A Spirited 15 Rounds ...

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
If, for whatever reason, Disney doesn't build a Marvel Land somewhere, they are far, far more foolish then I ever could have imagined. And that's saying something.

Honestly, Marvel Land should have started construction in 2010 or 2011. It is one of the three top franchises in ALL of pop culture, and for the last decade the most consistently successful.

Disney is creatively bankrupt, Like so many other US companies Disney would prefer to get a check for licensing its IP instead of using it themselves.

Disney sees themselves as rentier's and does not want to spend a dime on building stuff themselves.

Ever wonder why the best Disney parks in the world are not run by Disney???
 

TrojanUSC

Well-Known Member
You guys do realise it's possible to go to Florida, stay somewhere like Kissimmee or International Drive at Pointe Orlando, use Ubers etc and pay like a third of what you would staying on Disney, and still have an awesome time?

Because to me if you're moaning about price, yet not exploring these options, you're just moaning and not actually that bothered about paying it.

The Waldorf Astoria on property @ Bonnet Creek is nicer than any Disney Deluxe hotel, service and amenity wise (even the Disney executives from LA would go there to use the spa pre-Four Seasons), and is generally 2/3 of the price of the Disney deluxe hotels.
 

ParentsOf4

Well-Known Member
The short answer is after Frank Wells untimely death.
This is an oversimplification of Disney theme park history. Frank Wells was not the saint people make him out to be, although he did balance some of Eisner's excesses.

Michael Eisner and Frank Wells took over Disney in 1984. WDW immediately saw four years of double-digit price increases, the biggest percent increases in the history of WDW. The value of a WDW vacation dropped considerably even if quality did not.

Eisner had a low opinion of Disney's theme park management. Eisner infamously called Parks & Resorts management "monkeys" around this time, as in "even a monkey could do their job".

Pushed by major Disney shareholder Sid Bass, Eisner began to invest heavily in WDW in the late 1980s, largely creating the resort we know today.

By 1990, Eisner and Wells both started pushing out Parks & Resorts management, who I call the Old Guard. These were folks who had cut their teeth under Walt and Roy Disney, who truly believed in providing their Guests with the "value" mentioned in earlier annual reports.

By the time of Wells' premature death in 1994, the Old Guard (at least at the top levels) had been replaced by those "sharp-pencil guys" Walt warned about decades before. Or at least replaced by managers who were willing to sell their souls in order to keep their jobs.

Eisner and Wells were both a blessing and a curse to WDW. They grew the resort tremendously but also were both to blame for starting the trend of ever increasing prices coupled with lower quality, a trend that continues today.
 
Last edited:

asianway

Well-Known Member
This might just be pulling an idea out of thin air, but could the Marvel issue be with rights sold to Disney vs original creators (Stan Lee, etc) not wanting this stuff in theme parks more than it already is in Universal? Do the creators retain any rights over images or 'worlds' they created pre Disney ownership?
Hasn't Stan Lee been suing them on and off for years for a cut? This is now a new medium he could lay claim to
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
You guys do realise it's possible to go to Florida, stay somewhere like Kissimmee or International Drive at Pointe Orlando, use Ubers etc and pay like a third of what you would staying on Disney, and still have an awesome time?

Because to me if you're moaning about price, yet not exploring these options, you're just moaning and not actually that bothered about paying it.

Yep.

I stay at a hotel on Hotel Plaza Blvd. and never pay over 80 a night for a room and the hotel is nice, rooms are updated ...
 

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
This is an oversimplification of Disney theme park history. Frank Wells was not the saint people make him out to be, although he did balance some of Eisner's excesses.

Michael Eisner and Frank Wells took over Disney in 1984. WDW immediately saw four years of double-digit price increases. The value of a WDW vacation dropped considerably even if quality did not.

Eisner had a low opinion of Disney's theme park management. Eisner infamously called Parks & Resorts management "monkeys" around this time, as in "even a monkey could do their job".

Pushed by major Disney shareholder Sid Bass, Eisner began to invest heavily in WDW in the late 1980s, largely creating the resort we know today.

