Eddie Sotto's take on the current state of the parks

[The Conundrum]

Steve I am going to give you props my man. You are truly putting the naysayers to shame. :sohappy:

Not to be argumentative but doesn't this just prove the naysayers point even more by confirming that Disney will not do proper refurbs?

Also, Steve's argument is a poor one since in the 1970s and 80s the attractions would go down for refurbishments at the same rate as Disneylands would. This rationale was made somewhere in the mid 90s as justification for cutting costs (please correct me if I am wrong).

 

[Master Yoda]

Not to be argumentative but doesn't this just prove the naysayers point even more by confirming that Disney will not do proper refurbs?

Also, Steve's argument is a poor one since in the 1970s and 80s the attractions would go down for refurbishments at the same rate as Disneylands would. This rationale was made somewhere in the mid 90s as justification for cutting costs (please correct me if I am wrong).

I really hate to add to this argument but did you ever considered the possibility that the policy was changed due to guests complaining about attractions being closed while they were on their "once in a lifetime" vacations? Unless you have evidence otherwise your hypothesis is no more valid then the one I presented.

 

[The Conundrum]

I really hate to add to this argument but did you ever considered the possibility that the policy was changed due to guests complaining about attractions being closed while they were on their "once in a lifetime" vacations? Unless you have evidence otherwise your hypothesis is no more valid then the one I presented.

I'm sure a few people complained in the park's first 30 years of operation but that didn't stop Disney from doing what they wanted to do.

By that logic, Guets are complaining there aren't enough new rides at the parks so therefore Disney needs to build a ton of new rides right?

 

[Master Yoda]

I'm sure a few people complained in the park's first 30 years of operation but that didn't stop Disney from doing what they wanted to do.

By that logic, Guets are complaining there aren't enough new rides at the parks so therefore Disney needs to build a ton of new rides right?

When exactly did yearly rufurbs stop? You said the 90's which by my math is not 30 years unless of course it stopped in 1999 which would be close enough for the sake of argument. Secondly, what evidence are you basing this on? Do you have access to the dates off all of the attraction refurbs that have happened in WDW since it opened in 1971? Does this "master refurb list" show a significant decline in refurb frequency occurring in the 90's or at any time in WDW history? If it does show such a decline is Disney being cheep the only plausible explanation or might other factors such as improved component reliability, changes third shift maintenance practices, or guest relations feedback be possible reasons for the decline as well?

or......

Are you simply basing all of this on nothing more than your opinion as you have no real data to support your conclusions?

And yes, I do believe that if enough guests complained that there were not enough rides in WDW then Disney would build more rides. After all quite a few people complained about a certain wand and look what happened.

 

[The Conundrum]

And yes, I do believe that if enough guests complained that there were not enough rides in WDW then Disney would build more rides. After all quite a few people complained about a certain wand and look what happened.

The wand was removed by a totally different management team for totally different reasons 8 years after installation. It was becoming a liability.

 

[jakeman]

The wand was removed by a totally different management team for totally different reasons 8 years after installation. It was becoming a liability.

I'm sure Master Yoda will point this out, but you didn't answer his question.

I think an analysis of refurbishment trends over the course of WDW life would be interesting, not for angst sake or to prove a point but to correllate it to ebbs and flows within the economy, WDW management teams, and other important events.

 

[Master Yoda]

The wand was removed by a totally different management team for totally different reasons 8 years after installation. It was becoming a liability.

And I take it that you are just going to ignore the rest of my most.

 

[GothMickey]

And I take it that you are just going to ignore the rest of my most.

Of course cause he has NO ANSWER. He cannot find the answer on Wikipedia, so he cannot comment. He is just trying to ger a good rep on here and he failed. He failed at trying to show he knows what he talks about. He fails when he tries to impress people with knowledge that he takes from SOMEONE ELSE. He has failed. He is hanging by a thread here and he knows it. Time is short for him here now, and he is feeling the pressure, collapsing under it.

 

[WDW1974]

It's very interesting that you mention this. A lot of people seem to ignore this fact, and how it changes things considerably when talking about DL vs WDW offerings.

We've been discussing at length on another thread why WDW are so concerned about closing attractions such as the Mansion for the Nightmare overlay, and yet DL are happy to do so each year. The rational is that DL being comprised of locals and APs understand the closure is neccessary and enjoy the end result. Whereas at WDW, the visitor base are tourists on an average 2 year cycle and expect to have everything open when they are there.

You do realize how absurd this line of thinking is if you follow it?

I guess back in the 70s, 80s and early 90s when WDW was a much more unique, special experience ... more likely to attract the once in a lifetime guests that you seem so concerned with that WDW did much more regular refurbs/TLC etc ?

Now, with FOUR parks and marketing that pushes week(s) long stays on-site are you saying that Disney must let things fall apart because everything must be open for all guests every day?

How come you could get 93,000 people in the MK back in 1980, but today the place feels uncomfortably busy when there's 30,000 in the park? Diminished capacity and dead zones?

Yet that excuse, which was caused by years of poor management and decision-making that closed attractions, shops and dining locales and replaced them with nothing, is now trotted out as why they can't close Space Mountain for 18 months and redo the attraction ... or why they can't close Mansion for an overlay?

Because tourists would rather crappy experiences overall than having a few attractions closed from time to time?

Steve, I understand you're parroting TDO's line here, but I don't care who is saying it, it still makes no sense for a creative enterprise based on quality and freshness. It's a great excuse for neglecting things and letting the parks feel tired.

 

[The Conundrum]

Of course cause he has NO ANSWER. He cannot find the answer on Wikipedia, so he cannot comment. He is just trying to ger a good rep on here and he failed. He failed at trying to show he knows what he talks about. He fails when he tries to impress people with knowledge that he takes from SOMEONE ELSE. He has failed. He is hanging by a thread here and he knows it. Time is short for him here now, and he is feeling the pressure, collapsing under it.

you need to go outside and get some fresh air you take message boards wayyy to seriously.

I don't have actual data to give him at the moment what I am going to do is compile data who have been visiting since the beginning and have them weigh in.

Oh and well said '74

 

[Master Yoda]

you need to go outside and get some fresh air you take message boards wayyy to seriously.

I don't have actual data to give him at the moment what I am going to do is compile data who have been visiting since the beginning and have them weigh in.

Oh and well said '74

Just FYI but anecdotes are not data. You can compile all the "stories" you want and they won't equal a single spread sheets showing the actual refurb dates of the attractions in WDW.

 

[mcjaco]

The wand was removed by a totally different management team for totally different reasons 8 years after installation. It was becoming a liability.

I'm still trying to figure out how the Wand was a liability.... :shrug: Was it ready to fall over?

 

[WDW1974]

I'm still trying to figure out how the Wand was a liability.... :shrug: Was it ready to fall over?

It was a liability to the quality of the EPCOT experience!

 

[WDW1974]

Just FYI but anecdotes are not data. You can compile all the "stories" you want and they won't equal a single spread sheets showing the actual refurb dates of the attractions in WDW.

You know that's not really fair. Who has spreadsheets with that information? And if they did, people here still wouldn't believe them (see my old thread on how Disney has cut operating hours).

At some point you either accept something or you don't.

WDW used to regularly close attractions annually for work. That's why they had signs at both TTC and in front of MK (and later EPCOT and later MGM etc ) that said 'The Following Attractions Are Not Operating Today' ... often you'd see a list of attractions.

Taking away HoP (which had to close by nature of what it is) and the decade-plus overdue cleaning of Space Mountain (which also closes TTA too) and everything would be open ... because at WDW in the 21st century everything is always open ... except, of course, all the things that are simply closed without replacements.

And that makes closing things even more problematic and makes the need for new attractions even more compelling.

 

[RiversideBunny]

They never said it as such but I think that the final straw for removing the wand was that it was deteriorating and presented a saftey hazard.
Not that the whole wand would fall over but it had a lot of little pieces, including those on SSE. If any one of those came loose and hit a guest it would very bad.
Maintenance and safety probably became major issues and added to the esthetic reasons for making the managerial final decision to remove it.

IMHO

 

[WDW1974]

They never said it as such but I think that the final straw for removing the wand was that it was deteriorating and presented a saftey hazard.
Not that the whole wand would fall over but it had a lot of little pieces, including those on SSE. If any one of those came loose and hit a guest it would very bad.
Maintenance and safety probably became major issues and added to the esthetic reasons for making the managerial final decision to remove it.

IMHO

Nope.

It came down because of one reason: Siemens became sponsor and demanded (as part of the contract I might add) that it come down. So it did.

Disney built it to last a very long time ... much like the magical hat/pinshack.

 

[mcjaco]

Not that the whole wand would fall over but it had a lot of little pieces, including those on SSE. If any one of those came loose and hit a guest it would very bad.

I was joking about it falling over people.

And a liability to the Epcot Experience???? I hated the Wand, but I have no idea how you could call it a liability to the experience. It was just tacky.

 

[Vernonpush]

I was joking about it falling over people.

And a liability to the Epcot Experience???? I hated the Wand, but I have no idea how you could call it a liability to the experience. It was just tacky.

Something being "just tacky" at Disney World is a liability.

"It looks like something from Six Flags." :lookaroun :shrug:

 

[WDW1974]

I was joking about it falling over people.

And a liability to the Epcot Experience???? I hated the Wand, but I have no idea how you could call it a liability to the experience. It was just tacky.

That's exactly it. It was horribly tacky and out of place (and no, I don't want to argue with anyone who found it magical!)

I'm in the midst of getting ready for a move and have been going over some old Disney 'stuff' to sell, toss or gift and recently came across a handful (why take one when you can take 10?) of 1990 EPCOT Center guidebooks (no maps in those days) and it struck me yet again -- this time right in front of me -- how much more textured and deep a place EC used to be ... indeed all of WDW once was.

WDW used to be a place to have magical vacation experiences as only Disney could deliver ... but it wasn't all about the Disney brand (and most certainly not about the DISNEY MAGIC) ... it's so obvious how much more homogenized and ordinary WDW is these days to anyone who spent time there in the first 25 years. ... Of course, that's another reason why you don't have guidebooks these days ... why would you need to when everything has lost its depth ... when Space Mountain is described as 'roller coaster in the dark'?

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

The wand was removed by a totally different management team for totally different reasons 8 years after installation. It was becoming a liability.

Nope...It was removed becuase of our complaints and Seimens.

Nope.

It came down because of one reason: Siemens became sponsor and demanded (as part of the contract I might add) that it come down. So it did.

Disney built it to last a very long time ... much like the magical hat/pinshack.

10 to 15 years, right?