Disney Theme Parks: Today vs. Yesterday

I've never had a problem with "industry specific" inflation, it's just that until recently I didn't know how to calulate it. However, my feeling has always been that the disparity between the current WDW rates and a CPI adjusted rate (over 100%) was so large that even if we did have an industry specific rate it wouldn't cover the disparity. My mistake was assuming that others would look at the disparity and also think, "Hotel prices might be rising at a rate higher than inflation, but more than double?" But now we have a better idea.

However, as AV pointed out, in the days of yore you didn't have to qualify things to be able to make a positive statement about Disney.

Just wanted to see that again.
 
Hmmmm. All set to tackle Mr. Kidds… But wait!! EGADS!! It seems I’ve offended someone!! This will not do!! NO!! This will not do at all! Sorry Mr. Kidds. I have other business to attend to. I suggest putting on Seventh Sojourn while you wait! I’ve even grown accustomed to When You’re A Fee Man Again, by Pindar. I used to hate it as kid. Now I think it’s rather good!! Anyway, you and I are on hold for a while!!

But thanks for the welcome to this board.
Mr. Bear. I am sincerely sorry. I really thought you were at least a semi-regular. I remember seeing your posts, but maybe that has just been recently. I do apologize if I appeared to come on a bit strong. I really do want this board to be the friendliest place on the DIS, so…

WELCOME DancingBear!!

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

I really do appreciate your input.

I hope you receive a similar warm welcome should you ever venture over to join us on the Debate board.
WOW!! I hope I misread it!! It sure didn’t give off any warm and fuzzies!! But you needn’t worry (or prepare). Yeah! That’s right!! A clear case of, “Been there – Done that – Ain’t going back!!!” I find the debate board… well… ah… unfriendly!! And a little cliquish. Don’t you?

Anyway, my post, regarding our history on this board was meant to illustrate the need, every once in while, for a little perspective, and if nothing else a real requirement for a base line of some sort or another. The snappish tone of your response indicates to me that you might have missed the point. Can I surmise from your answer that the lesson within my post was kind of lost on you? If I’m mistaken I apologize again. I blame the awkward period of getting acquainted. If I am not mistaken then, that’s a shame.

You see, I’ve been on this board for the past three years. I KNOW its history. You do not. That doesn’t make me better than you. It only gives me the perspective of past posts and all the subtleties of the various personalities involved. And a little understanding of what may be the underlying reason (if not reasoning) behind some of the posts and posters. Understand that I have LIVED through it (a word you will get tired of by the end of this thing, I’m sure!!). And I recognize that it has changed. Fortunately, this Board has changed for the good. It is my considered opinion that Disney has not.

Just as you couldn’t possibly KNOW me from the few posts you’ve read from me, neither can someone who started to go to Disney in 1998 possibly KNOW what things were really like, ‘philosophically’, in the seventies. They have no perspective. They have no point of reference. They have no base line, just as you had no base line for my posts and/or philosophy. That’s really all I’m saying.

On the other hand I do have a much wider focus. I have a base line from which I can compare then to now. I can see trends and measure philosophical changes. Only because I LIVED it. NOT because it makes me inherently better! Is this making any sense to you?

It also does not mean in the slightest that this perspective (my perspective) takes away from anything that’s there. It only means that I have lived though BOTH time periods!!! They have only lived through one. Tell me. Who has the better vantage point?

You may not agree with my perspective. That is entirely a separate matter. But please at least grant me that I have one. And that I have one that is a little deeper that someone who ‘discovered’ WDW within the past five years!! I LIVED through the building of WDW. I LIVED through the grand opening. I LIVED through those stale years of broken promises that marked the end of Walker/Miller. I lived through a yearly trip, sometimes more, since 1972. I lived through the building of EPCOT Center. I LIVED through Ei$ner’s coronation. I LIVED through Frank Wells death. I lived through the ‘Disney Decade’ (HA!). I lived through the first year they cut hours in the summer (1998).

And WE (the new comers and I) LIVED through the past five, horrible, stock plummeting, boneheaded management moves, years together. You say you LIVED it as well. And you say these things I find VERY disturbing regarding Disney’s philosophy you have no problem with. Well! I gotta tell ya, I don’t understand you at all, but if you’re happy with that, I’m downright THRILLED!!!!!

You and I have to agree to disagree. I really don’t think there’s much point in talking. You see, I KNOW with all my heart and soul, due to my personal experience, that somewhere along the line Disney lost the old philosophy that set them apart from every company on the face of the earth! If you have truly known Disney for as long as you say you have, and really can’t see even the possibility I might be on to something, then we really would be wasting a bunch of bandwidth continuing this thing. As for the new arrivals however…

I’ve been where most of these people are today. I was in the rose-colored set!! Hell!! I was one of the leaders!! If you DID know my history you’d know that I bought the DVC within the first year it was offered, sight unseen, just because it was DISNEY!!! It doesn’t get much more rose-colored than that!!

Also, since I am deficient in my history of this board, I'd be interested to know just when the "Golden Period" of WDW was in your judgement. Pre-Epcot? Early Epcot?
From 1955 to 1984. Sorry. I take a hard line on this!!!



OK. That’s it. Just a couple of wrap up bits.

HOPE!!!! MY SAVIOR!! You’d think that after all these discussions, and being RIGHT just on gut instinct, I would have copied down some numbers and back-up so new members to the Board could ask me and I could actually respond with a modicum of intelligence!! But sadly, your Friendly Neighborhood LandBaron is almost as lazy as he is scatterbrained!!! So thank you.

As an aside, you really ought to keep that INDUSTRY stuff out of it!! Or at least give both sets of numbers. Especially in the theme park arena. Heck!! Until five years ago, Disney WAS the theme park industry!! You’d be forced to follow their own inflation!! Which would be a little like the cat chasing his own tail, wouldn’t it?

And finally to Mr. Kidds,

Did you enjoy Seventh Sojourn?
 
One short, final thought for the night. A page ago I wanted to acknowledge a poster who, in one very small post, made me continue. I had almost given up (even I think it feels good when you finally stop banging your head into the wall!!!) but his post made me go on*.

To mitros:
I still appreciate what you say about the Disney of yore.

THANK YOU!!!!
















* so I guess this means you all have him to blame!!! ;)
 
I find the debate board… well… ah… unfriendly!! And a little cliquish. Don’t you?

Baron - with all due respect, I do believe there is a select group of people here who tend to stroke one another.
 

Baron, thanks for your comments. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I hear this definite strain in your's and A-Vs posts that says everything is black and white. Either we're in the camp with y'all that things were much better before and the new Disney needs to get back to the old ways OR we think everything now is fine and dandy.

Let me ease some of your frustration. I get it. (And I think a lot of the other folks you get frustrated with get it). Walt's dead, and a lot of the company's heart died with it. Disney is no longer the center of creativity and innovation that it once was (if you go way back in this thread, I actually posted in support of A-V on this issue).

I'd love to have that spirit back. But, I don't see it happening. And, I don't think it's all Eisner's fault.

I know (correction--I think, based on my limited history here), that you've heard this before, and it gets under your skin, but: things have changed.

The studio system is dead. Nobody has a large in-house cadre of Sherman brothers, Xavier Atencios, etc. Disney keeps the animation department going, but the big studios today are largely financing and distribution companies, not creative centers.

Also, technology is highly developed and specialized, and costly. Where Walt was able to do a lot more of the development of audio-animatronics in-house, now Disney partners with folks like ETC and Pixar (talking here about their technical development together, not the movies). [Yes, I know that Walt partnered up with GE and the like, but I'd say a much higher percentage of the ride development was in-house than for, say, Mission Space.] I don't think it would be realistic now for Disney to have the relative in-house engineering capabilities that it once had.

Finally, the nature of business has changed. Walt was pretty much able to use the company's assets to pursue his ideas. Roy kept a reign on him, but from everything I've read Walt was fairly free, most of the time, from outside institutional investors and lenders looking over his shoulder. In the modern business world, with the overemphasis on quarterly results rather than long-term performance, I don't think a Walt would be given that same opportunity.

Despite Eisner's many faults and failings (yes, I, and I think the others, can see those, too), he did save the independence of the company. Not just on his arrival, but I think that's what the acquisition of ABC was all about. It may have been a huge mistake in retrospect with regard to its impact on the company's performance, but it was done at a time when the message on Wall Street was still "acquire or be acquired."

So, I don't think the Golden Age is ever coming back. So, I try to look at WDW in light of what it is, and can be, at the moment, given all of the circumstances above, and the competition, etc. I have my complaints, like everyone, but, on the whole, I enjoy the experience. Please don't let that frustrate you.
 
I started writing this yesterday morning, but didn't post it. Actually, Land Baron, I've thought about this before - but from a different angle than you are working from. Your basic point is that perspective is important, and that your level of past experience relates to your current perceptions.

I've noticed that there are some times when Melissa and I weren't having as much fun as we once did. I'm not talking about just when we were kids in the 70s, I mean currently - were were going two or three or four times a year, and some of the luster was rubbing off. Things weren't as exciting as they once were. Sometimes it didn't seem worth it to bother fighting a crowd to see an attraction. I'm thinking about those long week+ trips where you have all the time in the world and do everything multiple times. We were bored. We'll probably get bored again sometime. It wasn't just that some of the things that seemed lame before were seeming really lame now, it was that we didn't have that "fresh" view of things; imperfections that were already there were more visible now because we had seen things so many times. Oh please don't make me ride that back lot tour again, I'd say. Don't make me get on that raft to Tom Sawyer Island, Melissa would say. Now there's 45 minutes of our lives we'll never get back from Ellen. We had looked at the curtain enough that we could see through it. I mean, after you've ridden Pirates a few dozen times, the exit signs really start to stand out more. Familiarity sometimes bread contempt (but absence makes the heart grow fonder). And little things that most more casual visiters who don't have your experience would never notice begin to stand out to you. The more they stand out, then they really start to get irritating. I'll give you a werid example, those ship sails things on the bridge from swan and dolphin to the beach club. They have gotten to where they bug the hell out of me. I mean what are they supposed to be? What is this theming? Those dorky generic looking things. They look dumb, they are always in dis-repair. I'd cut those freaking things down. And then when I get started on that, my mind wonders over to the swan and dolphin. What are they doing there those ugly ubiqutous monstrosities? I'd like to see them demolished. It is at this point that the whole boardwalk/beach club/yacht club starts to bug me. What are those resorts doing over here, how does their theme relate to anything? What kind of "new" disney crap is this?

It is like my mother-in-law said one time "It is a lot better to be a guest than to be a cast member." That is because guests see the magic end of it, and aren't there day in and day out to see the reality of it. But after a certain number of park hours you start to pick up on that reality and see through the curtain.

Now, at that sort of point, you can do one of two things. We could have decided that things just weren't as good now as they were back in the 70s when we were kids. We could have pulled out those old memories that were full of more wonder, and were polished up a little by the nostalgia of time, and decided that things don't match the past. But I guess we both had enough memories from back then to know that not everything was perfect then. To realize, gosh, the country bears were always the country bears, if you see what I'm saying. So instead of thinking "gosh, this place isn't as good as I remember it," we accepted it for the reality of what it is (and was). It is like some people who go back stage can never believe the "magic" again, but me going back stage only gave me more of a complete picture. That kind of picture didn't make it better or worse, only more full. I can accept that "magic" for what it is. So we don't really get that burned out feeling, instead we enjoy interacting with cast members, we go do something that we've always loved, etc. There are a lot of new things that we love, and I think that being there together makes a certain newness to it, too. And along with those memories from our childhood we've added new ones, like getting married there, taking family and friends there, etc. Actually, we end up going with family and friends a lot, so that probably helps keep it fresh. LOL, last May we were there for 9 days and EVERY day we had to meet up with someone, somewhere; our schedule was like a commando schedule or something. When we have the kid to take that will add some new luster and perspective, too. So when I am ready to knock down the swan and dolphin I remember that we had a lot of fun at the dolphin with four of our friends, and the hot tub area really is nice, and we did have a couple of nice meals at Palio, and it is fun going to Kimonos after a hard day of drinking in epcot, and well, I guess they could stay (Melissa says to move Kimonos to the boardwalk, Palio to where Ariels used to be, and bring in the bulldozers anyway). Instead of hating that new fangled cheap looking and falsly themed epcot resort area, I know that it is nice to stay so close to epcot and the studios, I like storm along bay and breathless and flying fish and the storm door - holy cow, when did I get a whole new set of memories and nostalgia for this new side of the world?

But the truth is, we had time to get "bored" as kids, too, I think. I mean, I really liked If you had wings - because it was air conditioned! Melissa just told me a story about how much her friends thought mission to mars when they were kids. Melissa said that as an older kid they skipped fatasyland altogether; we only went there to be goofy. I can remember as a kid playing "Guess the Tourist" where we'd try to guess where people were from based on what they looked like, how they dressed, how much they were sweating, and sort of bet on it, and somebody would have to go up and ask them. Stuff like that. I know Melissa tells me some of her favorite things to do was to play air hockey at the food and fun center. So we both had enough time as kids to take it easy. And we do that as adults too. We did the AP scaveneger hunt one day last year and we had so much fun! Collecting things for the WDW in our attic has given us new interest. I think a lot of AP holders and locals have fun with pin trading like this, we really don't get into it. The truth is, WDW is corny, campy and lame, and it always was, you go because it is fun and you can appreciate that campiness. People that have only been a couple of times, or who are only able to go every once in a while, may not realize that, and think it is cool because it looks new and shiny to them. That's why they are impressed by the big shiney's, but don't get things like Ft. Wilderness or the Polly.

I think that this view of wdw is probably more like how a lot of AP holders in So. Cal view disneyland. Are there things that bug them? Sure. Do they take things personally? Probably more than they should. But ultimately, this is just there little park, a place to enjoy your families, a place to play, a place that is magical not because of the theming, but because every single person who comes there comes there to enjoy themselves, a place where our generation can re-live fond memories of youth that happened right there! It is a like going home again. It feels that comfortable and familiar. Some things make you mad, some things make you glad. It is a human endevor and it is not 100% wonderful or 100% blaw. We love it for what it is, that little slice of home.

