California Grill

[DancingBear]

Originally posted by airlarry!
Epcot's abandonment of the hub and spoke design was idiotic in my opinion....but there is a difference, you would agree Sir DB, between experimenting and willy-nilly expansion.

You are the first person that I can recall to make the statement that, if I understand you correctly, that expansion at the WDW resort under M. Ei$ner has been 'masterly' planned.

I suggest to you that a closer examination of your resort map would lead to the opposite reaction.

On what basis has the adding of the values, the two new parks, the EPCOT hotels, the DTD area, the water parks...how have any of these been more than the random development of unused property (oh how I wish I had handy that quote of Eisner's--how there was so much underutilized property just waiting to be developed). Ei$ner was sitting there with plenty of land, and he threw jacks across the table knowing that he had the reach to scoop them up. It is not as you intimate impossible to design this resort with expansion and with traffic flow and do a better job than the Disney Development Corporation.

Of course it is always possible to do "better." That doesn't mean that no plan existed, or that development hasn't followed some logical patterns.

You act as if ("willy-nilly expansion") the on-property development is equivalent to what occurred along 192. That's preposterous. Without a tremendous amount of planning, there wouldn't even exist the infrastructure to support the All-Stars, AKL, etc.

Look at the Boardwalk area. My understanding is that the Swan and Dolphin were on the boards prior to Eisner's arrival as non-Disney operated high-rise hotels, and Eisner quickly steered those into the hands of an internationally-acclaimed architect in Michael Graves. Then the Yacht Club, Beach Club and Boardwalk were all designed by another internationally-acclaimed architect, Robert A.M. Stern (also one of the master designers of Celebration), which when completed have given a cohesiveness of sorts to the area between the Studios and Epcot, and allowed a lot of visitors to get to those two parks on foot or by boat in lieu of on the road system.

 

[bretsyboo]

hard to believe disney can afford to have a reservation system anywhere huh?

Especially when in this case it would be the cost of the same CM on the 2nd floor already giving people access to the cali grille, and the same cm's phone people would call, and the same computer program they use for any other reservation system. For simplicity they might want to add a new window.

As I said many years ago we did the same system at the bowling alley I worked at, and in fact the system came in I think 2 weeks after I started there. We didn't hire anyone new, and as of last chck, that bowling alley was somehow still in business.

Oh, and you are dealing with someone who thinks that guest satisfaction is of such importance that if it takes a reservation system to have maximum guest satisfaction and it keeps em coming back, by all means do it.

Just how much money do you think Disney would lose TAKING RESERVATIONS?

And just how much of a profit margin do you think Disney needs before increasing guest satisfaction is just asking too much?

No one is requesting they build a 16th floor to add to firework viewing, but I don't think that a reservation system used at millions of places all over the world has Disney saying, "sorry, we can't afford to make you happier, it's just not worth it."

I could go with a million lines about how money comes directly from guest satisfaction, or how what's important is the resort as a whole and a magical experience likes this makes someone far more likely to come back to the resort and give disney a profit, as well as seeing up close the merits of the CG that might make them want to eat there, or that there are a whole host of little touches that cost wise are nothing to disney but are value wise everything to it's guests...or that yeah, even if this cost disney 500 dollars a day to get absolutly nothing in return, that sort of dedication to giving the guests everything they can is just why people shell out far more from their experience.

But instead I'll wonder why Disney has half filled balconies and empty buildings, cheapened attractions and parks sitting closed far more hours of the day then they used to, all because the profits weren't large enough to justify the costs of things like CM's...a new way of guest service...mass produced butter in a rectangal shape so that you don't have to spend money on a round shape...or as someone else put it...

"Hell it'd be cheaper not to build it at all"

 

[KNWVIKING]

***"You're increasing the onsite capacity in terms of rooms, but not increasing the amenities to match. "***

How do you figure ? While obviously PC resorts don't have the same amenities as Poly, but overall The World has added many more activities as the resorts have grown. Water parks, mini golf, West Side, Circ do Sol, fishing tours, Bike and Boat plans, carriage rides, AK, etc.

 

[airlarry!]

