DEBATE: "Removing Blinders" or "How I stopped worrying & came to disrespect Ei$ne

[DVC-Landbaron]

Mr. Kidds. Since my good friend and colleague, Sir Raider, is easily handling Scoop and the sadly mistaken Pirate, I thought I might spend my time conversing with you a moment. OK?

The specifics on many subjects we can agree on, it is that philosophy thing that gets in the way.

You know, I had to read this section three or four times before I understood what you meant. And the reason is really quite simple. You see, for the past few months we’ve been talking about two different things I guess.

I couldn’t understand how on “The specifics on many subjects we can agree” yet you couldn’t understand or at least agree with the “philosophy thing”. I’m telling you I was simply baffled!! And to tell you the truth my brain kind of stopped working as I read the rest of the paragraph. I was fixated on this “philosophy thing” impasse. Besides, the rest of the paragraph was typical Ei$ner defending nonsense, most of which I could never really understand why you include in almost all of your posts. (Hang on!! Don’t go brain dead like I did with your post. There’s about to be a revelation!!)

After the third time I re-read your post I continued on, but this time I had my brain in at least first gear. And then it hit me!!! You spew that nonsense because you think, that I think, that this defines the Ei$ner philosophy!! HOLY COW!! (I says to myself, I says – self!) HOLY COW!!! He thinks that I think that!!

The wanton disregard for the guest experience. The wholesale disregard of quality for the sake of the almighty buck. The sole Ei$ner strategy to fleece the WDW public.

MY GOODNESS!!! I don’t think that at all!!!!!! The whole time you and I have been talking about ‘philosophy’, I’ve been meaning Walt’s way of doing business. HIS take on things. I never once meant to define Ei$ner philosophy, other than it wasn’t even close to Walt’s. I believe he’s a businessman. I believe he’s out to make money. I believe he’s out to make money for the company as well as himself. If you want to call that a ‘philosophy’ I suppose you could. And to a certain extent I have to admit that I have inferred as much when I say that his and Walt’s ‘philosophy’ are diametrically opposed.

But please be clear on this. I do not believe, for a minute, that he is antimagic. Or that he sits up late at night and dreams of ways to screw the public. NO!!! NOT AT ALL!!!! He’s simply inept!! He doesn’t know HOW to be magic! He doesn’t know HOW to create! He doesn’t even know what his product is!! And this isn’t because he’s evil!! NO!! Nothing could be further from the truth! He’s not evil!! He’s just stupid!!!

Walt's philosophy I know, and that is what I’ve been talking about. I don't think Ei$ner really has one, unless it's to make money. And that really isn't such a bad philosophy for a CEO, when you think about it. I would imagine most CEOs have the same outlook. But Ei$ner has two things working against him. First is, of course, he's inept (have I mentioned that before?). And second, that's just not the right mission for Disney!! Sorry, but it's not! Oh! Don’t worry. The money comes. In buckets and barrels. But ONLY if the philosophy is followed. And he STILL doesn't "get that", does he?

But let’s face it Mr. Kidds. An honest mistake may be easier to forgive, but it’s still a mistake!! And when you add up all his mistakes, no matter how well intentioned, or self delusional, they are still monumental mistakes! And they’ve been going on for quite some time now!!

Take for example the roadway signs on WDW property. In my readings it says that the redo of all the signs on Disney property was an Eisner initiative. They spent big bucks to develop road signs. They are only road signs for crying out loud. Do road signs themselves feed the bottom line? No. Do the road sighs that were designed add a distinctive element of Magic to the Disney experience? Absolutely. There are many little such example that just might show some kind of understanding for what made/makes Disney 'Disney'

Thank you for providing a perfect example. Now, you see the road signs and say “Yea! Ei$ner!! What a guy!! Mouse ears on the signs.” And I see the signs and lament for a time when the Disney “philosophy” called for Disney to provide the transportation and there was no need for signs!! Ei$ner had to initiate SOMETHING to ease the busing situation! And in the end he said, “The heck with it!! Open the roads, put up signs and even print maps! We cannot move all those people by bus and I refuse to create any magical transportation, so let them drive themselves!! Oh! And by the way. Put some mouse ears on them!! It’ll look cute and we’ll remind them of the ‘brand’ at the same time!!” (a little cynical perhaps, but I’ll bet not far from the truth!)

