Magic Kingdom evening Extra Magic Hours attraction line-up to change next week

[flynnibus]

If the changes were so needed.. a focused company would take the attraction down for a day or two and put the resources on it necessary to bring it back to par. If you believe an extra 2hrs is going to make serious headway for them, imagine what an extra 10+hrs consecutive would give them.

I can buy its a change to give them more breathing room to get things done - but I don't buy for a minute it's so they can get through a specific pre-existing punch list. If so, there are far more effective ways to do that. And guests can survive having an attraction down for a day. It's far less disruptive to impact a fixed group of people then it is to impact everyone going forward.

And if you subscribe to 'its for maintenance..' - I look forward to the excuses to cover other changes that have been made and the more that will come.

I have no doubt the long running hours are hard on the park - but a company focused on quality would invest to fix that problem, not reduce their offerings to make the problem less serious.

 

[janoimagine]

Do you think they were saying"

"Well, they will hate us for pulling Splash no matter what we replace it with, so let's just give them the cheapest attraction to run we have."

While I agree with you ... what would they replace it with? They don't have another E-ticket because ... they have been stagnant for years in terms of expansion which in reality is the root of the problem ... They couldn't afford to take Splash and Thunder down at the same time because of a lack of E-ticket headliners within the MK ... so Splash suffered tremendously by not getting it's yearly refit and now they have to cut it from the lineup to attempt to fix the neglect.

It is unfortunate however it is reality.

 

[janoimagine]

Not to mention - many Ops CMs work 40-75, even 100 hours a week during extreme peak season. All of us CMs celebrated the news. It gives us a chance to rest more as well have more time with OUR families. Think about others before thinking of yourselves.

Yes, but you do that by choice ... If you don't like working that many hours then change careers. I'm not trying to be a d.ck by saying this but it's your choice, and people pay a premium by staying at Disney's resorts, and if anything expect an increase in service's as their ticket prices go up, not a decrease because they lost touch with their roots.

Just sayin.

 

[janoimagine]

Wow, was I late to the party.

 

[GoofGoof]

I have no doubt the long running hours are hard on the park - but a company focused on quality would invest to fix that problem, not reduce their offerings to make the problem less serious.

Until they raise ticket prices to pay for the extra maintenance. Then everyone would scream too. Look back to the threads on price increases.

I go back to my simple math. Revenue less expenses = profit. We all know that making less profit is unacceptable so don't try to make the argument they should just accept lower profits. Disney is a for profit company. It's stated on here numerous times how attendance is flat at WDW. On the threads about Disneys excellent quarter a lot of people were quick to point out that WDW was not a key driver of the success. DL and DVC and the cruise line got all the credit. Based on that revenues are flat at best. If revenues don't go up but expenses do then profits shrink. The only answer is to cut costs. That means less maintenance, less EMHs and parks open less than in the past. You mentioned that a shift in maintenance occurred around the start of this century. That coincides with 9/11 and a serious dip in vacation spending. Then the crash in 2008 hits. Again a decrease in spending and disposable income. WDW chose to discount hotel rooms and offer free dining to attract guests and try to maintain attendance. At the same time they cut spending. The cuts in maintenance did not negatively impact attendnace since they are mostly behind the scenes. Essentially they were robbing tomorrow to keep profits even. Fast forward to today. The cuts in maintenance and spending are taking a toll on the parks. They will need to make some investments in the near future to fix things. Hopefully the economy is beginning to rebound and Disney management will start to invest more in capital projects at WDW. This includes new attractions and major refurbs to attract guests and increase revenues so that they can spend more on things like maintenance. They have seen the success of Carsland and Potter on attendance. That has to be eye opening. I know its just a start, but FLE, Avatarland, Test Track refurb are all going on now. Lets hope they are just the tip of the ice berg. Only time will tell. Hopefully I am right.

