Disney Jr and Beauty and the Beast closing for refurbs in Jan 2013

wiigirl

Well-Known Member
Wondering the same thing... why refurb it now if you're putting in a new show!?!

Good question?
75.gif
 

Bolt

Well-Known Member
Attractions have cycles of fixing no matter what - just like Backlot still gets occasionally loving...
 

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
I would expect Disney Junior to have it's rumored show changes during this, but I wouldn't expect a changeover to Tangled for the Beauty and the Beast refurbishment. This is 100% speculation, but I would suspect this to be the case.
 

Patricia Melton

Well-Known Member
I am starting to thinking "refurb" is Disney code for "We will save $X.XX by closing this for a month..." I honestly think this is just another clever way management has figured out how to save money in the slowest quarter in the slowest park...

This doesn't make any sense. Disney can't fire the people working on that attraction for the month that it's closed...and then hire new people (or the same ones back) when they want to do the show again. Firing and then rehiring people is expensive. I don't know how Florida law works, but in Ohio if someone is fired because of a budget cut/lack of work then that same position can't be refilled for a year unless the person who was fired is rehired back. And even then I think there are penalties for doing this. At the very least, the people fired would be entitled to unemployment benefits and Disney would be assessed fees by the state for that.

If the people working those attractions weren't laid off, then they'd be moved to some other spot in the parks for that month, doing something else. New training would have to be involved there too, and all training is expensive because it's not producing a service for the guests directly. So, closing the attraction down for a month actually costs Disney money since there is no return on the investment already paid in training these people to do the job they are doing in the shows...and for the month the show is closed Disney will have to find something else to do with the people.

Even if the people used up vacation time they had on the books it would still cost Disney, since they'd be paying the vacation wages.

Another cost would be the fact that guests who would have been in the shows would be doing other things instead...and thus causing a need for more staff and activities elsewhere...which costs money.

You just don't close a show for a month to save money...because I don't see how any money is really saved no matter how you slice this apple.
 

menamechris

Well-Known Member
This doesn't make any sense. Disney can't fire the people working on that attraction for the month that it's closed...and then hire new people (or the same ones back) when they want to do the show again. Firing and then rehiring people is expensive. I don't know how Florida law works, but in Ohio if someone is fired because of a budget cut/lack of work then that same position can't be refilled for a year unless the person who was fired is rehired back. And even then I think there are penalties for doing this. At the very least, the people fired would be entitled to unemployment benefits and Disney would be assessed fees by the state for that.

If the people working those attractions weren't laid off, then they'd be moved to some other spot in the parks for that month, doing something else. New training would have to be involved there too, and all training is expensive because it's not producing a service for the guests directly. So, closing the attraction down for a month actually costs Disney money since there is no return on the investment already paid in training these people to do the job they are doing in the shows...and for the month the show is closed Disney will have to find something else to do with the people.

Even if the people used up vacation time they had on the books it would still cost Disney, since they'd be paying the vacation wages.

Another cost would be the fact that guests who would have been in the shows would be doing other things instead...and thus causing a need for more staff and activities elsewhere...which costs money.

You just don't close a show for a month to save money...because I don't see how any money is really saved no matter how you slice this apple.

Does someone else wanna handle this? I can't even bring myself to read it all...
 

Timothy_Q

Well-Known Member
Because they're changing two of the four sets used on the show, will need rehersales for a show that is now 50% different and refurbish the exterior to reflect the new characters in the show.
Disney-Junior-Live-on-Stage_Full_12797.jpg

They could also afford a new, good-looking facade... it would really improve the look of the courtyard.
Right now it looks like a temporary show in your local mall
 

awoogala

Well-Known Member
This doesn't make any sense.

If the people working those attractions weren't laid off, then they'd be moved to some other spot in the parks for that month, doing something else. New training would have to b
You just don't close a show for a month to save money...because I don't see how any money is really saved no matter how you slice this apple.
Equity contracts are different then "regular" hiring and firing for normal work. The performers in the stage shows are all part of professional equity actors union. I have a very small amount of knowledge, and it is 20 years old..lol. Equity actors cannot just pop into costume and join the characters on the street. Their contracts (at least they used to be) very specific. They usually cannot work in any non-equity productions, etc. Most likely their contracts were already drafted with this blackout period covered. Equity actors make much more than a decent wage, so they should do just fine- and disney could save a big chunk of change just not paying equity salaries for a week or two!
Like I said, I haven't worked with equity actors in very long time, but the compensation was always quite nice for those who had it!
http://www.actorsequity.org/agreements/agreements.asp?code=140
here you go, if you'd like to understand.
 

Bolt

Well-Known Member
No more debate needed here. It's not closing because of finance. Quite the contrary, work being put into the attractions. Let this thread just be about the show changes itself, not whether or not Disney closes things to save money.
 

WDWYankee15

Well-Known Member
No more debate needed here. It's not closing because of finance. Quite the contrary, work being put into the attractions. Let this thread just be about the show changes itself, not whether or not Disney closes things to save money.
Thank you and I agree. Complain because things are falling apart and then complain because they are closed for refurb. Come on everyone.

Not every thread needs to be derailed. It would be nice if everyone talked about the topic of the thread which in this case is "Disney Jr and Beauty and the Beast closing for refurbs in Jan 2013." I for one am very excited to see some changes coming to the Disney Jr. show. It keeps things fresh for the audiance and allows for some new experiences when people come back for a return visit.
 

Yankee Mouse

Well-Known Member
Thank you and I agree. Complain because things are falling apart and then complain because they are closed for refurb. Come on everyone.

No every thread needs to be derailed. It would be nice if everyone talked about the topic of the thread which in this case is "Disney Jr and Beauty and the Beast closing for refurbs in Jan 2013." I for one and very excited to see some changes coming to the Disney Jr. show. It keeps things fresh for the audiance and allows for some new experiences when people come back for a return visit.

The only thing I am disappointed about is losing Little Einsteins. I understand it is old but my daughter was just starting to really enjoy it.. Also makes sense to bring in Doc, still not sold on Sofia though. Fortunately we got to see little Einsteins there during our November trip, but at the time I felt like the show wasn't very good. It seemed like the segments were just kind of added in and didn't really provide anything to the overall theme of planning a birthday party for minnie. I kind of hope they do a better rewrite, of course that doesn't really matter to preschoolers who just want to see their favorite characters.
 

Bolt

Well-Known Member
The only thing I am disappointed about is losing Little Einsteins. I understand it is old but my daughter was just starting to really enjoy it.. Also makes sense to bring in Doc, still not sold on Sofia though. Fortunately we got to see little Einsteins there during our November trip, but at the time I felt like the show wasn't very good. It seemed like the segments were just kind of added in and didn't really provide anything to the overall theme of planning a birthday party for minnie. I kind of hope they do a better rewrite, of course that doesn't really matter to preschoolers who just want to see their favorite characters.

Despite how much they are still on TV - the show was canceled December 22, 2009 (back when it was Playhouse Disney) so if it didn't get taken out in this refresh, we'd start hearing from everyone about the staleness of the attraction. Plus - the Handy Manny and Little Einsteins portion has been the same for over 5 years, the parents know what to do before the kids in that show now :)
 

Yankee Mouse

Well-Known Member
Despite how much they are still on TV - the show was canceled December 22, 2009 (back when it was Playhouse Disney) so if it didn't get taken out in this refresh, we'd start hearing from everyone about the staleness of the attraction. Plus - the Handy Manny and Little Einsteins portion has been the same for over 5 years, the parents know what to do before the kids in that show now :)

Don't get me wrong, I completely understand it is old and not in production anymore so it is first on the chopping block. I will also admit my position is probably a little biased because I only now have a child watching this stuff, who gets really excited when she sees little Einsteins on tv. Unfortunately I can't say the same for her reaction to Sofia. In 2009 I wasn't watching or interested in this stuff and never visited playhouse disney live. On our first trip with my daughter in November we saw the show for the first time so not every parent knows what comes next, but I do get what you are saying, and I wasn't suggesting it shouldn't change, just disappointed that Einsteins has to go for Sofia for completely personal reasons.

While I understand wanting to promote their new show, I don't particularly like the idea of pushing a show that isn't even on yet. Although, they may not have any new episodes of Einsteins in production it still has decent playtime on disney junior, (of course that could change with the upcoming January season) and is even still available on fios in demand. Also IMO the educational value of Little Einsteins surpasses some of the stuff they have on there now.
 

Bolt

Well-Known Member
While I understand wanting to promote their new show, I don't particularly like the idea of pushing a show that isn't even on yet. Although, they may not have any new episodes of Einsteins in production it still has decent playtime on disney junior, (of course that could change with the upcoming January season) and is even still available on fios in demand. Also IMO the educational value of Little Einsteins surpasses some of the stuff they have on there now.

Same reaction was had for Jake and the Neverland Pirates. It opened live on stage before the show even premiered.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom