A Spirited Perfect Ten

[Phil12]

I stayed there for the first time later that year. It was $80 a night (and, yes, we thought that was plenty pricey in those days ... but not akin to $600 for standard room today!)

Spirited Weather Fact: It snowed for the first and only time in Miami 38 years ago today. No, I wasn't here to witness it.

I lived in Homestead, FL in 1977 and remember that snow (I was in my boat in Biscayne Bay). I didn't consider staying in a Disney resort (except for the campground) until 1994 when AAA was deeply discounting the All Star Sports rooms in the off season. Although we had stayed several times in the early days at some of the Hotel Plaza Blvd. resorts such as the Howard Johnson and the Dutch Inn.

 

[WDW1974]

Wow a blast from the past there! I certainly remember a lot of that.

How did you get started in the community? How did you decide to start this site?

 

[WDW1974]

Why does it matter to anyone who's a "lifestyler" or not? Even if you think they're unstable, or if you think it's unhealthy (my opinion is that who really could spend THAT much time in the parks and I'm not sure why many are making a 'career' out of it ...) who cares? Let 'em. Why do we worry so much about everyone else and what they're doing?

When I don't feel a topic is worthy of my time or I'm just not that interested, I don't comment on it.

Because of the way Disney has co-opted social media and bloggers to w- the product, I do feel the whole Lifestyler concept to be fascinating (even if I didn't bring it up this time!)

 

[flynnibus]

But if THEY win, we all suffer. We all pay the price for less, for lower quality, for a worse/Walmarted product. And, at some point, it's like global warming and it's too late to do anything ... and all those profits that went to companies, who didn't have to live up to stringent environmental laws, while the planet was getting destroyed won't matter much when we're all under water.

Your thoughts?

I think the 'point of no return' has been passed when it comes to the current company. It's just too big to pivot and change. The only hope is kind of like what you saw with Pixar... you get an offshoot that is mission driven and hopefully finds enough success to reach critical mass.. and then that thing comes home, hopefully with enough power to displace the ineffective leadership in place.

It would take such a bloody spree to divest the creative part of Disney of all the responsibilities and people to re-create it. I mean, we saw with Apple that is it POSSIBLE to do so at large scale.. but that took a one in a lifetime kind of guy and lots of battles before he won the war and was vindicated. Is there anyone with that level of passion , vision, and muscle in the hallways to make that happen?

Disney is too big, and too corporate to be able to take the kinds of risks needed. All the resources in the world... yet none of the balls to be bold as their forefathers.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Just thinking aloud after seeing the new Peter Pan queue features:

Why does WDI seem to have an unlimited amount of money for things like this and the Tangled restrooms, but not major attraction refurbs or additions? What if half the money spent on adding "details" like frying pans in washrooms was spent on fixing AAs or updating CoP?

I understand there's the difference in scale when it comes to costs, but it feels like some random, minor projects are getting blank checks when that money could be better spent elsewhere.

 

[flynnibus]

I'm a big history guy, and while taking in A show at HoP over the weekend I found myself thinking about how awesome the experience is. The whole show is just very well put together and maintained.

Maybe I'm just a softy for the patriotic stuff. The American Adventure is pretty awe inspiring too, even if I cringe at the end every time now since old American hero Lance was outed as a phony.

When I see the HoP.. I am moved to see the AA.. and I've even done two extra park hops in a day to see them both together. The sheer grand scale of a presentation like the AA is so lost on people. It's just incomprehensible how much goes into that show.. and to think it was just one of a dozen+ attractions that were created simultaneously. And to think the company today struggles to get little things fixed in years. It makes you wonder how it's even the same company sometimes.

 

[flynnibus]

I was going to like this, but then I saw how close you are to me in likes and ... I'm sorry, I just can't.

Alas all the context of posts and likes went out the window since the site allows people to play the games in the various chit-chat threads that are nothing but about playing games with counts and likes. Dilution...

 

[Gabe1]

I can tell you that I have tried (or friends have) to book me CM rates at WDW for at least 5-6 different trips in the past three years or so. None with success. And, usually, when they looked they could find no CM rates at all, even if they played around with the dates and resort levels. And I don't travel at the busiest times, so clearly Disney would rather have a resort filled to 60% capacity, instead of taking and adding 25% more guests at 50 or 60% off rack rate (where they still make a HUGE profit!)

Just a shell game ...

It is annoying. The last trip I stayed at the FQ but the discount was better at both CS and CB. Nothing available at WL or Contemporary. I'd say at best FQ was 30% occupied the two weeks I was there yet POR was overbooked.

 

[5thGenTexan]

My first trips were at a place with a vaguely western theme called the Stagecoach Inn in Kissimmee ... on 192 just west of downtown. For years there was a huge pasture with cows in it across the street, by the mid-late 80s there was the first Super Walmart in the area on it. When last I drove by, maybe a decade ago, it was still standing and was something else.

BTW, those first trips were amazing despite having to drive a good 30 minutes from the TTC every day.

Spirited Faux Top One Percenter Secret: Some days we'd come back to the motel room after stopping and picking up a bucket of chicken at KFC and some Dr. Pepper at Publix (it wasn't sold up in Boston where I was born and lived originally) and chowed down on the beds of a motel room.

I do suppose the Presidential Suite at the Poly would have been more befitting me, but I lived just fine without it!

I understand I am not important here, but this piqued my interest a bit. My first WDW trip was in 1985 during the 4th of July week. We stayed in a place in Kissimmee that I believe had two double beds, bathroom and a kitchenette. Its possible that was a fairly typical configuration. I have no recollection of the name of the place and my mother can not place it either. It wasn't long after that trip that my parents divorced, so I just don't speak of it with my dad. Does anyone have any ideas of the name of the place?

 

[Bolna]

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/japan-box-office-big-hero-764648
Big Hero 6, or "Baymax" as it's called, has done quite well in Japan grossing over $50 million. It may not be another Frozen, but a solid box office performance from a tough crowd of moviegoers is still laudable. The film has a handful a major markets left to open in including the UK, South Korea and China so $500-600 million worldwide seems very likely at this point.

It hasn't even open here in Germany yet either. And it always puzzles me that UK and South Koreas are the major foreign markets that are being named (saw that a few times already), but they both have a smaller population than Germany. However, it appears that in the movie business those are considered big international names, I have noticed the same thing a few times in the past. Any idea as to why this is?

 

[Cesar R M]

Bad news for Big Hero 6 as its been upsetting South Koreans for miniscule imagery of The Rising Sun and the movie isn't even out there yet....

http://kotaku.com/why-big-hero-6-is-upsetting-some-people-in-south-korea-1680370861

did you really used an AD-generator redirector to link to kotaku???

Shame on you

 

[Cesar R M]

You can always grab a cheesesteak hot dog at the Lunching Pad.

It's not the best. But it's also not awful.

lunching pad, he? Might try to grab something.. but my eyes are on Columbia Habour house.

 

[Cesar R M]

Hope y'all had a nice long weekend. Without sounding unthankful for the man who was MLK, I find that by the time I hit this weekend I'm usually burned out from the holidays -- and that's when they haven't been utter disasters such as my 2014 'holiday season'. My holiday meal today, at a major international quick casual chain, proved that so many American corporations truly are rudderless ships that exist only for short term executive (and, sometimes, shareholder) gain. In other words, it was one service failure compounded by another compounded by another to the point where I felt the entire restaurant should likely close and they can start from scratch with new workers and training. But ... that's a tangent you don't need to hear about.

Thankfully, I've seen the discussion has moved off of sugar and toward DVC and Lifestylers. Haven't had time to pop in until now, but have read many of the posts on the subjects.

What comes to mind on the subject of DVC is that if you really want timeshare and you want it in O-Town and you don't want to pay tens of thousands of dollars just to start, then perhaps the way to go is resale on properties like Vistana (Starwood), Orange Lake (Intercontinental/Holiday Inn) or any of the myriad of properties owned/run by reputable companies like Marriott and Hilton.

I don't have a clue what the market is like now (perhaps @ParentsOf4 does?), but as recently as 18 months ago you could buy a week at Vistana (a very nice high end product) for $1 on the resale market. Yes, those annual dues that so many people sorta look at as a small afterthought just weigh down on folks who don't have the money to 'own' timeshare. I have no idea why someone would spend $165 a point PLUS those annual maintenance fees so when they could literally pull a dollar out of their kid's piggy bank and just save up and pay those fees and you have that vacation every year. I know it's not that simple ... but the thing is that it isn't nearly as complicated as folks make it out to be either.

DVC bought from The Mouse has never been a great value. Now, there is absolutely no value in the thing at all unless you wait decades. DVC resale can make sense under certain circumstances, but in most cases they are not nearly as good as simply saving money and not 'investing' in timeshare at all.

Now, complex ... that is the whole 'Lifestyler' deal. BTW, I do hope I (and my huge sch... I mean ego) that y'all recall I was the first Spirit online to coin the Lifestyler term ... much like Walmarted and Inoverherheadmeg etc ... it's BRANDING, baby. It's what I do ...

What exactly is a Lifestyler seems to be a hot topic. Not sure how or why, but it's clearly trending on Spirited theads!

I said earlier to someone close when asked for my definition that ''I know one when I see one'' but that isn't really fair. It's certainly more complex. And in many ways it's easier to explain what doesn't make someone a Lifestyler automatically.

And, no, everyone who is a fan isn't a Lifestyler. Everyone who posts on a Disney fan forum (even with 15,000 posts in seven years like yours truly) isn't a Lifestyler. Everyone who enjoys WDW or Disney, in general, isn't a Lifestyler. Everyone who owns DVC or stays at Disney resorts isn't a Lifestyler. Everyone interested in how TWDC operates from a business standpoint isn't a Lifestyler. Everyone who buys Disney items isn't a Lifestyler.

So, OK Mr. Big Evil Disney-Hating Lives on Fanboi Tears Spirit, what does make one a Lifestyler?

Simplest thing: equating one's self-worth as a member of the human species with the creative output AND financial decisions of the largest entertainment and media company in the world.

What else?

Things like moving to O-Town to be closer to the parks. Visiting them like you would a mall or town park. Spending obscene sums of $$$ when you don't know what real work is and don't come from a top one percent background. Yes, having a blog or Disney site sorta is a guaranteed golden membership card into Lifestyler circles. Never missing anything new, no matter how small or trivial, as soon as it opens. In other words, if you were waiting for the walls to come down for the SDMT (or Diagon Alley) on a daily basis instead of ... you know ... living a life, then you're a Lifestyler. Having a Twitter account where all you do is converse 28 hours a day about Disney (and/or UNI) makes you a Lifestyler. Waking up in the morning and your first thought isn't about your family or friends or work (no, having a Disney blog isn't work, no matter how many hours you devote to it) or what's news in the world, but something like ''The new Disney Springs walkway is open, I better go get pictures before Mr. XYZ gets them first.'' then ... yeah, you're a Lifestyler. If you have the Marvel theme park rights contract downloaded on your computer, yet you didn't know who Thor was in 2009, then you're very likely a Lifestyler. If you feel that having the approval of a Celebration Place cubicle dweller (like Dr. Blondie) means you have a real friend and makes you better than other fans, then you're a Lifestyler. If you plan your life and real activities around Disney events, seasons, openings etc then you're a Lifestyler. If you buy Disney **** on eBay, then you're a ...wait, what's that @Lee ... oh, nevermind ... there are always exceptions.

Why do I feel like Jeff Foxworthy?

I don't when Lifestylers began. You can make a claim that it started with the advent of the Internet, about two decades ago. But I don't really agree with that date. You can say it started with the advent of Disney fans sites online ... especially with the first 'celeb site owners' ... folks like Al Lutz, Jim Hill, etc. I don't think that was really it either.

I think it began about a decade ago. Facebook and Twitter, iPhones and tablets were all tools that helped. Digital photography certainly did. A big difference from discussing Disney on message boards (like these) and any/every one trying to play citizen Disney (or UNI) journalist by snapping a photo (or 765 in a morning) and placing them out in social media. It's all about cliques and very juvenile at its heart. Of course, I often hear that I have followers (I prefer 'minions' myself) and I well know there are groups here that don't like me ... so, we're not very different from the cliques that pop up in the Twitverse. But at least here, you have virtually unlimited space to present a case or debate a point or issue. 140 characters ... to communicate? Really?

Those are some very quick thoughts. I'm interested in reading through some of the posts from the weekend.

minions...

 

[Cesar R M]

I can tell you that I have tried (or friends have) to book me CM rates at WDW for at least 5-6 different trips in the past three years or so. None with success. And, usually, when they looked they could find no CM rates at all, even if they played around with the dates and resort levels. And I don't travel at the busiest times, so clearly Disney would rather have a resort filled to 60% capacity, instead of taking and adding 25% more guests at 50 or 60% off rack rate (where they still make a HUGE profit!)

Just a shell game ...

I think they prefer to ALSO fire CMs so when the resort is filled at less than 60% capacity.
They Do not lose $.

To resume, they prefer to risk losing capacity and money, than actually expanding and running fully.

 

[Cesar R M]

Touche.

Yet, no one, and I'll speak for @ParentsOf4 here would expect Eisner levels of expansion or even spending now.

But it is very fair to look at how Iger hasn't nurtured the product very much or very well. All he has done is manipulate numbers through raising prices on everything year after year.

The last major addition that drove attendance at WDW was Everest, on the heels of Soarin and LMA. All that was Eisner's doing.

In other words, in nine years as the head of TWDC, Bob Iger has done absolutely nothing to make people want to visit WDW ... nothing to grow the business beyond people who would have come no matter what.

but..but.. we got such pretty armbands!!

 

[Cesar R M]

Simple economics dictates more is preferred to less.

Except amongst addicted WDW fans

Well, they are getting "more". Just not on the expected things.
They have to pay more on everything.. even DVC.
They have to plan ad-nausam, to shuffle between reservations, fps..etc.

 

[Cesar R M]

I remember discussing this with you a few months ago. In addition to underpaying its front-line CMs and lower-level managers, Disney has drastically cut its Cast discounts—something that cost the Company nothing and made $$$ where it otherwise wouldn't have had any. Disney would rather let rooms sit empty than offer them to CMs at reasonable rates.

Iger promised Wall Street the parks would have fewer discounts. It looks like the company cut CM discounts so he wouldn't be a liar. CMs have lost most resort availability and DDP offers. Maingate passes are constantly subject to needless blackout dates. Dining reservations without a DDP require specialized times and reservation booking windows. FP+ has made some attractions (Pan, Mine Train, etc) impossible to ride on moderately busy days.

With the benefits stripped away, why work for them?

I actually wonder why not do the inverse.
Instead of blacking out the hotels, let them get filled.. only black out the parks for discounts..
hotels can handle the crowds.. even if the parks dont.

 

[Cesar R M]

I don't know why it is but when someone says guac, i associate it with a slimy gross unappetizing image. Guacamole, however, sounds delicious... very strange thing I discovered about myself tonight.

Aguacate + mole = guacamole

 

[xdan0920]

Alas all the context of posts and likes went out the window since the site allows people to play the games in the various chit-chat threads that are nothing but about playing games with counts and likes. Dilution...

That's true, but largely irrelevant. At least, it's irrelevant to me. I never even look at post or like count. I have a general feel of which posters I'm interested in reading, and who I should simply scroll past. As I'm sure we all do. In fact, I bet lots of people are flying right past this very post. And I have lots of posts, and lots of likes. And I very rarely even browse the chit chat sub forum. It gets weird in there. Anyway, my rambling point is. I don't think post or like count can be diluted, as there is no barrier to posting as much as you like, it's already diluted.

Quality of posts, not quantity.

 

[ParentsOf4]

Yet, no one, and I'll speak for @ParentsOf4 here would expect Eisner levels of expansion or even spending now.

But it is very fair to look at how Iger hasn't nurtured the product very much or very well. All he has done is manipulate numbers through raising prices on everything year after year.

That's lost in the message It's just difficult to get a true one to one as the whole company was very different before the media acquisition charge. One could even argue that Iger the conqueror has a better batting average than Eisner in that category... going for the big, but sure-hits (Pixar, Lucas, Marvel, etc).

This I largely agree with. When we look at the parks post-expansion... they are no where as near as aggressive even within their own footprint as they were under Eisner. I do feel like the business is being managed like a financial portfolio.. where one moves and shifts things purely to move the bottom line vs actually investing to build something of substance. I interpret a greater disconnect between leadership and the front-line product than we've ever had.

Even if the financials screamed they were dumping money into the parks... I'd still be distraught over their approach and lack of human touch. It really does feel like the art of show has left the building. The little bits of good decisions we seem to see here and there... seem lost in a sea of bad blood.

As you both write, no one should expect Iger to invest at Eisner's levels.

Over 21 years, Eisner invested about 10% of domestic Parks & Resorts revenue back into domestic theme park growth initiatives.

The thing is, Iger has invested about 2%.

My opinion is that theme park investment should be roughly 4% to 5%, or less than half of what it was under Eisner. Over Iger's 9 years (so far), the difference adds up to roughly $2.5 billion. In other words, up to this point, Iger probably has undercapitalized his domestic theme parks to the tune of $2.5 billion.

For some perspective, Disney has spent $39.7 billion on stock buybacks during Iger's tenure, $6.5 billion in 2014 alone. We know exactly where WDW profits are being invested, and it's not back into the parks.

Capex is a long-term investment that takes patience to nurture. Stock buybacks are a quick way to pump up stock price.

The reason companies issue stock is to raise capital so they can invest in all the wonderful projects their creative (and well compensated) management team has in mind in order to generate even more revenue and profit.

Stock buybacks do not generate revenue or profit. Over the long-term, stock buybacks are one of the worst ways for a company to invest its money and indicate a wholly unimaginative senior executive management team.

Under Iger, The Walt Disney Company revenue has grown at an anemic 4.8% annual compound rate, including the purchases of Pixar, Marvel, and Lucasfilm. Excluding these 3 properties, organic revenue growth has been pitiful.

Wall Street love Iger because Iger runs the company like Wall Street. Iger needs to start running the company like a CEO.