Agreement with the ‘caste system’

NO!! Not at all!! Remember what was said. He said he would raise rates and build more resorts. I naturally assumed he meant up to the standards or the same caliber as the Poly or Contemporary. I really thought he’d dust off the five year plan. You know, the Venetian, Asian, Persian and the like. Never in my wildest dreams did I ever envision the caste system!

This is a perfect example of your propensity to blame a MEvil plan that just might not exist. Where is the proof. The day that AS Sports opened was there a corresponding jump in the ‘moderate’ rates that wasn’t in line with an appropriate measure of inflation?

I can’t ‘prove’ it to you, Mr. Kidds. I have no documentation. All I can tell you is I LIVED IT!! One year I could afford the Poly and the next year I could not! One year the Caribbean was an easy touch for me and the next year it wasn’t so easy. And all the while my income is outdistancing inflation by quite a bit (pretty upwardly mobile in those days!).

I wish I could produce a paper and say “Here it is!! In black and white!!” But I can’t! I related a story and my perception of the events as I saw them! I cannot PROVE it. All I can tell you is that it happened. Can you PROVE to me it didn’t happen!

I’ll invoke the gray color again. Many mistakes? Yes. Mistakes that could call his business acumen into question? Yes.

And that is enough for me. Again, he’s NOT evil. Just dumb! Not corrupt!! Heavens no!! Just a knucklehead! And a knucklehead that doesn’t even come close to understanding the business of Disney. And I say it again – He never did!!

You say earlier that Eisner didn’t save anything, much less the Disney Company. However, if Disney was taken over from the outside (as opposed to from within as you like to say) do you think things like the Little Mermaid would have survived?

Maybe yes, maybe no! But it doesn’t matter. The harm he has done FAR, FAR, FAR outweighs any good that he may have accidentally caused (or more likely allowed to happen in spite of him). Heck maybe an even better movie would have been produced!! Maybe the Rescuers Down Under wouldn’t have been made and the money saved would have been sunk into the finest E-Ticket ride of the century, leaving pirates and even Spiderman in the dust! Who knows! And who cares! I hate ‘what if’ games!! All I said is that all you folks that think he “saved” the company are mistaken. He did a ‘take over’!! The only difference is that it was peaceful as opposed to hostile. But there the difference ends. He did everything else, exactly according to the ‘take over’ script!!

However, in every case you have to take the good with the bad. It is unfortunate when the bad gets such a strong hold.

Really Mr. Kidds. I’m not trying to goad you. I am very, very sincere. I cannot see any good that he is directly responsible for. Sure he put mouse ears on the signs, but I’m really talking about something of value. Something magical. Something creative. Something… well… I guess… SOMETHING DISNEY!!!

Please tell me what you see. I truly want to agree with you. Or you with me.


And if we can’t agree, how about a nice game of darts!!

 

[Testtrack321]

Wow Baron, what have you been on lately?

Because Esiner puts up road signs and prints maps dosn't mean that he's opposed to all sorts of new "costly" transportation intitives.

Many people still drive to the parks or other resorts because they can or because they don't have a choice. They stay outside. Why must everything he do be negative? I bet that there were only green road signs everywhere before the inititive was set to create new ones.

Does everything need to be spinned to be negative about this man?

 

[DisneyKidds]

MY GOODNESS!!! I don’t think that at all!!!!!! The whole time you and I have been talking about ‘philosophy’, I’ve been meaning Walt’s way of doing business. HIS take on things. I never once meant to define Ei$ner philosophy, other than it wasn’t even close to Walt’s. I believe he’s a businessman. I believe he’s out to make money. I believe he’s out to make money for the company as well as himself. If you want to call that a ‘philosophy’ I suppose you could. And to a certain extent I have to admit that I have inferred as much when I say that his and Walt’s ‘philosophy’ are diametrically opposed.

Mr. Baron – I guess I know you better than you know yourself . Let’s look at one of the bedrock anti-Ei$ner principles you espouse (or should I say spew?) and see if it doesn’t clearly show that you do believe all of that. That nonsense would be the ‘Caste System of Resorts’. Let me recap your (conspiracy) theory and you correct me if I am wrong. Under this ‘Caste System’ Ei$ner determined that Disney resorts were underpriced and Disney land was underutilized. What ME proceeds to do is create a whole new class of resorts called ‘moderate’. The goal of these ‘moderate’ resorts was two fold. First, by creating this second class of resorts ME could justify jacking the existing resort prices up to exorbitant levels. ME thinks to himself – I am Disney, I have the Brand, people will pay whatever I want to charge, even if it is no longer a value. Second, in the ‘moderate’ resorts ME figures he can build cheap. Who cares about the guest experience. View of the parking lot, exterior corridors, smaller rooms, smaller beds, less, less, less. But who cares, I am Disney, I have the Brand, people will buy this lesser experience and love it, and we capture a new piece of market share. A few more years go by, a few more ‘moderates’ go up, and it is time to repeat the drill. Along come the ‘value’ resorts. The goal of these ‘value’ resorts was two fold. First, by creating this third class of resorts ME could justify jacking the existing resort prices up to more exorbitant levels. ME thinks to himself – I am Disney, I have the Brand, people will pay whatever I want to charge, even if it is no longer a value. Second, in the ‘value’ resorts ME figures he can build even cheaper than he did before. Who cares about the guest experience. No themeing, view of the parking lot, simple motel structures, even smaller rooms, even smaller beds, even less, less, less. But who cares, I am Disney, I have the Brand, people will buy this lesser experience and love it, and we capture a new piece of market share. There you have the ‘Caste System’. A clear plan to disregard the guest experience, disregard quality for the sake of the almighty buck, and an Ei$ner strategy to fleece the WDW public when it comes to resorts.

But please be clear on this. I do not believe, for a minute, that he is antimagic. Or that he sits up late at night and dreams of ways to screw the public.

The ‘Caste System’ you believe in diametrically opposes this statement. You appear to believe it was ME’s intention to give less, less, less (antiMagic?). Perhaps screw is a strong word, but you appear to believe it was his intent to give the WDW public less of an experience while he made beaucoup bucks, and price the ‘real’ Disney resorts out of the range of Joe Public, knowing that the old money and the nuveau riche would still provide the occupancy, or at least 80% of it.

This is but an example. You can’t talk about Walt and ME being diametrically opposed without believing that ME had a philosophy, a bad philosophy. All the rhetoric you spew paints a clear picture of what you believe the ME philosophy to be, even if you think you have never said so.

Thank you for providing a perfect example. Now, you see the road signs and say “Yea! Ei$ner!! What a guy!! Mouse ears on the signs.” And I see the signs and lament for a time when the Disney “philosophy” called for Disney to provide the transportation and there was no need for signs!! Ei$ner had to initiate SOMETHING to ease the busing situation! And in the end he said, “The heck with it!! Open the roads, put up signs and even print maps! We cannot move all those people by bus and I refuse to create any magical transportation, so let them drive themselves!! Oh! And by the way. Put some mouse ears on them!! It’ll look cute and we’ll remind them of the ‘brand’ at the same time!!” (a li

 

[FantasticDisFamily]

Man, I've been away for a bit (trying to instill critical thinking into the kiddies ) and return to find what amounts to a dissertation!

Hey guys...throw in a few citations and a bibliography and you could publish.

Seriously, I have one short comment to make on Eisner. His is an entrepreneurial spirit. It was the right approach at the time, and something I didn't see in the foregoing is that HE was the RIGHT person at the time because key decision makers trusted him to do the job. The job was to utilize the resources more appropriately to stave off the raiders. Period. End of discussion. He did that in the 80s and through much of the 90s with development. Development of the parks, development of the resorts, and development of the cruise line.

