Official D23 Thread

[EPCOT Explorer]

1)As long as it conforms to a narrow set of rule you have laid out based on a small plaque.

2)Interesting that you are so hung up on the futurism of Epcot, but in the same breath require Disney to pay tribute to nostaligia.

3)Nope. Disney owes us nothing and we owe nothing to Disney in return.

They have built a successful brand by providing a quality product, but they are under no obligation to keep providing that, and fans are under no obligation to keep purchasing what Disney is selling. Good business decisions are another matter, but there is no "owing" from or to either party.

There comes a point where a customers money is not worth it any more because their artificial expectation are too high. At that point, the company stops caring as the expenditure to make the customer happy is not worth the profit margin. My fear is that TWDC has gotten to that point with their fans.

Why create an extension of a whole land when a small group is only going to see the demographics don't fit their expectation?

Why make an interactive comedy club when a small group is only concerned about theming?

Why build a new attraction when fans are going to keep lamenting the loss of what was there 10 years earlier?

Why bother? You are going to come anyways, and if you don't, there is someone to take your place.

1) Well, Jake, that is the mission statement, so to speak. It's the personification of what they want to present. If they want to deviate from that, it's their choice...But it seems like a easy way out.

Take DAK for example...It's dedication is to Animals, and too the intricacies in natural life. It's also a place for adventure, exploration, and the magical side of animals.

Now...How would you feel if they plopped down a Fanstyland Castle into the middle of it, and had Cinderella holding a Meet and Greet?

It wouldn't make sense.

Obviously, this is a more drastic example, but it's the same deveation from the theme, and it's the same type of thing that I feel that they did with Nemo. Yes, it entertains...But what's the purpose? "Entertainment with a purpose" is/was one of the great mantras of WDI and maybe even Walt. I might have the wording wrong, though.:lol:

2) How is it so hard to not do both?:lol: There is such thing as a nostalgic future. See Horizons. See SSE, even! It retains the old a great aspects of the ride, while adding in the new. (Whether the new aspects are of quality is a whole other thread. Standing clear of the doors, there.)

3) I feel the bolded is your pure opinion, and I can't argue against it, since neither of us has facts to back it up. I do believe the opposite, however. We are linked to them, and they to us, in a symbiosis, if you will.:lol: Just look at the D23 EXPO.

Your series of questions, however...I've said it before: Not all of us have those issues, and they need to find a balance between old and new.


EDIT: And, jake....I do hope you know that this is a civil sort of talk, and there are no hard feelings. I know that we do this frequently, but I do consider your opinion to be a very viable one, and though different from mine, still one of a very good discussion.

 

[janoimagine]

Nope. Disney owes us nothing and we owe nothing to Disney in return.

They have built a successful brand by providing a quality product, but they are under no obligation to keep providing that, and fans are under no obligation to keep purchasing what Disney is selling. Good business decisions are another matter, but there is no "owing" from or to either party.

I see and understand the point's you are establishing. However I still disagree. The success of Disney's brand is due in large part to three things:

1) Unique exciting products.
2) Continuous improvement these products.
3) Consumers and Fan's response to these products.

If you eliminate 1 and 2 then 3 will follow suit.

A classic example of this is the Automotive bail-out on Wall Street. Both GM and Chrysler rested too long on the belief that people need cars, so what if we loose a few buyers, someone else will take their place.

Ford on the other hand took a look at its market, and realized that their name could only sustain them for so long. They opted to sink money into R&D, listened to the consumer's or fan's demands and came up with some exciting, well designed new products for the entire market, and is in a good place right now.

If Disney ceases to listen to what its consumer's or fan's want, ceases to appeal to it's entire range of demographics, and becomes concerned only with the shareholders profits, then they too will ultimately fail.

Like I said before, Apple has the perfect balance of this and does not sacrifice creativity, product design, market share, or innovation.

Disney has the ability to do this, whether or not they will remains to be seen. I think they are taking the right steps now, but the wake-up call was long overdue. IMHO

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

I see and understand the point's you are establishing. However I still disagree. The success of Disney's brand is due in large part to three things:

1) Unique exciting products.
2) Continuous improvement these products.
3) Consumers and Fan's response to these products.

If you eliminate 1 and 2 then 3 will follow suit.

A classic example of this is the Automotive bail-out on Wall Street. Both GM and Chrysler rested too long on the belief that people need cars, so what if we loose a few buyers, someone else will take their place.

Ford on the other hand took a look at its market, and realized that their name could only sustain them for so long. They opted to sink money into R&D, listened to the consumer's or fan's demands and came up with some exciting, well designed new products for the entire market, and is in a good place right now.

If Disney ceases to listen to what its consumer's or fan's want, ceases to appeal to it's entire range of demographics, and becomes concerned only with the shareholders profits, then they too will ultimately fail.

Like I said before, Apple has the perfect balance of this and does not sacrifice creativity, product design, market share, or innovation.

Disney has the ability to do this, whether or not they will remains to be seen. I think they are taking the right steps now, but the wake-up call was long overdue. IMHO

Again, well said.

So many things to say with the bail out...but...politics...


Bolded part, though...I honestly do think that things are beginning to change.We are turning a corner. Again, D23 EXPO. It changed a LOT of things in both the company and the image they put out, and the fan's perception. It's a good thing.

 

[jakeman]

1) Well, Jake, that is the mission statement, so to speak. It's the personification of what they want to present. If they want to deviate from that, it's their choice...But it seems like a easy way out.

Take DAK for example...It's dedication is to Animals, and too the intricacies in natural life. It's also a place for adventure, exploration, and the magical side of animals.

Now...How would you feel if they plopped down a Fanstyland Castle into the middle of it, and had Cinderella holding a Meet and Greet?

It wouldn't make sense.

Obviously, this is a more drastic example, but it's the same deveation from the theme, and it's the same type of thing that I feel that they did with Nemo. Yes, it entertains...But what's the purpose? "Entertainment with a purpose" is/was one of the great mantras of WDI and maybe even Walt. I might have the wording wrong, though.:lol:

That is quite a drastic example. I'll see if I can provide a real one:

Jungle Book characters in Africa at DAK. I'm okay with that because I understand their purpose. They don't detract from the message of DAK and provide a reminder that you are at Disney. However, they can be seen as a deviation from theme because the Jungle Book is fiction (does it take place in Africa? or India? I don't know enough to say for certain).

The same with the Seas.

2) How is it so hard to not do both?:lol: There is such thing as a nostalgic future. See Horizons. See SSE, even! It retains the old a great aspects of the ride, while adding in the new. (Whether the new aspects are of quality is a whole other thread. Standing clear of the doors, there.)

The future is about looking forward, not looking back at how people looked forward. That's called history.

3) I feel the bolded is your pure opinion, and I can't argue against it, since neither of us has facts to back it up. I do believe the opposite, however. We are linked to them, and they to us, in a symbiosis, if you will.:lol: Just look at the D23 EXPO.

Your series of questions, however...I've said it before: Not all of us have those issues, and they need to find a balance between old and new.

I don't really think it is opinion. TWDC has no obligation to provide us with what we want. Nor do we have to buy it. Is that a poor business decision to treat fans that way? Maybe, and that's an opinion! :lol:

I understand that not everyone shares that, but looking at demographics from a corporate level, those minorities can come across as representative of all 60,000 people registered on this site.

Not to go all WDW1974 by bringing politics into this, but many times when someone says Republican, the automatic assumption can be that their political views and attitudes allign with the Rushes and Glenn Becks. That is just an example. I won't address any other comments regarding politics. It was soley for illustrative purposes.

EDIT: And, jake....I do hope you know that this is a civil sort of talk, and there are no hard feelings. I know that we do this frequently, but I do consider your opinion to be a very viable one, and though different from mine, still one of a very good discussion.

No problem! I enjoy these back and forths. I think we have both demonstrated in the past that overall we probably agree on alot more than we disagree on. :wave:

I see and understand the point's you are establishing. However I still disagree. The success of Disney's brand is due in large part to three things:

1) Unique exciting products.
2) Continuous improvement these products.
3) Consumers and Fan's response to these products.
b
If you eliminate 1 and 2 then 3 will follow suit.

Honestly, I think we are both right.

I agree that what you have outlined is good business practice, but there is no obligation there for either party.

Additionally, consumers are going to be more important than the fans, always.

If everyone registered on this site made 3 trips to Disney a year it would still be a fraction of their total attendance.

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

1)That is quite a drastic example. I'll see if I can provide a real one:

Jungle Book characters in Africa at DAK. I'm okay with that because I understand their purpose. They don't detract from the message of DAK and provide a reminder that you are at Disney. However, they can be seen as a deviation from theme because the Jungle Book is fiction (does it take place in Africa? or India? I don't know enough to say for certain).

