EPCOT Entertainment cuts

[Fractal514]

Know whats the kicker here? The guy, in the photo of your avatar? He's losing his job over this. So while you insist on being a trip tramping under a bridge troll, he as well as a lot of other people, will be out of a job.

I have much more anecdotal evidence and observational data over the years then you ever could.

I had heard that he was part of a different type of contract realignment. And yes, that guy in my photo is probably my favorite performer in all of WDW, and yes, I do get annoyed by the financial crap messing up good shows, but I don't just jump there automatically. For what its worth, I'm much more upset over the changing of the opening song in the show because they won't pay for the royalties.

 

[Mac4life30]

People who come to Disney once every few years likely have not heard of many things. Just because you have not heard of Off Kilter does not mean the band is any less good.

 

[wm49rs]

You are changing my point to be something it was not. I said that we have no evidence to believe that this was done solely as a budget cut and that it is inherently a bad thing. Now, it is entirely possible that this could in fact reduce the budget AND be a good thing, provided the new entertainments are good. You're challenging me to provide information that you know I don't possibly have access to, nor really do I believe anyone else on this board has, and you're acting as if that proves I'm somehow wrong, it does not. The budgetary arguments being accepted as fact and as the primary motivation for this change is the thing I take issue with. You don't know for a fact that these changes where made because they are cuts any more than I know they were made as part of an initiative to spark new interest in the live entertainment at the parks, we are each simply making a guess. Unless, of course, you can show me the internal documents that indicate this decision was based purely on financials.

For that matter, can YOU show ME any documents that prove your point? Can you show us anything that proves that this IS a budget cut?

Go on, we'll wait.

Actually, @marni1971 confirmed there was indeed a cut to the Entertainment budget at EP. In addition, the number of acts lost since the beginning of the year is still greater than the number of replacements. Also, the new incoming acts are apparently third-party entities, which saves on the budget as well....

 

[dupac]

I'm imagining how this went down:

Person #1: We need to find more places to pare down costs.
Person #2: Well we pay for all that extra entertainment n WS
1: Good idea. Not looking forward to the crap storm from the internet that will follow though.
2: Well, what if we add cheaper entertainment-- 3rd party contracts? They're always complaining how the parks are stale. Then we'll be heroes for freshening up the park!!!!
1: Yeah!!

Poor misguided persons.

 

[DisUniversal]

Of course, other people will now have work that they didn't previously. That counts too, right?

Good point. The job market for lumberjacks in Florida has been terrible lately.

 

[Fractal514]

People who come to Disney once every few years likely have not heard of many things. Just because you have not heard of Off Kilter does not mean the band is any less good.

And just because you like them doesn't mean they are.

I'm not saying whether they are or aren't, but the opinion thing here works both ways.

 

[Mac4life30]

And just because you like them doesn't mean they are.

I'm not saying whether they are or aren't, but the opinion thing here works both ways.

What about the people who lost their job?

 

[PhotoDave219]

Of course, other people will now have work that they didn't previously. That counts too, right?

Nope.

 

[Fractal514]

What about the people who lost their job?

A band who had a steady gig for 17 years? I mean, maybe its because I do theater and know lots of folks who are musicians, but this is part of the business. This isn't like a normal 9-5 job where working somewhere for 17 years earns you seniority or security, this is an industry where you expect to move from job to job and take long-running gigs as a blessing. If this band is as great as people think, then this might be a blessing and should allow them to go on tour and further their careers.

 

[MichWolv]

I'm imagining how this went down:

Person #1: We need to find more places to pare down costs.
Person #2: Well we pay for all that extra entertainment n WS
1: Good idea. Not looking forward to the crap storm from the internet that will follow though.
2: Well, what if we add cheaper entertainment-- 3rd party contracts? They're always complaining how the parks are stale. Then we'll be heroes for freshening up the park!!!!
1: Yeah!!

Poor misguided persons.

Actually, you're close. You've hit on several things that usually come up in these situations (speaking generally, not Disney in particular). Your main mistake is the assumed disrespect.

Person 1: We've been told we need to pare costs.
Person 2: Other than trimming hours or attractions, which would be devastating, the biggest opportunity is probably entertainment.
1: Ok, good place to look. But we don't want to just cut things entirely, and we don't want to cut good stuff and put in place crap.
2: Some of our acts are very expensive. There are likely acts of comparable quality that would cost a lot less. These expensive acts have fans that will be upset, but hopefully the larger part of our audience will be happy with the new acts. And since we're doing this already, we might as well see if we can get some different kind of acts, to broaden the appeal a little more.
1: Sounds promising. Maybe we can turn a negative assignment into an opportunity.

 

[sshindel]

What about the people who lost their job?

Offset by some degree by the people who now have a new job due to the replacements. Not fully like @wm49rs is pointing out, but what entertainment position is guaranteed forever? Some of these acts have had employment for far longer than a vast majority of entertainment acts have.
I'm not trying to say that any loss of employment does not suck for those who lost their job, but from the 30,000 foot view, a few bands leaving and a few more acts coming in are not really a massive concern for a company that employs (and terminates, and hires) as many as they do.

 

[dupac]

Actually, you're close. You've hit on several things that usually come up in these situations (speaking generally, not Disney in particular). Your main mistake is the assumed disrespect.

Person 1: We've been told we need to pare costs.
Person 2: Other than trimming hours or attractions, which would be devastating, the biggest opportunity is probably entertainment.
1: Ok, good place to look. But we don't want to just cut things entirely, and we don't want to cut good stuff and put in place crap.
2: Some of our acts are very expensive. There are likely acts of comparable quality that would cost a lot less. These expensive acts have fans that will be upset, but hopefully the larger part of our audience will be happy with the new acts. And since we're doing this already, we might as well see if we can get some different kind of acts, to broaden the appeal a little more.
1: Sounds promising. Maybe we can turn a negative assignment into an opportunity.

I know. I was trying to be humorous. I've been told I shouldn't try that though lol. People are overreacting in my opinion. The hypothetical persons thought that by replacing entertainment instead of just removing they could ease the blow. Alas, they underestimated the love for OK in the hearts of (some) fans.

These acts are actually being replaced with something new and fresh and different. Yet people act like this is something sinister. I find the the overall way WDW is operated as a disappointment but this instance is not troubling to me.

 

[MichWolv]

I know. I was trying to be humorous. I've been told I shouldn't try that though lol.

These acts are actually being replaced with something new and fresh and different. Yet people act like this is something sinister. I find the the overall way WDW is operated as a disappointment but this instance is not troubling to me.

I apologize for not catching your tone! There's been so much blamecasting and flaming in this thread, I assumed you were doing the same.

 

[doctornick]

These acts are actually being replaced with something new and fresh and different. Yet people act like this is something sinister. I find the the overall way WDW is operated as a disappointment but this instance is not troubling to me.

Absolutely agree. There are a lot of things IMHO to be very critical about with regards to WDW. Replacing some WS acts with other acts doesn't strike me as one of them.

 

[BrerJon]

...and if just 3 or 4 thousand guests per year out of the 11.3 million that visited Epcot last year, decide not to go because of the cuts, they've lost their entire $400K in savings. That's just a decline of less than 3 1/100ths of 1 percent before they've screwed themselves. This is the part of the equation I think the bean counters no longer consider.

TDO don't care. There are thousands more guests from emerging markets coming to WDW every year, and they have no sense or interest in the history of the parks whatsoever. They will replace any guests lost, and spend more money, and have far lower expectations from theme parks than long time Disney fans.

WDW is in the business of attracting the biggest crowds with the biggest wallets, and DVC owners who have pre-paid for years regardless of any decrease in quality level. Discretionary regulars make up such a small amount, that in the long run they feel they can always increase profits by finding cheaper ways to do things, even if those things are a shadow of what once went on.

If we want Disney quality of old, we have to go to Disneyland, DCL, Tokyo Disney or Universal Orlando. WDW is trying to serve a different market, run an operation of a different quality, and be basically act as an ATM for the rest of the corporation to draw from. It's heartbreaking, sure, but until Staggs, Iger and Crofton move on that's how it's going to be.

 

[jakeman]

And why is that? Because I don't agree with you on this subject? Man, the temptation to post stuff that would get me banned is too damn high. This is a pretty darn ignorant thing to post.

Yeah, but wouldn't it kinda be worth it if you took a couple of internet tough guys with you?

 

[MichWolv]

I didn't see Pesci make it to the credits

So is your point that you don't mind being beaten to death as long as the other guy gets his in the end?

I think I've lost the train of this metaphor.

 

[MichWolv]

He'll actually be the most magical guy on earth. Wrong coast.

You mean Disneyland? While I'll give that group credit for running the parks more in the way I'd like them to be run, I'm still appalled on every visit by the ugly inaccessible elevated sidewalk running all over Tomorrowland, and its companion unused 2-ride station blocking traffic for no useful reason. Use 'em or take 'em down. The ugliness of that part of T-Land at DL actually annoys me more than the unused hulk that was Wonders of Life, because ex-WoL is at least out of the way.

 

[xdan0920]

Seems like there are a lot of hurt feelings in this thread. I'm guessing, a lot of you have relationships with the folks being dropped by Disney here. And I can understand that will hurt.

But, a lot(most) of us have no relationships with these performers. They are shows, and shows get swapped out, not nearly often enough IMO. All we can do is decide if we like the new better then the old. It's not personal for us.

 

[BrerJon]

Unlikely. While we may not like how the decisions of current management affect the parks, the owners of the company are pretty darned happy. The stock price has essentially tripled the last three years, as we've all lamented the treatment of WDW.

Comcast stockholders aren't exactly weeping over their theme park profits either, and look what they have to show for it compared to what WDW does.