Why "News & Rumors" is needed for debate.....

[bicker]

Not all attacks need be personal attacks (but only personal attacks violate the ToS, of course. ) The OP is attacking a thought, a concept, a belief, rather than an individual, and it seems to me that that's okay. For example, anytime anyone posts a message saying that Alfredo's has horrible food they're attacking the concept that it is a good restaurant, and therefore attacking a frequent belief of many of that restaurant's fans here. The fact that such critics are correct )) doesn't mitigate the fact that they're attacking their belief.

By the same token, it sure does sound elitist to categorically label economy resorts "un-Disney". Even though Walt never had any plans to offer economy resorts, doesn't mean that they're not appropriate: Walt's long dead, and what Walt may or may not have wanted is totally meaningless now. What matters is what is best for fostering the Disney vision, as outlined by its current leadership. Financial accessibility by folks who cannot necessarily afford $250 per night is part of that vision. Therefore, it is not only appropriate, but essential, that a resort be offered with theming commensurate with the economy price-point.

It wouldn't even be appropriate to provide theming at such resorts in excess of that which is justified at the price-point, because that would be akin to a fraud committed on those who choose to pay more.

 

[DancingBear]

Based on the context of DisneyKidds post, quotes but no indication who's being quoted, and Lumpalump immediate followup post that looked like a safe assumption. A person who quotes someone else without indicating who's being quoted is the one responsible for any confusion. I can't find the original thread from the resort board.

I still don't agree with the concept of having to a duty to criticize those people who have an opinion different than yours.

I understand your confusion. I found the original Resorts thread by clicking on DisneyKidd's name and looking through his past posts. Here it is:

http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=935265

 

[DancingBear]

By the same token, it sure does sound elitist to categorically label economy resorts "un-Disney". Even though Walt never had any plans to offer economy resorts, doesn't mean that they're not appropriate: Walt's long dead, and what Walt may or may not have wanted is totally meaningless now. What matters is what is best for fostering the Disney vision, as outlined by its current leadership. Financial accessibility by folks who cannot necessarily afford $250 per night is part of that vision. Therefore, it is not only appropriate, but essential, that a resort be offered with theming commensurate with the economy price-point.

It's not an elitist criticism; many of those who don't like the values from a PHILOSOPHY point of view also complain that the deluxe resorts are overpriced. They're criticizing design elements of the resorts, not the existence of reasonably-priced rooms.

 

[All Aboard]

The issue of the value resorts is one where I really understand and agree with (in parts) with both sides. I try to make the argument that WDW is more like GM than it is like Porsche. It is a general company trying to attract a broad slice of the socioeconomic spectrum. It offers Escalades (Grand Floridian), Cavaliers (All Stars & Pop) and many things in between so that a larger percentage of theme park guests can stay in their resorts.

Personally, I think that's a great strategy. It's a win-win for Disney and the guest. Instead of staying at the Holiday Inn on I-Drive, for $75 a night, a family can choose the All Stars. Drives up Disney's market share, gives more people an opportunity to experience on-site accomodations.

Now, I also understand the argument that Disney polutes the brand and throws their hands up creatively with the value resorts. While I understand the argument, and believe that it has merit and long term impact (if true), I disagree that the Values fall into that definition.

I won't waste time trying desperately to make my tired old argument again with any detail. But, from all I have read, there are many, many guests that are thankful the values exist and are truely endeared to the theming (or decoration if you will) of these resorts.

So, on this one, you really have two camps. And, I don't believe for one second that those who feel that the value resorts don't belong to the Disney lineup of resorts are being "elitist". Though, I will admit that over the many years of arguing this point, I have sometimes accused people of ignoring the opinions of the people who are actually staying there, in favor of knowing what's "best for them." It sounds a bit like believing they are elitist, I know. But, I truly understand where they are coming from. I just think they are wrong in this case.

And, to Lumpalump, this is just one shining example of an issue that I have disagreed with (place a huge list of Rumors and News regulars over the years here) and have not been told to go stick it.

 

[raidermatt]

The thing to remember is that in these discussions nobody is truly trying to tell any other guest what is "best for them". Really, its more comments about what is truly best for Disney, given its unique assets, products and history.

Yes, sometimes it comes across that way, but on the other hand, some take a criticism of Disney's business decisions as a criticism of their personal purchase decisions. I can say the values are poorly executed, or even that the idea of value resorts at all is a problem, but that shouldn't mean nor be interpreted to mean that anyone shouldn't enjoy staying there. They are two completely separate points.

Basically..unless you completely agree with all the regular cast of characters on this board then you should go shove a stick up your *****. Because your opinion won't mean a thing.

Except that as Greg and others have pointed out, the regular cast of characters don't completely agree on many of the subjects discussed here. In fact, in some cases, our opinions are diametrically opposed.

Which is why so many are questioning how closely or carefully you have really been reading.

 

[Peter Pirate]

Who are the "regular" cast of characters?

 

[airlarry!]

Therefore, it is not only appropriate, but essential, that a resort be offered with theming commensurate with the economy price-point.

Seems a stretch, doesn't it Mr. Bicker, to suggest that the 'theming' of the Poop Stars resorts is 'commensurate' with the price?

May I re-read that sentence? To me, it says that the DDC was forced to provide cheap, fiberglass decorations at a motel with a severe lack of amenities, location, and transportation, to accommodate those fans who could not pay $99 per night for the 'moderates'--which in turn had been built as the original values.

I don't agree--in fact, I can't agree with this take.

DIS had every opportunity to continue with the revolutionary planning aspects of the original resort. DIS had the chance to do so in a fashion that promoted true value.

But they didn't, and the 'value' resort users are the true victims. I know, cause I've been one. Oh, we fool ourselves--"All we do is sleep there," "we like to eat in the parks", "we don't mind the belching dragons", "we don't want boating activities", "we don't care about sit down restaurants", "our kids don't swim/hate slides/dislike having fun in the water," and a host of other silly little rationalizations.

But its a lie. The real reason we stay there? Cause we can sneak it in at $59-69 a night.

Disney should never be about sneaking in a cheap cot to sleep in to enjoy the parks. Disney World, at least the EPCOT idea that Walt had, should have been about providing to every guest a unique resort experience, tailored to fit the budget but designed to delight every visitor.

As an aside, M. Lumpalump, who sadly isn't around to read this, does not in my humble opinion have the temperment to discuss the finer points of Disney history yet. That's okay. Not everyone is ready for the Advanced Disney Philosophy. Prerequisites must be taken before enrolling in this senior level class.

 

[bicker]

many of those who don't like the values from a PHILOSOPHY point of view also complain that the deluxe resorts are overpriced. They're criticizing design elements of the resorts, not the existence of reasonably-priced rooms.

That sounds doubly-unreasonable to me. They're not acknowleding the value of the places where the company spends the money for rich theming, and they're expecting richer theming where the company is intentionally offering a lower-priced offering.

May I re-read that sentence?

No. You are welcome to make up an argument that no one made in order to have something you find easer to argue against, but if you do so you need to acknowledge that that is what you're doing, rather than trying to make it sound like your argument pertains to what someone else said.

What your argument lacks is sufficient acknowledgement of the strong tie between value and price. You're describing a situation where the theming that would have been provided would have been worth more. Therefore, the only rational and responsible choice for the company would have been to charge more, thereby the company would have left a significant segment of the market still unserved (and may have had too much capacity in the middle of the market).

 

[All Aboard]

But they didn't, and the 'value' resort users are the true victims. I know, cause I've been one. Oh, we fool ourselves--"All we do is sleep there," "we like to eat in the parks", "we don't mind the belching dragons", "we don't want boating activities", "we don't care about sit down restaurants", "our kids don't swim/hate slides/dislike having fun in the water," and a host of other silly little rationalizations.

But its a lie. The real reason we stay there? Cause we can sneak it in at $59-69 a night.

To quote Tonto, "Who's 'we' Cajun man?" Aside from the belching dragons, you've created a pretty valid list of reasons why people CAN'T rationalize a stay at a Deluxe, especially for trips of shorter duration.

