-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Liberty Tree Tavern closing in July for near 5 month refurbishment.
- Thread starter lnsemsf
- Start date
DisneyMusician2
Well-Known Member
You mean the old field guides, the white cover ones?
DisneyMusician2
Well-Known Member
Oh I thought you meant one of these
Attachments
Nemo14
Well-Known Member
I have one of those!
Although they have been split in terms of park maps, they are still bundled together for the Sorcerer's of the Magic Kingdom game, probably due to the size of the individual lands/spaces to put portals.
doctornick
Well-Known Member
To be honest, I always thought it was part of Frontierland as well, but I have been interested lately in the finer details of Disney parks and noticed it was clearly in Liberty Square. I appreciate the discussion on this thread by Martin and others that offers some insight into the history behind the land demarcations.
I certainly would agree that Diamond Horseshoe makes more sense thematically in Frontierland. If they ever would put a Western show back there -- pretty please! -- I would think they'd reclassify it back to Frontierland even with the breezeway in between the Horseshoe and the rest of Frontierland.
Heck, why don't they at least have some "Woody's Roundup" type show in the Horseshoe? I mean, I'd rather have something non-toon, but it would at least fit the environment (they use the Horseshoe for a Woody dance party during the hard ticket events).
, no more fife & drum corps 
Pay MORE & get LESS at WDW!
The Visionary Soul
Well-Known Member
Be Our Guest is actually considered a failure in WDW for a variety of operational reasons. I don't think you will ever see another restaurant in WDW that operates in that manner.Man do I agree with all of these posts regarding lack of quality dining within WDW's most visited park. I have never been a fan of the selections. We typically leave and go to the monorail resorts for more dining options. At least now BOG was added. Sometimes we also get food cart items and sit in Gaston's Tavern (love that little spot for chilling out).
WDW has to see how successful an upgraded dining option can be that people will actually surrender a coveted fast pass to eat there. They should try to replicate the success of BOG in the unused locations. Not saying that they would see the insane level of success they have witnessed at BOG, but, they can certainly come up with something. I have always felt that Adventureland needs more stuff, whether it be rides, shows, dining, whatever. This could be a great start. You could sit down and enjoy a good meal in the Adventureland Veranda right after purchasing some overpriced sunglasses from Sunglass Hut.
disneydudette
Well-Known Member
I'd love an explanation on how BOG is a failure...
A QS location by day... trying to operate under maximum capacity with FP+ times and 'return times'... and a TS location by night that books 180+ in advance?!
Failure?! Please enlighten.
Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
I agree. The place is ALWAYS packed. And for what it is (and it could be so much more...how about a Cogsworth AA, for instance?) it's a delight. I had a wonderful time last time I visited it, and I plan to visit it every time I go to WDW. How could it be a failure?
Tigger1988
Well-Known Member
Considered by whom, besides yourself?
Pretty sure Disney would consider it anything but a failure considering the amount of money it rakes in.
tigger1968
Well-Known Member
I know this is thread drift at this point...but anyway...lol.
I could easily see BOG being considered a failure for operational reasons. I have no idea what the kitchen layout or size is, but the restaurant is essentially two very different concepts. The lunch menu is huge for a QSR and the dinner menu is fairly large as well for the volume of that restaurant.
LUNCH - Three soups, 14 entrée options, 13 dessert options, 11 kids options. Some entrée and kids options are essentially the same item with an ingredient change such as bread substitution, or with or without sauces.
DINNER - Two soups, two other appetizers, two appetizer salads, eight entrée options, seven dessert options, two kids appetizers, six kids meals, seven kids desserts.
The menus don't really share a lot of entrees either. Basically just the soups and the braised pork and the meatloaf on the kids meals. So that means prepping, cooking, plating, and serving a huge number of items, close to 70.
The restaurant has a capacity of 546 at lunch and 340 at dinner. That means its possible that the kitchen may have to crank out 1,100 - 1,500 covers for lunch and perhaps 900 - 1,000 covers for dinner. Seven days a week.
I think that there must be a tremendous amount of pressure on the staff and the kitchen to prep and serve a high volume, fairly complex lunch menu, then close for less than 2 hours and convert to a full service concept and prep and serve a completely different menu. Desserts can be done in advance or brought in from a central commissary. But to push that volume of food out with two different concepts would most likely involve a huge kitchen staff just to make it happen, and that involves a lot of labor. Plus with that varied a menu, food costs have to be a factor as well. I don't recall ever seeing a Disney restaurant be out of an entrée (although I am sure it happens), so there has to be enough prep to cover the planned needs of the restaurant. Given the popularity of the restaurant I would assume there is a huge push for speed of service, and that means more pressure on the staff, especially at lunch with it's need for a minimal ticket time. It's possible that the layout/design of the kitchen is not optimal for the concept either (not suggesting that is the case). It could be any combination of the things I mention. All of it boils down to how profitable (and manageable) the restaurant is. It could easily have enough issues that TDO considers it a failure despite the long lines to get in. I know I would love to get a peek at the back of house there...
This, by the way, is what happens when I have too much free time on a Sunday to ponder these things...
I could easily see BOG being considered a failure for operational reasons. I have no idea what the kitchen layout or size is, but the restaurant is essentially two very different concepts. The lunch menu is huge for a QSR and the dinner menu is fairly large as well for the volume of that restaurant.
LUNCH - Three soups, 14 entrée options, 13 dessert options, 11 kids options. Some entrée and kids options are essentially the same item with an ingredient change such as bread substitution, or with or without sauces.
DINNER - Two soups, two other appetizers, two appetizer salads, eight entrée options, seven dessert options, two kids appetizers, six kids meals, seven kids desserts.
The menus don't really share a lot of entrees either. Basically just the soups and the braised pork and the meatloaf on the kids meals. So that means prepping, cooking, plating, and serving a huge number of items, close to 70.
The restaurant has a capacity of 546 at lunch and 340 at dinner. That means its possible that the kitchen may have to crank out 1,100 - 1,500 covers for lunch and perhaps 900 - 1,000 covers for dinner. Seven days a week.
I think that there must be a tremendous amount of pressure on the staff and the kitchen to prep and serve a high volume, fairly complex lunch menu, then close for less than 2 hours and convert to a full service concept and prep and serve a completely different menu. Desserts can be done in advance or brought in from a central commissary. But to push that volume of food out with two different concepts would most likely involve a huge kitchen staff just to make it happen, and that involves a lot of labor. Plus with that varied a menu, food costs have to be a factor as well. I don't recall ever seeing a Disney restaurant be out of an entrée (although I am sure it happens), so there has to be enough prep to cover the planned needs of the restaurant. Given the popularity of the restaurant I would assume there is a huge push for speed of service, and that means more pressure on the staff, especially at lunch with it's need for a minimal ticket time. It's possible that the layout/design of the kitchen is not optimal for the concept either (not suggesting that is the case). It could be any combination of the things I mention. All of it boils down to how profitable (and manageable) the restaurant is. It could easily have enough issues that TDO considers it a failure despite the long lines to get in. I know I would love to get a peek at the back of house there...
This, by the way, is what happens when I have too much free time on a Sunday to ponder these things...
Next Big Thing
Well-Known Member
Because by making people have to wait for "return times" during QS, they lose business and aren't running at full capacity.
If someone wants to eat at BOG for lunch and they're willing to wait 20 mins or so, they should be allowed to wait. Having wait times for BOG during QS is akin to McDonalds taking reservations. If someone is going to McDonalds, it's because they want to eat NOW. Same with BOG QS.
So what has been happening? They are running at half capacity pretty much since the switch to "reservations". If someone goes to eat there at 12:30 and gets a 3:30 return time, I'd say AT LEAST 50% of people will throw that away. Children get hungry and you can't always stick to such tight schedules.
So THAT is why it is considered a failure. At least from the quick service side of things. I feel like the only reason it hasn't been changed to a full service for lunch yet is bc MK can't afford to lose another QSR. They need to open some back up before they can think about changing BOG lunch to TS.
aladdin2007
Well-Known Member
This!! BOG or no BOG.
tigger1968
Well-Known Member
I had totally forgotten about the FP+ requirement. Makes me curious if it's a way to manage the capacity of the place better (i.e. they couldn't handle the volume running wide open, like I wondered about) or that perhaps TDO is just clueless on how to manage that restaurant. It seems like a plan to cut your profits for the place and hack off a lot of guests at this point.
jensenrick
Well-Known Member
regarding LTT- will they still be serving microwaved Stouffer's frozen entrees? 
The Visionary Soul
Well-Known Member
Well, I would reply, but most of the reasons have already been pointed out. But there is another major operational issue, and that's the technology thing. Those tables are expensive, and since they can't be moved together to make room for larger parties, that complicates things as well. Like everyone said, financially it's doing well, but it is a real Beast (pun intended) to operate.
englanddg
One Little Spark...
I would as well.I know this is thread drift at this point...but anyway...lol.
I could easily see BOG being considered a failure for operational reasons. I have no idea what the kitchen layout or size is, but the restaurant is essentially two very different concepts. The lunch menu is huge for a QSR and the dinner menu is fairly large as well for the volume of that restaurant.
LUNCH - Three soups, 14 entrée options, 13 dessert options, 11 kids options. Some entrée and kids options are essentially the same item with an ingredient change such as bread substitution, or with or without sauces.
DINNER - Two soups, two other appetizers, two appetizer salads, eight entrée options, seven dessert options, two kids appetizers, six kids meals, seven kids desserts.
The menus don't really share a lot of entrees either. Basically just the soups and the braised pork and the meatloaf on the kids meals. So that means prepping, cooking, plating, and serving a huge number of items, close to 70.
The restaurant has a capacity of 546 at lunch and 340 at dinner. That means its possible that the kitchen may have to crank out 1,100 - 1,500 covers for lunch and perhaps 900 - 1,000 covers for dinner. Seven days a week.
I think that there must be a tremendous amount of pressure on the staff and the kitchen to prep and serve a high volume, fairly complex lunch menu, then close for less than 2 hours and convert to a full service concept and prep and serve a completely different menu. Desserts can be done in advance or brought in from a central commissary. But to push that volume of food out with two different concepts would most likely involve a huge kitchen staff just to make it happen, and that involves a lot of labor. Plus with that varied a menu, food costs have to be a factor as well. I don't recall ever seeing a Disney restaurant be out of an entrée (although I am sure it happens), so there has to be enough prep to cover the planned needs of the restaurant. Given the popularity of the restaurant I would assume there is a huge push for speed of service, and that means more pressure on the staff, especially at lunch with it's need for a minimal ticket time. It's possible that the layout/design of the kitchen is not optimal for the concept either (not suggesting that is the case). It could be any combination of the things I mention. All of it boils down to how profitable (and manageable) the restaurant is. It could easily have enough issues that TDO considers it a failure despite the long lines to get in. I know I would love to get a peek at the back of house there...
This, by the way, is what happens when I have too much free time on a Sunday to ponder these things...
Whomever thought it would be a good idea to transition from a QS to a TS concept during shift change obviously has a few more degrees than they do real restaurant experience.
That being said, it isn't that much different than a restaurant transitioning from a "lunch menu" to a "dinner menu"...the issue is, how the FOH is managed. And that FOH is high volume, pretty much all the time.
Also, I'm not sure how that downtime really gives them much more than prep time and shift change to more experienced line cooks.
The whole thing seems to me to be a F&B nightmare operationally...though, I've not eaten there yet, so I can't rightly say...
I thought your analysis was well thought out.