And YES, he DID (does) have the brand and people will pay for that brand, and he DID (is) capturing additional market segments. That is called strategy. Growth strategy. We may disagree with the direction of that strategy, and it MAY be time for a new CEO to take over. But he did do the job he was brought on board to do.

The Professor

 

[raidermatt]

Professor- Yes, you are right that he was brought in to do those things, but he was not supposed to do ONLY those things. He was not brought in to exploit the brand without maintaining and enhancing it.

Which leads to this from DK:

However, that doesn’t change all the wonderful things that were added to WDW from 1984 through the mid-90’s.

Again, Eisner did have a great team around him, capable of creating many wonderful things.

One by one, he got rid of them all because they disagreed with him (or maybe he percieved them as a threat). Never mind that these people created wonderful things that made large sums of money. They didn't go along with Eisner, so they are gone.

Let's say a baseball manager takes over a team full of wonderfully talented players that are winning games left and right. But these players are not adhering to the manager's philosophy. So, one by one, the manager gets rid of his players. First the right fielder. Then the shortstop. Etc, Etc, Etc.*

The manager is happy. He has a team who will do things HIS way. Only now, they don't win as much. Talented superstar players are no longer interested in playing for his team. The team's performance suffers, and they no longer even do as well as the average team in the leauge. They are under .500.

Why in the name of Casey Stengal would we want to give so much credit to this manager that inherited this incredibly talented team? Sure, he got them to win when the previous manager couldn't, but he almost immediately tried to dismantle it. And many of the wonderful accomplishments made by the team were actually things he didn't want them to do!

(If we had any Cowboy fans around here, I'd bring up Barry Switzer...)


*Obscure movie reference

 

[raidermatt]

Do I dislike Eisner, hell ya, lowering standards and cutting prices, but do I HATE him and think his head should roll (NOT figuratively), NO!

Nobody hates him. (at least nobody that I know of who is posting in this thread).

He has just not made many decisions that are for the long-term good of the company. And the ones he did make (utilizing assets) were "no-brainers".

By definition, poor long term decisions do not immediately result in poor results. It takes time. Even if you only see the last three years as the "under-performing" years, the decisions that have led to that under performance started long before then.

(for the record, Disney has been under-performing vs. the Dow since mid-'98, except for a few months in 2000. Prior to that, Disney's performance has done no better than to mirror the Dow for at least 10 years.)

 

[FantasticDisFamily]

And it is probably time for a change - a CEO in positoin with one company for as long as ME has been (and not a family member) is highly unusual.

Indeed the strategy has changed. Perhaps he is not listening as well as he once was.

Although I would respectfully disagree with the comment that he hasn't enhanced the brand. It would appear he has - more people than ever are considering Disney as a viable vacation, entertainment option. No longer is it the family (translation kiddy) venue it was once considered to be. That is enhancement of the brand.

Indeed a good CEO must be an outstanding leader, and it is to his discredit that he didn't share credit and celebrate his people as he should have, particularly of late.

And now I must run to a meeting so can not comment further - speaking of crafting strategy that is the task at hand.

The Professor

 

[raidermatt]

Although I would respectfully disagree with the comment that he hasn't enhanced the brand. It would appear he has - more people than ever are considering Disney as a viable vacation, entertainment option. No longer is it the family (translation kiddy) venue it was once considered to be. That is enhancement of the brand.

But, with respects of course, more people does not automatically mean enhancement. Utilizing/exploiting, yes.

This example doesn't apply here, but I just want to quickly prove that more guests does not equal brand enhancement... If you lower the price of something, demand will increase, but the brand has not been enhanced, and could even be seen as damaged.

The Disney brand does have tremendous value. But does the brand itself REALLY have MORE value than it did 15 years ago? Forget whether Disney utilizes that brand more or less, that's not the point.

The Disney brand, with respect to the parks, used to translate into "WOW!". But Disney-MGM far from wowed most people from day one. It has grown stronger, but people had come to expect "WOW"! and VALUE from day one from Disney. Then AK, which has disappointed many, and now DCA and DSP, which are bombs.

In the meantime, Disney has gained a reputation for penny-pinching and cost cutting. Their customer service used to be pointed to as the shining example of how to make it work. Now, while still better than average, they have clearly slipped.

So, I must maintain that the brand has not really been enhanced. Better utilized? Absolutely. But enhanced? No.

 

[DisneyKidds]

Matt.........I don't think anyone, even car 1's and 2's, would say that things haven't gone afoul and that Eisner hasn't made mistakes. That certainly isn't what I'm saying. However, to say that after he was appointed and began to successfully utilize Disney's assets that....................

he almost immediately tried to dismantle it. And many of the wonderful accomplishments made by the team were actually things he didn't want them to do!

.............seems a bit strong and a bit too black and white.

That manager you speak of who failed to keep the right team together - he should be fired. Eisner should be fired. Are you saying that if that manager happened to win a couple or three World Series before he let the team fall apart that they should give the rings back because he screwed up later on?

To be honest, people should have stood up when the whole Katzenburg fiasco took place. When did that happen? Oh, about the time things really got bad. Hmmmm...............

 

[ohanafamily]

This is really interesting as far as the history goes, I am having a little trouble with the fact and fiction areas..maybe it is because of the dental surgery this morning.
Katzenburg- did he leave or was he fired.
how much of what our Dart Hero did that was good came out of projects started before his time, and would those projects have surfaced if it were still the previous administration.

one more thing, I am a Dallas Cowboy fan and I think that Jerry Jones is trying to destroy the local spirit so he can move it to Arkansas. Do you think ME has a hidden agenda?


I apologise if I am not really with it, I had 4 very bad wisdom teeth taken out this morning and have been told I would be in serious pain for 3-5 days...numbness hasn't quite worn off yet, and DW wants to hit me over the head with a hammer to keep me from pacing...I will be back as consciosness permits...

 

[BRERALEX]

please pass the vicadon* to everyone please or even better if you have percaset*

 

[scooby-the-doo]

Originally posted by DVC-Landbaron
I cannot see any good that he is directly responsible for.

As I said before, you can thank Eisner for Disney being a major player in the motion picture industry.

Disney Era: 20,000 Leagues under the Sea, best animation studio in the buisness
Card Walker Era: Herbie Rides Again, The Arisitocrats
Eisner Era: <No classics, but regularly in the top two grossing studios of the year>

 

[raidermatt]

That manager you speak of who failed to keep the right team together - he should be fired. Eisner should be fired.

Problem is, if you wait until he has actually accomplished the dismantleing, the damage is already done.

If I'm chopping down a tree, the last blow is no less responsible for the tree falling than the first. And when looking in hindsight, if you want to look for the point where the tree's demise began, its with the first blow, even though it didn't even cause the tree to wobble.

To be honest, people should have stood up when the whole Katzenburg fiasco took place. When did that happen? Oh, about the time things really got bad. Hmmmm...............

Well, we're making progress. For awhile there, you only classified the "bad times" as the last year or two...

Eisner did not all of a sudden "get dumb" with Katzenburg. Decisions that are not in the best long-term interests of a company take time to manifest themselves to the outside world in the form of results.

For example, if a chimp were put in charge of Pixar, what would the impact be on Finding Nemo? Probably minimal, because Lasseter and crew are still there, and the picture is almost finished. So assuming their next picture comes out in 2005, it would be at least that time before any of us saw the results. And if Lasseter has the pull to still get his way on the films, they might even make a few more successful films. Again, nobody thinks anything is wrong. But does that mean the chimp is doing anything really postive for Pixar? Eventually Lasseter will no longer want to work for a chimp who is threatened by him, so Lasseter will leave. But it might be 2007 or 2009 before we see a decline in results. Does that mean the chimp did a great job for 5 or 7 years?

Now, I am not saying Eisner is a chimp, but I am saying that nobody can screw up a company the size of Disney very quickly. Even if he had the clout on day one to go in and fire every executive in the company, it would have taken time for the impact of that to reach the consumers. But he didn't have the clout, and probably didn't even know who he would eventually want to get rid of. So it took time. But that doesn't mean the problem hadn't already started.

 

[FantasticDisFamily]

Ok, I am going to stand by my statement that ME HAS enhanced, not exploited the brand.

To enhance something in a marketing context means to make it more attractive to a targetted market segment. Those participating in this forum are NOT the segment for whom it was enhanced. In that respect for the segment of the market we might describe as Disneyphiles, an error was made. The enhancement of the brand towards segments that were ripe for capture actually decreased the brands value to an extent in the eyes of that segment. However, I would also point out that it has not decreased it to the extent some would like to claim as everyone who is engaged in the conversation is still going to WDW, buying merchandise and blatantly supporting the brand.


The Professor

 

[DisneyKidds]

Well, we're making progress. For awhile there, you only classified the "bad times" as the last year or two...

Sorry Mr. Raiders-Lost-Four-In-a-Row-and-Soon-to-be-Five-Fan, I have maintained that the last two or so years have been the so called 'doom and gloom' years. I have consistently labelled the last 5 or so as bad, with the good times right up through the mid 90's. It is back in the mid to late 90's when someone should have seen the axe coming out, but ME was Mr. Appleseed up to then.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Because Esiner puts up road signs and prints maps dosn't mean that he's opposed to all sorts of new "costly" transportation intitives.

Patience, please. All will be revealed soon. Just let me gather a few more quotes.

I bet that there were only green road signs everywhere before the inititive was set to create new ones.

You’d lose that bet.

Does everything need to be spinned to be negative about this man?

I spin nothing! I relate things the way I see it. You don’t have to agree. All I ask is that you consider it. Just as the previous quote clearly shows (green road signs), you don’t know everything that was Disney before. So all I ask is that you please listen, learn a bit, and consider it. In the end you may decide that every word I write is nonsense. That’s fine. As I said before, it’s only my take on things. But I do have a bit of history to offer. You may disregard it, but it doesn’t change the fact that it happened. I’ll get back to your first quote in a minute. But first I need to clear up a couple of things from the erroneous Mr. Kidds!!

There you have the ‘Caste System’. A clear plan to disregard the guest experience, disregard quality for the sake of the almighty buck, and an Ei$ner strategy to fleece the WDW public when it comes to resorts.

Now, I used this quote only as a reference to the ridiculous stuff you printed regarding my caste system. It is ALL blatantly WRONG!! The outcome is the same, but the motivations that move the plot along are 100% wrong. Not my take on things at all!!! I see no other way to do it but go line by line!! Sorry folks, but he keeps spinning me into an Ei$ner hater, giving motives that are inappropriate, distorted and quite simply, just plain wrong. He needs correcting if we are to keep up any semblance of civilized conversation.

Under this ‘Caste System’ Ei$ner determined that Disney resorts were underpriced and Disney land was underutilized. What ME proceeds to do is create a whole new class of resorts called ‘moderate’. The goal of these ‘moderate’ resorts was two fold. First, by creating this second class of resorts ME could justify jacking the existing resort prices up to exorbitant levels.

Agreed! Simply motivated by profit. Nothing sinister or ominous in the air. Money is the motivating factor.

ME thinks to himself – I am Disney, I have the Brand, people will pay whatever I want to charge, even if it is no longer a value.

He may have thought that, he may not have that. I certainly don’t know. I suspect it didn’t enter his thinking at all. He was motivated by money, pure and simple.

Second, in the ‘moderate’ resorts ME figures he can build cheap.

Money again. Nothing but money. Profit. Don’t you get it? Nothing despicable. Nothing nefarious. Just trying to be the best modern day CEO he can be. Unfortunately, it takes a bit more for Disney!

Who cares about the guest experience. View of the parking lot, exterior corridors, smaller rooms, smaller beds, less, less, less. But who cares, I am Disney, I have the Brand, people will buy this lesser experience and love it, and we capture a new piece of market share.

Here’s where the slant really begins. I do NOT believe that he consciously gave this concept any thought at all. If he did it may have gone your way and it may have really pained him. But again, MONEY, was the motivating factor. He was doing what he thought he was supposed to do. Make money.

Anyway, I grow tired of refuting your spin. Every word you say might be true and it might not be true. I don’t know and I don’t care. The motive was money. Profit. That’s all. Nothing more. It’s all those little, “Who cares about the guest experience.” Bits that drive me crazy!!! THAT IS NOT WHAT I THINK!! It’s only what happened. He is motivated by profit. ARE WE CLEAR YET!?!?!

He didn’t set out to ‘disregard’ the guest experience. He didn’t plan to ‘disregard’ quality. He didn’t actively scheme to ‘fleece’ the public. These were merely byproducts of the actions he took. Actions that were motivated by MONEY. (Scoop warning!! Double quote coming up!!!)

But please be clear on this. I do not believe, for a minute, that he is antimagic. Or that he sits up late at night and dreams of ways to screw the public.

The ‘Caste System’ you believe in diametrically opposes this statement. You appear to believe it was ME’s intention to give less, less, less (antiMagic?). Perhaps screw is a strong word,

Way too strong a word. In fact that aspect of his ‘intentions’ had nothing to with motivations. He was after money. And my statement does NOT diametrically oppose this view. NOT ANTIMAGIC!! Just motivated (highly motivated) by profit. Are we still clear!?!?!

This is but an example. You can’t talk about Walt and ME being diametrically opposed without believing that ME had a philosophy, a bad philosophy. All the rhetoric you spew paints a clear picture of what you believe the ME philosophy to be, even if you think you have never said so.

I guess this is as good a place as any to fill you in on what I think so there can be no question about it. His philosophy (if you really want to call it that) is to make money. Increase profits. That’s it!! And that is diametrically opposed to Walt’s philosophy. UNDERSTAND!?!?!! It really couldn’t be more plain. (And I’m not even talking about the fact that he’s terribly inept at it!!!)

OK Testtrack!! Here we gooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!

Guess what – roads and road signs existed before Eisner.

WRONG!!!! No signs in Disney!! But thanks for playing. We do have conciliation prizes!! A four page essay by yours truly on the true meaning of the painted stripes by the Magic Kingdom parking gates!!! No signs, Mr. Kidds!! You could get lost real easy back then! I know!! I did!!

He didn’t “open the roads”. That is ridiculous. People were already driving themselves – or did Disney put in all those parking lots at the CR and Poly after 1984? Oh, and the MK parking lot and tram system – was that an Ei$ner creation? Get real.

Do a little research pal!! And then you can “get real”!!

And look at your very quote. You clearly state that Eisner refused to create magical transportation. Wouldn’t that be antiMagic?

No! He’s trying to be fiscally responcible. For him it’s business as usual. Nothing antimagic about it. Just saving a few pennies while forgetting, once again, what his true product really is. Typical!

It is more recently that decisions have been made that might be contrary to a quality and guest experience based philosophy.

Why can’t we just agree to this and call it quits?

After you do that you come back and tell me that nothing magical, nothing creative, nothing Disney was added. Well, you can’t. All you can say is that Eisner was not responsible for any of it. That is hogwash.

I disagree!!

Many things were put out there in that time period that I can call Disney. But this in spite of Ei$ner not because of him. Surely you’ve read AV accounts? Do you totally ignore them or worse discount them? And these recent developments. How can you account for these? Did he just suddenly go brain-dead one day? Did he wake up one morning and think his wallet was a bit too thin and on that same morning turned greedy and stupid at the same time? I really don’t think so. So I challenge you. Put up or shut up!! Show me the PROOF (or at least a preponderance of the evidence) that he was responsible for anything that was created under his tenure. I don’t think you can. But have fun trying!!!

 

[Testtrack321]

I'm a nice guy Baron, I liked when you told me to enjoy my trip to DL and other things, but I don't see you taking our thoughts and ideas that mabey, just mabey, Eisner has some good still left in him.

Also, the road sign refrence was to the 'norm', what Universal and others do. Disney didn't have to do that, but they did.

And DisneyKidd, I think he does too.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Also, the road sign refrence was to the 'norm', what Universal and others do. Disney didn't have to do that, but they did.

I understand. And I also understand how you might assume it would be true for Disney as it was for EVERYWHERE else in the country. And that’s where the old Disney magic comes into play.

The whole concept was a place that simply steeped you in the “experience”. To let absolutely no hint (or as much as humanly possible) of the real world into your Magical Dream Vacation. So they took the Disneyland ‘berm’ idea and times it by the power of ten!! They bought up land to insure that they controlled EVERTHING!! And they provided innovative, themed, magical and just simply fun ways to get around!! I think I remember that from a little pamphlet that Disney used to give out. Goofy saying that “getting there was half the fun”!! And it used to be.

When you drove up to the gates, you told them your destination. And they told you what line to follow to the resort of your choice. No signs. No need for any. You left the driving to them. Once there you locked the car and didn’t return for it until it was time to go home!!

Scoop and others LOVE WDW for the immersive-ness of the experience!! That experience is being intruded on constantly today. Planet Hollywood. AMC. McDonalds. Rainforest Café. Workmen painting while guests are present. Non-themed partitions. And part of that intrusion comes from those damned buses belching diesel fumes. And thousands of cars cutting off those buses. And even the pretty, picturesque, purple signs.

To you those signs are cute. To me they say that Goofy’s “getting there is half the fun” is dead and buried in the long forgotten past.

but I don't see you taking our thoughts and ideas that mabey, just mabey, Eisner has some good still left in him.

Sorry Mr. Track. I really don’t see it. But you can see that I never saw much good in him. At least in retrospect. So it’s especially hard to for me to see any good still left in him!!

If you do, well, God bless!! But I think you’re heading for a real hard fall!! Even Scoop and Mr. Kidds agree there ain’t much good left, no matter how much he started out with!

 

[Testtrack321]

Cute, mabey, but for me it isn't Esiner's stupidity/reluctance/cheepness that their there. People DRIVE to WDW. People actually come from OUTSIDE to spend a day at WDW, then DRIVE out and then DRIVE back in tomorrow. That's why MK, Epcot, MGM, and AK all having PARKING LOTS! So does DD and all the other minor parks! A great concept! Have options for people who don't want stay at WDW or day visitors. Or hell, those who want to check out the other resorts.

With all those painters, unthemed walls, and those damn buses, I can tell you of one family who could stay at WDW, because it was cheeper. Were complaining about how un-themed All Stars is when we stay at Poly. But when my friends go to WDW, they can't afford the Poly or anyothers. They stay at the All Stars. They want to stay at Disney. They don't want to re-morgage their house to stay at a price on site resort. Nor did they want to stay offsite.

And Baron, Walt-did-no-harm, why then did Disney include Fort Wilderness Campgrounds? They could bring cars (SHOCK!), cook (HORROR!), and sleep in an RV (DESGUST!)? Because there were people out ther who wanted to do Disney, but not the expensive, rich people Disney that people are steriotypicaly refering to everywhere. Look at us. We stay at the $150 per nite sites for weeks instead of days. We look outside, OH MY GOD! It's a worker! HOW THE HELL DID HE GET IN! SHOT HIM! I want a refund.

But there are people who want to go to Disney who can't spend that much a night. They want to do Disney cheeply. But they want to stay on-site. They like the All Stars and think it's a wonderful theme (and IT IS! I've stayed there for FIRST!) for a resort. They then might drive to (OH MY GOD! UNDISNEY!) to Epcot to ride Test Track (IT REPLACED WOM! KILL THEM!!).

Should there be a bigger monorail line, yes. Should there be a better alternative to buses, yep. But look at the big picture Baron. It's a COMPANY. Pure and simple. It's here to MAKE money. Walt did it. And face it, if people don't pay, then it can't happen. Simple as that.

Money dosn't grow on the Liberty Tree.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

OK!! EVERYONE!! Scoop, Mr. Kidds! Pirate!! Please re-read the above post by Mr. Track. This is what the younger generation thinks Disney is all about!!






I rest my case!