Have I Become Jaded?

[GoofGoof]

Where did you graduate from law school?

I’ll let you know the outcome if it ever happens and stand by my original statement that I’d obtain legal council and sue. I’m not worried about lawyer fees or losing.

Anyone can sue anyone over just about anything. If you had some proof that the employee in question had a history of this type of activity either before being hired or even better while working for Disney and Disney still allowed them to enter guest rooms then you’d have a shot at winning, maybe. If this was a one off theft that occurred without any history it would be very unlikely you would win anything from Disney in court. They may agree to settle out of court, but I doubt they would want to set that precedent. IMHO Disney is not directly at fault in this case as long as they did proper background checks and the person they hired wasn’t a known criminal. The employee in question should have been arrested and the owner of the credit card should have had their money refunded (which it sounds like the credit card company handled). Disney offering additional compensation beyond refunding the illegal charges was more of a customer service move to keep a customer happy than a move to avoid a lawsuit.

 

[Chef Mickey]

Anyone can sue anyone over just about anything. If you had some proof that the employee in question had a history of this type of activity either before being hired or even better while working for Disney and Disney still allowed them to enter guest rooms then you’d have a shot at winning, maybe. If this was a one off theft that occurred without any history it would be very unlikely you would win anything from Disney in court. They may agree to settle out of court, but I doubt they would want to set that precedent. IMHO Disney is not directly at fault in this case as long as they did proper background checks and the person they hired wasn’t a known criminal. The employee in question should have been arrested and the owner of the credit card should have had their money refunded (which it sounds like the credit card company handled). Disney offering additional compensation beyond refunding the illegal charges was more of a customer service move to keep a customer happy than a move to avoid a lawsuit.

Where did you graduate from law school?

Again, people don't have to agree with my decision or go into some diatribe on the legality of the case or why I would lose. I would sue if something like that happened to me. If it got thrown out, so be it. I'm not going to be deterred by the high possibility of losing or relatively small legal costs. I have money, but I don't have unlimited patience.

My position would be one based in principle...not money. Everyone telling me I have 0 liability on a credit card is not telling me something I don't know. I'm not looking to simply be made whole financially. My motives would not be financial. In fact, if I got a settlement, I'd most likely donate it.

 

[GoofGoof]

Where did you graduate from law school?

Again, people don't have to agree with my decision or go into some diatribe on the legality of the case or why I would lose. I would sue if something like that happened to me. If it got thrown out, so be it. I'm not going to be deterred by the high possibility of losing or relatively small legal costs. I have money, but I don't have unlimited patience.

My position would be one based in principle...not money. Everyone telling me I have 0 liability on a credit card is not telling me something I don't know. I'm not looking to simply be made whole financially. My motives would not be financial. In fact, if I got a settlement, I'd most likely donate it.

I don’t need a law degree to know what the law is. In this case the hotel would be responsible for making you whole for the fraudulent charges made. If it was cash stolen, at most they would be responsible for reimbursing the cash. Every state has different laws that limit the actual liability for hotels for loss of guest property. The fact that they also offered a safe that the victim chose not to use would play into the calculation of a potential liability too.

The only way they would have to make a payout for punitive damages (payment beyond actual losses) would be if you could prove negligence on their part. That’s a high hurdle that is unlikely to be established for the reasons I listed in the previous post.

As I said before, anyone can sue anyone over just about anything. That doesn’t mean you have any shot of winning.

 

[Chef Mickey]

I don’t need a law degree to know what the law is.

Oh, I think you do. The law isn't black and white and I'm not really interested in your legal opinion. Again, I'll let you know the outcome if it ever happens.

 

[King Panda 77]

 

[LAKid53]

Where did you graduate from law school?

I’ll let you know the outcome if it ever happens and stand by my original statement that I’d obtain legal council and sue. I’m not worried about lawyer fees or losing.

Gee, paralegal for several years. For a very large state agency. So have a little experience in litigation, especially civil. The first thing Disney would do when it received your complaint is to file for dismissal. And the judge would probably agree. You will have to document damages and negligence on the part of Disney. And once again, you'd be suing the wrong entity, all which Disney would document in its Motion to Dismiss.

But go ahead and waste your money...and the court's time...to prove a point. But know the courts take a dim view of litigation like this.

Oh, once you file, please provide the case number. Would love to review your complaint.

 

[Chef Mickey]

Gee, paralegal for several years. For a very large state agency. So have a little experience in litigation, especially civil. The first thing Disney would do when it received your complaint is to file for dismissal. And the judge would probably agree. You will have to document damages and negligence on the part of Disney. And once again, you'd be suing the wrong entity, all which Disney would document in its Motion to Dismiss.

But go ahead and waste your money...and the court's time...to prove a point. But know the courts take a dim view of litigation like this.

Oh, once you file, please provide the case number. Would love to review your complaint.

I will. Probably has a 0% chance of happening since I'm smart enough to carry all import things with me or keep everything I care about in the safe.

 

[larryz]

So, hypothetically, it's a lawsuit that hasn't happened over something that hasn't happened. Got it.

 

[LAKid53]

So, hypothetically, it's a lawsuit that hasn't happened over something that hasn't happened. Got it.

Yeah.... Much ado about nothing.

 

[spock8113]

Not sure where you are going with this. GM were sponsors of the attraction since its debut in 1999.

What I’m trying to get at is that corporate sponsorship is a necessary evil, but companies like GM that seem to be a little too aggressive that make me jaded.

I’ll say outright that I don’t know who initiates ride or park changes, but GM has done it it three (3) times here and has Disney’s ear in other things.
A quid Pro Quo:
http://time.com/3677476/chevrolet-disney-world/

First, the World of Motion-1982 -1996. Everyone liked the ride but it did become a bit outdated and I’ll use the term World’s fair-ish.
They ripped that down and put in the original Test Track (1999-2012)
Then they updated Test Track.
And now MinnieVans which I think is collaborative between GM and Disney to reduce Ubers.

And don’t forget GM sponsored Innoventions in California from 1998 thru 2004 as well as “Make Yor Own Magic” video somewhere in the late 80’s or early 90’s.
Many parts of the old GM ride at the New York 1964 World’s Fair are back in Disney’s possession-City of Tommorrow on the PeopleMover and various displays on the old Horizons ride.

Three other sponsors also had their rides sent to Disney:
Ford is now the Grand Canyon Dinosaur display at Disneyland,
Pepsi is now It’s a Small World also at Disneyland and
GE is still the Carousel of Progress.

http://www.disneyeveryday.com/a-loo...olet-gm-vip-lounge-above-test-track-in-epcot/

When I look at all the other sponsored rides and all the countries, the GM sponsorships
seem to be the most active as far as changing.

Eventually, rides need to updated but generally the park visitors/customers can give you that message by ridership.

http://gmauthority.com/blog/2017/08/gm-ceo-mary-barra-elected-to-disneys-board-of-directors/
“GM CEO Mary Barra will be on the hot seat today as Congress grills the GM chief and government regulators over what took the company so long to issue a recall over a fatal ignition switch defect. Barra, who took over as CEO earlier this year will apologize in her testimony before the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and promise a "thorough and unimpeded" investigation. The defect has been linked to engine stalls and failure of airbags.”
https://www.autoblog.com/2015/01/21/gm-buying-awards-mary-barra-report/

There has to be some sort of limits on how much sponsorship a corporation can have other wise it is no longer Disney but a corporate park.

 

[King Panda 77]

What I’m trying to get at is that corporate sponsorship is a necessary evil, but companies like GM that seem to be a little too aggressive that make me jaded.

I’ll say outright that I don’t know who initiates ride or park changes, but GM has done it it three (3) times here and has Disney’s ear in other things.
A quid Pro Quo:
http://time.com/3677476/chevrolet-disney-world/

First, the World of Motion-1982 -1996. Everyone liked the ride but it did become a bit outdated and I’ll use the term World’s fair-ish.
They ripped that down and put in the original Test Track (1999-2012)
Then they updated Test Track.
And now MinnieVans which I think is collaborative between GM and Disney to reduce Ubers.

And don’t forget GM sponsored Innoventions in California from 1998 thru 2004 as well as “Make Yor Own Magic” video somewhere in the late 80’s or early 90’s.
Many parts of the old GM ride at the New York 1964 World’s Fair are back in Disney’s possession-City of Tommorrow on the PeopleMover and various displays on the old Horizons ride.

Three other sponsors also had their rides sent to Disney:
Ford is now the Grand Canyon Dinosaur display at Disneyland,
Pepsi is now It’s a Small World also at Disneyland and
GE is still the Carousel of Progress.

http://www.disneyeveryday.com/a-loo...olet-gm-vip-lounge-above-test-track-in-epcot/

When I look at all the other sponsored rides and all the countries, the GM sponsorships
seem to be the most active as far as changing.

Eventually, rides need to updated but generally the park visitors/customers can give you that message by ridership.

http://gmauthority.com/blog/2017/08/gm-ceo-mary-barra-elected-to-disneys-board-of-directors/
“GM CEO Mary Barra will be on the hot seat today as Congress grills the GM chief and government regulators over what took the company so long to issue a recall over a fatal ignition switch defect. Barra, who took over as CEO earlier this year will apologize in her testimony before the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and promise a "thorough and unimpeded" investigation. The defect has been linked to engine stalls and failure of airbags.”

There has to be some sort of limits on how much sponsorship a corporation can have other wise it is no longer Disney but a corporate park.

Thanks for the explanation

 

[GoofGoof]

What I’m trying to get at is that corporate sponsorship is a necessary evil, but companies like GM that seem to be a little too aggressive that make me jaded.

I’ll say outright that I don’t know who initiates ride or park changes, but GM has done it it three (3) times here and has Disney’s ear in other things.
A quid Pro Quo:
http://time.com/3677476/chevrolet-disney-world/

First, the World of Motion-1982 -1996. Everyone liked the ride but it did become a bit outdated and I’ll use the term World’s fair-ish.
They ripped that down and put in the original Test Track (1999-2012)
Then they updated Test Track.
And now MinnieVans which I think is collaborative between GM and Disney to reduce Ubers.

And don’t forget GM sponsored Innoventions in California from 1998 thru 2004 as well as “Make Yor Own Magic” video somewhere in the late 80’s or early 90’s.
Many parts of the old GM ride at the New York 1964 World’s Fair are back in Disney’s possession-City of Tommorrow on the PeopleMover and various displays on the old Horizons ride.

Three other sponsors also had their rides sent to Disney:
Ford is now the Grand Canyon Dinosaur display at Disneyland,
Pepsi is now It’s a Small World also at Disneyland and
GE is still the Carousel of Progress.

http://www.disneyeveryday.com/a-loo...olet-gm-vip-lounge-above-test-track-in-epcot/

When I look at all the other sponsored rides and all the countries, the GM sponsorships
seem to be the most active as far as changing.

Eventually, rides need to updated but generally the park visitors/customers can give you that message by ridership.

http://gmauthority.com/blog/2017/08/gm-ceo-mary-barra-elected-to-disneys-board-of-directors/
“GM CEO Mary Barra will be on the hot seat today as Congress grills the GM chief and government regulators over what took the company so long to issue a recall over a fatal ignition switch defect. Barra, who took over as CEO earlier this year will apologize in her testimony before the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and promise a "thorough and unimpeded" investigation. The defect has been linked to engine stalls and failure of airbags.”
https://www.autoblog.com/2015/01/21/gm-buying-awards-mary-barra-report/

There has to be some sort of limits on how much sponsorship a corporation can have other wise it is no longer Disney but a corporate park.

My take on this is that for the most part the type of corporate sponsorship that made EPCOT Center possible is dead. Back in the 80s when EPCOT first opened, companies saw sponsorship as a great way to reach consumers. This was before the internet and social media. The only other form of mass advertising was television or radio which were both realtively expensive. Many companies jumped at the opportunity to be part of EPCOT or WDW. Flash forward to today and it’s a lot harder to find corporate sponsors. When GM agrees to foot the bill for something Disney is more than happy to accommodate them. I doubt GE is paying much if anything in for CoP these days. If they wanted to write a large check I’m sure Disney would be happy to update the attraction but I doubt that will happen.

I do think that GMs relationship with Disney would probably make it hard for a company like Tesla to come in and update the Speedway cars to all Electric with a sponsorship deal. Since GM is one of the largest corporate sponsors they probably have a little more control.

 

[graphite1326]

Everyone is saying the crowds are worse than they used to be. This may be true but the lack of rides due to closings could be contributing. Backstage Pass was a huge crowd eater as well as TGMR & LMA stunt show. I don't know how many people they hold but I am sure it would be thousands per hour. You may say that would not affect MK. But I disagree. If you are like me, which a lot of people are, you do your rides (one less for me because I loved the GMR) and then head to another park. Thus adding to the crowds an congestion elsewhere.

Now Universe of Energy is shut down. Not a huge crowd eater but it did keep people busy and out of the way for 45 minutes.

Just a thought.

 

[SSH]

Maybe one day we can get our empty parks back when Uni and Disney stop competing with each other..

Actually it will be when the market and economy crash. It's not if, but when. As soon as another 2009 hits and sadly many deal with losing jobs, 401k balances, homes and any sense of confidence/security, you'll see some emptier parks.

 

[pax_65]

I know I'll probably be ripped to shreds for this, but I feel like there is a lot of negativity on these forums, I try to look past it so I can get helpful information for my next trip. I just dont understand why, if you arent happy with Disney, why keep going? Obviously you were saying you were thinking about not going for awhile. Maybe a few years away will make it a happier place for you when you come back.Just my opinion and experience, please be kind to me if you respond. Thank you.

A fair question and since I've been pretty negative lately I'll take a shot at a reply. First off, we have dramatically cut our Disney trips from 2-3 times a year to once every other year (and we may cut further). I keep going because I hope to find some of the magic that I used to get at WDW. I post on these forums to encourage others to (perhaps futilely) demand the same level of quality and service that Disney used to provide.

What saddens me most of all is the new generation of guests who don't know how good Disney was prior to 2010 or so, so they have no idea what they are missing or how much they are being ripped off.

 

[IanDLBZF]

I post on these forums to encourage others to (perhaps futilely) demand the same level of quality and service that Disney used to provide.

Why not protest about it?

 

[pax_65]

I'm a seasoned Disney guest veteran, former cast member in CRO, and former strategy consultant on a variety of projects to Disney Parks & Resorts. The simple fact, and I've posted about this before, is Disney changed their guest strategy over a decade ago. Originally Disney was focused on lifetime guest value; maximizing the spend per guest over their lifetime. Now their strategy is maximum spend per trip. Bean counters did the math and realized they couldn't feed the investment arms race beast and keep the required margins to make up for shortfalls in filmed and TV entertainment. The cornerstone of the strategy is a new 'belief' that guests should be visiting the resort once a decade, and by having that long to save, price should not be an object (internally they talk about it as a 'once in a lifetime vacation' but the bean counters need people to repeat it every 10 yrs to ring the register). If you only go every 10yrs, the capital investment can be stretched, although Universal has really messed things up for them. It's why we've seen the dramatic up-tick in 'extra' ticketed events. Disney's ultimate plan to address over-crowding is to keep ratcheting up prices and exclusive Disney owned property benefits until attendance is 'manageable' without negatively impacting revenue. Like many others, our family of six used to go twice a year through 2009, but then stretched it to 2011, then 2015 and now we're looking at 2019 before SWGE opens on the assumption attendance will dip while guests await SWGE. Our hope is to miss what we believe will be absolute insanity between the opening of SWGE and WDW's 50th. Frankly WDW's just not a good enough value anymore on mildly busy days and you're wildly upside down in the equation on busy days.

This feels absolutely 100% correct to me. But it seems like the strategy is failing, perhaps because Disney lacks the courage to commit 100% to it. As a DVC member, I could afford higher park prices since my accommodations are covered. If the higher prices meant lower crowds that would be a positive to me because I'd get more value for the passes (less waiting in line). But the hard-ticketed events actually take away from the value of my park pass (since they shorten the park hours to accommodate it). And since I've done all of the special events before, I don't feel the experience justifies the high cost to do them again.

Also... when attendance starts to dip, it seems like Disney still increases it's advertising and special offers to attract people to the resort - so the crowds are still very high. I wonder if their marketing arm is still trying to encourage more visitors and repeat visitors through discounts even as management is trying to maximize spend and make it more of a premium experience. These two things happening simultaneously guarantees both higher prices AND bigger crowds, which is a potentially disastrous combination for the long-term health of WDW.

 

[pax_65]

Why not protest about it?

We have written emails to voice our concerns and to their credit, Disney has listened carefully to us. But it feels like the issues are way too large to be "fixed" easily - there are many factors going into how Disney is running the parks these days. As others have said, the most effective protest is with your wallet. If enough loyal Disney fans like us start to reduce the frequency of their trips, maybe Disney will reconsider their strategy. Or maybe not. If they don't change the direction, my hope is that their strategy works and they can keep up attendance and demand. That way it hopefully won't be difficult for me to sell my DVC points.

 

[GoofGoof]

Also... when attendance starts to dip, it seems like Disney still increases it's advertising and special offers to attract people to the resort - so the crowds are still very high. I wonder if their marketing arm is still trying to encourage more visitors and repeat visitors through discounts even as management is trying to maximize spend and make it more of a premium experience. These two things happening simultaneously guarantees both higher prices AND bigger crowds, which is a potentially disastrous combination for the long-term health of WDW.

Higher prices and bigger crowds is a bad combo for us as guests. It’s a perfect combo for profits. I’m sure two of management’s primary goals is to drive higher attendance and more spending per guest. If they can get both to happen at the same time that’s a big win for them. Continuing that level of profits is the difficult task because Wall Street doesn’t just want them to sustain profits but grow them. Looking forward for the short to medium term with all of the new stuff coming in the next 5 years I don’t see either attendance or per guest spending dropping. Longer term...who knows.

 

[GoofGoof]

Why not protest about it?

Maybe take a knee during the Magic Kingdom Welcome Ceremony