California Grill

[Cricket2]

I still don't see what the big deal is.

If I had to hazzard a guess, 50% of the people see it as a snooty balcony viewing area and 50% see it as a knot-hole free viewing area close to the left field bleachers at a baseball game.

I'd rather be on Main St. watching it from the regular seats with the rest of the riff-raff.

 

[Lewisc]

I don't think Disney should charge UNLESS it could be a dessert/coffee package. Scoop your explanation makes sense. I don't think having people line up or play games with phone reservations makes a lot of sense. It'll cost Disney money without generating any revenue.

Perhaps the best solution is to try to have the observation deck only open to registered guests of the hotel.

Cricket--some people view the fireworks from the Contemporary on a non-park day so they can view the fireworks without burning a park pass. I've gone up to watch the fireworks after having dinner with the family at Chief Mickey's.

 

[WDSearcher]

Originally posted by WebmasterCricket
I still don't see what the big deal is.

If I had to hazzard a guess, 50% of the people see it as a snooty balcony viewing area and 50% see it as a knot-hole free viewing area close to the left field bleachers at a baseball game.

I'd rather be on Main St. watching it from the regular seats with the rest of the riff-raff.

Thank you, Cricket, for saying that! All the fireworks shows at WDW are designed to be seen from the parks that they're in. Seeing them from other locations is something that you can do because fireworks can be seen from far away. But if you're talking about "maintaining the guest experience" -- if that is your main goal here -- the absolute best way to do that is to tell said guest to watch the show from Main Street, where it was designed for you to watch from.

 

[KNWVIKING]

.... have the old timers noticed a difference in the number of people watching from Poly's beach ? Is overcrowding there going to lead to restrictions soon ?

 

[DancingBear]

Also, anybody watched recently from the Contemporary's lower deck area? Was it crowded? Were the speakers working to pump in the music?

 

[crusader]

But, I do like Bretsyboo's idea of a reservation system. You'd have to watch it from being manipulated like the Cinderalla breakfast ressies were, but if you kept that from happening, it wouldn't be a bad idea at all.

I don't know how you would prevent manipulation unless you restricted access similar to pool hopping.

This should be an exclusive benefit to CR guests.

 

[bretsyboo]

I don't know how you would prevent manipulation unless you restricted access similar to pool hopping.

Same way they do over at Bomos trying to stop people from making reservations just to get on property to view the animals.

you don't come you pay.

Reservations are held on a credit card and if you don't show up or call ahead to cancel a certain fee is placed on the card. Fireworks start at 9? Better be there at 8:30 not there by 8:35, no one has heard from you? Someone who happens to be in the lobby of the Contemporary gets a magical moment they might not have even heard of.

If you explain the system to the guests clearly, and you explain WHY the system is in effect to the guests clearly, and (can I repeat it again?) You make everything clear about the importance of time and the Contemporary knowing where you are and the limited venue then you won't have any problems. It's not a revolutionary plan, I call it the "local bowling alley on a saturday night plan."

Ridiculousness and sarcasam aside, the idea that Disney has somehow demeaned guests experience in this case is silly.

I agree, offering the guests something they have loved and adored for years, putting it on a list of reasons people will certainly return to your business, and then taking it away from them because too many people like it, well I can't see how the guest loses at all.

What guest? Certainly not the guest of this particular hotel, The Contemporary.

No, of course not, the very last people that would ever wish to utilize this guest service are the people in the contemporary. People in the lobby, the 2nd floor, and the 15th floor is just way too to ask from those in the contemporary.

How would you feel if paying $300.00 per night to stay at the Contemporary that you arrive home with baby in arms, toddler asleep on his feet, adults draggin' and got to the elevator only to find 200 people in front of you trying to get to the roof for fireworks?

HORRIBLE! This is why I advocate, and always have, all parks closing at 5 PM, you have 8 hours to play in the parks and then people won't be running around a hotel at some ungodly late hour, like 10 PM, to watch fireworks.

In fact I think that there should be a curfew regardless of park close. After all, if you happen to be going up to your room during Wishes or Illuminations only to find 200 (well not 200 the actual capacity for what I said earlier...civility...magic...is maybe 50) people all showing up at precisely the same time waiting to get up the elevator to experience magic while your kid sleeps, well just think about what is about to happen.

The fireworks shows are closing shows, so I might go out on a limb and say that in that particular day more that 200 people from the magic kingdom and epcot might be rushing home and trying to use those elevators 20 minutes later if you can believe that. Incredibly rude.

Enough said. End of discussion.

Once again, I 100% am right with you. End this thread. Peter has settled the matter.

 

[DC7800]

Originally posted by crusader This should be an exclusive benefit to CR guests.

I don't really like the present idea of requiring a CG prioroty-seating to use the deck, but regardless of what system is implemented to manage access to the roof, Comtemporary Resort guests should always have free, unimpeded access. It's their resort after all, and they're the ones paying for it. There should be more than sufficient capacity to handle both CG and CR crowds. Compared to some other suggestions, there is at least precedent for this, as resort pools are similarly restricted.

Again, this is hardly ideal. I don't think a new. larger deck (maybe with direct acess from the Grand Canyon Concourse) is the answer, if such a deck were even workable (it could cause more problems than it solved, not to mention the aesthetic considerations). Probably the only thing worse is a first-come first-served plan, which would in fact be the eventual result if nothing was done at all (with the CG eventually mobbed by people trying to crowd onto the deck).

I would have much preferred to have left the deck just like it has been for decades, but it may be too late for that. If removing tables (reducing CG capacity) or remodeling the CG to permit more direct deck access, would solve the problem I'd be all for it. However, like resort pool enforcement, unless there is overcrowding or something, there is no need to check resort ID's, so the occasional person who really wants to watch the fireworks can be accomodated.

 

[Lewisc]

Originally posted by bretsyboo
Same way they do over at Bomos trying to stop people from making reservations just to get on property to view the animals.

you don't come you pay.

Reservations are held on a credit card and if you don't show up or call ahead to cancel a certain fee is placed on the card.

Disney stopped do that years ago. A PS at Bomos is handled the same as any other restaurant.

No, of course not, the very last people that would ever wish to utilize this guest service are the people in the contemporary. People in the lobby, the 2nd floor, and the 15th floor is just way too to ask from those in the contemporary.

The observation deck can't handle everyone. Giving preference to CG and Contemporary hotel guests makes sense to me. A guest without a MK view from their room might very well like watching Wishes from the observation deck.

After all, if you happen to be going up to your room during Wishes or Illuminations only to find 200 (well not 200 the actual capacity for what I said earlier...civility...magic...is maybe 50) people all showing up at precisely the same time waiting to get up the elevator to experience magic while your kid sleeps, well just think about what is about to happen.

Not everyone see the closing show every night. Contemporary guests who are coming or going really shouldn't have to wait 20 minutes for an elevator. The guests may be going to PI, DTD or even just to the arcade.

Disney could probably solve this problem by only using one elevator for CG access and making the fireworks people wait longer for an elevator.

 

[raidermatt]

Notice the words "simply because" and "other major reasons".

Scoop, as ususal you apparently did not bother to read all of my post, or you would have noticed I specifically said you were not saying that's the only reason.

If you had read that, you would have realized there was no reason to list the other reasons, as I had already acknowledged that to be the case. I only said the boards had become a major reason when in the not too distant past they were not considered a major reason by some.

As you have stated you are not backtracking, there is apparently agreement on that point.

As for quoting, well, if you don't mean it, don't say it. But more to the point, read the ENTIRE response to the quote before making your determination about the quote being taken out of context.

I'm trying to decide here which one was the culprit -- the decision to mess with the layout of the restaurant, or the fact that more people know about it.

Honestly, I believe the underlying reason a change needed to be made was the popularity. Messing with the layout exacerbates the issue, but it would have existed anyway. I only have a problem with the idea that if a problem would exist anyway, something that improves the situation but does not completely solve it is not worth considering.

Its like if you have an overcrowded freeway that needs 3 new lanes to run smoothly... If you can add only one, or as a more accurate analogy, avoid taking one away, that's still helpful to the situation.

What guest? Certainly not the guest of this particular hotel, The Contemporary.

Hopefully your point is just that the successful operation of the hotel for its guests and diners should be of a higher priority than the accessability of its features to other guests of WDW, right? Not that the vast majority of those who are not staying at the hotel or eating at CG are not guests of WDW?

Assuming that's what you meant, I do agree. I just think that some of the things mentioned, as well as some that more talented folks than I could come up with, could be done to improve the situation.

 

[crusader]

But Bret at Boma's aren't you making a dining reservation for a fixed priced buffet which is the fee being charged? And I thought you were only required to give your credit card info if your party was a certain number.

What is it you're making a rsvp for at the balcony? Are you saying there should be something sold there?

 

[Lewisc]

Originally posted by raidermatt

Hopefully your point is just that the successful operation of the hotel for its guests and diners should be of a higher priority than the accessability of its features to other guests of WDW, right? Not that the vast majority of those who are not staying at the hotel or eating at CG are not guests of WDW?

I think non-resort guests using the resorts is increasingly becoming a problem. Look at the endless threads on pool hopping/crashing, parking abuse, the beach at POLY and so on.

The resorts were built to handle the occupancy of the hotel. The observation deck at the Contemporary and the POLY beach weren't built to accommodate all the people who want to watch Wishes without entering MK. It is irrelevant if the guests are staying at another WDW resort or offsite.

I stayed at PBH twice. Much more relaxing than the Disney deluxe resorts. Even when it's sold out it isn't as overcrowded as the Disney hotels. I'm not sure if the pool/common areas are larger, relative to the number of rooms, that the Disney resorts or if the Disney resorts just have a lot more non-resort guests visiting the resort.

 

[raidermatt]

Separate reply, rather than snake another shift into my last post....

It would only take a small fraction of the daily visitors to WDW who have done so to overcrowd the viewing platform.

This is true, but I'm not saying anything other than a small fraction are really using these sources. I'm just saying (and some are agreeing), that a significant number are. One or two percent is enought to throw small things, like the CG balcony, out of whack, and 5-10% is enough to impact a LOT of things.

I'm not sure what the number is, of course, but we know that whatever it is, it continues to grow.

That population of folks is still MUCH larger than the folks who care enough about Mickey butter to come on this board and complain about it (and of course also much larger also than those who come on this board to defend such actions).

Yes, true. But what we don't know is how many lurk/read, but don't get involved in the discussions. There's also folks who share the same opinions (on either side of a given discussion), but just don't get involved in internet discussions.

What we do know is that if Scoop is right, that the true philosophy is changing, then many of the things pointed out as problems on these types of boards were apparently shared by enough guests to encourage at least some level of change.

Even if it is all just window dressing for the scrutiny the 50th will bring to all of the parks, it still means Disney realizes enough people do care about some of these issues to cause them trouble if they don't fix them.


What does it all mean? I don't know.

 

[YoHo]

You know, there is no right answer to any of this. Part of me agrees with the sentiment that you should get your butt back to mainstreet, because otherwise you're not seeing the show as envisioned. This hits home if you've ever seen DL's Imagine A Fantasy in the Sky or Believe. It's bizarre to be standing by RoA or IaSW and see the primary fireworks to the left while the castle shots are to the right and if you so them all from mainstreet they'd line up perfectly.

But restrictions isn't a very disney thing to do either.
I like Bret's proposal a lot. The hotel guests can sod off. restrict the Fireworks to 1 elevator and you don't have an issue.


But maybe the best solution would be to create more hidden spots to view the fireworks from?

I don't know where, but I'm sure it's entirely possible to create plent of magical spots along the monorail.


Last time I was at the Poly in 1999 there were only a dozen or so people on the beach watching the fireworks in June. That was a Dozen including the boat dock and the entire stretch of beach. Has it really gotten so bad in the last 5 years that these places are that crowded?

 

[Lewisc]

Originally posted by raidermatt

Yes, true. But what we don't know is how many lurk/read, but don't get involved in the discussions. There's also folks who share the same opinions (on either side of a given discussion), but just don't get involved in internet discussions.

Scoop's point was things like the Travel Channel's Disney Secrets programs spreads the "secrets" more than the just the internet. Some of Mary's (mousesavers) suggestions have been quoted in maintream travel articles.

 

[raidermatt]

I think non-resort guests using the resorts is increasingly becoming a problem. Look at the endless threads on pool hopping/crashing, parking abuse, the beach at POLY and so on.

That's an interesting observation, and maybe this CG discussion is really just a test case for how we think that problem should be dealt with.

I've only gotten involved in the CG discussions sporadically, because to me, its really such a small move in the grand scheme, and its clear there was a problem that needed to be addressed.

But what if we take a step back and look at the general philosophy that should be employed, instead of focusing on the details about layouts, traffic pattern, elevator capacities, etc, since nobody here has all of that information anyway.

First off, its a problem created by the tiered hotel strategy. After all, we don't hear of flocks of Poly guests causing overcrowding at the PC pool. Now, for the purposes of this discussion, that's not to say this problem means the tiered hotel strategy (did I hear a voice from Illinois shout something about a "caste something"?) is wrong. Just that it does create, or at the least, significantly exacerbates, this particular issue.

Taking the hard line approach isn't optimal, and I think Disney knows that. Regardless of where you are staying, conceptually Disney does want you to feel like you are free to come and go in the "World". Making things like observation decks and pools off-limits to guests of other hotels/restaurants intrudes on that idea. I'm sure Disney also hopes that a PC guest will go check out the CR and decide they'd like to stay there next time.

But is the hard line approach the only answer? When things get too crowded, do we simply say it has to be shut off to the "non-paying" guests?

What if eventually that does happen to the Poly beach? Or the monorail?

Let's say attendance soars over the next few years. New records are set. Guests at the MK area resorts have to wait for more and more people before they can get on the monorail (just like that poor family Peter described trying to catch the elevator at the Contemp).

If it just gets too crowded, should Disney then make the monorail for guests of MK hotels only?

Is that the solution?

 

[Lewisc]

Originally posted by raidermatt
If it just gets too crowded, should Disney then make the monorail for guests of MK hotels only?

Is that the solution?

There are 2 monorails, express and resort. Park guests shouldn't be allowed to park at the POLY and take the monorail from there. Perhaps at park closing the resort monorail should check for resort ID's or for a half hour skip the TTC stop.

The problem isn't just the tiered hotel strategy. SAB can't handle the crowds even if you limited to guests of other deluxe hotels. I don't think the POLY beach or Contemporary observation deck could handle the crowds even if they limited access to other deluxe hotel guests. Hotel facilities are built to handle the capacity of the hotel.

The travel channel, internet, guide books... are making last years secrets general knowledge. A handful of extra guests at the Contemporary isn't the problem.

I think a hard line approach is probably the only fair way to handle the situation. Other hotels discourage non-guests by charging for parking. Disney might start by either charging non-guests for parking or eliminating non-guest parking and having the guests use Disney transportation.

 

[YoHo]

The solution is to have a firckin master plan.


It's exactly like the monorail thread. We can look at each individul problem as just that a unique and distinct issue with no reference ro relevence to anything else, or we could not be dumb and realize that everything in the resort is interconnected. It's WDW Chaos theory.

I would say Disney hasn't operated in that way in probably 10 years and that it shows.

It's the Circle of life, they need to have a master plan that addresses everything and looks at the cause and effect of everything instead of scurrying around from small issue to small issue spackling over the problem like an inept home handyman.

 

[bretsyboo]

Alright, I feel like my time in this thread is quickly coming to an end.
I think in some cases the point is being missed.

Disney stopped do that years ago. A PS at Bomos is handled the same as any other restaurant.

Is this an aside? I don't see the point in it. My point wasn't to copy whatever Bomas is doing, my point is Look! there is a solution that has already been invented and implemented before! Bomas and the AKL in general have had their newness, curiosity, and therefore demand wear off from when this system was needed. So long as the contemp needs this system they should go with it.

But Bret at Boma's aren't you making a dining reservation for a fixed priced buffet which is the fee being charged? And I thought you were only required to give your credit card info if your party was a certain number.

Again, the point isn't what Bomas was, the point is the system used to handle the demand and the possibility that capacity won't be reached when it obviously should, because of the RSVP system.

But, no, nothing is for SALE. Bomas didn't charge you a buffett, it put 10 bucks on your card, or at least did at one time. If you didn't show up, you were charged 10 dollars, if you didn't you weren't and you paid for your dinner in any way you wanted.

Apply it here and nothing is for sale. In the idea that scoop brought up you are raising prices to lower value and in essence lower demand.

Lowering value and demand at Disney is Always a bad thing.

Not raising prices mind you, going with the natural curve of the economy is just fine, but I'll repeat again...

Lowering value and demand at Disney is Always a bad thing.

This does not do that. If you show up, it's free. If you call ahead and cancel say...20 hours before or whenever it's free. Your experience is the exact same as before. A free viewing of fireworks. The only time this costs money is when you are taking the spot of someone else who tried to get a reservation but was just a little late. That's not fair for that guest, and that's why I don't have a problem of making it an incentive that you honor your reservation, or give the Contemp proper time to call someone on a waiting list so that your irresponsibility doesn't effect another guests experience. This is not anything for sale.

The observation deck can't handle everyone. Giving preference to CG and Contemporary hotel guests makes sense to me. A guest without a MK view from their room might very well like watching Wishes from the observation deck.

I don't mind, and have never agued against, a set number of spots available to Contemp guests first. Neither does this. So make 25 of 50 spots only for the hotel fine. As for the restaurant they have more than enough room in the rest of the restaurant to have perfect views of the fireworks. The idea is to have the area straight to your right, that used to be a lobby of sorts remain that way, and seperate from the restaurant experience. One main reason people dine their is to have the fireworks experience, and they should certainly have their own spot on the balcony. Their table should be their reservation for standing out there. I'm not talking about taking anything like that away. I'm talking about getting back what was taken away.

Not everyone see the closing show every night. Contemporary guests who are coming or going really shouldn't have to wait 20 minutes for an elevator. The guests may be going to PI, DTD or even just to the arcade.

come on now.

We aren't taking about a huge number of guests as was previously stated. You can name the number yourself but Even if they all arrived at the exact same time, you aren't waiting 20 minutes for an elevator. Beyond this let's remember the contemporary. You can't even get to the 15th floor from the elevators below the 4th floor. There is a monorail there that disperses guests, and heck, by my memory I will conservatively say there are at least 6 elevators in the thing.

Why is there this idea that mobs of people are clogging up this hotel?

No rather I already knew that not everyone stays for the closing numbers THANKS, but I'm thinking you probably already know that the Contemporary is a massive hotel with a monorail that runs threw it directly from 2 theme parks and that it actually does an excellent job of dispersing guests. I would gather that there is a rush every night of hundreds of guests returning to their room from the parks either by monorail or through the first floor, and let's be honest. These people getting on an elevator in 30 years has never been a problem. The monorail itself, the time between the trains arriving, the amount of contem guests per train, the length of the walk from the park, or the wait to get on a tram, get to your car and drive back...the guest situation at the contemp is excellent considering its location. The idea that these guests going to see the fireworks are clogging up this hotel and causing 20 minute wait for elevators is...well...I don't want to get banned.

But I'd imagine it's the same clog of people arriving home at 6:30 at the same time that people are going to the concourse steak house at the same time people are going to the CG and the same time people are going to the arcade, etc. Crowd control outside of the restaurant itself has never been the problem.

I think non-resort guests using the resorts is increasingly becoming a problem. Look at the endless threads on pool hopping/crashing, parking abuse, the beach at POLY and so on.

This is actually a ve4ry easy problem to deal with. People like monorails, boats, fireworks, things you can do and see from places like the poly, the contemporary, wilderness lodge. They like petting zoos and nice restaurants, and animals in fields, etc. etc. etc. They like all of the different experiences in these hotels.

And so I'd imagine it's pretty reasonable to expect that someone from wilderness lodge is watching animals while someone from AKL is eating at Hoop De Doo while someone is eating at the california grill from the poly while another is watching the fireworks while eating at the poly.

This sort of thing has been happening for 30 years.

Why is it a problem now?

More guests people say, no that's not true. Increased capacity and other resort experiences should in theory level that off.

Because these things are for WDW guests, and that has expanded in recent years with new resorts.

What does it is that while someone from the all stars or pop century is at another resort, there is no reason for someone at that other resort to go to the all stars or pop century.

You are giving more people access to the same facilities without any incentive to stay at their hotel or other people to visit it. You want less demand? Don't charge money. Don't close it. Give the people somewhere else to go. Give them a reason to visit the land of fiberglass.

 

[DC7800]

Originally posted by raidermatt
Let's say attendance soars over the next few years. New records are set. Guests at the MK area resorts have to wait for more and more people before they can get on the monorail (just like that poor family Peter described trying to catch the elevator at the Contemp).

If it just gets too crowded, should Disney then make the monorail for guests of MK hotels only?

In the specific example of the monorail, you can always add capacity to meet demand (more trains or cars on existing trains), and you load the trains to reflect traffic patterns.

I don't think you can add sufficient capacity to solve the CR's deck issues, at least not without causing other problems. Now, creating other "magical' viewing spots around the Seven Seas Lagoon is another matter, and in fact an excellent suggestion. Rather than the "hard-line" restrictions, you instead intice people with other viewing spots. Unfortunately, there is only one resort in the MK area with the elevation of the CR, so we need some creative alternatives.

I think non-resort guests using the resorts is increasingly becoming a problem. Look at the endless threads on pool hopping/crashing, parking abuse, the beach at POLY and so on.

Depends on what elements of the resort they're using, and at what cost. Disney wants guests (presumably any guest) visiting its properties to dine (or shop) in the resort restaurants, and there should usually be adequate capacity to permit those guests (on or off-site) to use some hotel amenities before/after they dine. I'm sure that a Polynesian (or other resorts') guest has went in search of dinner only to find that hotels restaurants all booked solid with visitors from other WDW reosrts (or off-site guests). But they could have made a PS themselves - as could anyone - so that's not an issue. Pools are another matter, hence the restrictions in place.