The same with the Seas.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
2)The future is about looking forward, not looking back at how people looked forward. That's called history.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

3)I don't really think it is opinion. TWDC has no obligation to provide us with what we want. Nor do we have to buy it. Is that a poor business decision to treat fans that way? Maybe, and that's an opinion! :lol:

I understand that not everyone shares that, but looking at demographics from a corporate level, those minorities can come across as representative of all 60,000 people registered on this site.

Not to go all WDW1974 by bringing politics into this, but many times when someone says Republican, the automatic assumption can be that their political views and attitudes allign with the Rushes and Glenn Becks. That is just an example. I won't address any other comments regarding politics. It was soley for illustrative purposes.

No problem! I enjoy these back and forths. I think we have both demonstrated in the past that overall we probably agree on alot more than we disagree on. :wave:


Additionally, consumers are going to be more important than the fans, always.

Numbering things is soooo much easier.:lol:

1)It's a matter of opinion, once again! :lol: I see it as no less drastic.... Disney's Animal Kingdom is not equal to Castles and Princess' then EPCOT is to Cartoon Fish in a Futuristic Setting.:shrug: Agree to disagree?

2) You are talking to a History Major, and someone who has loved and treasured history almost all of my life. Applying it to EPCOT- Yeah, it did that. A ton of it was retrospective...But the content outside that was future oriented. That's what I would return to. Not the nostalgia FOR the future, but the nostalgia about returning to the future. I think you confused my concept, sorry.

3)TRUE!:sohappy: Example: I am not buying the club part of D23. However, there is a obligation to the fans for the success. Kind of a cheeky example, but you know how stars always and tearfully "want to say thanks to the fans"? Well, Disney needs to do that on occasion. I would even think that they have done it already, and at the D23 EXPO.

And your last comment....Fans ARE consumers. There has to be something for us to consume, though. And not the same old stuff and refurbed attractions, and merch with a old logo on it.That stuff is great, but there has to be new things, things with respect to the "old" that are made. It's just differentiating the product a bit. WDW74 calls it WalMarting.

And, even in the process of doing that, they pick up a whole NEW line of fans! I'm sure that 20 years from now someone who rode SSE or Mystic Manor (That seems VERY "old" to me!) will reminisce about it.

See? By using their past to create some new things for one audience, they might be appealing to both. Disney is fantastic at this, especially, just because of the brand name.

And yeah, I enjoy it too. :lol: Wanna talk some Star Wars? We like that...:lol:

 

[jakeman]

Numbering things is soooo much easier.:lol:

1)It's a matter of opinion, once again! :lol: I see it as no less drastic.... Disney's Animal Kingdom is not equal to Castles and Princess' then EPCOT is to Cartoon Fish in a Futuristic Setting.:shrug: Agree to disagree?

2) You are talking to a History Major, and someone who has loved and treasured history almost all of my life. Applying it to EPCOT- Yeah, it did that. A ton of it was retrospective...But the content outside that was future oriented. That's what I would return to. Not the nostalgia FOR the future, but the nostalgia about returning to the future. I think you confused my concept, sorry.

3)TRUE!:sohappy: Example: I am not buying the club part of D23. However, there is a obligation to the fans for the success. Kind of a cheeky example, but you know how stars always and tearfully "want to say thanks to the fans"? Well, Disney needs to do that on occasion. I would even think that they have done it already, and at the D23 EXPO.

And your last comment....Fans ARE consumers. There has to be something for us to consume, though. And not the same old stuff and refurbed attractions, and merch with a old logo on it.That stuff is great, but there has to be new things, things with respect to the "old" that are made. It's just differentiating the product a bit. WDW74 calls it WalMarting.

And, even in the process of doing that, they pick up a whole NEW line of fans! I'm sure that 20 years from now someone who rode SSE or Mystic Manor (That seems VERY "old" to me!) will reminisce about it.

See? By using their past to create some new things for one audience, they might be appealing to both. Disney is fantastic at this, especially, just because of the brand name.

And yeah, I enjoy it too. :lol: Wanna talk some Star Wars? We like that...:lol:

1. I guess we will have to on this point. I see the Seas adhering to everything in the Epcot plaque, but that is just a difference in opinion.

2. No problem. I think I understand it now. Unfortunately it didn't work at the beginning and I don't think it would work now ("It's even boring to fly over").

3. It would be a good business move to do that, yes, but they don't have to. And I question if they even care about the hardcore fan base because their beligerant (sp?) attitude towards the company.

Fans are consumer, yes, but in some cases they are consumers that punch the cashier in the face as they pay. There is only so many punches the cashier will take before the customer is told not to come back.

WDW1974 has no idea what Walmarting is. It is a buzzword he made up to rally people to his point of view.

You know what is interesting, Star Wars is the perfect example of a brand that doesn't listen to it's fans (specifically Lucas bristles at it) and it is doing fine.

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

1. I guess we will have to on this point. I see the Seas adhering to everything in the Epcot plaque, but that is just a difference in opinion.

2. No problem. I think I understand it now. Unfortunately it didn't work at the beginning and I don't think it would work now ("It's even boring to fly over").

3. It would be a good business move to do that, yes, but they don't have to. And I question if they even care about the hardcore fan base because their beligerant (sp?) attitude towards the company.

Fans are consumer, yes, but in some cases they are consumers that punch the cashier in the face as they pay. There is only so many punches the cashier will take before the customer is told not to come back.

WDW1974 has no idea what Walmarting is. It is a buzzword he made up to rally people to his point of view.

You know what is interesting, Star Wars is the perfect example of a brand that doesn't listen to it's fans (specifically Lucas bristles at it) and it is doing fine.

1. I do too, save for the unhealthy balance on the entertain part without enough of the inspire and the inform. But, enough of that.:lol:

2. UGH...You pulled the worst thing ever.:lol: The infamous Homer Simpson quote. You do realize that he's not the brightest tool in the shed, right?:lol: With that in mind, we come to the differentiated and "new" and "old" audience. What's made for him is fine. What's made for Fanboys is also fine. They just need to Have it like a Venn Diagram. Some for us, some for them, and the middle is a mix. There should be a lot MORE in the middle than there is on the "Fanboy" and "New Fan" sides. Or "New" and "Old" sides.

3. So if it's good business, why not do it? NOT doing it seems to be BAD business.

Belligerence?! Trust me....we could be worse.:lol: I know I can't speak for my peers, but honestly, this is NOT ANGER. Not REAL anger, so to speak. This is, however, critiquing buisness.

74's Walmarting is the fact that they create things only for the "new" and stop doing unique things. See cloning.:shrug: At least that is my take on it. Do you have a different one?

SW...I could argue that, but I won't. Heh. I think that most of the "new" stuff for them does appeal to the old. I know it did for me.

 

[jakeman]

1. I do too, save for the unhealthy balance on the entertain part without enough of the inspire and the inform. But, enough of that.:lol:

2. UGH...You pulled the worst thing ever.:lol: The infamous Homer Simpson quote. You do realize that he's not the brightest tool in the shed, right?:lol: With that in mind, we come to the differentiated and "new" and "old" audience. What's made for him is fine. What's made for Fanboys is also fine. They just need to Have it like a Venn Diagram. Some for us, some for them, and the middle is a mix. There should be a lot MORE in the middle than there is on the "Fanboy" and "New Fan" sides. Or "New" and "Old" sides.

3. So if it's good business, why not do it? NOT doing it seems to be BAD business.

Belligerence?! Trust me....we could be worse.:lol: I know I can't speak for my peers, but honestly, this is NOT ANGER. Not REAL anger, so to speak. This is, however, critiquing buisness.

74's Walmarting is the fact that they create things only for the "new" and stop doing unique things. See cloning.:shrug: At least that is my take on it. Do you have a different one?

SW...I could argue that, but I won't. Heh. I think that most of the "new" stuff for them does appeal to the old. I know it did for me.

2. I understand the characters, but it mirrors the general public sentimate at the time. Homer might be dumb, but his writers weren't.

The problem with the diagram is that the Fanboy's circle is very small and constantly moving.

3. I agree for the most part. I was justing pointing out that nothing is required or owed from either the consumer or the company to each other.

I watch ER and took biology so I should be able to critique my doctor right?

I'm not saying we shouldn't express opinions, but there is a very fine line between critique and crazy arrogance.

Walmarting has no meaning beyond "I disagree with what Disney is doing and can't articulate my nerdrage in a useful way". If you look at what Walmart does: using buying power to leverage prices to undercut smaller stores and chains, while providing equivalent or substandard merchandise at a discounted price, I can't link that to how Disney operates at all. Even if you claim they have a substandard experience, they are still charging a premium price for it.

 

[hack2112]

Walmarting has no meaning beyond "I disagree with what Disney is doing and can't articulate my nerdrage in a useful way". If you look at what Walmart does: using buying power to leverage prices to undercut smaller stores and chains, while providing equivalent or substandard merchandise at a discounted price, I can't link that to how Disney operates at all. Even if you claim they have a substandard experience, they are still charging a premium price for it.

I believe what '74 means by Walmarting is how every Walmart is essentially a clone of every other Walmart in almost every way. My Disney example is the loss of unique merchandise in the stores and parks that were replaced with similar items that can be purchased everywhere else. This does seem to be changing though, as more unique merch is being added to the parks. (EPCOT Center cups, anyone?)

That's just my take on it, of course.

 

[jt04]

I believe what '74 means by Walmarting is how every Walmart is essentially a clone of every other Walmart in almost every way. My Disney example is the loss of unique merchandise in the stores and parks that were replaced with similar items that can be purchased everywhere else. This does seem to be changing though, as more unique merch is being added to the parks. (EPCOT Center cups, anyone?)

That's just my take on it, of course.

I believe it has been in the plans for at least 2 years to bring back "old school" WDW and do things in the manner they used to be.

I have been seeing the indications for over a year. As I say all the time, it is a matter of changing the way of doing things that have been instilled over almost 2 decades. That takes time.

But it is undeniable now that the changes brought about by Iger/Lasseter are a long term strategy. That is why I find the negativity intolerable sometimes.

 

[CaptainMichael]

You're all wrong/right. Get over it/or dont. You're welcome/or not.

Kungaloosh!

 

[EpcotServo]

You're all wrong/right. Get over it/or dont. You're welcome/or not.

Kungaloosh!

:lol:

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

2. I understand the characters, but it mirrors the general public sentimate at the time. Homer might be dumb, but his writers weren't.

The problem with the diagram is that the Fanboy's circle is very small and constantly moving.

3. I agree for the most part. I was justing pointing out that nothing is required or owed from either the consumer or the company to each other.

I watch ER and took biology so I should be able to critique my doctor right?

I'm not saying we shouldn't express opinions, but there is a very fine line between critique and crazy arrogance.

Walmarting has no meaning beyond "I disagree with what Disney is doing and can't articulate my nerdrage in a useful way". If you look at what Walmart does: using buying power to leverage prices to undercut smaller stores and chains, while providing equivalent or substandard merchandise at a discounted price, I can't link that to how Disney operates at all. Even if you claim they have a substandard experience, they are still charging a premium price for it.

2) So then don't market EPCOT to a Homer Simpson.:shrug: Like I said, different audiences, different Venn Diagram. Though it is part of a business, yes, they do need to appeal to both of us. Again...Agree to disagree? :lol: We are not meeting here, and partially because I think that we are thinking of the same thing, but saying it in VERY DIFFERENT TERMS.:zipit::ROFLOL:

There is no problem with the Venn Diagram, IMHO. Constantly moving, I don't think so. I would think we BARELY move. We want the same thing we wanted 10 years ago. The OTHER side, though? That's always current. It would be easier to market for us?

Small? SmallER than the rest of the population, yes, but I could see that not mattering. Again, Name Recognition! It's DISNEY. People will be responsive because of the tremendous past this amazing company has. Some might not like it, true, but that goes for ANY group. If Disney were to keep things running at full blast, not let things get stale, most would come to like it, I think.

3) True to a extent. But it is symbiosis. They wouldn't be them without us.

Jake...ER? Docs? Life and death? WAY too different here. Don't see the connection. You can sue for malpractice, though...:lookaroun:lol:

74) :lol: You just don't like his style, methinks. I'm not here to defend or argue for him, though...

But that's not Wal-Marting. It's what Hack said it is. The concept producing for the new. The doubling of attractions. The loss of uniqueness.

I don't see how anyone could not want them to stop doing the same thing over and over again.

 

[krankenstein]

Who cares about Epcot? DAK is where it's at! :lookaroun

*runs away*

 

[cdunbar]

Who cares about Epcot? DAK is where it's at! :lookaroun

*runs away*

HAHA your so trying to revive up Evan:ROFLOL:

 

[cdunbar]

Breaking news

I know this probably doesn't belong here but Richard *D-I-C-K* Cook has resigned from the studios effective end of business today

 

[krankenstein]

HAHA your so trying to revive up Evan:ROFLOL:

Evan is foolish young child that like "edutainment".... :lookaroun

*awaits the forks by text* :lol:

 

[_Scar]

Who cares about Epcot? DAK is where it's at! :lookaroun

*runs away*

Agree, but I shall sytay and take the flames one by one.

 

[cdunbar]

Evan is foolish young child that like "edutainment".... :lookaroun

*awaits the forks by text* :lol:

Hmm... I wonder how long that'll take...

 

[krankenstein]

Hmm... I wonder how long that'll take...

Don't worry, it happens daily... :dazzle: :lol:





BTW, Evan is a valued friend of mine.

Another BTW, I love EPCOT and "edutainment"