Do Projects Die Because of Internet Rumors?

AEfx

Well-Known Member
You must realize that to Disney, the relatively small subset of fanboys on the internet has no real impact on their business decisions - outside of a few small token events to cater to them and rake in some extra dollars. If they really cared what internet chatter said, Tower of Terror would still be at Disneyland.

You aren't wrong, but they also have no qualms about using the fan community for their purposes. This has happened before - someone leaks information on something that some faction wants to change, fan community goes nutty, it's used internally as evidence of "gee, this isn't a good idea".
 

jpeden

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No
Negative response had nothing to do with saving WDW's TOT. Operational needs and Kalogridis' reticence to close it did. If TOT resided in a theme park with a full roster of attractions, like DCA for example, it would not have been so easily spared.

I was surprised to see that Kalogridis carried that much weight with the suits in Burbank.
 

sedati

Well-Known Member
Oh I get that. Hasn’t stopped them from ripping everything else out and still charging $98 a day.

This is not an excuse as I too feel this park was allowed to diminish way too far. But I do remember my first visit when the park had an even smaller footprint with only a pair of studio tours, The Great Movie Ride, the Indy stunt show, and one stage show that I can't recall. We made a full day of it and even went back another day to do it all over again.

It was my full expectation this year that our studio day would be a half day and I was completely wrong. Much of this had to do with my not having been in so long, coupled with a group that wanted to do a lot of shows that I probably wouldn't have done if left on my own (but I did enjoy them all.) We had a very full day from open to close hitting everything but Disney Junior, Path of the Jedi, and Jedi Training Academy. I actually hoped to get back for another partial day as only two times on Rockin and Tower barely satiated me, and sadly I only managed a single ride on Star Tours and Toy Story.
 

sedati

Well-Known Member
This has been posted before I believe, but I think Joe Rhode's post on the simultaneous opening of both Pandora and Mission Breakout! remains relevant to the original post:

"Today, on each coast, two projects opened to overwhelming crowds and very high praise. Both of these were the results of incredible teamwork by talented and devoted individuals, some of whom worked both projects!! I had the privilege of overseeing these, but make no mistake, the work was done by two extremely talented groups of master storytellers. It interests me that both projects were announced to considerable skepticism. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and skepticism is a crucial component of good creative work. But there is something I wanted to comment on. Much of this skepticism was directed at the idea that "nobody cared" about these subjects. This is a false lead. Subject is nothing to holler about. Treatment is how stories work. Do you want to hear a story about two girls in a boat, a spaceship, a lost dog, or a man struggling with his identity? How could anyone possibly know? What makes story great is how it is told, not what it is about. If humans only told stories about subjects that people were familiar with and never changed the subject, every story on earth would be about a successful mammoth hunt. We, who are storytellers, take our charge seriously. We open the dream-channels of human minds, so that people have the power to believe in something more than what they believed yesterday, more than they see with their eyes. And hopefully, they transfer that open belief in the yet-unseen to other enterprises, to science, medicine, architecture, and politics. We always need new stories, about what? No one can say. But if they are well told, moving, and inspiring, they will work like seeds in a garden to help us all grow."
 

MerlinTheGoat

Well-Known Member
I wonder if sparing DHS' Tower of Terror had anything to do with it being so different from the DCA version. Besides the obvious ride layout differences (particularly the horizontally moving 5th dimension scene), the exterior is also VERY different. If they did overlay DHS ToT, they wouldn't be able to clone the exact same experience from DCA due to these differences. That would present a more costly project that may have given them some hesitation.

Also, i'm not sure how popular the DCA version is, but DHS' Tower of Terror is and always has been extremely popular. It is pretty much unanimously well loved and pulls in a constant stream of guests (often extremely long lines outside of off-season).

It should be quite apparent even for the more out-of-touch executives that overlaying the DHS ToT with GOTG would be a pointless wasteful expense that likely wouldn't present much of a return investment. Granted i'm sure they considered it at one point, but hopefully they were thoroughly talked out of it and will remain in that mindset.
 

HMF

Well-Known Member
I read an article yesterday about the ending of Avengers: Age of Ultron where the ending was changed because of internet rumors that proved to be true at the time. Does the same thing happen with Parks and Resorts? Were there projects that were in final stages of approval pulled because of internet rumors or insider leaks?
If it did matter, DCA's Tower of Terror would still exist.
 

seascape

Well-Known Member
I wonder if sparing DHS' Tower of Terror had anything to do with it being so different from the DCA version. Besides the obvious ride layout differences (particularly the horizontally moving 5th dimension scene), the exterior is also VERY different. If they did overlay DHS ToT, they wouldn't be able to clone the exact same experience from DCA due to these differences. That would present a more costly project that may have given them some hesitation.

Also, i'm not sure how popular the DCA version is, but DHS' Tower of Terror is and always has been extremely popular. It is pretty much unanimously well loved and pulls in a constant stream of guests (often extremely long lines outside of off-season).

It should be quite apparent even for the more out-of-touch executives that overlaying the DHS ToT with GOTG would be a pointless wasteful expense that likely wouldn't present much of a return investment. Granted i'm sure they considered it at one point, but hopefully they were thoroughly talked out of it and will remain in that mindset.
When I took the Destinations tour in Epcot in September the guide pointed out the view of Tot going over Morocco. He said the original color of Tot was changed to match Morocco. It was done so well I never noticed that ToT is there. Therefore they can't change the outside of Tot without ruining the view from Epcot.
 

stretchsje

Well-Known Member
The operational argument is impossible to ignore. DHS literally cannot afford to close anymore attractions.
And yet they closed The Great Movie Ride. TOT in Anaheim reopened before the summer crowds. As much as a closure would have been a mess operationally, it would have put a new draw in the park too (for better or worse)... which was the whole reason it was being considered in the first place. It would have been a non-starter otherwise. I genuinely think the public outcry was the tipping point here.
 

GiveMeTheMusic

Well-Known Member
And yet they closed The Great Movie Ride. TOT in Anaheim reopened before the summer crowds. As much as a closure would have been a mess operationally, it would have put a new draw in the park too (for better or worse)... which was the whole reason it was being considered in the first place. It would have been a non-starter otherwise. I genuinely think the public outcry was the tipping point here.

The GMR was already going to close and that was not going to change. Closing TOT for 6 months or more while GMR was closed would put the park into an untenable state.

Which is funny, because the park is already in an untenable state.

It's important to note that Disney in general doesn't care about fan outcry. Not one tiny little bit.
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
DHS's ToT was not given the overlay probably for a number of reasons:
  1. The new look clashing over Morocco's shoulder
  2. The ride system is different from DCA and so, it would nearly double the work
  3. There's been hints that putting GotG in UoE was the occasion of 'talks' between Disney and Universal, so, it's likely that those 'talks' would have been a damper on GotG going in at that time
But since they went with the GotG overlay in DCA despite fan outcry... that just shows the lack of power over fan outcry. Although... surveys seem to have more of an impact. Which is the way it should be. You don't want to dismiss the majority view just because a minority view is so well organized and loud.
 

danheaton

Well-Known Member
I'm skeptical that fan response on the Internet has much impact, as we saw with Maelstrom and Frozen. Even most of the comments on the Disney Parks Blog were negative. I agree that leaks most certainly happen, and they may make minor adjustments based on the overall feedback. But those were likely already in the works, and the response just confirmed expectations.
 

HauntedPirate

Park nostalgist
Premium Member
DHS's ToT was not given the overlay probably for a number of reasons:
  1. The new look clashing over Morocco's shoulder
  2. The ride system is different from DCA and so, it would nearly double the work
  3. There's been hints that putting GotG in UoE was the occasion of 'talks' between Disney and Universal, so, it's likely that those 'talks' would have been a damper on GotG going in at that time
But since they went with the GotG overlay in DCA despite fan outcry... that just shows the lack of power over fan outcry. Although... surveys seem to have more of an impact. Which is the way it should be. You don't want to dismiss the majority view just because a minority view is so well organized and loud.

The only problem with surveys is that we all know that they can be, and many are, constructed to get a desired result. A crude example:

If these 5 MAGICAL!!! enhancements were made to your resort room, how much more per night would you be willing to pay?

A. <$20/night
B. $20/night
C. $40/night
D. $50/night

No matter how people respond, it shows guests have an appetite to pay more, even if they really don't and were forced to answer 'A' because $0 wasn't an option.
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
The only problem with surveys is that we all know that they can be, and many are, constructed to get a desired result. A crude example:

If these 5 MAGICAL!!! enhancements were made to your resort room, how much more per night would you be willing to pay?

A. <$20/night
B. $20/night
C. $40/night
D. $50/night

No matter how people respond, it shows guests have an appetite to pay more, even if they really don't and were forced to answer 'A' because $0 wasn't an option.

Well, hopefully Disney isn't asking Betty in Accounting to come up with the questions but a reputable surveying organization, or, they hired people with degrees who know how to avoid the pitfalls of survey biases.
 

ToTBellHop

Well-Known Member
Well, hopefully Disney isn't asking Betty in Accounting to come up with the questions but a reputable surveying organization, or, they hired people with degrees who know how to avoid the pitfalls of survey biases.
On the contrary, they hire folks who are pros at producing the desired responses to surveys. They have graduate degrees in data manipulation!
 

GlacierGlacier

Well-Known Member
On the contrary, they hire folks who are pros at producing the desired responses to surveys. They have graduate degrees in data manipulation!

Why would a company conduct a survey for internal use that they intentionally flaw? If a company is wanting to see how a change would influence their market, they'd want it to be as accurate as possible. I could maybe see a biased poll or survey if it was going to be released to the public, but it makes no sense if they're doing it for internal use.

It's like if you went to the doctor and paid him just to say everything is fine instead of actually having him tell you what's actually happening and how to fix it.

Edit: it's come to my attention that that was sarcasm. Boogers.
 
Last edited:

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
Why would a company conduct a survey for internal use that they intentionally flaw? If a company is wanting to see how a change would influence their market, they'd want it to be as accurate as possible. I could maybe see a biased poll or survey if it was going to be released to the public, but it makes no sense if they're doing it for internal use.

It's like if you went to the doctor and paid him just to say everything is fine instead of actually having him tell you what's actually happening and how to fix it.

You missed the sarcasm of the post. :D
 

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

Back
Top Bottom