Seas with Nemo and Friends: anglerfish not working

[njDizFan]

How am I even remotely bending your words? You seem to be going in a round about manner of saying what I just said. I think you are just not fond of the blunt viewpoint I provided in reference of the matter. If the attraction went under for repair of the "main effect" I can see you post now if the attraction being closed.

For saying you aren't expecting an immediate repair of something you sure do insinuate you are. If you work in real world business then you should understand what it takes to repair something. Even if a main effect is not operating to par it should not be prioritized to shut down and repair if it still generates sufficient hourly numbers. That would only irritate more guests than appease.



Don't let them get to you. I go to enjoy myself and I do just that each and every time, several times a year. If someone goes and makes it a mission to point things out that are broke or not operating then they obviously do not know how to enjoy themselves. Wait… this isn't the grumpy thread… or is it?

I think that is where the problem is,you don't have to be scrutinizing every detail to see many things aren't up to standard. I love each one of my disney vacations and wouldn't trade those memories for anything. I certainly don't go there with a magnifying glass trying to find every last deficiency. I go there expecting everything to work.

I'm sure there a many minor things that I would not even notice but when there are major show effects not working and from previous trips remember seeing them it makes me raise an eyebrow. Maybe management doesn't care the way they used to, or are their hands are tied do to budget restrictions. Either way when I go on my annual excursion and look forward to seeing the Yeti move, and the boulder on BTMR, and all the fountains functioning in FoN or even effects that have been gone now for years like the smoke on TSI, I get upset that they aren't working. It doesn't ruin my vacation it just makes me think about spending my vacation dollars at another disney resort next time.

BTW.. to all you shareholders...how has these budget restrictions helping your stock value. Last I looked its the same price on July 1st 2000 and July 1st 2011(thanks to a recent upswing).

 

[ScoutN]

Funny you list items that have all been exploited online. Bandwagoning is in.

 

[njDizFan]

Funny you list items that have all been exploited online. Bandwagoning is in.

Just citing some major examples. If they have already been exploited then it seems a lot of people must care.

Should I have made a more comprehensive list?

 

[ScoutN]

Just citing some major examples. If they have already been exploited then it seems a lot of people must care.

Should I have made a more comprehensive list?

Complaining is no longer caring. That has gone by the wayside with time.

Making a list is whether you feel it is relevant. It would only be something to humor me even more than the constant threads on an irrelevant matter.

The internet has exploited what has been occurring for years. There is just new ways of communicating it at this point.

 

[devoy1701]

It's different for me. It's not about going on vacation and looking for maintenance problems. I have a critical eye, and being a passholder (and my interest in the company and theme park history has helped) my regular return visits multiple times per month has lead me to look beyond just the story being told while on the ride. I have ridden some of these things so many times over the past 5 years that I just "look around" and notice things that are different, or not working like they were before.

In a lot of cases too my repeat visits allow me to have more "fun" than people who only visit once every year or two as well because I can take the parks in at a leisurely pace, take time to look at those details that most people overlook because they are busily trying to get from one attraction to the next, etc.

It has nothing to do with not being able to have fun...we have plenty of fun every time we visit WDW.

 

[Kamikaze]

The upcharge you propose is already there in the Disney price... in the premium Disney charges compared to it's competition.. justified by the experience and atmosphere Disney is known for. Part of that experience, from the begining has been cleanliness and show standards. Why ask if we would be willing to pay more to get those things... we already are!

I'm chopping up your post, but I'm only commenting on the part that applies to my post.

WDW's competition is USF and SeaWorld. SeaWorld is $71.99. USF is $85.00. Disney is $85.00

I don't see a price premium. In fact, at those prices, Disney provides a better quality than the competition, which is what you're trying to say.

I do agree that the standards have declined, but those standards have to be accounted for somewhere. Currently, they are not, which is why they suffer.

 

[devoy1701]

Looks like Evan is back in this thread! :lookaroun

 

[Pioneer Hall]

Last warning folks...state your points but don't make it personal. The point of this forum is to agree to disagree. You can state your points without being insulting. Regardless of what good points you make, if it contains anything personal it will be taken down, no matter which side of the argument you are on. Keep it clean...I know you all can.

 

[space42]

I'm chopping up your post, but I'm only commenting on the part that applies to my post.

WDW's competition is USF and SeaWorld. SeaWorld is $71.99. USF is $85.00. Disney is $85.00

I don't see a price premium. In fact, at those prices, Disney provides a better quality than the competition, which is what you're trying to say.

I do agree that the standards have declined, but those standards have to be accounted for somewhere. Currently, they are not, which is why they suffer.

Where are the standards not accounted for??

For the people who keep saying that Disney simply cannot afford to maintain its show quality due to budgets and such. It would be nice for someone to explain how Disney was able to maintain this quality from the mid 50's through the mid 90's while remaining incredibly profitable.
I don't understand the apologetic attitude either. They are one of the most profitable corporations in entertainment history. If I didn't know better from reading these posts, I'd think that Disney was on the verge of loosing money. Yet ticket prices keep climbing and the show keeps getting diminished.

 

[celluloid]

The pessimism on these boards are amazing. They could've repaired what was broken and had the ride back up in a month or two. Disney is self-insured, so it isn't as though there's some evil insurance company forking over dough to have the entire show made over. I'm sure the costs of the refurb are 10x more than they would've been if they would've just repaired the Under New Management version.

Here's a perfect example of Disney doing what the fans wanted and people still not giving them credit for it. Amazing.

As devoy1701 has said there was no complaining of it being the classic show brought back in my post. I am so happy about something non movie related being in Adventureland and a show they should not of removed the spirit of in the first place. It also does not change the declining upkeep of major highlight effects in attractions around the resort.
I would say what you did was generalizing with a pessimistic crowd you seem to find. I find a lot of things to be in the opposite direction of praising every piece of pavement WDW paves. But that does not really matter.
That is fine if people want to get happy about it, but I am not going to overly rejoice over a decision that should of been one made long before a fire broke out inside the building. Please don't generalize. It causes troubles and could lead to the attacking mode that DisneyInsider has stated we are trying to avoid.

 

[AndyMagic]

Comparatively, the costs for maintenance between the two should be roughly the same, on a 1 to 1 basis. Looking at it that way, Disney is doing more. Note: Yes, Potterland is in good shape, and it will remain so. Other attractions are in very rough condition, however.

The last ten times I visited both USF and IOA I can't remember when a major effect wasn't working. Spider-Man still has every last drop of water and flame of fire working on full blast. Even the temperamental rides like Jurassic Park are constantly being worked on and when a dinosaur breaks, they instantly begin fixing it. The only major effect that was ever removed to my memory was the water vortex on Poseidon and even that was up and running after fans complained. The issue isn't that effects are broken during a particular ride at Disney. The problem is that lately (and only in the last few years) Disney has been so slow to fix them that thread after thread keep popping up about various effects being down. This never used to happen.

 

[Kamikaze]

The last ten times I visited both USF and IOA I can't remember when a major effect wasn't working. Spider-Man still has every last drop of water and flame of fire working on full blast. Even the temperamental rides like Jurassic Park are constantly being worked on and when a dinosaur breaks, they instantly begin fixing it. The only major effect that was ever removed to my memory was the water vortex on Poseidon and even that was up and running after fans complained. The issue isn't that effects are broken during a particular ride at Disney. The problem is that lately (and only in the last few years) Disney has been so slow to fix them that thread after thread keep popping up about various effects being down. This never used to happen.

Last time I went on JP, it was destroyed. Holes in the dinosaurs, they barely moved, etc. I haven't been since Potter opened, so if its changed in the meantime, thats one thing. But the place was a wreck the last time I went.

Where are the standards not accounted for??

For the people who keep saying that Disney simply cannot afford to maintain its show quality due to budgets and such. It would be nice for someone to explain how Disney was able to maintain this quality from the mid 50's through the mid 90's while remaining incredibly profitable.
I don't understand the apologetic attitude either. They are one of the most profitable corporations in entertainment history. If I didn't know better from reading these posts, I'd think that Disney was on the verge of loosing money. Yet ticket prices keep climbing and the show keeps getting diminished.

Disney almost went of out business in the early 80s.

Once again, and its a tired refrain, but this is what you all get for getting rid of Eisner. When he was running TWDC, he knew the value of show.

 

[CJR]

So because the price of a ticket jumped up a few bucks you expect a new ride? :veryconfu

I never said anything about a new ride, but rides that work properly would be nice. I realize that it takes time to approve things, but what should take days/weeks often turns to months/years at WDW. It's an insult to guests to charge what they charge and not offer the finest form of entertainment they can provide. I don't believe they're putting on the best show they can for their guests and that's where my problem lies. The reality for me is that it should have nothing to do with the price of admission. If it were $30 to get into the parks, I still believe they should provide the finest entertainment they can. Disney was built on that type of thinking.

I really hate WDW's upper management, so I'm not even going to get started. I want them all overhauled. It's not going to happen though. I feel like WDW management has lost the meaning of the following quote from Walt Disney:

"I think by this time my staff, my young group of executives, and everyone else are convinced that Walt is right. The quality will out. And so I think they're going to stay with that policy because it's proved that it's a good business policy. Give the people everything you can give them."

 

[space42]

Last time I went on JP, it was destroyed. Holes in the dinosaurs, they barely moved, etc. I haven't been since Potter opened, so if its changed in the meantime, thats one thing. But the place was a wreck the last time I went.



Disney almost went of out business in the early 80s.

Once again, and its a tired refrain, but this is what you all get for getting rid of Eisner. When he was running TWDC, he knew the value of show.

