Jim Hill on XPass coming in 2012

[AEfx]

Possibly group size. Lou limits his groups to no more than 6 people.

I'm sure that's a big part of it.

And, likely, Lou actually provides a service. From my understanding, Hill was just charging people like $25/head or whatever to follow him around, he'd stand up on the curb or something and start telling whatever stories he was telling. Whereas I'm sure Lou is more of a personal tour guide, not a "follow the windbag who took our $".

It's always back to either money or publicity with him. And, eventually, as many of us came to realize (there is a reason his name is often spoken with rolled eyes at most Disney sites), he doesn't have the ability, one way or another, to back any of it up, or to follow through on...anything.

 

[G00fyDad]

Well you'd have to ask Disney that.

Disney doesn't have a problem with the CDs because unless you say they are a Disney product or feature Disney copyrighted material, they really can't say anything.

As MasterYoda pointed out, the problem at Disneyland is that Hill made a spectacle of himself, some guests complained, and they threw him out of the park (I also think he got a 1-year ban? I can't remember).

Perhaps Lou doesn't make a big spectacle of himself. But like I said, you'd have to ask Disney.

The point about the CD's is that it reenforces the fact that Jim Hill has never finished anything in his professional life - a series of articles, CD's he took pre-orders for, or had a successful track record of anything. He's all in it for what he can get, from all appearances.

I'm sure that's a big part of it.

And, likely, Lou actually provides a service. From my understanding, Hill was just charging people like $25/head or whatever to follow him around, he'd stand up on the curb or something and start telling whatever stories he was telling. Whereas I'm sure Lou is more of a personal tour guide, not a "follow the windbag who took our $".

It's always back to either money or publicity with him. And, eventually, as many of us came to realize (there is a reason his name is often spoken with rolled eyes at most Disney sites), he doesn't have the ability, one way or another, to back any of it up, or to follow through on...anything.

^^^ All of this!. :sohappy:

 

[JustChillinBro]

Loving that. Going to read it to my son as his bed time story this evening. I'll replace Disney with Mickey Mouse though.

 

[JustChillinBro]

Here is a Lou Mongello tour in action:

I would guess that he has it cleared with Disney, who of course loves him. They are also such small gatherings that they couldn't be misconstrued as some sort of Disney sponsored event or tour. It just looks like any other family arguing over what ride to visit next or some dad boring his kids with a history lesson.

Just to reiterate, please disregard anything you see in the original story. While I'm sure something out of there will come to fruition, any of us could write the same story. Probably with a less annoying tone too.

 

[RSoxNo1]

Well you'd have to ask Disney that.

Disney doesn't have a problem with the CDs because unless you say they are a Disney product or feature Disney copyrighted material, they really can't say anything.

As MasterYoda pointed out, the problem at Disneyland is that Hill made a spectacle of himself, some guests complained, and they threw him out of the park (I also think he got a 1-year ban? I can't remember).

Perhaps Lou doesn't make a big spectacle of himself. But like I said, you'd have to ask Disney.

The point about the CD's is that it reenforces the fact that Jim Hill has never finished anything in his professional life - a series of articles, CD's he took pre-orders for, or had a successful track record of anything. He's all in it for what he can get, from all appearances.

I don't know if Jim received a ban, but he was definitely asked to stop giving the tours of Disneyland. The difference is, Lou has a Florida Travel license that allows him to do the tours - I don't think the same "loophole" exists in California.

I also don't doubt that Jim was probably giving information that Disney didn't necessarily want to be public.

Here is a Lou Mongello tour in action:

I would guess that he has it cleared with Disney, who of course loves him. They are also such small gatherings that they couldn't be misconstrued as some sort of Disney sponsored event or tour. It just looks like any other family arguing over what ride to visit next or some dad boring his kids with a history lesson.

Just to reiterate, please disregard anything you see in the original story. While I'm sure something out of there will come to fruition, any of us could write the same story. Probably with a less annoying tone too.

For $400 a tour, he better not be taking people to Stitch's Great Escape.

 

[c-one]

Of course Disney has always been a business trying to make lots of money. The difference is that they used to turn a profit by providing a superior vacation product. Now they try to turn a profit by cost-cutting, nickel-and-diming, and inconveniencing the customer.

 

[princessmadison]

I have no idea why people are complaining about this!?!? You don't and i repeat don't have to do this! Why don't people acctually read these threads thoroughly before they write something that makes them look stupid

 

[JustChillinBro]

Because of the effect it will have on people that don't do it. Is that difficult to grasp?

For example, let's say for $1 you could pre-purchase tickets to a concert you really want to go to. But you don't want to pay the $1, so you wait it out. When you go to buy tickets, there aren't any left because everyone that paid $1 to pre-purchase bought them all. Did you have to pay $1 to pre-purchase? No. But you also didn't get to go to the concert.

Obviously this is dumbed down for you, but it should make sense.

 

[spaceghost]

Because of the effect it will have on people that don't do it. Is that difficult to grasp?

For example, let's say for $1 you could pre-purchase tickets to a concert you really want to go to. But you don't want to pay the $1, so you wait it out. When you go to buy tickets, there aren't any left because everyone that paid $1 to pre-purchase bought them all. Did you have to pay $1 to pre-purchase? No. But you also didn't get to go to the concert.

Obviously this is dumbed down for you, but it should make sense.

Your reasoning is specious and your metaphor is not apt. In your scenario, you don't get to go to the concert at all (frowny-face!). However, with XPASS, you still get to see the parade and ride attractions, you just may not get the primo spot at the hub or you may have to continue getting FastPasses like you do now, instead of getting them ahead of time. While I'm sure this will not be 100% cut and dry, and there will be some changes that affect people to some extent, it is largely a plussing of your experience if you want to spend the $$. (Note this opinion is based on the limited factual data that has been released so far.)

 

[JustChillinBro]

Yes, it was dumbed down for impact.

Anyway, as I said two posts before, none of what you read in that article is factual.

 

[walterdisney]

Your reasoning is specious and your metaphor is not apt. In your scenario, you don't get to go to the concert at all (frowny-face!). However, with XPASS, you still get to see the parade and ride attractions, you just may not get the primo spot at the hub or you may have to continue getting FastPasses like you do now, instead of getting them ahead of time. While I'm sure this will not be 100% cut and dry, and there will be some changes that affect people to some extent, it is largely a plussing of your experience if you want to spend the $$. (Note this opinion is based on the limited factual data that has been released so far.)

I agree.

 

[AEfx]

I don't know if Jim received a ban, but he was definitely asked to stop giving the tours of Disneyland. The difference is, Lou has a Florida Travel license that allows him to do the tours - I don't think the same "loophole" exists in California.

Well he said himself he was kicked out of the park that day, and I believe he mentioned a ban for a year, but I honestly can't remember or be bothered to look it up - if it's even still there, as he tries to rewrite his own history by deleting certain old articles on his site.

 

[WDW1974]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wdwprince
Lou Mongello makes park tour CDs and charges to give personal tours in Orlando.

Why is Disney ok with that if they weren't when JH did it?

Well you'd have to ask Disney that.

Well, you could ask, but they'll never answer because they feel they don't have to. It's pretty obvious that folks at Disney have an arrangement with Lou since the man NEVER, EVER apparently has a bad word to say about anything at WDW. I'm also sure he paid for his Dream cruise and his five days in Hawaii and etc etc ...quid pro quo.

Disney doesn't have a problem with the CDs because unless you say they are a Disney product or feature Disney copyrighted material, they really can't say anything.

Even here, Disney doesn't play by its own rules. It makes them up on a case by case basis, which likely would hurt them in court (if someone had a bigtime lawyer to fight them and if the judge wasn't in Disney's pocket).

Disney has put DVD sellers out of business, yet some are allowed to sell Disney copywrights/IP without anyone shutting him down.

As MasterYoda pointed out, the problem at Disneyland is that Hill made a spectacle of himself, some guests complained, and they threw him out of the park (I also think he got a 1-year ban? I can't remember).

Perhaps Lou doesn't make a big spectacle of himself. But like I said, you'd have to ask Disney.

I don't know the man. Never had the displeasure of meeting him. But since he is an ex-lawyer from NJ who owns an Italian restaurant in Naples, I don't want to anger him ... But I don't see anything different between Hill and Mongello except DL steadfastly doesn't allow tours that compete with its own product. WDW doesn't either (imagine a Spirited tour of everything wrong with the MK ... I'd even take a final ride on Snow White's ADventures with you for an extra $50), but seems to look the other way for certain individuals.

As to making a spectacle of himself, the first (and only time) I watched/listened to a podcast he more than did so. He hung around with a posse when MSUSA was closing ... went into the Cinema shop, put a CP CM on camera without her or Disney's permission (again, unless there's an arrangement), conducted an interview (putting her job on the line and making her VERY and obviously uncomfortable) and kept asking why they weren't selling a book of his (everyone seems to have one today). It left me feeling dirty watching. He acted like he owned the place. I've been told he did the same thing on the first real Dream cruise, which he also took (have no idea what if anything he paid for it), where he was going up to people (including Tales From the Laughing Place publisher Lee MacDonald) and shoving a mic in their faces.

He comes off like a total sleeze. He isn't selling Amway or insurance or his religion ... just some cult-like supposed love for Walt and, more importantly to TDO, all that is the Disney BRAND.

The point about the CD's is that it reenforces the fact that Jim Hill has never finished anything in his professional life - a series of articles, CD's he took pre-orders for, or had a successful track record of anything. He's all in it for what he can get, from all appearances.

Sounds about right.

But how does that make him different from any of the Disney Lifestyle folks out there? Everyone has a blog or a website or a podcast or a self-published 'book' and wants in on the Social Media Whorefest. I'm no fan of Jim's (although he has been right on a few things in his day), but the whole Disney Lifestyle deal has become a cottage industry and many of the players are simply lowlifes and opportunists looking to leech off the Mouse in any way they can.

And, sadly, Disney is filling the trough for them and ringing the dinner bell.

 

[WDW1974]

Quote:
Originally Posted by DisneyJoe
Possibly group size. Lou limits his groups to no more than 6 people.

I'm sure that's a big part of it.

And, likely, Lou actually provides a service. From my understanding, Hill was just charging people like $25/head or whatever to follow him around, he'd stand up on the curb or something and start telling whatever stories he was telling. Whereas I'm sure Lou is more of a personal tour guide, not a "follow the windbag who took our $".

It's always back to either money or publicity with him. And, eventually, as many of us came to realize (there is a reason his name is often spoken with rolled eyes at most Disney sites), he doesn't have the ability, one way or another, to back any of it up, or to follow through on...anything.

Jim actually has stories to tell (not that I wish to defend him, because I don't). He does (or has) have sources. He knows plenty about what has transpired behind the scenes. And he has been writing about Disney for a long, long time.

What does Lou bring to the table? He has Walt lines down pat? He can stand in front of CoP and talk about its history (because let's face it, you can't put together a great script from online sources) ... or stands in front of PoC and pukes forth why it didn't open with the park and how this dude named Marc Davis had a western version all planned out for WDW and etc etc ... Literally, stuff that can be found by an eight-year-old and made into a script.

Again, I don't believe anyone, ANYONE who isn't a Disney employee should be allowed to run a business for profit out of Disney's theme parks. It's wrong no matter which windbag is doing the blowing!

 

[WDW1974]

I don't know if Jim received a ban, but he was definitely asked to stop giving the tours of Disneyland. The difference is, Lou has a Florida Travel license that allows him to do the tours - I don't think the same "loophole" exists in California.

I also don't doubt that Jim was probably giving information that Disney didn't necessarily want to be public.


For $400 a tour, he better not be taking people to Stitch's Great Escape.

A Travel License doesn't allow someone to conduct a business in Disney's parks as far as I know.

If it does, I'm getting a FLA tee license and a FLA pin lincense and a FLA turkey leg license and Lou can have all the rubes willing to pay him money (seriously, are these people certifiable?)

Taking a large group like say from Brazil and walking them through the parks, organizing meals etc is what I think of when I think of what is acceptable and allowed by Disney. Giving guided tours that compete with Disney's and arranging FP's from CMs etc seems to fall outside those bounds. I know when I mentioned it to someone fairly high up the food chain in Burbank (albeit in a different business unit) they were shocked and said 'we can't allow that' ... that was months ago and it sure seems to still be happening, so someone is blessing it.

 

[Next Big Thing]

Yeah, it shouldn't really matter.

Walt Disney World is privately owned property, which means Lou has no grounds to conduct tours within the Resort...Travel License or not.

 

[puntagordabob]

I have no idea why people are complaining about this!?!? You don't and i repeat don't have to do this! Why don't people acctually read these threads thoroughly before they write something that makes them look stupid

I like to sit on the inside of the hub on the edge of the street to watch the parades, fireworks, and the castle MOST especially at Christmastime... I many times sit there as early as 5:30pm to do this. NOW you say I do not need Xpass and yet this very spot has been mentioned as one example of places they plan to exclude non-xpass Guests.

As an Annual Passholder, DVC Member, etc.....I think its fine to have some special areas (such as the dessert party area in Tomorrowland).....but the precedent here that Xpass is going to set if they start to rope off large areas like this directly in front of the castle is really not good...and if this is successful it will most certainly be rolled out to all resorts except perhaps to the Value resorts (any of you that think this would never happen is sadly mistaken since on the accounting side of things this would be an excellent opportunity)

I fully support TDO for trying to make their operation more profitable....but I am afraid that THIS could be very quickly become a slippery slope.

Your reasoning is specious and your metaphor is not apt. In your scenario, you don't get to go to the concert at all (frowny-face!). However, with XPASS, you still get to see the parade and ride attractions, you just may not get the primo spot at the hub or you may have to continue getting FastPasses like you do now, instead of getting them ahead of time. While I'm sure this will not be 100% cut and dry, and there will be some changes that affect people to some extent, it is largely a plussing of your experience if you want to spend the $$. (Note this opinion is based on the limited factual data that has been released so far.)

Yeah but here is the thing.... it might be plussing your experience....but the folks that are not doing the Xpass are still paying as much as before but for less and less access. If the Xpass takes off I fully expect the entire front half of the hub area to be roped off in time between 75% xpass and 25% or less of handicapped (which understandibly need their spots....and I am sure they would trade their spots for yours if they could exchange their medical needs away!)

My points are only made the context of the limited info that seems to be making the rounds at the moment.....

 

[Map7711]

Goofy Dad-ur rite

^^ This!



Then you don't read his stuff too often do you? When this doesn't come to fruition he'll just backtrack and spew something about the deal falling through or XPass being postponed, or any other amount of BS. I can make the prediction that Disney is breaking ground soon on a Carsland expansion in DHS. And then when it doesn't happen I can just come back and say that they couldn't all agree on how it should be done so it got shelved.



What's the saying....? "A broken clock is right twice a day?"



People like them crack me up. They know they don't have to do this but they are so overdramatic about it. I hope they keep true to their word. All of them. That just means more room in the parks for us.

but this could be pointed to many insiders-on WDWMAGIC as well.

 

[Lee]

I can make the prediction that Disney is breaking ground soon on a Carsland expansion in DHS. And then when it doesn't happen I can just come back and say that they couldn't all agree on how it should be done so it got shelved.

The flaw in that logic is that such things do happen. And quite frequently.
Jim's only fault that I can see in this regard is that he may sometimes spin some of his predictions with a little too much certainty.

Example: At one time, they were considering adding some scary elements to PotC. They would only come into effect at night, and the ride would transform into "Pirates of the Scareibbean". (This is nothing that anyone on a message board made up, but a real concept being bounced around.)
I believe I mentioned it at the time, and so did Jim if I remember correctly.
But...it didn't happen, for whatever reason.
Does that make the information any less accurate? No.
Does it mean anyone was lying? No.
When we say they decided against it, are we backtracking? No.

It means Disney decided against it. No fault of anyone's.

It's not my job to defend Jim. To each his own, and all that.
Personally, I'd like to see a level playing field where nobody is allowed to give third-party tours, operate a business out of the parks, or profit from Disney's copyrights.
But that's just me....:shrug:

 

[RSoxNo1]

The flaw in that logic is that such things do happen. And quite frequently.
Jim's only fault that I can see in this regard is that he may sometimes spin some of his predictions with a little too much certainty.

Example: At one time, they were considering adding some scary elements to PotC. They would only come into effect at night, and the ride would transform into "Pirates of the Scareibbean". (This is nothing that anyone on a message board made up, but a real concept being bounced around.)
I believe I mentioned it at the time, and so did Jim if I remember correctly.
But...it didn't happen, for whatever reason.
Does that make the information any less accurate? No.
Does it mean anyone was lying? No.
When we say they decided against it, are we backtracking? No.

It means Disney decided against it. No fault of anyone's.

It's not my job to defend Jim. To each his own, and all that.
Personally, I'd like to see a level playing field where nobody is allowed to give third-party tours, operate a business out of the parks, or profit from Disney's copyrights.
But that's just me....:shrug:

This is very well said. People think we live in a black and white society right now when reality is somewhere in the middle. In all honesty, Jim Hill has a better track record over the last 5 years than Jay Rasulo. Nothing in the future is absolute. In September of 2009 we knew that 2012 would mean a chateau for Cinderella and Aurora in Walt Disney World. Jim reported on it, I discussed it, Lee discussed it and hundreds of others discussed it as well. Did we all collaborate on this fake information? No... things changed.

WDW1974 has hinted that he think the possibility exists that World of Avatar doesn't happen. My understanding of this is that because it's so far out and still technically early on in the design process that it's very easy for things to change.

To echo Lee's point - Jim is occasionally guilty of overstating where in the development process a project is. Something like the Monster's Inc Coaster wasn't something that he made up - concept art exists for it and it was uploaded to the cast member portal. That doesn't mean that the attraction was given the green light (although apparently it was close), it just means that it was far enough along in the design process that concept art exists.

People need to understand how to read rumors. If the source is trusted, you have to assume that the information is true at that time. That doesn't mean that things can't change, it just means that at the point of time when the rumor comes out, the rumor is true.