Bob Chapek Confirms Disney Will Overhaul Epcot

[Tony the Tigger]

Not Ratatouille, that ride's garbage, I've no idea why so many people want to see it in Epcot.

But new countries with new attractions. All would be forgiven if that happened!

Because it fits better than Frozen if this park wants to shove IPs in, and it's been rumored (not sure if it was actually on the table though) before.

And most probably haven't actually gotten a chance to ride it and judge it for themselves.

Realistically though... Ratatouille is far better than Frozen. Not only is it a better ride, but it is a better fit.

Also have you even ridden it? I've been on it like 5 times and it's at least on par with Kong at Universal. It's not as good as Spider-Man, or The Haunted Mansion, but it is very good.

Why couldn't we get an original ratatouille attraction for world showcase?

And, sorry, but we as their customer have every right to question their business model.

You have a right to go or not go. You have a right to publicly complain on a message board. But they have no reason to listen to your opinion of their business model.

 

[flynnibus]

It varies wildly from family to family as to how people pay for their vacations. However, I would like to point out that a credit card interest rate of 0-3% is in no way typical for the US. The average interest on consumer cards starts at 10%, and that is fairly low.

Try more like 16%

 

[James Norrie]

Sorry, but the "Diznee is a bizness" mantra is BS. It's all about priorities, and for nearly a decade TWDC, and TDO in particular, has had the corporate bottom line as their one and only priority

So Disney is not a business? I recall a story of Walt, when faced with a choice of adding bathrooms or drinking fountains, simply said "We'll put in bathrooms, they can buy their drinks"...

 

[Earl Sweatpants]

So Disney is not a business? I recall a story of Walt, when faced with a choice of adding bathrooms or drinking fountains, simply said "We'll put in bathrooms, they can buy their drinks"...

Yeah, I'm confused by that statement too. How does having the corporate bottom line as a priority not make them a business? How else is the bottom line maintained? Where does all the money come from?

 

[lazyboy97o]

So Disney is not a business? I recall a story of Walt, when faced with a choice of adding bathrooms or drinking fountains, simply said "We'll put in bathrooms, they can buy their drinks"...

What point are you trying to make? You've completely removed the remainder of the justification for bathrooms over water fountains. You're trying to pass the decision off as some sort of emphasis on making a buck when the decision was about customer service and convenience. People buying sodas was an available alternative to water fountains. There was no other place for people to do their business if the bathrooms were not operational, which Walt is said to have acknowledged. You're also missing two important factors of context.

First, in the mid-1950s it was customary for amusement parks and carnivals to charge for use of their restrooms. This practice was one of three very high margin revenue streams that conventional wisdom of the time deemed necessary to the profitable operation of an amusement park, the other two were alcohol sales and midway games (also steadfastly refused by Walt).

Second, most of the food service venues that opened with Disneyland were concessions operated by third parties. Any additional beverage revenue generated by the water fountains not being operational would not have gone directly to Disneyland, Inc.

So the story is hardly one of Walt looking to make a buck. He refused to make money on the bathrooms he chose to built and steered those who were thirsty to other businesses.

 

[RobidaFlats]

Try more like 16%

You can find cards at 10%. Hence the start at.

 

[Jones14]

What point are you trying to make? You've completely removed the remainder of the justification for bathrooms over water fountains. You're trying to pass the decision off as some sort of emphasis on making a buck when the decision was about customer service and convenience. People buying sodas was an available alternative to water fountains. There was no other place for people to do their business if the bathrooms were not operational, which Walt is said to have acknowledged. You're also missing two important factors of context.

First, in the mid-1950s it was customary for amusement parks and carnivals to charge for use of their restrooms. This practice was one of three very high margin revenue streams that conventional wisdom of the time deemed necessary to the profitable operation of an amusement park, the other two were alcohol sales and midway games (also steadfastly refused by Walt).

Second, most of the food service venues that opened with Disneyland were concessions operated by third parties. Any additional beverage revenue generated by the water fountains not being operational would not have gone directly to Disneyland, Inc.

So the story is hardly one of Walt looking to make a buck. He refused to make money on the bathrooms he chose to built and steered those who were thirsty to other businesses.

Not to mention that both were intended to be operational from Day 1. It was a water problem that caused him to have to make the choice between water fountains and bathrooms, and it was fixed as soon as they could reasonably do so. There was never a greedy intent to withhold free water to force the customers into buying a drink.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Not to mention that both were intended to be operational from Day 1. It was a water problem that caused him to have to make the choice between water fountains and bathrooms, and it was fixed as soon as they could reasonably do so. There was never a greedy intent to withhold free water to force the customers into buying a drink.

The problem was a regional plumbers strike, meaning the strike was not even specifically against Disneyland, Walt Disney, WED Enterprises, The American Broadcasting Company or Walt Disney Productions. The decision is also in relation to July 17, the televised preview day whose attendance was supposed to be limited by invitation. Most accounts I can recall at the moment suggest that much of the chaos of "Black Sunday" was resolved by the time Disneyland opened for the general public on July 18.

 

[BrerJon]

Also have you even ridden it? I've been on it like 5 times and it's at least on par with Kong at Universal. It's not as good as Spider-Man, or The Haunted Mansion, but it is very good.

I've ridden Ratatouille, yes, very disappointing. I haven't done Kong so can't compare that but Rat is just a series of screens with props around them and your bog standard Hunny Hunt style trackless cars. Of course they might not clone it exactly for Epcot, and I guess a trackless ride would be unique for WDW, but past form says they'd make few changes when importing the attraction.

 

[BrerJon]

So Disney is not a business? I recall a story of Walt, when faced with a choice of adding bathrooms or drinking fountains, simply said "We'll put in bathrooms, they can buy their drinks"...

OK, a quick primer on the 'Disney is a business' thing. Any business faces choices in how they operate. Walt Disney made a fortune by adding extra details, theming, guest touches and service, wrapped up in a package that was good value for money, and made guests have many happy memories, so they then would take their kids, guaranteeing years and years of income for the park.

Today's Disney looks at each of those small features, or attractions, or interactions, and says 'where is the profit in that', and cuts them relentlessly. Only one plausible E-ticket has opened across four parks in ten years, because attractions cost money. Tickets have gone up way above inflation, many things have closed without replacement, and small touches removed. But whenever fans criticise that, some people defend Disney by saying 'it's a business', as if there is only ever one way to make money out of something.

Look at Universal. Universal is a business, is it not? And yet do they cut the shows in Islands of Adventure and shutter attractions to increase the profit margin? Or do they spend a fortune on a relentless expansion plan, and enjoy record profits?

Nobody is denying that Disney is a business, but to use that as a reason to defend stagnation in quality and offering and increase in prices ignores the fact that Walt, or Universal, or any number of highly profitable companies, manage to make great profits by spending to invest instead of just cutting and raising the whole time and hoping the customer doesn't notice.

All we want is Disney to have a go too. After all, they practically wrote the book on it, even if they've now forgotten how to read.

 

[PREMiERdrum]

.....one of three very high margin revenue streams

Streams indeed. Pun intended?

 

[S 2]

Because it fits better than Frozen if this park wants to shove IPs in, and it's been rumored (not sure if it was actually on the table though) before.

And most probably haven't actually gotten a chance to ride it and judge it for themselves.

yep that's pretty much why, true I haven't ridden it except for on YouTube and it looks cute enough to me, better than no ride at all which is the alternatve. Another thing I think of is something to absorb Frozen's line, hopefully by the time I return I don't have to wait 3 hours to ride. It seems like since they did build Frozen this might be the direction they're going around WS? If they shut down as much when they start to revamp EPCOT as they did DHS its crazy to think that ride wait could go up even more while they build!

So Disney is not a business? I recall a story of Walt, when faced with a choice of adding bathrooms or drinking fountains, simply said "We'll put in bathrooms, they can buy their drinks"...

Are you referring to Disneyland's opening day when the the plumbing was down and he was forced to choose just for that first day or two because of a plumbers strike?

 

[Cesar R M]

It varies wildly from family to family as to how people pay for their vacations. However, I would like to point out that a credit card interest rate of 0-3% is in no way typical for the US. The average interest on consumer cards starts at 10%, and that is fairly low.

Thank you, Id say my family in Texas are lucky, they keep getting these cards at around 3% rate all the time from major banks.

 

[RSoxNo1]

Look at Universal. Universal is a business, is it not? And yet do they cut the shows in Islands of Adventure and shutter attractions to increase the profit margin? Or do they spend a fortune on a relentless expansion plan, and enjoy record profits?

Nobody is denying that Disney is a business, but to use that as a reason to defend stagnation in quality and offering and increase in prices ignores the fact that Walt, or Universal, or any number of highly profitable companies, manage to make great profits by spending to invest instead of just cutting and raising the whole time and hoping the customer doesn't notice.

All we want is Disney to have a go too. After all, they practically wrote the book on it, even if they've now forgotten how to read.

Before potter that's exactly how Universal operated.

 

[Cesar R M]

OK, a quick primer on the 'Disney is a business' thing. Any business faces choices in how they operate. Walt Disney made a fortune by adding extra details, theming, guest touches and service, wrapped up in a package that was good value for money, and made guests have many happy memories, so they then would take their kids, guaranteeing years and years of income for the park.

Today's Disney looks at each of those small features, or attractions, or interactions, and says 'where is the profit in that', and cuts them relentlessly. Only one plausible E-ticket has opened across four parks in ten years, because attractions cost money. Tickets have gone up way above inflation, many things have closed without replacement, and small touches removed. But whenever fans criticise that, some people defend Disney by saying 'it's a business', as if there is only ever one way to make money out of something.

Look at Universal. Universal is a business, is it not? And yet do they cut the shows in Islands of Adventure and shutter attractions to increase the profit margin? Or do they spend a fortune on a relentless expansion plan, and enjoy record profits?

Nobody is denying that Disney is a business, but to use that as a reason to defend stagnation in quality and offering and increase in prices ignores the fact that Walt, or Universal, or any number of highly profitable companies, manage to make great profits by spending to invest instead of just cutting and raising the whole time and hoping the customer doesn't notice.

All we want is Disney to have a go too. After all, they practically wrote the book on it, even if they've now forgotten how to read.

It seems its time to use this macro again...

cant believe people again overusing "but disney is a business!" excuse to shield from all shortcomings.

 

[Cesar R M]

Before potter that's exactly how Universal operated.

Good to know Potter actually opened their eyes, and now they are getting hefty visitor increases. Which in turn fuels more investment.

 

[marni1971]

Before potter that's exactly how Universal operated.

Good to know Potter actually opened their eyes, and now they are getting hefty visitor increases. Which in turn fuels more investment.

(Before Comcast)

 

[alphac2005]

It seems its time to use this macro again...
View attachment 183875
cant believe people again overusing "but disney is a business!" excuse to shield from all shortcomings.

What's it like? Every few months and someone on the board has to come crawling in starting the same Disney is a business routine. Geez.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

What's it like? Every few months and someone on the board has to come crawling in starting the same Disney is a business routine. Geez.

Apparently a lot of people here need to wake up to that fact because they think it's all about altruism and artwork, purity, fairy dust, super fans telling a company what to do (and that what they do is "wrong") because the super fans have some imaginary claim over the legacy.

When someone starts naïvely whining and crying about "why can't Disney just fix everything at the same time?" Out comes the appropriate business argument.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Apparently a lot of people here need to wake up to that fact because they think it's all about altruism and artwork, purity, fairy dust, super fans telling a company what to do (and that what they do is "wrong") because the super fans have some imaginary claim over the legacy.

When someone starts naïvely whining and crying about "why can't Disney just fix everything at the same time?" Out comes the appropriate business argument.

The argument is not appropriate as it falsely assumes a single universal truth.