 

[juan]

While it may be tough for people to get adjusted to it, I think it will help the ride out. After riding it this past weekend, I think it is in terrible shape with many of the AAs reminding me of the possum show from A Goofy Movie.

 

[flynnibus]

Until they raise ticket prices to pay for the extra maintenance

Another counter point that ignores Disney's own history of being able to do just that.

I go back to my simple math. Revenue less expenses = profit. We all know that making less profit is unacceptable so don't try to make the argument they should just accept lower profits. Disney is a for profit company

So what.. is the only way to make more profit is to reduce expenses?? No - it's called success through quality, not simply being the cheapest guy. Take any number of examples of premium brands (Disney used to be one of them).. or companies that build and attract business based on PRINCIPLES and not just a race to empty profits. They are successful, and grow profits too, because they know an INVESTMENT in the right things will drive revenue.

Disney was a for profit company under Walt too.. it didn't stop him from INVESTING in his product to make it better knowing that the money would follow if he did it right.

DL and DVC and the cruise line got all the credit. Based on that revenues are flat at best. If revenues don't go up but expenses do then profits shrink. The only answer is to cut costs

No that isn't the only answer.. and all one needs to do is look back and say 'hrm, why are these other divisions doing better, and we aren't?' - the answer wasn't "they cut costs and we didn't"

You mentioned that a shift in maintenance occurred around the start of this century. That coincides with 9/11 and a serious dip in vacation spending

Correlation doesn't not infer CAUSATION. The cause was a change in the leadership of the parks and their business model and how they thought parks could be ran. This started before 9/11. So the rest of your theory is bunk.

Essentially they were robbing tomorrow to keep profits even. Fast forward to today. The cuts in maintenance and spending are taking a toll on the parks. They will need to make some investments in the near future to fix things. Hopefully the economy is beginning to rebound and Disney management will start to invest more in capital projects at WDW

A thought that ignores the last 15+ years. You are painting the picture that this is a short term belt tightening to keep the bottom line up.. but that's not why such changes became acceptable nor why they were first used and business practices changed. They were a way to increase margins without actually improving the product or demand for it. They saw it as 'free money' by reducing what they saw as waste. But what it really was.. was the Disney extra that made the product the stand out it was.

Now without anything to really drive the market.. and no more 'waste' they can easy keep cutting.. they have to resort to actually cutting the physical product back.

It's a race to the bottom.

 

[GoofGoof]

Another counter point that ignores Disney's own history of being able to do just that.



So what.. is the only way to make more profit is to reduce expenses?? No - it's called success through quality, not simply being the cheapest guy. Take any number of examples of premium brands (Disney used to be one of them).. or companies that build and attract business based on PRINCIPLES and not just a race to empty profits. They are successful, and grow profits too, because they know an INVESTMENT in the right things will drive revenue.

Disney was a for profit company under Walt too.. it didn't stop him from INVESTING in his product to make it better knowing that the money would follow if he did it right.



No that isn't the only answer.. and all one needs to do is look back and say 'hrm, why are these other divisions doing better, and we aren't?' - the answer wasn't "they cut costs and we didn't"



Correlation doesn't not infer CAUSATION. The cause was a change in the leadership of the parks and their business model and how they thought parks could be ran. This started before 9/11. So the rest of your theory is bunk.



A thought that ignores the last 15+ years. You are painting the picture that this is a short term belt tightening to keep the bottom line up.. but that's not why such changes became acceptable nor why they were first used and business practices changed. They were a way to increase margins without actually improving the product or demand for it. They saw it as 'free money' by reducing what they saw as waste. But what it really was.. was the Disney extra that made the product the stand out it was.

Now without anything to really drive the market.. and no more 'waste' they can easy keep cutting.. they have to resort to actually cutting the physical product back.

It's a race to the bottom.

You paint a grim picture. I don't agree that the economic situation in the last decade had no impact on why WDW resorted to cost cutting. That theory is definitely not bunk. Revenues were down and costs were up. In the last 10 years health insurance premiums increased by 131% while inflation was just 28%. WDW has 50,000+ employees. Benefits are a big expense for WDW. During the same period costs of raw materials increased too. Just go to Home Depot and buy some paint or wood. They could not raise ticket prices any more than they already did without risking losing customers. At the end of the day it's a big balancing act between costs and revenues. If they were just cutting costs to pocket the savings where are the "super profits" that would have been generated. I do believe that this was more of a belt tightening to get past a rocky economic period that lasted a lot longer than anyone expected. We are already beginning to see Disney invest in large capital projects and I hope more is to come.

 

[t3techcom18]

Even the things you are not in the dark about, you know very little of. Management in Operations is notorious for their extreme lack of transparency on anything, and any and all explanations are rumors generated amongst the hourly front-line cast with no basis in fact.

It's amazing to me that so many front-line cast think they have the tidbits management doesn't want them to really know, when in reality they know nothing and management has not revealed anything about their true intentions.

Not unless you talk daily/weekly to the actual Maintenance folks who tell you the flat out truth about Maintenance situations when management doesn't want to say squat.

OH - and by the way folks - Got official confirmation today that it IS because of maintenance that is needed and that it does not hurt the bottom line during EMH as attendance at SM is practically nil during that time.

 

[asianway]

Splash didn't open with the park today at 9-any idea what time it came online?

 

[wannab@dis]

You paint a grim picture. I don't agree that the economic situation in the last decade had no impact on why WDW resorted to cost cutting. That theory is definitely not bunk. Revenues were down and costs were up. In the last 10 years health insurance premiums increased by 131% while inflation was just 28%. WDW has 50,000+ employees. Benefits are a big expense for WDW. During the same period costs of raw materials increased too. Just go to Home Depot and buy some paint or wood. They could not raise ticket prices any more than they already did without risking losing customers. At the end of the day it's a big balancing act between costs and revenues. If they were just cutting costs to pocket the savings where are the "super profits" that would have been generated. I do believe that this was more of a belt tightening to get past a rocky economic period that lasted a lot longer than anyone expected. We are already beginning to see Disney invest in large capital projects and I hope more is to come.

Careful, facts will get you nowhere. You'll be branded by the malcontents.

A lot of money has been spent over the past several years with refurbs and updates and more still needs to be spent. But, at the same time, they do need to keep guests happy. I would love for all the attractions to be 100% perfect, but that will never happen and it's never been that way. No matter what some claim to be the "golden" ages, things were not without fault.

 

[menamechris]

Splash didn't open with the park today at 9-any idea what time it came online?

This has happened a lot over the last year, I would say. There have been plenty of morning I have been to the MK and walked over to Splash at 10 and it wasnt running yet... I am not sure if it is due to the maintenance running over or technical difficulties

 

[t3techcom18]

This has happened a lot over the last year, I would say. There have been plenty of morning I have been to the MK and walked over to Splash at 10 and it wasnt running yet... I am not sure if it is due to the maintenance running over or technical difficulties

Whenever that happens at an attraction, it could literally be anything - including the two examples what you gave.

 

[AmongMadPeople]

If anyone else is interested, I counted the operating hours in a typical week for the preceding 5 months and the next 7 months. Last 5 months include EMH hours, next 7 do not. I chose what I think are typical representations of a month's hours, excluding April and December, where I've counted Easter and Christmas weeks to illustrate peak operating hours.

Of course this does not take into account start up and shut down periods. This is just to see what kind of use Splash gets over the course of a year.

It's my personal opinion that 3 hours a week is spitting on a fire, but I was intrigued to see just how much time this accounted for in the big picture. The very last number seems to be the most relevant.

April 2012 - 122 hrs Easter week, includes 6 hrs EMH
May 2012 - 96 hrs in a week, includes 3 hrs EMH
June 2012 - 107 hrs in a week, includes 6 hrs EMH
July 2012 - 106 hrs in a week, includes 6 hrs EMH
August 2012 - 94 hrs in a week, includes 6 hrs EMH
...the change!...
September 2012 - 93 hrs in a week with 2 MNSSHP (subtract up to 10 if closed), excludes 3 hrs EMH
October 2012 - 98 hrs in a week with 3 MNSSHP (subtract up to 15 if closed), excludes 3 hrs EMH
November 2012 - 92 hrs in a week with 3 MVMCP (subtract up to 15 if closed), excludes 3 hrs EMH
December 2012 - 96 hrs Christmas week, excludes 6 hrs EMH
January 2013 - 79 hrs in a week, excludes 2 hrs EMH
February 2013 - 87 hrs in a week, excludes 2 hrs EMH
March 2013 - 91 hrs in a week, excludes 2 hrs EMH

Hours gained September 2012-August 2013 closing SM for EMH - ~147 (just under 19 8 hr shifts, 11 typical operating days, and just over 6 full days of wear and tear and/or man hours)

 

[Lee]

And even more hyperbole...

How so?
A guest died in a crash on BTM. A crash due that was caused by inefficient and shoddy maintenance performed by outside contractors brought in as a cost-reducing measure by the Harriss/Irby administration.
Explain how that's hyperbole.

 

[JWG]

SO, since we all hope this is for maintenance reasons, the question becomes;
How much more maintenance is being done on the monorails due to their limited operating schedules and closures prior to actual park closings on EMH nights?

 

[Cosmic Commando]

No, it wasn't. There were no real facts, numbers, amounts, etc. We had a couple of "think we have" and "hardly hire."

One part I noticed is apparently the number of outside contractors has "increased considerably." They did mention going behind and redoing some things, but there were no rates... 5%, 10% of the time?

For most people, I would think "decimated maintenance" would mean things simply were unusable, completely broken, nothing right. I'm not seeing that at all. I believe if people are actually being honest, they would agree "decimated" is hyperbole.

You do realize that actual hard numbers of how many maintenance workers there are, how they're deployed, how many have been let go, etc. are virtually impossible for fans to get, unless you happen to know the password to Bob Iger's computer? The experiences of a 20+ year CM are as good as we're going to get.

Yeah...that works out well...until somebody gets killed.

(See: Big Thunder Mountain, Disneyland,)

And even more hyperbole...

Is the L.A. Times a reliable source? Disney Ride Upkeep Assailed Two guests have died at DL due to shoddy maintenance/training and through no fault of their own. There are more nonfatal accidents. Do you really think it can't happen at WDW?

 

[BigThunderMatt]

How much more maintenance is being done on the monorails due to their limited operating schedules and closures prior to actual park closings on EMH nights?

I would hope a considerable amount, but the fact of the matter is that all three beams still go down quite often throughout the day for maintenance reasons.

 

[wm49rs]

Yes, it's hyperbole.

Mistakes can be made by contractors or employees. Remember the WDW monorail incident? Employee.

Which could also be attributed to a reduction in the amount of proper training being given to those in the transportation department. Maintenance doesn't necessarily have to be the only area in which budgets have been cut.

 

[Lee]

Yes, it's hyperbole.
Mistakes can be made by contractors or employees. Remember the WDW monorail incident? Employee.

Which could also be attributed to a reduction in the amount of proper training being given to those in the transportation department. Maintenance doesn't necessarily have to be the only area in which budgets have been cut.

No, it isn't hyperbole. Undertrained, inexperienced outside contractors were brought in as a cost saving measure. Two guests died as a result, at no fault of their own. How many guests died (not counting guest misbehavior) prior to those two incidents at DL, before the cuts in maintenence? How 'bout none?

As for the Mono incident. How many hours had those poor guys been working? Mistakes like that tend to happen when the cast has been stretched thin and are overworked. If I recall the details of that incident, that was the case.