Disney and Universal: Two very different paths

[1023]

The approach by both of these companies in regards to their "theme park" operations in Orlando is complete dichotomy. One is investing in infrastructure innovation while the other pursues aggressive build out. The tangibles for guests are a handy phone app with a snappy looking bracelet ( that does time as a room key, charge card, and paper ticket replacement) or a string of new, technologically advanced attractions. This has been said by myself and others in many ways and in many threads.

What is tangible, (and arguably more valuable) to frequent guests is the variety, quality, and quantity of what is offered. If things are kept up to date, refreshed, or remodeled, then most frequent guests are mollified. If new quality attractions are added at a regular rate, the same frequent guests are thrilled. If none of these things are readily apparent to the frequent guest, they become less satisfied.

Many of the posts in this thread, (and others like it) are a direct result of customer dissatisfaction. It is that simple. It is not a negative or positive thing that you are seeing here. There are both positives and negatives at both companies offerings. The preponderance of visitors to threads that are critical, are fans saying they deserve better.

Right now, the prize for construction of new attractions is awarded to Universal. The award for slowest construction pace is Disney (in Orlando). The award for the company spending the most money is Disney (in Orlando). The award for spending money that the guest can see is Universal.

The problem is perception. If a customer can't see, touch, taste, or hear something, they have a hard time finding it valuable. While you can certainly interact with your magic band, it really didn't change much around you. When someone is made aware of it's price tag, they begin scratching their head. When a frequent customer is confronted with it, they become disheartened.

We should ask," If Disney Parks (in Orlando) are an institution, then shouldn't they be treated that way? Should they be allowed to remain stale and become shabby relics? Marty Sklar tells us that the parks are not museums. So where is the innovation? Where is the leadership?"

At the moment, both companies are on different trajectories as the OP states. It may very well be that a great resurgence for Walt Disney World is on the Horizon. Based on the quotes from the latest call stating quite the opposite, I don't think that is the case. I do think Disney (in Orlando) needs to find it's desire to lead again, but, I think it won't happen under current "profit at the expense of all else" mentality of current management. I hope I am wrong.

*1023*

P.S. The ignore feature really has improved my forum viewing.

 

[GoofGoof]

Since they can go and adults would also enjoy wouldn't that make them more FAMILY friendly then WDW? Not a statement, just asking.

I think you got that backwards. At MK they can ride most of the rides and the adults enjoy it too. FAMILY friendly. At the beach we can all enjoy the sand and the ocean together. FAMILY friendly. I can bring my kids with me to Las Vegas and I know the adults would also enjoy it, but that doesn't make it FAMILY friendly.

 

[doctornick]

I think you got that backwards. At MK they can ride most of the rides and the adults enjoy it too. FAMILY friendly. At the beach we can all enjoy the sand and the ocean together. FAMILY friendly. I can bring my kids with me to Las Vegas and I know the adults would also enjoy it, but that doesn't make it FAMILY friendly.

Yes, when I think of "family friendly" rides, I think of rides that can be enjoyed by all ages, by basically everyone without being aimed towards any particular segment. Rides that are geared specifically towards kids are not IMHO "family friendly" in this context. Rides like POTC or IASW are. Those are the kinds of rides that made Disney parks so special and really enjoyable because they were accessible to all kinds of people, even those who did not like your typical amusement park.

I think that's what Universal lacks. It sounds like the new HP offerings might help out considerable in this vein. So, we'll see,

 

[Prock3]

It could be fixed, with lightweight materials.

The fact that there isn't a crew redesigning the thing at 1/4 the original weight or less is just downright lazy. Maybe we just need more engineer in imagineering.

Its already probably made to be as light as possible, theres no use in making a moving object heavier than it needs to be. Unless they wanted to remake it out of titanium or carbon fiber there wouldn't be a significant weight loss.

 

[Goofyernmost]

I think you got that backwards. At MK they can ride most of the rides and the adults enjoy it too. FAMILY friendly. At the beach we can all enjoy the sand and the ocean together. FAMILY friendly. I can bring my kids with me to Las Vegas and I know the adults would also enjoy it, but that doesn't make it FAMILY friendly.

OK, I guess I'm just basing it on my own experience with my kids when they were young. Many things were not considered "kiddy" but they enjoyed it as much as I did. I'm referring to both WDW and Uni. It wasn't over their heads and it wasn't to much for them. They may not have placed it on their "I love it" list but they were able to do it with us and feel like they belonged there. Now I know that isn't how it always works out, but I have never found an attraction in a theme park that they were not on board with. In fact the only one that I ever had even the slightest notice of one not enjoying it much was HM in WDW. (She kept her eyes closed) Didn't find that out until about three years later.

 

[Tim Lohr]

True, for for the vast majority of the older generation (people in their 30s and up), theme park nostalgia is largely tied to classic Disney rides. Disney, after all, created the very notion of a theme park.

But nostalgia is a fluid thing. Disney does not have a stranglehold on it. Every child that is awed into reverential silence when handed their very own wand in Olivanders, every child that feels a rush of pride when hearing Optimus Prime refer to them as Freedom Fighters, every child whose eyes widen at their first glimpse of a living dinosaur will forever be tied to the Universal Parks through these memories.

I think you're suggesting that "nostalgia" and "sentimentality" are the same thing, but they aren't though. Sentimentatily is someone's own persona feeling about "what ever", and Nostalgia is something tied to single generation or specific moment in the past...

For example I grew up in the 1980's, I remember when Transforms were new because I loved them and had ton of the toys and watched the cartoons, so I'm both sentimental and nostalgic about the 1980's Transforms from "my" youth. But recently the Transformers characters for the 1980's were "remade" and altered it to make the Transformers accessible to a new generation, let's call the new guys the 2000's Transformers.

Now I Personally like the 2000's Transformers as well, and kids today seem to like the new improved, CGI, redesigned, 2000's version of the Transformers, but while kids today may have their own "sentimental" attachment to the new 2000's Transformers, I don't get the impression they care about the 1980's ones all that much, and Universal didn't build their theme park attraction based on my generation's "nostalgia" of the 1980's style toys, or the 1980's 2D, hand drawn animation. So this is why I personally have a hard time believing that the 2000's version of the Transformers will still be popular in 20 years from now... but maybe they will be

What I do know is that while Uni has been building the Transformers thing, Disney has been building a brand new roller coaster based on an 80 year old film called Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. From what I can tell though they didn't need to remake the Snow White characters in CGI or anything to appeal to the current generation of kids. It's the same film that my Grandparent's generation enjoyed, as well as my parent's generation, my generation, I've even the Snow White film to my 2 year old niece and she loves it too, but she is not "nostalgic" about it, my 2 year old niece just has excellent taste.

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, like most of Disney's stuff is a classic, or a masterpiece, or whatever other adjective you want to apply to "a work of art that transcends multiple generations". Da Vinci's paintings, Shakespeare 's plays, Beethoven's symphonies, Disney's animated films... are all things that appeal to generation after generation, and that my friend is the opposite of "nostalgia"

 

[1023]

I think you're suggesting that "nostalgia" and "sentimentality" are the same thing, but they aren't though. Sentimentatily is someone's own persona feeling about "what ever", and Nostalgia is something tied to single generation or specific moment in the past...

For example I grew up in the 1980's, I remember when Transforms were new because I loved them and had ton of the toys and watched the cartoons, so I'm both sentimental and nostalgic about the 1980's Transforms from "my" youth. But recently the Transformers characters for the 1980's were "remade" and altered it to make the Transformers accessible to a new generation, let's call the new guys the 2000's Transformers.

Now I Personally like the 2000's Transformers as well, and kids today seem to like the new improved, CGI, redesigned, 2000's version of the Transformers, but while kids today may have their own "sentimental" attachment to the new 2000's Transformers, I don't get the impression they care about the 1980's ones all that much, and Universal didn't build their theme park attraction based on my generation's "nostalgia" of the 1980's style toys, or the 1980's 2D, hand drawn animation. So this is why I personally have a hard time believing that the 2000's version of the Transformers will still be popular in 20 years from now... but maybe they will be

What I do know is that while Uni has been building the Transformers thing, Disney has been building a brand new roller coaster based on an 80 year old film called Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. From what I can tell though they didn't need to remake the Snow White characters in CGI or anything to appeal to the current generation of kids. It's the same film that my Grandparent's generation enjoyed, as well as my parent's generation, my generation, I've even the Snow White film to my 2 year old niece and she loves it too, but she is not "nostalgic" about it, my 2 year old niece just has excellent taste.

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, like most of Disney's stuff is a classic, or a masterpiece, or whatever other adjective you want to apply to "a work of art that transcends multiple generations". Da Vinci's paintings, Shakespeare 's plays, Beethoven's symphonies, Disney's animated films... are all things that appeal to generation after generation, and that my friend is the opposite of "nostalgia"

For the purposes of clarity I offer the dictionary version of Nostalgia.

The term nostalgia describes a sentimentality for the past, typically for a period or place with happy personal associations.

Now, clearly the entirety of any Disney attraction or experience can be nostalgic for someone looking back fondly at something. It could be for a movie or the theater they were in during said movie. It could be for the original SWSA that was destroyed for a meet and greet waste of time. It could be a wishing well area at Disneyland that was overtaken by a meet and greet and ruined a quiet and romantic place.

Nostalgia when taken apart literally means the pain of homecoming. I used it very recently in another thread in this paragraph below. It is an description of the word.

"I will always remember my stay at the Poly. The fireworks, the lagoon light parade on the water, and the feeling of being even farther away from the ordinary world. Oh the things that tear at the heart are the things for which a word was crafted, Nostalgia."

*1023*

 

[MerlinTheGoat]

ok sure... "IF" there is some catastrophic failure that would/could change people's perceptions and opinions of Disney, but this is a hypothetical you're describing not something based in present day reality. It's like saying if Brad Pitt became a serial killer people would probably not want to watch his movies any more, sure that's most likely true, if it did happen, but it is not something that has happened.

My point is that the Disney theme parks are more like American landmarks than simply products, in the same way people want to go see Time Square, Hollywood, and Mt. Rushmore they also want to see the Disney parks, and in the same way that Picasso paintings are valuable because they are original concepts, and Les Paul guitars are desirable because Les Paul is the guy who invented the electric guitar, Walt Disney is the guy who invented the theme park, and this is what makes them American landmarks. There is a certain prestige that comes with being the first at something and no matter what they build Universal they aren't going to change that.

I argue that a catastrophic failure is underway now. It just isn't a sudden thing, it has been and will continue to be a gradual decline unless something is done to pull them out of the fall. It will take time, and it's not going to cause WDW to close its doors. But it will be a big enough effect to put the Disney corporation in panic mode. As ParentsOf4 mentioned in another thread, WDW isn't going to close. But it will be in a crisis if nothing is done.

You're wrong about public opinion not changing just because of a brand. Someone else mentioned a good example in this thread, I believe it was Kodak vs Fuji. And Coke vs Pepsi. You overestimate the love of a brand name and can't seem to get that it's the substance that gets people interested in the product in the first place.

I think it will take a LOT for people to stop going to WDW completely. More than is ever likely to be allowed to happen. But I do believe that it's well within reason and even quite plausible that bad enough things can occur to start causing attendance numbers to shift, enough to make the corporate leaders descend into panic mode. Even if that number is just about 5-10% of a loss to the competition. Might not seem like a huge deal to the average person or nearly enough to destroy the parks by any stretch, but it sends panic through a corporation.

It could be fixed, with lightweight materials.

The fact that there isn't a crew redesigning the thing at 1/4 the original weight or less is just downright lazy. Maybe we just need more engineer in imagineering.

I know it can be fixed, the problem is that it is not. And there's little hope that it will be at this point in time. It's not a matter of what can and can't be done, it's a matter of will. A desire to do anything about it doesn't seem to exist at all in the people who run the place.

 

[GoofGoof]

OK, I just I'm just basing it on my own experience with my kids when they were young. Many things were not considered "kiddy" but they enjoyed it as much as I did. I'm referring to both WDW and Uni. It wasn't over their heads and it wasn't to much for them. They may not have placed it on their "I love it" list but they were able to do it with us and feel like they belonged there. Now I know that isn't how it always works out, but I have never found an attraction in a theme park that they were not on board with. In fact the only one that I ever had even the slightest notice of one not enjoying it much was HM in WDW. (She kept her eyes closed) Didn't find that out until about three years later.

I think you are probably talking about older kids. I'm not even talking about the kids not wanting to do something or it being over their heads. It's the exact opposite. They would want to do almost everything. My 3 year old is now a hair over 40in tall. At WDW he can do every ride but 5: Space Mountain, EE, MS, Primeval Whirl and RnRC. Last year he was under 40in but still could do everything in MK but the mountains and Stitch (no big loss).

Flash over to Universal. Here's the list of rides he can't do today:
1) Revenge of the Mummy
2) MIB
3) Hollywood Rip Rockit
4) Jurassic Park
5) Dragon Challenge
6) Dudley Do-Right
7) Popeye and Blutos Barges
8) Hulk Coaster
9) Dr Doom's Fearfall
10) Harry Potter Forbidden Journey

And last year before he hit 40in add in
11) The Simpsons
12) Despicable Me
13) Spider Man
14) Suess Trolley Train

That's over 1/3 of the rides at both Universal parks today that he can't do and about half he couldn't do last year. I am not going to take my kids to a theme park and then make them wait for me to do rides. I don't see the point in paying for a ticket for a park or parks that we can't do that many rides in. Also why I don't spend much time at DHS. If I wait a few years we will be able to ride everything.

 

[stingrock23]

The key takeaway for me is that while I will always spend time at both resorts when I come down to Orlando, recently I've been liking Universal more because I see that their money is being spent on quality attractions that I can experience, while Disney seems to be stuck in neutral. I'll never not spend time at either resort; I always plan time for both. But it does amaze me that some people don't go to Universal just because it's "not Disney". Just seems short-sighted to me.

Since IOA opened, I've been a huge fan of what they do, but recently I've decided to reward them for spending the money on quality attractions that I can enjoy.

 

[JimboJones123]

Its already probably made to be as light as possible, theres no use in making a moving object heavier than it needs to be. Unless they wanted to remake it out of titanium or carbon fiber there wouldn't be a significant weight loss.

That is a false assumption. The Yeti is HEAVY. The understructure is heavy in itself, as is the very unnecessary heavy fur.

There are plenty of ways to redesign it to be a fraction of the weight. Lighter materials would also give it the ability to be significantly more kinetic.

Heck, kill some weight, and it could become more mobile in the room. Imagine that.

It is an engineering nightmare. Far too heavy for its size.

Are these numbers right?
3 tons for the fur alone.
11 tons for the entire Yeti.

 

[gonnichi]

I think you're suggesting that "nostalgia" and "sentimentality" are the same thing, but they aren't though. Sentimentatily is someone's own persona feeling about "what ever", and Nostalgia is something tied to single generation or specific moment in the past...

For example I grew up in the 1980's, I remember when Transforms were new because I loved them and had ton of the toys and watched the cartoons, so I'm both sentimental and nostalgic about the 1980's Transforms from "my" youth. But recently the Transformers characters for the 1980's were "remade" and altered it to make the Transformers accessible to a new generation, let's call the new guys the 2000's Transformers.

Now I Personally like the 2000's Transformers as well, and kids today seem to like the new improved, CGI, redesigned, 2000's version of the Transformers, but while kids today may have their own "sentimental" attachment to the new 2000's Transformers, I don't get the impression they care about the 1980's ones all that much, and Universal didn't build their theme park attraction based on my generation's "nostalgia" of the 1980's style toys, or the 1980's 2D, hand drawn animation. So this is why I personally have a hard time believing that the 2000's version of the Transformers will still be popular in 20 years from now... but maybe they will be

What I do know is that while Uni has been building the Transformers thing, Disney has been building a brand new roller coaster based on an 80 year old film called Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. From what I can tell though they didn't need to remake the Snow White characters in CGI or anything to appeal to the current generation of kids. It's the same film that my Grandparent's generation enjoyed, as well as my parent's generation, my generation, I've even the Snow White film to my 2 year old niece and she loves it too, but she is not "nostalgic" about it, my 2 year old niece just has excellent taste.