But the other road that one can take when their eyes are a little more tired when they look at disney world is to focus on those flaws they are now able to see - I think that happened for three or four of you all and you found each other on the internet and reinforced to each other that your views weren't your own subjective perceptions, but were reality. Then that was coupled with a historical event, the drop in tourism after 9/11 and the economy, and you convinced each other that the rest of the world agreed with you. But you were tuning out those fresh eyes - those disney newbies - who were going and having wonderful times. They just don't know any better, right? Naw, they just haven't ran the place in to the ground for themselves yet. I know this probably sounds partronizing or condescending, sorry, but it really isn't any worse than the "your just not disney enough" stuff. So sorry if it is snotty. I think you are a little older than us, so your memories of back then are from a more adult perspective. I don't know. We all look through it from our own personal view, but I think Melissa and I are more able to see it through the views of other guests perspectives, I don't know. Land Baron, I also think that your kids are mostly grown up, and as they grew up and their perspectives grow more adult, yours probably change along with them - as they get older and don't get as excited about fantasyland or dumbo, Dad's perception may change along with them. A person can't admit or accept that campiness, they take it seriously, and then are disappointed because the serious things they are looking for and remembering aren't there.

I think I remember saying on here one time that when we went in the Fall of 1972 I was four, and it was before we moved to Florida, and we stayed in a hotel (motel?) off-property. One of the things that I remembered most about that trip was this amazing rocket ship. You could climb up it, it had a slide that came down. It was this gigantic amazing, shining thing. Years later when I was in high school I was driving over to disney with some friends and we went past some hotel (motel?) on the Kissimmee side, and holy cow. There was that amazing rocket slide. It was about 7 feet tall. Weeds were growing up through it, rusted looking. That's the kind of thing our nostalgic memories can be.

And yes, I can be here now in 2003 and actually love and be fond of Epcot and have a wonderful time there, and think it is beautiful and relaxing, even if I did think it was a hopelessly lame boring geek fest that I would just as soon go to as the dentist in the early 80s. That is a weird way that our perceptions can change also - we can begin to appreciate things we didn't like back then because we are older or are in different circumstances. At the same time, I can go to Ft. Wilderness and realize how hokey it might seem to newbies, but still have a wonderful time soaking in the old school disneyness.

Melissa says "If people are going to pull the "who is more disney crap, I'm going to go one step further. I'll say if somebody started going to walt disney world as an adult they will never get Disney really - if you think you have some trump card, that is the trump on you. If the first time you saw it was from an adult's eyes, you don't have a clue what Walt Disney World is. You had to grow up on it to really understand it - and I bet your kids don't have the same view that you do. Remind them I'm 30, so I'm not some late 80s bloomer or 90s person - I've been there every since I was 6 months old. I've only stayed off property for once in my life for one day (at the Dutch Inn) and my mom spent that day getting us moved over to the Polynesian, so I'm not some 'late comer.' I'm so Disney I think the Epcot resorts are new disney, so put that in your pipe and smoke it. That might sound crass but that's what y'all sound like to everybody else. It really is true tought that if you see it from when you are a kid, you see how wonderful it is a child, grow in to how lame it is a teen, then see how nostalgic it is as an adult. You have a more complete understanding."
 
"No one spent hours walking around World Showcase - only to tell themselves the trip was short becasue Disney always opened half-built parks."

Maybe not, AV, but many of us walked through world showcase in the early 80s thinking it was boring dorkville, and hoping never to have to come back again - you never went there on a shool bus, so maybe you don't know about that or understand it - weren't you an attraction cm at Pirates in California then? I'm sure that a DL cm would have thought that epcot was pretty nifty back then when it opened. Or had you started that yet - it is hard to get a feel for how old you are. Did you think that world showcase had went downhill any when you were there a few weeks ago when you took that trip across the country for that special preview ride of mission:space? Did you have a chance to check out any of your old favorites while you were there, or go over any of the sponsership contract changes? Did they let you ride on one of the segways?

DR
 
wow some thread!:p

so does anybody know if and when COMCAST makes a hostile bid to take over Disney?
I just thought a comment from way out of left field would be fun....

Maybe what Disney needs is a Last Action Hero at its helm, a prominant well like image/figure that people can connect to. I hear Goldie Hawn is a heck of a businesswomen...:)
 
The snappish tone of your response indicates to me that you might have missed the point.
****clink, clink******

Another nickel drops in the jar ;). Wow, Baron, all that writing to say "My viewpoint isn't better than yours, but can't you understand that my perspective provides me a more complete basis from which to form an opinion about what is REALLY going on (read: it really is better than yours)."

So, in answer to your question...............................
Is this making any sense to you?
.......................absolutely NOT!!!!!

Why not? Well, DancingBear and the good d-r have given you a little to chew on as to why your perspective might not be the only one that renders the ability to truely see everything that is happening. I'll try and add some more later when I have adequate time. For now though............On the heels of d-r/Melissa's sentiments allow me to play the part of the child and let's take a moment to think about, in context ;), exactly what Thomas might have been trying to say in Another Morning*...................."Yesterday's dreams.....are tomorrows sighs. Watch children playing, they can be so wise." Think about those words and I'll be back to give you my take later.
As an aside, you really ought to keep that INDUSTRY stuff out of it!! Or at least give both sets of numbers.
Why on Earth!!!?? Because realistic numbers that actually mean something don't support your argument as well!!?? Sorry, if that would be your approach on the cost subject you can talk to MY paw ;) :tongue:.




*For some reason I think you might be more partial to Pinder, so maybe let him speak to you.........................

"Night has now become day for everyone.........I can see it all from this great height.......I can feel the sun slipping out of sight..........But the World... still goes on.... throught the night......."

Oh, and the sun still rises tomorrow :).

PS....then again, if we summize that Disney is currently in a state of nightfall and we consider Ei$ner to be the orb in this context, maybe this is all it comes down to.................

"Cold hearted orb that rules the night........Removes the colours from our sight.......Red is grey and yellow white.........But we decide which is right.............And which is an illusion???

..............and I guess we all make that decision for ourselves.

Thus ends this particular portion of this discussion of Disney as interpreted thru the music of the Moody Blues :crazy: :).

PSS - Yes, perhaps I've gotten carried away, but perhaps this could be a way for Baron and I to communicate on a better level :).
 
Speaking as one of those original Disneyites from the 70's all I can say is that I do take exception to the "trump card" ploy. It is bogus, recriminatory, and completely biased.

A Disney experience is far too personal to analyze philosophically on an individual basis. Knowing and understanding the concept, direction and initial implementation of the creator's vision is very noble indeed and quite interesting to listen to. Beyond that it lacks the ability to govern perception.

What I mainly have the most difficulty with is the idea that only those in possession of such background knowledge are solely deserving of credibility. We are talking about a theme park, which affects every individual in a different way. Not everyone patronizes eating establishments to the point of mandating a fast food portion or butter mold. Not everyone overindulges themselves and attends the parks so often they notice every minute detail to the point of extreme. Not everyone becomes so engrossed in third party reading material they behave as self declared authoritarians.

Some of us have the ability to see very clearly what works and what doesn’t irregardless of who designed it or who authorized the construction. Some of us realize that this is a place of entertainment, which continues to evolve as we do. Some of us approach our experience from an outward perspective and analyze what gains the most favorability based on where the audience actually tends to spend their time.

To harp about who did what – when – where or how is serving a very limited productive purpose. Times change. People change. Consumer demands change. Our moods and our feelings and our expectations vary distinctly. The company needs to build what will resonate with the majority of today’s audience. This is a very scrutinizing public who will immediately dismiss an unrealistic portrayal of progress. They need to continue to provide what is desired today not what was expected based on the past. To not acknowledge market expectations and the reality of choice is a clever way to dismiss the entirety of the situation.
 
Here is a prediction which I hope someone will cut and paste and hold me to:

DinoRama will be a very nice surprise to many. In fact, I'd venture to say that it will get the type of response that the 100 yr celeb has had for several unbiased observers like WDWGuide, that is, going in with low expectations only to be pleasantly rewarded...

Scoop, just fulfilling your hopes. :)
 
For the record - in case someone didn't catch the sarcasm in what DR was posting as I was talking this morning. I don't for one second believe or buy into the whole "trump card" thing. I was pretty much shooting off the cuff as some thoughts entered my head. The history of the post is accurate, but I don't for one second think I'm more Disney than anyone else around here. We all appreciate things differently. Although I do believe that how old we were when we first happened upon the Magic Kingdom plays a large role in our opinions of it and how we see it today - it doesn't matter what decade that happened to be.

So no matter what anyone here thinks deep down about who best understands the themeparks or who knows Disney better then everbody else kind of junk, I just wanted it known that I truly don't believe that and wouldn't ever say it in reality. I was just making a point at how ridiculous it sounds.
 
Wow, these last posts are very impressive and give me even more to think about. I see a mix of "glass half empty" and "glass half full" philosophies and I don't see anyone being completely wrong. Except...

I don't completely agree that someone with a longer timeline is wrong for stating that they have a different view of WDW because of that timeline. I've said this before and I'll say it again, we all compare our current experiences to our past experiences. If our past WDW visits added up to more than our current trips TO US, we're not wrong to say that the Magic has decreased. Just as those who have fewer experiences to base their thoughts on aren't wrong to say that they're perfectly happy with WDW. And my congratulations to those who are well-seasoned WDW visitors and are happy with things as they are now. Also, while Disney may often still build wonderful things their overall approach has changed, hence the miscues IMO.

Baron - with all due respect, I do believe there is a select group of people here who tend to stroke one another.
Mr crusader, I agree with you but I don't think that they do it meaning to exclude anyone. A lot of posters here know each other well and tend to greet each other as old friends even when they disagree. At least, I hope that no one ever feels left out. :confused:
 
"A Disney experience is far too personal to analyze philosophically on an individual basis. Knowing and understanding the concept, direction and initial implementation of the creator's vision is very noble indeed and quite interesting to listen to. Beyond that it lacks the ability to govern perception."

A fancy way of saying "I know what I like". Yes, people have every right to their own opinion about things. What they like, where they want to spend time, etc.

But that's what this thread is about – is it?

It's about going from "but many of us walked through world showcase in the early 80s thinking it was boring dorkville, and hoping never to have to come back again" to "the entire concept is flawed" and the sudden desire to burn it to the ground, without any thought or knowledge between those two positions.

The ability to form an opinion is not the same as the ability to understand.

While "some of us have the ability to see very clearly what works and what doesn’t", without solid information or ideas behind that statement it often comes off as "I like it, it's good; I don't like it, it sucks". You see, the real difference is knowledge. Yes, not "everyone patronizes eating establishments to the point of mandating a fast food portion" – but you only see the results of eating at a restaurant. That rarely gives you any insight to into the process that got the butter onto your plate.

In much the same way knowing what you like in a movie doesn't instantly make you a director, a screenwriter or even the third assistant dishwasher on the second unit's catering truck.

There are certain ways things work. It's an art and a craft, but some things we do know beyond "I like it". We're still using the same principles of story structure that the Greeks first figured out three thousand years ago – and given the flock of movie I saw today it would be nice if a few more people would follow them. The cope out "Times change. People change. Consumer demands change." is only true for the most shallow levels of novelty. People get tired of cop shows, but people still like drama. It's the people that don't understand the difference that suddenly proclaim "People have moved beyond cops shows - all they want are GAME SHOWS!!!!!".

People want to be amazed, people want to be thrilled, people want to be inspired. That's as true today as in 1982, 1955 or when the first guy poked a sharp stick at a saber tooth cat for thrills. The techniques to deliver those thrills have changed, but wrong to say "it worked then, but they were stupid and easily amused in 1982" or to claim that today's novelty is a breathtaking breakthrough for all time.

The goal of a business is to meet the challenges of its customers – not to demand that those people lower their standards to make the CEO's job easier. Companies that do that go out of business.

EPCOT Center was created as a challenging park. And when it was, it was very successful. But over the years the company that ran the place did not live up to their requirement to please their audience; they choose to be lazy. It is wrong – flat out wrong – to blame this on the customers for Disney's unwillingness to do their job.

Epcot (wand and all) is losing its popularity not because it was flawed for the masses, but because the resources, talents, and ambition required to keep it vibrant have all been stripped away when lazy and untalented people found they could make a lot of money by selling snow globes to the undemanding.
 
Mr. Kidds, Mr. Bear, D.R. (no title. See! I remember!) and Sir Crusader:

OK. You all missed the point!!!!!!

But, as I keep complaining about (in this very thread) “how many Frenchmen can’t be wrong?” It is evident, since FOUR intelligent people have all reacted the same way, that I have been sending out the WRONG point (so take that nickel back Mr. Kidds!!). I don’t know how it happened. But it obviously has. So let me see if I can clarify this.

I mentioned earlier that my State of the Park Addresses, and the fact that I spent nearly a month there last year, AND the week for the Food and Wine Festival AND the week for the Flower and Garden and my wife and kids going at Christmas and that my daughter just spent a year there as a CM and my DEVOTION to this (and other) Disney sites should have made it clear that I’m kind of a Disney geek!!

I LOVE the place!!! I “SEE” everything you people do. I get lost in pixie dust and magic everytime I go there and have an absolutely MARVELOUS time. Most of you know that!!! You wade through my ponderous reviews and even comment how I change cars every time I get back!! How many times do I have to bring out my credentials!! I GET IT!!! I LOVE IT!!!! I WANT TO GO BACK!!! I MISS IT WHEN I’M NOT THERE!!!! (Should I do a Bart Simpson thing and write it a thousand times on the blackboard?) When do I get to stop saying it?

And more importantly, when do I get to critique decisions? Because that’s why I’m here. To discuss Disney PHILOSOPHY. And it is my considered opinion that in order to that intelligently you have to have a little perspective. You have to know what the philosophy is (or in Disney’s case, was). And the only way to do that is with a bit of history.

Now. That gargantuan post that D.R. posted was very well written. It rivals one of my old, passionate posts of old if for no other reason but length alone!!! But, I’m sorry D.R. it means nothing to me. Or better stated I could have written the majority of it myself. I agree with most of it. But my perspective and what I am talking about is not about how we see things. It is not even about the things that are there (or not there). It’s about the philosophy BEHIND those things!! It is the ‘why’ I question. It is the implementation that I examine. And I do the same for things past, things present and things future. I have a baseline. That’s all there is to it.

Your post postulates that I have grand memories of the seventies and ergo liked the old stuff better. You could not be more wrong!!!!

I have fond memories of my early days there. They were days of discovery and exploration. I was married in 1979. Elizabeth (currently a CM in Disney) was born in 1981. THAT is when my really wonderful memories just begin!! And guess what Scoop!!!??? My trips keep getting better and better every year too!! How ‘bout them apples!!!??

Yeah! Strange but true!! But I’m afraid that lately this is in spite of Disney, not because of it!! (is it this type of sentence that makes me so easily misunderstood, if not downright dismissable?)

People that have only been a couple of times, or who are only able to go every once in a while, may not realize that, and think it is cool because it looks new and shiny to them. That's why they are impressed by the big shiney's, but don't get things like Ft. Wilderness or the Polly
Isn’t that what I’ve been saying for the past four or five pages? Don’t tell me that we really agree?

I think that perhaps the newcomer has the best handle on the LandBaron’s intent. He writes:
Perhaps I'm wrong, but I hear this definite strain in your's and A-Vs posts that says everything is black and white. Either we're in the camp with y'all that things were much better before and the new Disney needs to get back to the old ways OR we think everything now is fine and dandy.
Well, if that’s your charge, then I must plead GUILTY!! And you really do understand. But your (how do I say this without sounding pedantic or worse yet, condescending?) education is not complete. Here’s why:

I'd love to have that spirit back. But, I don't see it happening. And, I don't think it's all Eisner's fault.
And
Despite Eisner's many faults and failings (yes, I, and I think the others, can see those, too), he did save the independence of the company.
OH MY GOD!!!!! The threads you’ve missed on those two subjects!!! All I can say for the moment is you are GROSSLY mistaken!! And I really think that EVERYONE here, no matter what car or motorcycle, all pretty much agree on this. (And I was tempted to name the ABC thing as well, but I really don’t think there 100% unanimity about that (although there should be!!! ;) ))

I know (correction--I think, based on my limited history here), that you've heard this before, and it gets under your skin, but: things have changed.
Oddly you’re mistaken again. I like it. I was one of the few who did not protest the changing of Mr. Toad’s. And I was a lone voice of car #3 that did not complain about Aladdin (until I saw it, that is!!)! No. Change is inevitable. Sometimes change is good. That is of course when we’re talking about nuts and bolts, rides and attractions, hotels and resorts. It is TOTALLY unacceptable when we are talking about the Disney’s philosophy!!!! For it is this philosophy that set them apart from every other company. It is this philosophy that brought me to the Disney Dance. Without this philosophy Disney is nothing but an ordinary company. And I don’t sign up to message boards for ordinary companies! Do you? (DAMN!!! Provocative again!! I gotta watch that!!)

So more to D.R. again, I am not remembering feelings, emotions or looking at things through the eyes of a child (12 when I first visited Disneyland). I see the grass growing through the slide, even in my memories. You have to keep in mind I am NOT comparing the success or failure of things implemented. I am NOT comparing the chipped paint and burned out light bulbs!! No!! I am comparing philosophical ideals. And you can do that in the present. Why did something get built? What was the cause and effect? How was it implemented?

Then, and only then, can you really understand the difference between what they used to build and what they build today!!! Of course if you don’t care about the philosophical aspect of Disney, then we’ll meet at Boma’s and I’ll buy the cocktails as we talk about our favorite fast food joint in the Magic kingdom!!

But if you want to UNDERSTAND the reasoning, background and basic ideals and goals of the PHILOSOPHY read AV and listen closely. HE WAS THERE!!!!!

For example:
Epcot was from a time when Disney thought big, tried big, and succeeded (and occasionally failed) big. Personally, I will take someone who really tries something impressive over someone who accomplishes that which is easy and safe.

The real magic is pulling off the impossible, not in achieving the practical.

Disney used to dream big - but today those dreams are only the size of a safe, small, high profit margin snow globe.

That, in a nut shell, is everything my 60 thousand+ words have been saying. Evidently I haven’t been saying it too clearly.

What we get in return is (I know it is old, but it is also typical!!!):
Here is a prediction which I hope someone will cut and paste and hold me to:

DinoRama will be a very nice surprise to many. In fact, I'd venture to say that it will get the type of response that the 100 yr celeb has had for several unbiased observers like WDWGuide, that is, going in with low expectations only to be pleasantly rewarded...
How do you try to explain to someone like this just how un-Disney the very concept is? The only way I know how to do it is illustrate what Disney did in the past and the reasoning behind it. I’m sorry I don’t always hit the mark. I’m easily sidetracked!!!

So no matter what anyone here thinks deep down about who best understands the themeparks or who knows Disney better then everbody else kind of junk
Again Melissa, I have not made my point clear (better, Mr. Kidds?). There’s no ‘best understands the theme parks’, there’s no ‘knows Disney better then everybody else’, there is only grasping the philosophy that drove the company until 1984. Why is that so hard to understand?







PS: AV!! You and I were writing at the same time it seems. BEAUTIFULLY PUT!!! Bravo!!!!
 
without solid information or ideas behind that statement it often comes off as "I like it, it's good; I don't like it, it sucks"

Unfortunately you are correct. It is absolutely the way most people today respond to just about everything. Either they like it or they think it sucks. There is very little time spent in consideration of the artform or the talent put forth to deliver something which doesn't appeal to the consumer.

I believe for anyone who creates something this is one of the most difficult challenges to accept. The audience may respond to the creative message behind art or miss it entirely because they really don't care for it enough to spend the time looking at what lies behind it.

There will always be those who want their talent permeated through time by participating in something legendary, whether it be a discovery; a writing or a classic work of art. It is very rare to incarnate a legacy. Walt was certainly that and more. All we have to do now is continue to run the show - not clone the guy.
 
All we have to do now is continue to run the show - not clone the guy.

I believe you are wrong about this. I believe Disney has been run for a decade or more from precisely that perspective, and that it has been both a creative and a financial failure over that time span exactly because one greedy man believes that's "all Disney has to do."

I believe if Disney is ever again going to succeed on either a creative or financial level they have to remove this "baby-sit and count the money" mentality from Disney's management... they might not have to clone a man, but they must re-awaken that man's dedication to creativity.

Disney's past success was based on creating with whatever resources were available, Disney's current failure is based on not creating with resources on a scale even Walter Elias Disney never dreamed of.
 
Epcot (wand and all) is losing its popularity not because it was flawed for the masses, but because the resources, talents, and ambition required to keep it vibrant have all been stripped away when lazy and untalented people found they could make a lot of money by selling snow globes to the undemanding.

Once again, Another Voice gets to the real source of the Disney Theme Park problems.
 
Crusader you are truly the best subtle twister there is!!! My hat’s off to you!! Take for example:
There is very little time spent in consideration of the artform or the talent put forth to deliver something which doesn't appeal to the consumer.
Are you saying that the things that the old philosophy built didn’t appeal to the consumer? Or are you saying that what was built did indeed appeal, but doesn’t anymore? I’ll wait for an answer. ;)
The audience may respond to the creative message behind art or miss it entirely because they really don't care for it enough to spend the time looking at what lies behind it.
Yep! I agree! And the great part is they don’t have to understand. They just have to like it. And sometimes they don’t, but that’s OK too. Remember what AV said:
Epcot was from a time when Disney thought big, tried big, and succeeded (and occasionally failed) big. Personally, I will take someone who really tries something impressive over someone who accomplishes that which is easy and safe.
And do you know what's really amazing? Most of the time, talent (and really hard work) will win out!! But it isn’t ‘safe’. Nothing ever that good is that safe. Safe is snow globes. Risky, but overpoweringly “impressive”, was EPCOT Center. I don't know about you but I'd like to see Disney ease out of snow globes (read:SAFE) and try something risky (read:IMPRESSIVE!!!!). WHat about you? Or at least, do you see the difference?

Hmmmm. I was going to go on, but the high exalted Frozen One beat me to it. And said it better!!! Thanks Mr. Head!!!
 
I believe you are wrong about this.
You missed the point which is due to my usual simplification. Running the show doesn't mean open the parks for business and neglect everything else. It involves managing and operating effectively while maintaining and continuing to develop and enhance it through drive, talent , commitment and dedication.
they might not have to clone a man, but they must re-awaken that man's dedication to creativity.
True. But does that really demand restoring food portions and park hours in order to be achieved? I believe creativity mainly lies within the attractions and the design and flow of the parks.

No doubt there is a tremedous need for new, innovative creations but to not consider something such as Mission Space to fall within this category because it doesn't incorporate enough show is to denounce anything Walt built along this caliber as well.

I simply disagree with that approach.
 












Receive up to $1,000 in Onboard Credit and a Gift Basket!
That’s right — when you book your Disney Cruise with Dreams Unlimited Travel, you’ll receive incredible shipboard credits to spend during your vacation!
CLICK HERE






DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter DIS Bluesky

Back
Top Bottom