Ah, then we agree it is not impossible to have planned this resort better. Perhaps we are right, then, that there was a little more money grubbing than master planning being done down there. Extended further, perhaps the Baron is correct that the changes to the Grille exacerbated or created a problem, and that these changes were done without planning aforethought and with every intention of blind profit-taking.

You are edging ever closer to the abyss. Keep walking, DB, keep walking toward the light.

 

[DancingBear]

Originally posted by bretsyboo
hard to believe disney can afford to have a reservation system anywhere huh?

Especially when in this case it would be the cost of the same CM on the 2nd floor already giving people access to the cali grille, and the same cm's phone people would call, and the same computer program they use for any other reservation system. For simplicity they might want to add a new window.

This isn't that difficult:

Cost: Yes, we have a reservation system in place, but of course there is are marginal increases involved in taking, changing and enforcing reservations for, say 80 people a night for fireworks viewing, shuffling those folks around, providing security for them, etc. If we have to create and monitor a special reserved area for CR guests, even moreso.

Benefit: This is not a direct revenue-producing activity. Some people think there will be increased guest satisfaction, but we have to evaluate the marginal increase in guest satisfaction (over alternatives like the fourth floor viewing area) considering that some folks will be dissatisfied with the experience for some reason ("We got charged $10 each for missing our ressie, even though we had a good excuse." "How come those folks [CR guests] have a special reserved area?" "They let too many folks up here."). In making this evaluation, we must consider that folks who have had to go through the reservation process will have higher expectation levels. Also, any time we create an opportunity for a special experience which is only available to a limited number of guests, we find that many folks complain about being excluded. Finally, even this controlled process will impact the experience available to our valued California Grill customers.

 

[DancingBear]

Originally posted by airlarry!
Ah, then we agree it is not impossible to have planned this resort better. Perhaps we are right, then, that there was a little more money grubbing than master planning being done down there.

Yeah, that's the logic. Since planners could have done better, there must not have been a master plan.

But wait, since I've shown even the original WDW planners could have done better, I guess there never, ever was a master plan. That follows, right?

What rubbish.

 

[raidermatt]

A true master plan isn't just a monorail plan, or where the next park/hotel is going to go. Even if you throw in a complete transportation plan for that new park/hotel its not yet a master plan.

A master plan includes EVERYTHING. Figuring out where those guests at PC are going to spend their time, and not just their park time, is part of it as well.

If they do indeed have a master plan with this kind of detail, it can only be assumed that either (A), it has a very different focus from what "The Philosophy" would dictate, or (B), its being implemented in a piece-meal, maybe even haphazard fashion.

"Well, we need to upgrade the transportation system because of the new hotels/parks, but that involves a HUGE capital expenditure, so that part will need to wait...."

"Well, these thousands of PC guests are going to try to utilize the services at our deluxe resorts, so we'll see where they go and just shut them out if it gets too crowded..."

"SAB is gettng too crowded, so instead of upgrading the pools at other hotels to meet the demand for this kind of pool, lets close it to hopping..."

"The monorail is getting too crowded so lets..."

 

[raidermatt]

Ok, I'd really like to at least find SOME kind of common ground here.

Is there anyone who is suggesting that the planning today is geared to the same purpose as it once was. That the INTENT is to make everything work for the guest, you know, THE PHILOSOPHY.

I'm not asking if everything is or was perfect. Only whether or not you believe that the INTENT is to integrate everything to the extent it was once intended.

Are some saying things have not changed for the worse, or is it merely a difference of degree?

 

[bretsyboo]

How do you figure ? While obviously PC resorts don't have the same amenities as Poly, but overall The World has added many more activities as the resorts have grown. Water parks, mini golf, West Side, Circ do Sol, fishing tours, Bike and Boat plans, carriage rides, AK, etc.

I'll explain the difference. Most of what you are talking about here are open to everyone regardless of where they are staying. We are talking the entire world, and if the entire world shows up to WDW no one expects them to have that sort of capacity. If you show up on XMas from your place on I Drive and the Magic Kingdom is closed, then you can't complain.

It's different though for resort guests. Resort guests have free parking because everyone is equal, so no matter where you are staying, you are staying everywhere. Resort guests staying at the poly can go to any other resort because just because they are staying at the poly doesn't mean disney is going to deny them any other resorts. Swim over at another hotel, it doesn't matter, the entire property is yours! (edit-it was pointed out you can no longer do this. I'm not suprised.)

Now, you can get into a resort as an outsider if you plan to dine. Essentially you are saying that you are going to pay to use that hotel. And no they won't check your ID getting on or off of the monorail but that's because they know it's not a big problem. Wide spread guests leaving their car elsewhere to have some long trek back to their vehicles doesn't happen much...and because it's not a problem then they aren't being denied, and that's fine.

But when it comes to specific things at the resorts they are meant for guests of the WDW resort. You can look at animals, ride the WL boat, swim in the waters of the poly (in the good ole days) go down the dragons tounge at port orleans whatever.

But now we have increased capacity on the resort itself. but not increased amenities for WDW guests.

Take swimming pools as an example. The swimming pools, not even the biggest ones, can possible handle a ton of capacity. But because there are enough of them, because the hotels all have some place to swim, you don't get overloaded.

Imagine if the all stars and the pop century hadn't been built with swimming pools. Hords of guests going over to other resorts to swim there.

The most popular pool on property is french quarters. So let's say it becomes so popular that there is over crowding and so disney...closes it.

Those people are going to go somewhere else.

So here we have hotels that have build up a ton of capacity, but nothing for that capacity to DO there. So they go elsewhere. Now the CG deck is closed. So they go elsewhere. Maybe somewhere where they spend money, but they are elsewhere.

Maybe they are at the poly making those places too crowded.

If you have capacity problems you have three ways to solve the problems.

1.Expand
2.Close it
3.make it less desirable for guests

Guess where my vote is.

It's apparent through this discussion that Disney is lacking enough family things for guests to do during the early night. Closing the deck doesn't help that problem at all.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

MR. BOO!!!! Thank you!!!!

"Hell it'd be cheaper not to build it at all"

Philosophically, almost all inclusive!!! One of my favorite Walt moments. The very core of The Philosophy. If you understand nothing but the meaning behind this quote, you know more about the Disney Philosophy than almost every higher level exec who works there and some of the people on most of the Disney fan web sites!!!

And how apropos for this discussion!! Thanks again!!

I've never seen a duplicate post within the same post. Was that intentional ?

Purely unintentional, I assure you!! A victim of the cut and paste method!! It finally bit me!!

In Epcot, all viewing areas were intended to be free for all paying guests. Disney simply chose to take away the prime spots and charge a fee for guests willing to pay.

And they charged before for the Deck? Or… They intended to charge but never did? Or… It was never intended to be free? Or… It was NOT a prime spot? OR… They didn’t take it away for only guests willing to pay? Pick and choose, Mr. Viking. Any or all. I see NO difference whatsoever!!!

but the point is that it is very different from the Epcot experience.

Tell me again how they are ‘very different’!!

Wether you want to believe it or not, the deck crowds were starting to interfer with the resort and dinner guest at CG

Only because they re-configured the dining/lounge area. For 25 years there was no problem at all. And even if I buy the argument that HOARDS and THRONGS of people were massing there nightly (which I don’t), we armchair Imagineers have come up with several viable solutions within 24 hours!! I’m quite sure Disney could outshine us in concept and implementation if they wanted to. The point is:

THEY DIDN’T WANT TO!!!!

Why? See above referenced EPCOT Viewing argument otherwise known as:

“Disney® - every square inch a profit center!”

 

[crusader]

Yeah, that's the logic. Since planners could have done better, there must not have been a master plan.

That's pretty much the logic on just about everything. It's easy to argue coulda shoulda woulda.

Great post by the way.

 

[bretsyboo]

Disney through epcot was a cohesive unit under a plan.

The plan didn't disappear in 1984 but it did dissolve.

The placement of the pop century resorts was like there wasn't even an attpempt.

Now you can argue if you want, and that's fine. Fact was through epcot there was a magical way to get to and from almost every place on property. Fact of the matter is even from within the parks there was a plan on how to disperse the guests. Epcot still has the largest paths of any park and there were those nice little swan boats you could take around the lagoon.

Magic kingdom had a skyway, a train, main street vehicles, and a people mover.

And complain if you will about the campground but...it was a boat ride away from the MK and it had a train that would travel around the property.

Now compare that to WDW's latest. I love animal kingdom but the amount of paths they have is pathetic and they admit it so. There one form of alternative transportation is the train to rafikis planet watch is a train with virtually no sites and also happens to be the ONLY way to get to the planet watch meaning both AK and MGM only have one way to get ANYWHERE. Epcot does now I believe, I don't think you can take swan boats or ferry's as transportation, but it did.

As for the parks themselves the magic kingdom even had two different ways to get to the front gate, ferry or monorail. It opened as a full park with plenty of attractions to gobble guests up and Epcot opened as an all day park with it's attractions and it's park in general having astoundingly large capacities. In the coming years the Living Seas and Horizens only underscored that point.

MGM openend with NOTHING but a way for a bus to get there, and somehow DAK opened with less.

The resorts have always had so many experiences within themselves it would make you ill to think of what you've been missing out on.

Now compare, the contemporary:
3 buildings
1008 rooms
activities available:
Arcade
Boat Rental
Butterfly House
Cruises(Specialty)
Electrical Water Pageant
Fishing
Health Club (5 Life Circuit Stations, 11 Cybex Statio Hand weights up to 50 lbs., Stairmasters, Life Cycles, Treadmills, massage service that by the way charges you 50 dollars if you don't cacnel within 4 hours)
Jogging
Marina
Parasailing
Personal Watercraft Operation
Playground
Pool (2)
Pool Tables
Sammy Duvall's Watersports Centre
Tennis (6 courts temporarily closed due to hurricane damage)
Tubing
Volleyball
Wake Boarding
Water Skiing

Food:
California Grill Lounge
Chef Mickey's
Concourse Steakhouse
Contemporary Grounds
Food And Fun Center
Outer Rim
Room Service
Sand Bar

Shops:
BVG (Bay View Gifts)
Concourse Sundries and Spirits
Fantasia
Pin Central

There are so many different options to spread out guests and not have crowds be a problem you could only do contemporary stuff and easily have a week long vacation.

Now, pop century
10 buildings (talk about needing that wilderness train!)
2,880 rooms

activities:
Arcade
Playground
Pools (3)

food:
Classic Concoctions (food court)
Everything Pop (also a shop...not open yet I don't think, a part of the food court)
Petals
Pizza Delivery

shop:
Everything Pop
Hair Wraps

IS there any wonder why the other resorts are having capacity problems with their offerings? Was this anyway to plan? Anyone can hack and hack and hack and hack the pre 84 way all they want, but if you do you can't possibly say their current planning is anywhere near equal.

 

[crusader]

Bret

how could you conveniently jump from the contemporary to the pop century to contrast resorts pre and post 84 with no regard for the epcot area?

It's not a fair presentation at all.

 

[bretsyboo]

crusader,

1.the contemporary was the main part of this thread, which is why I used it as the pre 84 example

2.the pop century is the most recent non dvc wdw expansion.

If the contention today is that the planning is near yesterday these should be similar.

But say the word and I'll post the facts on any of the Epcot hotels, and you can see if they compare to the pop century. I'd really like to hear what you did think was a fair comparison to the pop century.

I bet there are hotels post 84 with just as much to do, obviously the floridian would be one, but it's my contention that any hotel pre 84 had more than enough to do so that guests weren't flooding to other resorts without the other resorts flooding right back to them.

And remember I only ever speak for me. My arguement was that the plan didn't disappear in 84, it simply dissolved to what it is today.

 

[YoHo]

Probably, because Poop century and the allstars offer the biggest increases in crowding at other resorts.




I want to clarify something from earlier.

When I said friendship cruises, I was not refering to the International gateway, I was referring to the two boats that ran from the base of World Showcase to Morrocco and (crap I can't remember) Essentially crossing the spoke.

 

[airlarry!]

DB, rubbish?

Listen, I can't prove the negative other than to show you reality. I can only inject common sense into this discussion. I can't show you a video of the pilfering of the masterplan nor can I play for you tapes of Ei$ner and the DDC brainstorming for dollars signs.

But I don't need to. We've pointed out for years on this site and others that Disney has expanded and done so without thinking big picture. Heck, anyone who can see the forest can see that.

I'll gladly turn it around. Start with the Grille. Move up to the Resorts. Finish with the Disney transportation system. Tell me how this place accomplishes Walt's goal.

You can't.

Every stop sign, every park built with bus service only, every resort splattered about with no connection to the parks other than by bus, skewers your argument. Every traffic light spits in Walt's face and tells him that money is more important than improving man's transportation needs. The whole resort, in Walt's mind, was a testing ground for new ideas. What new idea since 1984 in the masterplan of this resort has been exhibited?

Stop fighting yourself, man. Don't let your preoccupation with mickey shaped margarine cause you to lose sight of where Ei$ner truly went wrong.

 

[crusader]

I think this thread had spun off into a great discussion on planning and infrastructure using transportation as the main focal point. Pool hopping was mentioned briefly as a situation which had to be handled due to capacity and guest interference issues somewhat similar to the observation deck issue.

Which incidentally, pool hopping never really became a problem until SAB.

But somehow pool hopping migrated into a full blown resort comparison which is a much broader issue.

Planning and expansion to include values is not a problem for me. I believe Disney is for all of us and these resorts replace affordable accomodations for that budget conscious camper of my day.

But when the values were built they were packed. The guest pretty much utilized the resort pools and food courts and hung out all night there because they are more comfortable in their own space. That hasn't changed.

I'm not sure what you mean when you ask me for a "fair" comparison to pop century. But I'd be happy to explore it.

 

[YoHo]

So if the Value resort people are spending all night at the Values, then who are these new Fireworks viewers that are congesting CG?

 

[bretsyboo]

you said compaing the contemp and the pop was unfair, so I said, ok tell me what is fair.

Planning and expansion to include values is not a problem for me. I believe Disney is for all of us and these resorts replace affordable accomodations for that budget conscious camper of my day.

Ahhh, but Crusader, that's the beauty in it, before this happened the resorts were all priced the same and far below what they are today no matter what Mr. Kidds says.

It's this simple. There were resorts, and then there were what are now known as the moderates. The moderates were cheaper but because they were cheaper it gave Disney the ability to raise the prices of the others. In essence they said, look, you have a CHEAPER alternative.

The same thing happened with the all stars and pop century. If you want proof look up the all stars (movies I believe) original opening price. It was going to be opened as early as 94 within the same plan, only as a moderate! Know what you will find? It had the same price as the moderates! Now praytell why is it not the same today? Movies got cheaper with the opening of the other values, and ALL of the moderates got more expensive.

I don't know why people deny disney does things like this. They have 3 different pricing systems depending on the saeson, and heck, only one will be more expensive next year (holiday) by 5 dollars a night. It must cost disney more to run those hotels this year at holiday time then it did last year, but nothing else...

They give you the option of a cheaper product so that they can make the better product more expensive. It's that simple.

The cheap products aren't values at all, they only put a strain on the rest of the property, it's that simple.

But let's not discuss that, it's a worthless discussion that will never ever reach a resolution. You will disagree, and that's fine, and you can put in your official disagreement, but there is no need to go on with it because it's a time tested never ending conversation.

But going back to planning...

It is extremely apparent that regardless of price there is nothing to occupy your time at these values and that DOES strain the other hotels.

Do you realize at all star movies there isn't ONE movie theatre that might, you know, give the guests a themed activity to do on property?

Do you realize at all star music there isn't one stage that perhaps a live band could play on theat might *gulp* be something for it's guests to do in theme?

Do you realize that all star sports doesn't have a baseball diamond, a football field, a basketball court, (fort wilderness does), or tennis courts (which the before mentioned contemp does)?

Really now if a guest is at the resort and doesn't want to swim or sit in their room, what are they going to do?

Doesn't that constitute poor planning?

 

[Peter Pirate]

very good