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

[DisneyKidds]

Those who still think a POP can be a Poly have to offer more the " Yeah, but....".

Nobody here is making that argument. There is no way I'd say that Dixie Landings is as good as the Poly, but I even managed to get Herr Baron to agree that a moderate, Dixie Landings, was indeed "Disney".

So Disney can make something less than the Poly still manage to meet the high bar that was the Disney standard. That doesn't mean it has to be as great as the Poly, but it has to be more than what the Values of today are. Finding a way to do that is what would have taken vision and imagination. Once again, to agree with Scoop, if that truely couldn't have been accomplished they shouldn't have come into existence.

I don't think Disney really tried to display any sort of real vision, imagination, or innovation in the Values.

Do you?

 

[YoHo]

If this is true, then we're actually much closer to agreeing than it might seem. I always thought that several of you had argued that there should not be a value price point at all because that price point simply can't be met with the level of immersiveness that Disney should provide.

It's mighty disingenuous to argue about threads past. Try sticking to what's written here.
Some people have the ability to evolve their opinions as fact and understanding come to light. Plus, I personally have never argued that although I may have conceeded it once or twice in the past.

 

[YoHo]

.... spending time in the parks tends to cut down on certain tasks usually reserved for the workplace.....

but I wanted to comment on the idea that a value resort could be built with all the same features that make a deluxe a deluxe. The idea that all it takes is imagination and guts is a little unrealistic. Every feature that makes Poly, Poly, has an up-front cost as well as follow up costs attached to it.

Hidding the parking lot requires moving it further away & building buffer zone. The cost to built & maintain buffer adds considerable expense. Moving the parking lot further away is an inconvienence.

Inside hallways are a major expense. Heating, A/C and air exchange are an expense as well as maintaining a carpet, painted walls, light fixtures, alarm and sprinkler system and inside stairwells. It also increases the overall footprint of the building which affects drainage calculations.

Every pool area feature & play area has considerable upkeep expense. Pool slides require lifeguards on duty.

DW is giving me the evil eye. Gotta go, but look at every aspect of a deluxe resort & realize there is an expense related to it. For people whose number one concern is cost per nite to sleep & shower even marginal increases for a value resort will push them off-site.

Those who still think a POP can be a Poly have to offer more the " Yeah, but....".

Yes and no, I don't have time right nw to discuss this further, but I have some thoughts I'll share later in the day.

 

[DisneyKidds]

My position is that a value price point can be accomplished while still maintaining WDW standards.

Can be accomplished, or was accomplished with the Value resorts we have?

 

[DisneyKidds]

{permission to treat the witness as hostile, your honor?}

Please answer the question, counsellor.

Yes, you said that it can be done. You have not said whether it has been done. Has it?

I agree that it can be done, but I don't agree that the Values as built accomplish the goal of a resort at a value price point that maintains the WaltDW standards.

So, again..........in your opinion has what you say can be done, been done?

 

[Sarangel]

To post a poll, you click on the Start New Thread icon, and type in your commentary, then you click on the "post a poll with this thread" checkbox and follow its instructions.

For the record, I think Disney could have done a value resort in a more immersive way. My original thought when they announced the Pop Century was that they would decorate the rooms and landscaping (which they paid for anyway) in a period styles - kidney shaped tables & beaded fringe for the 60's, formica and chrome for the 50's, shag carpet (which I bet they could have gotten a deal on) and mirrors for the 70's, etc.

I'll look forward to the DScoop Poll.

Sarangel

 

[YoHo]

Mr Kidds has presented my answer and all the caveats that go with it.

Yes they can, they have yet to.

 

[Onemoretime]

.... Dixie is a great example of how to build a Moderate resort. Love the place. But last I checked you couldn't touch it for $59.00.

I don't know what the break even point is on a resort. Could Dixie sell for less per night ? Probably, but then you're also throwing out the laws of Supply & Demand and ROI. It comes back to how much - if any - money should Disney leave on the table ala Baron and the $29.00 per nite Poly ( $29.00 is hyperbole, don't recall his actual stated price ).

Time to go check out the Poll thread.

 

[YoHo]

I've seen the numbers for Yacht Club and for Poly, I don't know the numbers for the Values.


One of the problems is that Disney restructured how the resorts are treated (as autonomous business units. That makes this harder, but that's a decision that could be changed as easily as anything else.

 

[YoHo]

Interesting thing that was just pointed out to me, when the Values were built, their price point was $69 a night.

NOw in this discussion, or limitation is still $69.

Why has this not changed over the 10ish years when the price increases of the mods and Deluxes have gone up?

 

[raidermatt]

As opposed to the AllStars where you get free transporation to and from the airport (a savings of roughly $50 for a family of four), access to Disney's parks for 15-20 extra hours per week (likely value for a family of four of $100 plus dollars.

Not sure how relevant this really is to the issue, but I do think its appropriate to point a couple of things.

Yes, the AS/Pop provide free transportation to and from the airport. However, the Birnbaum guide, the official WDW guide, had the following to say about Magical Express:

At press time, the service was free, but that may change sometime in 2006.

The good news? As long as the program stays free (and it's expected to do so through much of 2006)..."

Given that this is in the "official" guide, it seems pretty clear that this will not stay free forever. It's in its introductory price period, and therefore probably shouldn't be listed as an assumed beneit of staying at the values, unlike transportation to the parks.

What the Disney advantage boils down to is location. And I'm not saying that's a bad thing. Its just that it certainly seems as though they used their location advantage as a substitute for offering a more immersive experience.

Hence a price point not much different from outside the gates.


I may have been one who at one time said Disney shouldn't have built the values at all. If I did, part of it was that I wasn't looking beyond how Disney executed the plan. But part of it is also that we can't assume that if the Values weren't built, the resources (both capital and real estate) would not have been put to some other use.

But that said, I definitely agree at this time that rooms can be provided at the lower price point that meet with what should be WDW standards.

I'm not sure Disney as we know it can do this anymore, but it certainly is possible.

 

[peter11435]

"Can" a Disney quality resort be built at a value price point ($59-$89 per night)?--without losing gobs of money too...

I would argue that they have already built Disney quality resorts at a value price point ($59-$89 per night).

 

[The Dead Guy]

From 2005

What I'm really looking for is someone to cite an example of a highly-immersive resort with a value price point. Some real world example of how those numbers work (especially the maintaining numbers as I suspect the front end construction numbers could be value-engineered to come it at a value price point).

From 1936

What I’m really looking for is someone to cite an example of a full-length animated cartoon that’s a success at the box office. Some real world example where an audience actually paid a good silver dime to sit through an entire eighty minutes and that the foolish studio that made it didn’t go bankrupt in the process.

From 1953

What I’m really looking for is someone to cite an example of a major Hollywood studio that’s been successful at making shows for this new fangled television. Some real world examples of where someone can make movie-quality show on a television budget and get people to sit at home and watch it. And then why would people go to a theater and pay for what they get at home for free! It would be the ruin of any studio that tried it!

From 1955

What I’m really looking for is someone to cite an example of a highly expensive amusement park that can draw a big enough crowd to pay for itself. Some real world example of how these numbers would work - especially building a steamship, railroads and real crystal chandeliers that weren’t value-engineered to come to a value price point

From 1999

What I’m really looking for is someone to cite an example of a high service, high concept cruise line that’s at a price point where families can afford it. Some real world examples of how these numbers work, especially when you design and build the ships to your own exacting specifications instead of buying value-engineered ships!

The lazy and the talentless always have so much proof on their side and they take such delight in proclaiming their expertise. Fortunately for the world – people with skill, drive and imagination don’t listen to them.

 

[YoHo]

Since nobody else but Disney makes immersive resorts on the level that Disney has, it's still a bad question.

 

[Lewisc]

I'm confused.

Are posters saying Disney shouldn't have built a resort that's less expensive and offers less amenities than the moderate resorts? Disney owns enough land. There are more than enough customers who look to their resort only as a place to sleep to fill the rooms. I don't see any reason for Disney to ignore that part of the market.

Are the posters saying Disney should have added more amenities to the value resorts? A pool slide requires a life guard. It probably requires a deeper pool which costs more to heat. Add too many amenities and the price point will be close to the moderates. The icons at the value resort tell a story. The cost to build and maintain them is relatively low. We'd all like to be able to stay at a deluxe hotel and pay a value price. Disney is a public company. It's not going to happen. Look at the HIFS. It was re-themed as the Nick Hotel. Some amenities were added. Most of the discounted programs were discontinued and the cost to stay there almost doubled.

Universal has a limited amount of land to work with. They've chosen to only build deluxe resorts. They're able to allow pool hopping and all 3 hotels are well themed. Is that the model people want Disney to follow? That model ignores a big part of the market.

I've never stayed in a Disney value hotel. I'd rather stay offsite. The value hotel appeals to the guest who doesn't spend a lot of time in their room and want the Disney amenities. Extra hours, good park transportation, DME, package delivery, meal plans....

I don't get it. Disney has done a good job building hotels to appeal to guests with different budgets and different accommodation needs.

One of the posters is comparing the Raddisson Hotel with onsite hotels. You can always get a "better deal" offsite if you're willing to forfeit the Disney perks. Last year I got the Gaylord Palms for $85 through PL. I booked at the last minute and a Disney moderate would have cost me more. The hotel is as well themed as any Disney deluxe hotel.

I was lucky, it was during hurricane Charley and GP did a superior job. I was better off there than in any of the Disney hotels.

 

[Bstanley]

Lewisc,

I posted about the Radisson - not because I've ever stayed there or because I don't believe that Disney shouldn't have built a modestly priced resort (I am tired of calling them Values). I brought up the Radisson for the simple reason that it was the first location that popped up on an Expedia search and I was responding to a question about 'where else can you stay for $x that is as nice as Pop Century'.

For the record - I have NEVER recommended anyone stay offsite. I explain The All Stars to people who ask and let them decide where to stay. If I was looking for the lowest cost WDW vacation I would probably stay there myself. My budget has never been so tight that I felt I needed to stay there - that's all.

What I am trying to get across is that I personally wish that instead of hiring an outside firm and telling them to put up a common motel, Disney had sat down some real Imagineers with a blank sheet of paper and told them - "guys, we want to be able to offer rooms at this new resort at $70 a night and still make a profit...BUT...first and foremost you need to make sure that the guest experience here is pure Disney from end to end."

Would the result have been a Polynesian? - I don't think so - but I am absolutely positive that it would have been more than a common motel with bright colors and giant plastic adornments.

 

[Lewisc]

You're comparing rack rate with a Disney hotel with a promotional rate at the Raddisson. Disney just finished a free dining promotion. The value of the dining package for a family of 4 exceeded the cost of the room at a value resort.

I agree offsite hotels, without the Disney extras, are a better value in every price point. My stay at the Gaylord Palms, $85, was a better deal than spending over $200 for a Disney deluxe.

Disney prices their resorts to reflect the extras like bus service to the parks and extra hours.

The point of comparison is a Disney moderate with a Disney value. Can Disney add amenities to the value resort and still maintain the price differential with the moderate hotel and keep their margin where they want it.

Lewisc,

I posted about the Radisson - not because I've ever stayed there or because I don't believe that Disney shouldn't have built a modestly priced resort (I am tired of calling them Values). I brought up the Radisson for the simple reason that it was the first location that popped up on an Expedia search and I was responding to a question about 'where else can you stay for $x that is as nice as Pop Century'.

For the record - I have NEVER recommended anyone stay offsite. I explain The All Stars to people who ask and let them decide where to stay. If I was looking for the lowest cost WDW vacation I would probably stay there myself. My budget has never been so tight that I felt I needed to stay there - that's all.

What I am trying to get across is that I personally wish that instead of hiring an outside firm and telling them to put up a common motel, Disney had sat down some real Imagineers with a blank sheet of paper and told them - "guys, we want to be able to offer rooms at this new resort at $70 a night and still make a profit...BUT...first and foremost you need to make sure that the guest experience here is pure Disney from end to end."

Would the result have been a Polynesian? - I don't think so - but I am absolutely positive that it would have been more than a common motel with bright colors and giant plastic adornments.

 

[Bstanley]

What I was comparing was the readily available price for a motel room that was provided by a nationally available, widely used service that does not require me to own an Annual Pass or be a resident of a particular state. It demonstrated a point to another poster who wanted to see an example of a motel that provided more 'value' than the Disney All Stars. Clearly since you already agree that Disney is not offering the best value for your resort dollar but is depending on extras we can drop the Radisson discussion and focus on:

Can Disney add amenities to the value resort and still maintain the price differential with the moderate hotel and keep their margin where they want it.

Answer:

Yes. A full-service restaurant could be added for example.

Commentary:

I question why there should be concern that the price differential with a moderate hotel be maintained.

Better Question though:

COULD Disney have added many other amenities to a value resort and kept their margin where they want it - if they had thought about it when they were designing it.

Answer:

Absolutely.

 

[Lewisc]

Clearly since you already agree that Disney is not offering the best value for your resort dollar but is depending on extras we can drop the Radisson discussion and focus on.

Disney puts a value on perks like exceptional park transportation, extra hours, package delivery, ease of afternoon pool break and such. No question guests can get a greater dollar value offsite. I still don't agree with quoting rack rate for a Disney hotel vs a discounted rate offsite but your point is valid.

I thought this thread was more about comparing what Disney is doing with their resorts.

Answer:

Yes. A full-service restaurant could be added for example.

Full service restaurants make money if guests chose to dine there. I'm sure Disney would put restaurants in the value resorts if their surveys showed they'd be used. I'm not 100% sure but I thought some of the moderates didn't originally have table service restaurants.

Commentary:

I question why there should be concern that the price differential with a moderate hotel be maintained.





Better Question though:

COULD Disney have added many other amenities to a value resort and kept their margin where they want it - if they had thought about it when they were designing it.

Answer:

Absolutely.

Posters in this thread seem to like the moderate resorts. The purpose of the value resorts is to provide a price point below the value resorts. The current price differential is around $50-$60. Depending on available discounts the differential might be less. Reduce the differential too much and guests will just book the moderate resort.

The question is what amenities could Disney have added and still allow for the necessary rate differential.

Pool slides and better landscaping cost money to install and to maintain. I'm not sure I'd stay in a Disney Value resort, if that's my budget I think I'd be happier offsite but I think they serve a market niche.

 

[Onemoretime]

Did something happen to about 15 posts between page 5 and page 7 ? Also, what happened to Scoop's Poll ?