An honest to God rumor that even Scoop may like!!!

[Werner Weiss]

I just posted a couple of pictures over on the Disney Vacation Club board that probably belong in this thread too.

I was looking at the publicity drawing of the new feature pool at the DVC Saratoga Springs Resort & Spa. I noticed some buildings in the background that looked very familiar. So I found a publicity photo of the old Disney Institute. Sure enough, I saw the same buildings.

The picture above shows the Townhouses at the Villas at Disney Institute. The Disney Institute main complex is behind the Townhouses. That's where the Disney Institute had its spa, check-in lobby, dining room, and classrooms.

The picture above shows that the pool and new buildings of the Saratoga Springs Resort & Spa will replace the old Townhouses. Notice the same buildings in the background. (I've labeled them with letters and arrows so that you can't miss them.) I think it's safe to say that that's where the new DVC resort will have its spa, check-in lobby, restuarant, community hall, shops, and any other "town center" facilities.

There have been complaints in this thread that the theme of the new DVC resort is too close to home, and that DVD missed the opportunity to use an exciting, exotic theme. But the theme of the new DVC resort wasn't set this year. It was set in the mid-1990s when the esteemed architect, Thomas Beeby, designed the Disney Institute main complex.

Unlike the old Townhouses and other residential buildings at the Villas at Disney Institute, the new Saratoga Springs Resort & Spa, with its upstate New York theme, should blend nicely with Mr Beeby's design.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Who let the Baron out of his daytime cage?

Time off for good behavior. Good behavior and unusually keen insight into all things Disney. The Citizens of Chicago decided that you people needed some controlling.... So.....

Didn't we arg.., um, discuss, for pages upon pages the fact that you thought the moderates were, in fact, NOT DISNEY AT ALL?

Why is it that it must be all or nothing with you? Black or white? Why is it that you allow nothing in the middle? No shades of gray?

My stance on the moderates has never changed since the very first day I stayed there. They are VERY nice!! To a certain extent they are Disney!! In fact I’ll even go further, so there is absolutely no mistaking my meaning this time. The All-Stars are NOT Disney at all!! Pop Century, well....

The Moderates have many aspects of Disney within them. But not enough! The differences are subtle, but can be accounted for in the price differential. You want to see true Disney, look to whatever suits your taste in the Deluxe range (except the Floridian!) and then knock the price roughly in half. Ahhhh! There you have a “DISNEY” resort as it was meant to be! The moderates come close. VERY close. Close enough, for the purposes of our discussion regarding design, to be INCLUDED in the group of “Disney” resorts as opposed to ignored.

Am I clear now?

 

[DisneyKidds]

Why is it that it must be all or nothing with you? Black or white? Why is it that you allow nothing in the middle? No shades of gray?

Funny thing is, this is what I ask myself about you every time I read your driv... posts .

Why, oh, why do you want to go back into this moderate thing?

My stance on the moderates has never changed since the very first day I stayed there. They are VERY nice!! To a certain extent they are Disney!!

Hate to dredge up the past (ok, no I don't), but I had to share a few quotes from a certain someone we know. Can you guess who........?

In relation to allowing the moderates to be built.........

Of course they miss a beat! THEY ARE NOT DISNEY!!!

This one stands on it's own..........

I point to Port Orleans and say, “Well it’s nice. And they came so close. But it ain’t no Disney joint!”

In response to the contention that the 'mods' are a true 'Disney' experience..............

No not quite!! Why don’t you get it! THE STANDARD IS THE STANDARD!!!!! I can’t say it any louder!!

As you always say, if it doesn't meet the standard, it ain't Disney - or do you feel otherwise now? or do the 'mods' now meet the standard? THE STANDARD IS THE STANDARD!!!!! Hard to get more black and white than that .

In response to the question of whether the 'mods' were 'Disney'.........

they almost (ALMOST, mind you) make it!! But not quite!!

Seems just a little different from................

Disney through and through.

.......even if just 'to some extent'. So which is it my friend? Or should I ask which is it today?

Feel free to point out what I'm sure you will say are misquotes, or quotes taken out of context. However, the court record speaks for itself .

 

[DisneyKidds]

Scoop - thank you counsellor . If only I were presenting the evidence to an impartial jury. Furthermore, a jury of the good Baron's car 3 peers will never convict. Now if I could have the venue moved the neighborhood car 1 travels in (maybe even car 2) I think we could put him away .

 

[raidermatt]

Bring it on....

DK, if I may...

There's two ways to discuss all things Disney.

1- Only compare Disney to Disney. Forget what anybody else does, forget figuring out whether Disney is better than this, or better than that. Decide on what your view of the Disney standard is, and compare everything to that.

