Wonders of Life Pavilion cutting back on hours???

[Planogirl]

Why such a focus on how crowded an attraction is? Does every venue have to be crowded to be worthwhile? If that is the only consideration why not throw up some coasters and call it a day? This sounds silly but I guarantee that Six Flags with all of its warts regularly has long lines at its coasters.

But Disney is supposed to be creative enough and imaginative enough to put on a good show. If an attraction gets dated then it's time to REFURBISH it. Shuttering is not a good option; it tends to remind me of inner city blight where businesses start fleeing and one sees row upon row of deserted strip centers.

As for Cranium Command, what exactly is so dated? The boy puts on jeans and a t-shirt. The girl has a short dress on. Maybe the boy's haircut? I don't get it, my son has never commented on their dress but then he also enjoys a lot of older shows and movies so maybe he's just odd.

 

[Bob O]

And yet the " i understand" crowd still claims to not be happy about the current events but shows no outrage at the diminshed magic in the parks and even more understanding of the need for dinsey to reduce the magic in the parks.
Where has any need has been shown that Epcot needs a cut????
Without the cut will the park go bankrupt???
The whole problem is all we see are cutbacks, be it in park hours or number of attractions open at any given time. Most improvements of late have been re-doing older attractions but not offering anything new without closing something old.
You would have thought by now the powers that be at disney could have somehow come up with something up to the quality of Spiderman at IOA but apparently they arent up to the challenge or dont feel the need to up the magic quantity/quality.

 

[crusader]

Now we're talking...................

No one is stoning you because you are theorizing why Disney would make this decision...people are correctly pointing out that there is a difference between the search for truth, and the defense of the indefensible.

Correctly pointing out what? Not on your best day. What's happening is that there can NEVER be any discussion about a cutback without someone pulling the "apologist" card.

That leaves us with: (as Mr. Pirate so aptly put it) - Agree or be labeled a "defender of the indefensible".

What's tragic is that many of the remarks here have merit but very little acknowledgement of that is given.

It's gone way beyond principle and has become obstinate.

This one falls right in line for me -

Because the reality is that...there is no reason for this decision other than pure, unadulterated greed.

On whose part? Eisner? The Executives in charge of the parks? Rasulo? The Shareholders? WallStreet? The Investment Bankers? The Board? The Suits? Hollywood?

You don't really need me to continually restate the obvious cliff note in our capitalist society do you? Yes, Greed lurks within the Disney empire. Greed has consumed many of the key individuals who sit at the helm of every single public and private company in America. It sucks. Either get up and do something about it or get used to it.

Did greed take down the skyway to tomorrowland; the A-E ticket bookets; 20K leagues; the swanboats; the mainstreet vehicles and the canoes? According to everyone's logic here it did.

That's ridiculous.

Roy's right. The creativity is being strangled by short-term profit margins. The vision and focus has shifted to the bottom line. They have a serious problem which threatens the sanctity of Walt's legacy.

So how many of you have personally pledged your assistance beyond a "way to go" cheer? How many of you are actively involved in this campaign? How many of you are willing to go out and lobby or appeal to the shareholders or hire an attorney and file suit or garner public support or engage the media?

It's one thing to say you agree. It's another to fully demonstrate it. Unless you are willing to risk everything to go the distance this just comes off as sounding like a bunch of hot air.

No guts. No glory.

Eisner has two options - redirect or retire. He is fully aware of that.

 

[cristen]

I just have a couple of things to say, and things are getting ugly again. I don't want to argue.

That said, it is I then, who doesn't understand how you can understand that Eisner is not doing a good job right now. That you think he should be replaced, that the company is not heading in the right direction, yet not be upset about this. THIS is one of the reasons that the above is true. He needs to be replaced because these are the types of things he does to the company. So how can A,B and C things he does are wrong for the company and he should go, but D is "understandable"? I am not picking a fight, I truly do not get what you are saying. OK, let's get pass the "yeah, it does suck, but I understand." We can agree that if this place is outdated and no one visits, then it needs something done. Fine, then aren't you upset that it has come to this instead. If you don't care because it is not visited that much, then aren't you mad because they let it get that way, and now are just ignoring the problem?

I had a horrible boss for two years. Our weekly sales were about $400,000. She came in and for two reasons, cut hours. One reason was because corporate loves when your labor is low, and two because the lower her expenses were, the bigger bonus she got. She went as far as to not putting the A/C on for two months out of the summer, only putting half the lights on in the store saying that she was supporting the energy crisis in Cali. She ran the store on a skeleton crew, and of course, our customer service suffered. People started to complain and eventually went somewhere else. Now we only do weekly sales of about 150,000. The problem is, only our die hard customers stayed. Now she is gone, but we are fighting to try and get those customers back. You know the saying about how much more it costs to get a customer back. I only tell you this because what Eisner is doing reminds me of this, but on a much larger scale. I know, I can already hear the "touching story", but I just wanted to say it.

Lastly, I know someone has to know the numbers for WDW. Maybe Hope can help me out. I know WDW pulls in a LOT of money. But does anyone know exactly how much their operating costs are? I am curious just how much money the park is generating. I can't imagine this place never making enough money to justify this.

Cristen

 

[disrailfan]

We are in the world this week going home tonight and the last two nights the local news on the local NBC Affiliate reported that the Wonders of life pavillion would be closing due to low attendance figures and popularity.

 

[crusader]

So how can A,B and C things he does are wrong for the company and he should go, but D is "understandable"?

It's not that D is or isn't understandable. The whole situation is easily discernable. The problem I have is that the A, B and C failures can't be exclusive to Eisner unless the E, F and G successes are as well.

Is Eisner the reason for the banner year?
Is Eisner the reason for ABC moving out of last place?
Is Eisner the reason for Pirates?

He has to be according to your theory.

So if he can manage all this success on his own just as he single handedly managed to promulgate all the failures according to the critics how can you claim to "understand" he isn't capable of turning everything around?

That's contradictory.

He's got a ten year track record under his belt going in each direction and the pendulum just swung again.

 

[PKS44]

Originally posted by crusader

He's got a ten year track record under his belt going in each direction and the pendulum just swung again.

This is truly a sad misunderstanding of what is going on--the same sort of misunderstanding that plagues Ei$ner...you are mistaking recent short term gains for long term value---The first 10 years of success (with Frank Wells) were obtained by investment and a dedication to delivering an outstanding product--the profits came as a result of that approach--the last 10 years of failure have been as a direct result of turning AWAY from the strategy that worked...the current short term success cannot in anyway be seen to insure or promise any long term dividends as the first 10 years have--Disney is no longer seen as the THE HIGH QUALITY, premium brand it once was---they have squandered the brand identity and this is why Ei$ner must go -not because ABC had a few bad seasons but because his approach is WRONG for long term health of the brand and the Company...going cheap because you can cut costs and get by on brand name and post a good quarter or two is not going to work for long---

 

[KNWVIKING]

***"Most improvements of late have been re-doing older attractions but not offering anything new without closing something old."***

Not true. MK has been changing attractions- McPhil and L&S, I think availible room constraints prohibit adding a major attraction. But Epcot is adding Soarin', AK is adding E:E and MGM is adding a Stunt show, (at the expense of Residential Street, but I'd hardly call that an attraction).

Bretsyboo: The CM's that worked at WoL, were they given their pink slips....or were they reasigned to more popular attractions- did their expense get shifted TT or M:S in an attempt to satisfy more people. Did turning the lights off in WoL really save Disney money on electricity, seeings how they generate their own using mostly waste products from the World as fuel for the power plant ? Where is the money grab,the greed, the addition to the bottom line.

***" It's the principal of the matter. How can you get outraged if the government randomly kills someone you don't know? "***

There's a legitiment analogy. Sorry, but I have an entirely different set of standards on "outrage" for the real world as opposed to fantasyland. For all the effort I put into this board and all the enjoyment I get out of The World, it could all disappear tomorrow and the only thing that would change in my life is where I vacation. So please, don't be insulted if I'm not outraged about WoL.

It wasn't to long ago that posters here were quick to point out a stock price below $13.00, massive debt, poor credit ratings, poor attendance that wasn't the fault of 9/11, war, SARS,economy, etc... it was strickly ME's fault. Now the stock is going up, debt is down 11%, attendance is up, 3 billion in movie business, ABC going in the right direction, credit ratings improved, stock rating at hold or buy, major capital expenditures in the parks,etc.... and ME gets no credit ?

 

[KNWVIKING]

***"--Disney is no longer seen as the THE HIGH QUALITY, premium brand it once was" ***

Really ? I must have missed that announcement in the WSJ or on 60 minutes. Maybe the increasing number of tourists at the parks missed that news flash also.

 

[KNWVIKING]

PG,

How many kids know who Hans and Franz are ? How many know "NORMMMMM". Do they know Bobcat for any reason other then he's dating Nickie Something ? Is Charles Grodan relavent at all-for anything- today ?

 

[KNWVIKING]

***"I just have a couple of things to say, and things are getting ugly again. I don't want to argue."**

Ugly ???? I thought we've all been very civil Not a single "Element" or "Snowglobe". We've been good.

 

[PKS44]

The problem is that people don't post their general perceptions in the WSJ--the company is doing less with more than it used to and that is a manifestation of the fact that the name no longer carries the weight it once did..they thought DCA, DLP studios even AK and the Disney stores could fly on the name---it is not working...all of these have failed to perform--only in Japan have they maintained the quality and reaped the benefits of maintaining quality...There is a reason the stock is flat for the last 7 years- there is a reason Ei$ner has been called out by Roy and Stan and called by numerous financial analysts as the WORST CEO of any major company.

 

[KNWVIKING]

***"There is a reason the stock is flat for the last 7 years- there is a reason Ei$ner has been called out by Roy and Stan and called by numerous financial analysts as the WORST CEO of any major company."***

I'd hardly call Disney stock flat. It looks more like a Six Flaggs coaster. As for WORST CEO...... If Disneys numbers continue to improve, lets see where the "experts" rank him in a couple years.
And by numbers, I'm not refering to the pixie dust levels we deal with here, I'm talking about the spendable ones the stockholders lok for and the experts use to rank CEO's.

IMO, Roy and Stan should have bailed about two years ago. They may have waited too long to have any affect.

 

[Peter Pirate]

...and has been called by numerous financial analyists as the worst CEO of any major company.

Yeah, he's right up there with Ken Ley, I guess...But seriously you can't have your cake and eat it too. The analyists are currently on eisners side...Things are perking up and the outlook is rosy (as said by the wall st. types) and anytime any analyist has rallied against eisner it has NEVER had anything to do with quality. These are not the guys to have in your corner when making this argument.

I hope Roy & Stan succeed because I actually agree that more 'pixie dust' needs to be infused into the company (making it less generic as it is slowly, or not so slowly, becoming)...Like Vike though, I think they may be jousting at windmills in the midst of much improved economic times...

 

[bretsyboo]

Bretsyboo: The CM's that worked at WoL, were they given their pink slips....or were they reasigned to more popular attractions- did their expense get shifted TT or M:S in an attempt to satisfy more people. Did turning the lights off in WoL really save Disney money on electricity, seeings how they generate their own using mostly waste products from the World as fuel for the power plant ? Where is the money grab,the greed, the addition to the bottom line.

They were not given their pink slips, they had their hours cut...to be a CM at WoL means nothing everyone in WoL that works in food, beverage, or attractions is most likely trained elsewhere, if not they will be trained elsewhere because of this. Disney doesn't just fire people like that, they just take away the hours, FT has to get a minimum of 30hrs a week and much like it is every dry season FT will be working 6 hour days 5 days a week and Part times days per week will be downgraded to whatever disney needs. Do they save money on labor? Oh yes, yes they do, the CM's affected won't just be added to other attractions to help with guests, the amount of hours needed for the other attactions will not go up.

If it isn't a money grab, then what could the explanation be? Just doing it for the heck of it? Are you trying to say that this isn't a cost saving move? If you can't see the greed then I'd suggest opening your eyes because there isn't a single other explanation as to why it would go seasonal...

As for my government analogy I wasn't trying to say you should feel the SAME outrage as the other situations, I'd like to think that we would all be more outraged at the faults of our government then we would be for the faults of Disney. But your own personal outrage, what ever it could be for Disney related matters, should be applied here; Live in your real world and get more mad at things there than in Disney, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't feel outraged. If you get a pizza 20 minutes late, and the company doesn't want to compensate you in any way, that should make you outraged to whatever level poor guest service for ordering a pizza will allow. Disney has shown a lack of care for the guests in this case, and as a guest we should be outraged. Do you disagree? It was obviously done in the interest of money and in the complete lack of interest for the guests...what is nOT to be outraged about?

 

[crusader]

This is truly a sad misunderstanding of what is going on--the same sort of misunderstanding that plagues Ei$ner...you are mistaking recent short term gains for long term value

No. I specifically chose the analogous term pendulum to avoid this misinterpretation.

There is nothing short-term related at all here. It has completed a second cycle and is now entering a third.

AK is not failing to perform.

DCA and EuroDisney are failing and this is a major problem. But to then take these two parks and state they represent a turning point in perception and value giving a complete disregard for the FTP campaign and the public's absolute embrace and passion for WDW is a weak argument.

It is this level of judgement that selectively fails to account for everything in support of a platform position.

That's what I mean by Get Real.

 

[Another Voice]

So therefore Mr. Crusader – let's hear your case.

Things for Disney are all spiffy now. The horrors of the past are forgotten and every financial analyst in the country is tap dancing down Wall Street over joy that Disney has returned.

Then please explain how shutting the doors on 'Wonders of Life' – even if it's just the off months – is a good or even a justified thing?

Why is closing a pavilion a better business move than refurbishing it?

Where are those cost savings to be used?

Please, Mr. Crusader, tell us what reality is…

 

[Planogirl]

Originally posted by KNWVIKING
PG,

How many kids know who Hans and Franz are ? How many know "NORMMMMM". Do they know Bobcat for any reason other then he's dating Nickie Something ? Is Charles Grodan relavent at all-for anything- today ?

I agree that few kids would know these characters just like I'm not familiar with Charles Grodin and don't like the Bobcat persona. But I don't agree that audiences have to be familiar with all characters in each show to enjoy the performance. The story of a young boy is still quite relevant IMO. I believe that Cranium Command has suffered due to it being hidden in the back of a pavilion for years. I still talk to people who haven't seen it and don't know where it is.

As for ME's "successes" lately, an analogy comes to mind. My husband really enjoys playing darts but I'm quite lousy at it. But if I keep throwing enough darts at the dart board I'll score a few hits, even a bullseye from time to time. But that doesn't make me a good dart player.

And I agree with AV. Why not refurbish this pavilion? Why shutter it particularly if Disney is doing so well right now?

 

[KNWVIKING]

Well... not "all spiffy", just spiffy'er then they were this time last year. More spiffy'er then they were two years ago. WDW isn't going to be all spiffy for a probably a few more years. But IMO WDW is absolutely headed in the right direction. If EPCOT has to operate within an X budget and keeping M:S open till 9:30 means closing WoL seasonally - for the time being - then I don't view this as a pure greed money grab.

When GE stopped sponsoring Illuminations, did they cut back on th show ? From what I can tell -no they didn't. Did the operating expense of Epcot increase when this sponsorship ended ? Would Epcot be better with Illuminations every other nite and WoL remaining open full time ? Ideally we get it all. In a couple more years, maybe we will. But then what will we have to chat about.

 

[PKS44]

Originally posted by crusader
No. I specifically chose the analogous term pendulum to avoid this misinterpretation.

There is nothing short-term related at all here. It has completed a second cycle and is now entering a third.

A little too soon to be so definitive--and by my assessment they hve done nothing recently to make me think this current short term trend will have staying power...long term value is built by investment not cost cutting.

Originally posted by crusader
AK is not failing to perform.

Hmm? Somebody does need to get real here an it is not me...so Disney was satisfied that AK attendence fell every year from its opening?...that was all part of the master plan?--it was performing as they hoped? Really? AK has failed to perform because it has not generated the added revenue it was supposed to in order to justify the investment--the additions of discounted meal plans, PW, and shortened hours were necessary because the park has failed to generate enough interest. Or maybe this was the plan all along--if so then sure it is performing as they planned they just had a really stupid plan for using the company's money. Either way, they goofed. If they had built it as OLC built DisneySea (with the focus on the product not the bottom line) they might have had a different outcome. AK is not exempt from criticism as one of the parks that has failed to impress audiences because it was built on a budget. It's "success" as compared to DLP and DCA can be seen more as a reflection of the Park Hopper ticket and its proximity to parks that actually did draw people to come to WDW...in other words the rest of WDW has propped up AK attendence--it was supposed to be the other way around.