Why the Hatred Towards Meg Crofton and Jay Rasulo?

[AuntieM03]

I'm a bad Disneyite I had no idea who these people are, my brother would be so disappointed in me

 

[bicker]

bicker, this isn't Oz. Saying the same untruths over and over while you click your heels together three times won't make them so.

Saying something is untrue doesn't make them so either. I feel you need to accept that we're both reasonable people and can therefore disagree, with neither of us being wrong. Your insistence that only what you believe is possibly correct prevents you from interacting with my perspective in a constructive manner, which is why I choose not to give you further opportunities. If you would stop viciously attacking, and just support your own points, then this discussion could move forward.

 

[Another Voice]

If you would stop viciously attacking, and just support your own points, then this discussion could move forward.

Awaiting your discussion of the points I raised about the original topic...

 

[bicker]

I've said all I wish to say about this issue. Thanks though.

 

[raidermatt]

Saying something is untrue doesn't make them so either. I feel you need to accept that we're both reasonable people and can therefore disagree, with neither of us being wrong. Your insistence that only what you believe is possibly correct prevents you from interacting with my perspective in a constructive manner, which is why I choose not to give you further opportunities. If you would stop viciously attacking, and just support your own points, then this discussion could move forward.

You have not been viciously attacked, or even attacked at all, so stop with the "poor me" act. Only your statements have been addressed.

I've never insisted that only what I believe can be correct. In fact, at one time I argued many of the same points you argue now (the proof of that is in my posting history, if anyone is curious). However, over time I realized I was wrong about many things and my conclusions have changed with the inclusion of new information.

Perhaps they will change again.

What prevents me, or anyone critical of decisions made by Disney, from interacting constructively with you is your continued insistence that anyone who is critical in these forums is not qualified to criticize. Again, that leaves only one side to the conversation, yours.

On topic comments have been made, questions asked. Phillip even called for your input on these things. The choice continues to be yours.

 

[DancingBear]

Sorry, Philip, you're on your own. As a rundown, here are a handful of the issues which "the critics" are concerned about and would like to discuss:

--Degredation of the "Traditions" training program, and the ideals it taught
--Meg Crofton's lack of qualifications for her position
--The dismantling of Imagineering
--The dismantling of Disney Feature Animation
--Short term vs. long term management outlook
--Selling off WDW land
--The move to marketing of "Disney Parks" and away from individual park identities
--The degredation of "Show"

Can we take off the table the following generalities about "the critics"?:

--They're anti-Disney
--They don't know how to have fun
--They don't understand that Disney is a business
--They're against all change

 

[Another Voice]

I've said all I wish to say about this issue.

Thank you for stepping aside and letting people with valid opinions the opportunity to continue the discussion.


The other issue with Meg Crofton is that her appointment is just another step in the re-branding of “Walt Disney World” into simple just “Disney Parks – Orlando”. Anyone with knowledge of Disney can see what a horrendously bad business decision this is.

In the past, both Disneyland and Walt Disney World have benefited from strong local management. They were able to guide their parks to meet the specific needs of their markets. They were also able to keep operations unique from each other – WDW had the scope and scale for a vacation, Disneyland had the quality and constant new shows so the locals could enjoy their annual visit.

But Jay Rasulo has made a bad decision and changed the strategic direction of the company, Instead of focusing on the specific destinations; “Disney” will now become a generic travel brand encompassing everything from neighborhood hotels, time shares, cruise lines, tour companies, and these little places in Orlando and Anaheim.

Instead of staying at a unique ‘Grand Floridian’ hotel, you’ll just be staying at the Orlando location – copies will exist in Los Angeles, New York, Miami, Long Island, Boston, Chicago and Branson.

Disney World will loose its uniqueness – and anyone who knows anything about the entertainment industry can tell you that is certain disaster. What’s very troubling is that Disney is taking this path even after the utter and complete rejection of California Adventure by the public: a park filled with nothing but clones and cheap Six Flag attractions and without any uniqueness or identity of its own.

Anyone who ventured beyond their basement in last 20 years said it was going to be a flop – and it is.

All of this leaves poor Ms. Crofton as the front person representing very poor business decisions.

 

[Peter Pirate 2]

Mr. Voice, I mentioned earlier the loss of Matt Ouimet to Starwood right after Iger was appointed. Were my feelings right that he probably did know a thing or two and bailed at the thought of this Iger/Rasulo led homoginization? Any insight?

 

[Another Voice]

It’s been very widely discussed.

When Matt Ouimet was brought in, he thought he was going to run Disneyland. Under the old management structure all the departments – Operations, Resorts, Food, etc. – reported to him, he in turn reported to Jay Rasulo as head of Walt Disney Attractions.

But under Rasulo’s “Global Restructuring”, the manager running attractions at California Adventure joins a committee with Attractions – Magic Kingdom, Attractions – Epcot, Attractions – Tokyo DisneySea, etc. They all report to a new head of Attractions – Disney Parks in Burbank. Same thing with resorts, merchandise, dining, etc. Everyone at the same location has a tiny dotted line to the GM there – but there’s little real authority anyplace except Burbank.

Matt literally found that he had no authority over any of his own division heads. When he tried to do something at California Adventure, it’s said he found himself having to go to Orlando to convince people there a lagoon show was a good idea. All of this came after Ouimet had saved the Disneyland’s 50th Birthday marketing event from certain disaster after Burbank turned it into a muddled, WDW-focused mess. Attendance at Disneyland soared while millions of guests at WDW ignored all the generic “50 Years of Brand Marketing” merchandise.

No one is blaming Matt Quimet for leaving. Everyone understands his experience, his ability – he honestly tried to improve Disneyland. But Jay Rasulo has other ideas (bad ones). It is better to leave with honor than stay to serve the corrupt.