Do You think DISNEY has gone down hlll the last few years?

[WDSearcher]

Help me understand lack of decorations. I haven't been to Halloween or Christmas parties in over 5 years so don't know. All I know is that they have really upgraded the castle decorations at both DW and DL since our last trip during the holidays. The pictures look absolutely incredible of the castle. And this year they are adding Christmas elements to the MMY show on the castle. There are gigantic gingerbread houses at WDW, eleborate trees, the Osborne Family Spectacle of Lights, and incredible decor throughout the parks. I think complaining about the a lack of decorations at WDW is like a person complaining about not enough food on a buffet table. What you want may not be on the buffet, but there are still lots of other choices to more than fill you up.

KSDisneyDad -- I think the "lack of decorations" comment is related almost exclusively to Lights of Winter. While yes, the castle is much more amazingly and magically lit than in years past, removing the Lights of Winter from Epcot has left a huge gap in the decor menu at that park. Adding more to MK doesn't help the fact that Epcot is currently lacking from a "decor statement piece" POV. MK has the castle, DHS has the Osborne Lights, but Epcot has no major decor statement. (DAK is off the hook here for the most part due to the overall African theme where Christmas decorations don't seem to be as "expected" as they are in other parks.) I think if Disney had taken out LOW and immediately replaced it with another "statement" piece, much of the talk about lack of decorations would be gone.

Disney also tends to shoot itself in the foot about stuff like this. They do a big holiday special with David Bromstadt on HGTV where he talks about how "no one does Christmas like Disney does", and then they focus most of the hour on Main Street or the Osborne Lights. So ... people who have never been to WDW (or haven't been in a while) walk away thinking that the entire resort -- from front to back, land to land, hotel to hotel, park to park -- is literally covered and dripping in Christmas decor. So they expect that. And it doesn't match what they see. Or the Travel Channel reruns the Samantha Brown special where she spends 15 min gushing about LOW, and then when people arrive, there are no Lights of Winter to be found.

Malls, other theme parks, hotels, resorts, etc. are all spending more and more each holiday season in order to compete for Guests who want a "magical" holiday experience. So people expect to walk into WDW and see more than they would see anywhere else. When the reality doesn't meet the expectation (and in many cases I'm not sure reality could meet expectations, KWIM?), then Disney gets called on it.

Very well put.The last decade has been the slowest as far as new atrractions going in.The whole pleasure island thing is a mystery too!

PI isn't really a mystery, if you think about it. The clubs went away because Disney, for whatever reason, decided that they did not WANT to run an adult-based nightclub area any more. They wanted to get back to their core, which is "family friendly". That was their decision, and they likely understood that they'd lose a segment of their adult guests because of it. They decided that that was a risk they would take. Downtown Disney, however, is still crowded -- clubs or no clubs, it's packed there on weekends.

In designing something new, they have to figure out, "If not clubs, then what?" The whole Hyperion Wharf thing was an interesting concept, but it seemed to me like they were trying to mold DTD into something it's not -- a themed experience (which, I suspect, would eventually lead to putting a ticket price on it). DTD is shops and restaurants and some entertainment. And that seems to be working for the majority of guests. Looking at it from a business standpoint, if it's already crowded and people are already spending money there, does it NEED to have a ton of extra money pumped into it? Personally, I think they should leave DTD alone with the exception of doing a total overhaul of DisneyQuest -- beef that place up and update the technology and offerings there. And maybe get Cirque to refresh their show.

 

[brunette8706]

KSDisneyDad -- I think the "lack of decorations" comment is related almost exclusively to Lights of Winter. While yes, the castle is much more amazingly and magically lit than in years past, removing the Lights of Winter from Epcot has left a huge gap in the decor menu at that park. Adding more to MK doesn't help the fact that Epcot is currently lacking from a "decor statement piece" POV. MK has the castle, DHS has the Osborne Lights, but Epcot has no major decor statement. (DAK is off the hook here for the most part due to the overall African theme where Christmas decorations don't seem to be as "expected" as they are in other parks.) I think if Disney had taken out LOW and immediately replaced it with another "statement" piece, much of the talk about lack of decorations would be gone.

Disney also tends to shoot itself in the foot about stuff like this. They do a big holiday special with David Bromstadt on HGTV where he talks about how "no one does Christmas like Disney does", and then they focus most of the hour on Main Street or the Osborne Lights. So ... people who have never been to WDW (or haven't been in a while) walk away thinking that the entire resort -- from front to back, land to land, hotel to hotel, park to park -- is literally covered and dripping in Christmas decor. So they expect that. And it doesn't match what they see. Or the Travel Channel reruns the Samantha Brown special where she spends 15 min gushing about LOW, and then when people arrive, there are no Lights of Winter to be found.

Malls, other theme parks, hotels, resorts, etc. are all spending more and more each holiday season in order to compete for Guests who want a "magical" holiday experience. So people expect to walk into WDW and see more than they would see anywhere else. When the reality doesn't meet the expectation (and in many cases I'm not sure reality could meet expectations, KWIM?), then Disney gets called on it.


PI isn't really a mystery, if you think about it. The clubs went away because Disney, for whatever reason, decided that they did not WANT to run an adult-based nightclub area any more. They wanted to get back to their core, which is "family friendly". That was their decision, and they likely understood that they'd lose a segment of their adult guests because of it. They decided that that was a risk they would take. Downtown Disney, however, is still crowded -- clubs or no clubs, it's packed there on weekends.

In designing something new, they have to figure out, "If not clubs, then what?" The whole Hyperion Wharf thing was an interesting concept, but it seemed to me like they were trying to mold DTD into something it's not -- a themed experience (which, I suspect, would eventually lead to putting a ticket price on it). DTD is shops and restaurants and some entertainment. And that seems to be working for the majority of guests. Looking at it from a business standpoint, if it's already crowded and people are already spending money there, does it NEED to have a ton of extra money pumped into it? Personally, I think they should leave DTD alone with the exception of doing a total overhaul of DisneyQuest -- beef that place up and update the technology and offerings there. And maybe get Cirque to refresh their show.

*
Great post Searcher, eloquently put.

 

[KSDisneyDad]

KSDisneyDad -- I think the "lack of decorations" comment is related almost exclusively to Lights of Winter. While yes, the castle is much more amazingly and magically lit than in years past, removing the Lights of Winter from Epcot has left a huge gap in the decor menu at that park. Adding more to MK doesn't help the fact that Epcot is currently lacking from a "decor statement piece" POV. MK has the castle, DHS has the Osborne Lights, but Epcot has no major decor statement. (DAK is off the hook here for the most part due to the overall African theme where Christmas decorations don't seem to be as "expected" as they are in other parks.) I think if Disney had taken out LOW and immediately replaced it with another "statement" piece, much of the talk about lack of decorations would be gone.

Disney also tends to shoot itself in the foot about stuff like this. They do a big holiday special with David Bromstadt on HGTV where he talks about how "no one does Christmas like Disney does", and then they focus most of the hour on Main Street or the Osborne Lights. So ... people who have never been to WDW (or haven't been in a while) walk away thinking that the entire resort -- from front to back, land to land, hotel to hotel, park to park -- is literally covered and dripping in Christmas decor. So they expect that. And it doesn't match what they see. Or the Travel Channel reruns the Samantha Brown special where she spends 15 min gushing about LOW, and then when people arrive, there are no Lights of Winter to be found.

Malls, other theme parks, hotels, resorts, etc. are all spending more and more each holiday season in order to compete for Guests who want a "magical" holiday experience. So people expect to walk into WDW and see more than they would see anywhere else. When the reality doesn't meet the expectation (and in many cases I'm not sure reality could meet expectations, KWIM?), then Disney gets called on it.

Thank you for your response. I can see where some would be upset by the Epcot LOW decor even though they forget to mention that Disney has added decor elsewhere.

Does Epcot still have the huge tree at the entrance to WS? What about the Holidays around the World? What about CP?

I still think Disney has some of the best holiday decor anywhere when you factor in the resorts, parks and events. The GF decor is among my favorite. Taking away one thing does not mean that Disney is lacking in decor by any means IMHO. However, I do agree that it is disappointing to see any "tradition" change. This is why there is always an uproar when an aging attraction is removed. I still stand by my stance that complaining about lack of holiday decor at WDW is like complaining about not having enough food on a buffet. The peel and eat shrimp might be missing, but it's still a good buffet unless your absolute favorite thing is the peel and eat shrimp.

 

[WDSearcher]

Thank you for your response. I can see where some would be upset by the Epcot LOW decor even though they forget to mention that Disney has added decor elsewhere.

Does Epcot still have the huge tree at the entrance to WS? What about the Holidays around the World? What about CP?

Yes there is a huge tree, but it's "just" a tree. The tree lighting ceremony went away due partly to the huge bottleneck it caused around the stage before / during / after, and partly -- I suspect -- for budgetary reasons. So the tree just kind of sticks up out of a large planter and isn't quite the statement piece it used to be.

Candlelight is still there -- every night from the night after Thanksgiving through Dec 30. And while that is an amazing show -- visually as well as from an entertainment standpoint -- it has limited capacity, so it's not one of those "everyone walking in the gate can see it" thing, like LOW was. The storytellers and decorations on the pavilions are still there, but if you remember ... they tend to be more intimate experiences and a bit more low key. So again ... Epcot suffers a bit from not having a big "statement" piece that is accessible to everyone. If you look at the castle lights or Spectacle of Dancing Lights in relation to Candlelight, the first two are truly accessible to everyone in the park and are huge statements. Candlelight is three times a night and accessible to really only a few thousand per performance.

I still think Disney has some of the best holiday decor anywhere when you factor in the resorts, parks and events. The GF decor is among my favorite. Taking away one thing does not mean that Disney is lacking in decor by any means IMHO. However, I do agree that it is disappointing to see any "tradition" change. This is why there is always an uproar when an aging attraction is removed. I still stand by my stance that complaining about lack of holiday decor at WDW is like complaining about not having enough food on a buffet. The peel and eat shrimp might be missing, but it's still a good buffet unless your absolute favorite thing is the peel and eat shrimp.

Then again ... if they take away the peel and eat shrimp, and replace it with foie gras, you might really like the foie gras while at the same time really miss the shrimp. Giving you one doesn't necessarily make you not miss the other.

When people criticize the "lack of decor", I think they tend to forget the resorts and think of it only from a theme park standpoint. The parks are where most people spend their time / money and it's where the highest expectations live, IMO. And while I'll agree with you about "one piece of decor does not a decor package make," LOW was a really really big and spectacular "thing" to take away. There is really quite a void in Epcot with it gone. I still think Epcot is a beautiful park at Christmas, but there is something missing.

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

[/B]
MIckeyMinnieMom-

With all due respect your analyse above you state that your analytical opinion based upon the "DATA" and analytical experience. It just doesn't make sense. Disney doesn't really give us concrete solid numbers/data.

This is just incorrect. As KSDisneyDad said, all of the numbers I used were filed with the SEC -- i.e., they are "solid numbers/data". And I used my analytical experience to interpret that data... that's what analysts do. You can either a) disagree with my analytical interpretation of the data (by providing counter-analysis, for instance), or b) proceed as though data analysis is a pretend thing -- either way, I stick by my posts. I shared my PERSONAL opinion and my ANALYTICAL opinion, both of which I laid out as clearly as I could.

I FULLY respect that we may not share the same PERSONAL opinion. As for the the analytical opinion on the SEC data, you didn't provide one so I cannot say.

If you mean to convey that it is somehow inappropriate to share an analytical opinion in this thread, I'm disappointed, but OK then!! I've said my piece already.

I also really didn't like that fact that I was called a "downhiller".

Are you honestly saying that you didn't know that I meant this completely tongue-in-cheek -- totally a joke? I was certain that combined with the and no one could possible take this wrong!! Sorry if you actually did.

Overall, I probably overreacted, but I interpreted the tone of your post to mean that MickeyMinnieMom's thoughtful and diligent review of the numbers was inappropriate for this forum, but that it's okay to post an op ed piece in a local newspaper.

First, thanks , and I interpreted the post as you did as well.

It's reasurring that some people like you, have THE INTELLIGENCE and PERCEPTION of understanding that whether or not a "personal opinion" can be relegated to data on a spreadsheet.

It is my EXPERIENCE and opinion that there are negatives in the direction that Disney chooses to take. It woiuld further appear, that the COO of Disney, is focused purely on numbers as some other people are, and thus missed the mark on trying to understand how people's opinions and feelings (which can not be measured with numbers, regardless of how "Professional" one claims to be)

I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume you were referring to my posts...

If you read over them again, I'm sure you'll see that I NEVER tried to use numbers to support my PERSONAL opinion -- that doesn't make any sense. There is no such thing as "proof" or "supporting evidence" for a personal opinion. It is what it is, formed by personal experience. And 100% legitimate, as I said several times.

