DCA Setting Records and WDW

[Donfan]

When I was there in February the queue was full and had about a 30-minute wait. It's NOT TSMM and if Disney really expected it to to have massive 90-minute waits they were severely overconfidant on the narketability of an attraction based on a 20 year-old film.

I was in DCA last Friday and Mermaid was a walk-on. It may have been because many people were in Carsland which is really eating up the crowds right now.

 

[spacemt354]

However, they don't really care if YOU come or not, since someone else will eventually replace you.

There is a difference between caring about their guests and caring about individual guests. Can you not read between the lines? Do you really need to be spoon-fed information? Disney is good to all its guests. You didn't get that treatment because it was YOU, you received it because that's how Disney operates. When they don't see you return, that is considered a loss, so they will proactively try to convince you to return. But it isn't because it is YOU. They will always continue to market to you, but you WILL be replaced and they won't even blink.

My point was that they can't know for sure if someone will eventually replace you. So they do care if you come or not. Because if you, an individual guest, doesn't come back and starts spreading a negative review of disney, then they will not only lose you, but they might lose those future guests as well. Does stop and shop call us and email us if we don't go shopping there on friday like we always do? No. Because yes, a typical business probably doesn't care that an individual shopper didn't shop with them, because people are replaceable. But disney is not a typical business. Disney cares if you as an individual keep coming back, because their industry is held to a higher standard, and if individuals don't come back, that standard might drop. They can't know for sure.

Actually, I think we did get that treatmeant because it was us. You just said Disney saw that we appeared to go regularly and had stopped. You said they wanted that money and enticed us to go back. If someone would automatically replace us when we didn't go down, then why did they call us and go the extra mile? Because it's disney. It's not a typical company. If us not coming down is considered a loss for disney, then I guess someone didn't replace us right away.

And if that's just the way Disney operates, it's a lot different than any other business. All of your evidence for proving me wrong is based on your opinion, and to an extent, I am using my own opinion as well. There is no information to be spoon-fed, because you haven't provided any other than your own opinion.

We are reading between the lines through different windows. If you feel disney won't even blink and replace us, then that's up to you. But no matter how right you think you are, you're never going to convince me that you're right unless you provide something other than your opinions about how the company views individual guests. And that is never going to happen because no executive at disney would ever come out to the public and say the company doesn't care about individual guests. So until that happens, I will continue to see the situation through my perspective. And I'm not trying to prove that what you're saying is completely wrong. I can't do that in a full sense because I can only go off of the experiences I have had. But I don't think you can claim that you are completely right either, and that is all I am trying to say. And that'll be the last I'll say of it so we can get back on track to the discussion topic.

 

[Lee]

Blue Bayou's pricing is steep, but is it any worse than any other Disney restaurant? I always get the Monte Cristo as well, which I believe is the cheapest thing on the menu.

Mmmmm....I love the Monte Cristo at Blue Bayou.
And the creme brûlée from the little joint upstairs...

 

[DznyRktekt]

Mmmmm....I love the Monte Cristo at Blue Bayou.
And the creme brûlée from the little joint upstairs...

Now I'm hungry. Thank guys.. Still 35 minutes til lunch.

 

[wannab@dis]

Disney saw that someone who appeared to go regularly has stopped coming. They want that money. So they will entice you to return. However, they don't really care if YOU come or not, since someone else will eventually replace you.

Disney is good to all its guests. You didn't get that treatment because it was YOU, you received it because that's how Disney operates. When they don't see you return, that is considered a loss, so they will proactively try to convince you to return. But it isn't because it is YOU. They will always continue to market to you, but you WILL be replaced and they won't even blink.

I agree with most of the info above, but would add a couple of things.

First, they do care about the specific guests on the micro level more than the macro level. The front lines are tasked with making guests happy with their current trip, so they care (or should). The marketing groups care about seeing that customer return so they will send out offers to entice them back. Management (and so-called bean counters) want guest satisfaction / spending to increase on average so they will look for ways to do that. In each level of the organization, the guest is important. However, the further up, the metrics are more disassociated from specific guests and more to the averages. That's to be expected.

Second, a business shouldn't assume there will be continual replacements. If the metrics show a drop in return visits, someone better be looking for the reason and attempt to rectify it. Personally, I think this is where NextGen is coming into play. They are looking to expand their metrics so they can find better and more efficient ways to increase the return visits by improving guest satisfaction. Getting the first timer or the regular to plan their next visit is of utmost importance. If it's not happening, someone should be aware and changing policies (or culture) to increase the trends.

 

[fosse76]

My point was that they can't know for sure if someone will eventually replace you. So they do care if you come or not. Because if you, an individual guest, doesn't come back and starts spreading a negative review of disney, then they will not only lose you, but they might lose those future guests as well. Does stop and shop call us and email us if we don't go shopping there on friday like we always do? No. Because yes, a typical business probably doesn't care that an individual shopper didn't shop with them, because people are replaceable. But disney is not a typical business. Disney cares if you as an individual keep coming back, because their industry is held to a higher standard, and if individuals don't come back, that standard might drop. They can't know for sure.

But they don't care about the specific individual. They don't care if I myself return or if you, specifically, return. You can be anyone. They don't care who it is. Just as long as it is someone.

Actually, I think we did get that treatmeant because it was us.

I'm sorry, but that's nonsense. Disney could care less that it was you. You could be anyone in the world and they would have done exactly the same thing.

You just said Disney saw that we appeared to go regularly and had stopped. You said they wanted that money and enticed us to go back. If someone would automatically replace us when we didn't go down, then why did they call us and go the extra mile? Because it's disney. It's not a typical company. If us not coming down is considered a loss for disney, then I guess someone didn't replace us right away.

For the first time in years I don't have any upcoming reservations at A Disney resort. Guess what? I've been inundated with offers and Destination Disney e-mails and postcards. Know something else? It has nothing to do with it being ME. I could be anyone. Disney doesn't want to lose that money, but it has NOTHING to do with me as an individual.

And if that's just the way Disney operates, it's a lot different than any other business. All of your evidence for proving me wrong is based on your opinion, and to an extent, I am using my own opinion as well. There is no information to be spoon-fed, because you haven't provided any other than your own opinion.

No, it's not. Unlike your local small business who gets to know you on a first name basis, Disney has no idea who you are. They see you went regularly and then stopped. They know nothing about you, other than the fact that you are no longer giving them money. So they send you marketing materials and discounts. It has NOTHING to do with you yourself. You could be me and it would play out exactly the same way. And it's not exclusive to Disney. I go to the movies very frequently, but there was a time I didn't go for about a month. As a rewards member, the theater chain could see I haven't been, so sent me a free popcorn coupon to get me to come back. It had nothing to do with me...I'm a faceless consumer to them. They just wanted me to spend my money at their theater.

We are reading between the lines through different windows. If you feel disney won't even blink and replace us, then that's up to you.

Because I live in the real world where facts are facts (and there is no dgree to a fact: either something is fact or it is not). Disney doesn't care if I personally return. They care that I don't return because I'm not spending my money, but as I said it has nothing to do with me personally. I could be anyone. The fact that you think they care that it is you personally and not some faceless guest is ridiculous.

But no matter how right you think you are, you're never going to convince me that you're right unless you provide something other than your opinions about how the company views individual guests. And that is never going to happen because no executive at disney would ever come out to the public and say the company doesn't care about individual guests. So until that happens, I will continue to see the situation through my perspective.

Which is biased, since you think because they provided great customer service to you that it was motivated by the circumstance it was YOU and not some other guest. While Disney does provide great customer service, it had nothing to do with you. It could have been me and the same level of customer service would have been provided.

And I'm not trying to prove that what you're saying is completely wrong. I can't do that in a full sense because I can only go off of the experiences I have had. But I don't think you can claim that you are completely right either, and that is all I am trying to say. And that'll be the last I'll say of it so we can get back on track to the discussion topic.

But I am right. They didn't provide the excellent customer service to you because it was you and not some other guest. They don't care about a specific person. You could drop dead tomorrow and they won't care. They just want to get your money. They don't want to lose ANY guest. My argument is that you seem to think it's because of you specifically that they provided the customer service they did, and I'm telling you it had nothing to do with you personally. This message board is filled with posts of people who have received the same customer service you did.

 

[fosse76]

I agree with most of the info above, but would add a couple of things.

First, they do care about the specific guests on the micro level more than the macro level. The front lines are tasked with making guests happy with their current trip, so they care (or should).

Providing excellent customer service on an indivudual basis is not the same, though, as them caring about any one individual guest more than any other. spacemt354 claims Disney will care if he himself doesn't return or has a bad time, speficially because it is him and not someone else. Very few businesses would actually care about a specific person. It just isn't the same.

The marketing groups care about seeing that customer return so they will send out offers to entice them back. Management (and so-called bean counters) want guest satisfaction / spending to increase on average so they will look for ways to do that. In each level of the organization, the guest is important. However, the further up, the metrics are more disassociated from specific guests and more to the averages. That's to be expected.

Yes, they want people to have a great time so they will return. But their customer service isn't designed to appease any one individual group or person. It doesn't matter if it is me or you, Disney will strive for us to receive the same treatment. It's not they care specifically that it is me, or that it specifically you.

Second, a business shouldn't assume there will be continual replacements. If the metrics show a drop in return visits, someone better be looking for the reason and attempt to rectify it. Personally, I think this is where NextGen is coming into play. They are looking to expand their metrics so they can find better and more efficient ways to increase the return visits by improving guest satisfaction. Getting the first timer or the regular to plan their next visit is of utmost importance. If it's not happening, someone should be aware and changing policies (or culture) to increase the trends.

I somewhat agree, but as we have seen, WDW is exploiting its name because it has nothing new to offer, so if they cared that much about guests returning, they would actually add something of substance. NextGen will offer nothing of significance for the average park guest.[/quote]

 

[jt04]

Considering that you haven't been to Disney in years, how do you know what they are saying? When I was there in February the queue was full and had about a 30-minute wait. It's NOT TSMM and if Disney really expected it to to have massive 90-minute waits they were severely overconfidant on the narketability of an attraction based on a 20 year-old film.


And exactly what interactivity do you expect?

[/quote]

See TSMM or the new Monsters ride in Tokyo or Buzz at WDW or MiB at Uni or the finale at the HM. That is what I expect because that is what they said is the future.

 

[spacemt354]

But they don't care about the specific individual. They don't care if I myself return or if you, specifically, return. You can be anyone. They don't care who it is. Just as long as it is someone.

I'm sorry, but that's nonsense. Disney could care less that it was you. You could be anyone in the world and they would have done exactly the same thing.

But I am right. They didn't provide the excellent customer service to you because it was you and not some other guest. They don't care about a specific person. You could drop dead tomorrow and they won't care. They just want to get your money. They don't want to lose ANY guest. My argument is that you seem to think it's because of you specifically that they provided the customer service they did, and I'm telling you it had nothing to do with you personally. This message board is filled with posts of people who have received the same customer service you did.

I know I said I was finished, and I'm sorry, but I need to address this. They cared that it was us because we are long time guests. They keep a record of the amount of stays we have, and the times of year we go down. They sent us all of those emails, calls, etc, because they are afriad of losing long time guests, who have come several times in the past, and based on those trips, are projected to come in the future. They cared about losing guests like my family (and others as well) because we had come down often, and our future trips (along with disney's profits) could have been in jeopardy. Do they care about us, specifically, more than every other guest that comes to wdw, and did they give us that caring treatment because we are who we are? No. But that was never the question, nor did I ever intend to say anything of that notion. If you interpreted it that way, well then so be it. But that was never what I was talking about.

Yes, you're right. We could have been any other family and they would have provided those guests with the same care, devotion, and attention we recieved. But if you say that, then it's clear to me that they do care about their individual guests. They care about keeping old time guests as well as attracting new ones. Could we be a faceless guests to them in a business sense and from a macro level? We probably are. But I never said that we were given any special attention over another family simply because disney fears we are not coming back. We all know disney tries to give the best for their guests, and always tries to keep those individual guests happy and coming back to the world. And as someone else said earlier, if they know what you like to ride, and where you stay, they can offer you very appealing packages to keep you coming back. So what are we talking about then?? If they didn't care about the individual guest's enjoyment of the resort (and their incoming money), they wouldn't go to such lengths to try to get them back. Because when you think about it, where does disney recieve their profits from?...the individual guests. If you lose the individual guests, you lose your money, and your business, and you don't know for sure if other guests will replace them in the future.

 

[lazyboy97o]

There is no "they" in knowing you're a long time guest. It was calculated by a computer and triggered automatically by the programming.

It may not be wise, but yes, Disney is not concerned with small numbers not returning. They run the biggest theme park destination in the world and take that for granted, thus the lack of care in so many areas such as no desire to one up The Wizarding World of Harry Potter or trying to get people to financially commit to returning for years. You can believe all of the marketing and Walt quotes about how Disney claims to operate, but if you did some research outside of what is put out by the Mouse you would realize it is not the case.

 

[whylightbulb]

Then I guess I should just believe the sweeping generalizations that offer no evidence that they are actually true aside from a poster's opinion regarding the matter.

And I'm not sure what issue you are talking about then. I responded to a post that claimed wdw doesn't care about any individual guest. I didn't know someone can prove that is true or false if they don't take individual guest experiences into account. And I wasn't sure why someone would make a blanket statement like that if they aren't going to provide any concrete information to back it up.

You had said that my cousin working for disney doesn't mean very much. You said "He may just not be at the level where the lack of concern can be expressed. His coworkers may realize that he is a "Waltie" and, like they do with guests, will not speak honestly and in such terms." Someone earlier had also asked what if a person who works for the company says that they don't care about individual guests. Well, who in the company said that? Where is the evidence? And unless it is the president or other high executives of disney saying those things, how do we know that person who claims they don't care about individual guests means any more to the company's business model than my cousin?

The key word in all of this discussion is "may". I feel we can't base general statements on hunches or on maybe's. That's what the media does a lot and they convince people to follow a general perspective they deem to be truth, without really backing up their statements with anything much aside from their own opinions.

You also claim I am confusing micro and macro issues. From my knowledge, micro issues deal more with individials and macro issues deal with the big picture of things. The statement "wdw doesn't care about any individual guests" addresses both micro and macro issues.

From my view, the micro issue dealt with the individual guest experiences in the resort, associating with the company's cast members, and their own personal accounts of their stays.

I thought the macro issue dealt with the company's overall outlook on current and future business, which deals with past, present, and future guests who will come to the resort to spend their money for enjoyment.

I gave my own personal experiences because they dealt with the micro (that our individual experiences have been good) and the macro (that the disney company cared that we as individual guests did not come back to the resort)

I don't really mind that you don't view the company's business model the same way I do. But I'm not wasting my time providing information that supports why I believe certain generalizations are not the entire truth.

I can give you concrete evidence from my personal experience that, in general, upper management does not care about the guests. I'm not talking about an area manager in operations, I'm referring to the ones that make decisions as to what kind of quality will be produced for the parks.

While working at WDI, and also working for them on a contractual basis, there have been more than a few times that I have heard upper management say things like, "who cares if that show element 'pops' or 'flops'...they'll never know the difference"...or, "just put a coat of paint on it...we don't need to make it look great just acceptable." How about, "it doesn't matter what we put there the marks will continue to pay admission and buy merchandise." I'm not exaggerating when I tell you that there are more examples of these kind of remarks than I could possibly remember and they are not all from the same executive.

You can continue to believe what you want but I'm telling you that, at least as far as WDW is concerned, you are getting a far lesser product than what you should be getting in part due to Disney's lack of concern, and in some cases, even contempt for their customers. No it's not an official Disney policy but it's the reality of WDW today.

 

[spacemt354]

I can give you concrete evidence from my personal experience that, in general, upper management does not care about the guests. I'm not talking about an area manager in operations, I'm referring to the ones that make decisions as to what kind of quality will be produced for the parks.

While working at WDI, and also working for them on a contractual basis, there have been more than a few times that I have heard upper management say things like, "who cares if that show element 'pops' or 'flops'...they'll never know the difference"...or, "just put a coat of paint on it...we don't need to make it look great just acceptable." How about, "it doesn't matter what we put there the marks will continue to pay admission and buy merchandise." I'm not exaggerating when I tell you that there are more examples of these kind of remarks than I could possibly remember and they are not all from the same executive.

You can continue to believe what you want but I'm telling you that, at least as far as WDW is concerned, you are getting a far lesser product than what you should be getting in part due to Disney's lack of concern, and in some cases, even contempt for their customers. No it's not an official Disney policy but it's the reality of WDW today.

That is a fair point. Im going to take you for your word that you are telling the truth. But I was never disputing the point that there are individual people in the company who say these things. I was fundamentally arguing the point which is that you cannot use sweeping generalizations that label an entire company in a certain genre, while ignoring that there are instances that counter the statement. Maybe not fully, but counter the statement nonetheless.

 

[Tom]

I can give you concrete evidence from my personal experience that, in general, upper management does not care about the guests. I'm not talking about an area manager in operations, I'm referring to the ones that make decisions as to what kind of quality will be produced for the parks.

While working at WDI, and also working for them on a contractual basis, there have been more than a few times that I have heard upper management say things like, "who cares if that show element 'pops' or 'flops'...they'll never know the difference"...or, "just put a coat of paint on it...we don't need to make it look great just acceptable." How about, "it doesn't matter what we put there the marks will continue to pay admission and buy merchandise." I'm not exaggerating when I tell you that there are more examples of these kind of remarks than I could possibly remember and they are not all from the same executive.

You can continue to believe what you want but I'm telling you that, at least as far as WDW is concerned, you are getting a far lesser product than what you should be getting in part due to Disney's lack of concern, and in some cases, even contempt for their customers. No it's not an official Disney policy but it's the reality of WDW today.

Of all the posts on this board, I believe 100% of this one. That's sad.

 

[kaelynj1s]

That is really sad. I've always wondered what Walt Disney himself would say about the current state of TWDC as a whole and individual parks/resorts.

 

[xdan0920]

I can give you concrete evidence from my personal experience that, in general, upper management does not care about the guests. I'm not talking about an area manager in operations, I'm referring to the ones that make decisions as to what kind of quality will be produced for the parks.

While working at WDI, and also working for them on a contractual basis, there have been more than a few times that I have heard upper management say things like, "who cares if that show element 'pops' or 'flops'...they'll never know the difference"...or, "just put a coat of paint on it...we don't need to make it look great just acceptable." How about, "it doesn't matter what we put there the marks will continue to pay admission and buy merchandise." I'm not exaggerating when I tell you that there are more examples of these kind of remarks than I could possibly remember and they are not all from the same executive.

You can continue to believe what you want but I'm telling you that, at least as far as WDW is concerned, you are getting a far lesser product than what you should be getting in part due to Disney's lack of concern, and in some cases, even contempt for their customers. No it's not an official Disney policy but it's the reality of WDW today.

This post is a major downer. But the honesty is greatly appreciated.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

On the contrary, the reason Gran Fiesta happened was because those up top were pleasantly surprised how well Seas with Nemo was accepted.

That's the most depressing thing I've read all week.

(Which, I suppose, goes a long way to show how little I read of real media and real world events. *note to self: get a life)

 

[rioriz]

I must the only person who likes GFT....i am bias cause i love anything Donald

 

[The Empress Lilly]

I can give you concrete evidence from my personal experience that, in general, upper management does not care about the guests. I'm not talking about an area manager in operations, I'm referring to the ones that make decisions as to what kind of quality will be produced for the parks.

While working at WDI, and also working for them on a contractual basis, there have been more than a few times that I have heard upper management say things like, "who cares if that show element 'pops' or 'flops'...they'll never know the difference"...or, "just put a coat of paint on it...we don't need to make it look great just acceptable." How about, "it doesn't matter what we put there the marks will continue to pay admission and buy merchandise." I'm not exaggerating when I tell you that there are more examples of these kind of remarks than I could possibly remember and they are not all from the same executive.

You can continue to believe what you want but I'm telling you that, at least as far as WDW is concerned, you are getting a far lesser product than what you should be getting in part due to Disney's lack of concern, and in some cases, even contempt for their customers. No it's not an official Disney policy but it's the reality of WDW today.

Okay, forget my post above. This is the most depressing thing I've read all week.

Can I just say, that from a non-contractor perspective upper management's attitude is perfectly visible in most everything that is build in WDW? Everything oozes mediocrity, lack of care, lack of vision, lack of passion and believe in the product. We are being shoved a Rizzo down our throat, by a cynical management that has gotten wise to the low standards of its Walmart audience. WDW has set the bar so low, that by now it attracts the low end of the market, who in turn expect low end of the market offerings.
Just build a statue of Walt for them to worship, shove in a cartoon or celebrity everywhere, add a water play area for the kids, and they are yours forever. Meanwhile the discerning guests are pulling their hair out in disbelief and frustration.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

I must the only person who likes GFT....i am bias cause i love anything Donald

I adore Donald! He is my favourite Disney character. But the Mexico ride is ruined for me.

What I would love is for Donald to get a larger presence in the MK, maybe a ride of his own, and for EPCOT to remain character-free. Mexico's history and culture are worthy of more than three cartoon birds.

 

[dreamscometrue]

I can give you concrete evidence from my personal experience that, in general, upper management does not care about the guests. I'm not talking about an area manager in operations, I'm referring to the ones that make decisions as to what kind of quality will be produced for the parks.

While working at WDI, and also working for them on a contractual basis, there have been more than a few times that I have heard upper management say things like, "who cares if that show element 'pops' or 'flops'...they'll never know the difference"...or, "just put a coat of paint on it...we don't need to make it look great just acceptable." How about, "it doesn't matter what we put there the marks will continue to pay admission and buy merchandise." I'm not exaggerating when I tell you that there are more examples of these kind of remarks than I could possibly remember and they are not all from the same executive.

You can continue to believe what you want but I'm telling you that, at least as far as WDW is concerned, you are getting a far lesser product than what you should be getting in part due to Disney's lack of concern, and in some cases, even contempt for their customers. No it's not an official Disney policy but it's the reality of WDW today.

This is disheartening, but I have a few thoughts.

I work in a building with only 60 adults, and you would hear similar attitudes from a few of our people as well. Most of us, and most people I've worked with at different jobs, actually do care about people, product and have some pride. So am I surprised you heard that comment? Nope, not at all. I am not naive enough to believe that with 150,000 employees that some won't have these attitude. It's also been my experience that people who feel this way about their work, tend to be the loudmouths in the company. I don't believe the sky is falling or this is the prevailing sentiment. This attitude very rarely, if ever, represents the feelings of the majority.

Further, I feel that had you been working for or around WDI 20 years ago, you could have heard this. There have always been people who have no pride, passion or simply don't care at all places of employ. I doubt even all the Disney employees in the early days cared. After the strike of 1941, Walt was content that several hundred of those animators who didn't care were gone. Yep, always been people who try to dish out sub standard crap.

How does this affect me? well, some will argue that all the people with this poor attitude ensure that all we get at WDW is subpar; at least until there are changes in upper management. I disagree. On this point, there will be a very wide variety of opinions, but that's irrelevant. All that matters is, as spacemt354 noted, is the microexperience. My vacations at WDW involve experiencing the world from my point of view. I interact with CMs, eat at restaurants, partake in recreation, stay at resorts and visit parks. If what I experience is subpar imho, I'll talk to guest relations, write a letter, or simply vacation elsewhere. I've never had that experience yet. During my visit 3 months ago, doing parks daily and spending 9 nights on property, I saw about 5 minor things wrong and a million (slight hyperbole) that I was happy with. The executives you've overheard did not cause anything that I noticed. Perhaps they have little influence.