So What's Coming to the New Pleasure Island?

[TDC Nala]

I believe Disney is more concerned about losing money from parents who don't want to bring their children around alcohol. Not the loss or gain of profit on the alcohol it's self.

Parents who don't want to bring their children around alcohol would have to stick to the Magic Kingdom, as alcohol is sold everywhere else on WDW property.

There will be bars at Hyperion Wharf. But Disney will not have to manage or staff them.

As unpopular as it is Disney is still a business there is innovative stuff all around the World (DW) so why would they worry about it in a spot that is probably the least visited on property?

Either DTD is more popular without clubs, or it's not popular and Disney shouldn't feel any need to innovate there, because it's not popular enough. I'm not willing to give Disney a copout to say they only need to worry about innovation in the parks because the parks are all that count.

I used to have a better time at AC than I'd have in the parks.

 

[doconeill]

The day they decided to make the island free to get on is the day the island died.

Totally this...I've mentioned this before that when they decoupled PI as a whole and started accounting income to each individual club, expensive-to-operate locations like AC and CW, even if they showed a profit (and I heard that AC did), the margin on it was low enough that the suits would think they could get a better margin with the space.

And there is no reason why the AC couldn't come back WITH a bar. They've got outside bars and a tequila bar, for cripes sake. Frankly, Epcot during Food and Wine is probably a bigger issue.

At this point though, I'd like to see the AC in any of the rumored configurations...

 

[DC7800]

I think Disney made a good business move here.

Absolutely correct! That, indeed, is exactly the problem.

The reputation and overwhelming success of the Walt Disney Company has been built on a legacy of consistently excellent business moves - and frequently, simply brilliant business moves (like the original Epcot Center). Many people can construct a (good business strategy) outdoor shopping mall. For a resort with Disney's reputation and which commands premium prices we should reasonably expect better, like perhaps for Disney to maintain its own previously established standards.

Downtown Disney - from back before Pleasure Island even existed and it was the Walt Disney World Village - was and should be more than just another shopping center. Innovation and show have never stopped at the borders of the theme parks before; It's the Walt Disney World Resort (Vacation Kingdom). not just a collection of isolated theme parks. Why should it be acceptable for Disney to rest on its past success, not even try to create or innovate, and settle for just "good" when the company used to be better than that?

From a business standpoint though why would Disney invest such money AROUND an area that has seen a huge drop in it's guests when it can use this space and save money?

I have never seen or heard anything to suggest the Marketplace has seen a "huge drop in its guests", so I'd really be curious to know your source for this. Indeed, judging by the masses which descend upon the place, it looks to be pretty successful (and profitable). Do we really need to ask why Disney would want to build upon its success?

Instead, replacing the abandoned P.I. clubs with rented-out shops and restaurants will indeed save money - it's the cheap and lazy solution. While it will surely be a success, and even reasonably well executed, it doesn't appear it will be a particularly unique experience - the sort of thing you can only find at Walt Disney World. It is those unique, creative or innovative, and "magical" resort-wide experiences which lead people to spend big bucks to visit WDW.

innovative things in the places they belong like the parks

Innovative (creative, imaginative, etc.) experiences do not just belong in the parks. Again, it is the Walt Disney World Resort, not just a collection of theme parks.

 

[Maistre Gracey]

Just my opinion. But I feel strongly about it when I say I think Disney made a good business move here.

Absolutely correct! That, indeed, is exactly the problem.

Huh? Am I missing something here? Perhaps I'm not grasping what you two are saying..

My family now visits WDW less than before because the AC is gone. That means less hotel nights at the the Poly and GF (although I'm a DVC Member I used to grab a few nights at those hotels), less money spent at the Disney restaurants which we always eat signature, downgrading from Premium AP, less time in the stores, and yes, no cash spent at the AC or CW.
I'm sure there are many in the same situation. How is that a smart business move?

And why is it a good business move to get rid of one of the best imagineered experiences ever created, which is truly at the core of Disney's success?
I think the explanation was something like "There is other good stuff around WDW"? You must be kidding.. Does that mean Disney could justify getting rid of any E ticket attraction because there are other E ticket attractions in other parks?

MG

 

[DC7800]

How is that a smart business move?

It isn't, of course. My point was that for a company known for exceptional and even downright brilliant creativity and innovation (with the resulting payoff in business), why should WDW lower themselves to create something which is only a good business move. The real problem with Walt Disney World is that the company has been aiming for mediocrity for a long time now, doing something just good enough instead of the exceptional or even brilliantly creative projects which the company was once known for.

So, when it is said this is as good business move I agree, but again, only because that's exactly what's wrong with Disney. Based on their own traditional standards (which they haven't consistently met in a long time), and the fact that Disney is at least priced as a premium product, I don't expect WDW to lower itself to meeting a good standard. We should expect exceptional and brilliant projects, such as that which established the original Epcot Center and - perhaps - Pleasure Island and (at least) the Adventurers Club itself. If you want to debate the relative success of P.I. go ahead and state your case, but that in no way detracts from the fact that Disney created something innovative and creative - not just another shopping center which was just good enough.

 

[Maistre Gracey]

It isn't, of course. My point was that for a company known for exceptional and even downright brilliant creativity and innovation (with the resulting payoff in business), why should WDW lower themselves to create something which is only a good business move. The real problem with Walt Disney World is that the company has been aiming for mediocrity for a long time now, doing something just good enough instead of the exceptional or even brilliantly creative projects which the company was once known for.

So, when it is said this is as good business move I agree, but again, only because that's exactly what's wrong with Disney. Based on their own traditional standards (which they haven't consistently met in a long time), and the fact that Disney is at least priced as a premium product, I don't expect WDW to lower itself to meeting a good standard. We should expect exceptional and brilliant projects, such as that which established the original Epcot Center and - perhaps - Pleasure Island and (at least) the Adventurers Club itself. If you want to debate the relative success of P.I. go ahead and state your case, but that in no way detracts from the fact that Disney created something innovative and creative - not just another shopping center which was just good enough.

Okay.. If I'm reading you correctly we are in agreement.
I guess your post was somewhat tongue in cheek..

That said, still not sure about WDW Lover..

MG

 

[WDW_lover_in_SC]

This is an opinion game. To be honest I don't like this move either the Disney fan in me thinks why would they copout? But I know about the busniess side of it and I simply think it was a smart move for the company. I'm not going to debate it anymore and I do see that you all have valid points. But the fact is something made Disney make a change and I just don't believe it was due to Disney losing it's standards. These standards are preached on a daily basis to the CMs. I think people have their own standards too high for Disney as of right now. IMO ground breaking changes are coming just not to DTD.

 

[briarwolf]

But...alcohol is still available on property, as is area for one to "get down and party" if they so choose (though it won't be in a Club venue). Disney merely shucked the responsibility, and chose to hand that over to 3rd party companies with restaurant ideas.

And I've no doubt Disney rigged the customer surveys. Anyone can rig a survey if they know how to word things to get a certain answer. And I'm sure they had their survey takers aim for certain folks who would get them the answers they sought, to "prove that's what their public wants".

As a business, what good would rigging a survey be? Bottom line here is to make money, and collecting bad data from a slanted survey isn't going to make money from their investment. - JMHO

 

[briarwolf]

The day they decided to make the island free to get on is the day the island died.


My husband worked Pleasure Island full time and I occasionally picked up shifts there.

Disney is a business, bottom line, and alcohol sales bring in a good amount of money for them. Alcohol has nothing to do with PI shutting down. AC being the only club that was consistently busy is why PI shut down. When business started slipping there were no advocates for going back to the way things were in upper management so they decided to close it and go in a different direction.

I do hope they bring back AC, it was a consistent money maker and I don't see how it would conflict with the theme and atmosphere that they're putting in.

I am not saying the direction Disney is going with this is the right one, but based on the inside track from ProgressCity, and the fact that according to her experience there as a CM, AC was the only consistently busy club; I can see why they made a business move away from PI. Lets face it, if they aren't making any money they are going to close it, no matter how many people SAY they like it.
That being said, I am both excited to see where Hyperion goes but also dissapointed that at this point it doesn't seem to have quite the creative spark I have come to expect from Disney.
As someone who never had a chance to visit AC, I hope they bring it back also...just for my own selfish purposes!

 

[TDC Nala]

IMO ground breaking changes are coming just not to DTD.

This isn't a ground breaking change. It's a nice looking strip mall, like DTD in Anaheim.

 

[Luv2Roam]

Pretty sad when pretty much best one can say is it's better than nothun' from Disney. That is not what Disney should be about, even from a business perspective.
I already expected a revamped and better looking Lego area, just so they can promote their upcoming park.
That and the movie theatre upgrade has probably been in the works anyway. Theatres have to be constantly upgraded to meet consumer demand, or they go on a downhill slide fast. We see that in malls across the country.
But even those ideas are not innovative, and I doubt Disney driven. These businesses would have done that anyway.
To me, that part is just a spin making it look like they are upgrading the whole DTD area.
Well when you are near an urban blight level (PI and West Side for awhile), pretty much anything is an improvement.
Lipstick on a pig, IMO.
Sure take away the clubs. But bring in something at least up to that par, and hopefully better.

As far as the data goes, I think they hear what they want and twist what they can to sell to someone.

 

[anthony2k7]

As a business, what good would rigging a survey be? Bottom line here is to make money, and collecting bad data from a slanted survey isn't going to make money from their investment. - JMHO

as a business? probably none.

for specific managers - quite a lot. Especially if they've been given cost saving targets, or may get a kick back from less than ideal business deals.

 

[anthony2k7]

I already expected a revamped and better looking Lego area, just so they can promote their upcoming park.

plus, how messed up is it that Disney are allowing Lego to expand and possibly indirectly promote their upcoming park? So in the short term disney make money to promote a competitors park?

Disney may as well let out some of its space to universal to sell universal tickets while they're at it!

 

[Peter Pirate 2]

But the fact is something made Disney make a change and I just don't believe it was due to Disney losing it's standards. These standards are preached on a daily basis to the CMs.

LOL...Sorry, but this isn't the 1970's anymore. The Disney standard today always has a "$" in front of it.

 

[Luv2Roam]

Disney may as well let out some of its space to universal to sell universal tickets while they're at it!

No need to do that. Think of all the profit they sent over to City Walk. Too bad they did not think of a way to get commission on that.

 

[KINGBOBOFTHENORTH]

As a business, what good would rigging a survey be? Bottom line here is to make money, and collecting bad data from a slanted survey isn't going to make money from their investment.

Once Disney decided to shut down the comedy and dance clubs, they had to justify it to the public. So there can be a reason for skewing survey questions to get data they want. A large part of the big Disney announcement in May, 2008 that the clubs were being closed was because they claimed surveys showed that the public wanted more shopping and restaurant options at DTD. All the surveys had to ask was, WOULD YOU LIKE MORE SHOPPING AND DINING OPTIONS AT DTD? and who would answer no to that. I'm sure they did not ask WOULD YOU LIKE US TO CLOSE ALL THE CLUBS AND REPLACE THEM WITH MORE SHOPPING AND DINING OPTIONS? And survey takers could have been instructed to only ask their questions to people pushing strollers from 1pm to 5pm and not ask anyone the questions out there at midnight.

The day they decided to make the island free to get on is the day the island died.

I've not copied your entire lengthy post but it was excellent and told the truth about the situation. When they made the decision to open it up, the chain reaction it caused led to the demise of Pleasure Island. Many say Disney did it on purpose.

BobK/Orlando
www.savepleasureisland.blogspot.com

 

[Luv2Roam]

Well, I hope in a few years I can apologize profusely and say I am very wrong about the Wharf. (Don't even like the name, actually.)
I would love to be proved this new location will be more than 3rd party vendors and eateries, with lots of lights, a few street performers, and not much else.
My guess is those excited are mainly those trying to get retailers and restaurants to sign on the dotted line. (Which makes me wonder how long before Flamingo Crossings can start back up. Those acres of nothingness are still completely idle.)

Although I am very happy more jobs will be added in the WDW area.

 

[TisBit]

Huh? Am I missing something here? Perhaps I'm not grasping what you two are saying..

My family now visits WDW less than before because the AC is gone. That means less hotel nights at the the Poly and GF (although I'm a DVC Member I used to grab a few nights at those hotels), less money spent at the Disney restaurants which we always eat signature, downgrading from Premium AP, less time in the stores, and yes, no cash spent at the AC or CW.
I'm sure there are many in the same situation. How is that a smart business move?

And why is it a good business move to get rid of one of the best imagineered experiences ever created, which is truly at the core of Disney's success?
I think the explanation was something like "There is other good stuff around WDW"? You must be kidding.. Does that mean Disney could justify getting rid of any E ticket attraction because there are other E ticket attractions in other parks?

MG

Unfortunately, you are in a minority. I doubt the disappearance of AC or even PI has really significantly impacted WDW as a whole. Most visitors to WDW never even visited PI more than once per trip and I would say most did not at all.

I agree, when Disney changed PI and stopped making the entire Island a club, with outside concerts, NYE every night, they really were headed in only one direction...which was to close PI eventually. Now, was PI no longer sustaining itself? Fireworks are expensive, maintaining the outside entertainment was expensive and there was some strong public opinion on not being able to travel through the Island....I am not sure PI was supporting itself when they made those decisions.

As already said numerous times, aside from CW and AC, the clubs were not drawing large crowds most nights. I don't think CW and AC could support the rest of PI and they decided to go in a different direction. I did get to enjoy AC, because of these boards I learned about it and decided to visit....we thoroughly enjoyed it and would love to have it back....but I understand that it couldn't exist like it once did.

I am amazed at how so many people are offended about Disney being about the $. It would be foolish for any company not to be about the money, even Walt understood this. Yes, he was into innovation and doing something new and extradorinary, but he also understood the money aspect. Look at the Orlando land acquisition, it was a financial boom for Walt to make so many front companies and keep it a secret. There were a lot of people really upset because they felt that Disney did cheat, by buying the land so cheap and not being up front about it. It was a great business move then and now......

Disney has set a standard for not only Customer Service and Innovation, but also in a good business model. Disney did almost lose their shirt, but not always looking at the dollar and maybe they have gone too far towards the business end fo things, but that is expected from a large company.....

Anyone who thinks that Disney should put the money in the backseat to innovation or new ideas is foolish, because the company will go out of business and there will be no innovation or new ideas. These are tough economic times and there needs to be cut backs. Disney has had a very bad 10 years due to 9/11 and the current economy, but they are weathering the storm fairly well, mostly because they had already laid the groundwork to do so, long before the crisis hit and were able to adapt.....unfortunately services are cut, food quality and selection has suffered and hopefully one day you will see it return to what it once was, but there needs to be a change in both people's vacation habits and economic improvements to happen. just my opinion

 

[loganpaulsmom]

I think the previous poster hit the nail right on the head. Of course, Disney is known for their innovation but as a business they have to be about the money. If one of their "innovations" is not making them money it doesn't make sense for them to keep it..
I read so much negativity on this board about WDW. My feeling is, WDW would not be what it is and there would not be boards like this if people weren't going back their in droves. Yes, maybe its not the same excellence as it was years ago but they would not be able to stay in business if we weren't coming back..

 

[Jason71]

As already said numerous times, aside from CW and AC, the clubs were not drawing large crowds most nights. I don't think CW and AC could support the rest of PI and they decided to go in a different direction.

I don't know where you got your information, but it's dead wrong. 8-Traxx and Mannequins were the money-makers on PI; enough on an annual basis to make an impact even on WDW's massive bottom line. AC was modestly profitable--possibly more so if you include admission tickets used only there and especially if you include Jungle Juice, but I don't know that even TDO has formal numbers on this. CW rarely drew a crowd, and never made money, based on the short format of the shows--it was the weakest link.

One more time--Pleasure Island was profitable. Insanely profitable. But it required management by Disney. Disney would rather play landlord and simply collect rent, like a mall owner. Outsourcing PI, restaurants and valet parking was the easy first step; there will be more to come.