Disneyland versus Walt Disney World

Big Bad Wolf

Active Member
Original Poster
Ok...I truly understand and enjoy the original park of Walt, but have learned to love the variety of Walt Disney World. My main misunderstanding is that so many members do not understand the dollars spent for daily upkeep of the WDW resort. Sure...I truly would appreciate new attractions at the parks, but I'm grounded in reality. The two resorts are not equal in upkeep due to the vast size of the properties. Anyone out there that might be interested in adding.....
 

englanddg

One Little Spark...
Ok...I truly understand and enjoy the original park of Walt, but have learned to love the variety of Walt Disney World. My main misunderstanding is that so many members do not understand the dollars spent for daily upkeep of the WDW resort. Sure...I truly would appreciate new attractions at the parks, but I'm grounded in reality. The two resorts are not equal in upkeep due to the vast size of the properties. Anyone out there that might be interested in adding.....
Yes, I can add. How direct do you want me to be?
 

fngoofy

Well-Known Member
WDW's massive size is no excuse for lack of upkeep.
I agree, but it is not as easy as you might think, and size is the main issue.
When I worked there I was probably most shocked at the dips I worked with, the ratio was about 1/5 (dedicated to dip.)
Imagine the Beatles had to bring in 64,996 other people to make Sgt. Pepper's and they still had to maintain quality and form.
 

tirian

Well-Known Member
Ok...I truly understand and enjoy the original park of Walt, but have learned to love the variety of Walt Disney World. My main misunderstanding is that so many members do not understand the dollars spent for daily upkeep of the WDW resort. Sure...I truly would appreciate new attractions at the parks, but I'm grounded in reality. The two resorts are not equal in upkeep due to the vast size of the properties. Anyone out there that might be interested in adding.....

WDW has thousands more CMs and a much larger budget. They could easily invest in new attractions if they wanted. Let's be fair, too: all the parks are receiving much-needed refurbs right now—except for every highly visible attraction at Epcot and the Disco Yeti.
 

Californian Elitist

Well-Known Member
I agree, but it is not as easy as you might think, and size is the main issue.
When I worked there I was probably most shocked at the dips I worked with, the ratio was about 1/5 (dedicated to dip.)
Imagine the Beatles had to bring in 64,996 other people to make Sgt. Pepper's and they still had to maintain quality and form.

I still don't see its size as an excuse. Bring in the number of people necessary to upkeep it.
 

englanddg

One Little Spark...
I'm disappointed. I assumed that the long awaited, North American Cast Member Hunger Games battle between DL and WDW had finally been scheduled.
That would be awesome! Somehow I picture raven24 like this:

the-hunger-games.top.jpg


And me like this!

Redneck.gif


And somewhere along the line Peter will get involved, and he looks like this!

Professor-Charles-Xavier-professor-charles-francis-xavier-28939779-490-327.jpg
 

englanddg

One Little Spark...
I agree, but it is not as easy as you might think, and size is the main issue.
When I worked there I was probably most shocked at the dips I worked with, the ratio was about 1/5 (dedicated to dip.)
Imagine the Beatles had to bring in 64,996 other people to make Sgt. Pepper's and they still had to maintain quality and form.
No, just no.

Quality is a matter of mission and purpose, nothing more. The people who run and care for WDW (on average) care less about it than the people at Disneyland. As a result, the guests care less as well.
 

Travel Junkie

Well-Known Member
It’s not too much to ask to keep the parks we pay nearly $100 just to get into clean and properly maintained. That should be the expectation, not a surprise when it is. While it’s true that WDW has much greater expenses than DLR due to its size, it also produces much greater revenue than DLR. From obvious things like having more parks and hotels to less obvious things like the local AP audience at DLR vs the mostly visitor demo at WDW that spends much more per person since they visit less often, it all comes down to WDW being a gigantic cash cow for the company.


However WDW does not re-invest their profits to near the degree that DLR does. That is the problem I (and many) have with how WDW is run at this time. Disney cuts corners anywhere they can at their east coast operation, where in Anaheim they balance cuts with new additions both large and small.


This is not only indicative in things like attractions but smaller things as well. While WDW has made make cuts in entertainment offerings, hours, and maintenance for years, DLR is adding entertainment and plussing attractions all the time. For example DL’s Fantasmic makes technical upgrades every year or two while DHS’s has been largely left the same. How each resort treats Christmas is another example of WDW going cheap while DLR goes all out and they continue to add things every year.


Size is no excuse for making even small improvements and properly maintaining attractions. Disney just spent over 1 Billion improving DCA, so you would think DLR would add nothing a year after this massive project is over right? Wrong. In 2013, DLR introduced an elaborate meet and greet and new stage shows with Fantasy Faire, another new stage show (Mickey and the Magical Map), plussing the Haunted Mansion Holiday, adding a new holiday World of Color, adding new entertainment offerings such as Feliz Navidad and more. Nobody would have faulted DLR for not adding anything for 2013 because of all the money they spent the last 5 years, but they did it anyway. None of these additions were E-tickets. They don’t have to spend a whole lot to enhance the park. A new show every once in a while would help keep the park fresh in years they don’t add something more significant.
 

asianway

Well-Known Member
No, just no.

