Disney(World) vs. Disney(land)?

AndyMagic

Well-Known Member
Ahhh...so they only put the "Disney's" in front of the hotels.
Pointless, if you ask me.
:rolleyes:

Pardon me but you are a few years late to the ridiculous Disney naming convention train. Now instead of "Disney's" before everything they produce they prefer to just use "Disney" rendering the phrase even MORE nonsensical. It's no longer "Disney's California Adventure" it's "Disney California Adventure." Every film released by Walt Disney Pictures also now just has "DISNEY" before the name as well. It annoys me to no end. Not only is it unpleasant to say but there was zero reason for the change and I'm sure some moron in upper management got a nice pat on the back for the idea. "I know guys! Instead of investing in quality entertainment, why don't we drop the possessive in our name!!! IT'S GENIUS!!!" :rolleyes:
 

Cosmic Commando

Well-Known Member
Pardon me but you are a few years late to the ridiculous Disney naming convention train. Now instead of "Disney's" before everything they produce they prefer to just use "Disney" rendering the phrase even MORE nonsensical. It's no longer "Disney's California Adventure" it's "Disney California Adventure." Every film released by Walt Disney Pictures also now just has "DISNEY" before the name as well. It annoys me to no end. Not only is it unpleasant to say but there was zero reason for the change and I'm sure some moron in upper management got a nice pat on the back for the idea. "I know guys! Instead of investing in quality entertainment, why don't we drop the possessive in our name!!! IT'S GENIUS!!!" :rolleyes:
It is stupid, but I will give them the credit that it did fool people into saying the "Disney" as part of the title for a while. I think Epic Mickey was one of the first things to do this, and it was very very common to hear it called "Disney Epic Mickey".
 

Tom

Beta Return
Ahhh...so they only put the "Disney's" in front of the hotels.
Pointless, if you ask me.
:rolleyes:

The four parks in Florida are referred to as:
Epcot(R)
Disney's Hollywood Studios(R)
Disney's Animal Kingdom(R) Theme Park
Magic Kingdom(R) Park

Absolutely no logic there. They have Disney's before Typhoon Lagoon and Blizzard Beach, as well as all the golf courses.

And yes, Disney's in front of almost all the hotels. The following exceptions:
Bay Lake Tower at Disney's Contemporary Resort
The Villas at Disney's Wilderness Lodge (meanwhile, it's Disney's Animal Kingdom Villas - Jambo House/Kidani Village)
Walt Disney World Dolphin Hotel
Walt Disney World Swan Hotel

And we all know they re-named the carousel, and it's called Prince Charming Carousel. No possessive. And I'm 99% sure the official title of the castle is Cinderella Castle. It does not appear in their master list, but I've seen it published that way. I don't understand their inability to make things possessive.

And then renamed the DLR second gate Disney [no 's] California Adventure. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

The Disneyland copyright document I have was last updated in 2008, and it was possessive then. But according to the Disneyland website, it's called Disney California Adventure. Makes no sense.

Wow....way off topic :)
 

devoy1701

Well-Known Member
The four parks in Florida are referred to as:
Epcot(R)
Disney's Hollywood Studios(R)
Disney's Animal Kingdom(R) Theme Park
Magic Kingdom(R) Park

Absolutely no logic there. They have Disney's before Typhoon Lagoon and Blizzard Beach, as well as all the golf courses.

And yes, Disney's in front of almost all the hotels. The following exceptions:
Bay Lake Tower at Disney's Contemporary Resort
The Villas at Disney's Wilderness Lodge (meanwhile, it's Disney's Animal Kingdom Villas - Jambo House/Kidani Village)
Walt Disney World Dolphin Hotel
Walt Disney World Swan Hotel

And we all know they re-named the carousel, and it's called Prince Charming Carousel. No possessive. And I'm 99% sure the official title of the castle is Cinderella Castle. It does not appear in their master list, but I've seen it published that way. I don't understand their inability to make things possessive.



The Disneyland copyright document I have was last updated in 2008, and it was possessive then. But according to the Disneyland website, it's called Disney California Adventure. Makes no sense.

Wow....way off topic :)

The only one that doesn't bother me is Cinderella Castle...if we called it "Cinderella's Castle" (which is still acceptable) then it would still be begging for a name. Cinderella Castle kind of kills two birds.
 

SeaCastle

Well-Known Member
One thing being overlooked here, in my opinion, is that new additions are supposed to compensate for years of underinvestment. While I am not against investment in new infrastructure (whether they be rides, theater shows, parades, fireworks, etc.), there is quite a bit more that has to be done before Disney could ever be at the caliber it was say, ten years ago. And much more for even before then. Objectively speaking, Disney has hacked away at the guest experience over the past twenty years. Live entertainment has been cut, maintenance budgets have been slashed and staff outsourced (with an apparent decline in quality), merchandise has been homogenized, transportation is a mess as much as ever, and various "magic touches" across the resort have been deactivated or removed. And these are only things that would be obvious (or one would hope) to a regular visitor, nevermind the way Disney treats (or trains) its cast members or any number of back of house cutbacks. For the sake of this post, let's also overlook the fact that the resort has neglected to significantly invest in new attractions or improvements since essentially 2006 with Expedition Everest (there have been investments here and there, for example Toy Story Mania's development was supposedly split with Disneyland's, the new World Showcase restaurants were primarily financed by third-party vendors, etc.).

The problems at WDW (and throughout P&R) are manifest at every level of the company, from Imagineering to the executive suite to the CP'ers and everywhere in between. In a microcosm, WDW's problems wouldn't be solved by building Radiator Springs Racers in MGM or Indy in Adventureland. The company has to change the way it sees itself, its vision (if there is any) for the parks, and how they are to be run. There have been promising, if tiny, improvements. These range from the tiki torches above the Sunshine Tree Terrace to the geysers that are now working at Big Thunder Mountain, or the new Fantasyland/Liberty Square thoroughfare, or the Fantasyland beautification/expansion project. All of these projects received capital for things that could be considered extraneous and don't provide a return on investment. But alas, they are happening.

But such restorations are only the tip of the iceberg. Flowerbeds that are currently filled with low-maintenance green leafy plants should be returned to their manicured beauty for which Disney is so famous. Topiaries should be around all of the time rather than during just Flower and Garden Festival. Fountains and water features once long dry should be flowing with water once more. The parks should have their equity entertainment restored, from the Liberty Square Fife and Drum Corps to the Four for a Dollar pre-show at the Beauty and the Beast show at MGM. The current maintenance operations should be returned to how they were previously, when crews had a larger ability to fix bad show. Furthermore, positions such as animatronic technicians that disappeared as workers retired should no longer be vacant. Dining portions should be increased and less homogenized. Amenities at hotels that had been chipped away should also come back. Park hours should be extended. I don't think that any of these suggestions would be disagreed upon by anyone in the fan community. But these are all aspects of what made WDW so great that have disappeared in the recent future.

There is no reason why WDW should not be a world-class vacation destination. It was, at one point, and still is, to an extent. But so long as what make (and made) the parks so great is hacked away until there is just meat and potatoes, people will go elsewhere. And they are. Millions are flocking to the Universal resorts for their new (and groundbreaking) offerings. My family went on a NCL cruise to Bermuda this year, and will be out in California next year for the coast and Disneyland. By 2015, we wouldn't have been at the parks in three years, which for a family like us that has gone to WDW semi-annually since 2004 is a huge amount of time! But as WDW keeps cutting away and other places keep adding more, the argument to come back to the Resort proves harder to make.

WDW needs to up their game. This is realized (finally) by the upper echelons of park management and corporate. But an E-ticket here and there won't do the trick. WDW needs to restore what it has been cutting back in addition to new offerings, and then and only then will we have truly great parks once more.
 

WDW1974

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
74 where are you? Give us some more tid bits

Been working (and eating leftover pizza!) on an ugly Sunday and am now watching the concert that is
masquerading as an Olympics closing ceremony and thinking back to the killer party I was at in Beijing four years ago for the end of those Games.
I'm not sure I have any more tidbits ot dim sum to toss out right now, but I'll scan through the posts of the day (I am SO SURE JT has opted to stay in the 'which moderate resort is best for my toddler?' type threads) and see if I can add anything.

Also, will say that I don't hold anything against the DIS dude who borrowed my info, I just wish to be credited when it is borrowed ... of course, even the O-Sentinel seems to have trouble doing that.
 

WDW1974

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
OHHHHH ... it really, really is ... THE SPICE GIRLS!!!

(they were so popular at Vista Lay back in the day!)
 

WDW1974

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
One thing being overlooked here, in my opinion, is that new additions are supposed to compensate for years of underinvestment. While I am not against investment in new infrastructure (whether they be rides, theater shows, parades, fireworks, etc.), there is quite a bit more that has to be done before Disney could ever be at the caliber it was say, ten years ago. And much more for even before then. Objectively speaking, Disney has hacked away at the guest experience over the past twenty years. Live entertainment has been cut, maintenance budgets have been slashed and staff outsourced (with an apparent decline in quality), merchandise has been homogenized, transportation is a mess as much as ever, and various "magic touches" across the resort have been deactivated or removed. And these are only things that would be obvious (or one would hope) to a regular visitor, nevermind the way Disney treats (or trains) its cast members or any number of back of house cutbacks. For the sake of this post, let's also overlook the fact that the resort has neglected to significantly invest in new attractions or improvements since essentially 2006 with Expedition Everest (there have been investments here and there, for example Toy Story Mania's development was supposedly split with Disneyland's, the new World Showcase restaurants were primarily financed by third-party vendors, etc.).

The problems at WDW (and throughout P&R) are manifest at every level of the company, from Imagineering to the executive suite to the CP'ers and everywhere in between. In a microcosm, WDW's problems wouldn't be solved by building Radiator Springs Racers in MGM or Indy in Adventureland. The company has to change the way it sees itself, its vision (if there is any) for the parks, and how they are to be run. There have been promising, if tiny, improvements. These range from the tiki torches above the Sunshine Tree Terrace to the geysers that are now working at Big Thunder Mountain, or the new Fantasyland/Liberty Square thoroughfare, or the Fantasyland beautification/expansion project. All of these projects received capital for things that could be considered extraneous and don't provide a return on investment. But alas, they are happening.

But such restorations are only the tip of the iceberg. Flowerbeds that are currently filled with low-maintenance green leafy plants should be returned to their manicured beauty for which Disney is so famous. Topiaries should be around all of the time rather than during just Flower and Garden Festival. Fountains and water features once long dry should be flowing with water once more. The parks should have their equity entertainment restored, from the Liberty Square Fife and Drum Corps to the Four for a Dollar pre-show at the Beauty and the Beast show at MGM. The current maintenance operations should be returned to how they were previously, when crews had a larger ability to fix bad show. Furthermore, positions such as animatronic technicians that disappeared as workers retired should no longer be vacant. Dining portions should be increased and less homogenized. Amenities at hotels that had been chipped away should also come back. Park hours should be extended. I don't think that any of these suggestions would be disagreed upon by anyone in the fan community. But these are all aspects of what made WDW so great that have disappeared in the recent future.

There is no reason why WDW should not be a world-class vacation destination. It was, at one point, and still is, to an extent. But so long as what make (and made) the parks so great is hacked away until there is just meat and potatoes, people will go elsewhere. And they are. Millions are flocking to the Universal resorts for their new (and groundbreaking) offerings. My family went on a NCL cruise to Bermuda this year, and will be out in California next year for the coast and Disneyland. By 2015, we wouldn't have been at the parks in three years, which for a family like us that has gone to WDW semi-annually since 2004 is a huge amount of time! But as WDW keeps cutting away and other places keep adding more, the argument to come back to the Resort proves harder to make.

WDW needs to up their game. This is realized (finally) by the upper echelons of park management and corporate. But an E-ticket here and there won't do the trick. WDW needs to restore what it has been cutting back in addition to new offerings, and then and only then will we have truly great parks once more.

What an accurate assessment of what ails WDW and what needs to be done to improve things and get some of us hooked on the Pixie Dust again.

Great to see you back in these waters, SeaCastle!:)
 

WDW1974

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Im a bit upset there has been no tribute to WDWMagic.

Considering how MAGICal an Olympics really is (Beijing 2008 will always be a highlight of my life and I have had plenty and expect many more to come!), I agree ... I was about to say we should send someone over there, but we sorta have a presence over there as is!!!:D

Now, can someone 'splain all these Verizon mobile MAGICAL Disney Parks Apps they've been showing all day/week (filmed at DL)? I thought those were going bye-bye ...
 

WDW1974

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
That's why I will never sell ad space, my blog isn't about that. It's about an idea and that I've wanted to work for Disney now for 8 years and have been told I'm not a designer by HR.

Since when do you need design skills to actually work for Disney ... have they seen some of the work they've produced of late?

BTW, I'm seeing Nigel Channing on the Closing Ceremony ... and he isn't even insulting me for my lack of Imagination too!
 

Mike730

Well-Known Member
My family went on a NCL cruise to Bermuda this year, and will be out in California next year for the coast and Disneyland. By 2015, we wouldn't have been at the parks in three years, which for a family like us that has gone to WDW semi-annually since 2004 is a huge amount of time! But as WDW keeps cutting away and other places keep adding more, the argument to come back to the Resort proves harder to make.
Firstly, what a beautiful assessment. '74 would be hard pressed to say it better himself.

Also, my family and I took the same option this year, opting for that cruise instead of our annual WDW trip.
 

WDW1974

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Which raises questions in my mind about the value of social media.

It seems like the corporate thinking as been, "People will believe what we tell them to believe." And accordingly they've hired/comped these online personalities, thinking that these "real" people will drum up business.

But when it becomes apparent that these personalities have their opinions bought and paid for, I think a large percentage of consumers write those opinions off as PR fluff.

I'm sure there are the followers of the Disney Religion who find great meaning in those PR pieces (check the Disney Parks Blog for daily proof!), but if the company wants to ensure success, it'd be a good idea to make sure the product is as good as it can possibly be.

Should I just import about 600 posts from last summer's little 'happening' on LP.com over?

I can't say anything I haven't before but what happens is a few key scammers (and, yes, that is largely what i consider the self-proclaimed experts in social media and new platforms to be) get in with a few large corporations under this guise they know all there is about how to use these new media options to grow business. They use it to garner absurd consulting deals. I don't know how many shots I've taken at folks who consult for Disney, but don't work for the company (people like Shell Holtz and Josh Hallett) since last summer. I guarantee you these are the kind of folks who have alerts ANYTIME their name is raised anywhere online, yet they won't dare come in here and talk social media metrics and why it's important to fly Lou Mongello to Oahu or Anaheim ... or give any credential to some kid with anger issues who wishes he could be Lou ... or why it's important to pay off Mommy Bloggers with weeks at the GF (everything included for families of four for free).

Because ultimately, it's much like a Ponzi Scheme. And they are aware of it. Just look at the absurd IPO of Facebook and what the stock has done since. People are trying to make everyone have to be part of FB, but the reality is you do not have to. And most important people realized the dangers and damages it can do to you to have a FB account a long time ago.

But I just went off on a rant (while Queen was going through my head) as usual.

It all comes down to the same old, same old. Quality sells itself. WDW never advertised for the most part before Michael Eisner came to Disney. Guess what? People knew it existed with no Twits to tell them. People knew it was a top quality product to bring their families to. And the place was a financial goldmine.

Now, you need some snot-nosed 24-year-old loser to blog or podcast to the world about the wonders of the BRAND??!! And who do you really think he's reaching? More losers who are already addicted to Pixie Dust? Or totally new audiences?

This is just common sense. I'd love to tell Bob Iger what I think, but I doubt I'll get anywhere near him at the 64th Annual Academy of Television Arts and Sciences Primetime Emmys Awards on ABC Sunday, September 23 at 8 p.m. Eastern/ 5 p.m. Pacific if he bothers to show up. ... I can see them playing keep away with their suits already and my time is worth vastly more.

******

On another subject (and I don't want to be like Eddie Sotto where I just visit one thread and put everything including the kitchen sink, from Rivera of course, in it) but it occurs to me that WDW's reluctance to do away with 1-2 day options yet pricing them ever the more rididiculous has much to do with Disney internally (and this isn't more than educated opinion) seeing an uptick in people who only want to visit for a few days now as part of a bigger FL/O-Town vacation. In other words, people are adding a few days on at Disney more frequently than they used to. And Disney's paranoia about it's business falling through the floor is not because people are taking a day or even two away from the 10 nights at the Poly or POP and heading off-property, but because many of them are simply adding Disney as part of their trip -- not the center of it.

Just a thought, and I didn't feel like it needed a seperate thread.
 

WDW1974

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
I wonder if Disney Parks Jenn will accept my interview request...

Did you really request an interview?

I'd love to hear that. I could even suggest some wicked killah (as they say in your town) questions to ask Blondie ... and no, one would not be whether she really loves Dole Whips!
 

ChrisFL

Premium Member
Should I just import about 600 posts from last summer's little 'happening' on LP.com over?

I can't say anything I haven't before but what happens is a few key scammers (and, yes, that is largely what i consider the self-proclaimed experts in social media and new platforms to be) get in with a few large corporations under this guise they know all there is about how to use these new media options to grow business. They use it to garner absurd consulting deals. I don't know how many shots I've taken at folks who consult for Disney, but don't work for the company (people like Shell Holtz and Josh Hallett) since last summer. I guarantee you these are the kind of folks who have alerts ANYTIME their name is raised anywhere online, yet they won't dare come in here and talk social media metrics and why it's important to fly Lou Mongello to Oahu or Anaheim ... or give any credential to some kid with anger issues who wishes he could be Lou ... or why it's important to pay off Mommy Bloggers with weeks at the GF (everything included for families of four for free).

Because ultimately, it's much like a Ponzi Scheme. And they are aware of it. Just look at the absurd IPO of Facebook and what the stock has done since. People are trying to make everyone have to be part of FB, but the reality is you do not have to. And most important people realized the dangers and damages it can do to you to have a FB account a long time ago.

I agree entirely. The problem is "social media" is such a buzz-word (well 2 words) that all of the older execs who have no clue how it runs will throw money at it and hope that some younger "people in the know" will somehow make them more popular.

The company I work for is doing similar things, like hey, you can post to facebook when you saved 3 cents on a soda....its really, really stupid.

Like you said, make a QUALITY product and people will use whatever tools they normally do to tell others about it...whether its by morse code, telegraph, stone tablets or two cups and a string.
 

WDW1974

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
If Disney let Lasseter walk out of that company, we might as well all pack up and go home now. Iger has already dealt his hand and announced his intention to walk away so if it ever did come down to a choice between the two, it would make absolutely no sense for the board not to choose one of the most creative minds around today, one that is dragging WDAS out of the doldrums and I'm sure could do the same at theme parks in years to come. I really wish Disney would go back to the Eisner/Wells-type management structure where one handles the financial faculties of the company (aka the boring but important stuff) while the other handles the creative side of things. When Disney operated like that, everything was golden but Wells sadly passed away, Katzenberg walked out and then there was the Michael Ovitz debacle which all led the way to Eisner's meltdown and eventual ouster. But I don't see why a two-pronged management made up of two executives whose qualities compliment each other, like Eisner and Wells, couldn't work again.

I just want to be 100% clear.

If tonight Bob and John went to the Board and said they could no longer work together, then one would be leaving the company immediately (for some made up reason).

That one wouldn't be the creative mastermind that has brought billions upon billions of dollars in pure profit into the company since 1995 and has a passion for it. The one leaving would be the suit that can easily be replaced by so many others.

Bob may be CEO, but John holds all the cards here. Oh, and they both know that.
 

Cosmic Commando

Well-Known Member
I just want to be 100% clear.

If tonight Bob and John went to the Board and said they could no longer work together, then one would be leaving the company immediately (for some made up reason).

That one wouldn't be the creative mastermind that has brought billions upon billions of dollars in pure profit into the company since 1995 and has a passion for it. The one leaving would be the suit that can easily be replaced by so many others.

Bob may be CEO, but John holds all the cards here. Oh, and they both know that.
Won't they also view that as a huge problem? This is at least twice in recent memory that Lasseter has threatened to leave the company if he hasn't gotten his way. You either gotta give that guy all the power or push him out somehow. You can't depend so much on a guy that will stomp his feet and take his ball home whenever he doesn't get what he wants.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom