All Star Suites...

[airlarry!]

Please tell me how you are so priliged to have all of this inside information about every facit of the Walt Disney Company.

You aren't by any chance a new poster to this board? Has the search function been disabled again? The answers to this and many more questions you have are found in a treasure trove of archived posts...

 

[pedro2112]

The original concept for WDW was for a resort - that meant all levels of price points, including motels. Each guest would be able to enjoy ALL of WDW, and pick the accomidation that best suited their need.

The concept of "resort tiers" where the resorts themselves were segregated (and the only difference between rooms was "parking lot view") was brought in by Michael Eisner.

This is what I am not understanding. I've seen the plans posted above.. it is clear that Disney's original plans included "motels" in addition to the hotels, and those "motels" were at the fringes of WDW property. So how is that different than what was eventually built.. the values?

The company that claims they are the single greatest creative force in the world, the touchstone for imagination, the wizards that create "magic" for millions every year - and the best they can come up with is three tons of fiberglass spelling out "Do The Funky Chicken"?

Even I think they are capable of more than that had they wished to try. But, they didn't try because they figured you're not worth it. You'd spend the money to stay at the place no matter what they did, so they did the least effort possible.

I've never stayed at a value resort. Nevertheless, I still don't see what they could have done other than build a motel 6 with Disney themeing to compete with the cheapo motels out there for less than $100.00/night. Is your main complaint the themeing? Or is it something else?

 

[mrsR123]

The All-Stars are not themed. They are decorated. Their population density is too high. Their service is too low even at the price point presented. THey have been positioned out in the hinterlands, yet touted as Nirvana. They contribute to the need for decidedly unmagical bus transport. They don't put a person into the middle of a story. They don't evoke another time, place or possibility. They keep people from understanding what real Disney is, but they keep people from staying off-site.

Some of these issues might have come out the same, others might have not if someone had tried to do it well.

I'm no Imagineer, but get the rights to make it a Lego village where the boxiness wouldn't be a detractor, theme it to Honey I Shrunk the Resort and make giant icons that make sense, theme it to the Streets of America backlot-- there are plenty of real apartments in NYC that are about the size of an All Stars room.

I don't knock folks on a budget, but they deserve real Disney.

 

[Planogirl]

I personally don't see what's so horrible about staying offsite. I prefer driving to buses and I can stay in places that are closer to most of the parks than the icon trimmed budget resorts and also have more amenities. But I've always said to each their own.

And I do get "it". I just personally don't get it at the Values. To those who do, good for you!

 

[peter11435]

You aren't by any chance a new poster to this board? Has the search function been disabled again? The answers to this and many more questions you have are found in a treasure trove of archived posts...

I have been on these forums for a long time. Reading and posting for about 5 years now. I have never once heard AV provide any reason why we should believe him except for this cheap I have sources type of comments.

 

[peter11435]

I'd have to look at this and say...they didn't complete Pop Century so that makes me question how profitable these motels are. And the numbers cited don't include the DVC units.

True but the reason they didn't finish pop (yet) is because of the downturn that came after 9/11 (although I am sure AV will say there was another reason). The fact that no deluxe resort has been built, opened, or even rumored in this time kills your theory. As for DVC resorts they are an entirely different situation and ARE NOT deluxe resorts. If the All-Stars were not profitable they would have never started building another 5760 value rooms.

Obviously as Yoho states the deluxe resorts make more money per room than the values (that doesn't take a rocket scientist). And obviously the deluxe resorts make more money per guest (again...well that doesn't even take a used car salesman). However a value resort costs about the same or less to construct as a much smaller (in number of rooms) deluxe resorts. They then cost less to operate. Thus forget how much each guest is spending or the amount per room. The fact is that the value resorts have a higher profit margin than the big guys.

 

[doubletrouble_vb]

The All-Stars are not themed. They are decorated.

I wouldn't go so far as to say they are unthemed. All Star Music was nicely themed. If you walked through the Jazz section...especially at night...the landscaping evokes the same feeling of New Orleans as POFQ. The Rock n' Roll section has the theme of a 1950's diner. I didn't walk through Country fare so I can't say about that.

Now if you said POP fails to take you away to another place I'd have to agree.

Peter11435...DVC is certainly not deluxe except where they were built connected to a deluxe but SSR and OKW do fit into a slot between moderate and deluxe. They have more amenities than a moderate and fewer than a deluxe. If it was just the 9/11 downturn that was holding Disney back from building more values they would have started completing Pop Century.

I think Disney realizes that while the values are pulling people out of hotels off site they are also pulling people out of the moderates and possibly out of deluxes. Using DVC'ers as an example...some of them choose not to stay Fri & Sat nights on points. But they are Disney obsessed so they want to stay on property. Whereas they might have stayed in a moderate they happily suffer through a couple days at All Stars or POP before checking into their not-deluxe accomodations with DVC. Sure that may bump up the profits at All Stars but what does that do for the overall bottom line for on-campus hotels?

 

[peter11435]

Peter11435...DVC is certainly not deluxe except where they were built connected to a deluxe but SSR and OKW do fit into a slot between moderate and deluxe. They have more amenities than a moderate and fewer than a deluxe. If it was just the 9/11 downturn that was holding Disney back from building more values they would have started completing Pop Century.

While they may have the amenities between a moderate and a deluxe they can't really be compared to the other resorts because they have an entirely different pricing stucture and there profit is very very different.

As for finishing pop, attendance is starting to return to pre-9/11 levels. However not enough to (yet) justify adding another 2880 rooms every night.

 

[Bstanley]

I have been on these forums for a long time. Reading and posting for about 5 years now. I have never once heard AV provide any reason why we should believe him except for this cheap I have sources type of comments.

???

Are you saying that you are unaware that in the past AV worked for the Mouse at a level that brought him in contact with various levels of senior management at Disney?

Or that you doubt the claim?

 

[Bstanley]

The fact is that the value resorts have a higher profit margin than the big guys.

Source Please?

This flies in the face of the experience of the rest of the hotel industry in the US. A typical upscale hotel has a 15-20% profit margin (I'm sure Disney is better - their occupancy is through the roof compared to most resorts). A typical limited service hotel has a 5-10% profit margin (ditto).

So outside of Disney a typical 'motel' has one half to one third of the profit of a 'resort'. Basically - there's money in them thar Spas.

PS. Sorry - Hospitality.net statistics for 2004.

 

[peter11435]

???

Are you saying that you are unaware that in the past AV worked for the Mouse at a level that brought him in contact with various levels of senior management at Disney?

Or that you doubt the claim?

I don't remember ever hearing that. However that said I caution everyone that anyone can post anything on the internet.

 

[peter11435]

Source Please?

This flies in the face of the experience of the rest of the hotel industry in the US. A typical upscale hotel has a 15-20% profit margin (I'm sure Disney is better - their occupancy is through the roof compared to most resorts). A typical limited service hotel has a 5-10% profit margin (ditto).

So outside of Disney a typical 'motel' has one half to one third of the profit of a 'resort'. Basically - there's money in them thar Spas.

PS. Sorry - Hospitality.net statistics for 2004.

The key word there is typical. Disney is not a typical location. The values have extremely high occupancy rates. To to mention most limited service motels in this country do not have anywhere near 3000 rooms. The money is in the numbers.

 

[DisneyGirl4188]

I would just like to say that I do take offense at the "value bashing" that is going on. I loved ASMo. The service was great and I never once felt that I was "lower class". I think that they are wonderfully THEMED too. One of my favorite things to do was take pictures of the icons. These to me feel even MORE Disney than say the GF.

Personally, I think that some of the other resorts are stuffy, while the values are fun. Don't get me wrong, I think that each resort has a charm about it, but I much prefer the values. I don't feel like lower class or undesirable because I stay there. I also don't feel like I am out in the middle of nowhere. We did drive to the parks, but it only took a few minutes (less than 5 to AK). When staying on at the Boardwalk, BC, YC, etc they all share busses, so it isn't just a value thing.

While I do save money by staying at a value, that means that I have more money to spend elsewhere. I think that Disney realizes that too. All I use my room for is sleeping and showering, so to pay over $300.00 a night is crazy (to me).

I do plan on staying at POP for our next trip, although I could just as easy pick AKL or POFQ. I like the Mr. Potato Head and Roger Rabbit. Those icons are Disney to me.

 

[All Aboard]

With all due respect, you can caution all you want. But, Another Voice does happen to know what the heck he is talking about and rarely (if ever) embelishes to make a point.

 

[peter11435]

With all due respect, you can caution all you want. But, Another Voice does happen to know what the heck he is talking about and rarely (if ever) embelishes to make a point.

How do you know he knows what he is talking about. Without having "inside information" yourself there would be no way you could prove him right or wrong. The only reason you have to believe him is that you choose to. And say what you want but I find most of AV posts to be nothing more than fancy finger work if you know what I mean.

I'll just cite one example

"If you knew what Disney management really thinks about the three-visit-a-year pin trading crowd - it would make your snow globe boil.
"

That my friend is embelishment.

 

[Another Voice]

I would just like to say that I do take offense at the "value bashing" that is going on.

No one is bashing the Values here. What we’re saying is that Disney is not providing enough for the Values. It’s not the size of swimming pools or the number of little shampoo bottles they leave in your room every afternoon – it’s about the core element that made Disney resorts different than all those places strung out on International Drive.

“Themeing” means using all the elements around to provide a sense of being “somewhere” else. It’s more than just the art stapled to the walls or the cute names for the restaurants. It’s the flickering shadows on the vegetation cast by the torches at the Poly, the “zoom” of the monorail as it glides overhead at the Contemporary, the smell of magnolias at Port Orleans. At its core, truly theming a place is the same as storytelling. In fact, the whole point of a Disney themed hotel was to give you the exact same feeling you get when you walk into a themed land in the Magic Kingdom.

“Decoration” just makes something look more appealing that it would be otherwise. It’s the way a twenty foot Yo-Ho hides the concrete tilt-wall construction blockhouse. Things may look better, but it doesn’t have the same impact as being in a themed resort. The place may be pleasant to be in, but it doesn’t have the same “oh wow – look at this” feeling that the parks pull off.

And it’s not a question of money – like all storytelling it’s more about talent and effort. For the same amount of money they spent at Pop Century, Disney could have designed a place that gave had the same impact as Dixie Landings or Old Key West. It was Disney that decided against putting in this extra effort because of how they see the market.

No one is looking down at anyone staying in the Values. We’re just disappointed with Disney's approach.


Peter - No one is telling you to believe anything. In fact, I suggest you put me on your "ignore" list so you won't have to waste your time reading my posts.

 

[peter11435]

No one is bashing the Values here. What we’re saying is that Disney is not providing enough for the Values. It’s not the size of swimming pools or the number of little shampoo bottles they leave in your room every afternoon – it’s about the core element that made Disney resorts different than all those places strung out on International Drive.

“Themeing” means using all the elements around to provide a sense of being “somewhere” else. It’s more than just the art stapled to the walls or the cute names for the restaurants. It’s the flickering shadows on the vegetation cast by the torches at the Poly, the “zoom” of the monorail as it glides overhead at the Contemporary, the smell of magnolias at Port Orleans. At its core, truly theming a place is the same as storytelling. In fact, the whole point of a Disney themed hotel was to give you the exact same feeling you get when you walk into a themed land in the Magic Kingdom.

“Decoration” just makes something look more appealing that it would be otherwise. It’s the way a twenty foot Yo-Ho hides the concrete tilt-wall construction blockhouse. Things may look better, but it doesn’t have the same impact as being in a themed resort. The place may be pleasant to be in, but it doesn’t have the same “oh wow – look at this” feeling that the parks pull off.

And it’s not a question of money – like all storytelling it’s more about talent and effort. For the same amount of money they spent at Pop Century, Disney could have designed a place that gave had the same impact as Dixie Landings or Old Key West. It was Disney that decided against putting in this extra effort because of how they see the market.

No one is looking down at anyone staying in the Values. We’re just disappointed with Disney's approach.


Peter - No one is telling you to believe anything. In fact, I suggest you put me on your "ignore" list so you won't have to waste your time reading my posts.

To be honest I think that post was excellent. And I agree that Disney could have built something far better for the amount that Pop cost.

 

[DisneyGirl4188]

I see your points, but each resort is different and evokes a different 'feel'. When I see ASMo I DO get the feeling of magic. The values just have a different feel than a deluxe. I don't feel like I am at just another Hojo, but that I am somewhere special. I wouldn't change the resorts at all. My little brother will be going with DH and I next time and he picked POP. He loves the pictures of it and doesn't feel the same about any of the other places. To him, POP is magic.

 

[All Aboard]

The only reason you have to believe him is that you choose to.

If you mean that I have nothing more than just reading his posts online, then you are incorrect.

That my friend is embelishment.

Actually, in that case, it was the use of humor and metaphor (perhaps even allegory) to drive home a point. How Michael Eisner felt about theme parks and the guests who were "caught up in them" is no real secret.

 

[Jason71]

I think the real profit margin for the values lies not in the profit per room per night, but in the fact that guests in the hotel (i) are not staying along I-Drive (or 192), and therefore (ii) less likely to have a car, and therefore (iii) even less likely to make a day trip to Universal or Wonderworks, or have a meal at Bahama Breeze or Golden Corral.

From that perspective, it made sense for Eisner et al to throw up the cheapest resort they could find--it was all about keeping people on-site, not necessarily entertaining them with Disney magic once they arrived. To me, it's like McDonalds french fries in the parks. Obviously there is a market for it, but I prefered it when Disney did things better than the real world just because they could.