JustInTime
Well-Known Member
I am not familiar which one you are referring to. Which one is the largest?
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Are we to blame for WDW cutbacks?
- Thread starter whylightbulb
- Start date
I am not familiar which one you are referring to. Which one is the largest?
MarkTwain
Well-Known Member
I was trying to be discrete. Apparently I was too much so. :lol: I was referring to the DIS Boards.
devoy1701
Well-Known Member
JustInTime
Well-Known Member
Thats what got me confused, actually! Plus, I would never actually post on those boards.
They currently have 283,188 members. WDWMagic currently has 71,615.
devoy1701
Well-Known Member
Lucky
Well-Known Member
Those extra 212,000 or so warm bodies must dilute the average quality quite a bit.
WDWmazprty
Well-Known Member
WDWMagic is better than the DIS Boards :king:
devoy1701
Well-Known Member
not to mention the discussion boards look kind of messy IMO with all of the junk and banners people add into their sigs...makes for harder reading..
devoy1701
Well-Known Member
do you still post on dtuneslive too? conversation on there always seemed to be like 4 days too late...and always positive too. They always seem afraid to say something negative...I like the music, but prefer posting here anymore.
WDWmazprty
Well-Known Member
Yeah, :lol:. My wife is on there more than I am; I post every now and then. I'm a big lurker on there, but I listen to the music all day everday at work. Im a big requester-wdwpiratemaz. Im listening as we speak.
Thrill
Well-Known Member
I suppose it's a fair argument that complaints can be taken the wrong way. I heard that they justified cutting appetizers from the DDP because people complained that it was too much food. @_@
Still, I think that the executives (and thus majority stockholders) are to blame for the fact that management takes criticism as an excuse to cut back.
Still, I think that the executives (and thus majority stockholders) are to blame for the fact that management takes criticism as an excuse to cut back.
That is the main reason I initially gravitated to WDWMagic. The forums on Dis look like my teenage daughters walls with crap up everywhere and no real substance.
Jimmy Thick
Well-Known Member
The Dis boards have more people than this one? I might have to register there and offer a simulcast for my future threads, as I feel its important for my fellow Disney fans to read what I write.
Jimmy Thick- My fan club is getting larger.:king:
Jimmy Thick- My fan club is getting larger.:king:
hpyhnt 1000
Well-Known Member
Agreed. WDWMagic is by far one of the best organized discussion sites for Disney. And from what I can tell, Steve keeps the site up to date on a very regular basis as well; some of the others can be a bit slow in news and updating their info.
As far as Al Lutz's ramblings go, I think I can kinda see his point, but his writing can be interpreted a few different ways. Still, the fact of the matter is that passholders and frequent visitors are a very much a minority at WDW, much more so than DL. I just can't see TDO paying us THAT much attention. It would take an attendance and/or revenue hit before management really makes some visible sweeping changes (hopefully for the better).
Pepper's Ghost
Well-Known Member
Please understand that I'm not attacking anyone in this post. I just wanted to make some friendly comments.
I can't say I know anything about Lutz, but I can easily see that he talks out of both sides of his mouth. In one sentence, he says:
"When you add into this mix the rabid Walt Disney World fan boys who attack anything online they perceive as negative about the resort (to the sheer delight of the management there, whose use these posts to justify further cutbacks) along with the many WDW-focused sites that delete critiques of any kind, it practically insures that the East Coast complex will only continue to fall further behind quality-wise. "
So, which is it? Is he claiming that Disney is letting quality slip because "fan boys" complain about anything and everything that we think is negative, or is he saying that Disney is letting quality slip because people and websites are afraid of making any negative comments? It can't be both.
Aside from that, he's an idiot if he thinks Disney is making multi-million dollar decisions to spite descending individuals on forum sites like ours. That's absolutely ridiculous. Corporations don't care what individuals say, and certainly aren't going to cut their nose off to spite their face. They would not let their product fall into disrepair to spite individuals, or even small groups that complain. It's about money, not seeing if you can upset people who speak badly about you. :shrug:
What I read in an early post that his "assault" on TDA played any part in Disney making improvements is giving him WAY to much credit. Again, Disney made changes because they were necessary, not because some Putz was launching a verbal assault on them. That's like saying that the Yankees won the World Series last year because one 8-year-old kid was praying to God every night to bring them a World Series. The only thing the two had to do with each other is that they happened at the same time. It's giving him way too much credit, and taking away too much credit from those at Disney who really made it happen.
Anyway, I hope my comments don't seem harsh at all. His article got me riled up though.
I can't say I know anything about Lutz, but I can easily see that he talks out of both sides of his mouth. In one sentence, he says:
"When you add into this mix the rabid Walt Disney World fan boys who attack anything online they perceive as negative about the resort (to the sheer delight of the management there, whose use these posts to justify further cutbacks) along with the many WDW-focused sites that delete critiques of any kind, it practically insures that the East Coast complex will only continue to fall further behind quality-wise. "
So, which is it? Is he claiming that Disney is letting quality slip because "fan boys" complain about anything and everything that we think is negative, or is he saying that Disney is letting quality slip because people and websites are afraid of making any negative comments? It can't be both.
Aside from that, he's an idiot if he thinks Disney is making multi-million dollar decisions to spite descending individuals on forum sites like ours. That's absolutely ridiculous. Corporations don't care what individuals say, and certainly aren't going to cut their nose off to spite their face. They would not let their product fall into disrepair to spite individuals, or even small groups that complain. It's about money, not seeing if you can upset people who speak badly about you. :shrug:
What I read in an early post that his "assault" on TDA played any part in Disney making improvements is giving him WAY to much credit. Again, Disney made changes because they were necessary, not because some Putz was launching a verbal assault on them. That's like saying that the Yankees won the World Series last year because one 8-year-old kid was praying to God every night to bring them a World Series. The only thing the two had to do with each other is that they happened at the same time. It's giving him way too much credit, and taking away too much credit from those at Disney who really made it happen.
Anyway, I hope my comments don't seem harsh at all. His article got me riled up though.
"When you add into this mix the rabid Walt Disney World fan boys who attack anything online they perceive as negative about the resort (to the sheer delight of the management there, whose use these posts to justify further cutbacks) along with the many WDW-focused sites that delete critiques of any kind, it practically insures that the East Coast complex will only continue to fall further behind quality-wise. "
So, which is it? Is he claiming that Disney is letting quality slip because "fan boys" complain about anything and everything that we think is negative, or is he saying that Disney is letting quality slip because people and websites are afraid of making any negative comments? It can't be both.
Not to jump on you, but a handful of people in this thread have obviously misread the beginning of the quote. Let me try and rephrase it (or clarify it) ... Lutz is saying that there is a rabid group of fan boys who attack other people who make "negative" comments about WDW. And then he's saying that WDW management is delighted that the fan boys are attacking people who are critical of the resort (and by proxy WDW management). Finally, he says that management feels it can let quality slip because anyone criticizing them for cutbacks on maintenance will be shouted down by these fan boys as being too "negative".
It's not inconsistent, it's just poorly phrased.
Pepper's Ghost
Well-Known Member
AHHHH!!!! I sincerely appreciate you rephrasing that. NOW that part makes sense, and yes, it was VERY poorly worded. You phrased it much better. And I don't think you were jumping on me about it. Your explanation actually helped quite a bit.
In that case, I understand his point, but I still don't completely agree. I think that saying that Disney would allow their parks to fall into disrepair, or simply not improving on the parks because people seem to be satisfied is inaccurate. What about the Fantasyland refurb? Is Disney doing that just to pretend that they care? And I know the Yeti doesn't work, but Everest was added just a few years ago. And Soarin' a couple years before that. I don't think the issue is that TDO doesn't care. I think the issue might be that Disney has likely been squeezing budgets a little bit due to the down economy. I know revenues are increasing, but well run companies get prepared for worst-case scenarios and make cuts before it's too late. They would rather brace for a bad year in a bad economy, and be pleasantly surprised, rather than to plan and spend like it's going to be a good year, and then fall short of expectations. I'm not being a "fan boy" or Disney-defender. It's just food for thought. Disney has a track record for going the extra mile. I'm sure there's more to it than being solely a money-grab. They aren't going to treat their prized parks like a person who has paid off their used car and plan to just run them into the ground so they can get the most money out of them. I think there's some pride involved despite what he thinks.
I still think that people are giving Putz too much credit for being any kind of influence on changes made at TDA. :hammer: Like Rush Limbaugh, Lutz has made a living on being controversial, but he doesn't have any kind of direct or even an indirect affect on the decisions made by Disney.
Actually, I remember when TDA was run really poor back in the late 90's to early 2000. It was actually Roy Disney (God rest his soul) who should be given the majority of the credit to the way TDA is run now. Though having said that Lutz should be given some credit for helping provide Roy Disney with ammunition against Micheal Eisner. His site and some of his articles were often quoted by the local and sometimes national media during the time when Roy was launching his campaign against Eisner. The failure of DCA, the accidents around the park resulting in deaths (Big Thunder, Columbia) and the rise of the Disneyland passholders were constantly being reported on Lutz's site. Mostly negatively of course, but with the media, negativity produces sensational stories, so when trouble began brewing at Disney and specifically Anaheim, Lutz's site was one of the go to sites. You have to remember, the internet was still relatively new and there was probably about 3 major sites devoted to solely covering Disneyland, and the others all kept a happy outlook on the state of the resorts. Love him or hate him he was a presence in helping to shape the direction of the Disneyland resort.
Wilt Dasney
Well-Known Member
Oy. I feel like I just read an exegesis of why the New Testament's original Greek doesn't mean what it sounds like when you read it in English. :lol:
Seriously, if that's Al's line of argument, it could really use a clarifying edit.