For "cost containment" or Cognizant? Doesn't really matter, I guess, it applies equally to both.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Rapid Fill Mug Program Fails (at more ways than you might think)
- Thread starter The Visionary Soul
- Start date
For "cost containment" or Cognizant? Doesn't really matter, I guess, it applies equally to both.
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
For "cost containment" or Cognizant? Doesn't really matter, I guess, it applies equally to both.
'Cost Contained', Rightsized etc
Love the way executives salve what's left of their concience by terms like 'Cost Contained', News media ought to pull a Trump and say The Schwa Corporation Fired 30% of it's workforce today in a cost cutting effort designed to boost it's stock price.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
It might be true, but, I really don't care one way or the other. What any company spends for its infrastructure is 100%, totally and without argument, their business. Do we go into a grocery store and ask how much they spent on the frozen foods freezer or the scanning device when we check out. Do we ask if the prices might be lower if they hadn't invested in that particular thing? Do we ask our car dealer if cars might be cheaper if they hadn't modernized the show room with a fancy new interior? Do we question IBM when they design and build a new method of processing computer chips.Wasn't there an article recently that said the whole phase 2 aspect (the interaction of the MBs with the attractions) was no longer happening? I vaguely recall reading something along those lines...if I'm wrong, I do apologizeIt's been a bit of a long morning.
What Disney spends on that stuff and what they decide is to their benefit is not of our concern. Anyone that knows anything about budgeting knows that these things are planned for and financed over time. We are not missing out on an attraction because they spent money to upgrade their system. That is not how it works. We cannot constantly question their motivation or their return because, frankly, it is none of our business. When we own our own company we can make the decisions on what to spend our money on. Not doing the MB interaction may have had a million reasons for not doing it ranging from people get spooked when we know to much about them to it just didn't work like we planned. It really doesn't matter. It is what it is!
zakattack99
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
Very much disagree with this. It's a shareholders job to care. When a company like Disney is public it's no longer the companies money it's the shareholders money and it is their job to care.
Grimley1968
Well-Known Member
If this is in reference to the $2 billion plus that went into replacing a well-functioning FP system with one that has RFID capabilities and pre-arrival scheduling, then I totally disagree. That $2 billion plus could have gone into many, many new attractions, upgraded existing ones, and tweaked the previous FP system to make it paperless without trying to get guests to wear garish, sweaty plastic bands and monitoring the number of ounces of soda guests drink.
Last edited:
Angel Ariel
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure why what I said deserved this - what comes across as ranting- response. I never said anything about constantly questioning their motivation or return, or anything else.
Laketravis
Well-Known Member
Quite the liberal use of "we".......but as magical as Disney might be, they can't actually print money. And spending $2B on saving WDW with a program that didn't introduce a single new attraction was $2B worth of new attractions that never came to be.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
Show me the bill of sale that it cost that much to begin with! That number was made up by posters and every time it was mentioned the number got higher. We were the early alternative fact location. That said, yes the way things were going it was absolutely necessary to upgrade to a more versatile and multi-purpose system. The old one, did work as far as it was able, but, it was like still having a Ford Falcon in a world of Rolls Royces. And it is not up to us to decide what is needed and what isn't. We talk like we should have been consulted on decisions made in the Board Room.
That's the first part, the second part is that it would have been used to add attractions or upgrade existing ones. That's just foolishness. They had enough money to do both, the system was not the reason why they didn't. How many posts have we seen here where Disney bought back their own stock to the tune of Billions of dollars. It was a decision that they made that was going to have to be done at some point anyway. We lost nothing in the process and that money could have also built things if they had wanted too. There are many reasons to be upset with Disney Management for not taking care of things, but, upgrading the IT system was not one of them and would have also been very irresponsible and more costly later.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
I wasn't attacking you, I was commenting on an often repeated and just as often incorrect feeling that Disney should be only concerned about everyones immediate desires and not what may or may not be necessary to maintain the integrity of the company. We don't know that, but, we all do seem able to know what is needed and what isn't needed. I'm sorry if you thought that I was singling you out. I didn't intend to do that, but, all we have witnessed in the world lately is distorted, self serving opinions that are harmful and worse then that, incorrect and misleading.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
2 billion is parking meter change to The Disney Company. Chump change.
Laketravis
Well-Known Member
Chump change is what's lost in beverage sales to abuse and that certainly seemed to concern them.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
Apples to apples my friend. Soda is hardly necessary to the internal operation of the resorts. You can go to Walmart and buy soda.
In a word - YES it is of our concern. Part of my business is to monitor our suppliers for many things. Not the least of which is do I(we) think we should continue to use them as a supplier. I consider Disney to be one of my personal suppliers of entertainment. My responsibility to myself ( and family) is to monitor and determine if I will continue to use them as such, or if it is in my best interest to find and make use of another. If a supplier continually makes faulty ( in my opinion) strategic decisions, reduces the quality/quantity of product supplied, increases costs, and becomes more difficult to work with - then it is time to evaluate and qualify others who can provide the service. In my opinion MM+ provided WDW with mountains of data that have only been used for cost containment and not for the benefit of their customers. The most significant complaint against WDW has been crowd size for years and as of yet there has been no significant increase in capacity. All of the new lands coming on line in the next 5 years combined will not add enough capacity to address demand. As far as I can tell Disney has simply decided that the current size is the maximum they are willing to operate.
Laketravis
Well-Known Member
It's not about soda. It's about what constitutes what you called chump change.
So do you also go to your local grocery store when they install new freezer units to ask them how much they spent on them, and whether they could have done it cheaper? Please. And I don't care what certain posters here with agendas say about MM+. It has enhanced our experience in the parks. I do not believe for one second that JUST MM+ cost over 2 billion. The vast majority of that money went to infrastructure upgrades that were way overdue anyway. I have been going to WDW for over 40 years, so know all about how it used to be. Some things were better, some were worse.
Grimley1968
Well-Known Member
I couldn't agree more. When MM+ was first announced and as it was first implemented, Disney promised a bunch of interactive features to go along with it, many of which have not come to fruition. It also promised that wait times would be shorter.
Not only have wait times generally increased for many rides that were formerly walk-ons, I agree that the real purpose of it was the mountains of data you mention that have not made the guest experience better, but seem to have been used for dynamic staffing, and to throttle the amount of soda guests can put in their magic RFID cups.
"IT systems", not in reference to you but the other poster, consists of many more aspects than just new RFID devices given to guests to collect their data. Disney is still terribly lacking in many other aspects of "IT systems", especially their website, their wifi access and sometimes even getting the RFID devices to simply open room doors consistently. Disney is kind of a joke when it comes to "IT systems."
Laketravis
Well-Known Member
For those who may not have seen it, this might be an interesting read:
"The Messy Business Of Re-Inventing Happiness"
As @ford91explorer pointed out, it is rather curious why RapidFill did not take advantage of magic band technology.
"The Messy Business Of Re-Inventing Happiness"
As @ford91explorer pointed out, it is rather curious why RapidFill did not take advantage of magic band technology.
Jon81uk
Well-Known Member
Because it was cheaper/easier to buy an off the shelf beverage management solution http://www.validfill.com/
RustySpork
Oscar Mayer Memer
Yes, some of us do. Something about science demands it. People who accept things as they are, and challenge nothing are doing it wrong. The "it" in this equation is irrelevant.
I wouldn't have asked them if they could have done it cheaper - I would have tried to determine if the new higher costs for shopping there benefited me in any way. I agree MM+ was a huge kitchen sink project that was used to hide/include necessary infrastructure upgrades that had been neglected to the point of failure previously by management. Many of the promised benefits from MM+ will arrive with the pink unicorns ( never). The fact that management left the infrastructure reach that point in the first place should be cause for concern. After spending 2 billion ( the number being thrown around) will they now actually maintain it or in 5 more years will we be subjected to the "Son of My Magic" project?
My first visit was 1979 and returning usually not longer than every two years. Due to the changes imposed by MM+ the parks have become unworkable for us ( admittedly we have some rather unique limitations now that I would prefer not to get into) except for the "parties" where we do not have to plan months in advance. I am glad that it has enhanced your experience but it has totally degraded mine.