WDI: Smaller and now Cheaper?

[larworth]

Here is a lovely contribution from our good friend Al Lutz.

www.mouseplanet.com/al/docs/update.htm

You may take issue with his unrelenting point of view, but unless he is just outright making this stuff up....man it ain't pretty. Especially if you believe, like I do, that a strong WDI is essential to making Disney, well Disney.

My only hope is that the report is limited in focus to the DCA project (let's say experiment). They decided to take a drastic new approach to this park, and they have and seemingly will continue to abandon Disney standards (ride design, theming, innovation) at this location. This I am convinced of.

I guess the question is does this new DCA philosophy now pervade WDI in general. There was one quote that I wasn't sure if there was data to make this extrapolation

It explains very clearly why, under current management, you will probably never see another new or innovative attraction from Disney in an American park. Period.

I know that is what all the signs say. What are you guy's take?

 

[HBK]

Like landbaron's post re: the cutbacks in animation....it's something we all know, we just don't want to believe it.

Seeing something in print (even if it's from Lutz) just really hammers the point home.

 

[JeffJewell]

1. Missiion: Space completely contradicts this

In what way? Disney bought the ride mech whole and reduced the scope of the surrounding pavilion when they discovered Compaq's check covered little else. It would appear the major task entrusted to WDI is the big ball out front.

Jeff

 

[Another Voice]

'Mission: Space' is a prime example of this way of doing business. The pavilion is one third of the size of the initial concept (which was only half the size of the Space pavilion imagined in the eighties). I suggest that people wait until they see the spinners, er, I mean 'Mission: Space' until praising it.

Blizzard Beach is considered within Corporate to have been vastly over-designed, over-expensive and under-performing. It has often been sighted as an example of why WDI can't be trusted with the "big projects" things cost too much and are too expensive to operate. Expansion plans were cancelled and we got the mini-golf course instead (a better profit margin than just letting more people in Blizzard Beach).

I'd invite anyone who doesn't believe the article to visit California Adventure and enjoy blank concrete walls, breadmaking "atrractions" and dancing take-out food containers. Then again, if you've been to WDW - you've already seen all but one of the attractions anyway...

 

[Testtrack321]

First, M:S is only HALF as big because it would have cost over 300 mill to make! Second, AV, M:S is a spinner! It is just on its side and goes really fast to make people face G-Forces...

 

[DaveO]

First I would like to ask where everyone gets these so called facts. How do we know that this is not the way Disney has operated 20 years ago. Who is to say the very first concept of Space Mountain was 5X the size that it is now. In fact I remember on these boards the posts about how big BTM was supposed to be. That was before Eisner (I am almost sure). In this day of instant information and the inability for any comapny to keep any 'secrets' how can we be sure this in new?

Unfortunatley I read these boards less and less now. The last time I went to WDW my expectations were so low I almost was not looking forward to going. Then I rode TestTrack, RnR Coaster, saw the ToN, and Illuminations 2000 and it was one of my best trips ever.

I have said this before the majic is still there for me and a little cost cutting is not going to change that.

In this economy if you were CEO what would you do? Build a 1 billion dollar attraction that will take 20 years to get any ROI. I know Disney is 'different' so some say.

Unfortunatly they are not. They are a business and need to account to the Shareholders. And whoever is CEO will need to do the same. For good or bad Disney has changed forever as has the world in general.

Let's just hope the magic continues for the majority of us. It has for me.

Dave O.
Tyler's first visit 12/01.

 

[JeffJewell]

Build a 1 billion dollar attraction that will take 20 years to get any ROI.

Look at what Oriental Land Company spent on Tokyo Disneyland and look at their business results. Now look at what Eisner's Disney spent on Animal Kingdom and California Adventure and look at their business results.

There is hard evidence that doing business Eisner's way is bad business.

This is about Disney's creativity as a company, as reflected by their commitment to and support of WDI, their own creative arm. It's great that you still feel the magic, but that does not imply that Disney is making solid business descisions by cutting its creative throat.

I know Disney is 'different' so some say.

Not anymore. That's the point.

Jeff

 

[HBK]

Let's just hope the magic continues for the majority of us. It has for me

That's great! It really is. I'm glad you still have that feeling.

To some extent, all of us still do. I just worry about how much longer the traces of magic will last? Without the company putting any type of investments into the park, the magic will eventually fade. I see signs of it now. It's not totally gone, but I see signs of erosion.

Rides operating on reduced hours...cast members being asked to do more and more....the crowds (and lines) getting larger and larger...maintenance issues all over the place....I could go on and on.

Build a 1 billion dollar attraction that will take 20 years to get any ROI.

Yes and no....The Disney company has built how many hotels over the past 5-7 years? Have they build an proporionate ammount of attractions for all of these new guests to do? Or do they just expand the queue lines?

Uh Oh! Fastpass to the rescue! That solves that problem right?

Since fast pass has been introduced, They've added the Animal Kingdom Lodge, soon to come is the HUGE pop century.

What have they added for these new guests?

An Aladin Spinner.

 

[JeffJewell]

I thought one of our earlier posts clearly rebutted any comparison with OLC because completely different business culture which allows for completely different operating margins. Nobody stateside is building DisneySea level parks.

I certainly agree with the "nobody stateside" comment. My point was that OLC built quality, and people came, in numbers significantly outpacing OLC's projections. I still believe that there is a market for that kind of quality here, in spite of the fact that no one happens to be serving that market right now.

I hate to use personal taste/desire/intention in these posts, because it cannot be meaningfully extrapolated to the general population, but unless I just happen to be in Florida before my AP runs out in November, the next Disney park I attend will undoubtedly be Tokyo Disneyland. Yes, I'll have to make some sacrifices on some fronts to fit the plane ticket into the vacation budget, but I'm confident that the quality of the experience will make it worth my while.

I do not feel that way about California Adventure.

Jeff

 

[HBK]

Nobody stateside is building DisneySea level parks

The Disney company never used to build ANYTHING based on what the competition was doing.

That's what made WDW special, and different.

Remember, even IOA was cut back and, while it has some great rides, is smaller re: number of attractions (attractions, not rides) than any of the WDW gates.

I'd rather have fewer, high quality rides than a park full of spinners, carny rides & carnival games.

Personally, I'm going to WDW in October for my honeymoon....and after reading Jim Hill's write up on IOA I'm totally energized to check it out.

I haven't seen ANYONE write an energized article regarding ANYTHING happening at DisneyWorld.

And please, while Space was cut back, only the most depressed of cynics will label it a "spinner".

I believe Voice was going for sarcasm.

 

[larworth]

I don’t expect Disney to ignore prudent business practices. They need to be mindful of the cost/value equation and the bottom line. However, I do still expect them to act as the market leader in their industry. Market leaders do things better than their competitors. They invest in new product development (WDI) to maintain their competitive edge. Not only do they invest, but they continue to set the bar in terms of product quality and customer expectations.

So, if this practice had been a hallmark of my success till now, why abandon it? What change in industry fundamentals has occurred that warrants such a drastic change in philosophy?

Is the industry depressed? No, I believe amusement park investment and attendance continues to set new records. Are people no longer willing to pay for quality and innovation? Not that I can see. Is it becoming too expensive to build novel attractions? With all the advancement in technology (computers, ride systems, optics) making things easier and cheaper to do? What has changed that says this is the right move?


Thedscoop

I thought one of our earlier posts clearly rebutted any comparison with OLC because completely different business culture which allows for completely different operating margins. Nobody stateside is building DisneySea level parks. Remember, even IOA was cut back and, while it has some great rides, is smaller re: number of attractions (attractions, not rides) than any of the WDW gates

Actually, I think you bailed from that last discussion after making this statement so it wasn’t all that clear yet. I grant Asian companies will accept lower margins. However, I don’t think a half dozen margin points begins to account for the level of effort between a TDS and DCA.

I also don't know how much we can use IOA as a reference. Gee, a somewhat distant #2 player, with significantly less brand recognition and appeal, going into a market already flush with entertainment options spends a few billion on a new park.

It might not have been the right business decision. Time will tell. But I sure can't complain about their effort. Still way more agressive move for them than Disney deciding to spend the same few billion OLC is spending to build a TDS quality park here.

 

[larworth]

Thedscoop

My apology. No personal attack intended. I guess I have been hanging a little too much with my teenage daughter and "bail" was obviously a poor choice of words.

I was just trying to connect back to a similar point you raised in the "RIP WDI" thread, but we never got to hear your take on any of the responses to it.

However, it seems I'm repeating myself and that usually is a good time to stop talking or typing. So, see you all at the next thread..... scoop

.


I agree OLC has several advantages. Not only in terms of accepting lower returns, but I believe their Yen/guest spend is also a little higher. This would allow them to build a park on a somewhat grandeur scale than domestic economics would allow.

However, I don't think these economic differences come close to accounting for the big difference in approach between TDS and DCA. I think we are talking about a more fundamental philosophical difference. The kind of difference that was alluded to in the article.

OLC has chosen to error on the side of providing as much guest experience as can be justified (you can bet they are still expecting to make money).

I think IOA was another example of a company choosing to offer as much guest experience as they thought they could afford (maybe a little too much). Hey, I've said before that I think IOA would have been an excellent 5th gate project for WDW.

But DCA looks to me to be on the other end of that philosophical spectrum. Closer to the least guest experience they could provide while still trying to justify the $40+ admission price. Just doesn't seem like a move most market leaders, worried about the value of their brand, would make.


I know we differed on the parallels between WDI and other corporate R&D divisions. However, I was never sure what your take on the whole WDI issue was.

Is it your perception that there really has not been any change in Disney's operating philosophy regarding the importance of WDI to their business model, or just that the changes we are seeing in terms standards are appropriate given the times?

If you pick that latter it would be helpful if you could point out some the recent changes in consumer purchasing criteria that support such a change.

 

[DisneyFanGuy]

For me the issues isn't Disney not building state of the art attractions. They have gone through many periods in their history where they have not built a thing. They still have an amazing product from many years of expansion.

My concern is that they are continuing to build, but for the first time that I can remember....building poorly.

If they had nothing for me to see that was new, then I would probably still come and enjoy.

But when they draw me in to see something new, and it disappoints me...............I am really upset.

I don't even want to go to DCA. Not as much because it looks kind of yucky (It does!), but because Disney no longer commands me to see their new stuff.

Why?

JIYA, AK (three rides including the incredibly bad Kali River Rapids), The DL "new tomorrowland", That whole area in EPCOT with the all of the Millenium exibits, the Leave a Legacy Graveyard.

How can they open a whole theme park with two rides, and add the third the following year?

I saw these new things over the past two years. I was upset and "let down" by all of them.

I did like the Tap. of Nations parade, The AK Safari ride and RNR Coaster (tho could they have made it any shorter?)

 

[OnWithTheShow]

Yeah, and Blizzard Beach which fills to capacity almost everyday during the summer (who expects a water park to fill to capacity during the winter!) is a complete failure. Some people on this board with their consistently and overwhelmingly negative posts are starting to make me sick. Thats why I havent been posting hear as much. Whenever I try to share something with the board all I get is "That wont happen" "Thats too expensive" or "Theyll just turn it into a spinner". Give me a break!

 

[JeffJewell]

Blizzard Beach which fills to capacity almost everyday during the summer (who expects a water park to fill to capacity during the winter!) is a complete failure.

It looks to me as though you're the first poster to put the phrases "Blizzard Beach" and "is a complete failure" in the same sentence.

Another Voice pointed out that Blizzard Beach was considered internally to be "over-designed, over-expensive and under-performing," and as a result, was being used as a data point for justifying cuts to Imagineering. We could discuss what "under-performing" might imply, but it certainly doesn't equate to "complete failure."

consistently and overwhelmingly negative posts

In this case, anyway, no one appears to have made the overwhelmingly negative post that seems to bother you so much.

Jeff

 

[OnWithTheShow]

I really hhave just been lurking lately because of the reasons I posted in the previous message. If soemthing definite comes up I will post it but I no longer see the point to posting rumors that I hear, since they always get torn apart by the rest of the board. I feel soo unappreciated for the info I share and I really appreciate your post scoop.

 

[hedgehogcs]

I loudly second Scoop's post!!! We need insider opinions & information, but more than that, we need the positivity your posts bring to the table.

I'm sorry that you're feeling unappreciated - I can promise you there are other posters (and lurkers like me) out there who scan the boards for your name (and Safari Steve's!) on a regular basis.

Hang in there!

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

... Jump on the bandwagon?

I agree. We need EVERYBODY!!! I've always enjoyed OnWithTheShow's and Steve's posts. We need to hear them all. Don't just lurk. Post away.

Heck!! If for no other reason than I need someone to talk to!!!



Thanks.