Wonders of Life Pavilion cutting back on hours???

[Bob O]

I found this at another site themeparkinsider.com by Robert Niles and it does a great job explaining the problem with this move and the whole disney company as a whole!!!!!!!

So there's a fifth "key" being taught at Disney University now?
Delivering shareholder value, safety, courtesy, show, efficiency.

Gee, I guess I didn't need to major in math, but ordered that way, cost cuts to drop revenue straight to the bottom line will *always* trump spending on the other four keys. Which means, Disney is *no different* than any short-term-obsessed, bottom-line-oriented, make-money-now-and-forget-the-consequences, soon-to-be-bankrupt soulless corporation out there.

Thanks for the ride, Walt Disney Company. It was fun while it lasted. Perhaps someday another visionary with a passion for his company's creativity will decide to build a theme park.

I think dvclandbaron would like this!!!

 

[KNWVIKING]

***"So now the disney apologists dont like to be called on it or taken to task for their supporting disney decisions that reduce guest enjoyment at the parks. "***

I'm just having fun playing devils advocate.

***"Why is the lack of bodies bad show? "***

When you walk into an empty restaurant...what's your first impression ?

***"Besides, I would argue that the pavillion is not deserted. I have been to Epcot when there were only a few thousand people in the entire park, yet the Cranium Command theater was half full and my Body Wars car was completely full."***

Then you've seen something I haven't in a long time.

 

[Peter Pirate]

Up yours Bob!

So let me get this straight...To understand means to agree? This will be very important when debating further here on the DIS.

Like Vike, I always find it best to actually try and have a discussion rather than simply agreeing all the time...How would that work around here, anyway?

Bob O: Disney sucks. They can't build good rides and they close down old ones and Eisner personally puts the money in his pocket...

Viking: I agree, Bob.

Bob O: Damn you Viking. You don't what you're talking about. Eisner has horns, I've actually seen them.

crusader: Me too, Bob. I heard he honks at little ole ladies in the crosswalk!

Bob O: Get off it crsader. If you're going to defend Eisner then we have nothing to talk about.

Peter Pirate: Bob. I think DVCLandbaron should be made head of Disney with AV being named as special consultant. What do you think?

Bob O: Get off it Pirate. You don't know anything. Landbaron should be the head of Disney and AV should be the consultant...

Hmmm, it could work, I guess.

 

[WDSearcher]

Inspired, Pete!

 

[Another Voice]

"To understand means to agree?"

No, but often times it sure seems like the "understanding" comes off as both acceptance and rationalization.

The answer we hear is 'Wonders of Life' should be boarded because no one visits it. End of story.

But what about making the place intresting? What about leaving the place open for the people that do enjoy it and the millions that haven't seen it. Yes, you may been there, done that, bought the t-shirt and that's you're justification. So on behalf of the other 13,999,998 million people who went to WDW last year I'd like to thank you for allowing us to visit your amusement park. Saying that no one goes and I don't give a flip isn't an understanding of the situation. It's looking at it through the soda straw of self interest.

So the next answer is "Disney is need to cut costs."

Really? Did you see a profile on '20/20' showing Jane Eisner clipping coupons and shopping at the day-old bakery store just to keep food on the table for Mike and the boys. Was Pirates such a flop that Disney is selling its office furniture to make payroll? And won't the guests be happy to know that their vacation has been devalued so Disney can send all those savings to Afghani war orphans. Rationalization and platitudes aren't understanding either.

You really want to understand, or do you want to continue the polite little excuses?

The truth is that Eisner is stripping the parks for easy cash. Cash means earnings which means a higher stock price which means Eisner stays at the trough a little longer. The parks are an easy target because Eisner hates them and thinks that people who go to them are idiots. He believes there are enough people out there who will buy "Disney" no matter how crappy the product, people who will visit no matter how low the value, people who will buy the pins and the t-shirts no matter what he does. The public is a worthless mob that can be conned out of a lot of money.

That's why people hate the idea of 'Wonders of Life' – Disney no longer respects its guests.

 

[WDSearcher]

OK, AV ... we get it. You despise Michael Eisner. Geez.


(a/k/a one of the people who works to build and maintain low-value crappy product for all the guests we don't respect)

 

[Another Voice]

"...then perhaps you should either reschedule to a time when WoL will be open, or choose a different vacation destination where you won't feel cheated."

Yup - nothing says respect like "do it our way or get the hell outta here".

 

[Peter Pirate]

Yup, your characterizations are exactly what I was going for Voice...How's this, "I don't like the fact that Disney is closing WoL" (translation: "Good thing they're closing that piece of crap"). Or maybe, "I don't agree or like that they're closing WoL, but if they are going to close something it makes sense that it'd be WoL due to low traffic volumes" (translation: Gee that eisner is a wizard...Really knows how to make a buck). Or perhaps, "I wish they'd reinvest in the older attractions before they become irrelevent, making them new and exciting" (translation: That's a lie, I think they should worship the profit motive even more)...

Man, sometimes it's even hard to agree around here, but I guess that's ok because I really don't mind being pigeonholed by the educated keepers of the magic...

 

[KNWVIKING]

**"No, but often times it sure seems like the "understanding" comes off as both acceptance and rationalization.

The answer we hear is 'Wonders of Life' should be boarded because no one visits it. End of story."**

AV, I don't think anyone here has said WoL should be boarded up. I don't think anyone has even said it should be seasonal. I think everybody agrees it could and should be improved and up-dated.

Right now, the state of the parks appears to be on the up-swing with the completed attractions and the ones under construction. I'm more excited about the opening of Soarin' then I am disappointed that WoL is going seasonal. I'm not saying a seasonal WoL is acceptable, it just doesn't get my blood boiling.

 

[Another Voice]

Then Mr. Pirates, please answer the question.

Why in the very seem week that Disney announced it was the first studio to hit $3 billion in global renvue, the same week the CFO said attendence and bookings at WDW are improving, the same week that the company promised a 30% earnings increase - why are they closing a significant pavilion for cost savings?

If things are going so well, why do they have use the same tatics they followed right after 9/11?

Why are they simply nailing the doors closed instead of fixing it? What are the financial constraints forcing them close a large portion of Epcot's capcatity at the time when attendance is up and 'Mission: Space' is (as you describe it) such a massive hit? Wouldn't this be the thing to keep things open?

Wouldn't this be the time further up the recovery of boring Epcot by bringing in even more? If Disney has suddenly rediscovered how to make wonderful attractions that appeal to all ages - why don't they work some quick magic on 'Wonders'? Surely a new film for 'Body Wars' is faster and less expensive than a new attraction?

What, Mr. Pirate, do you understand that the rest of us fail to see?

 

[KNWVIKING]

***"Why in the very seem week that Disney announced it was the first studio to hit $3 billion in global renvue, the same week the CFO said attendence and bookings at WDW are improving, the same week that the company promised a 30% earnings increase - "***

So what you're saying is that ME is doin' a helluva job ? Maybe opening Adventureland at 10:00 was a stroke of genious. Can you imagine the numbers making WoL seasonal will reap ?

 

[Peter Pirate]

I understand that the greed of the current administration has indeed allowed attractions like the Wonders Of Life to degenerate into its current level of mediocrity (at best). I understand that in looking at the numbers, the guests flowing into WoL is way below other, newer venues...Meaning if some greedy people were of the mind to cut costs, this would be the most suitable place to do it.

I understand that current Disney policies are not fostering the overall good of WDW or the company as a whole but rather filling in blanks, putting out fires and maximizing profit whenever and wherever able.

I understand that in the midst of rising economies, Disney still seems to be playing 'Chicken Little'...A reference I'm sure they wouldn't appreciate.

I understand the road that being taken more resembles "the road to hell' than 'the yellow brick road'.

But because I understand these things doesn't mean I agree or that I think they are good.

I support Mr. Disney & Mr. Gold and truly hope some change comes before irreperable damage is done, a feeling (I once again) understand some of you feel has already happened...

Clear as mud?

 

[HB2K]

I'm not saying a seasonal WoL is acceptable, it just doesn't get my blood boiling.

Closing WOL seasonally doesn't make my blood boil either, but the thought process and the justification behind this move does.

That's what makes us different. Some here don't care about such moves unless it affects them (EE, AdventureLand, etc) while others worry that cutbacks, even if these cutbacks don't cut into their personal vacation, are spreading faster and farther.

 

[crusader]

I don't think we're really all that different.

For some reason whenever any one of us attempts to engage in a discussion about a recent announcement (which God forbid involves a reduction) and theorizes on the "why" using intelligence, reason, experience and knowledge as a reference tool we are declared guilty of treason and stoned by the lynch mob.

It has become ridiculous.

"declare your allegiance to the throne or die".

Well, isn't it ironic that a pirate, viking and crusader aren't bowing down to the masses.

To all those too obsinate to apply the truth I repeat: Get Real!

 

[WDWHound]

I think the problem is that we all have a pretty good idea of the reasons used by Ei$ner and company to justify decisions like this, but we don't see any validity to those reasons. What you seem to be saying is "Look, I know that closing a pavilion is a bad decision, but if they had to make a bad decision, heres why closing WoL is a good decision". I know you are not trying to come off as self contradictory, but thats the effect its having on me.

 

[KNWVIKING]

***". What you seem to be saying is "Look, I know that closing a pavilion is a bad decision, but if they had to make a bad decision, heres why closing WoL is a good decision"."***

I wouldn't go so far as to say "good decision"...... it just isn't the worse thing they could have done.

Bottom line is that for some undetermined / unfathomable / unknown reason, a cut is being made. If EPCOT has to make a cut- where's the best place ? People often complain that FW closes at 6 or 7, but they fail to add that M:S, TT, SE and maybe Energy-not sure- stay open till 9:30. Disney could have saved a whole lot more closing those attractions at 8:30 or earlier, but it would have had an impact on a heckuva lot more guests. People would have been pissed if TT or M:S closed early, they'll hardly notice WoL is closed.

 

[airlarry!]

No, M. Crusader, that's not quite right.

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.

I for one don't think there is any business justification for this decision other than pure unadulterated greed. Heck, AV did a masterful job in one nice succint post.

However, if some people are interested in divining the reasons why Ei$ner could excuse this decision, hey, more power to them. That's what this board is for. It is fun to read and contemplate the different reasons Ei$ner could use.

But can we inject reality in this dicussion at the same time? Because the reality is that...there is no reason for this decision other than pure, unadulterated greed.

Some of us are quick to get to the Cliff's Note version of this story, maybe a little to hasty for others on the board. Don't get mad that the present CEO takes away the fun of debating over different moves this company makes because they generally boil down to propping up a stock price.

Or, let me say it this way. Don't get mad at us because there's no real argument. Get mad at Ei$ner for putting you in that spot.

 

[Another Voice]

Thank you Mr. Pirate for your post.

My concern is that too often understanding on the guest's part is read as acceptance by Disney's current management. Over the last several years (long before 9/11) they have engaged in a practice of reducing the value offered to the guests in order to increase the profit margins from the parks.

By and large this has been accomplished without any visible upset from the general public. Public statements that "Disney is a business, we understand" have been used inside the company to justify the initial cuts and to justify even further cuts. Indirect evidence such as attendance short falls and reduced guest spending were explained away as SARS or the economy or as a line of unpopular pin releases. This further emboldened Disney to more aggressively lower the standards of their offerings.

The attitude that "Disney is magic" is a serious problem for the company. Even when confronted with the overwhelming clear case of Disney's California Adventure, the Company's attitude is that the guests are stupid ("they don't get it") and that things will just somehow work out ("the marketing was bad, people will come"). Naturally, pointing the finger at the guests instead of one's work makes life easy – Disney doesn't have to do anything to correct the problem. All they have to change is the marketing to reach those stupid guests.