2- Take everything else into consideration. What is the competition doing? Is Disney's new attraction better than Universal's? Would you rather stay at the Poly or the Hilton?

The difference between these two explains how somebody can be very critical of Disney, yet still make WDW their destination. Our friend Baron is the textbook example of someone who would give very different statements, depending on from which viewpoint he was looking. And certainly there are many others, including myself, who would do the same. To his credit, Baron typically tries to avoid even speaking to view point number 2, probably to avoid situations like this, where he is accused of double-speak.

What you have done in your cross-examination is compare quotes taken from a discussion using viewpoint number 1, and compared them to quotes clearly made when using viewpoint number 2.

Hence, the alleged contradiction. Yet its not a contradiction at all.

The Moderates ARE very nice. They DO have some Disney touches. Those are pertinent facts. But if the question is a yes or no, "Are they Disney?", the answer is no.

No contradiction.

DVCs that used the same "pay for Magic" philosophy would have the same issues...

 

[DisneyKidds]

So Matt wants to be a public defender, eh? Mislead the jury, cast false aspersions, misdirect, call for speculation...... seems you would make a good one .

I object, your honor! Redirect!

What you have done in your cross-examination is compare quotes taken from a discussion using viewpoint number 1, and compared them to quotes clearly made when using viewpoint number 2.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, this is simply not the case. The aforementioned positions by the defendant had nothing to do with what the competition was doing. The defense so stipulates in identifying exhibits one through four as being from viewpoint number 1. In fact, all were taken from a discussion regarding the tangible difference between Disney resorts, and only Disney resorts. Of course, the conversation found it's way into weather or not the 'moderate' resorts were 'Disney'. The Baron was clear on his position that, while some aspects may be nice, through and through the 'moderates' were not Disney, they were no Disney joint at all. But here is where the defense position falls apart. The discussion in which the alleged contradiction occurred, and the entire context of the statements in dispute, had nothing to do with the competition either. The comments had to do with Disney's choice of themeing and ability to carry off good theme in the Disney resorts.

The Moderates ARE very nice. They DO have some Disney touches. Those are pertinent facts. But if the question is a yes or no, "Are they Disney?", the answer is no.

yet we are still faced with this statement by the defendant...............

if we study them individually I think we can agree that they are very well done and for the most part, to some varying degree, Disney through and through.

Not Disney, yet Disney through and through (I remind the jury to not be swayed by the layers of qualification the defendant applies to his statement - they do not change th fact that he said they are Disney through and through).

No contradiction.

I guess that is for the jury to decide .

BTW, I also prefer to stay out of the 'what the competition is doing' aspects as well. If Disney is responding to the same market conditions as competitors I may comment, but in general I don't go much to the cometition and don't get involved in the 'this is better' rhetoric.

While I can certainly understand this (and have come to do it much more myself lately)............

The difference between these two explains how somebody can be very critical of Disney, yet still make WDW their destination.

............it can hardly be the basis for the defense against these charges.

Boy, is the Baron either going to be mad or have fun when they let him out of his cage .

 

[Lesley]

Y'all know that Landbaron is just going to say he "mis-typed" and that he meant something else.....

This is where I lose it with you guys (and gals too!)....all the goofy "meta" discussion of who meant what when they said whatever.

Matt, you did a great job of making sense of it all.....but it seems that DK, scoop and co. just want to catch Landbaron in a contradiction. As if that's so difficult.....

 

[raidermatt]

Very well put, Lesley. DK finds himself in an un-winable case, and so, as any good lawyer would do, he changes the arguement to one of semantics, or presumed contradictions.

Quite clever really.

But, unlike the justice system, the jury that is the DIS membership can see through such tactics, and knows a DVC shanty when it sees it..





(Alright, I know shanty was a "slight" exageration, but it sounded so good...)

 

[DisneyKidds]

Ahhh...justice is blind, the Baron defense team is not - you can see, and you see red. The lynch mob is out of control .

DK finds himself in an un-winable case, and so, as any good lawyer would do, he changes the arguement to one of semantics, or presumed contradictions.

'Objection! Relevance! Approach, your honor' .........

........the defense is clearly trying to cloud the testimony with irrelevant and inflammatory statements.........

'Objection sustained'.

You see, I am not in any un-winable argument. If it please the court, I have been a mostly casual observer in this thread........until the Baron 'engaged' me with a (comment) about the 'moderates', and then committed the alleged contradiction, which was completely unrelated to any arguments made by myself in this thread. I have no reason to change any arguments or to direct the testimony away from any argument.

the jury that is the DIS membership can see through such tactics

Unfortunately, I was not part of the jury selction process .