Go into the lobby of any value resort on a Friday evening and poll the guests waiting to check in. What you'll often find is quite a few Florida Residents in town for a two or three night weekend. They're not going to rent boats or spend countless hours marveling at authentic longhouses. They are there to spend some time at the theme parks and head home. The values give Disney a chance to capture their hotel dollars. Without the values, they've lost the guests to US192 (as they did for many years.)

Take a look at Disneyland. Where are the California residents staying when the go to the parks? HoJo, Best Western, etc. If Disney bought a couple of those properties, leveled them and opened something akin to the values at WDW, I'd bet they would be a huge hit with Californians.

Not every family travelling to WDW is making the trip of a lifetime.

 

[Onemoretime]

Okay, getting back to Chris' OT, do the "old timers" have a duty to educate the "newbies" on Disney history ?

I'm absolutely certain that someone who'se first stay on property at a POP or AS will be a great stay. They will love the resort and think this is everything Walt intended WDW to be. They may never want to try Poly or Dixie - why spend the extra money when POP is perfect.

IMO, if they are not educated as to why Poly is Poly, then they will always be satisfied when Disney management decides to build the next POP resort and not a Grecian Villa Resort.

 

[DisneyKidds]

They may never want to try Poly or Dixie - why spend the extra money when POP is perfect.

Give that man (and who is that man, earning his ears, who knoweth my name?) a cigar.

That is exactly the reason I, in a very polite and nonconfrontational way, made the quoted post over on the resorts board. I'm all for someone enjoying POP. I'm all for someone posting their opinion. I'm all for someone recommending the resort. However, if someone wants to make the statement that POP is THE best representation of Disney theming as far as resorts are concerned......well, I feel I'm somehow obligated to voice my disagreement in a very nice manner. Not because I desire to "attack" anyone, but rather so that those who aren't as familiar with Disney's history, and that of WDW, might have a better understanding of that which came before POP.

That's as far as I'd take such a point over on the resorts board. It is this board that serves as the place to discuss all the other aspects of the POP v. Poly type discussion. If Lewisc can't see that he is free to go off and assume some other things that aren't true. You know what they say about assuming. You make an a................

 

[ChrisFL]

This reminds me of something, I can make an analogy here...

I tend to follow the automotive industry quite a bit and one major story a few years ago was regarding the release of the Pontiac Aztek. It was basically the design that broke all of the rules about how a vehicle should look. People still bought them and some people even enjoyed it and how it looks...that doesn't take away from the fact that from a purely design/asthetics standpoint it was built totally wrong.

That said, sometimes we get new, great things that happen when the rulebook is tossed, but in this case, as with my opinion of POP, it didn't produce great things.

 

[airlarry!]

Larry:

Frankly, with our two young boys, we enjoy staying at the AllStars much more than Wilderness Lodge or the Polynesian because they meet our needs better. And, I suspect the same is true for quite a few other families.

I don't buy it.

I don't think RumRunner and the Professor would ever stay at the AllPoop Hotel but for the price point.

Plain and simple. Cut to the chase.

If the price were equal, tell me right here in public that you or M. Bicker or Rummy would 'enjoy staying at the (Yo-Yo) much more than (DxL) because they met our needs better.'

You can't.

And if the only reason a person would stay there is because its about the same price as the HoJo on 192 (and it has its own mickey-railing flavored belching dragons and access to Extra Money Hours), then what does that say about your point?

Me? I think it proves that the Little To No Value Resorts are a failure, not from a business perspective, not from a shareholder perspective, but from a value perpective. In otherwords, Disney had, after 20 years of experience, the opportunity and the ability to provide more for their resort guests with an integrated experience at or near its extra gates and for no other reason than sheer greed chose not to.

Of course, I may be a bit biased. Or I may be dead guy right.

 

[All Aboard]

You simply cannot ignore the price point though. Just as much as you cannot ignore what you are getting for the price. The two add up to value. And, yes, I feel that I am getting value when I stay there. Would I stay there if they charged $200 a night, of course not. But, they don't.

When I'm making a quick weekend trip to WDW, I am enormously thankful that the Value resorts exist. They are my oasis away from US 192 (The alternative in the days before Values). There is far more about them that is different and better than the Econolodge than railings, but I don't think any amount of typing is going to convince anyone, so I won't waste the keystrokes.

I do enjoy staying at the DxL better than Pop Century. And, I enjoy staying at the Poly better than DxL. But, remember, I spend 30 to 40 nights a year on property, there is a limit to the number of deluxe nights I can afford. Vive la variete.

 

[YoHo]

Ugh.

That's really all I have to say. Also, Hi Gcurling how do you feel about carjackers? (randomily chosen smilie)

 

[Patch'sD]

Very nice debate, I have not seen this type of thoughtfull ideas in such a long time. Thank you for restoring my faith in at least one of these boards.

We are dealing with a Corporate Disney Vision not a Walt Disney Vision. The Company in about five years will be run longer without Walt Disney than with the Man. When WDW first opened it was the last of Walt Disney's Visions as built by His Brother Roy.

What we see now is Corporate Disney's Vision of how things should be. Today's Value Hotels are now The Winnie the Pooh and BuzZ lightyears of Hotels. Some nice Plaster and Concrete Decorations for themeing. Moderates are Very nice Hotel Rooms with themed landscaping and Design. The original Hotels were destination resorts in their own right. They had Beaches, Boat Rentals, Pools, Entertainment, Golf, and of course access to the priemer theme park. Built to convince the guest that they were in the South Seas or in the most modern hotel in the world. I would have loved to see what the Vennietion (Sp) resort would have offered.

There are a few of us around now that new what Walt Disney was all about. The man has been gone for almost forty years now. Christ, I can still remember the night on the Wonderfull World of Disney he announced plans for the Florida Project. I remember thinking that Disneyland is going to be closer and easier to get too. To most people the Disney they see today is what Walt would have wanted. To me it is what Corporate Disney would have wanted. Don't get me wrong, I think what is down there is Good, but very little of it has the Walt Disney touch to it.

 

[YoHo]

Ah, that's right, I remember GC telling me that you tried to carjack him after the 7th rumrunner.

Strange timing.

You don't know nothin.

This is about a personal moment in a Disneyland restroom..............I've said way too much.

 

[airlarry!]

There are too many holes in the Brothers Rum's arguments! I would kill Pete's bandwith if I tried, but here goes...

King Rummy, you can't throw my 'we' back at me, and then give me a 'we' of your own. I believe if I polled Floridians, some of them would actually tell me that they do use the boats, and the pools, and the restaurants, and the bars, and the character dining, and the monorails--albeit illegally --and the...

...but by now you get my drift, don'cha? You may not, but others do, so isn't the better question that every resort should at least offer them to you?

Don't forget, King Rummy, that Professor Plum Rummy admitted that all things being equal (and assuming that Scoop, Jr doesn't get hold of Central Reservations before Mama Scoop does) the Scoop clan will stay at the AKL before they stay at the Eye Scars Resort.

I mean there is that little thing about how the AKL is the greatest hotel since sliced bread because it has animals, right? I seem to recall someone saying that. Maybe not you, but other people. On that other website. But I digress. Well, err, the company digresses, because the AKl in reality is the same exact hotel as...oh...never mind.

So what does this revelation mean?

It is further, and dare I say condescendingly final?, proof that the Ei$ner model stinks. Instead of building a nice resort area around each gate tied in to the others by monorail, with various price points the further you get away from that monorail..........instead of that we get two main resort areas. The Magical Fiberglass Resort and the More Magical But Non-Fiberglass Resort areas.

Don't believe me? Let's take any of the deluxes as an example. Could they not charge more for the rooms right in the building that houses the monorail, and less for the ones that are away? Could they not charge more for the rooms with a view of the lake, and less for the ones that look out over the gardens? Could they not charge more for the ones that have valet service and free boudin and Barq's, and less for the ones that don't?

Oh wait.

They do that already.

You mean it is possible to have various price points all on or near monorail service without having a large mob of Ei$ner wearing T-shirt clad vacationers storming Victoria & Albert's and setting the GF on fire?

Yes, Rummies, it is. It could have been. But they didn't do it.

Disclaimer: The above is not to be construed as an endorsement for drinking rumrunners or alcoholic beverages, and it definitely does not mean that if my family stays at the Poopers for a week that we will be forced to have a bad time by constant whining and complaining over the loss of Mickey headed butter. In fact, chances are, Clan Air will still have a great time, should we choose to accept the assignment of surviving for a week underneath a giant purple Yo-Yo.

 

[airlarry!]

Hey, Mini-AV, the transportation I was referring to was the free bus transportation to and fro Orlando Int'l. Last time I checked, not even cheap cajun families were trying to sneak into the Magical Express cargo holds...

Anyhow, it's quite a nice savings (and convenience) for a family of four.

I don't get what you are talking about. (not being condescending here at all). Is this quote directed at me? Cause I don't remember discussing transportation to and from the airport. If it isn't to me, then never mind.

And despite your assertions to the contrary, I think I do speak for everyone, and can do so with pretty full confidence.

No reasonable person would choose the AS or the PC over the other resorts found on property if the price were equal.

The better question, and one I'm still confident I can answer for all, is whether someone would choose the AS over any other resort if (a) the prices were the same and (b) the amenties were the same.

Ah....Move the Poop Century onto the monorail, give it a purple stained sand beach, and purple colored water mice, and giant yo-yo tiki torches, and a Rubik's Cube & Parachute Pants character buffet at the same exact price as the next door Polynesian.

Then what would King Rummy do? Would he stay at the Poop or the Poly?

Does the Poop tell a story?
Does it whisk you away to a little corner of the Magic Kingdom?
Does it feel like you are living a movie set? (Well, maybe Pretty in Purple or Purple Reign or The Hotel Purple but those don't count).

I can't for the life of me see why people feel they need to defend the Little To No Value resorts. I don't. My philosophy is simple. They are there. They are cheap. They have belching dragons that will drop you off right at the door of the Magic Kingdom. I recommend 'em to friends. I've stayed in them. Use 'em. Sleep in 'em. By all means, drink a rum runner by the crappy pool, assuming you are of legal age to imbibe.

But don't call them a true Disney experience. Don't pat Ei$ner on the back and thank him for he'pin' out the po' folk. Don't rationalize that they 'fulfil a market' or 'serve a proven need' or 'are a benefit to the locals.' Call a purple spade a purple spade. They are Disney-branded motels, nothing more. They should be bulldozed immediately, and integrated monorail resorts priced from $50-500 a night should be immediately green-lighted instead.

Right after the GPS based Villain Mountain is built, of course.

 

[DisneyKidds]

I recommend 'em to friends. I've stayed in them. Use 'em. Sleep in 'em. By all means, drink a rum runner by the crappy pool, assuming you are of legal age to imbibe.

But don't call them a true Disney experience.

Amen Brother.

Really, putting aside the fact that I guess I'm a spoiled elitest snob, I've stayed in the All Stars. Being a cheap spoiled elitest snob I had done so simply because of that price point. Having done so after having stayed at almost every resort.....I suppose every resort other than POFQ and OKW, well, and AKL....but I've stayed at WL.....so....well, never mind.....the All Stars were, are, and always will be less of a true Walt Disney experience than the original resorts, and even the Moderates. That isn't to say they might not be a great experience. Heck, you are on Disney property. The room is better than Super 8. Cool pools and all. And all that at a great price which I even would call a real value. But that doesn't change the fact that the Values do nothing more than simply serve a price point on the cheap. I don't think Disney should have ever become about that. Mind you, that isn't to say that true "Value" resorts, at a relatively low price point, couldn't have been achieved with true Disney themeing and the Full Monty of a Disney experience, but that would have required effort that the Disney of the 90's seemed unwilling to put forward.

So in the end I'm glad the Values are there for the people who have a plethora of reasons to use them.....I just lament what could have been.

Very nice debate, I have not seen this type of thoughtfull ideas in such a long time. Thank you for restoring my faith in at least one of these boards.

You are welcome. This is exactly the kind of discussion I hoped would ensue to show Lumpa what I always thought this board was best for.