Disney resorts rated #1 in customer satisfaction!

[Buzz2001]

http://www.marketmetrix.com/en/default.aspx?s=news&p=MMHIPRQ22007

I know, it's a conspiracy.

 

[Aisling]

I know, it's a conspiracy.

LOL

 

[Another Voice]

WOW! - my cell phone company and my cable company both tell me the exact same thing! I must lead a charmed life to surrounded with such fantasic service...and I guess all those dropped calls and "signal unavailable" channels are just a figments I make up so I maintain my evil lifestyle.

Besides - who trusts any company that put Disney's Hotels in the "Upper Upperscale"? Have these people even seen Pop Century?

 

[Lewisc]

Besides - who trusts any company that put Disney's Hotels in the "Upper Upperscale"? Have these people even seen Pop Century?

The service at POP Century far exceeded my expectations. There was a message on my phone telling me my purchases had been delivered to the gift shop. When we got there a CM retrieved the items. At the BC the CM couldn't find the item and said he didn't have time to check the items without labels. After 3 attempts, at 3 different times with 3 different CM I had to locate the resort manager. He said the gift shop employees don't report to him but he sent someone over to the Studios to repurchase the items (obviously I didn't pay twice) and had them sent to my room.

Shower drain wasn't working in BC. Three attempts to get maintenance. I finally told a manager my kids were going to take a shower and if they didn't want to fix the drain they could clean up after the flood. Maintenance was sent up within 5 minutes.

I have to give Disney a lot of credit. They were able to theme a 3 star hotel to look like a deluxe resort and are able to get 4-5* pricing. It's amazing how many posters on DIS think the GF is a 5* hotel when it's not even a 4*.

 

[G8RFAN]

When I read the article this morning, all I could think was how they must be screening and filtering the survey list given to this market metrics group or at least that's what certain folks here may feel, as they have the database and technolgy of categorizing their guests like no other hospitality organization.

 

[KMovies]

Why must people pick on the value resorts.

The great thing about WDW is that ...

it has resorts that you can spend $500 a night at

or $400

if those aren't in your budget, try $300

heck, we even have $200

and even $100 or less ... sometimes as cheap as $59


Most resorts can't advertise 4 theme parks are just a short bus trip away.

I stayed at a Holiday Inn off site once, it was a few bucks less, and they had shuttle service to the parks. Yep - about 3 times in the AM and 3 times in the PM. Couldn't even stay til park closing.

 

[EUROPACL]

Why must people pick on the value resorts.

Yeah how dare people have an opinion about a motel 6 with a Gaint Yo-Yo, they just don't get the magic like you and I do, who wouldn't want to stay at one of the great Roofiecolida All-Star Inns? Its like those people that don't get the magic behind another spinner being added...or don't feel the magic standing on that 30 min trip on a bus to MK. I have no idea why people don't think exactly like you and I do...its a good thing Ii didn't bring any rotten fruit to throw.

 

[Another Voice]

Why must people pick on the value resorts.

As I've written a million times - I have no problem with lower priced accommodations. "Motor Inns" were in WDW's plan in Walt's time; the concept for all of the original resorts was that each would offer different tiers of prices so that all different budgets could be accepted.

What I have a problem with is Disney's laziness and arrogance. For the same amount of captial - and a little imagination and innovation - they could have created $70/night places with all the "magic" that we expect from Disney. Warehouses with Lillian Vernon fiberglass monstrosities is not Disney – it’s junior high school level design. And it’s the height of arrogance that Disney tries to pass these places off as anything special or unique.

The Pop Century sitting out on International Drive would have long been out of business.

And as for “convenience” – the busses are so bad most people rent cars just to drive around WDW now. If I’m going to do that I might as well drive an extra five minutes and stay at a place that has more going for it than a fifty foot faux cell phone.

 

[Wick]

Why must people pick on the value resorts.

Believe me, after duking it out with the best of them on here, the most common complaints are centered around a disagreement on asthetics. They don't like an 80 foot Pongo or Yo-yo. big deal.

 

[Another Voice]

big deal.

You expect nothing, you get nothing.

That's why you must be so smitten with the way things are going.

 

[Wick]

You expect nothing, you get nothing.

Expectations have nothing to do with your disapproval of aesthetics.

Let's face it: every time a Value resort pops up (particularly Pop Century), the first issue raised is not about pricing or something substantial, but rather an issue over the "fiberglass monstrosities." Your basis for a loss of Disney quality is rooted in the notion that a 70-foot mickey mouse is distasteful-- which, to me, is hardly a noteworthy grievance.

 

[EUROPACL]

Expectations have nothing to do with your disapproval of aesthetics.

Let's face it: every time a Value resort pops up (particularly Pop Century), the first issue raised is not about pricing or something substantial, but rather an issue over the "fiberglass monstrosities." Your basis for a loss of Disney quality is rooted in the notion that a 70-foot mickey mouse is distasteful-- which, to me, is hardly a noteworthy grievance.

To really be honest the giant "icons" make for a giant easy target...but I think if you go back and read some of the other issues that are often brought up there are more than just problems with the cheap aesthetics of the place. Too bad Landbaron no longer post here he could write you a book on what is wrong with Disney Hotels and the Motels these days. To be honest I'd love to go over the issues again and again (as I'm sure you will demand of someone) but it's a lost battle at this point, Disney is not going to tear them down and the people that love them aren't going to change their minds.

 

[KMovies]

Motel 6 - Magic none

A building similar to Motel 6 but with a 80 ft. Dalmation - Magic

Since the value resorts are constantly full, and some of the largest of any of the resorts, I guess people do like them.

 

[EUROPACL]

A building similar to Motel 6 but with a 80 ft. Dalmation - Magic

So is this place "magic" too?? http://www.nickhotel.com/

Since the value resorts are constantly full, and some of the largest of any of the resorts, I guess people do like them.

Ahhh...the aforementioned Roofie colada motel...the magic of defloweing is overwelming all the way home.

 

[Another Voice]

Since the value resorts are constantly full, and some of the largest of any of the resorts, I guess people do like them.

The shallowness of this "logic" is endless.

 

[G8RFAN]

Before my wife got her architectural degree, I helped her build all these models of her designs and I got to see who were the artistic/creative ones in her class. The self proclaimed "Top Chef" of the bunch was once inspired to create a building from his tennis shoe and a roll of copper tubing. I would have failed him. The moral of the story is sometimes the artistic ones lose the concept of practicality and pracitcality is many times the drving force behind the economics of making a project work. Forgetting price points since this is Disney we are talking about, let's list the things that a value resort can NOT have:

1. Construction cost per unit equal to or higher than an inflation adjusted cost for a Moderate resort (read less S.F. per room)
2. Operating costs per unit higher than Moderates (read more units per $ of overhead)
3. Better furnishing than the Moderates
4. More convenient locations than the Moderates
5. Better amenities than the Moderates
6. Room rate comparable to the Moderates

See a pattern here? Otherwise, the gloves are off and they could have been as creative as they wanted...within budget. At what point do you risk canabalizing your Moderate business if you build a Value product so good that you suddenly diminish the value of a Moderate? They purposely built two story boxes. It's the same economic reason all the economy "resorts" have chosen to as it is the most effiicient construction and operating design. How they could have themed them probably leaves a lot to desired, but I guarantee you that a lot of experienced people in this business segment poured a lot of time to properly position these resorts. Hate em if you want, that's your right, but if you were the one to screw with marketing and suddenly have to reinvent the value proposition of your Moderates and then your Deluxe resorts, you would have been fired.

 

[raidermatt]

Expectations have nothing to do with your disapproval of aesthetics.

Let's face it: every time a Value resort pops up (particularly Pop Century), the first issue raised is not about pricing or something substantial, but rather an issue over the "fiberglass monstrosities." Your basis for a loss of Disney quality is rooted in the notion that a 70-foot mickey mouse is distasteful-- which, to me, is hardly a noteworthy grievance.

So all these people who talk about a "Disney Difference", or say that Disney is Disney because of the details, these people are all full of it?

True themeing is not a substantial component of what Disney is, or should be, about?

Nobody said a 70ft Mickey Mouse is distasteful. Only that any one of us hacks could come up with that idea. Shouldn't Disney be able to come up with something better?

Of course they should, and they can. The real question is why didn't they bother, and why aren't some willing to hold Disney to what was once its own standard? Doing so does not mean that you cannot stay at a value resort and have a good time. It only means that you recognize things for what they are.

 

[DancingBear]

Motel 6 - Magic none

A building similar to Motel 6 but with a 80 ft. Dalmation - Magic

And you posted this without any intentional irony?

 

[raidermatt]

They purposely built two story boxes. It's the same economic reason all the economy "resorts" have chosen to as it is the most effiicient construction and operating design. How they could have themed them probably leaves a lot to desired, but I guarantee you that a lot of experienced people in this business segment poured a lot of time to properly position these resorts. Hate em if you want, that's your right, but if you were the one to screw with marketing and suddenly have to reinvent the value proposition of your Moderates and then your Deluxe resorts, you would have been fired.

So the point isn't that they don't live up to "Disney" standards, it's whether or not we are ok with it?

This seems to be a pattern, where you explain why Disney did what it did. I, and most others here, know exactly why they did what they did. That doesn't make it right.

If in a company like Disney, pointing out that compromising certain standards isn't acceptable and would get one fired, then THAT is a problem. As strong as Disney's marketing is, Disney's greatest long term successes have always been driven by creativity, not marketing. Allowing marketing (or accounting, whoever) to drive these kinds of decisions is not the optimal way to run a content-reliant company.

 

[G8RFAN]

I'm sorry you lost your job.