PM EMH drops from THREE Hours to TWO Hours

[mesaboy2]

Nothing is ever a big deal if that loss is something you don't use.

Those who don't like Fantasmic! saw no loss in DHS cutting performances to 2-3 per week last year.

Yes.

How many times across how many subjects is this demonstrated here? A third hour of EMH, a show, an attraction, a character, a policy (ahem), a certain kind of ticket. If this particular offering is used by someone and it goes away, it's clearly a bigger deal to them than it is to another who doesn't use it. What I find perplexing is how many don't seem to understand how the person that loses that offering could possibly be annoyed with its loss because, after all, they never used it and they had a great time.

 

[KellyNY]

I've never seen Fantasmic, but I tnink that is somewhat more legitimate complaint. Again, if a trip is only 5 days, it could be very hard to get to see Fantasmic at all if it is only a few days a week.

But you know, even if they cut Fantasmic completely, I just don't think I could get too upset, even if I LOVED it, because things change, ya know? Sometimes it's a bummer when things we like are gone, but sometimes it's the only way to make way for newer, better things.

Exactly! And when things do not change, people complain that there is nothing new, and when they build new things, people complain about constractions, and when they updating rides, people complain about ride closures even so they complained about rides conditions. And the list continues.

 

[Violet Parr]

I think the poster was just trying to make the point that in reference to the EMH's, many posters repeatedly use the reasoning that I don't use them, anyway, and therefore it's perfectly all right by them if they go away. They continue to state that it's no big deal and seem to insist that those who do view this as a concern are somehow completely wrong. This comes across as pretty rude to those who DO think it's important as their feelings and concerns continue to be diminshed and disrespected. That's the frustration. This issue is very subjective, after all. So yes, some don't care, some care very much, and both views are o.k.

The reference to the dining plan, I believe, was simply to put the shoe on the other foot to perhaps get them to think how they would feel if something they did care about (since they don't care about the EMH)were eliminated. I don't think the intention was to discuss the dining plan per se or to take the thread off-topic.

It's not that I don't care. I really do feel for anyone who has a special portion of their trip that ends/changes. for me, it's not having my older daughter be allowed to dress up as the years continue. She's sad about it, too.

I also liked it when the dining plan included gratuity! They did away with that, but it made absolute sense to me, and so life goes on. I'm not canceling my Disney trips or crying foul. It's just a change that was made and while it was nice to not have to set aside 3 figures for gratuity for our trip, well, bummer.

I'm not trying to say that anyone who is disappointed has no reason to be disappointed. It's the "Those Big Mean Magic-Stealing Bean Counters Who Go Against All Walt Stood For" responses to the EMH change that seem really over the top to me. And yes, there have been some. There was also that same reaction to the napkin change.

Those responses are followed by, "It's not this thing alone, it's all these little things that add up." Okay, fine, but let's also talk about the GOOD changes that add up, too. It's only fair, and there have been MANY.

As I've said before, I'll start ranting when they get rid of my nightly fireworks.

VP

 

[Colleen27]

I completely disagree with the above statement in bold. We've done that much (except Dumbo twice...only do it once) and it was not between 1 and 2 am. We use touringplans, the crowd calendar, etc, and we've done that much on quite a few occasions. I'm not trying to sound competitive here, but doing rope drop and hitting the parks on the quietest weeks of the year, and that's been totally possible for us. Granted, we arrive at rope drop and do Dumbo first and fast and are usually on the first group on that ride (thankfully, that's no longer necessary!) and we get in Peter Pan twice, Small World, Winnie the Pooh, Snow White, tea cups, Cindy's carousel, and then we hit the opening of Toontown and ride Barnstormer (or do Space Mountain or HM.) That's about the same amount of stuff.

I'm sure there are others who can attest to having done that much during the day. It's not as easy as it was in 2005 or 2007, admittedly, but it is do-able with the right touring plan combo, rope drop, and FP use.

