WDiW to spend 15 million dollars on Disney Transportation

[manning]

Manning,

Name one rail system that isn't bankrupt in the U.S. and doesn't require billions of federal and state tax dollars to bailout year after year? A system which requires us to drive to a station, park, pay, wait on platforms, sit with each other, walk, hail a cab and risk relying on transportation which misappropriates every dime of funding for new rail to subsidize the obscene cost of daily operation and management.

Not to mention the environmental hazards seeping to the tune of untold billions continually spent on montoring, feasibility and cleanup at every single U.S. rail yard.

No, rail doesn't transport any of us economically.

It's great to fantasize about transportation as an attraction. I'm sure Walt incorporated joint ventures and tax subsidies to remedy his vision for commuting within the confines of his testing facility. Unfortunately, that's not what the company is providing today, and therefore, no one here can reasonably argue what alternatives are truly viable in terms of Disney's transportation cost effectiveness.

Better take your politicians to task. Metra here in Chicago area seems to be doing it right. Now CTA (the bus), that's another story.

 

[Another Voice]

how come a People Mover type system was never perfected for real transportation uses?

Disney set up a company to actively sell both the WDW PeopleMover technology and Disney's implementation of the Alweg monorail. Disney did sell a system – installed in 1981 –at Houston's Bush Intercontinental Airport. A description can be found at http://ntl.bts.gov/DOCS/11877/Chapter_24.htm along with many other examples of operating PeopleMover systems.

So why didn't Disney sell more?

Well – check the date. Michael Eisner came into the company a couple years later and shut down Disney's transportation initiatives despite several leads. He wanted to spend the money on making movies; he wasn't interested in competing against Otis, Westinghouse, GE or other companies getting involved the peoplemover business.

Disney has issues with moving sidewalks too. The problem is speed. Anyone who has spent time working one of Disney's OminMover attractions knows how difficult it is for some people to step onto the slow load belt. Increasing the belt's speed, which you need if you going to use it to move a serious number of people, is only going to make that problem worse. Of course, I've heard of no major problem with Universal Orlando's parking structure or in hundreds of airports that seem to have them.

The bigger problem would be the typical Disney issues these days. First is the cost. Why would Disney spend the money just for convience? Second is the opportunity cost. Why would Disney want to put in a PeopleMover from Disneyland's new parking mountain to the front gate when you can force all those people to walk through Downtown Disney!? Think of all those wallets that are going to bypass The World of Disney Store!

As for WDW monorail – it’s rather silly to compare the compare economics of a tourist attraction to that of a downtown city. Transportation is a part of the overall resort experience. It should be as innovative, as enjoyable, as “magical” as everything else on property. For Disney to be successful they have to think like that – instead all we get are the same arguments that GM uses to sell busses to Toledo and the money being thrown away to remake The Shaggy DA.

I don’t go to WDW to be bashed over the head by twisted corporate calculations of cost effectiveness. I’m dropping a lot of money and I want an experience that’s different from my normal life. If I wanted to deal with busses, I’d go to Branson. Disney has done better in the past and they have the capabilities to do better now.

The less special that Disney makes WDW only means fewer people are going to feel it’s worth the money.

 

[raidermatt]

You seem to want to make everyone think you are an expert on everything. The fact is all you seem to be an expert at is talking a lot, and pretending to know what you are talking about.

Nice contribution.

Doesn't do a lot for your own credibility.

Unfortunately, that's not what the company is providing today, and therefore, no one here can reasonably argue what alternatives are truly viable in terms of Disney's transportation cost effectiveness.

Yet some can "reasonably argue" against the viability of those alternatives.

Look, as I've said many times, I'm not married to a particular system for WDW, other than to say that the busses aren't the be all end all of the enhancements that should be made.

But one can't logically dismiss alternatives based on lack of evidence anymore than one can "prove" the viability with that same limited evidence.

The comparisions to systems in cities around the world provide helpful information, but they only tell part of the story. WDW has significantly different circumstances in many ways that demand careful consideration before any dismissal.

 

[Sarangel]

Gentlebeings, may I remind you that we have a no bashing the poster rule?

This means not belittling AV or peter11435. You may disagree with their premises, but the kind of language used in the last page or so is really not appropriate. If it continues, I'll lock the thread.

Sarangel

 

[crusader]

But one can't logically dismiss alternatives based on lack of evidence anymore than one can "prove" the viability with that same limited evidence.

Alternatives? Aside from what they have already in place, what are you referring to? Last time I checked we weren't able to teleport. Or we're you believing cars should fly?

The transportation medium remains the same. Vehicles evolve - speed, fuel efficiency etc..........

But Disney continues to require all on-site transportation systems accomodate every type of guest. And last time I checked they offered the largest variety of options.

As for WDW monorail – it’s rather silly to compare the compare economics of a tourist attraction to that of a downtown city. Transportation is a part of the overall resort experience. It should be as innovative, as enjoyable, as “magical” as everything else on property. For Disney to be successful they have to think like that – instead all we get are the same arguments that GM uses to sell busses to Toledo and the money being thrown away to remake The Shaggy DA.

The scope of the WDW property extends enough to warrant a comparison beyond the economics of a tourist attraction. We're talking the size of town here so it's not unreasonable to apply relevant cost effectiveness.

 

[crusader]

Better take your politicians to task. Metra here in Chicago area seems to be doing it right. Now CTA (the bus), that's another story.

Dig deeper. When your system runs without my money I'll listen. Chicago is not immune.

 

[raidermatt]

Alternatives? Aside from what they have already in place, what are you referring to? Last time I checked we weren't able to teleport. Or we're you believing cars should fly?

I honestly don't have any clue what you're trying to get at here.

I'm referring to alternative plans/configurations to what they currently have. That doesn't necessarily mean a whole new method of transportation. More or different busses are an alternative. Different dispatching systems are an alternative. Expanded monorail is an alternative. Expanded boat routes, light rail, peoplemovers, etc. Various combinations as well.

The scope of the WDW property extends enough to warrant a comparison beyond the economics of a tourist attraction. We're talking the size of town here so it's not unreasonable to apply relevant cost effectiveness.

Nonetheless, the fact remains that a vacation resort still has other significant factors to consider that no other city has. That's why I said comparisons to cities are useful, but not the end of the story.

 

[Another Voice]

We're talking the size of town here so it's not unreasonable to apply relevant cost effectiveness.

Then again – there aren’t any towns I can think of that charge $57 per person for daily admission, charge $200+ per night “rent” for a place to sleep, and where every dollar I spend on food, clothing, and trinkets goes directly to the government’s treasure. Gee, Disney even keeps a good sized chunk of the state sales tax they charge you. No city in the country would have a transportation problem if they could “tax” their citizens as effectively as Disney can charge its temporary residents.

Disney’s decision to scrap the monorail system and “expand” the busses is a purely corporate one. Disney does not want to spend the capital. The economics of the entire corporate are highly out-of-shape at the moment due to a decade of mismanagement. Walt Disney World’s primary function is to generate cash and bail Disney out from endeavors like GO.com, Fox Family and Home on the Range. Busses are not more “efficient”; they just cost less in the short term. Frankly, if they had their way, they’d dump the busses altogether and let Mears charge you $3.50 to park hop.

But then no one would ever go to Animal Kingdom.

 

[2Xited4Disney]

This may be naive of me to say but...

I would support a switch to Mears if Disney used the money from selling the busses to invest on more unique ways of transportation... but we all know that thats not going to happen

 

[peter11435]

. No city in the country would have a transportation problem if they could “tax” their citizens as effectively as Disney can charge its temporary residents.

But the thing is that Disney does not have a transportation problem. Sure some people would like something more Magical than the buses. But the fact remains that Disney does not have a transit problem at all.

 

[crusader]

Voice,

You know darned well every city in our country charges residents and non-residents alike a healthy percentage of their income along with sales and use, occupancy and property taxes to support it's entire infrastructure. And since that's never enough, they siphon large doses of our federal and state tax dollars under the guise of the Dept of Transportation to freely expend as well.

On the other hand, paying $57 at Disney is a purely optional discretionary entertainment expenditure on our part. In many cases, an individual can use the Disney transportation system complimentary without having to pay one dime in park admission fees.

But that's not the best part. Disney gets zero in DOT appropriations to subsidize their transportaion infrastructure at Disney World. They are forced to maintain themselves independently through sales and operations.

I would hope you agree that this is the way it should be.

Disney’s decision to scrap the monorail system and “expand” the busses is a purely corporate one. Disney does not want to spend the capital. The economics of the entire corporate are highly out-of-shape at the moment due to a decade of mismanagement. Walt Disney World’s primary function is to generate cash and bail Disney out from endeavors like GO.com, Fox Family and Home on the Range. Busses are not more “efficient”; they just cost less in the short term. Frankly, if they had their way, they’d dump the busses altogether and let Mears charge you $3.50 to park hop.

I know it's great to throw the old Go.com endeavor out there to support a false claim of 10 yrs of mis-management. But you always forget to mention the critical fact that Disney didn't even lose one year's worth of cash flow during the entire dot.com era. As much as you can't bear to hear it, this will never be considered a "real" black mark on Eisner's tenure.

