WDW Changes

[shanomi4]

Is irony totally lost on you? shanomi's snarkiness is okay with you, but A-V's sarcastic response brings forth your outrage?

Snarkiness........I like it!!! If the shoe fits...where it!! Yes, I was being snarky.

 

[DancingBear]

This is what is called diversification. A wise move.

Yeah, and that Disney Mobile was also called diversification.

I get the feeling that you and others are all for pumping more and more cash into the parks.

Nope. But they should spend money wisely.

So we agree Dis is a business.

Again, nobody ever said otherwise.

A business to make money, not to make dreams come true.

Well, the current Disney spends a lot of time selling the parks as a place where dreams come true. They're trading on the products made when creating "magic" (not just selling it) was the (quite successful) business plan.

We do not know 1/10th of a percent of what they know as far as their studies and projections to name a few. Maybe all there surveys are telling them something we don't have a clue to.

Thanks, Bicker. Remember, those are the same surveys that said the guests didn't want Early Entry, they wanted Character Caravan.

 

[EUROPACL]

I like the idea that now you have to have an MBA or work for Disney (Jester if you only knew how close you are with some of the people here) in order to comment on the quality of the latest offerings. Yes it take an MBA to see that Caveman sucks before it hit the air. Yes it takes a Disney exec to see the brilliance behind Underdog The Movie. You need an MBA to understand why Disney is selling mickey Cell Phones again when it already failed once. Do I need to see the surveys to know that Laughing Floor sucks? Do I need to see the surveys to know that bathrooms should be cleaned more offten in the parks? Would a powerpoint help me understand how broken ADR's have become when you have to plan a meal 6 months in advance and get up at 3 in the morning to book it? and the list goes on and on.....

 

[shanomi4]

Yeah, and that Disney Mobile was also called diversification.

Nope. But they should spend money wisely.

Again, nobody ever said otherwise.

Well, the current Disney spends a lot of time selling the parks as a place where dreams come true. They're trading on the products made when creating "magic" (not just selling it) was the (quite successful) business plan.

Thanks, Bicker. Remember, those are the same surveys that said the guests didn't want Early Entry, they wanted Character Caravan.

The quotes.....driving me crazy!!

Bicker....he is a member here...no? He is also on a cruise baord that I frequent, under another name. His post were the hardest posts to follow. No problem b eing called snarky....but i have to stop it at Bicker. Anyway, no hard feelings. I really do not care one way or the other. I do not have Dis stock. My kids are happy with it and that is enough for me. now if we want to debat about the cost.......wave your little pixi wand or whatever you call it an lower the prices!!!!

 

[Mouseaholic!!!]

I like the idea that now you have to have an MBA or work for Disney (Jester if you only knew how close you are with some of the people here) in order to comment on the quality of the latest offerings. Yes it take an MBA to see that Caveman sucks before it hit the air. Yes it takes a Disney exec to see the brilliance behind Underdog The Movie. You need an MBA to understand why Disney is selling mickey Cell Phones again when it already failed once. Do I need to see the surveys to know that Laughing Floor sucks? Do I need to see the surveys to know that bathrooms should be cleaned more offten in the parks? Would a powerpoint help me understand how broken ADR's have become when you have to plan a meal 6 months in advance and get up at 3 in the morning to book it? and the list goes on and on.....

I agree! Don't worry, I have my flame suit on!!!

 

[shanomi4]

No...you don't need surveys to tell you that you feel this and that sucks. But to be honest it really doesn't matter if you think x and z sucks or if the bathroom needs more cleanning. however, if the majority of the guests don't see that way....then why should disney care? If we the 'fans" and a I am certainly not a fan, will not spend more money for it or cut our time short, then it would not be wise for Disney to do so.

 

[Another Voice]

They are pushing more resources back into the enterprise.

Disney spent a whole lot of money to make California Adventure in the first place. Many, many people at the time said it the plan was poor and would hurt the company. Many people – especially around here – said that everything was going to be “magical” and the boards we filled with many, many happy fans dancing about the wonderful new park. We now know how it turned out – the fans were flat wrong from the business point of view.

And that’s the point – you and others claim that no one can critize Disney because they don’t know enough, but gushing from fans must be taken as a sure sign that of happy days ahead. Sorry – it ain’t true.

So the question remains – is this new investment in California Adventure actually improve the situation or not? As was proved back when the park opened and in all the years since, simply spending money isn’t the solution. It’s how the money is spent. You don’t like my opinion, fine – don’t read it. But in my view I see the plans as just more of the same stuff that failed in the past. It’s a shame that Disney is about to throw away a lot of money and have little to show for it.

Perhaps you do have a background that establishes you as an expert in the running of multi-million dollar entertainment venues…

I assume the same must apply to you. Unless you want to haul out your credentials, your statements that things are improving are just as invalid and ignorant as mine. Being “positive” is no less a value judgment than being “negative”, so let’s hear some wonderful stories about the films you’ve produced or should we summarily dismiss you too?

I am not trying to regain some childhood experience.

Nor am I. I am trying to make sure that my children and grandchildren are able to have the same kind of experiences that I had. More and more, it looks like those will not be coming from The Walt Disney Company. My experience were of watching brilliant movies, or running through the parks to experience new and original attractions, of seeing things that I never thought possible brought to life. Today, we get cheap carnival rides, rehashed videos and the demands that our dreams fit into the balance sheets and bonus plans of a bunch of people who really don’t care anymore.

There is a lot of dreck out in the world. Disney, even at its worst, tried to rise above it. Today, more and more people would rather give up and settle for less rather than work hard and expect more. To me, that’s nothing to be a “fan” of. A company needs to earn my respect, and needs to earn my loyalty. Disney just doesn’t want to do that.

A resort will certainly not help "WDW". It will however, hopefully, help the bottom line for Disney on the whole.

Which is exactly my point. The DVC resorts in Hilton Head and Vero Beach were such failures it destroyed the original DVC concept. How is Hawai’i going to be different? What can Disney bring to Hawai’i? Is it going to be more creative, more imaginative than other resorts? Or is Disney simply expanding their “comfort brand” for people too scared to go to Hawai’i on their own? And what’s the point of “Comfort Disney” anyway – who wants to see another McDonaldized corporation that offers nothing but the bland? It’s those questions that are really brought up by the Hawai’i resort for people interested in the business.

I’ll leave the burning issues about Dole Whip stands for the fans to ponder.

 

[shanomi4]

well AV...I certainly do not have enough info to debate you. And i am sincere with that comment.

 

[Another Voice]

if the majority of the guests don't see that way....then why should disney care?

Because Disney became a great company in the first place by exceeding people's expectations, by creating things the public didn't even realize they wanted until they first saw them.

Pandering to the lowest levels of acceptance or telling people to settle for the just good enough is not going to make any company successfull. Ask anyone at Ford, United Airlines or Sears these days.

Disney was successful because the earlier management had a deep understanding of what people wanted but could articulate. Today's managment lacks that sense and any business skill. They are reactive instead of imaginative - and that is the end of Disney.

 

[MassJester]

I like the idea that now you have to have an MBA or work for Disney (Jester if you only knew how close you are with some of the people here) in order to comment on the quality of the latest offerings. Yes it take an MBA to see that Caveman sucks before it hit the air. Yes it takes a Disney exec to see the brilliance behind Underdog The Movie. You need an MBA to understand why Disney is selling mickey Cell Phones again when it already failed once. Do I need to see the surveys to know that Laughing Floor sucks? Do I need to see the surveys to know that bathrooms should be cleaned more offten in the parks? Would a powerpoint help me understand how broken ADR's have become when you have to plan a meal 6 months in advance and get up at 3 in the morning to book it? and the list goes on and on.....

Precisely my point oh steamed one -- it was suggested that we were dealing from a position of inferior experience and understanding. I don't think you need to have any of those things to offer an opinion here. Quite frankly I don't care if other posters are former/current disney management or a traumatized survivor of the college program. Save for any presentation of obvious credentials, arguments will carry their own weight or not.

And how we end up going back to movies I will never know. In fact, I don't even know if the movie business is a commercial success. I thought we were talking about the parks.

I'm going to have to agree with you on the dining bit--can't say as I care for the direction that Disney Dining is going in.

But the rest I think you are not on the mark. I don't remember maintenance and clenliness in the parks ever being better than it is today. Things are freshly painted, in good repair, and the areas are clean to a fault. That was not true during my visit seven or so years back when there were obvious examples to the contrary. EE, Soarin', and the stunt car show at MGM are examples of thoughtful and creative expansion. The updates to POTC, HH, and other big attractions (although overdue) are welcome both for their need and the regularity of their announcement. The increase in CM entertainers is an excellent example of money spent for no direct return, but these additions add to the magic of the environment.

Disney Fan -- you betcha. And I don't think that makes me either uncritical nor incapable of understanding. Even when things were messy, I liked my visits--I was simply sorry for the bad turn. Now that these issues have or are being addressed, I'm glad for the positive change. And I'll never be ashamed of being a fan.

In no way does the pleasure I take in the positive changes mean that I think there is no further ground to cover. A poster a frew frames back offered a short but obvious list of places to turn when these changes are under the belt.

As far as Four Season, well we beat that one to death pretty thoroughly, and I think we will have to agree to disagree.

 

[minnie61650]

The quotes.....driving me crazy!!

Bicker....he is a member here...no? He is also on a cruise baord that I frequent, under another name. His post were the hardest posts to follow. No problem b eing called snarky....but i have to stop it at Bicker. !

I also caught the Bicker comment.
I too was questioning the use of Bicker's name.

 

[MassJester]

Pandering to the lowest levels of acceptance or telling people to settle for the just good enough is not going to make any company successfull. Ask anyone at Ford, United Airlines or Sears these days.

Is there no difference between Disney failing to meet your expectations and Disney pandering to the "lowest levels of acceptance"? Is your level acceptance just one notch above 'lowest level' or is there some are in between?

 

[MassJester]

I also caught the Bicker comment.
I too was questioning the use of Bicker's name.

I'd forgotten about Bicker--what became of him?

 

[Another Voice]

I understand the difference between intent and execution.

My primary beef with Disney is they don't even try for quality these days. How can one look at 'Cavemen' or Dino-Rama' and say Disney was trying for "good" there? Keeping the restrooms clean should be expected - why do they get kudoos for simply doing a less bad job on the basics?

Disney is supposed to be all about high standards, but all too often they are getting away with far less - and to the cheers of a bunch of people who ought to know better.

 

[minnie61650]

I'd forgotten about Bicker--what became of him?

I used our very unreliable DIS BoardTracker search and the lastest post that showed up was November 2007.

 

[MassJester]

Well, that seems failry recent

 

[Mouseaholic!!!]

AV - I must agree.

When someone posts that "WDW is clean enough for me to walk barefoot" I wonder what reality they live in - because I want to live there too.

We saw how Disney can do it very right at DL this autumn....it was spotless, castmembers more than friendly (and a few concerned about the bad reputation cast members have in WDW by the way), hotels magnificently maintained. It was how Disney SHOULD be.

I do not understand how people cannot see the changes in Disney - but that's what Disney is banking on.

Go to the DVD boards and see the notes written about perks being removed.....it's even happening to Disney's sacred group as well!

I for one just want to feel like a welcome guest vs. a new opportunity to harvest $$$. I want it the way it used to be.

By the way, this is from a castmember perspective. We KNOW Disney's new rules of management.

I apologize for the wee-bit of a ramble.

Ok, flame suit on for THIS posting. Go ahead everyone......I'm brave!

 

[EUROPACL]

Quite frankly I don't care if other posters are former/current disney management or a traumatized survivor of the college program. Save for any presentation of obvious credentials, arguments will carry their own weight or not.

Well then don't bring it up next time...the only point is that yes "some" people here know Disney inside and out as well as the Movie biz so don't be so quick to dismiss what they have to say. (No I'm not one of them)

And how we end up going back to movies I will never know. In fact, I don't even know if the movie business is a commercial success. I thought we were talking about the parks.

Sorry if it wasn't you but somewhere along the way Disney as a company got brought into the picture and if you can't see how ****-bombs like Underdog effect the company and more importantly money that could be better spent on the parks then we should stop talking now.

But the rest I think you are not on the mark. I don't remember maintenance and clenliness in the parks ever being better than it is today. Things are freshly painted, in good repair, and the areas are clean to a fault. That was not true during my visit seven or so years back when there were obvious examples to the contrary.

Great and that is the way it should be...but excuse me if I don't send Disney a tip for keeping the place clean....and I'm not ready to say the ship has turned around because they can keep the bathrooms clean.

EE, Soarin', and the stunt car show at MGM are examples of thoughtful and creative expansion. The updates to POTC, HH, and other big attractions (although overdue) are welcome both for their need and the regularity of their announcement. The increase in CM entertainers is an excellent example of money spent for no direct return, but these additions add to the magic of the environment.

Yes even under Eisner some good things were built....in fact when were those projects started.....

 

[MassJester]

Well then don't bring it up next time...the only point is that yes "some" people here know Disney inside and out as well as the Movie biz so don't be so quick to dismiss what they have to say. (No I'm not one of them).

I didn't bring it up--I was responding, and absent a clear understanding of the credentials and/or experience involved, I can see no reason to give their thoughts any more weight than anyone elses.

 

[DancingBear]

I also caught the Bicker comment.
I too was questioning the use of Bicker's name.

Simply a shorthand reference to the fact that Bicker's regular response has always been to say, in essence "Disney management has all of the data, so shut up, 'cause obviously since they have the data and you don't, their decision is the right one and your criticism is wrong." Shanomi's earlier response just rang that Bicker bell. (I'm happy to see Shanomi's good-natured responses).