There either seems to be a lack of understanding of how a personal opinion is different from an analytical opinion, or maybe a refusal to believe that such a difference exists? I assure you, on its own, this distinction is not even remotely a controversial notion.


Throughout this whole conversation I've only meant to share my personal and analytical opinions... and certainly never to discount anyone's PERSONAL opinions. I have tried to highlight how/when data can actually be used to support (or not support) a particular hypothesis (i.e. Disney is going downhill). Not sure that latter was really taken in, but I tried!

to all on this thread!! I now turn happily to squaring away my ADRs for our upcoming trip! Later!!

 

[Planogirl]

I think that it's a bit shortsighted to state that the number of DISers commenting about WDW is irrelevant since the sample is so small. Any statistical analysis only involves a small number of people in order to get what presumably is a fair sample of the overall population. Now you could argue that the DIS doesn't attract the typical WDW visitor but the overall number by itself is not a good argument to discount opinions here IMO.

 

[brunette8706]

I think that we agree... mostly...

I actually think that people here are answering two different questions...
1) is Disney worth it anymore TO YOU?, and
2) is an opinion that Disney is in decline one that is WIDESPREAD enough to actually be a sign of a firm in decline?

In other words, has Disney declined IN YOUR EYES and/or in the eyes of ENOUGH CUSTOMERS to be a sign of "a company in decline", if you will.

There is NO SUCH THING as proof for or against 1)... it's all a matter of us each sharing our opinions about how our family has appraised the value of a Disney vacation these days, as compared to the past.

With question 2), there are data to cite that can either strengthen or weaken a case that enough customers find the COST of a Disney vacation to have EXCEEDED IT'S VALUE over time. Here, this becomes a task for a business / financial analyst -- whom of course we can step in and take the place of IF we actually analyze the FACTS and not our OPINIONS.

For my piece...
1) For our family, the value continues to be there in a Disney vacation at current costs -- and even higher, quite frankly. The price we place - and are willing and able to pay - for a magical experience like no other is quite high. Still worth it in my PERSONAL OPINION

2) As someone who has conducted a thorough business and financial analysis of Disney about one-and-a-half years ago, and having reviewed the data posted in this thread, I see no objective evidence that Disney or Disney Parks SBU is in decline. The data simply don't support that thesis in my PROFESSIONAL opinion.


To be sure, business/financial analysis is not a perfect "science"... if it was, we could find the "best analyst" and routinely beat the stock market!! And as I said before, my professional analyst's opinion could prove to be COMPLETELY wrong in the long run. But it IS NOT "just a personal opinion" born out of personal experience or a hope or preconceived notion that Disney isn't going downhill.

Sooo... two separate things... 1) personal experience and opinion, and 2) analytical opinion based upon the data and analytical experience.Whew!! Got it all out... here's hoping it makes some sense...

I think I captured the answer to this in my last post above (wrote it before I saw this post of yours, flicx).

You are only capturing one side of the equation: price increase. The real question is whether consumers are willing to pay that increased price -- that's what determines whether there continues to be value for the money in a Disney vacation -- demand at current prices.

I mentioned before that historically, Disney customers tend to be extremely loyal -- there is tremendous price inelasticity of demand -- i.e. consumers are willing to bear fairly large increases in price because they view the product (a magical experience) to be extremely unique and thus valuable (as compared with widgets, for instance that have exact substitutes).

With respect to comparables / substitutes... my 2 cents... Universal is comparable in that they are a theme park. They are closer to a Disney product than, say, Six Flags, but they aren't Disney. Again - take it for what it's worth, but I say this after studying Disney Parks SBU and its competition for an entire semester and writing that big 240-page paper (that I got an A+ on ... and in a top business program and finance masters program that I got a 4.0 final average GPA in... and graduated 1st in the class... so I'm not exactly an idiot... is there a "tooting your own horn smiley??) ). I know... it absolutely doesn't mean that I'm right, but it does mean that I combed through A LOT of data, etc. in making these conclusions. And FYI, so have many other marketing and business experts over the years. Disney isn't a model for nothing!

I definitely get your points. I would posit that the 7% is a combination of weak economy (worst economy since the Great Depression... as the politicians like to remind us!! ), along with the increase in rooms - though granted BLT is a small block on the whole # of rooms. And it's hard to argue with occupancy being steady over the past couple of years despite a 9.8% increase in spending/hotel customer...

I was wondering if the display of posts being messed up was just on my end somehow... odd...

Thanks again for the dialogue here... and I do get what you're saying. We had more monorail issues than ever on our last trip (we go annually), and some other little things seemed to have slipped a bit. But on the whole, for us it's still more than worth it. And I have faith having followed Disney for AGES and studied them more recently that ultimately, leadership makes generally the right calls (expansion, investments in technology, more DVC resorts, etc.). And I do think that the data we have does not indicate decline... yet... Nice chattin' with ya' today, btw!!

*
This.

Your last statement below:

"And I do think that the data we have does not indicate decline... yet..."

Alright, this is where our differences are accentuated....

You are measuring a very subjective subject with absolute data. It is similar measuring how much one loves someone or something else. The problem with your approach, is that it completely dismisses the very real impact of individual's perception of what Disney is and should be. It can't be measured so simply, which is why I started this thread asking for how people feel.

For me personally, I don't believe that such things can be measured by looking at data.

brunette

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

*
This.

Your last statement below:

"And I do think that the data we have does not indicate decline... yet..."

Alright, this is where our differences are accentuated....

You are measuring a very subjective subject with absolute data. It is similar measuring how much one loves someone or something else. The problem with your approach, is that it completely dismisses the very real impact of individual's perception of what Disney is and should be. It can't be measured so simply, which is why I started this thread asking for how people feel.

For me personally, I don't believe that such things can be measured by looking at data.

brunette

I agree with you, Brunette -- no publicly available aggregate data can ever measure ANY PARTICULAR INDIVIDUAL'S OPINION as to this question or any other -- it's completely SUBJECTIVE. BUT... many people on this thread have tried to use data that they claim to prove something or other about their own personal opinion. My point is that data used in this manner is wholly uninformative, in that it can't make an opinion "right". Things like hotel price increases might explain why someone THINKS the offering is going downhill, but it's not PROOF of it.

My point is that the only thing that you can meaningfully do with such data is to say that it either a) supports or b) doesn't support a hypothesis that "Disney is in decline" according to Disney customers at large; i.e. is this actually a WIDESPREAD belief and a sign that Disney Parks SBU is OBJECTIVELY going downhill.

And to be totally clear, companies and analysts ROUTINELY use data to answer these types of questions... it's what marketing and strategy are completely based upon... gauging the subjective feelings of the masses with as much accuracy as possible. If you think one cannot accurately use aggregate data to assess the subjective feelings of the average Parks customer out there, then you are in disagreement with entire professions (marketers, analysts, strategists, salespeople, etc.) and in many important respects in disagreement with the business world. This is truly how things work.

And yes, I definitely said "yet", because this is a rolling analysis; i.e. the analytical conclusion can change with Disney's next 10-K since this is all based upon historical data at this point.

So here's my distinction...

1) The question as to whether Disney is going downhill in each of our opinions is completely SUBJECTIVE -- we totally agree here

2) The question as to whether the data supports the argument that on the whole, Disney Parks SBU is "in decline" can be attacked in a more OBJECTIVE manner. Here the difference of opinion is an analytical one: I interpret the data and conclude X, he/she interprets the data and concludes Y. But, any analytical opinions here MUST be based on trends, etc. in the AGGREGATE data ALONE -- not our individual experiences.


And finally, DARN!!!!! I said I would move on from this thread!!! You see... this is what happens when the system to make ADRs is down!!! Maybe Disney IS in decline!!

Again -- I totally respect your opinions -- and believe it or not, I share some of them about the offering itself in some respects. It's just that as someone with an analytical background, I couldn't help but point these things out... to tease out these different questions being answered and the uses of data. Don't hate me because I'm nerdy and analytical!!

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

I think that it's a bit shortsighted to state that the number of DISers commenting about WDW is irrelevant since the sample is so small. Any statistical analysis only involves a small number of people in order to get what presumably is a fair sample of the overall population. Now you could argue that the DIS doesn't attract the typical WDW visitor but the overall number by itself is not a good argument to discount opinions here IMO.

Agreed. This sample (i.e. responders to this particular thread on DIS) is self-selected, and thus by definition is NOT representative of the entire population (i.e. visitors to WDW). No conclusions - one way or the other - can be drawn from this sample, about this larger population.

In addition, any marketer will say that UNSOLICITED feedback (like anything on these boards) is far more likely to be negative than positive -- which is NOT true in an UNBIASED, REPRESENTATIVE sample. Pretty consistent with the "Disney's awesome" threads dying out long before the more critical ones. Human nature!

Representative sample or not, I'd bet Disney has an eye on these boards and takes feedback like this thread as anecdotal input. Always helpful to know what your strongest critics think... especially those who generally love your product as a whole.

 

[brunette8706]

I agree with you, Brunette -- no publicly available aggregate data can ever measure ANY PARTICULAR INDIVIDUAL'S OPINION as to this question or any other -- it's completely SUBJECTIVE. BUT... many people on this thread have tried to use data that they claim to prove something or other about their own personal opinion. My point is that data used in this manner is wholly uninformative, in that it can't make an opinion "right". Things like hotel price increases might explain why someone THINKS the offering is going downhill, but it's not PROOF of it.

My point is that the only thing that you can meaningfully do with such data is to say that it either a) supports or b) doesn't support a hypothesis that "Disney is in decline" according to Disney customers at large; i.e. is this actually a WIDESPREAD belief and a sign that Disney Parks SBU is OBJECTIVELY going downhill.

And to be totally clear, companies and analysts ROUTINELY use data to answer these types of questions... it's what marketing and strategy are completely based upon... gauging the subjective feelings of the masses with as much accuracy as possible. If you think one cannot accurately use aggregate data to assess the subjective feelings of the average Parks customer out there, then you are in disagreement with entire professions (marketers, analysts, strategists, salespeople, etc.) and in many important respects in disagreement with the business world. This is truly how things work.

And yes, I definitely said "yet", because this is a rolling analysis; i.e. the analytical conclusion can change with Disney's next 10-K since this is all based upon historical data at this point.

So here's my distinction...

1) The question as to whether Disney is going downhill in each of our opinions is completely SUBJECTIVE -- we totally agree here

2) The question as to whether the data supports the argument that on the whole, Disney Parks SBU is "in decline" can be attacked in a more OBJECTIVE manner. Here the difference of opinion is an analytical one: I interpret the data and conclude X, he/she interprets the data and concludes Y. But, any analytical opinions here MUST be based on trends, etc. in the AGGREGATE data ALONE -- not our individual experiences.


And finally, DARN!!!!! I said I would move on from this thread!!! You see... this is what happens when the system to make ADRs is down!!! Maybe Disney IS in decline!!

Again -- I totally respect your opinions -- and believe it or not, I share some of them about the offering itself in some respects. It's just that as someone with an analytical background, I couldn't help but point these things out... to tease out these different questions being answered and the uses of data. Don't hate me because I'm nerdy and analytical!!

MMMom:

One of the better experiences I've realized over the life of this thread, is finding new ways to see things from a different perspective, including how people "feel" about things and "why".

You have offered a lot of information on how you've come to your own conclusions and while it is clear we may see some things different, we both "love" Disney and want to always see it at the standard of quality that it has always been.

I appreciate your taking the time to express the logic used to form your own point of view and the courtesy you extended in doing so. Even with my occasional typos !!

I would like to add however, is that while this thread may appear to be "negative", it is not so much. As in my heart, I feel that discussing some of the things we see as in "decline", may bring this at some point, to the attention of those with the ability to "make things right".

Thank you especially for your last paragraph, it clarified many things to me and was appreciated!

Good luck with your ADR's!!

 

[asianway]

This just in-Animal Kingdom welcome show cut and character M&G bloodletting all starts in December.

I thought I'd post in this thread so I could hear how this is a good thing!

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

MMMom:

One of the better experiences I've realized over the life of this thread, is finding new ways to see things from a different perspective, including how people "feel" about things and "why".

You have offered a lot of information on how you've come to your own conclusions and while it is clear we may see some things different, we both "love" Disney and want to always see it at the standard of quality that it has always been.

I appreciate your taking the time to express the logic used to form your own point of view and the courtesy you extended in doing so. Even with my occasional typos !!

I would like to add however, is that while this thread may appear to be "negative", it is not so much. As in my heart, I feel that discussing some of the things we see as in "decline", may bring this at some point, to the attention of those with the ability to "make things right".

Thank you especially for your last paragraph, it clarified many things to me and was appreciated!

Good luck with your ADR's!!

Thanks so much for this!!

I think that we actually have A LOT of common ground here, and I fully accept your point that it is not "negative". Offering critique - even of the things we love most - maybe ESPECIALLY of the things we love most - can make those things better if people listen.

Your luck sent my way must have helped... the system went back up and I got ALL the ADRs I wanted!! Party time!!

Talk to you later!

 

[KSDisneyDad]

This just in-Animal Kingdom welcome show cut and character M&G bloodletting all starts in December.

I thought I'd post in this thread so I could hear how this is a good thing!

As I said in my prior post, anytime there is a cut, if it is dear to you then I believe that you are upset. If it is something that you don't utilize then it's a non event.

That said, I wonder if the evolving nature of the rope drops is based on guest feedback or simply cost/benefit. I bet I know who on here will choose the latter.

To me, one has to look at both the good and bad. And yes this is a negative thing IMO that has to be considered. How big of a deal it is depends on how it affects your own vacation experience.

 

[WDSearcher]

This just in-Animal Kingdom welcome show cut and character M&G bloodletting all starts in December.

I thought I'd post in this thread so I could hear how this is a good thing!

Without knowing who your source is or where the info comes from (as well as what you mean by "character M&G bloodletting"), it's hard to call this anything more than a rumor.

Although, for the record, I truly won't miss the DAK welcome show. If they have to cut something, I'm perfectly okay with cutting that!

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

Without knowing who your source is or where the info comes from (as well as what you mean by "character M&G bloodletting"), it's hard to call this anything more than a rumor.

Although, for the record, I truly won't miss the DAK welcome show. If they have to cut something, I'm perfectly okay with cutting that!

I'm not personally going to cry about this going away either, but I'm sure some will miss it.

From a business perspective, eliminating this show doesn't seem like it would cut much in the way of costs, though. A handful of people's hourly rates for what - an hour total (prep, show, denouement) per day? If it's a cost-cutting measure it seems like a poor one to me.

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

This is a bit of an aside, but I think connected to the discussion in this thread. The link below is to a recent poll of young professionals and the companies they most want to work for. Disney comes in 5th, after the likes of Google and Facebook.

In a big-picture sense this is a positive indicator for the future of these companies as a whole. I think this goes to the idea that the Disney brand is still a VERY strong one out there in the general population.

Not "proof" of anything, just something interesting I just read this morning.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203537304577032224274830372.html#project%3DYPRANK111120111114%26articleTabs%3Darticle

 

[WDSearcher]

I'm not personally going to cry about this going away either, but I'm sure some will miss it.

From a business perspective, eliminating this show doesn't seem like it would cut much in the way of costs, though. A handful of people's hourly rates for what - an hour total (prep, show, denouement) per day? If it's a cost-cutting measure it seems like a poor one to me.

It may be a "trade out", though. Like ... "if we close the RD show, that saves us X character hours and so we can use that to add characters somewhere else" (like the character lunch at Tusker, where Donald was just added). It doesn't really "cut costs", but it allows a new offering to come in to replace something that was maybe a lower performer.

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

It may be a "trade out", though. Like ... "if we close the RD show, that saves us X character hours and so we can use that to add characters somewhere else" (like the character lunch at Tusker, where Donald was just added). It doesn't really "cut costs", but it allows a new offering to come in to replace something that was maybe a lower performer.

Gotcha' -- that would make sense as a rationale: effectively replacing one offering for another. Presumably they would think this new use would be more popular with guests than the old, under this scenario. Hopefully that's the case with their reasoning, anyway...

 

[WDSearcher]

Gotcha' -- that would make sense as a rationale: effectively replacing one offering for another. Presumably they would think this new use would be more popular with guests than the old, under this scenario. Hopefully that's the case with their reasoning, anyway...

That would be my guess. The RD at DAK was always kind of an odd fit, IMO. They haven't really hit the right tone with that ceremony, I don't think. It's an odd location to try and stage something because there's such limited space and such bad sight lines. I have the same problem with the one at DHS. Plenty of space there, but unless you're in the first or second row at the rope, you can't see or hear a darn thing!

 

[KSDisneyDad]

This is a bit of an aside, but I think connected to the discussion in this thread. The link below is to a recent poll of young professionals and the companies they most want to work for. Disney comes in 5th, after the likes of Google and Facebook.

In a big-picture sense this is a positive indicator for the future of these companies as a whole. I think this goes to the idea that the Disney brand is still a VERY strong one out there in the general population.

Not "proof" of anything, just something interesting I just read this morning.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203537304577032224274830372.html#project%3DYPRANK111120111114%26articleTabs%3Darticle

Thanks for sharing.