Who Knows? But an insider came on this thread and said that something is being added into the mix of the FLE that will please almost everyone on these forums. Do you have any idea what that is?
I do not. I am not an insider.
Who Knows? But an insider came on this thread and said that something is being added into the mix of the FLE that will please almost everyone on these forums. Do you have any idea what that is?
This is all a pre-amble to my point that, if I had to sit through these M&Gs for hours on end, I'd be pulling my hair out. I don't find anything appealing about them at all - and I'm not asking for them to design an attraction for me - all I ask is that it have a Peter Pan or Snow White level of appeal for adults. I don't think that's too much to ask. I could even see building one of these M&G areas and cycling the princesses in and out throughout the day. But more than one? I think it's a poor allocation of resources.
That's you. (By the way, were any of those kids yours? You might not pull out your hair if they were.) Plenty of other people feel differently or there wouldn't be hour long waits to get a picture with Tinkerbell.
Is it too much to ask that every ride have the appeal of Peter Pan? Yes, it is. There should be attractions with mass appeal and attractions that appeal to Disney niches.
If there's enough demand to support all of these M&Gs (and there undeniably is) what's it to you? :shrug:
Your opinion isn't based on any real facts, though.In my opinion (have to have this qualifier in there or there will be complaints), M&Gs are not attractions. They are excuses for not building attractions.
Nieces and nephews. The occasional child of friends. None are mine.
In my opinion (have to have this qualifier in there or there will be complaints), M&Gs are not attractions. They are excuses for not building attractions. If you love them? Great.
When the park gets updates like this once a decade (if that), it bothers me if the vast majority of it is designed for one particular demographic (young girls) and in some instances to chase a fad that (in my opinion) will have little staying power (PH and, to a lesser extent, selling makeup and dresses to girls at $100) - I think FLE as designed is the first paragraph of a Jim Hill story, five years from now,where TDO laments merchandise sales not being what they expected and can't understand why.
I have already refuted your argument that they are manufactured by marketing by demonstrating that commercials in the past as well as the present showed families interacting with characters.
Your opinion isn't based on any real facts, though.
Meet and greets are posting hour plus wait times. It would stand to reason that demand is not being met.
I have already refuted your argument that they are manufactured by marketing by demonstrating that commercials in the past as well as the present showed families interacting with characters.
It's your opinion and you are entitled to it, but when there are no facts to support it, it will be understandably questioned.
This argument that FLE should be something other than it is because Disney updates MK infrequently really confuses me. So, because they update MK infrequently they need to tailor their updates to your tastes?![]()
I understand your deep concern for Disney's merch sales. It keeps me up at night as well. But I figure with all of their research and data they probably have a better idea of how to make a buck than you and me. Fret not, Krack, my friend. Disney will find some way to make money.
How about if it appeals to a lot of paying customers? I'm thinking the number of people the expansion appeals to might be more important than the diversity of the demographics. In fact, I think they'd rather have a large showing from a single demo that has been shown to spend money on their product rather than a smaller cross-section of the population at large.
I suppose you think the Pirates League is proof of something. :shrug:
Yup, that when you chase a fad, you shouldn't be surprised when you find yourself underperforming against your projections.
Yet you ignored the other commercials I pointed out that support my argument.No, you said that they were, and then proceeded to use a fan-made Disney commercial as your evidence.
:ROFLOL:
Then you backed that up with the "Model Day" video which you don't even realize supports my point of view more than your own; Disney isn't spending any advertising money to use that video to lure people to the resort. That video is something they posted on their website, as a "hey, look at this - it's neat". Let me know when they start using it in their advertising - then you might have a point.
I agree.This was my point when I said Krack is not objective. Rather than articulating an objective response, he gave a smart-______ response that he'd preface everything with "in my opinion."
For example, a statement such as "X is a negative because it causes Y and Z and precludes A as demonstrated by W and Y" would be an opinion, but it would be more objectively formed than, say, "X is bad," without offering any rationale or logic behind the opinion.
i think this thread is getting a bit off-track perhaps?
Yet you ignored the other commercials I pointed out that support my argument.
Krack, you either need to refute the whole argument or none, not just the points that you cherry pick out.
I admitted once I realized it was a fan made video and retracted it.
You didn't even acknowledge my other points.
You are wrong.
There was a commercial from 1990 that had Donald relaxing a pool with a family.
Another commercial from 1992 that showed a family meeting characters.
You yourself even admitted that a commercial in 1971 was marketed the same way.
You know what I did noticed? Most the commercials I viewed that were definitively from prior to your "15-year Disney went down the crapper" timeframe were the same commercial cut up different with a different voice over.
Same flyover of each park.
Same people in white dress dancing infront of Mann's Chinese Theater.
Speaking of Chinese, same Chinese dancers from WS.
Same horses running along the beach of Bay Lake.
I'll be the first to admit that Youtube won't have a complete conpendium of the commercials, especially the older stuff.
However, I think it is easy enough to refute the claim that all marketing falls into the category that Krack believes it does.
The simplest one would be the Boom de yadda campaign from this year.
In it's place I would submit, the Model Day a Disney videos, which while not actual commercials, promote the park in a different way.
One, the first link and the third link lead to the same post. :ROFLOL:
Two, I don't make any claim about Disney not marketing to moms in either post.
Thinking of the WDW commericials I've seen this year:
1. Muppets building houses
2. Something or other to do with toy Story Mania.
Not a Mom guilt trip in sight.
That's you. (By the way, were any of those kids yours? You might not pull out your hair if they were.) Plenty of other people feel differently or there wouldn't be hour long waits to get a picture with Tinkerbell.
As a former 'entertainer' at Disney, I'll let you know it can take an hour just to greet 30 people. So many people want pics, autographs, and to chat with the characters. In that same hour, 2000 people can be riding an attraction like the Haunted Mansion. So what's in higher demand? :ROFLOL:
Obviously this is my personal opinion, but it makes more sense to me to spend money to build actual rides to eat up guests in lines over small meet and greet lines. In the long run, these probably aren't going to eat up anywhere near as much of the crowds as rides would. Little Mermaid Dumbo, and Be Or Guest are all attractions that MAKE SENSE in this addition....the meet and greets, not so much. Build the Princess M&G's, because they are something people do enjoy, and now with the closing of Toontown there is a need for an area for them, even though I don't visit them, but lets not spend so much on them that we miss out the opportunity for another potential ride to help crowds, and axe the Pixie Hollow M&G's.
Indeed it does. Fixed.
For your assistance ... fixed link #3.
Care to make that claim about post #3? I'll quote it for you too:
Bolded for emphasis
So when I link Youtube videos it's trolling and not making a point.And that's it. That's the entirety of it. The rest of your contributions has been claiming you refuted my argument and that I wouldn't address your "evidence". Now it's been addressed. You can stop claiming otherwise, you still haven't made a point. I hate to go into a point by point rebuttal on a fun message board like this, but frankly you've been trolling for over a day and on at least three different threads, so it has to be pointed out that you didn't even make an attempt to rebut my comments, you just claimed evidence to support your opinion doesn't exist on YouTube yet.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.