If you can go during the quietest weeks of the year (and I'd like to get an update on when those are, actually, because our January trip was FAR busier than expected), and if you get up earlier on vacation than you do for work to be there waiting around for the rope to drop, and if you haul butt around the park with single-minded determination. And if you don't have any interest in characters that build long lines later in the day. We've done it and I really don't find it even remotely comparable to enjoying those same attractions late at night when it doesn't take racewalking and a precision agenda to ride them all.

As for actual topic of this thread, obviously some people are upset but since it is only 1 or 2 hours out of entire trip, I do not see it as a such a big issue. And while everyone is free to do whatever works for them, moving offsite and loosing remaining lets say 10 hours of EMH whe it is so important for person, does not really make sense to me.

It doesn't really have to make sense to you. If you ever stay for a 2am MK close you'll understand well enough; the first hour is every bit as crowded as the entire day, the second hour only slightly less so. It takes at least an hour for all the off-site guests to filter out and the lines don't start to drop noticeably until at least 1.5 hours in. So the hours of EMH that remain have very little value in my assessment; if the EMH closing on Sun is the same time as the general public closing on Sat, why not save money, stay off-site, and go to MK a day earlier?

We're a family of 5 so we're paying a LOT more to stay on site than we would offsite - for less than we spend on two rooms at Pop we could have a two bedroom villa at Bonnet Creek or a whole house with a private pool at Windsor Hills, and obviously that comes with a lot of perks that Disney lodging in the same price range doesn't. As the perks of staying on site become less numerous and less valuable, price and comfort become more important in the decision-making than they've been in the past. And as the evening options continue to shrink having a nicer resort to go back to starts to matter more, because we mainly go in off times when park hours are short.

 

[baler31]

It's a 33.33333333 (etc) % cut for those that do use it. I don't do the dining plan, and I wish they'd eliminate it and actually start serving a variety of good food. Imagine the howling you'd hear if they did.

Getting rid of the dining plan is something I would support. Losing any EMH time not so much.

 

[Rip]

Nothing is ever a big deal if that loss is something you don't use.

Those who don't like Fantasmic! saw no loss in DHS cutting performances to 2-3 per week last year.

Bingo.

 

[mom2rtk]

a policy (ahem)

You have a tickle in your throat?

You should get that looked at.

 

[Rip]

I think the poster was just trying to make the point that in reference to the EMH's, many posters repeatedly use the reasoning that I don't use them, anyway, and therefore it's perfectly all right by them if they go away. They continue to state that it's no big deal and seem to insist that those who do view this as a concern are somehow completely wrong. This comes across as pretty rude to those who DO think it's important as their feelings and concerns continue to be diminshed and disrespected. That's the frustration. This issue is very subjective, after all. So yes, some don't care, some care very much, and both views are o.k.

The reference to the dining plan, I believe, was simply to put the shoe on the other foot to perhaps get them to think how they would feel if something they did care about (since they don't care about the EMH)were eliminated. I don't think the intention was to discuss the dining plan per se or to take the thread off-topic.

 

[KSDisneyDad]

And since words and actions do not match it is difficult to take such comments anything but spreading negativity, which we do not need on Disney board where people come looking for help with their plans and to share their love for Disney. Discussing particular problems and situations helps, stating that everything is bad, calling CEO names, yet keep going, does not help anyone. I am not saying it is just her but it became a theme on board and it is very sad.

ITA that there is a difference between constructive criticism and downright negativism. I don't believe that anyone thinks Disney is perfect and likes every change they make, but it's how we react to it that is the key IMO.

Just look at this thread for example. 28 pages so far and nothing has been accomplished other than sharing the news that evening EMH will be cut by one-hour (maybe permanently, maybe not).

Yet what keeps the thread going is the desire to express frustration with this and other cuts. At some point we need to agree to disagree as it seems evident that no amount of back-and-forth will change anyone's mind.

For example, when someone brings something positive up such as the new FLE, it's called nothing but more meet and greets despite new attractions (UTS:JLM, SDMT) and restaurants or when Toy Story Mania is mentioned, it's called nothing but a video game. How is that type of rhetoric really beneficial to stating your case? It looks like nothing will make you happy and that you appear to complain just to complain. I think that attitude is the frustration by many. Why not civilly discuss both the positives and negatives? A focus on one or the other exclusively is not healthy.

We thoroughly enjoy our trips to Disney. Our last WDW trip was our best yet after 14 years and no we didn't use the third hour of EMH even though we stayed on-site. Our last Disney cruise was our second best yet (6 total). And we are excited about our upcoming trip to DLR to see the new Carsland, WOC and many other updates since our last trip in 2008. I think so many forget that Disney is more than just WDW and that they are working to improve the experience for guests in all parks and all venues whether on-land or at-sea. Granted, not all change is good but they do continue to expand and add so it's not all doom and gloom IMO.

 

[mesaboy2]

You have a tickle in your throat?

You should get that looked at.

 

[Planogirl]

Yes.

How many times across how many subjects is this demonstrated here? A third hour of EMH, a show, an attraction, a character, a policy (ahem), a certain kind of ticket. If this particular offering is used by someone and it goes away, it's clearly a bigger deal to them than it is to another who doesn't use it. What I find perplexing is how many don't seem to understand how the person that loses that offering could possibly be annoyed with its loss because, after all, they never used it and they had a great time.

I agree!

You see it all the time. It doesn't matter to ME, therefore it doesn't matter.

 

[KellyNY]

It doesn't really have to make sense to you. If you ever stay for a 2am MK close you'll understand well enough; the first hour is every bit as crowded as the entire day, the second hour only slightly less so. It takes at least an hour for all the off-site guests to filter out and the lines don't start to drop noticeably until at least 1.5 hours in. So the hours of EMH that remain have very little value in my assessment; if the EMH closing on Sun is the same time as the general public closing on Sat, why not save money, stay off-site, and go to MK a day earlier?

We're a family of 5 so we're paying a LOT more to stay on site than we would offsite - for less than we spend on two rooms at Pop we could have a two bedroom villa at Bonnet Creek or a whole house with a private pool at Windsor Hills, and obviously that comes with a lot of perks that Disney lodging in the same price range doesn't. As the perks of staying on site become less numerous and less valuable, price and comfort become more important in the decision-making than they've been in the past. And as the evening options continue to shrink having a nicer resort to go back to starts to matter more, because we mainly go in off times when park hours are short.

While park is still crowded as people exit for a while, rides are only for onsite guests so you are dealing only with onsite guests who choose to stay, not all onsite. Nobody arguing that you had no crowds at 3rd hour, this is actually our point, but first 2 hours have value, they are not useless.

 

[Violet Parr]

If you can go during the quietest weeks of the year (and I'd like to get an update on when those are, actually, because our January trip was FAR busier than expected), and if you get up earlier on vacation than you do for work to be there waiting around for the rope to drop, and if you haul butt around the park with single-minded determination. And if you don't have any interest in characters that build long lines later in the day. We've done it and I really don't find it even remotely comparable to enjoying those same attractions late at night when it doesn't take racewalking and a precision agenda to ride them all.



It doesn't really have to make sense to you. If you ever stay for a 2am MK close you'll understand well enough; the first hour is every bit as crowded as the entire day, the second hour only slightly less so. It takes at least an hour for all the off-site guests to filter out and the lines don't start to drop noticeably until at least 1.5 hours in. So the hours of EMH that remain have very little value in my assessment; if the EMH closing on Sun is the same time as the general public closing on Sat, why not save money, stay off-site, and go to MK a day earlier?

We're a family of 5 so we're paying a LOT more to stay on site than we would offsite - for less than we spend on two rooms at Pop we could have a two bedroom villa at Bonnet Creek or a whole house with a private pool at Windsor Hills, and obviously that comes with a lot of perks that Disney lodging in the same price range doesn't. As the perks of staying on site become less numerous and less valuable, price and comfort become more important in the decision-making than they've been in the past. And as the evening options continue to shrink having a nicer resort to go back to starts to matter more, because we mainly go in off times when park hours are short.

I totally respect your perspective and opinion. I just can't imagine making large vacation decisions based on one hour of park time. Just thought I'd join in the discussion. It appears that people are offended that others don't agree, but I guess that is to be expected.

I'd like to add that we've never had to get up earlier than we do at home (leaving our resort at 8:00 is actually much later than my husband leaves for work) and we don't do that first hour at breakneck speed. We go to the parks on the NON EMH days and we follow the crowd calendar and the recommended park of the day and it works out for us. We've walked on to Test Track plenty of times. We don't ever have to run anywhere (not my style!) Just a little advanced planning, and we have leisurely days and get plenty done and have lots of fun. Seriously, my husband would NEVER go back to WDW if I had ever made him run, get up earlier on vacation than he does for work, or haul "butt" to get around the parks. For the record, we usually go the first and second week of December for 2 weeks, although we went for 10 days starting the Sunday after Thanksgiving one year.

Anyway, call me a Pollyanna, but I think this conversation boils down to glass-half-empty and glass-half-full folks. That is just my very humble opinion, and I don't think there is a person on this thread who hasn't stated theirs.

I'll back out of the conversation though. I think I have unintentionally offended and I don't want to do it again.


VP

 

[KSDisneyDad]

Yes.

How many times across how many subjects is this demonstrated here? A third hour of EMH, a show, an attraction, a character, a policy (ahem), a certain kind of ticket. If this particular offering is used by someone and it goes away, it's clearly a bigger deal to them than it is to another who doesn't use it. What I find perplexing is how many don't seem to understand how the person that loses that offering could possibly be annoyed with its loss because, after all, they never used it and they had a great time.

I don't think everyone who is not upset about losing EMH is somehow unsympathetic to those who are upset about it or doesn't "understand".

As I've said before (and I've seen many others post similarly), we too have enjoyed that third hour of EMH. We too have ridden POTC as the only one in the boat more than once or done SM three times in a row with no wait. It was fun and a great experience walking onto Splash Mountain and being the only two on the ride with all the empty boats and then getting soaked and afterwards, walking down an completely deserted street through Frontierland laughing about it. But it is because of these experiences that I also understand why Disney has made the decision to no longer do the third hour of evening EMH. Am I disappointed - sure. Will it break my next trip - no. I'm not trying to downplay anyone's frustration, and I can see both sides to this. Even though I understand the frustration and disappointment, it doesn't mean I have to agree with it.

 

[mesaboy2]

I don't think everyone who is not upset about losing EMH is somehow unsympathetic to those who are upset about it or doesn't "understand".

As I've said before (and I've seen many others post similarly), we too have enjoyed that third hour of EMH. We too have ridden POTC as the only one in the boat more than once or done SM three times in a row with no wait. It was fun and a great experience walking onto Splash Mountain and being the only two on the ride with all the empty boats and then getting soaked and afterwards, walking down an completely deserted street through Frontierland laughing about it. But it is because of these experiences that I also understand why Disney has made the decision to no longer do the third hour of evening EMH. Am I disappointed - sure. Will it break my next trip - no. I'm not trying to downplay anyone's frustration, and I can see both sides to this. Even though I understand the frustration and disappointment, it doesn't mean I have to agree with it.

I agree, but I didn't say "everyone"--I said "many". My post is meant to point out the more meta-view that this is true of any cutback or loss, not just EMH. There is a segment of people that cannot seem to grasp that almost any of these is a disappointment to someone. I'd love to see some poster's reactions to one of their favorite things--small or large--disappearing and seeing how they may express that disappointment or if they look to justify it behind business sense or any other reasoning.

And I totally understand the business-end of the EMH argument as well, but it doesn't mean I have to agree with it.

 

[twojay]

Am I the only one who is hoping that they add an hour to the AM EMH to make up for the evening reduction? Why do night-owls get more time than the early birds? DH regularly has to be at work at 7am - being somewhere early is no problem for us. On the other hand, the latest we've been in the parks is 10:30PM. We just cannot stay awake late at night!

 

[KSDisneyDad]

I agree, but I didn't say "everyone"--I said "many". My post is meant to point out the more meta-view that this is true of any cutback or loss, not just EMH. There is a segment of people that cannot seem to grasp that almost any of these is a disappointment to someone. I'd love to see some poster's reactions to one of their favorite things--small or large--disappearing and seeing how they may express that disappointment or if they look to justify it behind business sense or any other reasoning.

And I totally understand the business-end of the EMH argument as well, but it doesn't mean I have to agree with it.

You're right, it's the handful on both extremes that seem to bring out the most lively "discussions". I was getting the feeling over the past page or so that there was a movement toward classifying anyone who disagreed as unsympathetic or that they only disagreed because it didn't affect them personally. I'm sure there are a few who simply don't care because it doesn't affect them personally.

I actually wish they'd keep EMH the same, but I do understand their decision nonetheless. Heck, I'm still upset they took Hunchback out of DHS several years ago. That was one of the best shows they've produced IMO, but yet somehow shows like the Beauty and the Beast musical endure? Unfortunately as we've seen numerous times, popularity often overrides quality. That's why I do like it when they add or improve upon attractions, shows or other events that are good quality and are popular. Yes, it does happen despite the many naysayers on here.

 

[UNCFanatik]

I can completely understand people's disappointment with changes that have a perceived initial negative effect on them. But the continued pronouncements of impending doom because of said change is a little much for me to take. Before a change is even implemented, we see the naysayers and prophets of doom come out and speculate on how awful things will be based on limited knowledge and wild conjecture. Some of these predictions come to pass while most never do. And these same people will fail to acknowledge any benefit that was a result of said change because they pine for the perceived "good ole days".

 

[KellyNY]

I agree, but I didn't say "everyone"--I said "many". My post is meant to point out the more meta-view that this is true of any cutback or loss, not just EMH. There is a segment of people that cannot seem to grasp that almost any of these is a disappointment to someone. I'd love to see some poster's reactions to one of their favorite things--small or large--disappearing and seeing how they may express that disappointment or if they look to justify it behind business sense or any other reasoning.

And I totally understand the business-end of the EMH argument as well, but it doesn't mean I have to agree with it.

We totally understand that every cut upsets someone but we cannot not to notice that some people use every single cut to just scream how horrible Disney became. I remember thread about adding 25c to the price of soda. For some people it was end of the world, another example how Disney went down, it was not 25c for some but a particular % of icrease that was apparently more then it has to be. It was only 25c after all but sky was falling once again and when it happens way too often, it is clear that all some people want is to complain, just to spread negativity.

 

[TLSnell1981]

That is not how it was said, when other people were asking why to even go if having such issues with Disney, the answer was she would even cancel this trip since she reached her tipping point, if not for deposit and kids, and since it was said many times in response to different people on different threads it speaks for itself. And since words and actions do not match it is difficult to take such comments anything but spreading negativity, which we do not need on Disney board where people come looking for help with their plans and to share their love for Disney. Discussing particular problems and situations helps, stating that everything is bad, calling CEO names, yet keep going, does not help anyone. I am not saying it is just her but it became a theme on board and it is very sad.

As for actual topic of this thread, obviously some people are upset but since it is only 1 or 2 hours out of entire trip, I do not see it as a such a big issue. And while everyone is free to do whatever works for them, moving offsite and loosing remaining lets say 10 hours of EMH whe it is so important for person, does not really make sense to me.

Well, once again, you stoop to personal attacks. You choose to cherry pick comments and not take my posts in totality (and I have quite a few). You do this frequently, whenever Disney is criticized. It's an attempt to shut down the topic. IMO You like to provoke arguments/fights and I will not waste my time indulging you.