Congrats to Magic Kingdom!!

[Angel Ariel]

I guess if other parks had Gay Days, maybe.

Disney doesn't "have" Gay Days. They aren't promoted or endorsed by Disney in any way. Nor are Goth Days or Dapper Days endorsed or promoted by Disney. A group of people decides to show up at Disney on a given day. That's something totally different than Disney putting on the event.

 

[BuckeyeBama]

That's like saying customer satisfaction ratings and awards for products and companies are only valid if everyone who rated them also used every competing product as well. That can never happen but it doesn't invalidate or discredit the results.

No, it is saying that you can't compare one rating to another unless the same guest rates both. You might give me a 5 rating for one service, while another person ones rates that exact same service a 3. This type of rating only helps comparatively when the same person rates all of the things being compared.

 

[jtowntoflorida]

?

I"m not "young" and not male, but I'd put IOA over MK any day.

Mind blown. I totally thought you were a dude. It's the Duff beer that throws me off, I think.

That's got to be the strangest complaint ever. I got to do everything I wanted over and over so we went back to our resort. Since you had UEP you were onsite at Deluxe, so I hope you got to lounge around poolside or eat some yummy food or something?

Having that experience is WHY we love Uni. We get to have tons of fun in the parks AND have a relaxing vacation at the same time. Woo!

ITA. Universal is awesome with an onsite deluxe stay because there's no rushing to anything. Want to ride something? Use Express Pass and there's practically no wait. When I'm essentially walking on everything, I don't really care if I have to wait 30-45 minutes for two rides (Forbidden Journey and Gringotts) and I don't feel like I have to storm the parks at RD like I'm taking a beach at Normandy. We stroll over when we feel like. We ride what we want to when we feel like it. We eat when we feel like it because we don't need dining reservations thanks to priority seating. It's so much more relaxing.

Well, maybe because they want to completely separate the lands from each other?

I'll admit, one thing that bothered me about Universal initially is the lack of separation between their "lands." It bothered me that were standing in Springfield and could clearly see the Knight Bus. Luckily, I got over that once I stepped foot into Diagon Alley and had my mind blown by the theming.

 

[BuckeyeBama]

Yes, because it is a completely apt analogy in every way.

More people go to McDonalds than go to a 5-star restaurant, indisputably. (McDonalds is more popular.)

However, I believe - as most logical people would - that if patrons of both restaurants were given an opportunity to rank their experience from 1 to 5 stars, the 5-star restaurant would garner a higher average number of stars than would the McDonalds. (The 5-star restaurant provides a better customer experience.)

It is not more popular - it is more available and affordable. Start charging $$$ for McDonalds meals and see how popular it is.

 

[BuckeyeBama]

Just a few points of clarification on some recent squabbles:

The Tripadvisor "award" is not the result of a static poll. It is a slice in time report that captures the thousands of reviews posted for the most popular theme parks. If a new theme park opened yesterday and got three "5 star" votes, it would not qualify for the award. The MK is the recipient of 121,168 votes as of yesterday with an approval rating of 4.522. IOA is the recipient of 23,393 votes with an approval rating of 4.617. No one was asked to "rate their favorite park". The "award" is simply the compilation of the votes that each has received over time.

Exactly - this does not mean that anyone likes IoA more than MK, it means that the people who posted gave it a higher rating. It is useless in comparison, and the TA award is just as useless (unless you are the winner, and you can use the award to help convince the uneducated that this makes you "better").

 

[TwinPrincessMermaids]

Maybe this would explain why Epcot has slipped to #16.

I just took a Disney annual pass survey asking me about how much value I get out of my pass. I gave it very low marks. But two or three times I was asked in the survey if I thought Disney only cared about money, if I thought Disney was greedy, if I thought Disney was keeping the parks up to date.

If they are asking those questions of their pass holders, they might find the trip advisor results useful.

I'm curious about this. We are getting tons of value out of our AP...?

 

[BuckeyeBama]

The only poll that matters to me - I have been to both and would give both a 5. But I am easy to please.

I have also been to Dollywood and would give it a minus 5. Look at the Dollywood reviews and tell me that this isn't meaningless.

 

[bcrook]

I'm curious about this. We are getting tons of value out of our AP...?

The survey? it asked all kinds of questions. But it wouldn't let me voice my complaint that the AP discount doesn't work inside the parks at quick and counter service. That seems ridiculous. If it should work anywhere it should work INSIDE the parks.

Have I had fun with my passes? Yup.
As for the value? Those prices hurt this year. No I don't think I can call them a value. The few discounts that I get don't help offset the costs. Plus I would already get the food discounts with my DVC card or Chase Visa card or TIW card. The cost this year was shocking, and I got a DVC Discount. I have reached my max price point. I can't justify spending $2200.00 for park admissions anymore. I have to regroup and decide what to do next...

 

[WillAustin]

No, it is saying that you can't compare one rating to another unless the same guest rates both. You might give me a 5 rating for one service, while another person ones rates that exact same service a 3. This type of rating only helps comparatively when the same person rates all of the things being compared.

But you can compare one to another. Overall satisfaction in different areas can certainly be compared in a valid way. You don't need double blind testing with the same participants to get trends. I completely understand that in your opinion the numbers are meaningless, but that doesn't make that opinion any more or less valid.

 

[BuckeyeBama]

I completely understand that in your opinion the numbers are meaningless, but that doesn't make that opinion any more or less valid.

Sorry if I implied that my opinion was more valid than anyone else's - not my intent. Just sharing my point of view. I enjoy reading others.

 

[Planogirl]

Reviews are certainly subjective. That would be true of movie reviews and restaurant reviews or anything else. However if a large percentage of reviewers give high scores to a place then that is useful information IMO. It's even more useful if you can read detailed reviews such as you can on Trip Advisor or the DIS. Plenty of people pay attention so it matters where you fall.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Maybe I misunderstood your post with regard to Gay Days.

I'm not weighing in on how scientific the methodology is. It doesn't really matter to me. TripAdvisor is pretty reputable, IMO if in no one else's, but I don't think I'm alone. The list is something to consider. That's all. It's not as though I take whatever is at the top of the list, and decide - we're going there. It's just something to consider. In fact, when I'm going to a new city, I will look at the list of top attractions there. I may discard the 6 most popular attractions as things my family would just not be interested in. I like lists like this, but they're just one tool to consider.

I still think any issues with methodology would affect things across the board, and not disproportionately affect Disney. If people are rating too high, they're doing it across the board. If people are only complaining and not praising, they're doing it across the board. If some people have looney-tunes complaints, the looneys don't just weigh in on Disney. If only the kind of people who leave reviews are the ones weighing in, then that's true for all theme park reviews, not just Disney.

The simplest way that I can explain it is that more valid rankings have a set criteria and review many factors.

It seems TA just looked at existing reviews from folks who were moved to write one. While it gives a good idea of what parks may be good, others have chimed in already why it isn't anything to bet the farm on.

I include ALL parks under that statement. Perhaps that was not clear.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Not in the way that you think. I'm not suggesting that people lie. If they "hate" something, they are probably likely to report on that as a warning to others. If they are "meh" on something, they probably let it slide and don't report on it. If they like something, they are likely to brag about it. And since most people go through life enjoying what they do and experience, the "likes" outpace the "hates", and the "mehs" disappear. The net result is more positives than negatives. If you have another theory as to why positives far outweigh negatives despite the common adage that people complain more than they praise, we are all eyes and ears.

That makes more sense. I was kind of wondering what you meant.

As to my theory:
That most people in a population actually like the place. Be it a restaurant, gas station or a theme park.

But it sounds like you think that there are more negatives out there. If they are, it isn't translating into bad reviews, bad reports or in money to the point where the AVERAGE patron does not like the experience.

Crazy theory. But there you go.
(And to remind, this wasn't to dispute that people don't carry negative opinions. This exchange began to discuss your "theory" that negatives have a "profound impact". How can that be if people aren't sharing those negatives on droves? It's the profound impact that wasn't. Now McD's and pink slime on the other hand...)

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Reviews are certainly subjective. That would be true of movie reviews and restaurant reviews or anything else. However if a large percentage of reviewers give high scores to a place then that is useful information IMO. It's even more useful if you can read detailed reviews such as you can on Trip Advisor or the DIS. Plenty of people pay attention so it matters where you fall.

And I do want to reiterate that these are my thoughts as well.

There is value in them.

 

[BuckeyeBama]

Reviews are certainly subjective. That would be true of movie reviews and restaurant reviews or anything else. However if a large percentage of reviewers give high scores to a place then that is useful information IMO. It's even more useful if you can read detailed reviews such as you can on Trip Advisor or the DIS. Plenty of people pay attention so it matters where you fall.

You suggested movie reviews, so I'll use that as an analogy. Critics aside (movie critics are also movie snobs and have no idea what the public might like), movie reviews by "users" are useless without the context. The number, I mean. You can read a movie review in which a person gives a movie a 1 rating for reasons personal to them but meaningless to you. Their 1 rating is meaningless, but the context is valuable. Yes, you can learn a great deal from reviews, but not from the numbers (IMO). You actually have to read to learn anything meaningful. Same with the Dis. Lots of good stuff in here, but you have to filter through a whole lot of stuff that might be useless to you to get to it.

 

[itchin2go]

You suggested movie reviews, so I'll use that as an analogy. Critics aside (movie critics are also movie snobs and have no idea what the public might like), movie reviews by "users" are useless without the context. The number, I mean. You can read a movie review in which a person gives a movie a 1 rating for reasons personal to them but meaningless to you. Their 1 rating is meaningless, but the context is valuable. Yes, you can learn a great deal from reviews, but not from the numbers (IMO). You actually have to read to learn anything meaningful. Same with the Dis. Lots of good stuff in here, but you have to filter through a whole lot of stuff that might be useless to you to get to it.

But what about when lots of people review a movie? Rotten Tomatoes, for instance .... Do you assign any value to their tomato ratings or popcorn ratings (for lack of knowing the right terms for those)?

 

[WillAustin]

This is a link to an interesting study that shows consumer reviews taken in aggregate will usually correlate with expert critical analysis. The subject was book reviews, but it shows the methodology works.

http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/6823.html

Satisfaction level with anything, even taken in a vacuum, can still be held up for valid comparison to another related thing.

 

[JimmyV]

That most people in a population actually like the place. Be it a restaurant, gas station or a theme park.

But it sounds like you think that there are more negatives out there. If they are, it isn't translating into bad reviews, bad reports or in money to the point where the AVERAGE patron does not like the experience.

I agree 100% with the first bolded statement. But the second bolded statement is a 180 degree turn. Remember that I am one who is positing that there are more positive reviews than negative ones (at least in social media world). I am refuting the oft-stated but never-supported adage that "people like to complain more than they like to praise". I have never believed that for a moment. And now with social media data, it appears easier and easier to show. So, no. I do not think that there are more negatives out there.

 

[JimmyV]

Critics aside (movie critics are also movie snobs and have no idea what the public might like)

I think this is an incredibly unfair statement. Movie critics who have a strong academic background in cinema and who have seen almost every film from Georges Melies to Brad Bird are certainly not unqualified to predict what the public might like. Being learned in a subject does not make one a "snob" nor does it make one detached from reality.

 

[cigar95]

You suggested movie reviews, so I'll use that as an analogy. Critics aside (movie critics are also movie snobs and have no idea what the public might like), movie reviews by "users" are useless without the context. The number, I mean. You can read a movie review in which a person gives a movie a 1 rating for reasons personal to them but meaningless to you. Their 1 rating is meaningless, but the context is valuable. Yes, you can learn a great deal from reviews, but not from the numbers (IMO).

Once we have an *extremely* large sample size, such as the tens of thousands in the TripAdvisor surveys, much of those concerns can be averaged away. With that many respondents, you're going to have a statistically valid cross section, or nearly so.