 

[airlarry!]

You know, the reasons ya'll allegedly caught him in this 'double speak' are:

1. Everything Matt said...

2. Baron doesn't work for Disney's PR department

3. and last, but not least, he IMHO is wrong when he thinks that CBR and PO are not up to the Disney standards. But he is wrong in the specifics of his standard, or in other words the application of his standard to the facts. But he has always told us that...it is the standard that is uncontrovertible not the individual example.

It is better to be wrong, in my opinion, as to the application of Walt's Disney standard to an individual component of WDW, then it is to ignore the standard, as many here do when talking about this subject.

Really, Sir DK, we're not sheep. We just know Lord Baron is right. Let's keep the criticism over LB's comments on moderates in perspective--we're talking about why he thinks a resort just misses the Walt Standard. LB isn't sitting here a year after defending all things Ei$ner and claiming that he knew all along that Ei$ner was bad. That would be worthy of cross-examination, my friend, not this little argument over whether or not LB know thinks the Mods meet the Walt standard.

 

[DisneyKidds]

At the risk of opening the freezer with a blatant car reference, you car 3 folks sure do rally .

Boy, the good lord Baron is going to LOVE how he has been the topic of discussion in his absence (but he doth bring it uponith himself ).

The reasons ya'll (allegedly) caught him in this 'double speak'

LB now thinks the Mods meet the Walt standard.

At least the jury is listening, now if we can make them hear .

then it is to ignore the standard, as many here do when talking about this subject.

Now, your airness, I am not totally familiar with your writing style - so please confirm that this is accusatory innuendo .

Go ask you sheph... the Baron. I, as much as anyone on this board, have taken a recent active interest in getting to know the standard. I am putting in the time, and the length of the shots that Baron and I take on some threads bears witness to that. He and I may interpret fact, action and circumstance differently, but one can hardly say I ignore anything.

[Note - good tactic Mr. Larry. Take me from the offensive and put me on the defensive. Crafty counsel abounds - but it won't work ]

IMHO is wrong when he thinks that CBR and PO are not up to the Disney standards.

Go get him, tiger. I would love to see some car 3 infighting .

Really, Sir DK, we're not sheep.

Scoop and I may be on the same prosecution team, but go get him for the comments regarding the herd . Used to be the folks who weren't in car 3 were the blind faithful following the brand, incapable of free thought. Now it is the others who need to follow something.......... we got em on the run Scoop .

 

[airlarry!]

And another thing.....

How does one down the theme of Fort Wilderness but give props to the theme of the rumored DVC resort? Or, worse, think the alleged themes of the All-stars or, God forbid, the Poop Century motif are more 'Disney' than FW?

 

[airlarry!]

Sir DK, the first rule of Scoopness is to get the sources correct. Else the court reporter shall banish you to the coffee room amid peals of laughter from your colleagues.

My friends, I never actually said:

LB now thinks the Mods meet the Walt standard

What I said was...

whether or not LB know thinks the Mods meet the Walt standard. (misspelling --sic-- included)

Sir DK, am I forced to cross-check all of your quotes of our friend, Lord Baron?

As for infighting, some of us have been on here so long we talk in code. Not necessarily a good thing, but it doesn't mean we all agree. I know how Baron feels about Mods. He's made his case clear. I know how he feels about the Golf Resort. He's made that one clear too. No need to rehash these, right? But if those two things are the only two things he might be wrong about then that's a pretty good record, doncha think?

Besides, everyone knows Monsieur AV is the only one around here who is always right.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

If O.J. was the trail of last century can LandBaron be the trail of THIS century?!?!?

Down to business!!!

A trial!?!? In absentia? I thought I had the right to face my accusers? You’d think they’d wait for a reply from the witness in question. Oh well. I supposed I shouldn’t be surprised. I have to expect such tactics!!



OK!! So!!! On with the “trial”....

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury. One word. And one word only will end this nonsense!

CONTEXT!!!

Do you understand the term, Mr. Kidds? Now, I’m gonna use small words and type real slow so you can understand. What were we talking about when I made this statement?

Of course they miss a beat! THEY ARE NOT DISNEY!!!

or even this one:

I point to Port Orleans and say, “Well it’s nice. And they came so close. But it ain’t no Disney joint!”

Well? Come on. It’s not that hard. Give it a try.