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, like most of Disney's stuff is a classic, or a masterpiece, or whatever other adjective you want to apply to "a work of art that transcends multiple generations". Da Vinci's paintings, Shakespeare 's plays, Beethoven's symphonies, Disney's animated films... are all things that appeal to generation after generation, and that my friend is the opposite of "nostalgia"

I see what you are saying about the opposite of nostalgia, but I don't think Snow White would be as appealing to todays children if it were not for the Disney Parks and how the Princesses are marketed. The movie is a part of The Magical World of Disney now. Disney Magic will never get old because of the Disney Parks in my opinion. Snow White is not 80 years old, its fresh and alive in the parks today. It is still a great work of art and is a masterpiece but its got more going for it then just the movie itself now. So I think that helps an 80 year old movie stay relevant also. So Because of the parks I see Disney staying quite relevant and I don't see why Universal cant learn how to do the same especially with Harry Potter.

 

[Bairstow]

What where they thinking?

 

[magicallactose]

I think you're suggesting that "nostalgia" and "sentimentality" are the same thing, but they aren't though. Sentimentatily is someone's own persona feeling about "what ever", and Nostalgia is something tied to single generation or specific moment in the past...

For example I grew up in the 1980's, I remember when Transforms were new because I loved them and had ton of the toys and watched the cartoons, so I'm both sentimental and nostalgic about the 1980's Transforms from "my" youth. But recently the Transformers characters for the 1980's were "remade" and altered it to make the Transformers accessible to a new generation, let's call the new guys the 2000's Transformers.

Now I Personally like the 2000's Transformers as well, and kids today seem to like the new improved, CGI, redesigned, 2000's version of the Transformers, but while kids today may have their own "sentimental" attachment to the new 2000's Transformers, I don't get the impression they care about the 1980's ones all that much, and Universal didn't build their theme park attraction based on my generation's "nostalgia" of the 1980's style toys, or the 1980's 2D, hand drawn animation. So this is why I personally have a hard time believing that the 2000's version of the Transformers will still be popular in 20 years from now... but maybe they will be

What I do know is that while Uni has been building the Transformers thing, Disney has been building a brand new roller coaster based on an 80 year old film called Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. From what I can tell though they didn't need to remake the Snow White characters in CGI or anything to appeal to the current generation of kids. It's the same film that my Grandparent's generation enjoyed, as well as my parent's generation, my generation, I've even the Snow White film to my 2 year old niece and she loves it too, but she is not "nostalgic" about it, my 2 year old niece just has excellent taste.

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, like most of Disney's stuff is a classic, or a masterpiece, or whatever other adjective you want to apply to "a work of art that transcends multiple generations". Da Vinci's paintings, Shakespeare 's plays, Beethoven's symphonies, Disney's animated films... are all things that appeal to generation after generation, and that my friend is the opposite of "nostalgia"

The two terms are very closely linked. Even the Merriam Webster dictionary conflates the terms within it's definition of nostalgia: "a wistful desire to return in thought or in fact to a former time in one's life, to one's home or homeland, or to one's family and friends; a sentimental yearning for the happiness of a former place or time: a nostalgia for his college days."

But I think you are trying to make a distinction between personal nostalgia and nostalgia for a communal past that one did not directly experience; the difference between the sense of nostalgia I might feel watching a rerun of The Cosby show that I had previously seen, and the nostalgia I feel for a grand, imagined past that I get when I watch A Room With a View or read Anne of Gables or a Jane Austen Novel.

Now there is definitely something to that. We tend to view the past (as long as it is safely removed from us by a few decades ago) as charming, romantic, comfortable, even paradoxically 'familiar', even if we had never lived in that era. This is why fairy tale castles and '1940's Hollywood and Wild West saloons make for great theme park experiences. We love the idea of comfortabley stepping into the past.

Let's take a look at the Universal parks, and see what areas there evoke 'communal nostalgia', the nostalgia for a historical time gone by. Most of the lands in Islands of Adventure qualify: the Lost Continent gives us ancient Greece; Suess Landing gives us a fantastical non-history that certainly evokes a time other than our own, perhaps even the 1950's when most of Suess's books were published; Toon Lagoon has characters such as Popeye whose been around even longer than Disney's Snow White.

I would even argue that The Wizarding World of Harry Potter allows for communal nostalgia. True, the books are set in the 1990's. But the aesthetic of the Wizarding World are distinctly of the past. The architecture, claptrap, and even clothes range from Medieval to Victorian. Even if a visitor to the land had never seen a Harry Potter movie or read any of the books, they are effectively transported to a fictitious 'past', a place that evokes strong nostalgia.

Let's go back to your example of Seven Dwarfs Mine Train. True, it is a ride based on a piece of fiction that has stood the test of time and can rightly be termed a masterpiece. It is, after all, the film that started a completely new genre, the animated feature movie.

Now let's compare it to something Universal is currently working on: Potter Phase 2, featuring the Gringott's Coaster and Hogwarts Express. This franchise certainly has not been around for as long as Snow White. But I would argue that this I.P has firmly established itself as a modern day classic, and that it's legacy will reach about as long and far as other classic children's books.

So the real question here is, next year when, Diagon Alley opens up within months of the Seven Dwarfs Mine Coaster, what will be the greater draw? Nostalgia? Or nostalgia combined with substance and quality?

 

[JimboJones123]

What where they thinking?

So, 4 tons. 8,000 pounds. 19 movements. Unnecessary dreads. 2 seconds of show time.


Yup, you could cut that weoght by 75% and still retain 85% of the show. Beats the 12% show that it ia running on now.

 

[PeteNY]

I'm in the car driving home from a wonderful week in Disney.
We spent 2 days in universal for the first time in years, I have to say I was unimpressed. transformers was the reason my 6 yr old wanted to go, so we went expecting the best. Unfortunately, it fells like a copy of Disney without the soul.
Even transformers is a copy of Spiderman. potterland was nice but felt small, its slow time and it was tough to see the wand ceremony, i could only imagine this area at peak season, don't even get me started on the joke shop and Cady store, way too small and tight, and the people who attend this park are pushy and rude. They are a different breed then the Disney folks, I'll leave it that. both parks look good, offer something of value, it not enough for my family to ever consider this a focal point of our vacation. Walkways are too narrow, and the flow in both parks in not well thought out. I come to these parks every few years with high expectations, but my outcome is always the same. We eat at Mythos on Tuesday, that place is a cave with sub par food. Where is the great theme restaurant which won best themepark.... Yada yada this place is joke. Fish tacos and burgers, I was just as displeased with this place as the rest of the establishment, what mess.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

I'm in the car driving home from a wonderful week in Disney.
We spent 2 days in universal for the first time in years, I have to say I was unimpressed. transformers was the reason my 6 yr old wanted to go, so we went expecting the best. Unfortunately, it fells like a copy of Disney without the soul.
Even transformers is a copy of Spiderman. potterland was nice but felt small, its slow time and it was tough to see the wand ceremony, i could only imagine this area at peak season, don't even get me started on the joke shop and Cady store, way too small and tight, and the people who attend this park are pushy and rude. They are a different breed then the Disney folks, I'll leave it that. both parks look good, offer something of value, it not enough for my family to ever consider this a focal point of our vacation. Walkways are too narrow, and the flow in both parks in not well thought out. I come to these parks every few years with high expectations, but my outcome is always the same. We eat at Mythos on Tuesday, that place is a cave with sub par food. Where is the great theme restaurant which won best themepark.... Yada yada this place is joke. Fish tacos and burgers, I was just as displeased with this place as the rest of the establishment, what mess.

But I bet you were impressed with the New Fantasyland.

It also sounds to me like your 6 year old wanted to go and enjoy the new Transformers ride, but you had absolutely no intentions of actually enjoying the place.

 

[Voice of Disney sanity]

ok sure... "IF" there is some catastrophic failure that would/could change people's perceptions and opinions of Disney, but this is a hypothetical you're describing not something based in present day reality. It's like saying if Brad Pitt became a serial killer people would probably not want to watch his movies any more, sure that's most likely true, if it did happen, but it is not something that has happened.

My point is that the Disney theme parks are more like American landmarks than simply products, in the same way people want to go see Time Square, Hollywood, and Mt. Rushmore they also want to see the Disney parks, and in the same way that Picasso paintings are valuable because they are original concepts, and Les Paul guitars are desirable because Les Paul is the guy who invented the electric guitar, Walt Disney is the guy who invented the theme park, and this is what makes them American landmarks. There is a certain prestige that comes with being the first at something and no matter what they build Universal they aren't going to change that.

The catastrophic failure is in progress. It looks to some of us as though TDO isn't seeing it. It's completely invisible to pixie dust addicts, and is extremely difficult for one and doners to spot. For a lot of us longtime "fanboys" it is becoming more apparent. It is the RAPID decline of the WDW product quality. From service of CMs to the broken down rides and attractions to the cleanliness of the entire property to the declining quality of the food served. I was last there in April and everywhere I went there was broken down stuff. Fountains that didn't work, torn carpet in my room, paint peeling in the MK, broken animatronics on attractions, attractions completely and permanently closed down, poorly maintained roads and parking lots, trash floating in splash mountain for days. Any long time visitor to the world that says "they don't see it" is either lying or delusional. I'm not saying everything at WDW is broken but everywhere you look SOMETHING is broke.

 

[Voice of Disney sanity]

I argue that a catastrophic failure is underway now. It just isn't a sudden thing, it has been and will continue to be a gradual decline unless something is done to pull them out of the fall. It will take time, and it's not going to cause WDW to close its doors. But it will be a big enough effect to put the Disney corporation in panic mode. As ParentsOf4 mentioned in another thread, WDW isn't going to close. But it will be in a crisis if nothing is done.

You're wrong about public opinion not changing just because of a brand. Someone else mentioned a good example in this thread, I believe it was Kodak vs Fuji. And Coke vs Pepsi. You overestimate the love of a brand name and can't seem to get that it's the substance that gets people interested in the product in the first place.

I think it will take a LOT for people to stop going to WDW completely. More than is ever likely to be allowed to happen. But I do believe that it's well within reason and even quite plausible that bad enough things can occur to start causing attendance numbers to shift, enough to make the corporate leaders descend into panic mode. Even if that number is just about 5-10% of a loss to the competition. Might not seem like a huge deal to the average person or nearly enough to destroy the parks by any stretch, but it sends panic through a corporation.


I know it can be fixed, the problem is that it is not. And there's little hope that it will be at this point in time. It's not a matter of what can and can't be done, it's a matter of will. A desire to do anything about it doesn't seem to exist at all in the people who run the place.

YOU ARE EXACTLY RIGHT! The fact that we are on here complaining instead of singing Disney's praises is evidence of that failure.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

I'm in the car driving home from a wonderful week in Disney.
We spent 2 days in universal for the first time in years, I have to say I was unimpressed. transformers was the reason my 6 yr old wanted to go, so we went expecting the best. Unfortunately, it fells like a copy of Disney without the soul.
Even transformers is a copy of Spiderman. potterland was nice but felt small, its slow time and it was tough to see the wand ceremony, i could only imagine this area at peak season, don't even get me started on the joke shop and Cady store, way too small and tight, and the people who attend this park are pushy and rude. They are a different breed then the Disney folks, I'll leave it that. both parks look good, offer something of value, it not enough for my family to ever consider this a focal point of our vacation. Walkways are too narrow, and the flow in both parks in not well thought out. I come to these parks every few years with high expectations, but my outcome is always the same. We eat at Mythos on Tuesday, that place is a cave with sub par food. Where is the great theme restaurant which won best themepark.... Yada yada this place is joke. Fish tacos and burgers, I was just as displeased with this place as the rest of the establishment, what mess.

It is all about the magic after all is it not.

Thanks for the laugh.