You are starting to sound like another forum member who has trouble with the concept that there are far, far fewer factual things than you think. There are some, of course, but just because you believe it, that doesn't make it a fact.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Aha! Disney Parks were never perfect...or were they?
- Thread starter dreamscometrue
- Start date
You are starting to sound like another forum member who has trouble with the concept that there are far, far fewer factual things than you think. There are some, of course, but just because you believe it, that doesn't make it a fact.
You're welcome!
spacemt354
Chili's
Exactly. People on here like to throw around the word "fact" a lot to justify their statements. Yes, there are facts, but that word is used way too often on these forums to justify things that are subjective in nature. "This attraction is great! That is a fact!" Well...no it's not, someone else could think it wasn't great. Doesn't make them any more right or wrong than you. Grading something by using words like good, bad, poor, average, and then claiming it is "fact" is only true to the beholder. Others may feel differently, and a lot of the topics we discuss on these forums revolve around people's perspectives, and this thread is no exception.
flynnibus
Premium Member
Sure, but now you start taking into account things that only support your view - instead of taking in ALL the facts. You're putting on blinders to make your own case seem valid.
Sure some some changes can be seen as good or bad - and therefore, 'subjective' - it just because some are, it doesn't mean everything is so wishy-washy. There are plenty of examples that are straight up regressions over what the company built themselves on and you can't ignore those.
There are other examples that may have been 'good intentioned' - but have proven to be mistakes or failures in hindsight. Yet, often the company keeps repeating themselves.
The defense about mistakes made during INNOVATION - really don't justify mistakes made during simple business operations or theme park ops. I mean - struggling to get the world's first version of a tubular coaster working.. really doesn't justify bone head moves like having to add a generic fence around Casey Jr.. or moves like The Stitch stage fiasco.. etc.
The reality is the PRIORITIES of the organization have shifted over time. They are far more willing to settle for inferior show today, then they were in the past. They've made operational changes to make such choices SOP. They've made staffing changes knowing the impact it would have, but have chosen to make those impacts 'acceptable' when in the past they would not. They have changed their long term strategies towards making money - turning to licensing, royalities, and development rather than being an operator themselves.
These are examples of how the company has changed - and for guest experience - for the worse. Past failures really doesn't change any of this.
In the past, the company was willing to work fast and agile.. and take any bruises it got along the way and generally try to fix them. That's where a lot of the 'oops' came from.. moving so fast, so far ahead of the norm.
Who can argue misques like what happened at Paradise Island or the like as justified because they were 'too far ahead' of the industry?
GoofGoof
Premium Member
Great article and interesting debate so far.
Here is my 2 cents. My main takeaway from the article is that even Walt could not possibly manage every detail of a major theme park. Stuff slipped through the cracks and decisions were made to prioritize one thing over another based a lot on money. Same thing happens today. The notion that Disney has a lot more money to spend now is really flawed. Any large investment needs to meet ROI requirements. Management reports to the BOD who serve the shareholders. They may have more revenue and cash, but in a lot of ways they have less control over spending it.
On the issue of maintenance I personally have never witnessed what others talk about. I never see trash, dirty areas, rude cast members. The place is always spotless when I am there so I can't speak about the now vs then when it comes to cleanliness.
I acknowledge that some rides need some TLC especially in MK. The other problem that modern management has is they cannot take away rides that we all love and consider classics even if they are replaced with better versions. I have noticed a lot of objections to closing Snow White despite the mine train opening. Many people wanted to keep both. Walt had the ability to close or remodel rides that needed it since there was no history. Current management is "stuck" with an aging park in need of some refurbs or remodels that everyone loves.
One final observation. According to the article Walt loved the circus. I bet he would have loved Casey's Splash Zone and Storybook Circus. I guess we'll never know.
Here is my 2 cents. My main takeaway from the article is that even Walt could not possibly manage every detail of a major theme park. Stuff slipped through the cracks and decisions were made to prioritize one thing over another based a lot on money. Same thing happens today. The notion that Disney has a lot more money to spend now is really flawed. Any large investment needs to meet ROI requirements. Management reports to the BOD who serve the shareholders. They may have more revenue and cash, but in a lot of ways they have less control over spending it.
On the issue of maintenance I personally have never witnessed what others talk about. I never see trash, dirty areas, rude cast members. The place is always spotless when I am there so I can't speak about the now vs then when it comes to cleanliness.
I acknowledge that some rides need some TLC especially in MK. The other problem that modern management has is they cannot take away rides that we all love and consider classics even if they are replaced with better versions. I have noticed a lot of objections to closing Snow White despite the mine train opening. Many people wanted to keep both. Walt had the ability to close or remodel rides that needed it since there was no history. Current management is "stuck" with an aging park in need of some refurbs or remodels that everyone loves.
One final observation. According to the article Walt loved the circus. I bet he would have loved Casey's Splash Zone and Storybook Circus. I guess we'll never know.
No, i'm not putting on blinders, I'm just disagreeing with you about how objective or subjective the concept of a 'mistake' is.
You've said that a couple of time, and I agreed that does sometimes happen in business as leadership change. I would like to see an example of a decision to improve or change, that you consider to be a mistake, that was later repeated. I'm curious to see how objective or subjective you will be.
In your opinion, and perhaps that of some others on here, the Casey Jr. fence is a bonehead move. Get it? O-p-i-n-i-o-n.. When that was being discussed, some people noted that circus trains often had a fence like this around them while in station. Obviously it might serve another purpose, but perhaps it was Imagineering being authentic. The Stitch stage show was considered a mistake by Disney. If Disney considers an attraction a mistake, is that your criteria for placing it in the mistake category, or is it more what you think? I'm just still trying to figure out how you decide.
I agree that things have changed with the current TDO staff and upper level management, and I've acknowledged that maintenence needs to be improved in some areas, but the bolded statement in your post is a perfect example of something you note to be a fact, but is in fact another subjective comment on your part. Some people might think things have changed for the worse, others not. It's not a fact man! I might like my WDW experience better now with fastpasses, Bay Lake Tower, Mission Space, the new Main Street facades, without the clubs at PI, with the Town Square meet and greet, MSEP, LMA, the talking busses, the present quick service offerings, TT, FLE instead of 20K, SGE over AE, etc. Yeah, a guest might like WDW now more than in 1995. If TDO address a few maintenence issues and effects on a few rides, a person might enjoy WDW a few years from now more than at any time since '71!
flynnibus
Premium Member
@dreamscometrue there you go again with the premise that the benefit of one thing - negates the negativity of another.
No matter how good TT is - it doesn't negate that the guest experience was lessened by allowing an entire pavilion WoL to rot to the point of closing it. You do this over and over... Instead of acknowledging that a change lessened the guest experience, you go and throw in other changes and say 'see, its subjective'. What is subjective to you is the OVERALL SUM - that doesn't make the individual mistakes subjective.
I'm tired of going in these circles with you and not going to waste any more time on it.
No matter how good TT is - it doesn't negate that the guest experience was lessened by allowing an entire pavilion WoL to rot to the point of closing it. You do this over and over... Instead of acknowledging that a change lessened the guest experience, you go and throw in other changes and say 'see, its subjective'. What is subjective to you is the OVERALL SUM - that doesn't make the individual mistakes subjective.
I'm tired of going in these circles with you and not going to waste any more time on it.
^^^ This! Great post!
( I especially like the reference to money. Yes, Disney Parks make a profit. But there has to be a list of priorities when spending that money as their is within any company. Our friends in California definitely deserved an infusion of cash at DCA, DCL had demand enough to justify 2 new ships at $900 each, a new park is being built in Asia, and despite all this, WDW gets an expanded FL, a new Liberty Square-Fantasyland path and Avatarland in a few years. The wealth has to be spread around, but some people always expect it to come to WDW. Disney Parks have several parks aworldwide and a cruise line on which to spend their money.)
Sounds good. We'll have to agree to completely disagree in this respect. That's all good...that's what discussion forums are for...to discuss and debate.