1023
Provocateur, Rancanteur, Plaisanter, du Jour
I don't know if that example fits, they removed a large feature from the lobby, maybe removing the large Mary Blair mural for a lesser mural would be a better example. The area is the same but the grand centerpiece is no longer grand.
@1023 I'm not happy that they removed the fountain, I stayed there twice and loved the whole resort. I made sure to take some video of the fountain on my last visit because I knew it was going away. I don't mind the bungalows and am waiting to see the final product of the lobby before I decide if it's good or bad. It won't be the same that's for sure. The new sign gives me slight hope that the water feature can be nice, the stone looks similar. I do think more space in the lobby can be a plus, we'll see.
@tikiman is an insider about the resort and has said that there will be improvements and to wait to see the finished product.
I agree the new sign was a nice improvement (I've stated that a few times) and would have gone well with an unchanged lobby. I am afraid that the limited artist renditions and the construction photo updates leave me with less hope about the final product inside. Trader Sam's should be nice but I have to agree with several here that the lobby will fill up with clutter quickly. The reason many (in this thread) have also come to that conclusion, is that current leadership looks at all square footage as a mall. Malls pricing structures look at earnings per square foot. Hence, anything not generating capital is an expense or a missed opportunity. The old lobby feature was a loss leader financially (perhaps generating a few dollars per day in Koi Food). The new lobby feature is unobtrusive and allows for plenty of space to market goods and services.
I am girding for the onslaught of, "Disney is a business and they have to make money" folks who always pop out of the woodwork when anyone suggests maintaining something that doesn't generate profit. I find that argument disingenuous, specious, and entirely irrelevant when discussing theme parks and their associated business units. If profit was the ultimate motive, why bother themeing any areas at all. The space used to have a water feature at all would generate more revenue as a shop. But I digress and tangent, so apologies for that.
I am all for re-working something. I know that things must be kept fresh. There was a better way to do that in the GCH than what has been done. I can give an example of every Disney resort property around the world where a change in a major feature would destroy the resort's value. That is, in the prevailing opinion of this thread, what has been done.
As I have said before, I hope I am wrong and that this a vast improvement over the predecessor. I hope I am wrong.
*1023*