News Disney CEO Bob Chapek reiterates his belief that park reservations are now an essential part of Disney's theme parks business

[CaptainAmerica]

But they do make changes they expect customers will TOLERATE instead of love. They don't make guests miserable on purpose, but they do want to find the line.

Of course they do. Every provider of every good and every service does this. Apple could make an iPhone with a battery that lasts 20 years, is surrounded by flawless scratch-proof crystal, and runs 4K resolution at 60 fps. People would love it. And it would cost $3,000.

McDonald's could staff their kitchen and drive-thru so that you never wait longer than 45 seconds. But they know that their guests are satisfied waiting 120 seconds, on average, so that's their target.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

But they do make changes they expect customers will TOLERATE instead of love. They don't make guests miserable on purpose, but they do want to find the line.

Right amount of miserable and right amount of happy are essentially the same thing.

Either way they are doing the bare minimum to keep people coming back, but not any more than absolutely required.

 

[Ayla]

Sure. Ironically both could be helped immensely but doing the beyond BTMRR expansion and removing/moving IASW and using that space to connect to this north of the RoA expansion- not only would that be a good link to the proposed Villain land but it would also allow for access to space for more Fantasyland expansion

Where could they move IASW to?

 

[flynnibus]

Of course they do. Every provider of every good and every service does this. Apple could make an iPhone with a battery that lasts 20 years, is surrounded by flawless scratch-proof crystal, and runs 4K resolution at 60 fps. People would love it. And it would cost $3,000.

No - the idea of operating at the minimum someone will tolerate before being upset is not the same thing as managing product design tradeoffs. Just stop.

McDonald's could staff their kitchen and drive-thru so that you never wait longer than 45 seconds. But they know that their guests are satisfied waiting 120 seconds, on average, so that's their target.

Again, picking an operating point below somewhere 'ultimately achievable' is not the same thing as trying to find the bottom people will tolerate before being miserable and picking that as your operating point. Especially for a company that was supposed to be a SERVICE LEADER.

And to cut off the strawman, no I'm not saying operate at the max capacity possible at all times - I'm saying Disney seems more than happy to test and find that lower bound... sacrificing customer sat rather than finding the intersection of peak customer sat and operating efficiency (to have the best product). Instead they seem happy to instead find the peak of efficiency before customer sat goes off the cliff.

 

[flynnibus]

Right amount of miserable and right amount of happy are essentially the same thing.

No. You are balancing costs and customer sat... you find the balance point that emphasizes what you want to optimize for and protect.
Just like you can find out exactly how far your car can go before totally running out of gas... that doesn't mean you optimize to be right on that edge all the time.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Where could they move IASW to?

They’ve kinda already walled themselves in. If they had rebuilt small world up against the train tracks and then built all of new fantasyland against the tracks then if they had shortened the rivers of America the new path could line up nicely.

They could in theory move small world straight back and still have room for an e-ticket or something behind be our guest etc.

Lots of ifs if you go into the blue sky

 

[CaptainAmerica]

No - the idea of operating at the minimum someone will tolerate before being upset is not the same thing as managing product design tradeoffs. Just stop.

Again, picking an operating point below somewhere 'ultimately achievable' is not the same thing as trying to find the bottom people will tolerate before being miserable and picking that as your operating point. Especially for a company that was supposed to be a SERVICE LEADER.

THEY DON'T DO THAT! It's just horse .

Disney does not "try to find the bottom people will tolerate before being miserable." It's a false premise. I'm not defending it, I'm saying it's crap and isn't what happens. They test the bottom of where guests will leave happy and satisfied, not the bottom of where they'll be just-barely-not-miserable.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

Where could they move IASW to?

The better option would be a path between Haunted Mansion and ROA, move haunted queue to the west side of the building and there’d be enough room for a path around ROA.

The bigger problem would be trying to add more bodies to the Fantasyland paths that are already gridlocked many times of the year.

 

[flynnibus]

They test the bottom of where guests will leave happy and satisfied, not the bottom of where they'll be just-barely-not-miserable.

Well then by evidence of so many... they aren't succeeding at that now are they?

Because 'I'm not ready to quit.. yet' -- is pretty much the theme these days.

 

[flynnibus]

Besides... remember when service meant to be 'wow'd' -- Not just 'not ready to put up a fight yet'

?

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Well then by evidence of so many... they aren't succeeding at that now are they?

Because 'I'm not ready to quit.. yet' -- is pretty much the theme these days.

Besides... remember when service meant to be 'wow'd' -- Not just 'not ready to put up a fight yet'

?

This board is not a representative sample of guests, nor are COVID and COVID-recovery representative time periods.

The labor shortage is real. Supply chain issues are real. Inflation is real. "Revenge travel" was real. The looming recession is real.

I'm not saying that Chapek will be a lavish spender once normal times get here again. All I'm saying is we haven't actually seen him at the helm during normal times to say one way or the other.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

No. You are balancing costs and customer sat... you find the balance point that emphasizes what you want to optimize for and protect.
Just like you can find out exactly how far your car can go before totally running out of gas... that doesn't mean you optimize to be right on that edge all the time.

That’s exactly what Disney is doing though, finding the exact minimum it requires to keep people coming back.

The people arguing they are trying to find the line of how miserable they can make people before they stop coming and the people saying they are trying to find the line of least happy they can make people before they stop coming are saying the same thing.

Disney used to exceed expectations, they are now trying to find exactly how little they can do to barely meet them.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Disney used to exceed expectations, they are now trying to find exactly how little they can do to barely meet them.

Exactly!!! Guests still enjoy night parades, but WDW learned that they can get by without them. It causes terrible overcrowding after fireworks but “people still buy tickets”

 

[Chi84]

Well then by evidence of so many... they aren't succeeding at that now are they?

Because 'I'm not ready to quit.. yet' -- is pretty much the theme these days.

It’s the theme here. From my experience, it’s not the theme at WDW.

 

[UNCgolf]

We just returned from a week at WDW and, in my opinion (no one else needs to agree), there are hordes of people who don't find the product nearly as diminished as one would think after reading these threads. They show up and spend what it costs because they still find it's worthwhile for their family.

To be fair, if you didn't attend the parks 25 years ago, you'd have no frame of reference for it to be a significantly diminished experience since then.

It can still be good for new (or relatively new) guests without being as good as it once was. Which is why Disney doesn't really need to care about people comparing it to what it was in the 1990s; they only need current guests to find it enjoyable enough to want to return.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

To be fair, if you didn't attend the parks 25 years ago, you'd have no frame of reference for it to be a significantly diminished experience since then.

It can still be good for new (or relatively new) guests without being as good as it once was. Which is why Disney doesn't really need to care about people comparing it to what it was in the 1990s; they only need current guests to find it enjoyable enough to want to return.

who is bringing the new guests (kids)? Parents who visited when they were a kid. Parents who remember things like night parades, free-roaming characters, etc.

 

[UNCgolf]

who is bringing the new guests (kids)? Parents who visited when they were a kid. Parents who remember things like night parades, free-roaming characters, etc.

Not necessarily. I'm sure there are plenty of parents bringing kids who never attended the parks themselves, or only did it once. And if they did attend as kids, they weren't really aware of what kind of planning (or lack of planning) went into it anyways.

Plus, if their kids have a great time, I don't know that it really matters if it seems diminished to the parents.

 

[Jrb1979]

who is bringing the new guests (kids)? Parents who visited when they were a kid. Parents who remember things like night parades, free-roaming characters, etc.

That's part of it. I do think a lot of it has to do with your average guest not caring or knowing about the behind the scenes stuff. A lot care more about the family time over any of that stuff. IMO most don't know anything else.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

To be fair, if you didn't attend the parks 25 years ago, you'd have no frame of reference for it to be a significantly diminished experience since then.

I don't care how old you are, your perception now and your perception 25 years ago are not the same thing. The differences in the way I view Disney at 33 and the way I viewed Disney at 8 are not just differences with Disney, they're also differences with me.

Yeah, things were a lot more magical when we all believed in magic.

who is bringing the new guests (kids)? Parents who visited when they were a kid. Parents who remember things like night parades, free-roaming characters, etc.

Free-roaming characters were a nightmare. Guests could never guarantee that they'd see their favorites, and when a favorite character did appear, it was an instant, uncontrolled mob scene.

I know this is shocking to the Very Online Disney community, but kids would rather have a dedicated place to meet Mickey Mouse and Elsa than accidentally run into Mr. Smee or the White Rabbit.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

To be fair, if you didn't attend the parks 25 years ago, you'd have no frame of reference for it to be a significantly diminished experience since then.

It can still be good for new (or relatively new) guests without being as good as it once was. Which is why Disney doesn't really need to care about people comparing it to what it was in the 1990s; they only need current guests to find it enjoyable enough to want to return.

The irony in this statement is when I started going to the parks a decade ago, and shortly thereafter joined the boards, I was a huge defender of the parks and heard the exact same thing.

Maybe Disney is just one of those places that is amazing when you are new to it and the problems become more and more apparent as the newness wears off.

When it was “best” and whether or not the “magic” has disappeared depends on our perception of the parks more than the actual parks.

(How depressing to realize I’ve gone from one of the sites new pixiedusters to one of the sites old grumpy guys).