "special dining events" with super high Prix Fixe menus. Theme parks all over are charging for preferred parking, "instant ride access" and special events. There really doesn't seem to be an end in sight.

Disney is perhaps being short sighted in its approach to rolling all this stuff out in succession the way they are. However, they are simply pushing the boundaries to see how far they can go. You think these $150 "EMH" won't sell out? Guaranteed they will. And why wouldn't Disney's response be "let's do more of these!"

And why is everyone not getting that this is FINAALLY a way for off property guests to PAY for a perk that on property guests still get for free. What is so wrong with that? Assuming that EMH will go away in favor of this is ludicrous at this point. EMH is perhaps the most tangible perk for being an on-site guest. No way they do away with it.

Let's say all four parks stay open until 9:00 p.m. every day to guests (doesn't matter if you're staying on-site or not) every day of the year.
Disney now changes the closing time to 7:00 p.m. and they add a $149 ticket to go to the parks from 8:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. Would that make
you happy that you, as a day guest, have lost 2 hours each day in the parks? (I'd be p*ssed.) Would you then go purchase that $149 plus tax
ticket for 3 more hours in the park? (I wouldn't.)

 

[rmm7e]

I thought it all started with a mouse.

I haven't listened yet...not sure I need that stress!

Replying to myself to say that I had a chance to listen today, and the up charging discussion didn't stress me out nearly as much as the Sea World discussion. I'm officially going to have to fast forward through any/all SW mentions in the future if I'm going to keep liking y'all.

 

[beastlyprince]

Well, there is talk of building a Lego Land in Orange County NY that would be bigger than the one in Orlando ... so hey, anything is possible. Well, ok, a full theme park in Manhattan is probably not possible but a legit Disney park (even if on the smaller side) within driving distance of New York City could do big business

The crowds would be nightmarish. Six Flags Great Adventure in Jackson, NJ, is about an hour away for Manhattan. Going there, or any other Six Flags park, on the weekend is a terrible experience due to the crowds. You're lucky if you get to ride 5 rides. This has been my experience at
Six Flags New England and Six Flags Great Adventure. I no longer will go to these parks on the weekends. Going to the parks on week days
can also be nightmarish.

Even with that said, yes it would do big business unless you have a summer where there is lots of rain. A rainy summer kills the amusement
parks in the northern U.S. because people won't go to the parks on a rainy day. The vast majority of the rides are open to the elements and
will be shut down if it's raining and/or there is lightning within a certain radius of the park.

 

[Boski]

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/opin...d-for-conservation-032016-20160319-story.html

From the article:

The fact is that SeaWorld's killer whales live as long as the most studied wild populations. When you look carefully at the science, trends indicate that in the next decade SeaWorld's whales will outlive those same wild populations by a significant margin. They are not suffering; they are not mistreated; they are, in fact, thriving. But perception is reality, and the business side of SeaWorld is responding to perception.

So are you saying based on this one article that Orcas are better to be kept in SeaWorld as opposed to in the wild?

 

[beastlyprince]

I haven't had a chance to read through everything, but I just wanted to expand on my comments during chat today....

My argument is not one that everyone should be able to do everything. I agree about special experiences costing more and fully grasp that it's not in the budget for everyone. My argument is one that Pete normally throws into his rants that didn't seem to make it in today. I get angry when I pay more for less. And if this $150 special event leads to an end to EMH and possibly even an end to regular parks guests getting things like evening parades and fireworks (i.e. the FPs being discontinued), then I think there's reason for people to be angry.

Kevin used the analogy of not being able to buy a particular Porsche, but I don't see it that way. Things like the Villains party, dinner at V&A, and such are great for that Porsche example, but that's not the concern or really applicable here...at least not in my eyes. The concern is that success with this party COULD lead to your regular park admission no longer including things they've included for some time. How would you feel paying that annual price increase on tickets that so many of us have just come to tolerate if they eliminate EMH, parades, fireworks, and evening park hours in general with that admission in favor of them doing hard ticketed evening events for these things? Because if Disney can charge $150 a head extra for this stuff and it's a hit...it wouldn't shock me to see things take this ugly turn. Obviously, it's pure speculation, but that kind of more $ for a lesser experience would be what sends us elsewhere for vacations.

I concur.

The "pay more for less" is the key to this whole topic.

 

[beastlyprince]

I am reminded of when businesses found they could sell bottled water!



I understand the arguments made on the show regarding the market being a determining factor. It’s certainly correct. If Disney have pushed things too far, the market will respond accordingly. Perhaps.

On the other hand, the argument that Disney is nickel and diming guests is also valid. There’s a slippery slope and I’m reminded of the foot-in-the-door technique (guests are ok with a small and ‘reasonable’ upcharge/loss of a benefit, and only when they agree or accept this change a more significant upcharge/lost benefit will incrementally follow. This makes it more likely that the guest will also accept this). I disagree that this is anything about crowd control. That’s great PR spin but companies are purely profit focused.

I empathise with Steve’s arguments regarding the removal of benefits that were deemed ‘free’. Yet, in a capitalist society it’s important to note that very little is free and I would argue that things like the Magical Express and Extra Magic Hours are already factored in to the high resort costs. I think we’re paying for it anyway. Disney, by introducing a resort fee, are deceptively making guests pay more for what they’ve already paid for! Maybe even for things guests never demanded (i.e. magic bands).

I also think the argument about there being tiered guests is an interesting one. Will there be greater inequality among guests and the way Disney perceive them? I don’t know.

My final observation is one based on values. This is more likely my problem than Disney’s but the message guests may be receiving is ‘’you’re ripe to commercially exploit at every turn and that’s all you are to us’’. Sure, you can make the choice to pay or not and I completely get that. I can afford what Disney is charging without much problem but I dislike that message intensely and it puts me off. Every company perceives guests/customers as revenue but there’s a delicate balance between being subtle and guest focused or overt and bullish. There’s also a line between ‘we charge because we can’ and charging for a good value experience. That message is a powerful one and why I think guests are reacting with hostility about the changes on these boards.

Each panellist made good arguments but I thought it a pity that Steve, Cathy and Theresa didn't quite get a chance to fully articulate their arguments further.

I agree with your post, particularly with your last statement.

RE: That’s great PR spin but companies are purely profit focused.

Yes.

One thing to remember is that Disney wants FP+ to be successful. Disney park customers don't spend money while waiting in lines.

 

[DisneyKevin]

So are you saying based on this one article that Orcas are better to be kept in SeaWorld as opposed to in the wild?

I agree with the article, but I don't believe that the article states that orcas are better in captivity.

I think a bigger issue than orcas in captivity is the condition of our oceans.