New survey .. proposal .. Tiered Ticket Prices

[Lisa loves Pooh]

The quotes in my post that you quoted are from the comments section of his article. They are in print. My comments about the podcast earlier were separate from the post you quoted.

MY apologies. But the gist of what I said remains. It is great that he followed up in comments AFTER someone asked. BUT--it would have been better to update his article to
reflect that and even better if he acknowledged it if he knew it in the first place.

In the professional world, fact
checking is critical because you only get one chance despite the ability to issue correction or clarification later after the fact. While he or other bloggers is not a journalist in moot in that the principle is the same.

But apologies for mixing up what you had said.

 

[Angel Ariel]

MY apologies. But the gist of what I said remains. It is great that he followed up in comments AFTER someone asked. BUT--it would have been better to update his article to
reflect that and even better if he acknowledged it if he knew it in the first place.

His responses make it clear he didn't know about the others until after the article was published. Many people did not realize that there were multiple charts for quite a while. How could he "acknowledge it if he knew it in the first place" if he didn't know it in the first place? When he was aware, he acknowledged it, in writing - on the page of the article - and on a podcast.

WDW Magic also only presented 1 chart. That article has not been updated to acknowledge that there are other pricing charts out there. There are no comments on the same page as the article with any updates, as there were in Mr. Testa's article. It appears as though Mr. Testa is being held to a much different standard than others.

I don't disagree with holding bloggers to high standards. That said, even the best journalists sometimes miss something. IMO, missing something at the start isn't *necessarily* unprofessional. It can be, sure, but I don't think missing a bit of information automatically makes someone unprofessional. How they handle it makes a difference, IMO. Sweeping it under the rug would be unprofessional. Lying about it would be unprofessional. Acknowledging what was missed and putting that acknowledgment in writing isn't unprofessional, IMO.

 

[ArwenMarie]

He was commenting on a proposed price chart that Disney created. He did not make it up.

We don't know how many versions of this price chart are even out there, there could be many more than never surfaced on the internet.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

His responses make it clear he didn't know about the others until after the article was published. Many people did not realize that there were multiple charts for quite a while. How could he "acknowledge it if he knew it in the first place" if he didn't know it in the first place? When he was aware, he acknowledged it, in writing - on the page of the article - and on a podcast.

WDW Magic also only presented 1 chart. That article has not been updated to acknowledge that there are other pricing charts out there. There are no comments on the same page as the article with any updates, as there were in Mr. Testa's article. It appears as though Mr. Testa is being held to a much different standard than others.

I don't disagree with holding bloggers to high standards. That said, even the best journalists sometimes miss something. IMO, missing something at the start isn't *necessarily* unprofessional. It can be, sure, but I don't think missing a bit of information automatically makes someone unprofessional. How they handle it makes a difference, IMO. Sweeping it under the rug would be unprofessional. Lying about it would be unprofessional. Acknowledging what was missed and putting that acknowledgment in writing isn't unprofessional, IMO.

"IF"

 

[Angel Ariel]

"IF"

If what? It's clear in the progression of his responses when he became aware of the other surveys.

The double standard for Mr. Testa and WDW Magic is perplexing at best.

 

[wisblue]

Just take a look at the reactions to the Toruing Plans item, both in the comments on the Touring Plans site and in this thread. The comment about how the tiered pricing represents a "huge interest in ticket prices", which is presented in bold type, has drawn far and away the greatest response. I think it is apparent that people in both places are much more interested in the bottom line of how much tickets will cost them than in what formula is used to get there. That huge increase in prices is not a necessary result of tiered pricing. Disney could obviously get to the same point just by eliminating the low marginal cost of days 5 and after.

If Mr. Testa didn't know about the other pricing proposals, fine. But, once he learned about them, I personally think that it would have been appropriate to update the article than to rely on comments to make this important point. Anyone who reads just the article, or just the bold headings, would draw the conclusion that "Disney's proposed tiered pricing means a huge interest in ticket prices". It would be just as irresponsible to take the other chart and emphasize that tiered pricing would have a minor impact on what many customers would pay. But, as far as I recall, the WDW Magic item didn't do that. That just described the tiering concept and provided the chart pretty much without comment or analysis. So, I don't think it's a double standard at all.

 

[ArwenMarie]

Just take a look at the reactions to the Toruing Plans item, both in the comments on the Touring Plans site and in this thread. The comment about how the tiered pricing represents a "huge interest in ticket prices", which is presented in bold type, has drawn far and away the greatest response. I think it is apparent that people in both places are much more interested in the bottom line of how much tickets will cost them than in what formula is used to get there. That huge increase in prices is not a necessary result of tiered pricing. Disney could obviously get to the same point just by eliminating the low marginal cost of days 5 and after.

If Mr. Testa didn't know about the other pricing proposals, fine. But, once he learned about them, I personally think that it would have been appropriate to update the article than to rely on comments to make this important point. Anyone who reads just the article, or just the bold headings, would draw the conclusion that "Disney's proposed tiered pricing means a huge interest in ticket prices". It would be just as irresponsible to take the other chart and emphasize that tiered pricing would have a minor impact on what many customers would pay. But, as far as I recall, the WDW Magic item didn't do that. That just described the tiering concept and provided the chart pretty much without comment or analysis. So, I don't think it's a double standard at all.

I really don't think it was meant to be a big sweeping announcement. He showed the picture of that chart and said if this proposal (and he used "proposal" over and over again, he never said this was certain) came to be, this is what he liked and didn't like about it. Both. The pros and the cons. It wasn't any different than the many news stories this generated about "surge pricing"...the idea that you would pay more or less on different days.

 

[WillAustin]

Defend Disney at all costs is in full force today. TP did nothing deceptive or inappropriate and they included pros and cons. A lot of people seem to be trying to deflect or mitigate the negative perception of these numbers by throwing up anything to get in the way of the possibility that this might suck for most guests. There isn't a "good set of numbers." Both charts are bad.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

If what? It's clear in the progression of his responses when he became aware of the other surveys.

The double standard for Mr. Testa and WDW Magic is perplexing at best.

My statement that you bolded and correct me on was an IF statement. Not a statement of fact. It was an IF statement on what my expectation would be IF those circumstances applied.

So IF you are suggesting that I am holding a double standard, you are very much mistaken and a huge leap on your part. IF you are referring to others, then clarity in your original comment on double standards would have been appreciated. Though I do not see anyone demonstrating double standards unless you are aware of a situation where an error or error by omission was pointed out and instead of Acknowledging the error they touted how awesome the blogger was.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Defend Disney at all costs is in full force today. TP did nothing deceptive or inappropriate and they included pros and cons. A lot of people seem to be trying to deflect or mitigate the negative perception of these numbers by throwing up anything to get in the way of the possibility that this might suck for most guests. There isn't a "good set of numbers." Both charts are bad.

Who is defending?

The prices and charts stink.

But how you package the information is important to maintain integrity or it just comes across as sour grapes.

 

[WillAustin]

Who is defending?

The prices and charts stink.

But how you package the information is important to maintain integrity or it just comes across as sour grapes.

Sour grapes at what? There should be sour grapes about the potential rise in prices. TP actually wrote a balanced opinion on it. If you look back on my post history, I'm not a TP fan, but they weren't wrong here.

Several posters are defending whatever happens by obfuscating the discussion with strawman attacks.

I'd point it out specifically, but I'm sure I'd end up being reported for something.

 

[Angel Ariel]

If Mr. Testa didn't know about the other pricing proposals, fine. But, once he learned about them, I personally think that it would have been appropriate to update the article than to rely on comments to make this important point.

The above is a much different vibe than:

In my opinion, it is one of two things:

1. He didn't know about the other price structure until someone pointed it out to him after he published the article, but he doesn't want to admit it.

2. The article was unprofessional because it intentionally misrepresented what Disney is floating out there in its surveys.

I don't think either of these possibilities reflects well on Mr. Testa, who I generally think presents very good information.

#1 essentially says that essentially says that option is that someone pointed it out to him after he published the article, and he stayed silent on the matter.

#2 essentially accuses him of intentional misrepresentation...which is a synonym for lying.

He did not stay silent - he did acknowledge the other surveys in multiple ways - in writing and on the podcast.

His responses make it clear he did not intentionally misrepresent anything.

As to

I know these are probably sample prices, but even if they’re a rough idea of what Disney wants to do, this ticket pricing scheme is a naked cash grab.

This is the very first sentence in the "It's a huge increase in ticket prices" section.

I read that and it is abundantly clear that these are hypothetical prices, and that the author isn't definitively saying this is what will happen.

He was offering his opinion on a chart released in a survey. This wasn't a news article announcing a definitive price increase. That distinction is made very clear in the article.

 

[wisblue]

Defend Disney at all costs is in full force today. TP did nothing deceptive or inappropriate and they included pros and cons. A lot of people seem to be trying to deflect or mitigate the negative perception of these numbers by throwing up anything to get in the way of the possibility that this might suck for most guests. There isn't a "good set of numbers." Both charts are bad.

Maybe you aren't referring to me, but I do not see how questioning how this article was presented represents "defend Disney".

I have made it very clear that if the pricing in that chart were to be put into effect, I would not be happy. Not to mention that I think Disney would be making a mistake.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Sour grapes at what? There should be sour grapes about the potential rise in prices. TP actually wrote a balanced opinion on it. If you look back on my post history, I'm not a TP fan, but they weren't wrong here.

Several posters are defending whatever happens by obfuscating the discussion with strawman attacks.

We must be reading different threads.

I didn't say TP was wrong either. I merely commented on the importance of not omitting known information and when done, correcting it. That is all.

I don't know how you inferred that anyone claimed he was wrong.

Sour grapes is offering an opinion on what seems
To be one situation as though it is THE situation and not others. Clearly TP did NOT do that if he had no knowledge that his one scenario was not the only one.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion. No one claimed otherwise.

 

[Angel Ariel]

My statement that you bolded and correct me on was an IF statement. Not a statement of fact. It was an IF statement on what my expectation would be IF those circumstances applied.

And I was questioning the inclusion of such wording when the responses from Mr. Testa made it clear that he was not aware of the multiple charts at the time of publishing.

So IF you are suggesting that I am holding a double standard, you are very much mistaken and a huge leap on your part. IF you are referring to others, then clarity in your original comment on double standards would have been appreciated. Though I do not see anyone demonstrating double standards unless you are aware of a situation where an error or error by omission was pointed out and instead of Acknowledging the error they touted how awesome the blogger was.

I was making a general statement, but yes it applies to a statement you made as well.

As a reader in general, I don't have time to go and point out a flaw in an article when I am researching something unless it is an egregious error. What I will do is rely less on that writer as a valid source and if it happens repeatedly, then that is one less reader they have.

I get bloggers want to scoop a big story. But scooping is useless if it lacks evidence of credibility. Once again, generally speaking.

If Mr. Testa lacks credibility because he did not include information about the other surveys in his original post, nor has he updated the article itself since learning of them (even though he has acknowledged it in writing in his comments as well as on his podcast), then the same should apply to WDW Magic as well (who has not updated their article to include this information, nor do they have responses to comments on the article page).

If you agree that the same standard applies to WDW Magic, then that would not be a double standard, and you have my apologies.

 

[WillAustin]

According to TP, he didn't know there were other numbers.

Even with several survey charts with different numbers, the numbers are certainly enough for people to be up in arms about potential tiered tickets and higher prices for many guests. The discussion of that potential cost increase has been buried by the integrity police over something that doesn't matter in the overall picture. What matters is that Disney put out a survey with these numbers.

 

[baler31]

Sour grapes at what? There should be sour grapes about the potential rise in prices. TP actually wrote a balanced opinion on it. If you look back on my post history, I'm not a TP fan, but they weren't wrong here.

Disney is going to have to raise prices. Demand outstrips supply for the parks. In less than a decade MK attendance has increased from 16.5 million to 19.5 million. Disney cannot grow in Orlando, they are already the largest single site employer in the US with over 70,000 CM's . They cannot build a 5th gate, there is no way they can support even any hotel growth at this point. Hence building more DVC and utilizing existing facilities and employees.

IMO, Disney could raise ticket prices 25% and not experience any significant attendance drop. Personally, I would pay much more for a better experience and/or less crowded parks. However, I won't hold my breath that they will plow that money back into the experience.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

And I was questioning the inclusion of such wording when the responses from Mr. Testa made it clear that he was not aware of the multiple charts at the time of publishing.



I was making a general statement, but yes it applies to a statement you made as well.



If Mr. Testa lacks credibility because he did not include information about the other surveys in his original post, nor has he updated the article itself since learning of them (even though he has acknowledged it in writing in his comments as well as on his podcast), then the same should apply to WDW Magic as well (who has not updated their article to include this information, nor do they have responses to comments on the article page).

If you agree that the same standard applies to WDW Magic, then that would not be a double standard, and you have my apologies.

You are reading far too much into my p

And I was questioning the inclusion of such wording when the responses from Mr. Testa made it clear that he was not aware of the multiple charts at the time of publishing.



I was making a general statement, but yes it applies to a statement you made as well.



If Mr. Testa lacks credibility because he did not include information about the other surveys in his original post, nor has he updated the article itself since learning of them (even though he has acknowledged it in writing in his comments as well as on his podcast), then the same should apply to WDW Magic as well (who has not updated their article to include this information, nor do they have responses to comments on the article page).

If you agree that the same standard applies to WDW Magic, then that would not be a double standard, and you have my apologies.

Thank you!
I think it may be because you read more into my posts in some cases and not enough in others as from my first post, I did say it would apply to all bloggers or something like that.

Also--I did not say he was lacking credibility on one article. It would have of take a series of mistakes or lack of information for a knowledgable blogger to no longer seem the expert. I did not state that explicitly--but neither did I make a claim that he specifically lost credibility due to this own article.

 

[Angel Ariel]

Thank you!
I think it may be because you read more into my posts in some cases and not enough in others as from my first post, I did say it would apply to all bloggers or something like that.

Also--I did not say he was lacking credibility on one article. It would have of take a series of mistakes or lack of information for a knowledgable blogger to no longer seem the expert. I did not state that explicitly--but neither did I make a claim that he specifically lost credibility due to this own article.

Happy that we cleared that up

ETA: To be clear, I was not intentionally reading anything more into your post. I'm sorry if it came across that way.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

According to TP, he didn't know there were other numbers.

Even with several survey charts with different numbers, the numbers are certainly enough for people to be up in arms about potential tiered tickets and higher prices for many guests. The discussion of that potential cost increase has been buried by the integrity police over something that doesn't matter in the overall picture. What matters is that Disney put out a survey with these numbers.

So then discuss that rather than policing who you proclaim the integrity police.

If they put out 50 surveys and only this one stood out, would it still be reason to be up in arms?

I don't think you will find anyone who loves it or even likes the chart.

But bottom line--supply and demand. Disney will do what they can get away with as would any company with an issue of customers willing to still come and then some every time they raise prices.