A Spirited Perfect Ten

LuvtheGoof

Grill Master
Premium Member
I usually see a difference in internet services on hotels.
I am really surprised they charge for the free wireless one...

The big hotels usually offering 2 packages:
the free wireless slow (shared with all)
or the 100Mbps/1000Mbps high speed dedicated line for like 10-30$ a day.
One of the other main differences is charging the "resort" fee , and a daily parking fee. Disney does neither of these, but every single resort I looked at off-site - resort NOT Motel 6 - charges both fees. The resort fee is usually $20-30 per day, and the parking is anywhere from $15-30 per day! Oh, and yes, many higher end offerings still charge for internet. Disney isn't the latest to drop that charge. That really adds up over a 10-14 day stay!
 

TalkingHead

Well-Known Member

This is classic Disney announcement swill:

The design team has gone to great lengths to ensure that every element – from the propeller-based ceiling fans and diving bell “booth” to the “Rolling Boulder Meatballs” on the menu – fits within the storyline.

Imagine if the Leaky Cauldron had "Ollivander's Magic Wand Fries" or "Voldemort's Scary-Good Brownie Sundae" or some other crap. That's what modern-day Disney does for beloved movie franchises.

The concept art doesn't even really evoke "Indiana Jones." I'm guessing they spent an afternoon coming up with some menu puns and slapped the Indy name on this place to drum up some interest.

What a crock. Can Universal trade Disney the Marvel rights in exchange for Indy? :angelic:
 

marni1971

Park History nut
Premium Member
In the REAL world, the Poly would have either closed entirely for a year to 18 months for a redo ... or Guests would have gotten huge discounts ... think $99-150 a night rooms because they were staying in a construction zone.
They used to.... I forget the time frame but one of the mods (I want to say Riverside) was closed for a makeover.
 

asianway

Well-Known Member
This is classic Disney announcement swill:



Imagine if the Leaky Cauldron had "Ollivander's Magic Wand Fries" or "Voldemort's Scary-Good Brownie Sundae" or some other crap. That's what modern-day Disney does for beloved movie franchises.

The concept art doesn't even really evoke "Indiana Jones." I'm guessing they spent an afternoon coming up with some menu puns and slapped the Indy name on this place to drum up some interest.

What a crock. Can Universal trade Disney the Marvel rights in exchange for Indy? :angelic:
This concept reeks of desperation
 

wdisney9000

Truindenashendubapreser
Premium Member
This concept reeks of desperation
The concept art looks far more like an aviation theme. It looks cool, but if you showed me a picture of that and asked what movie franchise it's themed after I would never guess it was inspired by Indiana Jones. Like @TalkingHead said, they just slapped some Indy names on food items and called.it a day. #fail. Rolling boulder meatballs? Lm@o.
 

FigmentJedi

Well-Known Member
The concept art looks far more like an aviation theme. It looks cool, but if you showed me a picture of that and asked what movie franchise it's themed after I would never guess it was inspired by Indiana Jones. Like @TalkingHead said, they just slapped some Indy names on food items and called.it a day. #fail. Rolling boulder meatballs? Lm@o.
They'll probably slap in some Indy memorabilia like Trader Sam's has in Disneyland.
 

the.dreamfinder

Well-Known Member
Now that we have some distance from Age of Ultron's opening weekend and that initial wave of backlash. I present to you, The Black Widow Reader. I've compiled all the germane articles to the Black Widow backlash so each perspective can be viewed within the context of one another. The backlash mostly came about from a number of writers misreading, either unintentionally or deliberately to egg on clicks, the film and thus misunderstanding the character's perspective and arc. This also came at a time where Jeremy Renner called BW a and the character has virtually no presence on merchandise because Marvel is for boys only and Disney is exclusively for girls and fanbois. However, I thought it would be good to have an organized record of what went down for safe keeping for the next time folks start a backlash after they misread or misunderstood a work of popular art.

The initial blacklash pieces:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...**-shamed-their-most-badass-superheroine.html
Uncensored link below
(http://goo.gl/T4Dfsb)
http://io9.com/black-widow-this-is-why-we-can-t-have-nice-things-1702333037

Criticisms of Marvel's "girl problem":
http://www.themarysue.com/invisible-women/

http://www.avclub.com/article/avengers-toy-cut-black-widow-out-one-her-coolest-s-219278

The Backlash Against the Backlash:
http://tay.kotaku.com/black-widow-bruce-banner-and-babies-1702609749
(In response to the piece from io9)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/act-four/wp/2015/05/05/black-widows-feminist-heroism/

http://www.salon.com/2015/05/07/what_avengers_got_right_about_black_widow_infertility_is_devastating_— even_for_superheroes/

http://www.npr.org/sections/monkeys...idow-scarce-resources-and-high-stakes-stories
 

the.dreamfinder

Well-Known Member
An excerpt from the Mary Sue piece on Marvel and girls. If you needed proof the execs in Burbank think Disney is a "girl's BRAND", look no further.
While working at Marvel post-acquisition, I saw a deck circulated by Disney’s Brand Marketing team. I’m prohibited from sharing the slides, but the takeaway is that, unlike the actual demos, the desired demographics had no females in it whatsoever. I asked my supervisor why that was. Ever the pragmatist, he said, “That’s not why Disney bought us. They already have the girls’ market on lockdown."

I’d entered the comics industry because I was a comics fan. It hurt to see so plainly that to Disney, people like me didn’t matter. My demographic was already giving them money anyway, with Disney Princess purchases. Even now, there’s no incentive to make more Marvel merch for women, because we already buy Brave and Frozen products.

This does not come as a surprise, really. Anyone who knows about branding and marketing can tell you how most gender-skewed business models work (and most businesses are gender-skewed). It starts when we’re babies. Blue for boys, pink for girls. Separate, but equal. Sound familiar?

Disney bought Marvel and Lucasfilm because they wanted to access the male market. To achieve this goal, they allocate less to Marvel’s female demo, and even less to a unisex one. They won’t be interested in changing how they work until consumers understand what’s going on.
 

Lee

Adventurer
Damnit.....I'm there!
indy.gif


Between this and the jungle skipper restaurant....they seem to know what will lure me back.
 

asianway

Well-Known Member
An excerpt from the Mary Sue piece on Marvel and girls. If you needed proof the execs in Burbank think Disney is a "girl's BRAND", look no further.
While working at Marvel post-acquisition, I saw a deck circulated by Disney’s Brand Marketing team. I’m prohibited from sharing the slides, but the takeaway is that, unlike the actual demos, the desired demographics had no females in it whatsoever. I asked my supervisor why that was. Ever the pragmatist, he said, “That’s not why Disney bought us. They already have the girls’ market on lockdown."

I’d entered the comics industry because I was a comics fan. It hurt to see so plainly that to Disney, people like me didn’t matter. My demographic was already giving them money anyway, with Disney Princess purchases. Even now, there’s no incentive to make more Marvel merch for women, because we already buy Brave and Frozen products.

This does not come as a surprise, really. Anyone who knows about branding and marketing can tell you how most gender-skewed business models work (and most businesses are gender-skewed). It starts when we’re babies. Blue for boys, pink for girls. Separate, but equal. Sound familiar?

Disney bought Marvel and Lucasfilm because they wanted to access the male market. To achieve this goal, they allocate less to Marvel’s female demo, and even less to a unisex one. They won’t be interested in changing how they work until consumers understand what’s going on.
The best was the toy where they threw iron man on her motorcycle.

Iron man. On a motorcycle. That is all
 

truecoat

Well-Known Member
Now that we have some distance from Age of Ultron's opening weekend and that initial wave of backlash. I present to you, The Black Widow Reader. I've compiled all the germane articles to the Black Widow backlash so each perspective can be viewed within the context of one another. The backlash mostly came about from a number of writers misreading, either unintentionally or deliberately to egg on clicks, the film and thus misunderstanding the character's perspective and arc. This also came at a time where Jeremy Renner called BW a **** and the character has virtually no presence on merchandise because Marvel is for boys only and Disney is exclusively for girls and fanbois. However, I thought it would be good to have an organized record of what went down for safe keeping for the next time folks start a backlash after they misread or misunderstood a work of popular art.

The initial blacklash pieces:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...**-shamed-their-most-badass-superheroine.html
Uncensored link below
(http://goo.gl/T4Dfsb)
http://io9.com/black-widow-this-is-why-we-can-t-have-nice-things-1702333037

Criticisms of Marvel's "girl problem":
http://www.themarysue.com/invisible-women/

http://www.avclub.com/article/avengers-toy-cut-black-widow-out-one-her-coolest-s-219278

The Backlash Against the Backlash:
http://tay.kotaku.com/black-widow-bruce-banner-and-babies-1702609749
(In response to the piece from io9)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/act-four/wp/2015/05/05/black-widows-feminist-heroism/

http://www.salon.com/2015/05/07/what_avengers_got_right_about_black_widow_infertility_is_devastating_— even_for_superheroes/

http://www.npr.org/sections/monkeysee/2015/05/12/404168828/black-widow-scarce-resources-and-high-stakes-stories

Making mucho denaro @ $880 million.
 

Bairstow

Well-Known Member
Give me a break. Dollywood is a nice place, however, it is hardly a pillar of quality and technology. It is built on the side of a mountain which makes it very country (smokey mountain style), but, a challenge sometimes to navigate. Some of the big name attractions are totally sad and miskept. It consists of 60 year old buildings and it shows. Many parts of it resemble the worst of roadside carnivals. Let's put it this way, if you put Dinorama and that together you would be dropping down to your knees in appreciation of what DAK has to offer.

Their coasters are top notch, if you like coasters. If you don't there is not much else to do except to listen to country western music via live entertainment and piped in. Even the ride from the parking lot reminded me of days on my uncles farm where an old International school bus was cut down to become a utility vehicle. Sides removed, seats replaced by wooden benches, etc.

If anyone want to praise Dollywood for it's creative energy and outright beauty it's best to say it to someone that has never been to both Disney and Dollywood. The difference will take your breath away and not in a positive way. It is a once and done park for me. Before anyone sends out a hit squad after me, I know many people find it quaint and charming. Fine, I won't try and stop you from going there.

Here comes the hit squad

I'm curious which big name attractions being totally sad and miskept you're referring to. Other than the canaries on Mystery Mine, pretty much everything works as it's supposed to.
Weagle, Fire Chaser, and Mystery Mine are all recent, groundbreaking coasters, in many cases world-firsts in various ways.
I'm perfectly willing to put Dollywood's staff and counter-service food up against any Disney park in the country, and I say this having seen Disneyland last week.
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
Hotels generally offer reactive recovery for any loss of accommodations. If the guest never notices lack of monorail transportation because it was available when they needed it, why would Disney give them a rate reduction? So if you were staying at the resort and had issues with monorail transportation, you could talk to Guest Services and receive recovery.

Except you are glossing over this 'accomodation' we just highlighted as the major differentiator of this property vs other deluxe properties.. hence justifying the delta. I was highlighting how that conveniently worked one way and how the company that supposedly is known for it's customer service did squat for those impacted unless you made a stink about it. For a four diamond hotel.. I should not have to complain to get that elevated customer service that is expected of a hotel of that caliber.

Additionally, Disney is very good at telling their guests in advance whenever construction or refurbs could impact their vacation. Its not like the guest shows up and Surprise! you can't get what you paid for

I suggest you take a closer look at what has been happening at the Poly recently... additionally the monorail service changes were NOT advertised far in advance and have been dynamic at periods over the last two years. What Disney is good at is allowing you to be re-homed if you complain... but the Poly is a good example of where Disney didn't put customer service first and instead opt'd to wing it and just deal with the complainers as they came up.
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
Imagine if the Leaky Cauldron had "Ollivander's Magic Wand Fries" or "Voldemort's Scary-Good Brownie Sundae" or some other crap. That's what modern-day Disney does for beloved movie franchises.

The concept art doesn't even really evoke "Indiana Jones." I'm guessing they spent an afternoon coming up with some menu puns and slapped the Indy name on this place to drum up some interest.

Maybe Disney went back to the marketing crew that did DCA v1.0 :)
 

flynnibus

Premium Member

ParentsOf4

Well-Known Member
OK, I didn't want to respond, but decided I had to. :D.
This will be fun! :)
Let's look at the actual numbers for your vacation. Fictitious family of 4. Mom, Dad, 2 kids ages 8 and 12. They want to stay at AKL with a Savannah view. From July 11 - July 18, the total cost of the room is $2,761.27.
I just want to make sure I understand the price you are using: $2761 / 7 nights. Excluding tax, that's about $351/night. With tax, that's $394/night. I hope I got that right.
Since they are going only to Disney, they use Magical Express from the airport, and Disney transportation everywhere. They want the ability to leave whenever they wish from a park and take a bus/boat/monorail to wherever they need to be. They have no other costs for the room under this setup.
No, your fictitious family does not have "the ability to leave whenever they wish". They are at the mercy of Disney's mass transit.

We know what Disney transportation can be like. Certainly we've all waited 30 minutes or longer for Disney's transportation, even longer at the start of the day and end of the night. That's not exactly whenever I wish. :D

And it's just a joy being crammed onto a bus, standing the entire ride after standing in line waiting for that bus. :rolleyes:
Next, they decide to see if they can save some money and stay off-site at the Hyatt Regency Grand Cypress. I don't know where you got a rate of $167/night, but I couldn't find that.
Since you referenced the AAA diamond rating, I used the AAA rate which was $167/night. Expedia offers the hotel for $179/night.
Anyway, in order to make a more apples to apples comparison, they want to stay with a pool view at the resort (as opposed to the savannah view at AKL). That nightly rate is $240. Since I will be staying off-site, and still want the option to come and go as I please, I will need a rental car. Since I am going to a 4 diamond resort, I'm going for a nicer full size car, such as a Ford Fusion. I can rent this for about $355 for the week. So plugging in everything at the resort, my room will cost $2,079.75, and I will have to pay a parking fee of $17/day, so add another $119. Total cost with rental car - $2,553.75. So I have saved just $207, and now I have to drive everywhere!
You and I have very different views of Disney transportation. Sorry but Disney mass transit sticks!

Let's not use your numbers. Bundling what you suggest through Expedia comes up with a price of $1,814.37. Tacking on the parking brings this to $1,933, significantly different than the $2,553.75 you quote.

Of course, by staying onsite, I'm now at the mercy of Disney pricing! Any offsite vs. onsite comparison is incomplete without comparing dining and merchandise. You conveniently add ancillary offsite costs without adding ancillary onsite costs. ;)

And don't get me started on how truly mediocre most onsite dining options have become. I miss the pre Disney Dining Plan days. :(
Then comes my scenario. I am a DVC member, and it would be 139 points for a Deluxe Studio for that same week. With my cost of dues, that comes out to $718 for the week. I can even get a 1 bedroom savannah view for 272 points or about $1,400. Over $1,000 less than stay off-site, and almost half of paying cash, AND I get a 1 bedroom suite instead of a hotel room.
I see you are conveniently leaving out those onsite costs again.

Exactly how much did you spend to purchase your DVC points?

If you want to compare timeshares, you'll find DVC is by far the most expensive. You can get a 1-bedroom savannah room at AKV for $1400/week. I can get a 3-bedroom presidential suite at Wyndham Bonnet Creek (located next to Caribbean Beach Resort) for about the same price. And it's closer to Epcot and DHS than AKV!
I respect you a lot for what you bring to the numbers here, but you have totally missed the mark on this one.
Thank you but I'm not sure I'm the one missing the mark. ;)
If you really feel that way, maybe it's time to sell your points, and move on.
Interesting you mention that since I'm renting out my points and using the proceeds to visit Universal later this month.

You know, the place where they are actually building a steady stream of new lands and attractions. :D
That is in no way inaccurate. When I get to the resort, I pay absolutely nothing out of my pocket to stay there. No room rate, no taxes, nothing. That is what I meant.
You "pay absolutely nothing" when you get to the resort because, between purchasing your DVC membership and your annual Maintenance Fees, you've already paid Disney 5-figures before you've spent a single night at the Disney timeshare!

Again, how much was your DVC membership?
If you are better off staying at Universal, then by all means, stay there. My wife and I have no desire to even visit Universal, and would certainly never pay for a room with cash at a resort we couldn't care less about. Just us, and not for everyone. We have a Sea World here where we live, so don't need to go there.
I was having fun until I read this.

Really, "no desire to even visit Universal"? No desire to visit theme parks that are building the most exciting attractions in Orlando? You mean you'd rather (for example) ride Peter Pan's Flight for the 101st time? You'd rather see decade old shows? You'd rather deal with the hassle of Disney's buses, spending hours each day in line, rather than stay at a resort with easy theme park access and unlimited front-on-the-line access?

Really?

I cannot fathom "no desire" to visit Universal.

Unless it's a really bad case of Pixie Dust. :D
 

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

Back
Top Bottom