wannab@dis said:
Exactly... In addition... The whole "what would Walt do" mess has nothing to do with reality... it's 100% a self-centered extrapolation of bad logic and little or no understanding of what really happens in business.
wannab@dis, we were getting so close to agreement,b ut guess we have to go back to old splits, now.
Actually, I do agree that there is a definite business model decision that agrees to not finishing the mountain. The tangibile return on finishing the mountain would appear to be minimal since most guests would not affirmatively notice or care.
However, there is one element that Disney himself did that is being lost. He paid close attention to artistic details. Everything did not look or feel real. But, he had a knack for finding elements that were important to jog that childhood imagination. It had to feel right, not necessarily look or be accurate. That, in my opinion, is what the Disney success was based on. I know you will disagree, but I am not much of a WWWD person. I actually think some of his ideas would have prevented the WDW of my childhood. But, I think this is one where he got it right. It's a basic principle of theater. There are things backstage that are not to be seen. Will most people affirmatively find problems with them, no. BUT, guests notice. It may be subconscious, but it registers. THe more of these that happen, the more hollow the effect becomes.
As much as I would have like to see the mountain finished off, it is the entire lack of completion in a direct view that is important. Soarin', while the building is a bit garrish, dealt with impossibility. Covering it would be difficult. EE, on the other hand, could have easily been improved through a storng faux paint job, tiers of planters with trees, or, of course, the finished rock work.
No matter how you look at EE, it will be much more difficult to believe. You see it first from the parking lot, and it's got a big box jutting straight out. You can see Mansion and Pirates from the train, but you have to try and know what you are looking for. It could have a neon sign and perhaps be less obvious on EE. That's bad show.
Also, as for the paint, it is a similar situation. If there are chips around, that happens. But large swatches of several square feet sitting for 8 months (which I saw first hand) is excessive.
All of these come from one thing: being cheap or "economic" for the company. Of course these decisions must be made, and perhaps they are the right ones. But, to go into it blindly and say that "no one cares" or that it has no effect is a bit naive. To say it is fully illogical is frankly wrong IMHO. I have a pretty strong family history in this line of business, and I DO have a good idea. The modern Disney is not nearly the success of certain points in its past. The company has recreated its approach several times (and is doing so now). There is a balance between art and marketable business, and a tip too far one way OR THE OTHER is bad.
