A Spirited Perfect Ten

JediMasterMatt

JediMasterMatt

Well-Known Member
WDW1974 said:
Yes, if you're looking at simply the last few quarters. I'd like a longer term view before I proclaim WDW the ''juggernaut'' it was in the 80s and 90s. We both also know, and you've even posted using the numbers, that taking NGE costs out of the equation has contributed to the rosy financials (not that WDW hasn't performed well of late, it has).

I just don't know how you leap to the conclusion that WDW is getting a Diagon Boost. It's a nice theory to toss out. And it likely has some validity. But not to the extent you're implying without the data needed to back it up (and, in this case, that data doesn't exist).

Plenty of WDW visitors are still booking a week at 'Da World' in a CBR Pirate room with DDP included and transport by DME. They aren't going to UNI at all because they aren't leaving the bubble.

It's also reasonable to say that many folks drawn to O-Town specifically for Diagon Alley may not have visited WDW at all, isn't it? Or that they went to the MK for a day and EPCOT for another? How do we know? It isn't compiled in ANY of Disney or UNI's data.

There's just no solid way of knowing. Look at all the conventioneers that come to the OCCC for huge events and never set foot in ANY Disney/UNI park unless there's a private event for them at one or both of the resorts.

On a tangent from the above, but something I've wondered for a long time (and you may or may not be able to answer, but you're probably the best bet here) is how does Disney compile Per Room Guest Spend and how does it include DVC owners and, if so, how are they calculated into the equation?



I certainly believe that was true, but that is coming from an incredibly Disney-centric viewpoint. I've also never seen one Disney or UNI document to that effect. In 2010, WDW was still struggling due to the economic collapse and offering massive discounting. How do you know that UNI didn't get people in with Potter in 2010 and many of those folks decided ''this is so much better than the same old MAGIC at Disney'' or ''my kids enjoy these experiences so much more than another ride on Pirates or RnRc'' and have changed their O-Town vacation habits greatly? It seems very naive to think that people simply always visited WDW, suddenly discovered UNI post-Potter and now give it two days of what is still a WDW-based vacation.

I could argue (I won't, but I could) the point that when WDW decided to make the MK (the quintessential castle park that most people will always view as 'Disney World') a pricier one day experience, they were telegraphing to the industry that their other O-Town gates were struggling and that many people, indeed, were buying one-day tickets and not 9-day WDW vacations with all the trimmings.

Sure, the more people who visit O-Town, the better it is for Disney ... and UNI ... and SW ... and Darden ... and IHOP ... and Starbucks ... and the mom and pop Florida gift shops along 192 and I-Drive. But I'm not sure where your certainty that UNI visitors are largely WDW visitors who are stopping by for 1-2 days at most comes from. ... And I do think the water park will help UNI, just as Disney and SW's water parks have done very well for them.



I don't disagree with the last six months being good for Disney (or UNI). I'm just not at all convinced of who is making up that crowd (at either resort). That goes into a whole other topic that can be discussed and debated ad nauseum (I think it is a very different mix.)

I just don't see how sending Disney Guests to UNI is ever a good thing. For every Guest who spends half a day there, complains and rants on forums like this after they rushed back to the Pixie Dust about the TMs, the scary coasters, the overrated Potter etc., how many decide they are getting a far better product over there and really don't wish to vacation at WDW in the fashion they have in the past?

Is Disney really that confident in its O-Town product, that it will gladly send its Guests over to sample the wonders that UNI has been creating?

Sorry, but I have sincere doubts on that one.
Click to expand...
WDW1974 said:
Excellent post and I agree with most of it, but I'd say there are far more groups:

1.) One and dones (right of passage/saved up for six years types);
2.) First-timers (may wind up as part of No. 1 or not);
3.) Relatively newbies (people who have been visiting largely since Y2K or slightly before ... they don't know a WDW that's all that different from this one);
4.) Locals/APers (visit regularly and may or may not have issues with the way the parks look or are run);
5.) Lifestylers/BRAND advocates (people who moved to O-Town to leech off the Mouse, many who have serious mental health issues, many who are just looking for freebies that seem available to anyone with a social media footprint);
6.) DVCers ( again, could be older Guests or people who visited for the first time in 2007 and bought right in. Some are happy with the place, others wonder how this WDW isn't a Bizarro version of the WDW they fell in love with);
7.) Internationals (who can fit into -- and do -- almost every category above);
8.) Long-timers/chronics (people like myself who have been coming since there wasn't a traffic light on property, since there was only one park in a forest of green that seemed to go on forever ... people who were awed by the sheer audacity of building EPCOT Center in the swamps in the early 80s when O-Town was much more a town than a city, let alone an urban sprawl zone. People who are incredibly unhappy with the way the resort has been run dating back to the end of the last century. People who, frankly, know better and realize that between rubes, Social Media whores and Disney PR, it will be tough to ever even approach the standards and quality that existed for WDW's first quarter century).

And the thing is, those groups all have sub-groups too. From CPers who move to the area to folks who love UNI and SW to folks who would never set foot in any of them to retirees etc.)

It's not simple. But I can tell you which group management has the most disdain for, and that speaks incredibly poorly of them not simply as custodians of the Disney Legacy, but also as simple business people.
Click to expand...

I think it's a combination of Disney is confident enough in its self to not care about the quality of product they've been serving up in Orlando more than leeching off the competition to offset the lack of quality.

Their confidence is that the legacy they built is enough for today and into tomorrow.

I personally don't like it and don't think it's the best approach; but, it's hard to argue that WDW is still a cash cow for the Company.

Until the day comes where people can see the resort for what it currently is and not what it once was... I hold little hope for meaningful change.
 
Goofyernmost

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
Nubs70 said:
Please don't misunderstand, I am not implying a Waltism.

I am inferring to any provider of a good or service. If the organization's fall back is Buyer Beware, that organization is in trouble. Caveat Emptor belongs to used car salesmen and Wild Steve's Stereo.
Click to expand...
That used to be true, however, it isn't the world we live in anymore. I'm also not suggesting and huge morally awful thing either, just that everyone needs to be watchful and question things, no matter what side of the fence one is on.

I don't think that you were directly implying Waltism either, but, it is a standard theme that so many people feel that it should be run like it was back then. (Walt had his share of questionable actions as well though.) The world is tougher, the people in it are more inclined to be unreasonable and demanding, on both sides and there is always a reason to question and be aware of our surroundings. Simple doctrine for a reduced stress life.
 
flynnibus

flynnibus

Premium Member
CaptainAmerica said:
My initial objection was simply that I don't believe Disney to be "tricking" people into thinking they're getting something that they're not from Club Level. They're pretty explicit with what it offers.
Click to expand...

and to be honest... I think its because you don't relate to what a concierge is outside of WDW. Even the hotel concierge, not a private one, used to be worlds different. At WDW, it's just another CSR agent.. and that's not what the role is at 'deluxe' hotels that pride themselves on service and attention to the guest.

It's like earlier in the thread.. you dismissed all of the lack of services and amenities that the WDW hotels lack, and instead focus on paying for the location as the value (and to a lesser extent the theming). Yes you pay for location, but I can pay for a motel 6 on the beach, or I can pay for the Ritz on the beach. Both will have a location premiums, but that doesn't negate that the Ritz will have a different service expectation than a Motel 6.

When Disney labels something 'deluxe' and advertises products as their TOP tier... that conveys expectations of what that product should be. The fact they fail to meet those standards is bad enough, but when they charge you a premium on top of a premium... it's insulting.

Paying $300 a night simply because it's Manhattan... is a location premium. Advertising something as deluxe, and using terms like 'lavish', and charging for it.. but not delivering... that is simply overpriced and under delivered.
 
Last edited:
71jason

71jason

Well-Known Member
CaptainAmerica said:
You're also being disingenuous when you mock Disney's concierge level, because Disney never calls it concierge level, but "Club Level." If someone assumes that a product called "Club Level" is going to be the same as an arbitrarily defined industry standard "concierge level," that's their own fault for jumping to conclusions and/or poor reading comprehension.
Click to expand...

And the "concierge" position at each Disney hotel ...?

Nice attempt at spin, tho. After work tonight, you should cross the street over to Tavern. It would be fun to beat you at trivia.
 
Disneyhead'71

Disneyhead'71

Well-Known Member
ford91exploder said:
Yet once WDW DID have concierges who were worthy of the title...
Click to expand...
Frowning+Flower+Girl+The+15+Minutes+of+Fame.jpg
 
CaptainAmerica

CaptainAmerica

Premium Member
71jason said:
And the "concierge" position at each Disney hotel ...?
Click to expand...
Keep reading the thread. I never said they don't use the word "concierge." I said that the club-level rooms are not called "Concierge Level."

71jason said:
Nice attempt at spin, tho. After work tonight, you should cross the street over to Tavern. It would be fun to beat you at trivia.
Click to expand...
I'll use context clues and assume you're saying that I work for Disney and Tavern is a bar of some kind in Orlando? Good one.
 
71jason

71jason

Well-Known Member
TP2000 said:
You're better off hiring A PRIVATE VIP Tour Guide and making it clear to her within the first 10 minutes that you are capable of tipping well, and that's about the only way to open doors at Disney that a "Concierge" in any real hotel in any mid-sized city can.
Click to expand...

Brilliant post (and I have two good friends who have held Disney concierge positions. But did feel the need to correct one small point. Disney VIP guides are often just CPs in admittedly cute plaid dresses.
 
PhotoDave219

PhotoDave219

Well-Known Member
So while we're discussing concierge at Disney…

I've done it a couple of times. Always on a discount. Overall observation? It's "introduction to concierge".... Meaning it's peoples first taste of what deluxe and high-end is in the world. It's their first chance.

The true high-end guests that I have met that are staying at the grand Floridian on a club level? They purchase a VIP tour guide for the entire trip. They spend that money because it's nothing to them and it makes their life infinitely easier.

I wouldn't say Disney scamming anyone… Certainly not more than they do with their normal advertising. They bill everything as the greatest thing ever. (From my perspective, the greatest thing ever is clean drinking water followed by antibiotics)

I would say there is a problem with guest service across property and The concierge position is just another example of it. I do not want my concierge person to have three months of experience and are still in college. I want the chain-smoking 58-year-old woman with brittle hair that knows everyone and knows how to get anything at the drop of a hat.

It's just indicative of how there is a loss of a cadre of professional guest service people. There's a lack of leadership, there's a lack of experience, and there is a lot of poor guest service attitudes put forth by those whom chose the role to help.

Such is my opinion.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom