Iconic Purple Directional Signs Being Replaced

[TikibirdLand]

Disney's weren't always purple either... so do we like change or not? Seriously asking.


This is a new rule that didn't exist 20 years ago.

when was the rule passed? Any current sign would have been grandfathered in. So, this is a change they wanted to do. Won't make-or-break a WDW vacation. But, they're certainly ruining the anticipation factor we had with our family as we approached the resort. Less magic, less Disney. Turn that coin over and it's More Universal, More Potter!

 

[JoeCamel]

when was the rule passed? Any current sign would have been grandfathered in. So, this is a change they wanted to do. Won't make-or-break a WDW vacation. But, they're certainly ruining the anticipation factor we had with our family as we approached the resort. Less magic, less Disney. Turn that coin over and it's More Universal, More Potter!

Probably the signs reached the end of their design life so now they are being replaced, when replaced they have to conform to current standards.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Well it technically wasn’t a rule 20 years ago.

Disney's weren't always purple either... so do we like change or not? Seriously asking.


This is a new rule that didn't exist 20 years ago.

Probably the signs reached the end of their design life so now they are being replaced, when replaced they have to conform to current standards.

Once again, the rule doesn’t apply to these signs.

 

[jinx8402]

Once again, the rule doesn’t apply to these signs.

As I understand your point about the overhead signs not being wayfinding signs, thus not governed to the rule. However, wouldn't these be:

So perhaps when Disney wanted to put up the new wayfinding sings for the Galactic Starcruiser (or because the purple signs were EOL and needed to be replaced), they needed to conform to the new rule. Thus, deciding to update all signage to follow the same standards.

 

[MagicHappens1971]

As I understand your point about the overhead signs not being wayfinding signs, thus not governed to the rule. However, wouldn't these be:

So perhaps when Disney wanted to put up the new wayfinding sings for the Galactic Starcruiser, they needed to conform to the new rule. Thus, deciding to update all signage to follow the same standards.

Disney has updated and made new signs for years and years, I’m sure this has nothing to do with conforming. As other people have mentioned, these aren’t ”community way finding signs”

 

[lazyboy97o]

As I understand your point about the overhead signs not being wayfinding signs, thus not governed to the rule. However, wouldn't these be:

So perhaps when Disney wanted to put up the new wayfinding sings for the Galactic Starcruiser, they needed to conform to the new rule. Thus, deciding to update all signage to follow the same standards.

No, because they are also in the right of way and along exit ramps. They also provide directions to limited access facilities, primary destinations and to streets.

 

[dovetail65]

when was the rule passed? Any current sign would have been grandfathered in. So, this is a change they wanted to do. Won't make-or-break a WDW vacation. But, they're certainly ruining the anticipation factor we had with our family as we approached the resort. Less magic, less Disney. Turn that coin over and it's More Universal, More Potter!

Now that the wife and I have been looking there are still tons of purple signs, it doesn't seem like this is anything they are trying to do super fast.

I don't think laws have anything to do with it. Florida is so pro business and the state relies on Disney and WDW so much they could pretty much do anything they want. I can prove that statement so many ways, but then I'll probaly be accused of turning this into a political discussion. Facts are Disney pays to play on both sides or the aisle, literally having laws on the books that exclude theme park owners from doing thing eveyone else must do. WDW has power, that is fact and enough said.

Do we really believe in FL if WDW didn't want to change the signs they would have to? No way.

What I have seen is most of those replaced signs are right by the new Star Cruiser wars hotel area as shown in a previous post . When driving by the Star Wars Cruiser the signs are easy to miss compared to the purple, maybe that is the intent? If not why not make signs that scream this is the the Star Cruiser, kind of like the Purple does. For me personally and especially at night, I find the purple signs just easier to read. For the first 2 weeks backs to WDW after a couple years not driving all the roads(two trips we used lyft and finally the rental car pricing dropped enough for me to get one), the purple signs did help me get around,.

Still, the signs aren't a huge deal. I do think purple screams more theme park and with all the price increases possibly they think this give a more upscale look. Who knows their rationale.

 

[IMDREW]

As I understand your point about the overhead signs not being wayfinding signs, thus not governed to the rule. However, wouldn't these be:

So perhaps when Disney wanted to put up the new wayfinding sings for the Galactic Starcruiser (or because the purple signs were EOL and needed to be replaced), they needed to conform to the new rule. Thus, deciding to update all signage to follow the same standards.

I really think the Mickey ears would look much better black than blue.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

I really think the Mickey ears would look much better black than blue.

I agree. As much as I don't like the new overhead signs, I actually like these roadside signs but think black ears would look better.

 

[HauntedPirate]

Rumor I just heard - Bob Chapek himself came up with the idea for these signs. "Everyone likes blue!"

 

[JohnD]

not sure if anyone else mentioned this in the thread...but in an alternate universe I wonder what people's reactions would be if we had the blue sign for a long time and switched to the purple....my guess is people wouldn't like the change either.

Nostalgia is a very strong thing.

I have nostalgia for the original brown signs before the purple ones went up

Those brown signs were in line with signifying you're in a park. So while WDW didn't yet have its own color scheme, they still had the same effect of, "You're no longer on the highway or city but truly in a unique national park."

 

[JohnD]

Playing off of that, I wonder what the reaction would have been if WDW stuck with the brown signs for all of these years and just switched to the purple ones.

Brown signs then and now on US highways signify information about a "park", etc. It made sense at the time, as a color scheme for WDW hadn't yet been developed but still told you that you were now in a unique "national park" and no longer in the city or highway. Over time, the new purple signs developed. If they were still using the brown signs, I'm not sure it would have been as much of a fuss because, again, they would be the same color scheme as all US park signs.

 

[Casper Gutman]

But their signs are also a shade of blue?
View attachment 622763

Those signs are much more dynamic then the new Disney crop. The contrast is between blue and red rather then blue and slightly different blue and the unconventional shape of both the signs and the support marks it as a place outside of the ordinary. Without seeing it in person I can't be sure, but the shade of blue at Uni also seems more visually pleasing. It's not a comparison that benefits WDW.

 

[JohnD]

Those signs are much more dynamic then the new Disney crop. The contrast is between blue and red rather then blue and slightly different blue and the unconventional shape of both the signs and the support marks it as a place outside of the ordinary. Without seeing it in person I can't be sure, but the shade of blue at Uni also seems more visually pleasing. It's not a comparison that benefits WDW.

I agree. Their dark blue is in line with the old purple which stand out. The new signs remind me of standard blue info signs you see on major highways. Meh.

 

[drnilescrane]

Once again, the rule doesn’t apply to these signs.

Yeah, but I'd put in an argument that Disney tends to err on the side of caution these days/voluntarily complies with rules that don't necessarily apply to them.

These are the first new signs put up since Feb 2020 (in line with SW:GS opening) and they conform to the new rules to a tee.

Even Universal changed their wayfinding signage from Futura to Highway Gothic recently.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Yeah, but I'd put in an argument that Disney tends to err on the side of caution these days/voluntarily complies with rules that don't necessarily apply to them.

These are the first new signs put up since Feb 2020 (in line with SW:GS opening) and they conform to the new rules to a tee.

They do not conform to these rules at all except for the lack of purple. The entire section before the one on colors is full of rules to which these signs do not conform.

 

[peter11435]

These are the first new signs put up since Feb 2020 (in line with SW:GS opening) and they conform to the new rules to a tee.

These are not the first new signs installed since Feb 2020

 

[drnilescrane]

These are not the first new signs installed since Feb 2020

Ok, I take that back. I thought they were.

I agree that they don't meet the definition of community way finding signage.

I do still stand by the assertion that the decision to radically alter their appearance was driven by legal considerations - even voluntary ones - rather than somebody wanting to tinker just for fun.

All I hear constantly from friends who work at the company is that every decision - illogical or otherwise - is driven by somebody in legal putting up arbitrary road blocks.

 

[dovetail65]

Yeah, but I'd put in an argument that Disney tends to err on the side of caution these days/voluntarily complies with rules that don't necessarily apply to them..


These are the first new signs put up since Feb 2020 (in line with SW:GS opening) and they conform to the new rules to a tee.

Even Universal changed their wayfinding signage from Futura to Highway Gothic recently.

I tend to side on Disney does what they want it.

The Florida legislature granted the park extreme, unilateral control over their land. This is why Reedy Creek exists. They can do what they want and have control over roads, sewage, building permits and many other aspects of governmental control in the area. Heck they can even issue their own liquor licenses to themselves(unless it changed since 2018- I doubt it).

If they err on anything it is safety, but that is self imposed and a major key fundamental of how they operate. Literally the top of the their "five" keys.

Unless Disney comes out and says the sign change was due to some law or rule I will not believe it has anything to do other than aesthetics.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Ok, I take that back. I thought they were.

I agree that they don't meet the definition of community way finding signage.

I do still stand by the assertion that the decision to radically alter their appearance was driven by legal considerations - even voluntary ones - rather than somebody wanting to tinker just for fun.

All I hear constantly from friends who work at the company is that every decision - illogical or otherwise - is driven by somebody in legal putting up arbitrary road blocks.

Except you’re supposed legal decision is one that is clearly contrary to the law. These are “higher level signs” that have their own entirely separate set of criteria. It would be like Disney lowering all of the grab bar is the restrooms because there is a separate criteria for kids and ignoring the primary one for the general public.

If anything, it seems more like the law was written to protect the use of purple since one entity was really using that color in such a manner.