How badly Leave a Legacy failed!

[Passport]

I will believe Disney is "moving on" when this issue is resolved. Clearly the present situation is problematic. Thanks.

What issue do we have to resolve? Or what issue does Disney need to resolve?
Also, how is it problematic? Who has a problem or is troubled by the situation?

 

[mousermerf]

Well, lots of people think they're ugly, and that Epcot needs a more attractive entrance. Viola - problem that needs to be resolved.

 

[Hakunamatata]

That's funny, it would've required magic for you to discern whether he was exaggerating or not, but you knew quite easily which of the fifteen definitions of 'complete' he meant when he used the word. Please explain why some of these other ten don't also fit, because some of these definitions certainly don't suggest his statement was as "harsh" as you state it was. Sorry if it requires magic for you to explain that one, but try your best!

Hmmmm....a thought provoking question. Well, there were actually 15, not 10 and I used the one I wanted to use which I fealt was most appropriate. Of the 10 adjective forms of the word, numbers 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, deal with how the word is specifically used in a study, sport, or discipline, therefore not quite applicable to the description of the success of LAL. Of the remaining, I chose to use the one I did because I fealt it to be most descriptive for my purpose, just as Merf utilized some limited information and supporting his position that LAL was a "complete and utter failure".

Guess I should be glad I didint provide the definition of utter....

 

[unkadug]

Can we quit using "would of" and start using "would've?"

Probably NOT.

Well, lots of people think they're ugly, and that Epcot needs a more attractive entrance. Viola - problem that needs to be resolved.

:ROFLOL:

Viola - is a bowed string instrument
Voila - comes from a French expression literally meaning “look there!”

Sorry, but I literally busted out laughing when I read that! :wave:

 

[Epcot82Guy]

in the stillness of the night...
There comes a time to understand.
To reach out and touch the memorial,
Take the bird poo in our hand.
We can see a wandless Epcot icon,
And stones some love and some would bomb.
And our words begin another 1000 threads on page 1.

WE GO ON... Moving forward now AS ONE
Moving on with a spirit born to run
Ever on, another 1000 decisions by Bob...
A new Epcot's begun
The two(?) of us as one...
We go on...

(seemed better than Kumbaya ).

 

[jmvd20]

I see kids playing on fences at the Mk every time we go there - perhaps they should be removed.

I have seen bird droppings on sidewalks - remove the sidewalks

Bird droppings on fences - get rid of all of them.

Bird droppings on buildings - get rid of the buildings....

 

[bears163]

we did onlybeause it was a free gift

 

[Hakunamatata]

we did onlybeause it was a free gift

How did you come by the free gift?

 

[mousermerf]

Because, as mentioned before, they did try multiple times to give them away. Not just in packages.

 

[colliera]

Empty by design

While I don't dispute the reported tiles mounted v. expected sales physically the taller stones can not be completely filled and serve their intended purpose. At some point in height the tiny etched photos are too high to be viewed.

Edit: Unless I could find a certain yellow ladder.

 

[jmvd20]

I thought the taller stones were reserved for Bao Xishun... :shrug:

 

[jt04]

What issue do we have to resolve? Or what issue does Disney need to resolve?
Also, how is it problematic? Who has a problem or is troubled by the situation?

Precisely.....171 contributions and........

 

[Surf Fish2285]

In my year or so of looking at these boards, I have always found him to be an asset to these boards. He posts pictures on a regular basis, spends hours researching all things Disney (come on, who else regularly goes to the comptroller site?) and gives us extensive posts on what he finds. He quite obviously loves Disney and shares this love with us.

Thanks for the post, Merf, and for all in the past. I may not always agree with you, but at least you present a valid argument instead of an emocotive one, and provide for engaging discussion.

Yes, I agree. Thank you Merf.

 

[polarboi]

What issue do we have to resolve? Or what issue does Disney need to resolve?
Also, how is it problematic? Who has a problem or is troubled by the situation?

I'll answer this with my earlier post:

Unfortunately, while it's special to those of you with tiles, the look of the stones and the fact that many of them are dedicated to those who have passed on really does make them feel like a memorial to the dead, which isn't a cheerful way to enter a theme park about the possibilities of the future.

I really think the best solution is what others have suggested: move the structures elsewhere in the park so that the entrance can be greener and more cheerful (I really think Epcot could use a bit more greenery) and, if possible, redesign the stones to look more futuristic and less somber. Something clear, something colorful, whatever - just anything that doesn't look like "tombstones." They could be redesigned into something attractive, rearranging the tiles to use all available space, and turn a negative into something that really enhances Epcot for all visitors, not just those who purchased tiles.

-p.b.

 

[raven]

Well, lots of people think they're ugly, and that Epcot needs a more attractive entrance. Viola - problem that needs to be resolved.

In YOUR mind, Merf. Lot's of people may think they are ugly but not ALL people.

Just because some people think it's ugly doesn't mean that Epcot has to change it's entrance to please them. More than likely these are the people who don't own one of the tiles on the wall because they were to cheap to pay $25 to put one up. That doesn't mean it should come down. (Yes, toward the end they were only $25. We added one and it was a very affordable price.)

The only other thing I'm having a difficult time understanding is people saying they get lost among them or they think it's an obsticle when you get past the gates. Am I the only one who has never had a problem with this? I've never had to even go through them to enter or exit the park. Is it too difficult to stay near the giant planter in the center of the entrance and head straight into or out of the park? Maybe I'm just navigationally gifted. :animwink:

 

[maui2k7]

Something to think about...

550,000 Tiles sold in from 1999-2007 (68,750 per year = 188 tiles per day)

~68,000,000 visitors to Epcot between 1999-2007 (average ~8.5 Million per year)

Lets assume 3 guest per tile which equals 564 per day(188 tiles per day x 3) had their pictures put on tiles

564 out of an approx ~23,000 guests per day or 2% of all guests.

Even if you factor in repeat guests and double the percentage who bought a tile, we are talking about somewhere in the neighborhood of maybe 5% of guests to Epcot in the last 8 years had a tile put on the Leave a Legacy. Which means, 95% of all visitors did not put their photo on the monuments.

Based on my math (which may be flawed) most guests would not be disappointed if the monuments were moved to another location.

I for one would like them relocated to a less contraversial place that keeps the guests happy that bought them and at the same time brings back the clean and classic look of the entrance to Epcot.

I chose not to buy a tile in the several visits I have made simply because I felt it was like putting my picture on a tombstone (especially if it was with one of my ex-girlfriends!)...

 

[Epcot82Guy]

The only other thing I'm having a difficult time understanding is people saying they get lost among them or they think it's an obsticle when you get past the gates. Am I the only one who has never had a problem with this? I've never had to even go through them to enter or exit the park. Is it too difficult to stay near the giant planter in the center of the entrance and head straight into or out of the park? Maybe I'm just navigationally gifted. :animwink:

While I'm trying to stay out of the personal opinions, I do have to disagree with this one. I consider myself pretty darn adept at navigating the parks, but I do find the stones a bit cumbersome, particularly at open and close. I've had numerous times I've accidentally stepped on a child darting out from behind a stone or been bumped into by someone else rounding a corner of the stone. It also feels very imposing when you walk in, so people aren't really sure where to go. I can vouch for that myself and for two separate parties I've been with. From a purely functional, design-perspective, it is poorly done because it does not draw guests in toward the end. It has a similar, albeit lesser effect, of DAK's entry. Except that was intentional for the ascethic (i.e. the "story" of the park).

I am not saying it is impossible or even "difficult." What I am saying is that the entrance to a park, absent a compelling story reason, should have the effect of making you want to walk in. That is true for any space design. You pull people toward a point of reference. (for an example, look at a basic single-point perspective drawing). With this, you have strong horizontal lines that visually and physically block your path absent a fairly small central column. The better approach is long, horizontal lines that draw to the point. While I respect your opinion, I have to say, from a pure design approach, the layout is poor IMHO.


EDIT: Just to add the visual. If you look at the stones, you will note there are not any direct pathways through them. The spacing is off in both channels so that you walk directly into the corner or face of a stone. Actually, the best fix would be to reshape some of the stones, remove those that are blocking, reduce the size of the central planter, and put down colored concrete to mark the pathways to the fountain. http://local.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&cp=nqwc2q863sq1&style=o&lvl=2&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=3949786&encType=1

 

[Enigma]

See that's the problem, you found 2 statements on the internet and have drawn a conclusion that is not based on fact. If you had found a financial statement demonstrating that Disney made only a fraction of what they planned, or a statement from an executive saying that it was a mistake to install the displays, then you have a valid argument. Instead, you presented a biased (you don't like the Leave a Legacy) opinion that you are defending as fact.

Was Leave a Legacy a failure? Maybe. Maybe not. We don't have enough information to determine that.

dj

Why keep defending this leave a legacy junk?

It's like the handful of people who kept defending disney's decision to leave that tacky wand up. The silent majority think it is ugly, even people at disney probably think it was ugly, it was just a matter of getting the money and getting a management that really cares about the product to finally have it removed. Thankfully now there seems to be better people throughout the company (Jobs, Lasseter, Catmull, Vaughn, Macphee) and they are going to take action to clean up the mistakes of the past.

 

[MickeyTigg]

I think reason for the possible disappointing sales had nothing to do with the display stones but rather from the fact that the pictures are very small and after time are nearly unrecognizable. I would guess that most of the sales came early and after people saw how the weather affected them sales slowed down.

 

[Epcot82Guy]

You also had a huge slump in tourism right after the celebration, and Disney's costs started to go up significantly then, too.

Point being, CAN'T WE ALL JUST STOP THIS ALL OR NOTHING ATTITUDE. One of the best things Epcot as a whole taught me was that you could find the best in something but also work to make it better. Why are the only things people are seeing here are
1. It's a failure vs. It performed just fine and was great.
2. It's horribly tacky and ugly vs. It's a wonderful monument to my family.

Just because something doesn't perform as expected does not make it a failure in every regard and should be wiped from the face of the planet. On the other hand, just because you have a personal investment and others do does not mean a business decision was wise (even to the point of being a FINANCIAL failure). That is measured in how much $$ is coming in vs. how much it costs goint out. Therefore, we're arguing things that are irrelevant. It would be like arguing that EPCOT was a failure because EPCOT ITSELF IS BUILT ON THIS TYPE OF SITUATION! And I think everyone here would staunchy disagree that it was, although everyone notes directly that it may have been a financial failure in some regards.

Can we please just stop these attacks. There were elements of financial underperformance by 2007. That is guaranteed by the fact they were giving substantial pictures away, cut the price dramatically, etc. That's just business, and that's why the kiosks were pulled. PERIOD. As for their placement, ascethics, design, etc., we can debate all day. But can we at least stop this constant, personal attacking over corporate business decisions mixed with family decisions.