But in reality only hard work and investment is going to make the parks work. In days past Disney understood that; today the company ignores that fact. It's a delusion brought about because of the lure of easy money (increasing the margins at the park is about as easy as you can make money) – and it's a delusion that's supported by hundreds of people on the Internet saying "so what if it's closed". Disney does not hear the concerns or the issues of the people that don't visit WDW and so they substitute what they want to hear instead.

Understanding doesn't mean agreement, but silence becomes acceptance.


This is ridiculous, Mr. Crusader, because among the very first posts in this thread was "…DW and I were in the "World" approx 5 weeks this year. Didn't go to WoL once." I'm sure I'm not the only person who read this as "it doesn't affect me, who cares". But a latter post the attempted to clarify this statement basically said it was the guests fault for the closure because not enough were going to the pavilion.

The ridiculous part is the assumption that it’s the guest's obligation to give their money to Disney for whatever the company chooses to offer rather than it being Disney's obligation to offer something people which to see. The "Get Real" part is that people don't blindly follow a brand – people look for interest and for value. Disney should have learned that "Get Real" lesson at California Adventure and Disney Studio Paris.

The tragedy is that they didn't and now seem intent on dragging down all the other parks to that level.

 

[KNWVIKING]

***"This is ridiculous, Mr. Crusader, because among the very first posts in this thread was "…DW and I were in the "World" approx 5 weeks this year. Didn't go to WoL once." I'm sure I'm not the only person who read this as "it doesn't affect me, who cares". But a latter post the attempted to clarify this statement basically said it was the guests fault for the closure because not enough were going to the pavilion."***

AV, there was no "it doesn't affect me" implacation. I was simply pointing out that DW and I didn't feel a need to spend time in a pavillion that had nothing new to offer. We enjoy cranium command, but it's not enough to draw us in. As for the "guests are the fault".... well, that's a stretch. How can I get truely outraged that a pavillion I don't go to closes ? Maybe if I had made a point of going in there on each trip, as well as all the others out there like me who have "been there,done that" , then maybe WoL wouldn't be going seasonal.

Don't read more into my "we didn't go statement" then is really there.

 

[bretsyboo]

How can I get truely outraged that a pavillion I don't go to closes ?

It's the principal of the matter. How can you get outraged if the government randomly kills someone you don't know? It's a move made purely for money, and is detrimental to all guests...what's not to get outraged about?

Think of the logic...what if noone cares? What if the attendance stays the same? After all, how many people's Epcot visit depends on WoL availability? So attendance stays the same and Disney makes some extra money. Why not close the Land next? At what point are you going to be outraged?

"...then perhaps you should either reschedule to a time when WoL will be open, or choose a different vacation destination where you won't feel cheated."

But Disney is supposed to be doing things for us! They are supposed to service us! Why should we work around THEIR schedule? People understand rehabs and closings for a new attraction...the goal with each are to improve things and we know that it is natural. But no one should have to change their vacation plans (which I'm sure you realize is excruciatingly difficult and sometimes impossible) because Disney has chosen not to service their guests. And while one could go somewhere else, it doesn't mean the disappointment is not there.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And I understand WHY there are doing it, because they want more money at of the pavillions it is the only one that can go...no sponsers and I do thing closing S:E for this reason would have resulted in a far different thread. BUT understanding the need for it is completely different...because there is no need for it. We all know disney has the money no one can possibliy argue that, and thus there reasoning is moot. Therefore there is no understanding for this. This is not a decision that they had to make. This enhances no ones experience, and so this is not the best of the bad decisions.

Perhaps, if disney really did need to scratch and claw for every penny to stay afloat then we would all agree that this was a regretable but necissary move, but it's obvious it's not and so the move is completely unneeded and completely unacceptable.

As for the arguement that disney fans should have been calling for an update all of these years, doesn't WoL's lack of numbers show that itself? and what did they do...make it seasonal. As if the current thinking is that this is the only option...that it could NEVER be updated...

Well, isn't it ironic that a pirate, viking and crusader aren't bowing down to the masses.

Actually, that's not ironic, doesn't it fall right in with what we would expect?