Dear Eisner

[cristen]

I have also found this. It is a little older, but as you can see, our average Joe is not making much more than he was in the 70's.

"Most ordinary Americans have suffered stagnant or declining
incomes and wages for at least two decades. In 1972, the U.S.
median family income was $38,760 in 1993 dollars. In 1992, the
median family income had slipped to $38,266 in 1993 dollars. The
U.S. median individual income has fallen from the 1968 level of
$15,782 in 1993 dollars, to the 1992 level of $15,629 in 1993
dollars. The average hourly wage for a production and non-
supervisory worker in 1973 was $11.37 in 1991 dollars. By 1991,
the average hourly wage had fallen to $10.34 per hour in 1991
dollars. For males, in 1963, the median income was $21,492 in
1993 dollars. In 1993, median male income had dropped to $21,470
in 1993 dollars. There has been no growth in median male income
in the last 30 years, making this the first generation of sons in
the history of America who earn less than their fathers did."

 

[wtg2000]

Numbers are interesting but comparisons to past years don't always tell the story.

To stay at this hotel in Jamaica my friend and I stayed at a few years back would cost $5,500 Canadian for the two of us for a week. That's probably $4,000 U.S. We can stay at Disney for less, including airfare and food (as the Jamaica package includes). The Jam hotel is okay, four-stars, but not as nice as say the AKL or WL (which we just booked for March for $189 per night). It doesn't even include unlimited golf anymore as it once did. So if Disney hotels were a lot cheaper as people are suggesting, the value would be out of whack.

Even at $400 per night for say the Poly, that would be $2,800 for the week for two. Say $500 for flights. That leaves $2,200 for food and recreation to match the $5,500. I'd say the value of the Jamaican place doesn't match Disney.

Value is what people feel they get out of a product. Judging from the number of people willing to stay at Disney and pay those prices indicates they find value in the outlay.

 

[SCDizFan]

Good lord! I can afford to pay $500 in season peak rates for a club room at one of the better resorts on property but will I? Heck no, I'm not insane.

I'm going to pay the discounted rate of $49 to stay at one of the All Stars. Do I think they are a great value? Yes.

I get Disney 24/7, I can park my car upon arrival not getting back into it until I leave, stay on property, and see the happiness on my husbands face on being in Disney.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

I get Disney 24/7

I don’t mean to be contrary, but what type of Disney is it? I mean the type you’re getting 24/7? Other than a rather smelly and sometimes infrequent bus, what else do you get in your “Disney 24/7”?

 

[SCDizFan]

I have not encounted smelly nor infrequent buses.

What I mean by Disney 24/7 is Disney all the time. That is what I get when I stay on property. If I'm going to Disney, I'm staying on property and unless someone else is paying, I'm staying at the All Stars. I think they provide excellent value for money.

 

[KNWVIKING]

.... but statistics weren't exactly what I was thinking about. Back in '81, it would have been impossible for me to afford a nite at the Poly at $75.00. However, 23 years later, the $334.00 is very do-able, (and understand, DW and I have simple blue collar jobs in one of the poorer counties in South Jersey). Statistical annual inflation rates don't tell the whole story all the time.

Maybe I'm looking at this all wrong, but for what Poly is offering in the location it is offering it, todays price does not seem unreasonable or of less value then in the past.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

What I mean by Disney 24/7 is Disney all the time

Well… That doesn’t quite answer the question, does it? I mean it restates your position about “Disney 24/7” or “Disney all the time”, but it really doesn’t further it. I’m trying to find out what makes it Disney. Specifically. Is it the view? Is it the theme? Is it the amenities? Is it the… Well… Just what it is that makes it “Disney”?

I think they provide excellent value for money.

Again, such as? I mean what do you get that cannot be gotten from the hotel down the street that doesn’t happen to be on Disney property?

I don’t mean to be obtuse. I really want to know, because I’ve never seen the difference. I KNOW the difference between the best the outside world has to offer and the Poly. I KNOW and can articulate if I’m forced to just what that difference is. I can even do that with Riverside (although I may have to stretch a point to get my argument across). But I have never seen it with the All-Stars. And it becomes more puzzling to me in Pop Century. So, maybe you can clear it up for me. Just what is the difference!?

 

[KNWVIKING]

I have never stayed at the Poly but have visited the resort many times. I think it is a great,unique resort. I'm going to assume that it is just as great today as it was for you back in the '70's. So it seems to me that two things have changed since then. One, the price and as I've esplained previously I don't believe it to be unreasonable. Second, and probably more important, is that the quality of the off property resorts have increased tremendously. Yes I can stay at an off property resort that comparing bricks, boards, pools and landscaping match up very well with the Poly, for less money. BUT.... IMO, there is no comparison between off property and on. That's where the Poly is worth the extra.

 

[BibbidyBobbidyBoo]

I'm not sure how *I* stand on the resorts- I haven't stayed at all of them. I can't even speak of the past- because although I wanted to go to WDW for practically my entire life- my first trip was Christmas 2002.

But for the sake of example- let's look at where I've stayed and why.

Our first trip we stayed offsite- it was cheaper and spur of the moment and I really did not know what all staying onsite included, plus I'd never been before to know that staying onsite was any different in ANY way than staying offsite. We stayed in a 2 story condo for about $129 a night (2br, 2 bath, full kitchen, washer/dryer, the works.

2nd trip was solo- I'd since found this board and many other websites about Disney and wanted to stay onsite. Where did I stay? ASMu- why? Because it was a solo trip and I wanted cheapest onsite. I used AP discount -and it seemed worth the price to me.

3rd trip was solo again- and the trip was a little Disney, MNNSHP, and many nights at US/IOA for halloween nights- I stayed offsite trying to go cheaper... big mistake. Cost me more in taxi's than it would have to rent a car- and if I'd stayed onsite at Disney and used their transportation for all the things I did at Disney.

4th trip was with family- we stayed at ASSp because we could make our trip longer (12 nights) and mostly for the KIDS. Son was thrilled with touchdown building with football field right outside our 1st floor room... kids loved the "crimes against fiberglass" (as it was described) We also had to make a trip to ASMo because they had to see the "crimes against fiberglass" there also.

Our next trip? It will be a short 2-3 night stay at WDW before the cruise on DCL. We'll be staying at GF- probably concierge... mostly for myself. I just want to stay there- I've seen it, ate there, went to the spa, etc- and I want to stay there.... but it's expensive- so we'll only stay there on such a short trip to WDW. What does that say about me?

I can also sit here and say that we will most likely have our next trip after that- where? At Pop Century... it will be another longer trip and we prefer to spend the extra money saved on enjoying ourselves the entire trip. We're not rich- so staying at a more expensive resort would limit our budget BIGTIME for everything else (food, activities, etc.)

I think I would also like to stay at BC- mostly because we like the short walk to Epcot, Beaches & cream- and the kids would love stormalong bay. I can see us someday staying at Poly (but not contemporary) and maybe POR.

But so far we've either stayed offsite, or onsite at the very resorts that are considered "not-Disney". And the only ones that interest me in the future are either considered "not-Disney" or Poly... I wonder what that means... anyone care to analyze that? LOL

 

[SCDizFan]

I will explain Disney 24/7 to you as it applies to me.

Firstly, anytime I get a hotel room for under $50 anywhere, that is excellent. I know that it costs Disney at least $18 to turn that room (labor, electricity, security, etc).

The All Stars are an excellent value. When I stay at a Disney property, there is a certain 'feel' of being in Disneyworld. The piped in music, the decor, the CMs, the food (excellent yet expensive), the merchandise, the service, Mickey Mouse ears covering everything, and so on. That 'Disney feel' has a price and therefore adds value to my stay. So on top of getting my accommodations, in addition, I get the 'Disney Magic.

Try staying onsight at Universal and you will see the difference. Universal does rides but Disney does the magic.

When you stay on Disney property, you get transportation provided. You don't need a car. Some may argue that it is slow, smelly, whatever, it is still provided for free. Deduct the cost of renting a car and now the savings are really going up.

So now for $49 dollars a night, I'm getting cheap accommodations, the Disney magic, and free transportation.

If you still can't get what I'm talking about maybe it's time for a return trip?

 

[SCDizFan]

I don't think you are being obtuse. I understand what you are asking.

I don't understand the reference to Disney accommodations being non-Disney. Would someone explain that to me?

 

[DisneyKidds]

That is all that matters!

Nope.

$85 = $230

That is all that matters. You don't have to work any harder today to get the Poly for less than the pre-Eisner inflated rate than you had to work back in the day to plan your trips two years in advance just to get a room.

Rack rates........................we don't need no stinking rack rates .

Yeah, yeah, yeah.....................but you can't always get a discount and they never needed discounts back in the day.

Well, no............................since 1991 we've stayed in all the deluxe hotels and never paid more than $199 a night. We also never resolved whether or not there were discounts back in the day. I think Hope's archives may have indicated they did..............................

Ultimately the World isn't that different than it was back in the day. With a bit of work and advance planning you can plan a somewhat expensive vacation that provides great value at one of the premier destinations on the planet.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

I don't understand the reference to Disney accommodations being non-Disney. Would someone explain that to me?

I think I may be able to shed some light on this one. The response to your fourth quote might answer a part of it.

Firstly, anytime I get a hotel room for under $50 anywhere, that is excellent

I agree. But… well… That doesn’t make it “Disney”. Does it?

I know that it costs Disney at least $18 to turn that room (labor, electricity, security, etc).

I don’t know how you know that, but I will accept it as true.

When I stay at a Disney property, there is a certain 'feel' of being in Disneyworld.

See. This is where we start to part company. I will agree that the higher end resorts display a certain amount of Disney charm. And there are some (the Poly and Riverside and even the Contemporary, although it’s very dated) that simply ooze that Disney magic I think you’re referring to.

But I simply don’t see it at the All-Stars. And I certainly don’t see it at Pop Century.

The piped in music, the decor, the CMs, the food (excellent yet expensive), the merchandise, the service, Mickey Mouse ears covering everything, and so on.

Ah! And that’s why I don’t see it!! If you take “the CMs” out of the above sentence there is NOTHING Disney about it! To me at least. There is no theme. There is no story. There is no painstaking attention to trivial details. There is no grandeur for ‘value’ prices (i.e. real crystal chandeliers in a hamburger joint). There simply isn’t that old “Disney Touch”. Instead there are huge decorations painted in primary colors.

I don’t know about you, but that is certainly not Disney to me. And that goes to your question regarding “Disney accommodations being non-Disney”. Disney does NOT mean piped in music. Now, don’t get me wrong. That doesn’t mean that piped in music isn’t part of the equation, it’s just that piped in music is such a small part it becomes ancillary in nature.

And Mickey Mouse ears covering everything is the antithesis of a Disney resort. Where is the theme? What is the theme? How is this ‘like’ a movie? How does this sweep you away to another place or time? How is this ‘excruciatingly and exquisitely’ detailed? You see, these motels are simply decorated. They are not themed.

AV gave a great explanation about this. If I draw some Mickey Mouse ears on a cardboard box and plop it outside my house, does that make my house a “Disney” house? No!! Of course not!! I’ll even go further than that. I really do have Mickey Mouse wall paper in my kitchen. And everything in it is either Black or White or Red! PRIMARY RED!!! IN THE KITCHEN!!! And when you walk into that kitchen you can’t help noticing that some very disturbed people, obsessed with Disney, have “DECORATED” it. But that’s all it is. Decorations. NOT themes!! Good enough for my kitchen – in my house. But certainly not good enough to be considered “Disney”.

Well, the same goes for a motel on Disney property. Just because the art work is of high caliber (as opposed to my drawing on a cardboard box, or my wall papered kitchen) and really, really BIG, does not change the fact that it is merely a decoration and NOT a theme. It becomes a matter of degree only.

Now, if you really want to see a true Disney resort I suggest that you fully explore the Poly. Or perhaps the Contemporary or even riverside. And I’d also check out Fort Wilderness. Of course you can’t put price into the equation any longer, as the current regime has milked every dime out of it. But for the sake of argument knock off about a third of the price (maybe even a little more). Now, how does that grab you for real “Disney” magic!!!???

If you still can't get what I'm talking about maybe it's time for a return trip?

Yes! It’s always time for a return trip!!

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

We also never resolved whether or not there were discounts back in the day. I think Hope's archives may have indicated they did

Wrong again!!

I cannot state absolutely, without a doubt, that there were NO discounts, ever. There may have been some obscure ‘something’ somewhere that no one is really aware of, but it has NEVER been shown that any discounts were ever offered! And especially not on a regular basis as it is today! With all the discounts Disney has become the ‘used car salesmen’ of vacation packages!! Back then they took a little pride in their product and their pricing. Heck, Mr. Kidds!! They didn’t even have different seasons. It was one price all year long! So let’s keep it straight. Rack rate to rack rate. OK?

 

[wtg2000]

If I draw some Mickey Mouse ears on a cardboard box and plop it outside my house, does that make my house a ?Disney·house?

If I stick a palm tree in my living room does it make it the Polynesian?

You're trying to push this concept of story. Well, agreed, the story of the Polynesian is that it relates to Adventureland and gives the impression of being on a south seas island, as the WL makes you feel like you're in the Northwest, or the AKL makes you feel like you're in Kenya. Or at least they all try to.

The AS and PC don't have the luxury of a sense of place, but that doesn't mean they can't have a theme or story. They just don't transport you to a specific place because they are not about place. The PC is about decades and the AS about concepts that are not spatially related. Think of an abstract painting for instance. If people walk through the PC and it evokes memories of the 70s or gives them a craving to hunt for the complete Partridge Family on DVD then it's done as much a resort that transports people to a resort based on place - which I think is much easier to emulate.

Go to a Disney review site and read reviews of the PC. People seem to like it. Maybe that will help you understand the points of view that are different from yours.

 

[SCDizFan]

DVCLandbaron, this is where we can agree we disagree. I totally get immersed in the Disney Magic at The All Stars. I've also gotten immersed at the other upscale resorts. Granted, it has been since October of 2001 since I've been to the All Stars (last year was Universal) but it grabbed hold of me then.

Could it possibly have changed that much since then?

As far as the $18 to turn a room, that is about the national average in a non-union resort area destination.

 

[SnackyStacky]

Originally posted by DisneyKidds
Rack rates........................we don't need no stinking rack rates .

Yeah, yeah, yeah.....................but you can't always get a discount and they never needed discounts back in the day.

Well, no............................since 1991 we've stayed in all the deluxe hotels and never paid more than $199 a night.

Kidds, what sort of view do you book, and HOW did you do that?!?!?!!

I'm finally breaking down and staying at Deluxe hotels for my honeymoon. The Beach Club, and the Polynesian. The cheapest rate I can get is $245 (That's $274 after taxes) at the Beach Club for a Standard View, and $254 (That's $284 after taxes) at the Polynesian for a Garden View. Those are AAA rates, and the only thing I can get right now. We'll have an annual pass, but this past September (which is when I'm honeymooning...) no AP rates were offered.

You can say that "we don't need no stinkin' rack rates", but isn't that a bit exorbitant, and quite obnoxious that I have to sit and wait for Disney to make me feel like I'm getting a value? Sure, I booked what I can afford, but I would love to have a Polynesian Lagoon View!

Anyway, I still stand on the opinion that Disney hotels are no value. They're simply over-priced.

 

[Another Voice]

"If people walk through the PC and it evokes memories of the 70s or gives them a craving to hunt for the complete Partridge Family on DVD…"

There's a difference between "storytelling" and "making people remember". The fact that you mention the place giving people to sudden urge to buy something is very telling.

"Storytelling" is about giving people new experiences. The Contemporary is about making people feel they are in the future; the Polynesian is about making feel they are in the South Pacific. Good movies make you feel you are watching real events unfold before. Good stories about new experiences happening to you in the hear-and-now.

"Ironic Nostalgia" is about triggering memories that people already have. It's not about creating anything new, it's about taking what someone already has and using it. When it's down cleverly only good memories are triggered – that's why it can be an enjoyable experience. But the "irony" is that past is distorted by the exclusion of the not-so-wonderful parts. The Pop Century is designed not to create anything new, just simply to have people go "I remember how much fun a Rubick's Cube was".

Personally, I see no reason to pay someone to trigger my own memories to induce me to buy their products. But that's the trend in all things Disney for a decade now. Frankly, getting "immersed in Disney Magic" is a marketing gimmick. All the characters, all the hidden Mickey's, all the bed linen in corporate colors exists to remind you about Disney without actually having to be anything uniquely Disney.

It's to remind you all that was accomplished in the past rather than making the effort to make something new.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Kidds, what sort of view do you book, and HOW did you do that?!?!?!!

Mr. Kidds always says that rack rates don’t matter. I contend that it is the only thing that matters. The whole system sucks!! On every level and from every viewpoint. From the guest’s perspective it is one of uncertainty. Never are you sure. Never are you completely satisfied. You feel like you’re buying a used car from a guy in a very loud plaid blazer!! Or worse yet, you blindly book a rack rate and then find out that much, much better deals could have been if only… Or there is a huge difference in price by a matter of weeks, or worse by days. Of course the time you want to go is the higher. So you are forced to change your plans to the less desirable time. In any of these scenarios (and countless others) no matter how you slice it, the guest feels inconvenienced at best and most of the time, downright ripped off by sharp pencil kind of guys!!

That doesn’t build up very good relationships between the company and the customer. There’s always a bad taste in your mouth, even if you get a substantially reduced rate. Because there is always doubt. Uncertainty. Or worse, alienation from not being in the select crowd. The ones with the numbers. The ones with the preferred rates. That stinks!!

And from a corporate aspect, to me at least, it gives the impression that Disney is doing its absolute best to squeeze every last dime out of their clientele but at the same time admitting that their prices are so ridiculously high that the only way to pacify the masses and insure that they don’t have to shutter any more resorts than they already do is to opt for cheap sales gimmicks, taking on the persona of a cheap carnival huckster. Is that the image they want?

“Back in the day” they had one, fair, reasonable price throughout the year. No specials. No quickie deals. No cheap tricks. Just a set price that they thought their resorts were worth. It said that the product was worth a price. And the price was worth the product. It smacked of quality and value. Pretty neat concept, eh?

Anyway, I still stand on the opinion that Disney hotels are no value. They're simply over-priced.

I couldn’t agree more.

It's to remind you all that was accomplished in the past rather than making the effort to make something new.

Maybe the current regime are really Elves and it is high time for them to forsake their rings of power and take the last ship over the unbending seas to the utmost West.

 

[crusader]

The whole system sucks!!

Sure does.

Unfortunately, it isn't going to change so there's really no sense in belaboring over what once was.

Vacations are structured much differently today. They are market driven and variably price oriented.

We understand this. We deal with it at every turn from the moment we decide to travel.......... and we plan and spend accordingly.

What you want does still exist - at the "park properties" in Hershey, Pa. The rack rate is the rate. There are two hotels and a campground - sound familiar? And lo and behold, if you want to stay at the "lodge" it'll cost you $189 + tax/night off peak. (more than 2 adults are extra)

Sounds pretty high doesn't it? Now that place differs substantially from the Poly. No view. Smaller standard rooms with a 4 person max. capacity. No rollaways are permitted. There is a shuttle but you certainly aren't "on property" and there is no boat or monorail. The pool is a basic motel swimming hole. There is no immersion - just boatloads of chocolate and every fathomable type of merchandised object available for purchase at just about every turn.

In other words, the lodge is to Hershey less than what the moderates are to Disney at a fixed price of $189.00 +tax. So what do you honestly think the rates for Disney's deluxe resorts should be set at in today's market considering the added amenities?

Another similarity I found with Hershey was in trying to book a cheaper room with a competitor. Here, you can play the rate game, but they are inflated in direct relation to the park properties and there is very little flexibility.

That's exactly what Disney was back in the day when the "big 2" were it. Look closely at Hope's numbers and you'll see a proportionate comparison between the on-site and the off-site rates. In other words, the competition was capitalizing on the overflow.

That shouldn't be ok with any company that owns as much land as this one.