Raineman
Well-Known Member
I am well aware of the "shareholder value" and "underutilized space" mindset, as it has been repeated ad nauseam in this thread, but nothing at WDW "has to go". And it's always interesting to me when people sound like they work in Disney's financial department when they talk about why an attraction/area had to go, or even why they are happy that a replacement is happening. For them, it's never about "I didn't really care for the old attraction, but the new one looks great", which is an argument/opinion that I can at least respect. The focus and agenda with Disney theme parks has always included financial considerations-it's always been a business-but there was a time when alot of other creative factors were just as important. Now, money is the overwhelmingly most important factor, and creativity/theming/originality take a backseat to it.TSI wasn't creating shareholder value and had to go, sorry.