Quality is a matter of mission and purpose, nothing more. The people who run and care for WDW (on average) care less about it than the people at Disneyland. As a result, the guests care less as well.
In all fairness DL doesn't let the honey boo boo crowd add on days 6-10 to multi day pass at a few bucks each. Sooner they fix the damage that pricing glitch did the better. The point was to fill resort rooms which doesn't seem to be the case
 

AEfx

Well-Known Member
In all fairness DL doesn't let the honey boo boo crowd add on days 6-10 to multi day pass at a few bucks each. Sooner they fix the damage that pricing glitch did the better. The point was to fill resort rooms which doesn't seem to be the case

I don't know where you get your misinformation, but that "glitch" is one of the main reasons they have continued to have the revenue they have and more people haven't split vacations between WDW and Universal. It's not a glitch - it is a very carefully implemented and designed pricing plan that has kept WDW profitable even though the economy has been in the garbage (Disney saw the post-9/11 drop because of fear, but has done very well in the current purely financial crisis).

What WDW brings in as admission is not what pays the bills and makes the profit. Although we band about 1-day ticket prices as "how much it costs" we all know that most guests pay far, far less. By keeping people in the parks and general area longer, they are greatly benefiting their lodging, food, and the smaller attractions WDW has - few people can spend seven or eight days straight in the four parks proper (I can, but I don't think I'm typical) - that's when they get people to go to the waterparks, or mini-golf, or shop more at DTD - if you stay for 4/5 days you have little time for that stuff.

Your "honeybooboo" comment is silly at best - you know that family has millions now, and are probably worth more than anyone on this board (Honey Boo Boo makes more money each time she breaks wind that some folks make in a month, I am sure) - but your intimation is that lower-income folks like they were before their celeb-reality fame, but you couldn't be more wrong there, either. Lower-inclome folks haven't been able to afford WDW for years - the past decade a trip to WDW has increased the price incredibly way out of pace of inflation, the "average" family is barely able to afford vacation anymore, and WDW has already become a "luxury" destination, at least where theme parks are concerned. Though even then - I know people who pay the same amount for a week at an all-inclusive resort on the beach somewhere exotic for the same price a family pays for a vacation package at WDW with the dining plan at a moderate.
 

englanddg

One Little Spark...
I don't know where you get your misinformation, but that "glitch" is one of the main reasons they have continued to have the revenue they have and more people haven't split vacations between WDW and Universal. It's not a glitch - it is a very carefully implemented and designed pricing plan that has kept WDW profitable even though the economy has been in the garbage (Disney saw the post-9/11 drop because of fear, but has done very well in the current purely financial crisis).

What WDW brings in as admission is not what pays the bills and makes the profit. Although we band about 1-day ticket prices as "how much it costs" we all know that most guests pay far, far less. By keeping people in the parks and general area longer, they are greatly benefiting their lodging, food, and the smaller attractions WDW has - few people can spend seven or eight days straight in the four parks proper (I can, but I don't think I'm typical) - that's when they get people to go to the waterparks, or mini-golf, or shop more at DTD - if you stay for 4/5 days you have little time for that stuff.

Your "honeybooboo" comment is silly at best - you know that family has millions now, and are probably worth more than anyone on this board (Honey Boo Boo makes more money each time she breaks wind that some folks make in a month, I am sure) - but your intimation is that lower-income folks like they were before their celeb-reality fame, but you couldn't be more wrong there, either. Lower-inclome folks haven't been able to afford WDW for years - the past decade a trip to WDW has increased the price incredibly way out of pace of inflation, the "average" family is barely able to afford vacation anymore, and WDW has already become a "luxury" destination, at least where theme parks are concerned. Though even then - I know people who pay the same amount for a week at an all-inclusive resort on the beach somewhere exotic for the same price a family pays for a vacation package at WDW with the dining plan at a moderate.
Very well put.
 

asianway

Well-Known Member
I don't know where you get your misinformation, but that "glitch" is one of the main reasons they have continued to have the revenue they have and more people haven't split vacations between WDW and Universal. It's not a glitch - it is a very carefully implemented and designed pricing plan that has kept WDW profitable even though the economy has been in the garbage (Disney saw the post-9/11 drop because of fear, but has done very well in the current purely financial crisis).

What WDW brings in as admission is not what pays the bills and makes the profit. Although we band about 1-day ticket prices as "how much it costs" we all know that most guests pay far, far less. By keeping people in the parks and general area longer, they are greatly benefiting their lodging, food, and the smaller attractions WDW has - few people can spend seven or eight days straight in the four parks proper (I can, but I don't think I'm typical) - that's when they get people to go to the waterparks, or mini-golf, or shop more at DTD - if you stay for 4/5 days you have little time for that stuff.

Your "honeybooboo" comment is silly at best - you know that family has millions now, and are probably worth more than anyone on this board (Honey Boo Boo makes more money each time she breaks wind that some folks make in a month, I am sure) - but your intimation is that lower-income folks like they were before their celeb-reality fame, but you couldn't be more wrong there, either. Lower-inclome folks haven't been able to afford WDW for years - the past decade a trip to WDW has increased the price incredibly way out of pace of inflation, the "average" family is barely able to afford vacation anymore, and WDW has already become a "luxury" destination, at least where theme parks are concerned. Though even then - I know people who pay the same amount for a week at an all-inclusive resort on the beach somewhere exotic for the same price a family pays for a vacation package at WDW with the dining plan at a moderate.
I the beginning yes, but the hotel room rates are getting to the point where everyone I know is opting to buy the multi day tickets due to their being a bargain and staying at swolphin or bonnet. People will always find a way to save on their overall vacation cost. Have you priced a value lately? Cheaper to stay close, rent a car, maximize the multi day ticket, and eat offsite.

I know what the MYW ticket pricing hoped to accomplish, and it's starting to backfire.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom