Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
Except in countries where the comma is used in a number the same way a decimal is used in a number in the USA.
1.000 in the USA = 1,000 in many other countries

In the post under discussion, it was perfectly clear what was meant. The poster simply forgot to include a comma in one instance, and then someone decided to make a huge fuss about it for no good reason.

ETA: This isn’t directed at you, by the way. You shared a very interesting tidbit.
 

imsosarah

Well-Known Member
The money should be going to the companies to maintain their payroll instead of individuals through unemployment. Rather than the state individually processing, vetting, and paying 70k individuals it could be done as a single transaction with the employer and save tens of millions of dollars while protecting jobs and citizens.
That is happening with the smaller companies. The larger companies are using their bailouts to pay for the operations and the benefits. When they are furloughed vs laid off they are getting the benefits still paid. The PPP and how you talk about are actually ways to manipulate the true unemployment numbers in the country to make it look less bad than it actually is.
 

Parker in NYC

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Actually, the people doing the studies do have agendas, as most of them are paid for by the government.

So, the idea of reopening any entertainment venues, including theme parks comes down to one fundamental question:
Do you trust the government (federal, state and local) completely or do you think the government is testing us to see how much of our liberties we are wiling to let them take in the name of safety?

If you completely trust the government, then the theme parks should remain closed until they say so; however, keep in mind the theme parks can't remained closed indefinitely, even once CMs are furloughed, there is still a lot of expense being incurred. And California's economy is heavily dependent on entertainment and theme parks and if the theme parks fail, so does California's economy, which is the 5th largest economy in the world. That also means, the U.S. economy fails and we end up in a depression, which would have devastating effects and make the deaths caused by Covid-19 look small with death on a far more massive scale and in ways that would be even more heartbreaking than what we see with this disease.

If you don't trust the government, then those that are insisting we reopen things are most likely suggesting the correct course of action, as we the people need to be willing to stand up and say we will not let our rights be trampled in the name of safety, which would also include reopening the theme parks.

So the reality is the theme parks and other entertainment venues need to reopen in the relatively near future, not matter which position you take, otherwise we are looking at death and disease on a scale we can't even begin to fathom.

Now there are logical things that can be done, such as reducing max capacity (which Disney parks should have done long ago just to keep the park crowds at more comfortable levels), more virtual queues, but then you need somewhere for people to safely go while waiting, so there will need to be more show venues setup, as each venue would need to operate at reduced capacity. Quick Service could become mobile order only, lids for drinks will need to come back, all resorts will need to switch back to individual amenities instead of shared amenities. We could see all attractions with FP becoming FP only, when you return, you would go through the standby queue and the FP queue would be for those with DAS, wheelchair, over a certain age (in other words high risk) and guest recovery. We could also see something like the parks allowing those that are high risk to enter the parks two hours early with everything running. There will also likely be permanent hand washing stations setup throughout the park. But really, I think all restaurants (everywhere, not just in theme parks) should have hand washing stations setup outside of restrooms, they do this at most places in the Philippines and it really makes a lot of sense, no need to go into a restroom just to wash your hands.

Harvard is not working for the government. But by your definition, we shouldn't trust anyone with whom you don't agree. Got it.
 

imsosarah

Well-Known Member
If we have to open up with temperature Checks before we go into places the economy will not rebound as to many will stay home. For our economy to survive it cannot have these type of restrictions as people will be scared to go out

Would it be better for them to "feel safe" and die.

I won't go to the grocery stores that don't require masks. We wouldn't go out to eat if the waitstaff wasn't wearing one.

Most people I think will be rational and feel safer seeing precautions because at this point it is understood this is real and we need to take it seriously.
 

imsosarah

Well-Known Member
i can assure you based in what our focus groups have said and the intel we are getting if you need to temp check and have servers wearing mask and gloves people will not go out to those places.

who are you focus grouping? were these done in the last 7 days or 14+ days ago?
 

Polynesia

Well-Known Member
The way CA Gov was talking, Disney land won't be open for a LONG time (no large events, concerts, weddings, conferences, etc likely through end of year) - will be interesting if FL follows the same approach...
Very interesting. Disneyland was given an exemption when California announced closures. Disney decided to close anyway which was the right thing to do. I have to wonder if they’re still exempt. However, I do think Disneyland will open in some capacity this summer.
 

Parker in NYC

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Would it be better for them to "feel safe" and die.

I won't go to the grocery stores that don't require masks. We wouldn't go out to eat if the waitstaff wasn't wearing one.

Most people I think will be rational and feel safer seeing precautions because at this point it is understood this is real and we need to take it seriously.

Getting slimmer by the day. At least on this board.
 

Kamikaze

Well-Known Member
Speaking of which, I was listening in on DH’s Company meeting. Like I said, they already received their funds. But they said that for the next 8 weeks, any money spent on payroll does not have to be paid back.

In light of some of the discussion yesterday about why didn’t we use existing payroll systems instead of the unemployment system to distribute funds, I thought that was interesting. Looks like it’s sort of a patchwork of both.

Thats .. how it works. The point of the plan.
 

gmajew

Premium Member
who are you focus grouping? were these done in the last 7 days or 14+ days ago?

Continual for the past week and will continue for the next month or until economic opens. My company is doing them to see what effects all of this will have on my restaurants. As I need to know when to lay off even more workers... If I dont think it will come back fast enough I need to cut my loss earlier.
 

DisneyCane

Well-Known Member
That is happening with the smaller companies. The larger companies are using their bailouts to pay for the operations and the benefits. When they are furloughed vs laid off they are getting the benefits still paid. The PPP and how you talk about are actually ways to manipulate the true unemployment numbers in the country to make it look less bad than it actually is.
Another thing interesting about the PPP is that the money used for payroll includes payroll taxes and withholding. When this gets forgiven, the taxes will have been essentially paid to the Treasury from the Treasury.

I think some of the logic behind the program is that since a business is retaining employees it can easily start back up with the same workforce that is already trained and working together. Otherwise, assuming some kind of staggered opening somebody with a skill that is useful at company A and company B who was previously employed by company A might get a job at company B because they open first. Even if company B has a similarly skilled employee who can now work at company A when they open, there will be training and integration time required by both companies.
 

DCBaker

Premium Member
"Figuring that the COVID-19 crisis will calm by the summer, Cinemark CFO and COO Sean Gamble today told investors and financial analysts in a special conference call today that the chain is looking to “ramp up” by July 1 with employees coming back roughly two weeks prior in late June. That said, openings could be “state by state, county by county” per Gamble “scaled by demand” with possible reduced hours and days of the week.

That said Gamble cautioned that it could take three months before the circuit is experiencing normal levels of business.

“We won’t be everything back day 1, but dip our toe approach,” said Gamble."

 

Parker in NYC

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
There are a lot of studies in progress, and it's probably too soon to draw conclusions from any of them.

But, I do agree with the original post (not yours) that all studies have some type of agenda (political or otherwise) behind them. There is something to prove and the study is used to prove a point.

I really struggle with what "experts" or studies to believe at this point. Heck, even the studies and "facts" on man-made climate change are not universally accepted by all scientists, and that has been studied to death for a LOT longer than this virus. (Warning: no need to hijack this discussion with arguments about climate change).

Again, only those reports and studies you acknowledge as important should matter.
 

imsosarah

Well-Known Member
And what about people who work for companies that ARE NOT applying for loans?
They are not loans, it is grants/loan is forgiven as long as you use it for payroll - we are waiting on funding now. For some companies, their employees make more on unemployment and they furlough them with the extra $600/week (unemployment payments are different state to state, some give bonus money for kids, some dont, etc)

Companies who aren't taking the loans are either 1) Fine 2) laying off - in that case, people have unemployment.

None of this is ideal, but there are different things going on for small businesses to try and keep going.
 

DisneyCane

Well-Known Member
i can assure you based in what our focus groups have said and the intel we are getting if you need to temp check and have servers wearing mask and gloves people will not go out to those places.
Even as a germaphobe, if my server was wearing a mask and gloves I would feel like I am more likely to get infected with something. I know logically and scientifically the opposite is true but it presents an image of a contaminated location.

I would go to a restaurant and eat today if I was allowed to if the server wasn't wearing any PPE. When the restrictions are eased, I will be perfectly comfortable eating out.
 

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
But, I do agree with the original post (not yours) that all studies have some type of agenda (political or otherwise) behind them. There is something to prove and the study is used to prove a point.

It’s sad that people have such a low opinion of experts. No decent scientist behaves the way you describe—openness to alternative findings and an ability to admit error are key to the scientific method. I’m not saying there aren’t exceptions to this, but the idea that most experts are tendentiously serving an agenda just isn’t true.
 

Polynesia

Well-Known Member
I’d like to know how California can open schools but keep other businesses shut. The governor talked about staggering starting times. Once in the school building though there are thousands of students. It seem contradictory to what else is being banged.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom