Eddie Sotto's take on the current state of the parks (Part II)

[jhastings74]

I was poached by WED from Landmark Entertainment and that was how I got in. It is very hard to keep companies from doing this. Contracts only go so far and so it's hard to prove who approached who first. You try to not introduce them to your clients.

I imagine that it becomes a bit of a double-edged sword...where on one hand, it is flattering to know that you have team members that are in demand from the Big Boys because they have incredible talents and skills, but on the other hand, you want to protect what is 'yours'. Hindsight being what it is, do you have any regrets about leaving Landmark, and did you face any backlash for going to WED?

 

[Eddie Sotto]

I imagine that it becomes a bit of a double-edged sword...where on one hand, it is flattering to know that you have team members that are in demand from the Big Boys because they have incredible talents and skills, but on the other hand, you want to protect what is 'yours'. Hindsight being what it is, do you have any regrets about leaving Landmark, and did you face any backlash for going to WED?

I'd rather have my team, but always want to see people grow and succeed. If you can't offer what others do, then they have the right to progress. It's the deliberate poaching that is hard to deal with. No regrets leaving Landmark other than smaller cultures are easier to work in that big corporations with layers and politics. Still, no regrets leaving. The salary was almost double and I walked in to WED with an executive position. no backlash as the management of Landmark were Disney fans. No backlash, they would put down WED, but later they would take credit for training me, so I think they were proud of it in a strange way. I like the Landmark guys for sure and they did teach some great lessons.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Most Innovative companies. Forbes list.

Here's the Forbes list of the 100 most innovative companies. Monsanto made the top 10 with Apple, Amazon and some others. Disney did not make the list at all! Interesting how they define innovation and why these companies succeed. Great reading and lots of good links in there.

http://www.forbes.com/special-features/innovative-companies.html

 

[bayoubelle]

Here's a question...

Is there really a market, or maybe need is a better word, for a new theme park?

I know a lot of people wish for a 5th park at WDW or another part of the country and it'd undoubtably get guest, but would it be a success in the long run as opposed to improving upon current parks and making them fresher (such as the FLE). It keeps making me think of the AK and how it feels sort of stale to me at least after repeat visits (using it as the example since it was the newest). It filled a niche, but people still want more. Maybe that answers the overall question, but would improving a park be more beneficial than opening a new one probably is the refined question.

At the same time, leaving disney to the side, I don't consider Universal Studios to be a "theme" park. The rides tie in with the movies, but I dont get the same sense of escapism I do with disney. I know I'm just in a flashy amusement park. I havent been to IoA since I was a kid and it first opened, but that seemed to me to be their try at doing something with better theming and I never felt like it paid off. The lands felt too small and the transitions were very "in your face". (And I never understood how slapping superhero images or others on a generic ride counts as theming. A green rollercoaster called the Hulk doesn't give me a sense Im truly in another place. Its just a name) Maybe the wizarding world improves IoA a ton, I dont know, but would Universal Studios be better off having a new theme park somewhere with a truly all out theme to it. Where it really transplants you into the movies and such? Thats where I can see a need for another park.

Im sure arguments can be made for a theme park outside of UniS and WDW, a brand new one based off whatever concept, but where would it fit in and how would it rival the big 2?

I dont know if I let my mind wander too much with this post and made any sense.

Great post and welcome to the thread.

I think the next great "theme park" should not be a "theme park" at all.

Here's what I mean. To me, theme parks have become cliche's of themselves by perpetuating the same format over and over inside the park. The queue, pre-show, ride, post show and gift shop with the "I survived" franchise merchandise. Do that six times and you wonder why you came. The themed "lands" no longer immerse or transform, they are thin veneers over food carts, gift shops and parade seating. The ritual of revisiting your childhood as it was has nostalgic value, but is that the extent of the entertainment? I want to escape and really feel it. Where is the "gamechanger" in theme parks? It starts by saying why is "escape" confined to theme parks? I've been spending the last few years digging for the "immersive" gold in other fields and thinking of different ways to reinvent the whole mess. I like how WDI is questioning the whole notion of the queue, and looking at NextGen things. It's time for a breakthrough in this industry, not just more theming and a bigger store. Movie franchises do not last in the consciousness as they once did, so rides hung on a movie are more risky too. It's true that the guests love total immersion that extends through the retail and food, like WWHP does. Disney should see that and get back into leading their own business but take a leap into something completely different.

As for more parks, I think "urban renewal" is better than "urban sprawl", so i'm in favor of cleaning your own house instead of ditching it. If the "next level" is that unique then it may have to be it's own park, or rather experience then it's justified. I'm just waiting for the right client to explore this stuff with or I'd be doing it right now.

Kudos to both of you. Disney needs to improve the existing parks before they build another one. Take away the Disney name from many(notice I did not say all) of the attractions in say Fantasyland and you have carnival rides available on any given weekend in Podunk, USA. The company needs to stop resting on its laurels and get some excitement back into their parks.

Here's the Forbes list of the 100 most innovative companies. Monsanto made the top 10 with Apple, Amazon and some others. Disney did not make the list at all! Interesting how they define innovation and why these companies succeed. Great reading and lots of good links in there.

http://www.forbes.com/special-features/innovative-companies.html

This, unfortunately, does not surprise me at all.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

BTW- This does not mean that I don't love the parks, I do. And if the formula is so bad, why are they so crowded? Why fight a goldmine?

I guess when you ask the "what's next?" question, My sense is that the answer deserves being just as breathtaking and innovative as Disneyland once was when it emerged on the 1955 carnival landscape. Reach higher and break the mold.

Like the old joke...One day they asked an Imagineer...

"Tell me, how many Imagineers does it take to change a light bulb?"

After a brief pause and a dead stare into space the answer came.

"Does it have to be a light bulb?" (My sentiments exactly.)

 

[trs518]

Here's the Forbes list of the 100 most innovative companies. Monsanto made the top 10 with Apple, Amazon and some others. Disney did not make the list at all! Interesting how they define innovation and why these companies succeed. Great reading and lots of good links in there.

http://www.forbes.com/special-features/innovative-companies.html

From the list I only saw 2 companies that I could identify as entertainment, Nintendo and Activision. Both of them are video game companies.

I think the big reason Disney isn't on the list, is because it's current major innovations pale in comparison to it's history; multi-plane camera, Disneyland, Disney World.

How can you call a ride or Audio-Animatronic within a park a major innovation, when it's located within an even more historically significant innovation?

 

[Eddie Sotto]

From the list I only saw 2 companies that I could identify as entertainment, Nintendo and Activision. Both of them are video game companies.

I think the big reason Disney isn't on the list, is because it's current major innovations pale in comparison to it's history; multi-plane camera, Disneyland, Disney World.

How can you call a ride or Audio-Animatronic within a park a major innovation, when it's located within an even more historically significant innovation?

The industry they are in is pretty mature, so it lacks reinvention. There are no "gamechangers".

 

[trs518]

The industry they are in is pretty mature, so it lacks reinvention. There are no "gamechangers".

As much as we would like to see a gamechanger, we'll have to settle for "advancing by degrees"; more advanced audio-animatronics, better queues(interactive doesn't always mean better), interactive games throughout the park (recent rumors), rides that seemlessly use advanced technology.

 

[jt04]

The industry they are in is pretty mature, so it lacks reinvention. There are no "gamechangers".

Do you hold out any hope for the nextgen tech that is in development? No doubt in my mind it could be a revolution for the tourist industry at the very least.

 

[HMF]

Here's the Forbes list of the 100 most innovative companies. Monsanto made the top 10 with Apple, Amazon and some others. Disney did not make the list at all! Interesting how they define innovation and why these companies succeed. Great reading and lots of good links in there.

http://www.forbes.com/special-features/innovative-companies.html

I am not surprised considering that the type of people that magazine appeals too are the types who would have told Walt that Disneyland would close within a week. As for Monsanto what were they innovative in, making enemies with most first-world Nations?

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Do you hold out any hope for the nextgen tech that is in development? No doubt in my mind it could be a revolution for the tourist industry at the very least.

Yes...I hope it does have an impact.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

I am not surprised considering that the type of people that magazine appeals too are the types who would have told Walt that Disneyland would close within a week. As for Monsanto what were they innovative in, making enemies with most first-world Nations?

Astroturf.

 

[HMF]

Astroturf.

Many Sports fans wish that were never invented.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Many Sports fans wish that were never invented.

Here's more on Monsanto and their "Adventure thru Inner Space" project.

http://themightymicroscope.com/atis-report.htm

 

[ChrisFL]

Eddie, not an imagineering question per se, but I wanted to know your thoughts on whether Disney should consider changing their formula for supply/demand.

To me it would seem risky, but possibly very beneficial if they were to increase the price-point for guests overall, meaning Disney's revenues would stay the same, but there would be less crowds, which also means less strollers, less monorail and bus problems, less cleanup required, etc.

I think the addition of so many hotels after Eisner's reign may have been a double edged sword.

For example, clearly the Fantasyland Expansion was designed to ease traffic and allow more guests to spread out in new attractions, however that still leaves the problems of the sea of crowds leaving MK, having to open up the backstage areas just for safety and traffic flow.... and the monorail and bus problems which seem to be getting worse.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Eddie, not an imagineering question per se, but I wanted to know your thoughts on whether Disney should consider changing their formula for supply/demand.

To me it would seem risky, but possibly very beneficial if they were to increase the price-point for guests overall, meaning Disney's revenues would stay the same, but there would be less crowds, which also means less strollers, less monorail and bus problems, less cleanup required, etc.

I think the addition of so many hotels after Eisner's reign may have been a double edged sword.

For example, clearly the Fantasyland Expansion was designed to ease traffic and allow more guests to spread out in new attractions, however that still leaves the problems of the sea of crowds leaving MK, having to open up the backstage areas just for safety and traffic flow.... and the monorail and bus problems which seem to be getting worse.

Good question. I know here in Anaheim, the passports are priced so low (15 bucks a month) that the parks are packed except during blackouts. This means high volume, but very low per capita spending and a miserable guest experience. You don't make much and the maintenance is high. Most of the guests are there for free, coming and going at odd hours, using the parks like daycare or a mall. AP's change the dynamic big time.

To me, the guest experience is the sacred thing. So I'd vote in a less supply side situation for an "A Plus" guest experience (meaning higher priced, less crowded, close the gate when it hits a lower number) targeted to a more affluent customer that wants Disney quality and will pay for that. Sea World has the "Discovery Cove" thing that is that way. The whole fastpass program forces guests into the streets, so that just makes it worse. I miss the random serendipity of eating where I want and going on something when it seems fun, not planning every bite and ride in the morning and running to get passes.

The guest experience was never about being a slave to access. The con of all of this is that some will not be able to afford to go to the park. My sense having been there on crowded days, is that the whole experience at times has become so compromised I'd rather pay more to see the park and love it, than to be miserable and have access to overcrowding. I don't go to Anaheim now as it's so bad. Bad reviews eventually creep up on you and erode the desire to return.

There must be a balance between overcharging and overcrowding.

 

[LuvtheGoof]

I have to agree. I don't like having to plan parts of my vacation 6 months in advance, but it is the world we live in today. My sons absolutely love LeCellier, so I have to call right at the 6 month mark just to be sure we get an ADR when they are with us. Of course, we only do lunch now, since the change to a signature restaurant. No reason to spend more for the same steak at dinner, and the boys get their fix.

I would be all for raising the prices to lower the crowds and increase the individual satisfaction of guests, if that means that the quality of the guest experience is raised as well. I say that, though, knowing that we can afford to pay the higher prices that Disney may charge. Some people would be priced out of the market, and some will say that it wasn't Walt's vision, but Walt wasn't thinking that 16 million people would be visiting in one year either! Maybe if there had been a lot more park expansion in the past, that the additional crowds would not be noticed. Maybe even a second exit from the MK than doesn't take people through CM only areas might be a good workaround. You would think there would be some way to alleviate the mess after Wishes in the evening (my wife and I don't even go anymore due to the crowds, and it's our favorite).

 

[wedenterprises]

So glad this topic came up.

It's hard to take in all the amazing detail when you are being corralled down main street with a million other people. You don't have time to look at stuff, only to look down at strollers and people criss-crossing.

I'd be in favor of boosting prices if it meant a lowered attendance, but I wonder what that price point would be. Here's a crazy thought - what about getting rid of annual passes?

 

[ChrisFL]

I would be all for raising the prices to lower the crowds and increase the individual satisfaction of guests, if that means that the quality of the guest experience is raised as well. I say that, though, knowing that we can afford to pay the higher prices that Disney may charge. Some people would be priced out of the market, and some will say that it wasn't Walt's vision, but Walt wasn't thinking that 16 million people would be visiting in one year either! Maybe if there had been a lot more park expansion in the past, that the additional crowds would not be noticed. Maybe even a second exit from the MK than doesn't take people through CM only areas might be a good workaround. You would think there would be some way to alleviate the mess after Wishes in the evening (my wife and I don't even go anymore due to the crowds, and it's our favorite).

Well in a way, I feel the problem is that there's still a great majority of guests who visit MK compared to the other parks.

We complain when attractions that seem to be fit for MK get added to the other parks, but in a way...it seems like its been the reason why Disney has been doing this...to see how well they can spread out the crowds.

I'm not making apologies for Disney, we know that they are still lacking some major improvements, but it is just a thought.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Well in a way, I feel the problem is that there's still a great majority of guests who visit MK compared to the other parks.

We complain when attractions that seem to be fit for MK get added to the other parks, but in a way...it seems like its been the reason why Disney has been doing this...to see how well they can spread out the crowds.

I'm not making apologies for Disney, we know that they are still lacking some major improvements, but it is just a thought.

As you all know, the Magic Kingdom has the broadest appeal of any of the parks and so it has historically been a "must see" of Walt Disney World. So if you are in management, you end up focusing on parks that have difficulty attracting enough guests to pay for themselves, such as Epcot Center. So in a way, you are absolutely right in that they are spreading out the crowds to utilize the entire property. It's nice to see that the Magic Kingdom is getting some renewed attention and of course finding the right balance of comfort and crowds is a tricky formula to arrive at. I'm not sure I have any of the answers for this or even that the answer is merely pricing, but it would be nice to experience the park as it was designed to be experienced.