My opinion on this particular area differs a bit. Granted I am basing my opinion on myself and a very small numbers of AP holders that I know where as yours is more than likely based on a much more reliable source of information.
Back in the late 90's when I would travel once or twice per year using either a length of stay pass or a FL resident Play "x" days pass I would do what you described. Rush from one ride to another. Pre-show and details be dammed I needed to do everything!
Now as an AP holder I already feel like I am in the black the day I buy the pass because I know that I will be there more than enough days to make the pass a value. For that reason I slow the pace way down. I will walk into a park with a plan as simple as "I want to see the new HOP, have a dole float and a burger at Peco's Bills" I enjoy my time. I sit in AL and enjoy the music. I wonder through Liberty square and notice the sagging shutters and I might go on HM 3 times just so I can look in a different area on each ride. I appreciate that parks for their complexity and attention to detail and story and no longer see them as a big to do list.
Seasonal changes and events make me visit the parks more often. I go in October because of F&W and MNSSHP, SWW brings me in despite of the blazing heat and I simply can not imagine a December without the Osbourne lights. An additions to this schedule would only make me go to WDW more.
This may be the case for you given your proximity (I realize it isn't still out your backdoor), but there is a large contingent of AP holders from the North. These people may be much closer to the "break even point" (11 days or whatever it is) per year, so they may still pursue vigorous touring plans. However, that conflicts with Eddie's statements, as this large contingent is not in a position to know cast members by name or stress over the little details. Unless they're learning these things via the internet, which I doubt many are in large numbers. I suppose what I mean to say is that you're both right--that there are likely two general categories of AP holders with which WDW must contend: nitpicking Floridians and well-to-do Northerners.
The nitpicking Floridians have been discussed well, so I'll address the well-to-do crowd. As was discussed in another thread, I think expectations differ based on the type of guest that Disney attracts. I am not insisting that money buys class, but often, with it brings expectations. Those more financially well-off individuals will compare their WDW experience that they have had on other pricey vacations. If WDW can't offer something to compete with the other vacations on which these individuals might go, WDW loses them as customers.
However, we might be getting ahead of ourselves here. Because of the perception that WDW has among such a crowd, I think it would be a waste of advertising dollars to target these individuals. I think it would be wise if Disney looked past some of the generic "Disney Parks" ads rife with characters and attractions, and created targeted advertising to change the perceptions and put said advertising in travel magazines and other supposedly prestigious magazines (perhaps the New Yorker, GQ, etc.). Perhaps a retro-looking “Vacation Kingdom of the World” ad with a collage of images—golfing, parasailing, the luau, etc., (I’m pretty sure the old WDW books have really similar collages in their front areas. Maybe they could just take one of those). I think that would catch people’s attention and pique curiosity. Certainly it’s not the Walt Disney World people expect, so maybe they would do some research. I know this is getting too much into the minutiae when we're talking in broad terms, but I digress.
Along the same lines, I think you will find that many DVC members represent a different demographic than the average repeat visitor to WDW. While I am not suggesting that DVC is a luxury item, it certainly is cost-prohibitive for some (whereas a once-a-year vacation may not be), and I think it is a safe assertion to say that DVC members as a whole are more likely to be financially well off than the average once-a-year visitor, and are thus also likely to have more discerning tastes (I'm sure many will dispute this--but I think in a broad and general sense, it's probably true). That would mean that in order to meet expectations, WDW has to make the parks appeal to these individuals. It's hard to guage right now given the economic state, but I think, even considering the economy, the large number of resale properties currently available suggests that some of those 1992 members are beginning to tire of their ownership interest. If WDW doesn't take note of this, what happens in 10 years, when the individuals who just purchased SSR, BLT, and AKV start getting tired of the properties--in much larger numbers?
I know a lot of this is highly speculatory, but I think it's at least based on reasonable contentions. Besides, beyond speculatory statements, what can we really offer on the topic?
:lookaroun
