Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
I was there this morning. When were you last at Disneyland Paris?Hohoho, you obviously havent been watching that Parq for a while. you think WDW has maintenance issues?
I was there this morning. When were you last at Disneyland Paris?Hohoho, you obviously havent been watching that Parq for a while. you think WDW has maintenance issues?
Wdw customers are under the impression that wdw is not the least well maintained park complex lb for lb at presentI was there this morning. When were you last at Disneyland Paris?
Yes, there was a time Disneyland Paris was in a pretty rough state for all the reasons I think everyone knows. The difference between DLP and WDW is that they spent a lot of money restoring their parks once the debt monkey was finally off their backs and have managed to keep the maintenance up. WDW just seems to run things into the ground and then every 20 years or so do a major refurb.Wdw customers are under the impression that wdw is not the least well maintained park complex lb for lb at present
…they are wrong
Even if that were the case, the ability to threaten change remains. That’s the problem, that the district can apply pressure regarding anything in the future. There’s no mechanism to uphold any of these hypothetical promises.It could be that basically nothing is going to change in practical terms.
But they did buy the land and here they are and what came down the pike in practical terms ended up being a lot less dramatic than the fire and brimstone that was being threatened from Tallahassee.The real problem here isn’t the current clown show…that will pass
The problem for Disney is RCID allowed them to operate in a certain way that was good for business and propped up their whole company at times.
Now they are subject to meddling. And if that was the deal…they would have NEVER bought the land in the first place
The ability to threaten change was never going away, regardless of the outcome of this.Even if that were the case, the ability to threaten change remains. That’s the problem, that the district can apply pressure regarding anything in the future. There’s no mechanism to uphold any of these hypothetical promises.
But they did buy the land and here they are and what came down the pike in practical terms ended up being a lot less dramatic than the fire and brimstone that was being threatened from Tallahassee.
Sure, it's an annoyance going forward but I think it's a little like this:
Disney could absolutely challenge and win. That’s not getting the short end of the stick. Just fighting would make them less of a target going forward because it’s not a win. Making a win more likely only invites further aggression because the root issue is never resolved and cannot be resolved.The ability to threaten change was never going away, regardless of the outcome of this.
They were going to be getting the short end of the stick, regardless. The only question was, how short they wanted to let that end become.
Please refer to my robot chicken reference above. :/
I'm in almost the same boat, except I naturally now look even further East to Tokyo Disneyland to get my Disney Resort fix. I've lost track of how many times I cancelled and re-planned that last trip to Tokyo for 2020, but it's back on my radar again for later this year or Spring '24.
The only difference is the Disney Look is still in total control at Tokyo and the CM's there always behave as good as they look!
As for Florida, I found this last paragraph in an otherwise slanted AP article released today to have a refreshingly good point about RCID...
"The creation of the self-governing district was instrumental in Disney's decision to build near Orlando in the 1960s. The company had told the state it planned to build a futuristic city that would include a transit system and urban planning innovations, so the company needed autonomy in building and deciding how to use the land. The futuristic city never materialized and instead morphed into a second theme park that opened in 1982." -Associated Press, February 27th, 2023
It's a very valid point, one that seems to have been lost in many discussions, about why the RCID was created in the first place and why it was given the unusual autonomy that it was in 1966.
I found it to be a good point that seems to have been lost lately: The reasons why RCID was created in 1966 no longer exist, and never will exist.
If I were Universal or Sea World, I wouldn't want it to be known that Disney World has stricter government safety regulations than I have at my parks up the road.
If safety regulations do change for WDW under this new government setup, it will be interesting to see how the other theme park operators respond to that.
If the changes to RCID just come down to stuff like county tax rates and costs of ambulance services or fire departments, then I imagine Universal will not bother to get involved.
As for taxation and county control of WDW property? I would imagine the Orlando counties are salivating over that.
Show me where, in the Reedy Creek Act where it states the reasons for creating the district, that it mentions the building of a city. No
RCID was not created in 1966. And, from the charter, was created to promote tourism. I'd say that still exists.
This kind of shows you really don't know what you are talking about. The other theme park regulators aren't subject to the more stringent RCID safety regulations today.
Again, this shows you know very little about this whole situation. As has been pointed out here repeatedly, Disney already pays taxes to Orange and Osceola counties, the maximum allowed under the state Constitution. If the district had gone away completely, the counties would have been responsible for Reedy Creek's debt without an ounce of additional revenue from Disney.
Under the FL constitution, special districts are allowed to tax beyond the constitutional limits, which is what Reedy Creek did, but only to the extent that the voters of the district (e.g. Disney) approve.
Not like Disney had anything new on the horizon, anyway.Did you see the board?
There are literally morons now in control of their planning/zoning
That may prove to be the worst case possible
Yes, there was a time Disneyland Paris was in a pretty rough state for all the reasons I think everyone knows. The difference between DLP and WDW is that they spent a lot of money restoring their parks once the debt monkey was finally off their backs and have managed to keep the maintenance up. WDW just seems to run things into the ground and then every 20 years or so do a major refurb.
There really is no comparison between the condition of the rides right now at Paris versus Florida. Nothing I went on seemed rough around the edges.
Why? What did you do?I can’t believe I’m not banned from this thread!
If you used the word Burbank in your response, he would be less confused.A government punishing a company for exercising its right to free speech. I’m not sure what you’re confused about given how many times it’s been stated.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.