OK... Now I'm mad about something

[crusader]

Baron –

I was just going to chime in with the usual sentiments regarding those good ole days when you blew me away with this statement:

So, YES!!! I admit it!! My Disney was not perfect!! We usually don’t discuss the problems of thirty years ago, but it had a lot of problems!! A whole bunch of problems!!

Thank you. This is what seemingly fails to be properly reflected here. The “glasses” analogy works both ways I’m afraid. Viking is right – when it becomes an issue of let’s reminisce, our memory can sometimes fail to serve as an accurate medium. This is mainly because there is no bias to affect one’s perception when first embarking on the World.

Ah, but how quickly that impression begins to fade once something you’ve grown to rely on substantially changes (enter the infamous straw mentality). Since when was a vacation critically dependent on a piece of chicken, molded butter and an operating schedule? Come-on! Heavy reliance on the external is a guaranteed formula for disappointment.

The concern I have with the “business practice” blame game is when it appears to lack any degree of counterbalance or justifiable application. What rarely gets mentioned is the reality of simple economics. How certain financial demands continually escalate and burden a business, which cannot possibly be passed along without affecting the customer.

It would be foolishly unrealistic today to not expect someone to have a problem with just about every change imaginable. People complain and complain and complain as if their voice truly represents the population, when in reality it barely supports a small fraction of a sample. That does not make anyone wrong. It simply means one may feel so compelled in argument; they fail to concede that the majority of individuals don’t share their sentiments to the same degree.

It just doesn’t matter to most people - particularly with respect to Disneyworld (which is what many here are closely associated with). That place continues to wow its’ audience and has remained exactly what it has always been: a great vacation destination. There really is no sign of this changing so why continually draw a false hypothesis in defense of an unsubstantiated argument?

 

[Another Voice]

"There really is no sign of this changing so why continually draw a false hypothesis in defense of an unsubstantiated argument?"

What draws them in is a fifty year old Disneyland and a thirty year old Magic Kingdom.

The bright shinny new places like Animal Kingdom and California Adventure are complete financial failures.

What continues to WOW the guests are all the thing you hate - what the public shuns are all the great changes you justify.

It's easy to pretend you're doing something right when all you can do is to strip mine the past. But eventually the ore will run out and all you have is the waste and the filler.

What's the most tragic part about this entire thing (besides the number of people that are so willing taking part in the dismemberment) is that the parks today could be a good business. But the "financial conditions" have nothing to do with the parks - but everything to do with ABC and other failed businesses.

You might be happy to give up your evenings in the Magic Kingdom to vote for ABC Family's 'All American Girl' at GO.com - but I do not.

 

[DancingBear]

Gee, I remember back in the 70s when THE water park (River Country) hardly ever closed. Sure, Typhoon Lagoon and Blizzard Beach didn't even exist, but at least you could count on River Country being there.

 

[jaletu2000]

Gotta tell you, I agree with most of what I read here but this decision kind of worried me.

You don't close down two popular water parks for two whole days unless you are trying to save MONEY! Maybe WDW is bleeding a little more red ink than we thought? Not too far fetched. It's been a tough two years for Disney.

HOWEVER, I am not in panic mode - not at all. As stated in this thread, I believe things are turning around financially for Disney. Thank goodness! For a while there, I was afraid I'd be telling my grandkids (years in the future ) about that late, great place in Florida that used to be called Disney World. Maybe Eisner woke up just in time.

And yes, I admit, some of these decisions drive me crazy too! I hate that some kids will be missing out on the water parks.

But if they ever close those main parks for a day....UH OH...

 

[HB2K]

Any decision is going to piss someone off. Wether it's a ride that closes, or a favorite item on a menu that's removed or a change in the paint color. Everybody has something they are partial too and any change will be a negative. Why would Disney close a ride ? Because its popular ? More then likely its ridership is way down and it's due for a major refurb. What would be best ? Spend a furtune to refurb a ride that has lost its appeal,or shut it down and build something new ?

While I'm not against replacing an older product when it's usefullness has past, there are two important things to bring up for this arguement:

1) Many of the closures are not being replaced (COP, Timekeeper, Skyride, the Subs)

2) It's not like they're running out of space....I thought that's why Walt bought all that land.

Another thing. One decision here or there will tick people off, and that's ok. What's not OK is to CONTINUALLY make business decisions that lead to P.O.'d customers.

There really is no sign of this changing so why continually draw a false hypothesis in defense of an unsubstantiated argument?

All due respect Crusader but...

WHAT PLANET ARE YOU LIVING ON?????

This is the first time in recent memory that Disney HEAVILY discounted admission to it's parks (by way of it's vacation packages). It's the first time I'm aware of that waterparks are going to be closed routinely during the week.

Yet the place is as good a deal as ever? It's bringing in the people in the same numbers (and at the same profit level) as before? Come on....

Maybe WDW is bleeding a little more red ink than we thought?

More than likely, somewhere else in the Disney corp (I.e. Ei$ner's pockets) needs more profit to come from the place....

And yes, I admit, some of these decisions drive me crazy too! I hate that some kids will be missing out on the water parks.

But if they ever close those main parks for a day....UH OH...

So you see the straw falling, but this one doesn't break your back....right?

Just wait. At the current pace you're bound to be hit by a log sooner or later.

As AV says:

If you want to keep your snowglobes, someone better start listening....

 

[d-r]

this is why i roll my eyes about the way some of yall think - and why I yawn because it is so boring that you can't get passed it

I've said this so many times on here before - disney world is there to make money. If they are going to make money on something it will be there, if they are going to loose money they will shake it up. Can't you understand how greed works? Capitalism? If there are enough people there when the kids are in school in the fall to open two water parks every day they will, if not, why do you think they should loose money paying salary and costs to keep them both open when they aren't full? Honestly, I know that people take walt disney world in such a personal way and all that, but surely at some level you see that despite the perception of "fairy dust" there is a real world back stage?? Again, and again people talk about "straws" LOL - i want my own personal disney world that is for me and me only, even if it makes no sense at all for the real world - whatever, it is just so sad, anyway Hey I liked discovery island open that up just for me even though nobody else wants to pay to go there! Hey open up river country just for me even if nobody else wants to go there! Hey, keep horizons open just for me even if nobody else wants to go there. It is about money folks, not walt disney world trying to mess with you, lol. It may look like Fantasyland on the outside, but that doesn't mean it is happy kindergarten communist world -


HB2K as long as people pay money for snow globes, don't worry, you'll have them. LOL, you won't have to mount an e-mail campaign if they are making money lmao-
DR

OH NO A LOG HIT ME LOL

 

[KNWVIKING]

***"1) Many of the closures are not being replaced (COP, Timekeeper, Skyride, the Subs)

2) It's not like they're running out of space....I thought that's why Walt bought all that land.

Another thing. One decision here or there will tick people off, and that's ok. What's not OK is to CONTINUALLY make business decisions that lead to P.O.'d customers."***

Well,technically CoP and Time are still rides....just wish we knew what was going on with them. Skyrides was a decision Disney was forced to make. And Subs was replaced with Carpets (kidding). Has anybody ever posted a historical ride count of MK thru the ages ? And not just ride count, but a ratio of E rides to A-rides. My bet would be that the ride count has remained fairly constant.

Yep, Walt bought a lot of land. They added ToonTown to MK specifically and Epcot,MGM,AK,TL and BB to the overall landscape.

Just thinking out loud.... are people here REALLY pissed when they post a cut back or a closing, or are they just pushing their agenda ? This Oct when we go to Spoodles, if Oraschetta (sp) is not on the menu I'm going to get an "earfull" from my DW. But is she really pissed at Spoodles or WDW or ME ? No. She'll just miss her favorite Spoodles dish.

 

[DC7800]

What would be best ? Spend a furtune to refurb a ride that has lost its appeal,or shut it down and build something new ?

Actually, neither. What would be best would be to have maintained the attraction all long, with the investment to make incremental improvements and other enhancements to keep the ride interesting and sustain it's popularity. Spaceship Earth has seen elements of this, and so has The Land (Imagination was changed too much, of course). Both have high ridership - and remain popular - to this day. It costs a lot less to maintain an attraction, with modest periodic changes, than it does to start from scratch.

Any decision is going to piss someone off. Wether it's a ride that closes, or a favorite item on a menu that's removed or a change in the paint color. Everybody has something they are partial too and any change will be a negative.

Every little decsion shouldn't have to be seen as a negative by some segment of WDW visitors. Sure, look hard enough and you can find someone to dislike almost everything, but such decisions are not based on the desires of individuals (and if you also give that person sewveral other items they see as positive changes, you can avoid much of the anger). Problem is, Disney doesn't do this. The changes discussed on this board are widely disliked by a variety of park-goers. Even worse, we are not the only people to have noticed the decline - the general public is gradually growing in awareness, and more and more are staying away from WDW (or DCA, etc.). If I was literally the only person who thought Dinorama was a hideously ugly mistake, Disney would not have a problem. But I am hardly alone in that assertion.

Hey I liked discovery island open that up just for me even though nobody else wants to pay to go there! Hey open up river country just for me even if nobody else wants to go there! Hey, keep horizons open just for me even if nobody else wants to go there.

Again, if you or I (or even a relatively small number of people) were the only people who missed these attractions then it would be different. But, judging by the amount of attention these (and other) closed attractions get, it seems a safe assumption that we are hardly alone. Granted, we can't assume that DIS members (or other Disney sites) reflect Disney vacationers overall, but if we are widely critical of the EE fiasco or lament the reduced park hours, it seems reasonable that a sizable segment of the general travelling public would as well.

You don't close down two popular water parks for two whole days unless you are trying to save MONEY! Maybe WDW is bleeding a little more red ink than we thought? Not too far fetched. It's been a tough two years for Disney.

Disney is certainly trying to save money all right - by bleeding ("strip-mining") the most profitable divisions of the company to pay for ABC-family, M.E.'s salery, and other mistakes. WDW isn't the one suffering from red-ink. Rather, it's keeping the rest of the company afloat. Now, I'll agree it has been a rough couple years for WDW. After several years of neglect, and a lack of new investment resulting in stagnant parks (Future World), attendance and income certainly have failed to meet objectives. Hence, the next round of cuts to save the "cash" that didn't come from park hopper and resort sales. The really tragic part is, though, that the "rough" years at WDW have largely - not entirely, but largely - been a problem of Disney's own making.

 

[d-r]

Again, if you or I (or even a relatively small number of people) were the only people who missed these attractions then it would be different. But, judging by the amount of attention these (and other) closed attractions get, it seems a safe assumption that we are hardly alone. Granted, we can't assume that DIS members (or other Disney sites) reflect Disney vacationers overall, but if we are widely critical of the EE fiasco or lament the reduced park hours, it seems reasonable that a sizable segment of the general travelling public would as well.

you know, I am absolutely positive, I am totally and completely sure, that anyone here could pay to rent out blizzard beach or typhoon lagoon for a private party one of those days that it is closed in the fall. I have no doubt about it. Then one could simply sell tickets to all these people who would like to go, and turn a nice profit. But if there were these people who would like to go, Disney would have kept them open in the first place. If there was a profit to be made disney would be making it. But if anyone really believed that enough people would go they should put their money up and rent it out and sell tickets to their private day and make a tidy profit - but none of you will because you know that I am right if you think about it, and you wouldn't put your own money on the line because you know you would loose it. The same thing for the park hours. One day in September or Oct or Nov you could rent out the entire magic kingdom from closing time to however late you wanted to pay for it, and then sell tickets to your private affair - go ahead and see how much profit you make from the sizable segment of the american travelling public.

Things are getting better at walt disney world and the crowds are coming back and will continue to do and things will continue to do better. I think I'm done for a while. I hope.

DR

 

[Lewisc]

Although I'm sure you could rent out the park for a private event I'm not so sure Disney would allow you to charge admission. You may very well be able to make money. Disney decided they could MAKE MORE MONEY by putting the water park customers in one park instead of two. I suspect a number of customers are captive (they bought UPH or PHP passes) and are stuck at whatever waterpark Disney decides to open.

Originally posted by d-r
you know, I am absolutely positive, I am totally and completely sure, that anyone here could pay to rent out blizzard beach or typhoon lagoon for a private party one of those days that it is closed in the fall. I have no doubt about it. Then one could simply sell tickets to all these people who would like to go, and turn a nice profit. But if there were these people who would like to go, Disney would have kept them open in the first place. If there was a profit to be made disney would be making it. But if anyone really believed that enough people would go they should put their money up and rent it out and sell tickets to their private day and make a tidy profit - but none of you will because you know that I am right if you think about it, and you wouldn't put your own money on the line DR

 

[KNWVIKING]

**"Although I'm sure you could rent out the park for a private event I'm not so sure Disney would allow you to charge admission. You may very well be able to make money."**

Actually what I think D-R is saying -pardon me if I'm wrong- is that you won't make money by renting it out because if there was a profit to be made, Disney would not have shut it down, they would have made the profit for themselves.

Disney knows exactly what the water park attendance has been in both parks. If the thought Sept would bring SRO crowds to both parks,they would both be openfull time. Something we notice in May: Disney seems to be adjusting park hours on an as needed basis- and by adjusting I mean adding. I'd be willing to bet that if the crowds are there and the weather cooperates you will see some of those closed days canceled.

**"Actually, neither. What would be best would be to have maintained the attraction all long, with the investment to make incremental improvements and other enhancements to keep the ride interesting and sustain it's popularity. "**

Every ride, regardless of how it is maintained, is eventually going to need a major refurb. Now,had the Matterhorn in DL not been an immensely popular E-ride, I suspect it would have been bulldozed. As a side note: What was the last E-ride to be eliminated ? Rides come,rides go.Way of life in all theme parks. But every person who is pissed about X being closed, I'd bet hundreds are thrilled Y is opened.

**"Every little decsion shouldn't have to be seen as a negative by some segment of WDW visitors."**

I'm sorry, but my experience on this board and with people in general is that if Disney installed golden toilet seat thruout the entire park, people would whine that "there too cold when I sit down".

 

[wdw4us2]

as originally posted by KNWVIKING:

"As a side note: What was the last E-ride to be eliminated?"

The last E-ticket ride to be eliminated and not replaced was 20K Leagues Under the Sea which closed permanently on September 5, 1994 and has been dormant ever since. I do not consider a Character Greeting area a replacement for an attraction.

 

[Lewisc]

My point is there might be enough guests to make a profit but Disney can MAKE MORE PROFIT by squeezing the guests in one water park.

Originally posted by KNWVIKING
**"Actually what I think D-R is saying -pardon me if I'm wrong- is that you won't make money by renting it out because if there was a profit to be made, Disney would not have shut it down, they would have made the profit for themselves.

 

[Another Voice]

The fancy PowerPoint term they use is something along the lines of "Capacity Maximization".

Quite simply it means that once Disney has your money the game is to spend as little as possible on you. It's the rationalization behind the last three years of cuts in park hours. They got your fifty bucks so you're not going to spend more on admissions if the hours are longer or shorter – but it costs Disney bucks for each hour they have to run the place. They fiddled around for a long time to find the shortest number of hours they can open the park without discouraging ticket sales.

The only variable in the equation is the in-park spending on merchandise and food. Disney figures that people will still need to eat so if the parks are closed then the business will go to the hotels and shopping malls (where the margins are better anyway). And if they can get a few more guests to the bars, well – image what the margin is on booze!

Since the majority of out-of town guests use a form of ticket that includes the water parks, the same trick work here. You've already paid for the park, Disney doesn't really care if you get to go to one or not. If you don't make it into a park, you should have planned better.

As we keep being told – we're to blame for everything.*. And wallets shouldn't think anyway.

The same rational has also been used to justify the closure of Animal Kingdom. Why run the place for 10,000 guests when we can stuff them into Magic Kingdom with no increase in costs? It’s a 50-50 chance that the park remains at seven day operation through the end of September right now; the new fiscal year is still somewhat up in the air.

The net result of these changes is that Disney is able to squeak out a few more bucks from the people currently showing up, but the tactics are devastating repeat and non-rabid fan attendance. Most of vacation destinations have recovered substantially by now, yet Disney was forced into another wave of massive discounting to slow the attendance decline. For a "premium" brand like Disney to be worse off than the cruise industry or Vegas or Hawaii simply proves that it's not "the economy" excuse.

Far from people complaining about a golden toilet seat, the general public is tired of being shown a hole behind a bush. Sure, there are some people who will still say "it's the most magical® bathroom experience I've ever had", but majority of people are getting harder and harder to con.

Those that scream about "capitalism – Disney has to make a buck" don't understand the business at all. You can only make money by pleasing guests. Calling them stupid and cutting the value of what you're selling is the quick road to bancrupcy.

But maybe that's their agenda – drive everyone away from the parks so they can buy their snow globes on clearance.


* The "Disney was forced to close the skyway because people dropped things"..., the real reason was one of costs. It's a high maintenance, slow moving, low capacity ride that didn't sell anything. Some added requirements for the American With Disabilities Act and the accounts killed it deader than the Mickey butter.

 

[Pinnie]

****Most of vacation destinations have recovered substantially by now, yet Disney was forced into another wave of massive discounting to slow the attendance decline.****

Beg to differ here. DS got laid off a few weeks early from his summer job at "tourist location." And I just found this about Cedar Point in Ohio, attendance is down at that park this year too.

http://www.virtualmidway.com/news/0801032.asp

pin

 

[KNWVIKING]

****Most of vacation destinations have recovered substantially by now, yet Disney was forced into another wave of massive discounting to slow the attendance decline.****


So I guess the news article I read a couple weeks ago that stated something to the affect of attendance sucking at all theme parks across the country was a spin article published by ME.


****"* The "Disney was forced to close the skyway because people dropped things"..., the real reason was one of costs. It's a high maintenance, slow moving, low capacity ride that didn't sell anything. Some added requirements for the American With Disabilities Act and the accounts killed it deader than the Mickey butter."****

Well, maybe idiots dropping things was just "the last straw" for a high cost,low ridership,high maintenance,slow moving ride that didn't meet ADA specs. What were they possibly thinking when they shut this prize down ? Maybe a better question would be to ask whose brilliant idea was it to build it in the first place.

 

[crusader]

WHAT PLANET ARE YOU LIVING ON?????

The one that sells gasoline* at $1.70/gallon in South Jersey. In other words, the REAL WORLD which last time I checked was loaded with snow globe owners here in the continental U.S.

*Interesting how Ei$ner commented on fuel during that obscure cable interview. Coincidence? or quite possibly related to a certain oil company included in the holdings portfolio.

Seriously,

This is the first time in recent memory that Disney HEAVILY discounted admission to it's parks (by way of it's vacation packages). It's the first time I'm aware of that waterparks are going to be closed routinely during the week.

I don't dispute the fact that these precedents have recently occured. I challenge the explanation being put forth that bad business decisions have caused a decline in attendance particularly at WDW and Disneyland.

Maybe, if you could successfully demonstrate to me that there isn't a recession going on and that most consumer's possess a healthy level of disposable income to readily afford luxury items, I'd be more inclined to buy into this theory. It just doesn't happen to be true - that's all.

Sorry AV - but last week I was able to secure an upgraded suite at the Venetian over labor day weekend for $119/night. Doesn't sound like an economic recovery to me.

Although your take on how Disney analyzed its' business is exactly what I'd expect from within a corporation. Honestly, is the criticism really toward the company implementing a cost control formula to maximize profitability during an economic downturn? or is it simply toward Disney having invested in one failed business venture during the dot.com era. Shame on them.

 

[CasualObserver]

Originally posted by crusader

Maybe, if you could successfully demonstrate to me that there isn't a recession going on and that most consumer's possess a healthy level of disposable income to readily afford luxury items, I'd be more inclined to buy into this theory. It just doesn't happen to be true - that's all.

As I recall a news item, the recession was over more than 20 months ago. The economists did not announce it because they wanted to be sure it wasn't just a spike in the statistics.

It seems that if Disney says "Oh, woe is me" then you buy into it hook, line, and sinker. I don't. No one ever won customers by reducing product. Rather than do things to attract customers, Disney has been doing everything they can to drive away business. It does seem that they are starting to put in some effort with M:S, ExpEverest, etc. Our side's argument is that they shouldn't be playing catch up.

It's not about The Good Old Days, it's about good/bad business decisions. That's all. Reducing available options, while demanding full price is a bad business decision in the long run.

Do the Car 1 people really believe that this latest round of improvements are the result of Disney Mgmt wanting to give more to the guests and maximize their entertainment at the parks? I don't. I think it's Disney Mgmt realizing that they better do something to quit driving away return visitors. Bad press builds and Disney has been getting it's share of it.

I think, however, that once their numbers start turning around, these improvements will end and we will return to the standard practice of reducing the available options/times. To paraphrase AV, they already have your money, their job is to make sure they spend as little on providing you entertainment as possible. This is the kind of thinking that leads to reduced numbers of repeat visits. The correct thinking would be to do things to expand your customer base - not squeeze ever harder on a shrinking one.

Casual Observer

 

[ThAnswr]

>>>>Since when was a vacation critically dependent on a piece of chicken, molded butter and an operating schedule?<<<<

Let me read this one more time.........Yup, I really did read operating schedule!

Since when does a vacation depend on an operating schedule?

HUH!

Is this a joke or a moment of temporary insanity?

I'm sitting here trying to find the words to explain the correlation between operating schedules and a vacation, but even I can't do it.

All I can say is........it is so obvious, it speaks for itself.

Continually changing the operating schedule to reflect "attendance" is crappy business because the most expensive way to go for anything is continually screw around with it whether it's car parts, groceries, or theme park operating schedules.

The powers that be at Disney are not changing schedules to meet attendance, they're changing schedules because they're floundering and running out of ideas of how to pay for that massive debt that's been incurred. Saving a few shekels here and there looks as if one might know what one's doing. Pure BS because they haven't got a clue.

Now, changing the operating schedule after Disney has taken your money is unforgivable and damned near borders on fraud. They're sellling a product and are then failing to give you that product. That crap about schedules being subject to change is being taken to the nth degree by Disney almost to the point of being ridiculous.


Oh, btw, my father (may he rest in peace) had a wonderful expression for last-straw moments. Dad would sit back in his chair, focus his eyes on you, and out would come the melodic words "When it burns your *ss".

Dad really did have a way with words.

 

[Lewisc]

AV--Well written post. Other theme parks (Cedar Point) aren't vacation destinations. The rainy start of the summer killed their attendance.

I just got back from Disney. Fantasmic was a zoo. An extra section was set aside for the dinner package. I asked a CM what was going on. Evidently Fantasmic was rained out a few times during the week. Guest services was giving out passes for people to come back for Fantasmic (without requiring park admission). In the "old days" Disney would have added a second show. Standing room was packed.

I wanted to have dinner at Mama Melrose. They closed at 6:00.

I read one the reasons they don't close AK some days is that there is a fair amount of staffing required for the animals. Closing the park doesn't save as much money as you would expect.

Not sure if Mission Space is a flop (I like it) but Test Track had longer lines. The single line as MS was basically a walk on, FP were available into the early evening and the standby line was reasonable.

I understand that BC is only at 30% this week. I wonder if Disney thought MS would cause people to book an extra trip? Certainly delaying and reducing AP discounts may have caused some regulars to delay additional trips.