Alcohol in the Magic Kingdom

[flynnibus]

Got it. So he included the concept in his plans and made it part of his park. Well as long as he died before it opened I guess he wasn't in favor of it

He also built an office and apartment in the park... that doesn't mean he intended to green light hotels in the park.

Club33 has almost nothing to do with how anything else in the park was setup

 

[SorcererMC]

Because that brings in a rowdy element. That brings people we don't want and I feel they don't need it.

Damn straight, hellions don't need it. No ruffians and thugs, either.

 

[Baloo62]

WHO WANTS A FREAKING VIRGIN MOSCOW MULE?!?

Extremely lonely Russian farmers?

 

[IMFearless]

A demand for something does not necessarily mean that it is a good idea.

Any decision made about the parks (or not made) has more than one effect.

I think this is something that at times the management miss. They seem to think of many things in a fairly isolated narrow minded way, I think sometimes things get implemented when the bigger picture has been missed.

The express transportation option and VIP tents seem symptomatic of this. I feel that all decisions made need to enhance the delivery of the overall purpose of the park, making it more cohesive and a more fuller whole.

Doing something for short term financial gain makes no sense if it detracts from the bigger picture. Time will tell if this is a good decision.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

A demand for something does not necessarily mean that it is a good idea.

Any decision made about the parks (or not made) has more than one effect.

I think this is something that at times the management miss. They seem to think of many things in a fairly isolated narrow minded way, I think sometimes things get implemented when the bigger picture has been missed.

The express transportation option and VIP tents seem symptomatic of this. I feel that all decisions made need to enhance the delivery of the overall purpose of the park, making it more cohesive and a more fuller whole.

Doing something for short term financial gain makes no sense if it detracts from the bigger picture. Time will tell if this is a good decision.

One does indeed get the impression modern management thinks in isolated gains, with scant regard for larger effect.

But not so with alcohol. The positive and negative effects of alcohol in the park have been known and debated for five decades. It is the Forbidden Fruit. It brings tremendous rewards, the margin on alcoholic drinks is immense, and where there is only so much food and drink you can sell a guest, there is no ceiling to alcohol. The negatives are perfectly well known to management too. A decline in atmosphere, security problems, social issues, aggression towards guests and employees. After 45 years, we now have management who couldn't resist the temptation. That, and a slow evolution of the audience that visits WDW. After to or three decades of moving the park ever lower on the cultural ladder, the current audience feels more favourable to a drunky town theme park environment than before.

 

[SorcererMC]

One does indeed get the impression modern management thinks in isolated gains, with scant regard for larger effect.

But not so with alcohol. The positive and negative effects of alcohol in the park have been known and debated for five decades. It is the Forbidden Fruit. It brings tremendous rewards, the margin on alcoholic drinks is immense, and where there is only so much food and drink you can sell a guest, there is no ceiling to alcohol. The negatives are perfectly well known to management too. A decline in atmosphere, security problems, social issues, aggression towards guests and employees. After 45 years, we now have management who couldn't resist the temptation. That, and a slow evolution of the audience that visits WDW. After to or three decades of moving the park ever lower on the cultural ladder, the current audience feels more favourable to a drunky town theme park environment than before.

Quite frankly, the social and cultural norms around the sale and use of alcohol have changed in the past 45 years - and decisions the company has made since then reflect this. The Disney company of 50 years ago would probably not have prominently featured the tavern scene of Beauty and the Beast, or the pub scene of Tangled. (Hence my tongue in cheek post above). My point is that the negative consequences of this decision are being exaggerated, and that adequately trained CMs can manage the negative consequences that you listed. We are not talking about 'drunky town' binge drinking like Epcot (which I don't care for in the least).

This is a glass of wine or a beer with dinner at a table service restaurant - which is within the CDC guidelines for moderate drinking, and it is consistent with how the majority of adult Americans who consume alcohol use it, according to their surveys. Personally - at times I have gone years without a drop of alcohol, but I do like having it on special occasions/holidays. And I consider a visit to the Magic Kingdom a 'special occasion'; I like celebrating milestones/events there. I don't think that I am outside the norm, and that is how I think this decision provides value to the guest experience. YMMV.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

Quite frankly, the social and cultural norms around the sale and use of alcohol have changed in the past 45 years - and decisions the company has made since then reflect this. The Disney company of 50 years ago would probably not have prominently featured the tavern scene of Beauty and the Beast, or the pub scene of Tangled. (Hence my tongue in cheek post above).

Hmmm...vintage MK featured drunken pillaging pirates (almost as rowdy a crowd as WS on a Saturday!) Drunks in CBJ and Thunder. You played a drunk driver who killed himself in a dui road accident and went to hell in mr. Toad. All visited by chain smoking patrons who bought cigarettes in the Tobacconist on Main Street.

It's not out of prudeness that the MK had/s resisted alcohol in the parks for so long. It followed the old wisdom that Walt understood perfectly well:

No liquor, no beer, nothing. Because that brings in a rowdy element. That brings people we don't want and I feel they don't need it. I feel when I go down to the park I don't need a drink.

Walter Elias Disney-1956-Saturday Evening Post

 

[Doorknob]

Of course it's possible. Choosing not to drink and thinking that anyone who has a drink is a drunk..those are different mindsets. One is a personal choice, completely fine. The other is narrow minded horrible outlook on your neighbors and people in general.

According to your post, you think no one ever gets drunk?

Club33 was intended to be a corporate/VIP lounge -- not part of Disneyland proper... and Walt never actually took part in it. He died before it was completed. Beyond including the concept in the disneyland plans.. and making it part of NOS.. he had little to do with it.

Exactly, it wasn't for park goers.

 

[SorcererMC]

Hmmm...vintage MK featured drunken pillaging pirates (almost as rowdy a crowd as WS on a Saturday!) Drunks in CBJ and Thunder. You played a drunk driver who killed himself in a dui road accident and went to hell in mr. Toad. All visited by chain smoking patrons who bought cigarettes in the Tobacconist on Main Street.

It's not out of prudeness that the MK had/s resisted alcohol in the parks for so long. It followed the old wisdom that Walt understood perfectly well:

I don't deny at all that the depictions of alcohol in Disney movies and theme park attractions offer 'moral lessons' as to its use (aka being a drunk is bad and has consequences), but it is also being used for its comical effect. (Mostly that sort of proselytization is directed towards children, and I find it hard to believe that adults need to be lectured on the effects of alcohol or are somehow unaware of the dangers of drunk driving.)
ETA: On second thought I may have misinterpreted what you were saying about this? Did you mean - not out of prudeness but for humor?

I don't object to Walt's perspective on alcohol in the parks, and I often lament TWDC decisions that fly in the face of his vision and what he wanted - and I'm coming to terms with the fact that 'the ship has sailed' (even Diane Disney Miller said it wasn't her dad's company anymore). But again, I don't think that this decision is going to result in the complete breakdown of the Magic Kingdom atmosphere, since it is limited to table service restaurants. (I wouldn't mind a crackdown on the binge drinking - ie enforcing the law- in Epcot at all. Perhaps retraining CMs will help that? One can hope.).

 

[21stamps]

According to your post, you think no one ever gets drunk?

Exactly, it wasn't for park goers.

According to my post, I don't think everyone who has a drink is a drunk.

 

[Sonconato]

One does indeed get the impression modern management thinks in isolated gains, with scant regard for larger effect.

But not so with alcohol. The positive and negative effects of alcohol in the park have been known and debated for five decades. It is the Forbidden Fruit. It brings tremendous rewards, the margin on alcoholic drinks is immense, and where there is only so much food and drink you can sell a guest, there is no ceiling to alcohol. The negatives are perfectly well known to management too. A decline in atmosphere, security problems, social issues, aggression towards guests and employees. After 45 years, we now have management who couldn't resist the temptation. That, and a slow evolution of the audience that visits WDW. After to or three decades of moving the park ever lower on the cultural ladder, the current audience feels more favourable to a drunky town theme park environment than before.

As a person who has gone every Saturday and Sunday for eight years straight, I can safely say this is exactly what has happened. As an example, I saw a friend at Epcot during Food and Wine who was so drunk, his girlfriend was holding him up (she was drunk as well). I tried to say hello, but he wasn't seeing us. When I saw him again yesterday at his job, I asked him how much he spent, and he said he didn't even think about it. Therein lies the problem.

 

[GoofGoof]

Doing something for short term financial gain makes no sense if it detracts from the bigger picture. Time will tell if this is a good decision.

I assume you are saying that in your opinion serving beer or wine at table service restaurants will result in something that detracts from the bigger picture. I have asked this question a number of times with no real answer: how many incidents are documented with people behaving poorly after having a beer or glass of wine at BOG? I haven't heard of any problems related to it. The only response I've seen is someone posting a picture of the guy climbing the pyramid in Mexico, but that is at a park that serves hard liquor and shots and allows people to drink at a bar without eating food.

A demand for something does not necessarily mean that it is a good idea.

I agree with this. However, I don't see having a beer or wine with dinner as being a bad idea either. Just because some people can't handle alcohol or get out of control doesn't mean it's a bad idea to offer it to anyone. I know it's not exactly the same thing, but since some people text while driving a car which is dangerous should we ban all cell phones from having a text feature? Or maybe just ban driving altogether? To me it would make more sense to have Disney handle the actual problem directly. At EPCOT or any other place either cut people off when they have had too much or remove them from the park if they are publicly drunk.

 

[NearTheEars]

One does indeed get the impression modern management thinks in isolated gains, with scant regard for larger effect.

But not so with alcohol. The positive and negative effects of alcohol in the park have been known and debated for five decades. It is the Forbidden Fruit. It brings tremendous rewards, the margin on alcoholic drinks is immense, and where there is only so much food and drink you can sell a guest, there is no ceiling to alcohol. The negatives are perfectly well known to management too. A decline in atmosphere, security problems, social issues, aggression towards guests and employees. After 45 years, we now have management who couldn't resist the temptation. That, and a slow evolution of the audience that visits WDW. After to or three decades of moving the park ever lower on the cultural ladder, the current audience feels more favourable to a drunky town theme park environment than before.

When they start selling it in carts or kiosks out on MSUSA is when I'll be concerned. Someone having a glass of wine or beer at a TS restaurant doesn't concern me at all.

 

[GoofGoof]

Exactly, it wasn't for park goers.

Why build a bar in a theme park if it isn't for park goers? The people visiting the club still had the ability to visit the parks before and after having drinks. It still let "drunks" into the park

 

[njDizFan]

Well, I am seriously conflicted on this subject. I think I liked posts on both sides of the spectrum. I am far from a teetotaler and on a couple of occasions even half stumbled around the WS. When adult beverages are offered at a MK dining location there is a good chance I will order a beer or 2. But I also like the idea that MK is a dry park, it was Walt's vision and it still resonates to this day is some aspects. It's pure family escapism and I would like to keep it that way.

As far as 21+ places, I certainly think there should be some more. I think we are up to about 4-5 that we have totaled( is Splittsville still 21 after 9?). I still think there could be a few more. I fully believe that a bar/lounge is meant for adults. Not to save my precious child from seeing people consume adult libations but for the actual adults trying to enjoy themselves. When I'm drinking the last thing I want to do is be concerned about saying an off colored word or toning down my buzzed antics. In the establishments where I live, if there is a separate bar area within a restaurant, children cannot be seated in that section.

Also, children have a wide spectrum of behaviors even under responsible parents. It's not so easy(sometimes even impossible) for parents especially with multiple children to get them to toe the line of respectfulness and placidity. So I agree with no children at lounges for those 2 factors.

 

[flynnibus]

Why build a bar in a theme park if it isn't for park goers? The people visiting the club still had the ability to visit the parks before and after having drinks. It still let "drunks" into the park

Because it wasn't a bar. It was a restaurant. It was meant as a secluded high end place to entertain and do business. The club was your destination - the park was entertainment for those interested. It's more akin to a country club than a DVC lounge

 

[ford91exploder]

When they start selling it in carts or kiosks out on MSUSA is when I'll be concerned. Someone having a glass of wine or beer at a TS restaurant doesn't concern me at all.

THIS.

Unfortunately I think it's only a matter of when before the ODV carts selling beer and wine are all over the MK.

 

[GoofGoof]

Because it wasn't a bar. It was a restaurant. It was meant as a secluded high end place to entertain and do business. The club was your destination - the park was entertainment for those interested. It's more akin to a country club than a DVC lounge

Right so a restaurant that serves alcohol. Sounds familiar and it serves hard liquor not just beer and wine.

The fact that it was exclusive to wealthy guests doesn't change the fact that it was a place within the park that served alcohol. Those who were members (or guests) there had the option to consume alcohol and then leave the restaurant to go into the parks. If Walt didn't want anyone who consumed alcohol in the parks he could have built a members only club outside the parks.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

ETA: On second thought I may have misinterpreted what you were saying about this? Did you mean - not out of prudeness but for humor?

Oh, my point was merely that alcohol was not hidden in Disney movies and parks in previous eras. And that despite this alcohol was not served at the MK, as a deliberate policy.

 

[ford91exploder]

Well lets go back to your argument about guns and your daughter. Statistics show that you are more likely to be killed by your own weapon than to use it in your own defense. Therefore, is it impossible to be a responsible gun owner just like you think it is impossible to be a responsible drinker? After all you are introducing a risk that seems to outweigh the reward.

For the record that statistic you quote is greatly helped by the fact that the most common police carry weapon the Glock REQUIRES that you pull the trigger to disassemble it for cleaning making for many many accidental discharges when the weapon is pointed in the direction of the operator. That feature is a giant #FAIL in my opinion