I'm just going to have to disagree. Not holding both the finance, and the creatives responsible is not how we improve the parks on a consistent basis.
As an "on-the-ground" engineer I completely disagree with this. Have you ever dealt with the bean counters/management on a construction job? We once had a project that would have cost $1.5 million and would've saved our company ~$1 million a year. They didn't approve it for TEN years of asking, and only finally did it when the system deteriorated to the point that we HAD to do it.
I can picture how the meetings went:
Imagineer: It'll take $200 million to finish Dinoland properly.
Money Manager: You can't have that.
Imagineer: Well, if we cut this and this we could do it for $125 million.
Money Manager: Nope, you have $20 million.
Imagineer: $20 million for the whole land? We've already spent $80 million on the Countdown to Extinction attraction! You're crazy, it'll be f*&&in parking lot.
Money Manager: Then build a parking lot. $20 million. Get it done.
Imagineer: %$)# 9$#(%@!!! (Throws protractor)
Money Manager: Oh, and about this Beastly Kingdom idea....
Imagineer: @$!%& %%#@!%^!!! (Throws coffee mug)
