When will anything be open? I'm sorry, but the MK was about extending cement and capacity. 7DMT is all right but nothing great. MDE was supposed to satisfy everyone and now that it's not generating revenue, but continuing to be a money suck, management has decided to add more attractions. But they are trickling in slowly. Too slowly IMO.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Iger rumored to extend his term as CEO
- Thread starter Darth Sidious
- Start date
PB Watermelon
Well-Known Member
It's simpler than that...one of my best friends from High School became a Vice-President of Disney Interactive, and mentioned the concept of "real estate" earning its potential. California Adventure was taking up a whole lot of real estate, yet wasn't working because Eisner low-balled it. It was tacky and done on the cheap, and audiences weren't going. So it was by far the biggest problem in the U.S. Disney parks and fixing it was the biggest priority. Having accomplished that (in terrific fashion), now they're on to plussing up WDW.
Oh, and I'm in Texas, so neither park is in my back yard. I think you're referring to Disneyland Park being close to the Corporate HQ and the original studios. Tangent -- Sure, I'd love to see Disney build a third park in Texas (San Antonio would be a natural fit, but we don't have a big enough airport, among other problems...some suggest the Dallas/Ft. Worth area, but they have brutal winters as far as Texas goes, and some nasty storms every year in May. Anaheim and Orlando never ice over or flood or have to deal with tornados), but no, neither park is in my back yard. It's why I only get to one or the other every five years or so.
Are we reaching a point, where as many have stated here, TWDC has become so large and invested in so many businesses, it is time to have more that one true leader? You can have president, a CEO, and a board, but, until you identify leaders that are effective for specific arms of the brand, the leaders at the top are spread too thin. Move some of the movers and shakers, brightest people you have into complete control positions so maybe they get a "sign off" from the upper leaders that everyone knows, but, they have autonomy to run their branch of the company. It may be the best way to move in the future and could actually bring about a path to find new leaders within. And it takes the heat off the top and allows them to just be the faces of the company and keep the companies reputation positive and to what Walt envisioned. The reality is the leaders job is to make decisions and be the face...The company is so complex its not like it was when Walt and Roy ran things. Let the leaders be that face and that vision, and let the people in charge of specific entities manage them to that vision but with a lot of lattitude. And then fund them properly. Obviously easier said than done.
PB Watermelon
Well-Known Member
That's how the film divisions operate -- Kennedy runs LucasFilm, Feige runs Marvel's film unit, Catmull runs Pixar, Millstein runs Disney Animation, Lasseter is creative officer over Pixar and Disney Animation, all answer to Alan Horn, who then answers to Iger. You hire great people who can take care of their own so Iger doesn't have to, he has enough on his plate.
DDLand
Well-Known Member
The whole "they were spending, but they just weren't spending where you wanted it spent" is a classic. Somewhat true too.
Projects like Disney Springs and Avatar weren't ever generating nearly as much excitement as Star Wars Land and even Toy Story Land. Recently there's been pivots, with excitement mounting for Avatar, but I'd actually say that it's more of a recent event. Neither project captivated the community right out of the gate.
Even knowing that, something still feels wrong with your original assertion. Intuition proves correct when one does a deep dive on the statistics. Alas, I don't personally have the annual reports and information going past the late 1990s, but @ParentsOf4 is always willing to give us breakdowns.
I'll spare him having to write one of his excellent posts (I hope you have a form letter), but instead direct you to:
http://forums.wdwmagic.com/threads/walt-disney-world’s-biggest-investment-since-1998.922682/
I'd also follow up with this for methodology:
http://forums.wdwmagic.com/threads/walt-disney-world’s-biggest-investment-since-1998.922682/#post-7489630
In short, Iger could have been doing much much more. His management team incorrectly concluded that Walt Disney World Resort was a "mature business." Under his leadership the company pivoted away from expansion and instead to extraction.
Extraction of every dollar from each individual that comes in.
His early leadership can also be celebrated as a time when extraction included systematically selling off real estate from Walt Disney World (Golden Oak, Flamingo Crossing, and even DVC to an extent [I know it's just a lease on the building, but still is real estate]). Instead of a canvas to work on, the land was there to be sold off in chunks.
Finally you could also throw in credit for his incredible focus on efficiency, as the teams slashed away features and services that people enjoyed for a few extra dollars here or there and further damaged the already declining service that Walt Disney World offered.
All while building very few new areas and offerings.
At the same time three lesser parks languish even today, and while plans to exist (or are going to exist) to fix each one, they still are going to need more. Even the flagship, the most important theme park in the world, languishes with attraction and area upgrades needed; and I haven't even pointed out capacity boosts are needed too.
With the film studio expected to have an off year, with media networks essentially flat, consumer products still suffering from no major Star Wars Film, and Parks and Resorts still recovering from opening Shanghai Disney Resort, you know what would have been a great distraction? A Walt Disney World that had already fixed Epcot or DHS and was already collecting those rewards while also throwing Avatar into the mix.
Epcot or DHS could be done by now. If Bob Iger had been bold enough 5 years ago to forgo buybacks and build instead, we wouldn't be in the situation we are. Universal seemed to have gotten the memo, but Iger's Disney sat around in stagnation.
In short, it's great to be a Disney Parks fan anywhere but in Walt Disney World's sphere of influence.
That's Iger's shortsighted leadership, or really the shortsighted leadership of a accountant turned Parks Chairman that Iger has since fired after almost making him his successor.
I think Iger's Disney has been extremely successful at implementing his strategy. It has its positives, but also negatives. His leaderships simply hasn't been good for Walt Disney World. There's signs that the worst is behind us, but the fact it took all this time is pathetic.
He wasn't a visionary, he was the very essence of a follower.
Last edited:
L.C. Clench
Well-Known Member
Not saying I agree with it but everything you listed there is part of the reason WDW takes a back seat. People go regardless so there is no reason to make major changes. Close things people still come, leave unpopular attractions churning along and people still come, replace attractions with commercials and people still come. Then you announce that something may come and people lose their minds. Now they can market all these exciting things coming in time for the 50th and most people won't even acknowledge the neglect over the last 15 years.
PB Watermelon
Well-Known Member
WDW is pretty great, and construction afoot in overhauling DHS, Animal Kingdom's overhaul opens in May and will be a literal and figurative zoo when it opens. Epcot will follow. And no, Iger isn't a visionary, he's a steward. Nothing wrong with that.
At some point in time, either the BoD, President or CEO is going to realize that reworking MK to improve traffic flow isn't going to fix the real problem - capacity. I said this before, MK needs to expand its boundaries. Increasing ticket prices to limit bodies may be great short term, but is that a viable long term solution? Does Disney really want to become the destination that only those making $250k and up can afford? Everyone keeps talking about the 1% (I'd say 10%). Do you really think someone who has the financial resources to choose 2 weeks in Paris, London, Rome, Monaco, the Riviera and other expensive locals, says, "nah, I'm going to WDW"? Maybe if they had kids...
Finish building Copper Creek and the renovations to other resorts. Then STOP. Are Disney hotels REALLY at capacity 90% of the year? If they were, then why the conversion of cash rooms to DVC at Poly, WL and potentially CBR?
Make the MK bigger...not price people out from visiting. Finish the work in other parks. But reconsider IP overlays to classic rides because you have to do something with those IPs you paid nearly $12B for. How many of us really were clamoring for GoG at ToT? As many have pointed out, other than a few new rides, much of what's been done at WDW is just updating existing attractions. And some not well done at that (looking at you Space Mountain).
What did Walt say about Disneyland? That ii never will be completed? Can that be applied to WDW? But not just overlays, please.
Every time I visit Epcot, I think "someone get the paddles...this park needs resuscitation!" It's a shame. Hopefully what gets announced will be more DCA 2.0 than the Hub at MK.
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
Yes, but I'd argue they need to do both.
The problem with MK is that it was designed in the late 60s by a team of people who never could have imagined an annual attendence close to 20 million, "virtual queueing", minimal CM staffing or the need for every guest to have a double wide stroller, a wheelchiar and a service animal.
Adding real capacity with new attractions will only solve part of the problem, because it will simply encourage more people to come and many of those will not be waiting in organized, dedicated queues because of FP+. The park still needs a major rethink of how pedestrian traffic is routed and a better strategy of where to put everyone beyond simply removing benches, planters and shop displays. There's also no excuse at this point to have any "seasonal" resturants either.
Disney could also lower the cap on how many people are let into the park before starting phased closes, but we know they'd never do that.
EDIT: Some suggestions, not all may be needed:
- A path that takes guests completely around the Rivers of America, connecting too...
- A walkway behind Small World, adjacent to another Fantasyland expansion
- A secondary Main Street bypass on the west side
- A secondary park entrance on the east side of the park by the speedway, which would be replaced with a higher capacity ride that takes up less acerage
- Two-level queues to replacing some of the existing, older ones (think Jungle Cruise at DLR)
- New attractions on the expansion plots in Adventureland and Frontierland
- Second floor dining rooms for the Tomorrowland Terrance and Cosmic Rays
- A Restuarant similar to Walt's at DLP on Main Street (relocating existing offices)
- A path that runs from CoP to the south end of the MS bypass (may have to relocate employee parking), maybe with something for guests to see/do attached
Last edited:
DDLand
Well-Known Member
That's great and all, but you know what would have shown true leadership? I don't know, a land that's actually open today, something like:WDW is pretty great, and construction afoot in overhauling DHS, Animal Kingdom's overhaul opens in May and will be a literal and figurative zoo when it opens. Epcot will follow. And no, Iger isn't a visionary, he's a steward. Nothing wrong with that.
Image source: http://thefairytaletraveler.com/2014/09/09/universal-studios-diagon-alley/
Am I impressed and excited by the massive plans coming in? Of course. The fact that they took so long is the problem. Before Disney could muster a proper response to Hogsmeade, they had already been outflanked by DA.
There are plans just waiting to be dusted off, and they haven't been built because Iger didn't believe in his assets and didn't invest.
Even after Star Wars, they'll need more. We'll see how serious they really are with Epcot. That's the big question.
HMF
Well-Known Member
Billions that in retrospect were wasted considering they are about to break it again by turning Tower of Terror into a giant oil refinery.
BubbaQuest
Well-Known Member
Disney Animation had been chasing the teen boy market for years, and not succeeding -- Treasure Planet, Tarzan, Hercules. Some of these movies may have been successful, but you weren't suddenly seeing 2 hour lines for Tarzan meet-n-greets. Marvel quickly gave them that market.
I originally laughed at the deal because the licensing restrictions were so complicated, but Iger has seemed to do an okay job working around that.
Very true. What management would limit available food options with a pretty much guaranteed clientele? It's infuriating to walk by QS restaurants in MK and notice they're closed...
I think phased closing is more driven by fire codes than some arbitrary cap Disney imposes.
DDLand
Well-Known Member
I'd say that's a touch hyperbolic. Mission Breakout will visually intrude, but it's still going to be a quality E Ticket and will complement all the existing rides and areas.
It's not a great design decision, but it won't ruin Cars Land and the future Marvel attractions.
Edit: by complement, I mean purely from a roster standpoint. Yeah visually the intrusion stinks.
HMF
Well-Known Member
We have passed that point and the company really needs to downsize and get out of owning television networks and Comic Book companies and get their focus back on the Studio and the parks where it belongs.
HMF
Well-Known Member
HMF
Well-Known Member
Yeah, by buying out someone else rather than doing something yourself.
PB Watermelon
Well-Known Member
Disney, from what I can tell, isn't particularly worried about Hogsmeade or Diagon Alley. They think longball, not short stick, and they've got Star Wars, and they're building it as we speak. I think Disney World fans were a bit hyperbolic and even panicky about the Wizarding World, as if Disney needed to respond immediately! Immediately! Immediately! No, they didn't need to rush out some knee-jerk response, and they now have the perfect response to Potter, and they aren't going to rush it. Wouldn't surprise me at all to one day see Harry Potter simply adding another day's stay at the WDW resort hotels, with families heading down to Universal Orlando for the day and then returning back to the resort, not too dissimilar from when I was a kid and we'd leave to go to Sea World, Wet 'n' Wild, etc. and then come back on property. Or skip Potter and Universal altogether in favor of Skywalker and Co. and all the other offerings at WDW.