WDW1974
Well-Known Member
I believe they also monitor for complaints and praise.
Disney monitors these sites for all sorts of reasons. None of them really good or healthy.
They even have posters that they particularly enjoy reading ...:wave:
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."
I haven't said much on this thread because you're doing a great job, whylightbulb.
I wish people would just read the above post. Close out all other thoughts. Read it. Let it seep in. Maybe then, some folks will open their minds and realize why some of us are so tough on the Mouse.
Sites like this tend to attract three groups -- the old guard who understands what it was that made Disney, Disney; fanboys/girls who believe Disney has never been better, can do no wrong and can't (or won't let themselves) think that Disney ever was better or could do better; and very casual fans who simply think WDW is a fun vacation destination and really don't think much beyond it's a place that makes them happy.
I can't find fault with groups one and three, but the folks in group two bother me tremendously because they are Defenders of Mediocrity and they absolutely contribute to Disney's ability to WalMart its product.
Disney can do better and does every day, even now ... in Anaheim, Tokyo, Paris and even to certain quality standards Hong Kong too.
I'd love to take all the newbies back to WDW in 1988 and show them that bigger ain't better, but my time machine had to be E-bayed when my 401K disappeared and my stock became worthless.
![Cry :cry: :cry:](/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/cry.png)
![Cry :cry: :cry:](/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/cry.png)
![Cry :cry: :cry:](/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/cry.png)