Originally posted by airlarry!
M. D-R:
The use of Mister or Monsieur is what some of us taught by our parents here in the South. It is neither insulting nor ignorant. It is just a show of respect, especially when one offers a differing view.
Larry. Despite the current few weeks in Japan and the last 3.5 years in Michigan the previous 30--odd years of my life were in the south. I don't think that Land Baron was doing a "southern thing" (and I don't think I said "ignorant") but I will try to explain to you my pet peeve and why it bugged me, fwiw.
First, my given name is "Darrell" but people have called me the shortened version of "D.R." for years and so that is what I usually respond to. If I hear "Darrell" that means I'm in trouble, if you know what I mean (I don't know if your given name is "Lawrence," if so, you may know what I mean). So it was natural for me to use D.R. or d-r as a nick on the internet since the early 90's; for example you can't use periods on the disboard nicks so it was d-r. So when I read it is sounds to me like Mr. (my nickname). People don't call you Mr. Larry often do they? Sometimes children who know you well enough to not use your last name might call you Mr. (First name), but not adults, unless they are joking. In my experience, it is somewhat condescending for an adult to call someone Mr. (first name).
Now here is the second part to that, and it is actually a southern thing but I don't know if it is a Louisianna thing or not. When my Grandfather was alive, he was Mr. Meece. That is what everyone called him (well, people outside of his family who didn't say "Dad" or "Grandpa"). Beyond familiy, EVERYONE. Even his contemporaries would call him "Mr. Meece." The only person I ever heard call my grandfather by his first name was my grandmother. And my grandmother continues to be called "Miz Meece" (how it sounds) by everyone. Even her neighbors who are dear and long, long time friends and contemporary with her in age call her "Miz Meece." When my grandfather passed away, my father became Mr. Meece. Up until that time, most everyone at church, in the community, wherever, had called him by his first name, "Arthur," but now he is called "Mr. Meece." Old childhood friends, etc. will call him Arthur, but generally he is "Mr. Meece." I am not called Mr. Meece by anyone. My father is Mr. Meece. Of course people in Michigan would have no way of knowing that, but if someone does have to call me by a title they usually use "Dr. Meece." However, they don't do that with just my first name.
And when we say 'old school' we mean that:
would never be taken as an 'old school' thought. Never. Uncle Walt did things just like this, and in some cases things that the average guest would NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER even notice. But he noticed. And his friends and co-workers noticed. That's why he did them. Expanding the Cali Grill to take over a free spot for regulars to watch the fireworks is something Walt probably would NEVER have done.
I disagree. First, I think your premise is wrong. The Ca. Grill was not "expanded to take over a free spot for regulars to watch the fireworks." The 15th floor has been the Ca. Grill ever since it was top of the world. You always, always have had to go through that restaurant to get to the doors of the deck. Always. That deck is still there, that door is still there . You get off the elevator, the desk is in front of you, you turn to the right, you walk past the tables. There are still tables there that are "lounge" tables where you can get a drink or wait for your table. There were ALWAYS tables along the walk to the outside door. The entire area between the desk and the outside door was NEVER only a lounge - part of it is, part of it is a dining area for groups. There was no such thing as expanding the restaurant to take over a "free spot" - as far as I know they haven't put tables out on the deck for high altitude al fresco. This was not done.
What was done was this. In the past there was NO way of limiting the number of people who could come up that elevator and walk through that restaurant and go stand outside on the deck. It has gotten to the point where a lot of people go up there - I think more than should. There are limited numbers of elevators and with so many people leaving at the same time it is a mess. Plus it is a mess for that many people to walk through a restaurant. What Uncle Walt would not have done was allowed that to continue, and allowed the experience of the guests in that restaurant to be ruined. When Uncle Walt expanded
disneyland with New Orleans Square I'm sure that there were people who were disapointed that their favorite fireworks spot was covered by pirates or whatever; I'm sure that many people would have loved to have been able to go and stand at the balcony of club 33 for free to watch the fireworks, but Uncle Walt didn't do that. Also, Uncle Walt understood a little bit about moving large numbers of people around and funneling and controlling crowds so that the number would be suitable for the facility. I will never, ever believe that Uncle Walt would have thought it was OK to throw open the elavators of the contemporary so that as many people as wanted to on a given night could go up there with no concern at all for the experience of the people dining there. Bullony. Walt not only would have been concerned about the show and experience for the guests dining at the CG, but he also would have been concerned for the show and experience and SAFETY of the people coming up there and crowding on to that deck.
And no, we're not fried, it won't make Sir Baron skip his next state of the world address, it won't make M. AV become a writer on "Joe Millionaire VI: Would You Marry Paul From Cheers for $1 million?". But don't excuse it either. Call a spade a spade.
Well, I said that my mind was fried trying to comprehend the logic, not that others were.
This isn't about increasing the magic for Cali Grill patrons. This is about the almighty dollar. Plain and simple.
Again I disagree. It is about putting some control on an uncontrolled situation. Plain and simple.
You know, D-R, Scoop makes some excellent points in his posts on this issue. But those points are, IMO, from a side of looking at things that Disney's intent here was to upgrade the guest experience for Cali, first and foremost...to increase the show for their guests.
That's one way of looking at it, and that view can excuse almost anything Disney has done lately. We choose to follow Sir Baron's advice, and filter everything the Company does through Walt's standards...and the inescapable conclusion is that the Firework Secret Place was cut out because they could make more money with tables from the Cali.
If you think that Walt's standards were to allow free and open access with no control of the crowd whatsoever you are flat out wrong. This was no secret place!!
Pretty cut and dry when you think about it.
Absolutely, I agree, amazingly so.
It is absolutely cut and dry. There is a limited resource and more people wanted to use it than could. There had to be a limit to it or a way of controlling it. It was a problem that needed to be fixed, and they fixed it. Look, there is no way that Walt would have had them reverse engineer the contemporary to add in special elavators just so that people could get to the deck at the top of the contemporary to watch fireworks. And there is no way that our other uncle, Roy, would have let him. Frankly, that is just nuts.
The crux of this matter isn't what Walt would have done. Instead it is the egocentric thinking that Walt Disney World revolves around the wishes of a particular guest, because they have done something before or are "old school" or for some other reason they deserve this special magic, without any regard for the needs or wishes of other guests. I would love for them to open up the magic kingdom for me alone with nobody else there - it would sure be magical to me, do you think Uncle Walt would have allowed it? One has to understand that crowds can make or break something - maybe during a particular time there is not enough of a crowd to allow a park to be open an extra hour, maybe during another time period there is too much of a crowd to allow free and uncontrolled access to an observation deck. WDW is a complex system with many people moving through it. And again, there are many, many places where one can watch the magic kingdom fireworks, even if they do not want to buy a park ticket or a coke at Ca Grill.
I can't fault Scoop for looking at it from the bright side, but that doesn't mean you and he are right. Heck, I'll compliment him right here for the logic of his argument, but I still think he's wrong.
It just ain't logical to put gold paint on a carousel.
Don't stop posting, M. D-R. Post and read, post and read, and we both might learn something. [/B]
This is very, very similar to the patio seating at the rose and crown. Melissa and I have sat out there I think 3 times over the years for illuminations, and it can be a pretty nice way to see the fireworks. We had PS's a fourth time, but we weren't able to get a patio table. The thing is, there are only so many tables on the patio. There is a limited resource of space. But you can read all over the internet or guidebooks "secret tips" about this "secret place." There's nothing secret about it. But a lot of people are set up with high expectations about this "magical spot." I've observed them trying to make changes and figure out a way to get a handle on guest satisfaction and/or disapointment over access to this limited spot. At one time, they tried only using it for PS made a specific time. That didn't work. People who couldn't get a PS for that magical time would make one for much earlier, sit on the patio and "camp out." I've seen internet advice on how to eat slowly and space out ordering your drinks and appetizers and desert. You know what, I don't care - if it is so important to you that you are willing to devote several hours of a day at epcot for it, then more power. But it was disapointing guests who were making the later PS that they thought was appropriate but who still couldn't get a table because they were camped out. So then they tried changing it such that you couldn't say "I'll wait for a patio table," instead, you had to take whatever table was available when your time came up. That way, people knew that they would just have to take what was available. I'm not sure if that has worked well or not, but I am sure that they are trying to be fair and manage a large number of people who want to use the same limited resource. Heck, I'd rather sit out there and drink beer and eat appetizers on a Feb. afternoon when the sky is blue and the sun is warm anyway, but that's just me, and part of the magic at times like that is that it isn't crowded.
Actually, the desert things at epcot are another example - another way to control a limited resource that is desired by many people is to make it less desirable by increasing the cost of it. If people are willing to pay for those spots, more power to them - they are able to get the limited resource that they desire because it is important enough to them to pay for it. If it isn't that important, then don't get it. You know, Walt didn't make sure that meal prices where the same at Blue Bayou, Plaza Pavillion, Casa de Fritos, and Tahitian Terrace. If you wanted something a little nicer you had to pay more - also, Walt didn't seem to have a problem with Club 33 charging for a limited number of memberships. Was it bad show to Walt that so many guests couldn't go in that secret door at that magical spot? And Walt didn't mind charging for special tours or VIP access, either. If there was anything Walt Disney wasn't, he wasn't some sort of socialist that thought that everyone should have equal and unfettered access to everything in order to give them a magical time and a good show.
Another example is Cinderella's Royal Table for breakfast. More people want to go there than can fit, so they have used a first come, first serve policy to get priority seatings. Still more people, so people have to call the very first thing in the morning that these become available. Guide books and internet sites give advice, and at least one even offered help in calling, which caused WDW to respond by requiring credit card deposits to make sure that the person who actually showed up was the person who called. Again, too many people for a limited resource - so they opened up a princess breakfast in Norway to help meet this demand. The price here is that if it is important enough to you then you will get up and call every day and try to get it. Still people are going to be dissapointed.
So, in this case, too many people showing up to stand on the balcony at the CR. There was no way to limit the number of people who could show up. I think that they handled this in a very good way, limit the Ca. Grill balcony to those people actually dining at the Ca. Grill on a given night. I that this is fair and reasonable. The more I think about it, the more I think it is fair and reasonable - I commend the idea. I think I will write Al and praise him for it. I think that it is 100% a GREAT idea. If it is important enough to you to enjoy this limited resource you can dine or drink there. Heck, to me, it is 100% value added - a decent meal and a decent view thrown in to boot. It is a reasonable way to control crowds. Proposals to move the Ca. Grill so that people could have unhindered access to the Ca. Grill balcony is not, or to add private elevators for the balcony is not. I mean, jeez, maybe they could take the old sky buckets and install them from space mt. to the top of the contemporary. It would be much easier to just lock the doors, which is what they didn't do. That balcony is still right there and you are still free to use it whenever you dine in the restaurant that it is attached to and accessed from.
.
- I gotta blow a gasket every now and again 
. Seriously though. Your post came across to me as saying that Disney's uncontrolled, rampant growth in resorts and hotels rooms has had the unfortunate and 'should have been anticipated' consequence of ruining certain elements of the magic of WDW. If that isn't what you intended, I humbly provide my apologies. Not that I want to turn this thread into a resort/hotel growth debate, but how is Disney supposed to increase attendance each and every year without some such growth?
.