What? A little louder, please. YES!!!! That’s right!! We were talking about STAYING THERE!!! Being a guest!! You remember, actually renting one of the rooms and sleeping in it and living out of it for several days at a time. The entire EXPERIENCE!! Yeah! That’s right!!! (I can just “feel” you “getting it” now.) The “DISNEY” experience. Which, very sadly, falls very short in the moderates. In that CONTEXT!!! they are unquestionably, in my very humble opinion (and the opinion of every thinking Disney fan) NOT Disney. (am I typing slow enough for you to follow this? Am I using words you can easily understand?) Good!! Then we’ll proceed!!

Now lets talk about the recent thread. The one where I said:

I, on the other hand, normally would not consider quibbling about theme. I think it all boils down to taste. Some may not like the Poly and others may LOVE it. I really don't see how that fits in with the current conversation. When I do look at theme choices it becomes personal. To each his/her own. I find each resort (yes even the moderates, Mr. Kidds) to be themed rather nicely. Some more than others, but hey, you gotta justify the price differential somehow, don't you?

Anyway, theme is theme and Disney does it very well. I get a genuine kick out of just about every resort on the property. And if we study them individually I think we can agree that they are very well done and for the most part, to some varying degree, Disney through and through. I certainly hope this takes care of the 'current' regime vs. the 'old' regime (ps, Scoop. I LOVE the water parks, too. Current regime!). I LIKE all the resorts built to date (notable exceptions I think we all know )!! I even LOVE some of them.

OK!! So, the question begs, “what CONTEXT!!! are these paragraphs referring to”? Is it staying there. Is it sleeping over night? Is it whether these places have restaurant facilities? Is it a queen sized bed vs. double beds? Is it, in any way shape or form, talking about the Disney EXPERIENCE? No. No, it’s not. And you know it.

So, in what CONTEXT!!! was it said? That’s right. Architecture. Theme. Period!!


I thank one and all for the wonderful words!! But this really just boils down to (All Together now!!)....

CONTEXT!!!

Your witness!!


ps: Scoop! You said:

Baaaaaahhhhhhhh.........

Is that your considered legal opinion? Or is it your normal courtroom manner?!

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

One more thing. Through all this nonsense two wonderful quotes come shining through. And both are attributed to Sir Larry!

How does one down the theme of Fort Wilderness but give props to the theme of the rumored DVC resort? Or, worse, think the alleged themes of the All-stars or, God forbid, the Poop Century motif are more 'Disney' than FW?

Something I’ve wanted to know for quite some time. For some reason or another Scoop chooses to stand on the sidelines and cheer others rather than get down and dirty himself. Hmmmm. Maybe he thinks he’s above it all. Or perhaps he’s finally figured out that he has an indefensible position. Heck, if I’d been defending Ei$ner for the last two years, I’d go into hiding too!!!

The second gem, of course is:

Besides, everyone knows Monsieur AV is the only one around here who is always right.

Ditto!!

 

[HorizonsFan]

LandBaron:
I intentionally stayed out of the whole trial thing, but after your last couple of posts, I have to ask...
How do you seperate the theme of a resort from the experience of staying there? IMO, the theme coupled with the staff are the biggest part of providing an experience. If the theme is Disney "through and through", and they're staffed with Disney CM's, what is it that keeps those folks staying in the moderates from having a bona fide Disney experience?

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

IMO, the theme coupled with the staff are the biggest part of providing an experience.

IMO, that is but an aspect of it. Theme puts you into a place. Or perhaps a time, but mainly it’s associated with a place. I suppose the best themes do both (Dixie Landings comes to mind). And the staff is wonderful all the time.

However, are there differences in staff levels between the Deluxes and the Mods? Is there a difference in room size? Is there a difference in restaurant choices? Is there a difference in recreational choices? Is there a difference in pools? Is there a difference in philosophy between landscaping (and views) between the two? Did they take pains to hide the parking lot and fulfill their mandate to insure that the outside world not enter the themed “set”? Transportation choices? Distance to the bus stop, restaurant and shopping from the furthest room? Depth of theme is another subjective albeit, very important distinction for me at least. Layout is another distinction that really doesn’t enter into “theme”. And it’s a lot of little things. Did you ever notice that all the deluxes have doors that open automatically. The Mods (at least to the best of my recollection) do not!!

Mostly, Mr. Fans it all those little things that I couldn’t possible put my finger on, but can “feel” and “sense” all the same. Much as one can “feel” the difference between something Disney and something that tries, very, very hard to be Disney. Say like IOA!! Both are WONDERFULLY themed. And yet... there’s just that feeling... that little something... that tells you that one of them, just ain’t Disney!!! Maybe an Imagineer can point it out. Maybe AV can shed some light. But I can do nothing but point out the “feeling” that we have all experienced, but few can explain!!

All these things have nothing, whatsoever to do with the architecture or theme "concept". And that’s what I was talking about in this thread. Theme concept!! Should we build ANOTHER north American fairly modern resort, or should we finally do the Venetian!!?? Or the Asian??? Or the Persian??? Or the Lunar Experience!!??

Understand?

 

[HorizonsFan]

I undestand what you're saying, but I'm not sure I agree completely. Once again, we're back to "the show is in the eye of the beholder". What's lacking for the Landbaron may not even register for Joe Sixpack. His "Disney experience" is not your "Disney experience". His "Disney standards" are not your "Disney standards". It's a personal thing and no amount of "Walt would have done it better!" is going to convince him that he's not having a "Disney experience" that's up to "Disney standards".
I still wonder if your expectations are a bit unrealistic...
Take a look at the quote in your signature. It reads, "Give the people everything you can give them" not "Give the people everything you can dream up".
Is it possible that the moderates and values exist to give the people (all the people, not just those that can afford a Venitian or Asian) everything they can give them (without going in the hole in the process)?
As always, this is just my opinion. I'm no lawyer and you're not on trial as far as I'm concerned...

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

I understand what you're saying, but I'm not sure I agree completely.

I hardly find that surprising!! Do you!?!?

Once again, we're back to "the show is in the eye of the beholder".

Well, not quite.

What's lacking for the Landbaron may not even register for Joe Sixpack. His "Disney experience" is not your "Disney experience".

Very, very true!! I completely - 100% - agree with you!! And if that "experience" works for you, God bless!!

His "Disney standards" are not your "Disney standards".

WRONG!!! The standards are the standards!!! I didn’t make them up! Disney did, when they first created Disneyland and WDW (up to and including EPCOT)! I merely point out the differences, in all three areas. Quality, quantity and price!! This is something that is NOT subjective. Although a real bitc... Ah... Although really hard to do, it is indeed - quantifiable!! Did Disney feel, through it’s philosophical ideals that ‘hiding’ a parking lot was important? Not is it important to you, but was it important to Disney! I’ve never argued that you have to agree with every aspect of the philosophical concept!! Heck, even I don’t!! I just point out the difference. And the Standard is the standards!! It is NOT subjective!! It is not based on individual preferences. It is what it is!! Or at least it WAS what it WAS!!

I still wonder if your expectations are a bit unrealistic...

Very unrealistic!! In fact there has only been one company that lived up to and exceeded my expectations. And that company is no more!! How sad!

Take a look at the quote in your signature. It reads, "Give the people everything you can give them" not "Give the people everything you can dream up".

OK!! Fair enough. Do you really think, for one little heartbeat, that this company is giving us everything they can give us? Forget about the dreaming part! (Ei$ner pretty much put an end to that this week, didn’t he?)

Is it possible that the moderates and values exist to give the people (all the people, not just those that can afford a Venetian or Asian) everything they can give them (without going in the hole in the process)?

Ok two answers for this one!! First: YES!!! Very possible! But I don’t believe for a moment that they would go into a hole. And more importantly they prostituted the standards to do so!! A compromise you may say. Bit some things can’t be compromised. And the standard (or their philosophy, if you will) is one of those things. I contend that this “compromise” started them on the road that ultimately led to Pop Century and that horrible wand over EPCOT! And finally to the obliteration of WDI! Very slippery that slope is. Very slippery indeed!

And second: Come on Dave!!! It doesn’t give ALL the people anything!! Believe it or not there are people in America that can’t afford the All-Stars!! Just so we’re clear, you’re not advocating communism here! Are you? No! I didn’t think so! So there are still “haves” and “have nots” It’s just a matter of where you draw the line!! That’s all! But the line is still there!

As always, this is just my opinion. I'm no lawyer and you're not on trial as far as I'm concerned...

Thank you!! That’s why it’s fun to discuss things with you!!

 

[DisneyKidds]

I will take the time to digest the current Horizons/Baron discussion a little later. Just a few quck thoughts now.....

Sir Larry - yours was the only sentence I may not have used in it's entirety . Couldn't help myself. It is a pretty powerful statement. Even us good guy DIS lawyers have to use what we can .. In the CONTEXT of my comments it is not only powerful, but appropriate. I simply wanted to point out that the jury was listening. The fact that one could even consider the concept of Baron believing the 'mods' meet the standard is significant as far as making my case is concerned .

Good Baron - As HorizonsFan is pointing out, 'Disney through and through' is a pretty strong statement. Too strong, in fact - and you are way too eloquent a speaker to have inadvertantly used it (remember that Freud guy ). So I have to say, if the glove does not fit, I can not acquit. Sorry, but the context glove just don't fit, my friend .