As far as the expansion of the monorail system is concerned, I happen to agree with the decision to delay this magnitude of a project while the company utilizes their capital expenditure budget more appropriately. Unless they want to set up a private building campaign fund and solicit donor contributions, I don't want to see operating income used in this regard right now.

 

[peter11435]

Voice,

You know darned well every city in our country charges residents and non-residents alike a healthy percentage of their income along with sales and use, occupancy and property taxes to support it's entire infrastructure. And since that's never enough, they siphon large doses of our federal and state tax dollars under the guise of the Dept of Transportation to freely expend as well.

On the other hand, paying $57 at Disney is a purely optional discretionary entertainment expenditure on our part. In many cases, an individual can use the Disney transportation system complimentary without having to pay one dime in park admission fees.

But that's not the best part. Disney gets zero in DOT appropriations to subsidize their transportaion infrastructure at Disney World. They are forced to maintain themselves independently through sales and operations.

I would hope you agree that this is the way it should be.



I know it's great to throw the old Go.com endeavor out there to support a false claim of 10 yrs of mis-management. But you always forget to mention the critical fact that Disney didn't even lose one year's worth of cash flow during the entire dot.com era. As much as you can't bear to hear it, this will never be considered a "real" black mark on Eisner's tenure.

As far as the expansion of the monorail system is concerned, I happen to agree with the decision to delay this magnitude of a project while the company utilizes their capital expenditure budget more appropriately. Unless they want to set up a private building campaign fund and solicit donor contributions, I don't want to see operating income used in this regard right now.

Excellent post.

 

[Another Voice]

While it would be nice to offer a point-by-point rebuttal, I’m going to skip to the end.

You’re trying to justify WDW’s decision like it was a city. They aren't, they’re a tourist attraction. If WDW wants to remain as success, they must offer a pleasant and enticing place for Joe Tourist to drop five grand for a week. Joe doesn’t care about cost effectiveness, DOT subsidies or whether you think busses are sexy.

Joe wants to have fun.

Cramming Joe and his family on a standing-room only blenching diesel cattle car – with or without a brand new Musack system blaring commercials for the Disney Vacation Club – is not fun. It’s not any different than what Joe can do at home, in fact it’s an activity that Joe purposefully avoids doing at home. The less Joe and his family have fun, the more likely he is to someplace else next year.

Disney needs to make WDW work as a vacation resort. The rules and economics are going to be different.

To whine that Disney can’t do what it takes to attract visitors because Detroit gets federal funding for their busses is dumb. Disney needs to do what pleases and attracts its guests. If they can’t, then they have no business running a resort.

Just like they couldn’t run GO.com.

 

[raidermatt]

Geez, Crusader. You make it sound like we need Jerry and his kids to do a telethon for poor 'ole Disney World, so they can afford to transport all those burdens who check into the hotels and go to the parks.

Use the same criteria for WDW as you do for big cities and you'll end up with a big city. Won't that be Magical.

Peter, whether WDW has a transportation "problem" is debateable. You say it doesn't, others say it does. But that's missing the overall point. Yes, of course if there is a problem, it should be fixed, but looking at things from such a basic level is hardly why Disney is Disney and not Universal, MGM, Warner Bros or even RKO, for that matter.

From the moment a person enters the property, every single component contributes to the guest's view of the value they are getting for the significant amount of money they dropped. Unlike a city, the transportation is not simply a way to get people to work. Its part of the vacation experience, and as such, its not as simple as just asking is there a "problem"? The question should be do we have an opportunity to add value and, as a consequence, encourage more people to drop more money more often.

Again, if were as simple as looking for the most cost efficient way of transporting people, with minimal capital investment, we wouldn't have the monorail at all. Heck, lets face it, if that were the way the company made decisions, we probably never would have had Disneyland in the first place. If we did, certainly it would have been built and expanded in a more "fiscally responsible" manner.

Cost efficiency, as its being used in this conversation, is not what made Disney so successful. Disney had a different model and no one can deny its success. Its not wise to cast aside such a successful business model so lightly, though it is true that is what Disney has done in many ways.

 

[peter11435]

Cramming Joe and his family on a standing-room only blenching diesel cattle car – with or without a brand new Musack system blaring commercials for the Disney Vacation Club – is not fun.

Thats funny because I have been crammed onto a standing room only monorail far more often than I have been on a bus. Sure the monorails hold more people but the percentage that must stand on a full one is no less than on a bus.

Disney needs to do what pleases and attracts its guests. If they can’t, then they have no business running a resort.

Don't you thnk thats a liitle harsh, if not just plain dumb. Disney does thousands of things every day that please and attracts guests. Heck many people are pleased by the current transportation system. Say what you want, while it may not be magical, it IS efficient. If someone where to go to WDW and come away with the attitude that they have "no business running a resort" simply because they use buses than I I think they have no business visiting the resort.

 

[raidermatt]

Forget the hyperbole and just focus on the main point... Is or is it not true that while important, efficiency is not the only function of the transportation at WDW?

If it were "magical", would it or would it not add to the guests' overall value perception of their vacation experience?

To make it more specific, has the monorail, for example, contributed more to the resort than simply a way to get people from point A to point B?

We can go round and round about whether monorail expansion is appropriate, or whether light rail or steam trains would be appropriate, or expanded boat routes, etc. While interesting, we all know we don't possess the info to really prove any conclusions in that regard.

But all I'm saying is that there is tremendous potential in using the transportation system as more than just a way to get people from A to B, and that I truly believe that has been largely lost on current management.

 

[peter11435]

Forget the hyperbole and just focus on the main point... Is or is it not true that while important, efficiency is not the only function of the transportation at WDW?

If it were "magical", would it or would it not add to the guests' overall value perception of their vacation experience?

To make it more specific, has the monorail, for example, contributed more to the resort than simply a way to get people from point A to point B?

We can go round and round about whether monorail expansion is appropriate, or whether light rail or steam trains would be appropriate, or expanded boat routes, etc. While interesting, we all know we don't possess the info to really prove any conclusions in that regard.

But all I'm saying is that there is tremendous potential in using the transportation system as more than just a way to get people from A to B, and that I truly believe that has been largely lost on current management.

While I agree with what you are saying in general. The problem is that for most guests efficiency is the only factor when it comes to transportation. No matter how magical or unusual a form of transportation may be if it doesn't move people efficiently guests will not be happy. Sure its nice to say that the monorail is an attraction in its self. However to the average guests it is just a way of getting to the real attractions. At park closing I have seen far more complaints from guests waiting for monorails than I have for the buses. Many can't understand why there is not another Monorail immediatly behind th one that just left. With the buses Disney can and does on a nightly basis load multiple buses at a time and have them lined up one after the other at closing. This is simply not possible with a fixed rail system such as Disney's.

 

[seashoreCM]

I would say that the biggest reason why WDW has a monorail was because Walt Disney was a both railroad buff and technology buff.

Currently the biggest overall disadvantage of buses at Disney is the cost of labor (drivers).

There is one problem area for buses at WDW, Downtown Disney. There is too much traffic congestion and some form of additional right of way regardless of the kind of vehicle is needed.

A system with more rail (e.g. monorail) will also have lots of vehicles sitting idle waiting for peak travel times.

Disney hints:
http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/disney.htm

"Buses (omnibuses) came before street railways (horse cars, trolleys). The roads were terrible, not only jostling passengers but also causing vehicles to disintegrate quickly. If smooth paved roads were in widespread use beginning around 1800, light rail and monorail might never have been invented." (yours truly)

 

[raidermatt]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not ready to write off the busses completely, though I can say the busses are far from perfect in getting guests out at the end of the night too. We usually hang around the park and wait for things to die down simply because of that, and the one time on our last trip that we did try to leave with the masses, it was a nightmare.

But that aside, should it really come as any surprise if the monorail generates more complaints now than it once did? When was the last time it was upgraded/expanded? How many more people are in the resort and trying to ride it than there used to be?

Really, if there were no substantial improvements to the bus system while the volume of passengers grew, they'd be in pretty sad shape too.

The problem is that the issue is looked at in the short term, and incrementally, instead of stepping back and looking at the big picture and long term. $15 million to improve the bus system is probably enough to keep things rolling along for awhile. And in another few years, another $15 million will be enough. But the rest of the system, and any potential "Magic" that could be added, struggles along with little or nothing, because that would take a larger initial investment. Therefore any long term benefit that could come from it will never materialize.

Let any system stagnate while the demand for it grows and eventually people will demand it be completely torn down.

Its not that efficiency is the ONLY factor for most guests, its that its the most basic factor for most guests. Guests weren't asking for a monorail, but nonetheless it added tremendous value to the resort. Likewise, all they are usually going to ask for now is to be picked up and moved around quickly.

That doesn't mean there is no value to anything else except efficiency.

So, yes, the system must be efficient, but its not as if that and "Magic" are mutually exclusive.

 

[raidermatt]

I would say that the biggest reason why WDW has a monorail was because Walt Disney was a both railroad buff and technology buff.

That, and he had a pretty good idea what people wanted, even if he knew it before they did.