A Spirited Perfect Ten

LuvtheGoof

DVC Guru
Premium Member
I think it all comes down to preference: many people, when paying that much for a meal, want a fine dining, elegant experience. Others don't. I don't think you can necessarily criticize either group.

Personally, if paying that much, I want a date night, refined experienced with nary a child in sight. I realize not everyone is me, though.
And at a regular restaurant that isn't sitting in the middle of the WDW resort, that would probably fly. At Disney Springs, not so much. My wife and I are both ready to eat there, and couldn't care less if people are a bit more casual there. It is Disney after all, and you will have kids there. It will really depend on how well the parents have taught their children to eat in a finer restaurant that will make the difference.
 

wdwmagic

Administrator
Moderator
Premium Member
My list of 'is it better than...?' restaurants would be:

Yachtsman Steakhouse
Jiko
Artist Point (underrated)
Flying Fish Cafe
V&As (price point for some dishes is close enough to make the comparison apt)

I can't speak to the food as I have not tried it, but just in seeing photos, it cannot touch a single one of those restaurants in terms of ambiance.
Ambiance is subjective. A lot of guests are going to prefer the boathouse ambiance to those you listed. It is great to have another option.
 

Steel City Magic

Well-Known Member
Disneyland 60 preview during the fireworks Matterhorn gets a new name

#Disneyland60 will feature songs from Tangled and Frozen. **** Van **** will appear. Matterhorn will turn into Mt. Wannahookaloogie- from Twitter
First time I've seen dick van in a post here. After 30 seconds of trying to figure out what the phrase was, it made me laugh so hard, can't breathe.
 

DougK

Well-Known Member
I think it all comes down to preference: many people, when paying that much for a meal, want a fine dining, elegant experience. Others don't. I don't think you can necessarily criticize either group.

Personally, if paying that much, I want a date night, refined experienced with nary a child in sight. I realize not everyone is me, though.

I often agree with you Tom but in the case of restaurants I will happily take the fine dining food without the dressing up part. When I vacation in Orlando I do not even like to bring along "dress-up clothes". Neither does my wife. That is why we have only been to Victoria and Albert's one time. We brought those clothes along on that trip just so we could do V&A. And by the way I am not suggesting V&A should go casual I just think there is room for some restaurants with GREAT food and a casual atmosphere. Although I would still draw the line at offensive wording on t-shirts and the like. After all, children may be present.
 

chiefs11

Well-Known Member
And at a regular restaurant that isn't sitting in the middle of the WDW resort, that would probably fly. At Disney Springs, not so much. My wife and I are both ready to eat there, and couldn't care less if people are a bit more casual there. It is Disney after all, and you will have kids there. It will really depend on how well the parents have taught their children to eat in a finer restaurant that will make the difference.
We are planning to hit it in May when we're down, can't wait to try it. I'm fine with the casual atmosphere they're going for, even with 'upscale' dining. Also, the lack of Dining Plan might cut down on some of families with kids eating there.
 

PhotoDave219

Well-Known Member
I think it all comes down to preference: many people, when paying that much for a meal, want a fine dining, elegant experience. Others don't. I don't think you can necessarily criticize either group.

Personally, if paying that much, I want a date night, refined experienced with nary a child in sight. I realize not everyone is me, though.

We found something we agree on!

Seriously tho, you should try the Chef's Domain at Citricos sometime.
 

MichWolv

Born Modest. Wore Off.
Premium Member
I think WDW pushed pretty hard to ensure Gibson did NOT enforce a dress code,
You are wrong. Gibson's barely has a dress code at their fancy steakhouses. To wit, the following is from the website of the downtown Chicago location.

Dress code: Gibsons does not have a formal dress code except that men are not permitted to wear sleeveless shirts. Some of our customers will be in suits others will wear jeans. Most men will have coats. We ask only that you are comfortable and enjoy your time with Gibsons.
 

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
Citricos
Shula's(not a fan, but it's comparable)
Brown Derby (again, not a fan)
Cali Grill

Just a few in WDW. Comparable price wise, though I suspect The Boathouse will outstrip them all in quality.



Old Navy all the way.

I was hoping for off property other than Shula's done all the others hoping for something new, Perhaps I WILL check out 'The Boathouse' after all
 

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
You are wrong. Gibson's barely has a dress code at their fancy steakhouses. To wit, the following is from the website of the downtown Chicago location.

Dress code: Gibsons does not have a formal dress code except that men are not permitted to wear sleeveless shirts. Some of our customers will be in suits others will wear jeans. Most men will have coats. We ask only that you are comfortable and enjoy your time with Gibsons.

In short wear anything clean except a 'Wife Beater' shirt, I still don't get the american fascination with comfort.
 

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
The atmosphere at V&A and the Boathouse are very different. Boathouse has something like a third of it's seats outside and a rather large bar area that's pretty casual as well. I wouldn't have a problem if they had a business casual dress code restricting things like tank tops and flip flops but I think it would be a stretch to ask a bunch of people sitting on an outdoor patio to wear a coat or tie in Florida (especially in the summer). A nice pair of shorts and a golf shirt would be perfectly appropriate IMHO.

I think it's very possible to have a "fine dining" menu in a more casual atmosphere. I've seen it work many places, especially in tourist areas and beach towns.

As have I - I do a LOT of work in Silicon Valley so I understand that half the folks I work with dont even OWN a sport coat., But casual to too many people means flip flops, belly shirts unisex unfortunately and half moons peering out of shorts (top bottom or both), Not to mention the screaming out of control kids.
 

MichWolv

Born Modest. Wore Off.
Premium Member
I still don't get the american fascination with comfort.
So you agree with Fernando Lamas: It is better to look good than to feel good.

remember-fernando-lamas-snl-demotivational-posters-1294691278.jpg
 

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
A place where a steak is north of 100 bucks is fine dining whatever Disney chooses to call it, It probably IS good but I have certain expectations at price points like that one of those is a dress code. Even while at WDW I have a sport coat on hand.
Hooters has Dom Perignon on the menu, it doesn't make it a fine dining establishment, although I would argue that it is a perfectly fine dining establishment.
 

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
It's all in the title of the article:

Disney Stock Rises Ahead of Potential Record Setting Summer Blockbuster Season​

Wise investors know that when everyone is talking about how great a stock is, then it's time for a "correction".

After a tremendous run-up in stock price, everyone is talking as if DIS has no place to go but up. The reality is that DIS is through the roof with sky-high expectations built into the price. Anything less than home runs by all divisions (and another $6.5 billion in stock buybacks ;)) will lead to a correction.

DIS is due for a fall in the next 1-2 years. Not because the company did something wrong but because, as it always does, Wall Street can't control its "irrational exuberance".

Frankly, Disney's stock price is representative of why there will be another stock market crash sooner rather than later. :(

Even with last year's success of Guardians of the Galaxy, Frozen, The Winter's Solider, and Maleficent, Studio Entertainment generated only 12% of operating income. That was double the year before. However, you'd never know that by reading this article, which seems to be absolutely giddy that this year's films will lead to explosive growth in 2015. What about the other 88% of the company?

Yes, a successful movie has consumer tie-ins but, as Disney specifies, "Studio Entertainment segment revenues and operating income include an allocation of Consumer Products revenues, which is meant to reflect royalties on sales of merchandise based on certain film properties." In other words, much of the bump from tie-ins is already lumped into studio revenue and profits.

Again, what about the other 88% of the company?

Disney's challenge is that 2014 was an exceptionally successful year, and CEO Bob Iger exercised the stock options to prove it. :D

In order to justify the current stock price, Disney has to pile success on top of success. Blockbusters are already built into the price. Having to compete with last year's Frozen, Studio Entertainment revenue declined 2% for the first fiscal quarter of 2015, and that's taking into account home rentals and sales for Guardians of the Galaxy and Frozen. Revenue from theatrical distribution dropped 46%. Big Hero 6 is not going to have the same strong home rentals that Disney's earlier films did.

The run-up in stock price is not Disney's doing. With the exception of the ridiculous amounts being spent on stock buybacks, Disney's management is operating the company properly.

Wall Street is the one that's running up the stock price.
Interesting thoughts. Personally I was looking to buy back some stock before Age of Ultron came out and ride it until at least after Star Wars debuts.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom