Disney YOU HAD BETTER START LISTENING...

[whylightbulb]

I'm with you. Unless there's a significant raise in prices, I'm going to keep going. And going. And then go some more. They don't need new attractions, hotels, or anything of the like to keep me coming back. I'll be there regardless. A lot of people just sound like a bunch of spoiled brats.

I'm pretty sure you are in the minority. Not that there's anything wrong with that. It's good that you can be satisfied with a product that doesn't evolve positively. You are a corporations dream in that they don't have to strive to improve or keep up with the times. If everyone was like you Disney could count on maintaining its margin without any major investment or risk. Unfortunately most people are not like you in that respect. I don't mean to sound harsh and I'm not putting this attitude down. I can't say I understand it but you certainly have a right to think that way.


I've had a bit of down time in the last few days and have had the opportunity to post some thoughts that have been plaguing my brain for years now. You can place me in the camp that believes Disney's standards have dropped so far down the proverbial rabbit hole that, if you had told me 15 years ago what the present conditions would be, I would have thought you were as crazy as the Mad Hatter.



Here's is the irony: Many people have commented on how those of us that want more regular new E tickets, or just better quality new attractions of any level, are in the minority or "spoiled" as you say. My thought is that those that are satisfied with the number of new projects and their level of quality are the ones in the minority. Many of them visit the parks regularly for different reasons than international and long distance domestic guests. It might be because they remember how they felt as a child when entering under the Main Street Station and hearing the train's whistle and the all too familiar announcement. They might be holding on to these memories and going back again and again to recapture them. They might simply enjoy the atmosphere. They are okay with taking a stroll through World Showcase for the hundredth time without experiencing anything new because to them, people watching or just taking in the atmosphere is enough to satisfy that nostalgic fix or stir up the Disney "pixie dust" emotion. it doesn't matter to them whether there is a new log flume in Canada because that's not why they visit the parks. As one poster stated, many are happy just going to a place that brings the family together.

Those that have never visited Disney World have had the opportunity to experience Tokyo Disney for example. I would be extremely shocked to hear of anyone that has visited the Tokyo Disney Resort and WDW that prefers WDW. And it's not just in cleanliness that TDR excels (and believe me TDR makes WDW look like a ghetto) but in every area with the exception of size. Visiting WDW after TDR would be like going to WDW and then Six Flags over Georgia. So certainly, the quality of attractions as well as maintenance would be very important for a first time visitor in this category.

What about the casual visitor that may go to WDW twice or maybe three times in their life. Maybe one of the reasons they are only going so few times is because there is very little to offer them on subsequent visits if mediocre, more of the same, product is all Disney has been rolling out. After all, to them a trip to the beach or an all inclusive resort in Jamaica will bring the family together also.

Those that visit often but are not die hard fans look forward to new attractions. Without new attractions there isn't much else for them to be attracted to. Eventually, the high prices and less value will win over the tradition and cause many in this group to stop coming. They don't necessarily have childhood memories to recapture, their children are growing and will stop vacationing with their parents, and WDW will see a decline in attendance from this category. The emotions and traditions built up in their kids are a distant memory because the place just isn't the same. Sure there are new attractions, but they are "watered down," low quality rides and shows compared to Pirates or Tower Of Terror. How can these kids create new memories and nostalgia with their kids in a shadow of the place they remember so fondly? Some in this category will still go every so often, but Disney will lose many if trends continue as they are. I have personally seen multiple friends and family that fall into this category.

I personally used to see WDW with the rose colored glasses. I used to defend management vehemently. Until I started working for WDI and other design firms. In my estimation we are getting about 40% of the quality possible in most projects. This includes Everest. I'm not just talking about budgets either. I'm also referring to the enormous waste at WDI. It's a combination of upper management and their miserly, bureaucratic thinking and WDI's egos and poor use, or non use, of talent.

What it boils down to is, the OP is correct. WDW management better stop and rethink their strategy of offering less for more money. There is a breaking point and in my opinion they are pretty close to getting there.

 

[SirGoofy]

Great post whylightbulb. I'm still hoping WDW Upper Management is on the way out, and I've heard whispers that it might.

 

[DisneyMusician2]

Who is in charge of the WDW parks right now?

 

[whylightbulb]

So what is the solution? Which level of management is curtailing progress? I'd be curious to know just because there is so much speculation about this on the boards. Admittedly TSM is not what I would consider a Disney classic, but M:S and Everest were great experiences to me. Especially M:S.

I guess I am asking if there is anyone in the company to become the next Walt. Or at least someone with the imagination to do so.

I have very specific reasons why I consider Everest and MS to be inferior attractions to their predecessors. In the case of Everest, I enjoy riding it just as much as any family coaster. I enjoy the nice theming in the queue. What I'm extremely disappointed in is that in my opinion the quality theming and show end in the queue. If you analyze what is offered during the ride it's far less than even Big Thunder. Where is the rich storytelling during the ride? One animatronic? One lame shadow projection? That's about it. I won't go into what this ride could have been but I can tell you it's a great example of how Disney has been going backwards in innovation and quality.

Another example is Philarmagic. If you look at the progression of 4D attractions you'll see Philarmagic as a huge step backwards. magic Journeys - introducing the new Kodak 3D film system. Great technology. Decent visuals and music. Next came Captain EO - introducing 4D theater effects. Great sound system, celebrity pop star...another set of innovations and a decent experience for the time. The Disney 4D repertoire took a huge leap forward with MuppetVision - first animatronics and 4D (some great A100s to boot), first physical effects such as water spritz and bubbles, immersive theater etc. Honey I Shrunk the Audience - first motion base theater for 4D, leg ticklers and another funny show for the time. Now we come to Philarmagic - uhhhhhh 3 screens where only one is polarized 3D? Well maybe the content...no that is pretty much everything we've seen before if you watched any Disney special on their animation. Where is the innovation? Where is the engaging story? It's not all bad. I have to admit I felt a twinge of emotion during the flying carpet sequence but that's about it.

Do you see my point? The same could be said for many other attractions, some a lot worse. Don't get me started on Imagination, SGE or Laugh Floor, Nemo or Mexico. And as I've pointed out before, it's not all about big budget. One of the attractions that was done right in my opinion was Cranium Command. They took a very small budget and a very short production schedule and turned it into a great attraction. It wasn't flahsy or extremely high tech but it did have emotion, a connection with its audience, some great humor and a decent presentation.

Is there anyone that could be the next Walt? Yes. There are plenty within the ranks of WDI that feel as I do and have the talent to produce some great attractions. The problem is Disney has been steadily letting them go for a while now. Before anyone accuses me of being in that category I left WDI by choice to work for Universal then start my own company.

There is a solution to this trend of mediocrity. Hopefully Jobs and Lasseter will bring about change. But beyond that the Disney consumers need to really start speaking out about this. As long as Disney feels as though the average guest will be okay with what they are churning out they won't do a thing about it. Too many on this board are content. I'm not saying you have to hate Disney. All I'm saying is let's hold them up to the standard they are capable of.

 

[MousDad]

It is known and has been proven and announced that Disney employs people who do nothing but monitor message forums - so they are seeing this.

I believe that's true, and Spirit/WDW1974 confirmed as much the other day.

However, I don't think the reason they monitor forums is to get ideas or direction. I think they do it only to see if they need to sue/threaten/fire anyone.

 

[drew81]

Who is in charge of the WDW parks right now?

President of WDW-Meg Crofton

 

[drew81]

I have very specific reasons why I consider Everest and MS to be inferior attractions to their predecessors. In the case of Everest, I enjoy riding it just as much as any family coaster. I enjoy the nice theming in the queue. What I'm extremely disappointed in is that in my opinion the quality theming and show end in the queue. If you analyze what is offered during the ride it's far less than even Big Thunder. Where is the rich storytelling during the ride? One animatronic? One lame shadow projection? That's about it. I won't go into what this ride could have been but I can tell you it's a great example of how Disney has been going backwards in innovation and quality.

Are you talking about the portion when the yeti was going to grab the track and swing it back and forth? Wasn't that one of the blue sky ideas that got shelved because of budget?

 

[DisneyMusician2]

I have very specific reasons why I consider Everest and MS to be inferior attractions to their predecessors. In the case of Everest, I enjoy riding it just as much as any family coaster. I enjoy the nice theming in the queue. What I'm extremely disappointed in is that in my opinion the quality theming and show end in the queue. If you analyze what is offered during the ride it's far less than even Big Thunder. Where is the rich storytelling during the ride? One animatronic? One lame shadow projection? That's about it. I won't go into what this ride could have been but I can tell you it's a great example of how Disney has been going backwards in innovation and quality.

Another example is Philarmagic. If you look at the progression of 4D attractions you'll see Philarmagic as a huge step backwards. magic Journeys - introducing the new Kodak 3D film system. Great technology. Decent visuals and music. Next came Captain EO - introducing 4D theater effects. Great sound system, celebrity pop star...another set of innovations and a decent experience for the time. The Disney 4D repertoire took a huge leap forward with MuppetVision - first animatronics and 4D (some great A100s to boot), first physical effects such as water spritz and bubbles, immersive theater etc. Honey I Shrunk the Audience - first motion base theater for 4D, leg ticklers and another funny show for the time. Now we come to Philarmagic - uhhhhhh 3 screens where only one is polarized 3D? Well maybe the content...no that is pretty much everything we've seen before if you watched any Disney special on their animation. Where is the innovation? Where is the engaging story? It's not all bad. I have to admit I felt a twinge of emotion during the flying carpet sequence but that's about it.

Do you see my point? The same could be said for many other attractions, some a lot worse. Don't get me started on Imagination, SGE or Laugh Floor, Nemo or Mexico. And as I've pointed out before, it's not all about big budget. One of the attractions that was done right in my opinion was Cranium Command. They took a very small budget and a very short production schedule and turned it into a great attraction. It wasn't flahsy or extremely high tech but it did have emotion, a connection with its audience, some great humor and a decent presentation.

Is there anyone that could be the next Walt? Yes. There are plenty within the ranks of WDI that feel as I do and have the talent to produce some great attractions. The problem is Disney has been steadily letting them go for a while now. Before anyone accuses me of being in that category I left WDI by choice to work for Universal then start my own company.

There is a solution to this trend of mediocrity. Hopefully Jobs and Lasseter will bring about change. But beyond that the Disney consumers need to really start speaking out about this. As long as Disney feels as though the average guest will be okay with what they are churning out they won't do a thing about it. Too many on this board are content. I'm not saying you have to hate Disney. All I'm saying is let's hold them up to the standard they are capable of.

I'm just curious if you think Jobs and Lasseter are capable of this. I don't know, and it seems like you might have a different perspective.

 

[dizzney]

Still love it!

We still love WDW regardless and would still go, its clean, we have lots of fun, and everyone is asking when we are going again, and thats after 10 days there in February and 5 nights in Disneyland in August,

We also just did an add-on at Bay Lake Tower to our vacation club membership

Its our favorite vacation place in the world!:sohappy::sohappy::sohappy:

 

[jakeman]

I'm not sure the ones that are happy are in the minority. The tone of your post would seem to indicate that a majority of guest are displeased with their Disney experience.

How do you account for the progressive increase in attendance over the past few years?

Additionally, quality is in the eye of the beholder. I have been quite pleased with the current additions to the parks. Getting upset over something we never had (i.e. other "versions" of rides) seems like a waste of time.

When it really comes down to it you fall into one of two categories:

1) You see WDW for what it is. A theme park complex where you pay money to make unique memories with family or friends.

2) You see WDW as a symbol for something more.

Either one is your choice, but there seems to be considerable less angst in the first group.

 

[Missing20K]

We still love WDW regardless and would still go, its clean, we have lots of fun, and everyone is asking when we are going again, and thats after 10 days there in February and 5 nights in Disneyland in August,

We also just did an add-on at Bay Lake Tower to our vacation club membership

Its our favorite vacation place in the world!:sohappy::sohappy::sohappy:

I must not have been in the same parks and resort last January.

 

[DisneyJoe]

I believe that's true, and Spirit/WDW1974 confirmed as much the other day.

However, I don't think the reason they monitor forums is to get ideas or direction. I think they do it only to see if they need to sue/threaten/fire anyone.

I believe they also monitor for complaints and praise.

 

[sarabi]

Please you have just opened another can of worms. I'll let others deal with the obvious categories such as cleanliness, food, retail etc. What I am able to talk intelligently about is the category of attraction quality. I give examples in the "stale" thread of how attractions like Dinosaur, Toy Story Mania, Everest, Mission Space, Philarmagic and Soarin' are far below the level of quality one should expect from Disney. They are offering less because they used to roll out attractions like Tower of Terror or Haunted Mansion. if you are at all interested in the answer to your question please start with my posts in that thread. If you'd like more on any of those I'd be happy to expound further as I could probably write a book on the subject.

Having worked on some of these attractions while employed at WDI and at some of its vendors I can tell you that you are experiencing the bottom rung of potential versions that could have been developed. It's true that throughout WDI's history no attraction ever made it off the drawing boards and into the parks in its original form. We would always start with a high concept far above what we thought would be approved. Once the project estimators got to work we'd be left with maybe 70% to 80% of the proposed scope. That was fine because we knew we could work with 70% of a 130% proposal. Now, creativity and passion has been replaced with corporate branding, lower budgets and poor management. Is that what you want after an 80% price increase?

I'm actually really happy with "stale" attractions like Soarin' and Everest. From what I hear, TSM is well loved also. I can see where you'd have a different perspective, knowing what might have been, but to me, the consumer, it still feels cutting edge.
When ideas were cut down to 70-80 percent of the proposed scope, you cite that part of it was due to lower budgets. I don't know what can be done about that, rather than for a business to attempt to make more money so that they CAN churn out a larger scale caliber of attraction. That was the point of my post you are quoting.

 

[wedway71]

Well, I have been going to WDW since it opened. I still to this day love it. I never feel ripped off when I go. I have been on this site for about 8 years and have seen it all.

Is Disney perfect? No. In my opinion, it is the best run,most clean, magical place to go.
I hear all the time how it isnt as clean anymore. A bunch of names like Eisner and others are quick to be spoken of.

I have a pic of me around 1976(Before Eisner and the lack of quality everyone speaks of). One thing I notice more than my brady bunch haircut is a 3 inch chip of paint on the railing on the Dumbo Attraction.

My question is, has WDW lost its clean edge or have we started to look more for imperfections?

 

[EpcotServo]

Imagineering = Still Great

Management = Not so great

End of story.

 

[wedway71]

Imagineering = Still Great

Management = Not so great

End of story.

I think one of the big problems is that we dont have any Managers that had the pleasure of working with Walt while he was alive. We have Marty Sklar left. I think one of the best IMO was ________ Nunis when he was in Rasulo's position. He himself started at DL and had alot of Walt's values rubbing off on him.

Richard Nunis....... I used his nick name and it blocked it out.

 

[whylightbulb]

I'm not sure the ones that are happy are in the minority. The tone of your post would seem to indicate that a majority of guest are displeased with their Disney experience.

How do you account for the progressive increase in attendance over the past few years?

Additionally, quality is in the eye of the beholder. I have been quite pleased with the current additions to the parks. Getting upset over something we never had (i.e. other "versions" of rides) seems like a waste of time.

When it really comes down to it you fall into one of two categories:

1) You see WDW for what it is. A theme park complex where you pay money to make unique memories with family or friends.

2) You see WDW as a symbol for something more.

Either one is your choice, but there seems to be considerable less angst in the first group.

I didn't say that most guests that visit aren't happy. I'm sure they have a pleasant enough time. What I was saying, referencing the posters comment, was that those that would be content to continue paying admission for the rest of their lives if Disney never added another attraction are in the minority.

The reason there has been an increase in attendance is due to several factors. Disney's marketing campaigns and Pixar's success to name a couple. Mcdonald's is still doing pretty well and they continue to build more units and therefore see an increase in sales. Does that mean they are doing all the right things? Not necessarily. Their food is still lousy (I suppose you could argue that it is not but by every standard, health, quality and kitchen staff it's far inferior to a "real" restaurant) but their marketing is as agressive as ever. The American people will fall for a good marketing campaign every time. So to say that Disney seeing an increase in attendance means that they are building quality attractions isn't necessarity true.

Just like the Mcdonalds example, Disney could serve up absolute rubbish and people will still flock to the parks for a while. The company is mostly relying on the strong brand and characters that have been created by the early Disney and Pixar. But unlike Mcdonalds, WDW is more difficult to frequent. Eventually many of those that enjoy WDW but don't think it's the cat's meow will stop making the effort because there has been nothing in the last ten years to attract them. It will be easier to visit the Jersey Shore or more importantly for the international guests, Tokyo Disney or Disneyland Paris or Dubai. The die hards will continue to frequent but as you know that is a small minority of WDW's market share.

I'm not sure why you say getting upset over lower quality and less product is a waste of time. I might agree if I thought the company wasn't capable and did not have the resources to pull it off. I also might agree if it was simply a matter of budget. Disney is a public company and has the right to invest the least amount possible while delivering an adequite product to increase its margin. The issue is that the product has not been adequite for the last ten years. It has been way below Disney standards set by the company in years prior. The other problem is that most of the time it's outright corruption, ego and poor management. I go into specifics in the other thread but I'll be happy to give more examples if you are interested.

As far as your two categories you can place me in a bit of both. Disney has a rich legacy and can stand for more as it used to. Unfortunately Disney has become very much like most of corporate America: a massive leviathon that is too big to care about its product past the sales numbers. When I worked at WDI I personally knew executives that would not step foot in a Disney theme park because they thought it was beneath them. Hell, my boss didn't realize Walt Disney was a real man until he went through orientation. And these idiots were in charge of new projects! They wouldn't know a good quality attraction from a carnival ride. That doesn't make you mad?

It's because of these things that we don't see attractions that inspire awe anymore. We don't see Haunted Mansions or Indiana Jones rides anymore because Laugh Floor will be good enough. Disney knows that the public will consume almost whatever they throw at them. I can't tell you how many times I heard at WDI, "why go into that much trouble? they'll never notice and it will be good enough without it."

 

[whylightbulb]

I'm actually really happy with "stale" attractions like Soarin' and Everest. From what I hear, TSM is well loved also. I can see where you'd have a different perspective, knowing what might have been, but to me, the consumer, it still feels cutting edge.
When ideas were cut down to 70-80 percent of the proposed scope, you cite that part of it was due to lower budgets. I don't know what can be done about that, rather than for a business to attempt to make more money so that they CAN churn out a larger scale caliber of attraction. That was the point of my post you are quoting.

As I've said, these attractions are enjoyable enough. There are some that I exit and then want to vomit (and not from the g-forces), but certainly the examples you have here are OKAY. But that's the problem, they are just okay. I have taken several friends and family on these and I received pretty good response after soarin', but after Everest and Toy Story most of the response was pretty average. Nothing like you see after watching guests exit Journey to the Center of the Earth or Indy for example. I'm not saying every attraction has to be a major blockbuster, but I would like to see one at least every few years.

The last ten year can be summarized with attractions that are okay and are mostly reduced in scope compared with attractions of the 70s, 80s and half of the 90s. They barely pass. Logically you can't really argue with that if you use standard markers such as quantity of scenic, effects and animation per square foot for example. Compare Muppetvision to Philarmagic using that one marker. MuppetVision is world's apart in that category.

I realize the sometimes quality is subjective but in some cases it isn't. Is there anybody that can truly say the movie Plan 9 From Outer Space or Howard the Duck were quality productions? Sure there are those that enjoy them for there kitsch or cult status or whatever personal reasons someone might have, but as far as using the word "quality," I don't think that word can be synonymous with those films. The same goes for the writing and content in Toy Story mania, or Tiki under New Mangament or Stich or Dinosaur. Not exactly quality productions from a professional standpoint. These each do have some strong points. But once again, overall not close to Disney standards.

 

[whylightbulb]

I'm just curious if you think Jobs and Lasseter are capable of this. I don't know, and it seems like you might have a different perspective.

I think quite possibly they are capable. Lasseter has already done some house cleaning and made some good decisions. There were many no talent hacks that have been let go already. There are still many left however in my opinion. But there are also some amazing and brilliant designers still there that, if under the right management, will be allowed to use their talents for the company good.

 

[Jasper Dale]

i think the more you look at "anything", you are bound to find more and more things you dislike about it or would like improvement.

WDW isn't and should never be held up as some sort of "shrine" or "idol". it's a theme park. a fun place to spend with family. my wife and i are looking forward to our trip next month. we are not expecting to feel as if we have arrived at the pearly gates.

it will never ever reach the state of perfection that it seems some people want it to reach. i think when you hyper focus on something for too long, you forget to put things in perspective.

we live in the midwest. i can't think of anywhere that offers anything close to what WDW offers. four theme parks, tons of attractions, rides, shows, any type of food you want to try.

of course it will never be a perfect place. this isn't Heaven we are talking about.

in my opinion, i think some people who go on and on about "this" defect or "that" problem with the park need to stop and just enjoy a few days in a fun place with family and friends.

i'm just really happy that even with the economy so messed up that WDW is still there for my wife and i to take some time off and relax and have some fun.