Are the users on this forum jaded?

[Broomstick]

As a long time lurker on the boards I tend to see negative trends about things, but this is similar to one of my old jobs. I worked at a childrens party place, very much like Chucky Cheese or Showbiz, but it was local to my area. To me, since I was in there everyday, the place looked run down and dirty. I could spot giant cobwebs on the ceilings (they were 20 ft high), broken and cheap rides the owner would install or never fix, broken amusement games and the list goes on. However later on in life if someone found out I had worked there they would go on and on about how much they loved it. And I would ask them if they hadn't noticed how dingy the place was, and I would always get a confused look. Then one day it hit me, they didn't take in the details, just the experience as a whole. So they would run around with blinders on essentually because they weren't looking for the negative, just the positive. So maybe that's why the general tone of some threads seem negative, after you've been there enough you start to look past the novelty of being there, and start to focus on what's wrong. For me, I'm only able to go every 3 to 4 yrs so every time I go the novelty is still there and personally I hope to keep it that way.

 

[OklaHoops]

jaded

I get to go every 2 or 3 years and I love WDW!:sohappy: I also see the gradual decline in care and maintenance of the park, the cast members not being as helpful and thanks to the economy and misguided CFO's the overall experience declining when I am there. I do not enjoy lowering my expectations in order to keep a happy face about all things Disney. I just go and enjoy my time there, wish they would fix the Yeti and other things and hope to see cast members will do their best to show they enjoy their jobs in the happiest place on earth! (oops that's Disneyland).

 

[Jimmy Thick]

The reason most people on this board are "jaded" is due to the fact I believe 70% of the board don't go, or does not go as much as they wish they could, and due to this they tend to lash out in the only way they can, by complaining about Disney for trivial issues.

I don't think the jadedness is honestly wished upon at Disney, its more towards wishing upon a star.




Jimmy Thick-I personally go at least 2 times a year...

 

[wm49rs]

I would recommend more fiber for your twice-a year issue then......

 

[SleepingMonk]

I would recommend more fiber for your twice-a year issue then......

It does explain quite a few things.

 

[worldfanatic]

The reason most people on this board are "jaded" is due to the fact I believe 70% of the board don't go, or does not go as much as they wish they could, and due to this they tend to lash out in the only way they can, by complaining about Disney for trivial issues.[/I]

Jimmy, you've made this point before.......and I agree.

If somebody can't experience something they want to so badly, it's human nature to try to convince themselves that it's not that great anyway, and they'll start coming back when it's up to snuff again.

The honest truth is that the parks, and Walt Disney World as a whole, are far superior now than they've ever been.
Despite what the ridiculous "back in the day" crowd claims.

 

[Penelope]

I get alot out of the opinions, questions, and experiences. It has always helped me to plan better trip and enjoy my time. These forums are probably the best on the web for honest WDW information in my opinion. Jaded? Some on here maybe. But it doesn't bother me.

I am new here but am not new to discussion forums specific to a topic and you will always get negative opinions along with the positive. I am trying to ignore what I would call "whining" and remember why I joined. I do not get to travel to Disney annually so a lot of these seemingly to some us as nit-picky things I am just not paying mind to. If that Yeti was not working when I first rode Everest in 2007 - well I honestly don't know but I had a great time on the ride!

That does not mean I think he should not be fixed - I just had a great time without even knowing he was likely in that Disco mode :lol:

 

[Malvito]

I'm afraid that I would not consider the term "jaded" to be harsh. I've seen a lot of negativity on this site. I've heard Imagineers described as "lazy," "stupid," "uncaring," and worse by people who display no evidence that they have any better ideas, or the foggiest idea about the limitations of a budget.

I could go on further, but it would turn into a rant, and I am trying to stay in Jeff Bridges mode, man.

 

[Krack]

WDW is a product. The people that visit are customers. Any customer will have a set of standards it expects from any particular product; it is how they judge whether or not the value of the product/service is worth it's cost.

All of that said, this standard will be different for different customers. I think most people judge WDW against its other theme park competition - they say, "WDW is a better experience than Universal/IOA and Six Flags and that is why I happily spend the extra cost to attend often." And that is a perfectly reasonable opinion to hold.

However, other people have a different set of standards. For example, I happen to judge WDW against itself. When I look at Epcot, I say to myself "Is this better than EPCOT Center?" and the answer is "no". I judge the level of upkeep and maintenance versus what it was in the 80s and early 90s. I judge the opening of a park like AK against what EPCOT Center and MK were like when they opened. I find these comparisons are not favorable to modern day WDW; others may disagree.

And I don't just judge WDW against itself, I also judge it against it's domestic brother - Disneyland. That's another comparison WDW fails on many levels; imho. Again, reasonable people may disagree.

What does this all mean to the question posed in the first post? Are we jaded? I don't think so; it's just that many (most?) of the posters on this message board judge WDW against a different set of standards than the thread's creator. We're all customers; that is what we do. I know that based on my set of standards, over the last 15 years or so, the frequency of my trips has decreased from 1 (sometimes 2) trips a year to once every other year, the length of trips have decreased from a week to 4 or 5 days, and half these "Disney" trips are now to California instead of Florida. For me, I have discovered some better uses of my dollar. Do I still enjoy going to WDW? Sure. But I enjoy it less than I used to. I don't feel bad about expressing that opinion on a discussion board about WDW.

 

[Jimmy Thick]

Jimmy, you've made this point before.......and I agree.

If somebody can't experience something they want to so badly, it's human nature to try to convince themselves that it's not that great anyway, and they'll start coming back when it's up to snuff again.

The honest truth is that the parks, and Walt Disney World as a whole, are far superior now than they've ever been.
Despite what the ridiculous "back in the day" crowd claims.

This is a valid point.

A lot of posters from this site, tend to "nit pick" as stuff thats so trivial, like a missing light bulb under a canopy 20 feet from the dock thats off limits to guests, that it becomes absurd and makes people like me wonder why anyone would notice that to begin with, if there was even a missing bulb at all.

I never seem to notice these thing on vacation myself personally.


Jimmy Thick-And it makes me wonder...

 

[Jimmy Thick]

I'm afraid that I would not consider the term "jaded" to be harsh. I've seen a lot of negativity on this site. I've heard Imagineers described as "lazy," "stupid," "uncaring," and worse by people who display no evidence that they have any better ideas, or the foggiest idea about the limitations of a budget.

I could go on further, but it would turn into a rant, and I am trying to stay in Jeff Bridges mode, man.

The only people who know what the Imagineers do is the Imagineers themselves, to call them names is beyond ignorant, and nothing more than a weak cop out.

No one posting here knows what Disney really has planned for the future of Disney World, the information we get is only what Disney tells us, and chances are, as an extremely well run company, they have time tables for everything, and break us, the general public, the info they want us to know when it benefits them.


Jimmy Thick-Pick on the Imagineers? For what?

 

[WDWGoof07]

There are quite a few who would fall into the "jaded" category.

 

[Figment1986]

This fruit punch is good...

it is a forum full of discussion that may or may not be one sided... no matter where you go you see the same even if it's an apple or Microsoft forum...

 

[LilSuzy]

I would recommend more fiber for your twice-a year issue then......

:ROFLOL: :ROFLOL: :ROFLOL:

I LOVE this board

 

[nepalostparks]

Well, since alot of others are chiming in, figured I would give my 2 cents.

I agree with several other posters that jaded may not be the best term, but yes, what you describe is true of some members of the board. And I stress some... it just tends to be those handful that spend a lot of time posting and re-posting their same views. A majority of the members on this board are much more casual users, and many pop in just to ask questions when they have an upcoming trip. And then there are the few who will always play devils advocate and the negative card... just for the sake of being negative and trying to get a rise out of people. A few visits to the boards and you can usually figure out who those members are.

Part of it for those who are "jaded" (or whatever term you feel fits best) is that they have been long time fans and have made a number of visits, and it's a sense of nostalgia, holding the company to a higher standard, comparing what happens to what Walt's ideals were/might have been, or a combination of the three. In their opinion, what is happening today is not what they feel is the best course of action, and they use one or more of those three reasons to back up their opinion.

The reality remains though. Walt isn't here. We can't know what the parks might look like today if he was around longer. We can't say for sure what Epcot would have become. Plenty can speculate and make hypothetical situations of what could have happened, but at the end of the day, he wasn't here to develop the Florida resort.

You also have to realize that the Disney Company is, and will remain, a business. Their goal is to make money for their shareholders. Can we argue that looking at the bottom line is effecting the parks? Sure, and I think in some cases (i.e., the Yeti situation), there is a strong argument that money is trumping show. But is Disney really any different in this respect than say, any other major corporation? It's sad, but true.

Nostalgia is something you can't argue against with alot of people. Fans will always remember the more positive qualities of Disney (or for that matter, just about anything) when looking back. It's a natural human reaction... we gloss over many of the small negative details of our past, and often view the past with rose colored glasses.

Comparing an attraction today to a past attraction is usually a wash. From nostalgia, the older attraction will usually seem better. If that old attraction was your favorite for whatever reason, then the new one will most definitely rate lower. Change is rough on a lot of people... but staying the same for any business will eventually run them into the ground. If you don't adapt to the changes of the mass market audience, then you don't stay in business long.

And that's the big thing I think a lot of hardcore fans who become "jaded" of Walt Disney World forget. Disney has to play to the main stream, average tourist... the mass market audience. They have to give what the average guest wants, the one who may only make the trip once in their lifetime... or if more than once, likely years apart. The non-planner, the one who doesn't make detailed touring plans. That's the bread and butter, and that's who is paying the bills.

I could go on longer on the subject, but I think I've typed more than most people will bother to read at this point anyways. :lol:

To answer the original posters last question, I am one of the members here who that, while not always happy with every decision, and can constructively criticize some of the negative things I see with Walt Disney World, I do at the end of the day smile and remember that it really is the most magical place on earth, and I still love every chance I get to go, discuss it with others, help other members with questions on their trip planning, etc. After all, the whole reason I even started posting here is because of how much I love the World.

 

[nepalostparks]

WDW is a product. The people that visit are customers. Any customer will have a set of standards it expects from any particular product; it is how they judge whether or not the value of the product/service is worth it's cost.

I think that's a very valid point. The cliche that you can't please everyone all the time fits well. You will never be able to get everyone to agree on everything, simply because we all come in with our own standards.

And I don't just judge WDW against itself, I also judge it against it's domestic brother - Disneyland. That's another comparison WDW fails on many levels; imho. Again, reasonable people may disagree.

I'm one of those who disagree with a direct comparison between the two in many cases (but not all). Certainly in some areas, comparisons can be made. But I do think it's important not to confuse Walt Disney World and Disneyland with being the same. You call them domestic brothers... I would liken them more to cousins. (Close first cousins, maybe, but it's really all semantics I suppose :lol

Disneyland and Walt Disney World for the most part cater to two very different audiences. The biggest difference is Disneyland caters much more to local and regional customers, who will visit on a much more regular basis for short stays. Walt Disney World is more of a several day to a week destination, and more of a long distance vacation, where the majority of customers are a once in a life, once in a decade, or at best, once a year visitors.

Are their locals in Florida who visit all the time? Sure. Are there families that make their one big trip to a Disney park to Disneyland? Sure. But overall, I think you're looking at two different types of audiences.

The simple fact is, at Disneyland, you need to keep everything fresh and new. To get your customers to come back again and again, you need to have new entertainment, parades, shows, rides, etc. on a regular basis. You need to keep things running top notch and looking good, because you can't afford to turn off guests from returning on a regular basis.

At Walt Disney World, the majority of guests aren't coming back next month. Or next year. Or even maybe in the next decade. The parades and shows don't need to be constantly changed... because a majority of each audience has never seen it before. Rides don't have to be constantly built or updated, because each one is a new experience for many people.

Is it right? Should Walt Disney World put out "better" new attractions and do more and better upkeep and changes with their current attractions and shows? From our perspective, the fan who keeps up with the parks and visits on a regular basis, I think the answer is an easy yes. But from the eyes of the number crunchers, looking at the bottom line, I think it's easier to say no. And we on the boards here can argue that point until we're blue in the face. (And I see some do it. :lookaroun)

Again, I'm not saying looking at only the bottom line matters, but I caution those who try to make a direct comparison between Disneyland and Walt Disney World as the main part of their argument.

 

[The Duck]

Some are jaded. Some are fans who truly and sincerely care. Most of us fall into both categories from time to time depending on the situation. I try to make an annual trip to WDW and sometimes one or two things may be out of whack but I generally don't let them bother me. Life's too short to kvetch about burnt out light bulbs and Fast Pass pros & cons. Now, if someone broke my nose at Epcot I might be a wee bit testy but then again, who wouldn't?

 

[Walt Disney1955]

This board is a refreshing breathe of fresh air sometimes. The cynical attitudes and the downright name-calling arguments you see on Youtube over the silliest things make anything that happens on here look like a church choir.

But yeah, once in a while people get upset on here over how much better things can be. I know that they are improving the place as we speak but the fact that this is the happiest place on earth and the most visited park in the world should tell you something. It kind of reminds me of a star athlete who is the best player in the world. Despite that, he will still have his sharp critics. Think of Disney as the Babe Ruth/Michael Jordan/Wayne Gretzky/Peyton Manning of theme parks.

 

[progroupie]

I think the only thing that prevents the name calling and behavior you see on places like youtube is the fact this board has mods who step in and prevent that from happening.

To be honest I think it's very easy to go on the internet and complain about every nitpicky thing after the fact. Most users on here probably had a fantastic time on their vacation even if they saw a burned out lightbulb or two but then once they have the chance to bring it up on here they're going to make it sound like it was the end of the world and ruined their vacation.

 

[Krack]

I'm one of those who disagree with a direct comparison between the two in many cases (but not all). Certainly in some areas, comparisons can be made. But I do think it's important not to confuse Walt Disney World and Disneyland with being the same. You call them domestic brothers... I would liken them more to cousins. (Close first cousins, maybe, but it's really all semantics I suppose :lol

Yet a direct comparison is exactly the one I make. Since I no longer live near either set of parks, when I am deciding where I want to experience Disney, I have to choose whether I'm flying east or flying west. Recently, I've been choosing west. It never used to be that way, but the last few years, I'd just rather be at Disneyland - I enjoy the Resort more (and really, it's just Disneyland proper; I generally think DCA stinks), it's typically cheaper and there's many, many more non-Disney places of interest (for me) to visit in the immediate area.

Disneyland and Walt Disney World for the most part cater to two very different audiences.

Yet they both compete directly for my dollar.

EDIT: Effectively, your point is that one resort has to try (California) and that the other resort (Orlando) does not have to try; and I agree that if you look at it entirely in a short-term "we need to make maximum profit today and we'll worry about tomorrow's profit tomorrow" manner of thinking and management. However, I fail to see how one can be branded as "jaded" because they happen to point out that the one resort (WDW) doesn't try and makes very little effort and that the behavior of the other resort (DLR) proves the company is capable of trying if it chooses to do so. Pointing out the obvious doesn't make someone jaded, imo.