I can see why they didn't go with Walt's EPCOT

[Dragonrider1227]

I was looking at Waltopia.com and Walts ideas on EPCOT and I could kinda see why they didn't go with it. I'm not sure if anyone in the world would've actually went with it. I know Walt's intention was good, but I know so many dumb people that would've taken his thoughts as "promoting communism" and such. We've already GOT some idiots that claim THAT! Just the same, it's pretty sad it never happened and part of me kinda wants to see them add a pavillion or expand Futureworld into a seperate part of EPCOT that replicates what Walt wanted. Not exactly a city, but maybe a series of rides or attractions that illustrated Walt's idea just so the dream doesn't really die.

 

[MaryK]

I think Walt's idea for EPCOT was neat, but in reality wouldn't have been able to be feasible.

That said, they still somewhat did what Walt wanted in terms of a community...Celebration, FL.

 

[lwalker8]

I wouldn't say his vision wasn't feasible, it may just have been that once Walt died no one really had the drive to create the city. When Walt died it went from being Walt's company, to "the Disney Company" we have today; that is, the kind of company that wouldn't take a chance on building a multi billion dollar urban development, that showed little hope to make a profit.

 

[CHAPPS]

I think Walt's idea for EPCOT was neat, but in reality wouldn't have been able to be feasible.

I would love to have a nickel for every time someone said that about one of Walt's "crazy ideas" (i.e. the first sound cartoon, the first color cartoon, the first animated feature, the first theme park, etc). I'd be a rich man!!

 

[Computer Magic]

I would love to have a nickel for every time someone said that about one of Walt's "crazy ideas" (i.e. the first sound cartoon, the first color cartoon, the first animated feature, the first theme park, etc). I'd be a rich man!!

so true...

 

[Woody13]

Don't forget that Walt was very crafty and smart. His intention was to build Epcot with money from sponsors, not his own money. WED or another private company created and owned by Walt would have been the exclusive contractor to design and build EPCOT at the total expense of the sponsors.

Walt would not have owned EPCOT (just as he did not own Disneyland or Walt Disney Productions, etc.), so if it went bankrupt, he wouldn't be hurt financially. He would just reap the profits from the investors and run the transportation system (huge profits).

If EPCOT was a success then WED would again be the exclusive contractor to handle the expansion. Walt would not allow outside contractors to do the work that WED could do at twice the price and half the quality. The Florida legislature stupidly gave Walt that power with the Reedy Creek Improvement District. Walt was very smart!

The reason that EPCOT was never build was because of Walt's brother Roy. He (Roy) knew all the inside dope on Walt's financial schemes and he knew that Walt was cheating Disney shareholders with WED. They had many arguments about WED and at one point, they both refused to speak to one another for about a year!

Finally, Roy won and Walt agreed to sell WED to the Disney company. However, Roy knew that Walt intended to create another privately owned company (owned by Walt) similar to WED to build his EPCOT project in Florida so that he (Walt) and his family (not Roy) could make all the profits at the expense of investors.

Of course, Walt died in 1966 before he could put his plan into action. Too bad he couldn't pull this off.

So, I disagree with you. EPCOT would have worked great, for Walt! He would have made a huge amount of money. The city EPCOT would have been the pits but Walt would be rich, rich and richer! :wave:

 

[MickeyTigg]

I wouldn't say his vision wasn't feasible, it may just have been that once Walt died no one really had the drive to create the city. When Walt died it went from being Walt's company, to "the Disney Company" we have today; that is, the kind of company that wouldn't take a chance on building a multi billion dollar urban development, that showed little hope to make a profit.

Walt living and having the drive had nothing to do with it....it wouldn't have been practical to build EPCOT as Walt envisioned it. To have people living in a resort area would have given the inhabitants say over the functioning and building of the parks.

 

[Rayray]

I think it's tough to actual judge EPCOT. I'm sure Walt had ideas that had yet to be recorded. Think of it as Einstein's death in a different field. The actual execution of an idea would be different if its mastermind was still alive.

We don't really know the entire concept behind the real EPCOT because the idea did not go past master plan (big picture, non-detail oriented) modeling. We only understand the basic idea. (Right? There is little documentation about it. Correct? :veryconfu )

 

[T-1MILLION]

You can look at it this way. It was the prototype of tomorrow not the feasible idea of today. So while we may find it not to be feasible or possible now. In the future things can easily change and with work, who knows. It could become a reality.

 

[PaisleyMF]

E.P.C.O.T. Concept didn't die it just transformed and became what is Walt Disney World today For instance, the geographical center is EPCOT, you got a series of resorts, Theme Parks, Utilities, Residential Areas, Shopping, Dinning, Entertainment, all under a same area, all under a Same name. if you look at the Proyect X plans is most of it was acomplished, not as it was envision with a Center Plaza that distributes persons and "whatever" else was there. but if you start and see a bigger picture, Ticket and Trasportation Center is a main link between Parks, Resorts and the "Outside" World.

Celebration is the final step in doing the "living" but then is not inside Disney. And what about other properties (non Disney owned) that are very close, like Buena Vista Palace, and so on... that fit on the living, not in high density as in big apartment complexes or Condos.

But then this is my Opinion i could be Wrong!!

 

[Since1976]

EPCOT was a project only WD himself could have tackled and made successful. The Disney Company was right to only apply certain technological innovations of the concept rather than try to interpret and possibly distort Walt's vision.

 

[T-1MILLION]

E.P.C.O.T. Concept didn't die it just transformed and became what is Walt Disney World today For instance, the geographical center is EPCOT, you got a series of resorts, Theme Parks, Utilities, Residential Areas, Shopping, Dinning, Entertainment, all under a same area, all under a Same name. if you look at the Proyect X plans is most of it was acomplished, not as it was envision with a Center Plaza that distributes persons and "whatever" else was there. but if you start and see a bigger picture, Ticket and Trasportation Center is a main link between Parks, Resorts and the "Outside" World.

Celebration is the final step in doing the "living" but then is not inside Disney. And what about other properties (non Disney owned) that are very close, like Buena Vista Palace, and so on... that fit on the living, not in high density as in big apartment complexes or Condos.

But then this is my Opinion i could be Wrong!!

I like the way you think. I often think the same thing that as far as a vacation
can go, the Walt Disney World resort is a very close dream to that of Epcot. you have basicly everything you could need in one resort. Just the way the resort functions like one controlled community.:wave:

-Preston

 

[PhilosophyMagic]

Don't forget that Walt was very crafty and smart. His intention was to build Epcot with money from sponsors, not his own money. WED or another private company created and owned by Walt would have been the exclusive contractor to design and build EPCOT at the total expense of the sponsors.

Walt would not have owned EPCOT (just as he did not own Disneyland or Walt Disney Productions, etc.), so if it went bankrupt, he wouldn't be hurt financially. He would just reap the profits from the investors and run the transportation system (huge profits).

If EPCOT was a success then WED would again be the exclusive contractor to handle the expansion. Walt would not allow outside contractors to do the work that WED could do at twice the price and half the quality. The Florida legislature stupidly gave Walt that power with the Reedy Creek Improvement District. Walt was very smart!

The reason that EPCOT was never build was because of Walt's brother Roy. He (Roy) knew all the inside dope on Walt's financial schemes and he knew that Walt was cheating Disney shareholders with WED. They had many arguments about WED and at one point, they both refused to speak to one another for about a year!

Finally, Roy won and Walt agreed to sell WED to the Disney company. However, Roy knew that Walt intended to create another privately owned company (owned by Walt) similar to WED to build his EPCOT project in Florida so that he (Walt) and his family (not Roy) could make all the profits at the expense of investors.

Of course, Walt died in 1966 before he could put his plan into action. Too bad he couldn't pull this off.

So, I disagree with you. EPCOT would have worked great, for Walt! He would have made a huge amount of money. The city EPCOT would have been the pits but Walt would be rich, rich and richer! :wave:

You're descriptions of internal management during Walt's time are really interesting. But where did you find this out? Can I confirm the information above, for example?

 

[Woody13]

You're descriptions of internal management during Walt's time are really interesting. But where did you find this out? Can I confirm the information above, for example?

This will get you started on learning about how the Disney empire was built;

WED was founded as a separate company, fully owned by Walt Disney
himself, and not the Disney Company. It was founded 3 years before
Disneyland opened as a planning and development organization for
Disneyland. During those years before Disneyland opened Walt moved alot of his best artists and story men from the animation department over to WED to help in the building of Disneyland. To Walt's way of thinking the "stories" he was telling at Disneyland were the same types of "stories" his best guys from the animation department were working on, only much bigger and in three dimensions.

Originally Walt wanted to name the company Walt Disney Incorporated, but Roy Disney was concerned that the shareholders in Walt Disney Productions (later The Walt Disney Company) would perceive a conflict of interest between the two organizations and persuaded Walt to change the name. (Building a Company - Roy Disney and the Creation of an Entertainment Empire (c)1998 Bob Thomas p. 181)

As you can clearly see from the description by Bob Thomas, Walt was "cherry picking" the best people from Walt Disney Productions (owned by shareholders, not by Walt) and moving them over to WED (Walt's privately owned company). After Roy finally convinced Walt to sell WED to Walt Disney Productions (Roy feared a shareholder revolt), Walt turned right around and created RETLAW to take the place of WED. Roy would let his little brother get away with murder!

Walt was a crafty, deceptive and clever business man. :wave:

 

[ctwhalerman]

I don't think EPCOT would have worked as Walt wanted it to because it is largely based on 60s era urban planning, which just about everyone realizes now was just about a complete failure in creating living and breathing cities. Even the models show it as a stale combination of suburban-style homes (which the people would not own, another weakness of the plan) with a steel skyscraper and downtown core that would be devoid of life a la Le Corbusier's almost frightening urban planning designs (Think Levittown right outside the steel canyon that is 6th Ave from 40th to 57th street). Plus, planned cities never seem to work very well. Look at Canberra or Brasilia, or even Washington, and see that cities are extremely hard to plan, predict, and execute.

While the New Urbanism concept behind Celebration also has its problems, it is based more in reality than in concept. Planner Jane Jacobs offered New York's Greenwich Village (at least the Village of the 60s) as a true example of how a city works: people live, work, and shop in close proximity, and must interact with each other daily as the neighborhood developed to suit the needs of its population.

EPCOT seems to work on paper and in animation, but I think Walt may have underestimated the ability and need of a city to develope organically, thus making his plan unworkable.

Nevertheless, we don't know what really works until someone tries it, and it would have been great to see if Walt could have pulled off his dream, whether it would have turned out to be a success or a failure. Most of his ideas do have merit, especially those on transportation (a wide system of monorails and peoplemovers), which hopefully someday will transform some modern cities.

 

[Woody13]

I don't think EPCOT would have worked as Walt wanted it to because it is largely based on 60s era urban planning, which just about everyone realizes now was just about a complete failure in creating living and breathing cities. Even the models show it as a stale combination of suburban-style homes (which the people would not own, another weakness of the plan)...

It would have worked, for Walt and his family. That was basis of the design. Walt could have cared less if EPCOT failed. He would have gotten all his money from the project up front and the Disney Company would still own the whole thing.

They could bulldoze the entire project at any time and start over if they desired. It would have been no problem because sponsors and investors would suffer the financial loss, not Walt or the Disney Company.

The DVC is the current incarnation of EPCOT (a very clever scheme) and new "members" sign up on a regular basis with the idea they are making a good financial investment. DVC "members" have spent and continue to spend millions of dollars and yet they own nothing! Walt would be very proud of the DVC concept. :wave:

 

[MaryK]

I would love to have a nickel for every time someone said that about one of Walt's "crazy ideas" (i.e. the first sound cartoon, the first color cartoon, the first animated feature, the first theme park, etc). I'd be a rich man!!

There's a BIG difference between creating a cartoon & theme park...and creating a city. It has nothing to do with supporting Walt with his "crazy ideas"...it has everything to do with the reality of creating an actual town in the capacity he wanted...it was just not a feasible idea. It's not at all the same concept of animation and theme parks. If it was something that definitely could have lifted off the ground, it would have been done. Celebration is the closest they have to Walt's dream...but even so, a controlled environment has its faults. And yes, I realize that Celebration is also *somewhat* of a success, but not in the capacity they hoped it would be. When it comes down to it, people still want to be able to make their own choices and the original plans for EPCOT and the ones for Celebration don't allow much room for that. It was way too much a controlled living environment. ctwhalerman also dedscribed it really well. It was 60s era urban planning...something that may have worked in its time, but in the long run would have flopped. Everything is really easy to conceive on paper, but there is a heck of a lot more to city planning and development than is involved with animation or a theme park. Cities cannot be developed nor can they thrive simply on one person's dream...because now you actually have people living there who are going to want a say in what goes on. Think about it with your own towns & cities. How many of you would be upset if you weren't allowed a say in what was going on, the development of where you lived, you had no vote on the matters at hand, etc? As much as I have always loved and will always love Walt Disney, his concept of a city is just not something that would would go over too well.

 

[MaryK]

It would have worked, for Walt and his family. That was basis of the design. Walt could have cared less if EPCOT failed. He would have gotten all his money from the project up front and the Disney Company would still own the whole thing.

They could bulldoze the entire project at any time and start over if they desired. It would have been no problem because sponsors and investors would suffer the financial loss, not Walt or the Disney Company.

The DVC is the current incarnation of EPCOT (a very clever scheme) and new "members" sign up on a regular basis with the idea they are making a good financial investment. DVC "members" have spent and continue to spend millions of dollars and yet they own nothing! Walt would be very proud of the DVC concept. :wave:

True, the sponsors would suffer the financial loss. But to say it's no problem? I beg to differ. Reputation goes a long way for a company, especially when it's trying to prove itself (in this case, while TWDC proved itself with Disneyland, it had not yet proved itself with WDW). Yes Disney has every right to bulldoze a project and start over if necessary, but it's not in its best interest to have a flippant "it's not MY problem" attitude...lest they risk losing those investors. Maybe that wouldn't happen now because TWDC is much bigger today than it was back then...but back then when it was as big as today, that kind of attitude could have hurt. A lot of business was based on personal relationships with people. Walt himself turned away from locations and potential investors because of something as simple as how he was treated.

Also I can't quite agree that DVC is the incarnation of EPCOT. DVC is simply a vacation timeshare. Not at all like living in a community. Celebration is really the closest they have to the original idea....because it's an actual community with a school, a hospital, shops, homes, etc. Though I do think Walt would be happy with DVC.

 

[Woody13]

True, the sponsors would suffer the financial loss. But to say it's no problem? I beg to differ. Reputation goes a long way for a company, especially when it's trying to prove itself (in this case, while TWDC proved itself with Disneyland, it had not yet proved itself with WDW). Yes Disney has every right to bulldoze a project and start over if necessary, but it's not in its best interest to have a flippant "it's not MY problem" attitude...lest they risk losing those investors. Maybe that wouldn't happen now because TWDC is much bigger today than it was back then...but back then when it was as big as today, that kind of attitude could have hurt. A lot of business was based on personal relationships with people. Walt himself turned away from locations and potential investors because of something as simple as how he was treated.

Also I can't quite agree that DVC is the incarnation of EPCOT. DVC is simply a vacation timeshare. Not at all like living in a community. Celebration is really the closest they have to the original idea....because it's an actual community with a school, a hospital, shops, homes, etc. Though I do think Walt would be happy with DVC.

Well, you're looking at it from the "living" aspect and I'm looking at it from the financial aspect. Walt's first concern was always financial and he manipulated the company to serve his financial needs in every respect. By today's standards, Walt's business practices would be considered both unethical and illegal!

Walt was a brilliant showman and pitchman. He could sell an icebox to an Eskimo. Many people today still think of Walt as a kindly and benevolent show business person and movie producer. It was a public relations image that Walt purposely cultivated his entire life. The public only saw the "TV show" Walt. The fatherly figure that guided them through a week to week grand adventure on their TV screen. In reality, Walt was a very harsh and ruthless businessman.

Walt grew up poor and that fear of poverty stayed with him until his death. Trust me, I know! Early in Walt's career his cartoon character, Oswald the Lucky Rabbit, was stolen from him. Walt learned the lesson, "never give a sucker an even break". He lived the rest of his life by that motto.

I don't blame Walt for being the way he was, I think it only natural under his circumstances. However, I find it strange that people still hang onto the "public" image of Walt and refuse to acknowledge the ruthless businessman side of Walt (the real Walt Disney).

I used the DVC as an example because it represents a perfect part of Walt's various financial schemes. The DVC is selling a timeshare with no fee simple title! In other words, the buyers own no property and their timeshare becomes worthless at the end of its term. It's a brilliant idea and Walt would have loved it! It's as if the DVC is selling air. Please note that the DVC is a separate company from the Walt Disney Company. There's a very important reason for that. I'll let you figure out how it works. Otherwise, we get into the whole sordid DVC issue.

Walt would have done the same deal if he had lived to create EPCOT. He would have gotten outside investors and sponsors to put up the money. His company (RETLAW) or another company he would have created, would actually design and build EPCOT. Walt would not own any part of EPCOT except for the transportation system (monorail, wedway, etc.). However, if EPCOT went bust, the parent company (Walt Disney Productions) would still own the land and they could foreclose! Walt would make a fortune upfront and get to start the whole process again!

Also, as far as Walt and investors go, he never turned down money! He would have sold his soul to make a buck. Consider the 1964 World's Fair as an example. He all ready had three major projects in development and just 9 months before the opening of the fair, a representative from Pepsi Cola Co. calls up and speaks with a Disney staffer about creating a ride for the Pepsi and Unicef. The Disney staffer tells Pepsi that it's too late to work on a new ride.

When Walt heard this, he went through the roof! Disney called Pepsi back and agreed to create a ride for them. In nine months, "A Small World" was created for Pepsi at the 1964 Worlds Fair. It cost Pepsi a bundle and Walt laughed all the way to the bank! :wave:

 

[MaryK]

Well, you're looking at it from the "living" aspect and I'm looking at it from the financial aspect. Walt's first concern was always financial and he manipulated the company to serve his financial needs in every respect. By today's standards, Walt's business practices would be considered both unethical and illegal!

Walt was a brilliant showman and pitchman. He could sell an icebox to an Eskimo. Many people today still think of Walt as a kindly and benevolent show business person and movie producer. It was a public relations image that Walt purposely cultivated his entire life. The public only saw the "TV show" Walt. The fatherly figure that guided them through a week to week grand adventure on their TV screen. In reality, Walt was a very harsh and ruthless businessman.

Walt grew up poor and that fear of poverty stayed with him until his death. Trust me, I know! Early in Walt's career his cartoon character, Oswald the Lucky Rabbit, was stolen from him. Walt learned the lesson, "never give a sucker an even break". He lived the rest of his life by that motto.

I don't blame Walt for being the way he was, I think it only natural under his circumstances. However, I find it strange that people still hang onto the "public" image of Walt and refuse to acknowledge the ruthless businessman side of Walt (the real Walt Disney).

I used the DVC as an example because it represents a perfect part of Walt's various financial schemes. The DVC is selling a timeshare with no fee simple title! In other words, the buyers own no property and their timeshare becomes worthless at the end of its term. It's a brilliant idea and Walt would have loved it! It's as if the DVC is selling air. Please note that the DVC is a separate company from the Walt Disney Company. There's a very important reason for that. I'll let you figure out how it works. Otherwise, we get into the whole sordid DVC issue.

Walt would have done the same deal if he had lived to create EPCOT. He would have gotten outside investors and sponsors to put up the money. His company (RETLAW) or another company he would have created, would actually design and build EPCOT. Walt would not own any part of EPCOT except for the transportation system (monorail, wedway, etc.). However, if EPCOT went bust, the parent company (Walt Disney Productions) would still own the land and they could foreclose! Walt would make a fortune upfront and get to start the whole process again!

Also, as far as Walt and investors go, he never turned down money! He would have sold his soul to make a buck. Consider the 1964 World's Fair as an example. He all ready had three major projects in development and just 9 months before the opening of the fair, a representative from Pepsi Cola Co. calls up and speaks with a Disney staffer about creating a ride for the Pepsi and Unicef. The Disney staffer tells Pepsi that it's too late to work on a new ride.

When Walt heard this, he went through the roof! Disney called Pepsi back and agreed to create a ride for them. In nine months, "A Small World" was created for Pepsi at the 1964 Worlds Fair. It cost Pepsi a bundle and Walt laughed all the way to the bank! :wave:

Actually there have been times Walt walked away from business deals. When Walt was looking for a location for WDW, he went to St. Louis to check it out. A comment was made by the head of the city's leading business that offended Walt and Walt pulled out of St. Louis. Bankers came to California trying to change his mind, but he already made it up. By this point it was no longer about money. So to say he never turned down money simply isn't true. This is a very obvious case of him walking away from a business deal because of how he was treated. He wouldn't tolerate it...and as a result, St. Louis lost on a very big opportunity (just as well, I highly doubt WDW would have thrived in St. Louis like it does in Florida).

Yes, Walt was a business man and I don't agree with all the things he did (I do believe that how WDW and Reedy Creek got started was very underhanded). But at the same time, he expected to be treated with respect and money was no longer of interest if the people he was doing business with didn't treat him right. All ties were cut.

I've read enough about Walt Disney to know that there's more to the public image of him...that there was a harshness in him and some practices he approved that I would not have supported. But I also know that he wasn't so ruthless that money was the ONLY thing in his eyes. It wasn't. It may have been a big thing in his life, but it wasn't the be all end all. If that were the case, he wouldn't have take such great measures to make sure that everything was of quality. Those who only see green and nothing else aren't interested in the quality so much as they are the profit. But Disney WAS interested in quality...you only have to look at the results of his labor to see that. A person who did not care about quality would not have succeeded in the way he did. He believed in his projects and that's evidenced by its success.