By 1990, Eisner and Wells both started pushing out Parks & Resorts management, who I call the Old Guard. These were folks who had cut their teeth under Walt and Roy Disney, who truly believed in providing their Guests with the "value" mentioned in earlier annual reports.

By the time of Wells' premature death in 1994, the Old Guard (at least at the top levels) had been replaced by those "sharp-pencil guys" Walt warned about decades before. Or at least replaced by managers who were willing to sell their souls in order to keep their jobs.

Eisner and Wells were both a blessing and a curse to WDW. They grew the resort tremendously but also were both to blame for starting the trend of increasing prices coupled with lower quality, a trend that continues today.

You are absolutely correct on all points here my post was in response to a poster looking for the cliff notes version of when the bad management at Disney parks began.
 

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
Hasn't Stan Lee been suing them on and off for years for a cut? This is now a new medium he could lay claim to
Stan Lee and other creators retain absolutely no claims on the characters they created for Marvel.

Also, if you know his history, Stan Lee would be the last man in the world to try and prevent Marvel superheroes from showing up in a theme park... or anywhere else.
 

the.dreamfinder

Well-Known Member
Stan Lee and other creators retain absolutely no claims on the characters they created for Marvel.

Also, if you know his history, Stan Lee would be the last man in the world to try and prevent Marvel superheroes from showing up in a theme park... or anywhere else.
There's a company called Stan Lee Media that has been trying, through litigation, to get the rights to the characters for years
 

ParentsOf4

Well-Known Member
Those of us who find value and enjoyment out of today's WDW aren't allowed to have opinions because we're "idiot pixie dust snorters"
Unfortunately, there is some truth in this. Some of us are unkind in our posts.

However, some of us are simply "remember when" people. As in, remember when a 3-day park hopper ticket cost $35, today's equivalent of $86.

At $86 for a 3-day ticket, I hope you can see why some of us struggle with using the word "value" when discussing today's WDW. ;)
 

Nemo14

Well-Known Member
Unfortunately, there is some truth in this. Some of us are unkind in our posts.

However, some of us are simply "remember when" people. As in, remember when a 3-day park hopper ticket cost $35, today's equivalent of $86.

At $86 for a 3-day ticket, I hope you can see why some of us struggle with using the word "value" when discussing today's WDW. ;)

It's not just the obscene price increases though, it's the whole experience. That sense of awe that we felt at EPCOT , the meticulous upkeep at Magic Kingdom, and even the "Old Hollywood" feel of MGM Studios made every trip an awesome family vacation for us. I just don't feel that anymore, and I feel bad for those who never saw those glory days.
 

Nubs70

Well-Known Member
20170812_132428.jpg
Unfortunately, there is some truth in this. Some of us are unkind in our posts.

However, some of us are simply "remember when" people. As in, remember when a 3-day park hopper ticket cost $35, today's equivalent of $86.

At $86 for a 3-day ticket, I hope you can see why some of us struggle with using the word "value" when discussing today's WDW. ;)
Found this when moving this weekend
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
I mean ... prices go up. I agree they've gone up WAY too much but we shouldn't expect the pricing to be what it was three decades ago. I'd love to book a moderate resort for what I paid for one ten years ago, but is that realistic? Now as for what you PERSONALLY think it's "worth" ... I've made mentions in the past of them taking things away and still raising prices. Do they understand they don't HAVE to raise prices every year? But yet people still pay them. There has to be a tipping point somewhere.
 

the.dreamfinder

Well-Known Member
Been meaning to post this. Interview with the CEO of the Four Seasons from Monocle. Compare with how Disney views and treats its guests.
https://monocle.com/magazine/the-escapist/2017/staying-power/
Clean lines
Four Seasons’ president and CEO Allen Smith knows what keeps guests coming back time after time to the brand’s storied hotels: a fine-tuned and deeply knowledgeable service alongside a refined product. We met him in Toronto.

Four Seasons is known the world over for its top-notch hotels. The company traces its origins to Toronto in 1961, where it was founded as a motor-hotel for business travellers. Since 2013 its president and CEO has been Allen Smith, an affable 60-year-old American who was formerly in charge of one of the world’s largest property-investment firms. He is refreshingly frank about the direction he thinks Four Seasons should take: do less but do it better.

Despite his willingness to chart a new course for the hotel brand, Smith says that a constant in Four Seasons’ ethos is the understanding that service is its strongest asset. That remains the case whether the location is a redesigned former sailing club in Miami or one of the company’s longstanding properties in cities including Damascus, Vancouver and Kyoto. We met Smith at Four Seasons’ testing laboratory in Toronto to find out more about the brand, its imminent expansion into Asia and how it is now branching out into residential developments.

Monocle: Are there things that you have decided Four Seasons should not do?
Allen Smith:
We don’t chase trends. We are a brand that stands for timelessness in what we do. Since I joined, we have opened 22 new hotels but we have also exited seven. That speaks to our willingness to say there are certain situations where, for a variety of reasons, it’s time for us to move on. It’s a strong statement of how important product quality is to the brand. Our growth needs to be measured. You have to be willing to wait for the right opportunity.

M: When you took over, you mentioned wanting to do less but better. What did you mean?
AS
: Four Seasons is an extraordinary brand – and it was before I arrived. When I talk about quality over quantity, I’m making it clear that Four Seasons is not in the commodity business. Every single one of our hotels is unique and every single one is custom-built in its character. If you’re going to pursue that strategy, you can never compromise on the quality of the physical product or the service you provide. If we wanted to simply drive unit growth, we could make lots of compromises to accumulate hotels. But that’s not the business we’re in.

M: But you are diversifying. How does that work?
AS
: Four Seasons is known as a hotel and resort company. In reality it’s about hotels, resorts and residences. If we look at our new projects, 80 per cent are mixed use, consisting of both hotel and residential components. In many cases the hotel would not get built but for the residential element. But to sell those residential units you need the hotel to provide the services. That combination defines the approach we take now; it has allowed us to go into projects we wouldn’t have otherwise done, such as Twenty Grosvenor Square in London. Another extension of the brand is in the Four Seasons Jet: the concept is an end-to-end travel experience where everything you can think of has been thought of, from the moment you leave your house to the moment you return. That experience resonates with people.

M: How has technology changed the face of the hospitality industry?
AS
: You have technology-based disrupters: companies that have scale and financial resources we can’t match. We’re relatively small in comparison. To think we can go head to head with Priceline or Expedia or Airbnb in the online world – we can’t win that game. I think of the next tier – Marriott, Accor, arguably Hilton – as consolidators. They are focused on every hotel segment, from economy to luxury. That allows them to face off against online competitors. And then you get to the luxury space, we represent one of the largest of that ilk. We have this unique pedigree and history, we have a company based on a principle called the Golden Rule [treating others as you’d hope to be treated yourself]. It isn’t a slick corporate slogan, it is something that resonates deeply with our employees. One of the things I never lose sight of is that this is the ultimate people business – and the people at Four Seasons have a passion for service that is unlike anything I’ve ever seen.

M: What sets Four Seasons’ approach apart?
AS
: I routinely get letters from our guests sharing experiences they’ve had with us – often joyous but in other cases tragic. A woman was travelling with her husband when he passed away unexpectedly at our hotel; she wrote me a five-page letter about what our team did to support her. As she put it, through their care and compassion they “allowed me to keep breathing”. It’s extraordinary. What’s so compelling is that these are situations for which there is no playbook, there’s no training manual. We don’t always get it right – we’ll be the first to admit that – and that was one of the brilliant things about Izzy [Isadore Sharp, 85-year-old founder and chairman of Four Seasons]. He realised that when you make a mistake, correcting it is often one of the best ways to win back your customers. The genuine emotional connection our employees seek to make with people is really extraordinary.

M: How are your guests’ expectations of luxury travel changing?
AS
: Innovation has become much harder. There was a time when you could innovate by introducing things in the guest room, such as complimentary bath amenities. We have gone well past that. Innovation today is around guest experience. Guests are looking for a personal connection; they’re looking for a set of authentic experiences. And those qualities can only be delivered effectively by people who have a deep understanding of what we are trying to accomplish, a passion for service and a level of emotional intelligence that allows them to exercise judgment in the moment. For that reason it’s hard to do well all over the world and that’s why we stand out.

Key facts
Founded: By Isadore “Izzy” Sharp. The first Four Seasons hotel opened on Jarvis Street in Toronto in 1961.
Current portfolio: 105 resort and residences in 43 countries.
Annual revenue: €3.8bn.
Employees: 45,000 worldwide.
 
Last edited:

FigmentForver96

Well-Known Member
I mean ... prices go up. I agree they've gone up WAY too much but we shouldn't expect the pricing to be what it was three decades ago. I'd love to book a moderate resort for what I paid for one ten years ago, but is that realistic? Now as for what you PERSONALLY think it's "worth" ... I've made mentions in the past of them taking things away and still raising prices. Do they understand they don't HAVE to raise prices every year? But yet people still pay them. There has to be a tipping point somewhere.
I definitely don't know anyone would realistically expect to pay the same prices they did ten years ago. Inflation happens, prices have to go up. Disney just does it way beyond inflation.

(I would hope nobody would think a 3-day hopper should cost 35)
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
I definitely don't know anyone would realistically expect to pay the same prices they did ten years ago. Inflation happens, prices have to go up. Disney just does it way beyond inflation.

(I would hope nobody would think a 3-day hopper should cost 35)

But that's how people are talking, to some degree. I've said they've raised the prices too high but it's yet to be a tipping point for most. Maybe I'm taking it wrong and they're suggesting they got more value when prices were less and I can understand that but for better or worse, things change. Do I love a lot of decisions they've made? Do I want more entertainment, themed napkins? More "little things"? Yeah I do, it's not like they really can't afford all of that. And as they raise prices the parks stagnated for a decade and a half so I understand that as well.
 

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
Here's what I will say to that. You are always looking for a negative spin so perhaps when you do hear a complaint you amplify that into "everyone" hates Disney World. Sometimes you hear what you want to hear. Don't take it too personally, but I find it hard to take you seriously with some of the extreme opinions you have.

I don't doubt that some people will come back with a negative opinion. That's always been the case. I remember my parent's friends telling them not to waste their money on a trip to WDW when I was a kid in the 80s. I wanted to kill them...luckily my parents didn't listen. Like I said before, I don't know anyone who has said they thought WDW was a bargain or a great deal. Almost everyone complains about the price...as they hand over their Visa or MC. Most of the people I know had positive experiences overall. A lot of people figure as long as the kids have a blast it's a worthwhile trip and Disney does a great job with photo opportunities and souvenirs that kids love.

Most of the normals have no way of knowing that rides are closed or effects are broken. They just go and have a good time and complain about the cost later;). The one area I have heard more consistent complaints on is FP+ booking. Mostly just people regretting not booking their FP earlier even when in a lot of cases they were advised they should have.
I don't think everyone looks at broken effects the way that they should. Your average guest doesn't know that the Yeti moves and the thought process is that nothing is lost on those guests because they don't know what they're missing. That's not true at all. A ride can always be better received, and a functional Yeti would fuel that.

Say for example Guest A has experienced Expedition Everest with a functional Yeti and they return and it doesn't work. That guest is 85% satisfied in the ride because they know something wasn't working.

Guest B experiences Expedition Everest without knowledge of the Yeti working. That guest is 90% satisfied in the ride because it's a solid ride and they don't know that they're missing anything.

Then both guests go back on the ride and the Yeti is working again and they're both more satisfied than their 85 and 90% rides. Perhaps they're both all the way up to 100% satisfied. Guest B, didn't know that the ride could be better, but when it is better they're more satisfied.
 
Last edited:

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom