Disney Theme Parks: Today vs. Yesterday

[MelissathePooh]

The world is a much smaller place today than it was in 1955. There will certainly be huge successes to come and innovations to be made, but I believe that they will be fewer and further between. I don't believe that is the direct result of one CEO in particular as much as it is society. Any CEO would have trouble in todays world.

DR just told me his take is that its because innovations come so much more quickly now it makes them blase. Which I guess is a similar thought - in that either way there are few that really wow us anymore. That doesn't mean that those things won't come or that we don't already have a few new ones.

The Disney company is never going to have straight success after success after success, it never has and it won't now. That's not unique to Disney, but most business in general. I don't think even Walts blueprint would cut it today necessarily - he had a tough enough time back then. So I'm not sure anyone else could pull it off either. Its going to take a combination of common sense and out of the box thinking and few people can think both ways at the same time!

 

[DisDuck]

Well, Pirate, AV, Baron, et-al.

I stay away for a year and find things have not changed in the least. At least there is some comfort in consistency and continuity.

I will be down in the area week of Aug. 17th to take my singing star to UofTampa (major in music theater). Maybe one day she will be starring for Disney. Currently wowing the Gilbert & Sullivan crowd. Anyway, I will try to get to at least 1 park while in the neighborhood so I can confirm my car#1 position or do I move to car#2 (that is as far down as I will go).

Anyone going to be there that week. Maybe we can get together.

Once a Duck; Always a Duck

 

[Peter Pirate]

Horns blaring, crowds cheering for a guy who always understood what was going on! (hear that Baron?).

Seriously Duck, it's great to see you here again (and congrats on that future Broadway star you're raising!).

OK...Back to business & sorry for taking the thread off topic...My apologies to the original poster.

 

[d-r]

one last thing from me. I know you all love quotes. I found one that I think does a nice job of illlustrating that Walt was a complex man, that it wasn't just this OR that, that he was dedicated to high quality, hated cutting corners, wanted to entertain, and had integrity, and was always looking ahead and moving forward, but at the same time he recognized that he lived in reality and had to do business within real world financial constraints -


Walt said this when someone asked him why he was making live action, not just animated-

I'll keep on making pictures all-cartoon, mixed with human actors, or with an all-live cast. It's the story that appeals to me and the manner of treatment is dictated from that. Yes, I've herad some people say I ought to stick to features like Snow White or Pinocchio, and it's true that the cartoon is my first love. I'll always go back to it. But I'm still experimenting and I've got to keep a busy schedule to make enough money to finance the big all-cartoon feature folks seem to expect of me.

I thought of another example of how Walt was complex, not either/ or, artist or businessman sort of thing. In my earlier post I talked about the Davy Crocket tv shows being edited together for theatrical release to cash in. The flip side is, it demonstrates the dedication to quality and not doing things half way if the TV shows were good enough to put into the theater. Walt Disney was dedicated to high quality, and would risk $ to make sure things were quality, but he also knew to give the people what they want, and not to throw good money after bad.

DR

 

[EUROPA]

The Disney company is never going to have straight success after success after success, it never has and it won't now. That's not unique to Disney, but most business in general. I don't think even Walts blueprint would cut it today necessarily - he had a tough enough time back then.

Yeah one small example blows that completely out of the water. Pixar.

 

[Another Voice]

In not quite 25 words…

Walt was nothing but a capitalist (boo, hiss) whose only hope of saving the business he routinely shoved over the edge into financial ruin was to scam money from stupid, easily-impressed Californians by concocting a slime ball amusement park.

Although people claiming to know "what Walt would do" are doing nothing but putting words in a dead man's mouth, it is well known that had Walt tottered on WDW would be nothing but a singe park, road-side attraction continuing to swindle money from fools instead of the hallowed paradise for us better people that we all know and love today.

Today's management can not be faulted for failing to live up the perceived (however incorrectly) faux-success Walt enjoyed in the past. People then were too easily amused and Walt didn't have to work hard. No, today we are the sophisticated elite that demand far too much for even the geniuses like the current management to provide.

No – it is not their fault that attendance is failing. It is we – the customers – to blame. We must understand the horrors, the oppressive toil under which today's company must suffer. It is we that should fall down upon our knees and be grateful for every scrape of economically correct Magic® (all rights reserved) they wish to bestow upon us.

Yes, we who truly love Disney, we special people, we better people – are the only ones with that have earned the right to enjoy WDW.



Sorry kids, but some of us are actually working to make quality products instead of fabricating excuses for shoddy work. Enjoy your world; enjoy your snow globes; and have fun.

 

[crusader]

Wow!!

First of all - to d-r and melissa:

I want to thank you both for the wealth of information you have bestowed upon us. Great read! (which I'll have to go over again to really grasp the timeline of Walt's legacy in film. Thank you.)

Very, very informative indeed! Too bad I can't bottle and patent those brains - man, what an asset!!! That little one will certainly be blessed!

To the DisDuck: Your reputation precedes you quite well! Welcome back.

AV -

I said subsidy not subsidiary!!!
You can subsidize anything you want without the legal formality - all you have to do is cough up whatever it is that's lacking. In this case it was money and if they really are two separate entities then maybe one company floated a note or two.

And actually I was remarking on the great Baron's comment. I personally am not as well versed (YET!). It was merely a restated reply rather than a direct remark.

 

[DisneyKidds]

After finally reading this thread (except for the full text of DR's give-Baron-a-run-for-his-money essays ) all I have to say is.....................................

WELCOME BACK, SIR DUCK!!!!!!!!!!

 

[d-r]

Walt was nothing but a capitalist (boo, hiss) whose only hope of saving the business he routinely shoved over the edge into financial ruin was to scam money from stupid, easily-impressed Californians by concocting a slime ball amusement park.

All right.

Can you not possibly understand that everything in this world is not simple, black and white, right or wrong, us or them, full or empty??

Or have you invested so much in to hating Eisner, hating today's Disney, that you can't see it as anything but black and white? That nothing from today can possibly be good, that anything from yesterday could have possibly be compromised??

Melissa or I didn't say he was nothing but a capitalist. We said that he wasn't some socialist hippy saint running around handing out pixie dust for free because he wanted to entertain the people of the world. Yes, he had integrity, yes he wanted to do the best possible, yes he wanted to enteratin, yes he knew the magic was in the details. Was everything perfect, no AV it was not. Walt Disney was a businessman as well as an artist, and he made that park to make money, just like he made snow white to make money, just like he made mickey mouse to make money. AGAIN, admitting that out loud doesn't take away anything from the man. It doesn't take anything away from his accomplishments. He made mistakes, he had greatt triumphs, he was a human being.

Not every single thing that Walt Disney did was golden. Not every single thing that the company does now is rotten. As hard as you try to keep finding what is wrong with anything that Disney does today (e.g., mission:space, pirates movie), and no matter how smart elicky and cynical you are about anyone who can find something to like today and doesn't share your view that every single thing is negative, it doesn't mean that the company can not have something successful or good today. Sorry if that disrupts your world view and agenda. Reality is grey.

And one other thing - for someone who complains so rightously about Disney execs having contempt for AP holding brand monkeys, you sure do get aggravated by people having snow globes. You may think you are smarter and better than other people, but just like so many other things that doesn't mean it is true. And where do you get that "we special people" crap.

Get outside and take your boy surfing or something. And for goodness sakes please, please keep producing that quality. I'm going to play with my dog and argue with a rock. I'll try not to read this thread again, maybe you will come up with a way of responding to someone that isn't cynical and pompous. Or you can wallow in your hatred of ME. I really don't care. I'm done.

 

[MelissathePooh]

Originally posted by Another Voice


Yes, we who truly love Disney, we special people, we better people – are the only ones with that have earned the right to enjoy WDW.



Sorry kids, but some of us are actually working to make quality products instead of fabricating excuses for shoddy work. Enjoy your world; enjoy your snow globes; and have fun.

I'm not sure where you got that (or the rest of your post) out of our posts, but you can feel free to twist our words around however you please I suppose, if that is the proof you have of your point in how inaccurate we are or it makes you feel better.

As far as the last paragraph, I'm not sure how you're working to "make quality products" has anything to do with anything. I work hard every day to contribute to society in the jobs that I do, but I guess since its not Hollywood, it doesn't matter??? And I would like to know what "excuses" I have ever "fabricated", but whatever.

And again I hope that snowglobe collectors everywhere find your statement to be as insulting as I do - and I don't even collect snowglobes. You really do seem to have the same disdain for the general public that your profess Eisner to have!

 

[MelissathePooh]

Originally posted by EUROPA
Yeah one small example blows that completely out of the water. Pixar.

I believe I said "most business" I didn't say it applied across the board. As much as I like Pixar, they haven't been around that long and as with anything no future is certain.

 

[EUROPA]

Originally posted by MelissathePooh
I believe I said "most business" I didn't say it applied across the board. As much as I like Pixar, they haven't been around that long and as with anything no future is certain.

Your post said nothing of the future. There are many businesses following the "Walt Disney way" of doing business. Because they are not the size and scope of Disney does not mean they don't exist are they aren't successful. That also does not mean they could not succeed if they were the size of Disney.


For those of you that keep saying that Walt produced some "non-golden" products or that not everything that Walt did was successful can you name a few. I'm having trouble coming up with a list.

 

[d-r]

critical or commercial, or both?

 

[EUROPA]

Originally posted by d-r
critical or commercial, or both?

Any...lets see the list I think it will provide some great insight.

 

[crusader]

Europa -

d-r gave very specific examples of Walt's film legacy which included all ranges of quality - some good; some great; some bad and a laundry list in between.

Sorry kids, but some of us are actually working to make quality products instead of fabricating excuses for shoddy work.

More of us strive to acheive quality than you could ever imagine. Not all of us can run the ship. I agree with you regarding the importance of producing a product with real blood and sweat. I also see what hollywood puts in front of us and it is usually not very pretty. I give you a tremendous amount of credit. It must take a brass set of b@!!$ to survive in your world. You all want to push that envelope just a little bit farther than the last guy. Problem is you overexposed and overemphasized the relevance of entertainment in our society.

We don't see the many employed writers and artists just like we don't see the many employed inventors. That's because they happen to work behind the scenes for industry giants like Disney and Sony and Johnson & Johnson who happily put their label on every product being put forth by these hardworking creative individuals.

Disney is still employing good people. You may not like the CEO but he didn't build Mission Space or create Pirates. These are the individuals still committed and dedicated to delivering quality and working very hard to keep this company moving in the right direction. I for one appreciate that effort.

 

[EUROPA]

Originally posted by crusader
Europa -

d-r gave very specific examples of Walt's film legacy which included all ranges of quality - some good; some great; some bad and a laundry list in between.

Ahh yes missed that post. Looking at it now.

 

[MelissathePooh]

Originally posted by EUROPA
Your post said nothing of the future. There are many businesses following the "Walt Disney way" of doing business. Because they are not the size and scope of Disney does not mean they don't exist are they aren't successful. That also does not mean they could not succeed if they were the size of Disney.


For those of you that keep saying that Walt produced some "non-golden" products or that not everything that Walt did was successful can you name a few. I'm having trouble coming up with a list.

Europa, I guess I should have said that FEW companies/businesses have had nothing but success. You are absolutely correct that Pixar has so far.

My point which I guess wasn't clear enough was that Disney during the years of Walt himself was not a continuous string of successes. To expect it to be today is not rational - there is no history to support such a thing. Most any company will have some bombs here and there. Disney wasn't on the brink of bankruptsy so many times because everything was a hit. Doesn't matter how large or small or what business plan a company follows - few don't suffer some setbacks now and then. Again there are some that don't, but they are few. Outside of Pixar, I can't think of any entertainment/motion picture/animation studio business that hasn't had some flops???

As far as a list of Disney bombs - well DR has been laboring vigorously on the other sofa for while now - it will be coming soon. If you're ever interested "The Disney Films" by Leonard Maltin is an excellent resource for information.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Well gang. This thread will be remembered NOT for the the silly premise Peter first postulated, nor for the rockets launched by D.R.-Melissa and AV, or for my brilliant comments! NO!!! It has brought back one of my favorites!

WELCOME BACK
DIS DUCK!!!!

Isn’t it great to see that some things never change!! Please post often!! You were always my favorites to quote you know!!!


Anyway, Mr. Crusader:

A little clarification.

I said he built it as a subsidy because he was tired of losing money. Did I marginalize it? Nah. From the sounds of this, Walt wasn't making it in the movie biz enough to sustain himself.

Not quite right. The way I understood things is EXACTLY the way D.R. said it.

Do you get the feel for the ups and downs of box office? This is why Walt wanted a more steady source of income to compliment the motion picture studio.

Perfect D.R. Absolutely perfect!!! “Compliment”. That was the word that eluded me. A wonderful way to put. Thanks!!

Something to smooth (not subsidize) the ups and downs inherent in the movie business, especially animation!!

He needed a cash cow. Why is it OK for him to use the parks to finance other ventures but it is wrong for Disney to try to hold onto ABC?

Because it wasn’t used to “finance” or subsidize. It was used to compliment (Thanks again D.R.!!)!!

Now do you “get it”, Crusader?

Melissa or I didn't say he was nothing but a capitalist.

I don’t mean to split hairs, and it may be writing style or my predisposition as the receiver of this information, and it’s really nothing specific (if it was I’d have quoted it) but you didn’t come off that way at all. But to me at least, Melissa did. (Sorry Melissa!!! )

Not every single thing that Walt Disney did was golden. Not every single thing that the company does now is rotten.

You still have a way to go to match my longest but it was an absolutely wonderful post. I thought you were (in that initial post at least) evenhanded and fairly fair. In fact, though we have disagreed in the past over particulars I thought much of your essay could have been written by me. They mirror my thoughts almost to a tee.

That is why I try to stay away from the actual “What would Walt do” (even though I have it in every post, go figure! ) and try to talk philosophical issues instead. I find myself defending Walt, but only in contrast to the current regime.

You see, Walt HAD a philosophy. He was also human. Which you detailed rather well. At times he tried to make money. At times he failed. At times he guessed wrong (although not often). And at times he made mistakes. But ALWAYS (I think) he tried stick to his philosophy. And that’s something sadly lacking in the current administration. They not only discarded Walt’s philosophy, they don’t have one of their own. Unless it’s the “where’s mine” principle (but that’s old hat in Chicago, maybe that’s why I recognize it so easily)!!

 

[crusader]

Baron:

At the risk of being gonged with the obtuse mallot I am going to delve a bit further:

Compliment to you means:

Something to smooth (not subsidize) the ups and downs inherent in the movie business, especially animation!!

Compliment to me means works well together. In your example the parks balanced out the peaks and valleys of the studio business.

To me, the parks smoothed out the balance sheet by tipping the scales from RED to GREEN.

Now I will rely on the great minds of expertise here because obviously I have a tremendous amount of summer reading to dive into. (Thanks for the recommendation Melissa)
What I need to know is: Did the parks provide any equitable resource which Walt then used to help finance the studios? Whether he distributed money to himself first and then took those same funds and put them into the studio projects is irrelevant if the source of the money remains the same.

 

[MelissathePooh]

I will admit my post was/were a little heated and for clarification I don't believe that he was ONLY a capitalist above all else, but I do believe firmly that he was a capitalist none the less.

I think the quote from Disney himself - the one back a few posts in DR's post said it best. He was willing to do what he had to to get done what he wanted done. In some cases that wasn't necesssarily the absolute highest possible quality.

Please don't get me wrong - I believe Walt Disney was a brilliant visionary, but I also believe that he was interested in seeing what he wanted done make a lot of money! Hope that clarifies some.