HUH? They most certainly did not ALMOST go out of business in 1984. Yes, Saul Steinberg (a majority shareholder) attempted to take over the company and sell off the pieces (like the parks and resorts.. oh wait.. history repeating in 2011?) but he was bought out by the Bass brothers. That is a far cry from going out of business.

 

[Pioneer Hall]

HUH? They most certainly did not ALMOST go out of business in 1984. Yes, Saul Steinberg (a majority shareholder) attempted to take over the company and sell off the pieces (like the parks and resorts.. oh wait.. history repeating in 2011?) but he was bought out by the Bass brothers. That is a far cry from going out of business.

There really is no question that the company was in some serious financial trouble back in the mid-80s. There is a reason that Roy was able to get rid of Ron Miller and bring in Eisner and Wells. The company was literally on the brink because every area was being mismanaged. Had a change in leadership not come in the company would very likely have ceased to exist in the way we have known it.

 

[SeaCastle]

Last time I went on JP, it was destroyed. Holes in the dinosaurs, they barely moved, etc. I haven't been since Potter opened, so if its changed in the meantime, thats one thing. But the place was a wreck the last time I went.



Disney almost went of out business in the early 80s.

Once again, and its a tired refrain, but this is what you all get for getting rid of Eisner. When he was running TWDC, he knew the value of show.

But the parks were just as bad off (if not worse) under Eisner. Most of the reason why the parks were so bad now was because they were the results of changes made under Eisner. Like the Aladin spinner? Eisner wanted something there because he thought the center of Adventureland was a waste of space. Or the incredibly shortened Tiki Room: Under New Management? That was ordered by Eisner, too. Or Beastlie Kingdomme being cut from the budget of Disney's Animal Kingdom? It goes on and on...

You can make tons or arguments about the parks, who ran it better, etc. Of course, Eisner outwardly liked the parks more, but didn't like spending money on them. He hired the MBA consultants that made the cost-cutting changes that we're still dealing with today. Iger certainly isn't a hero (and is in some ways just as bad as Eisner) but now that things that previously went unnoticed for years are being brought to attention, folks are painting Eisner like he was the Messiah, but the truth is that we were just as bad off under him as we are now.

 

[Pioneer Hall]

But the parks were just as bad off (if not worse) under Eisner. Most of the reason why the parks were so bad now was because they were the results of changes made under Eisner. Like the Aladin spinner? Eisner wanted something there because he thought the center of Adventureland was a waste of space. Or the incredibly shortened Tiki Room: Under New Management? That was ordered by Eisner, too. Or Beastlie Kingdomme being cut from the budget of Disney's Animal Kingdom? It goes on and on...

You can make tons or arguments about the parks, who ran it better, etc. Of course, Eisner outwardly liked the parks more, but didn't like spending money on them. He hired the MBA consultants that made the cost-cutting changes that we're still dealing with today. Iger certainly isn't a hero (and is in some ways just as bad as Eisner) but now that things that previously went unnoticed for years are being brought to attention, folks are painting Eisner like he was the Messiah, but the truth is that we were just as bad off under him as we are now.

You seem to be summing up his legacy as CEO in just the last few years he served in the position. If it wasn't for Eisner, those parks could have very well fallen apart. He expanded them to what they are and invested in them quite a bit when previous management had lost all interest in it. Also, being CEO of such a large company comes with other concerns as well. Eisner took a movie studio that was becoming the laughingstock of Hollywood and turned it into one of the largest players in the game. There is a reason that they brought the MGM name into the park in 1989, and it was because they didn't believe the Disney movie name could sell. I think a lot of us believe that Eisner overstayed his welcome towards the end of his tenure, but to overlook over 15 years of progress isn't fair to him as well.

 

[SeaCastle]

You seem to be summing up his legacy as CEO in just the last few years he served in the position. If it wasn't for Eisner, those parks could have very well fallen apart. He expanded them to what they are and invested in them quite a bit when previous management had lost all interest in it. Also, being CEO of such a large company comes with other concerns as well. Eisner took a movie studio that was becoming the laughingstock of Hollywood and turned it into one of the largest players in the game. There is a reason that they brought the MGM name into the park in 1989, and it was because they didn't believe the Disney movie name could sell. I think a lot of us believe that Eisner overstayed his welcome towards the end of his tenure, but to overlook over 15 years of progress isn't fair to him as well.

I'm not going to deny that he helped turn the company around, and it is quite true that he saved it, based on what I've read. But I believe, based on the evidence above, that him back at the company would just be more of the same old, same old. (Again, his earlier reputation aside.)

 

[flynnibus]

I'm chopping up your post, but I'm only commenting on the part that applies to my post.

WDW's competition is USF and SeaWorld. SeaWorld is $71.99. USF is $85.00. Disney is $85.00

I don't see a price premium. In fact, at those prices, Disney provides a better quality than the competition, which is what you're trying to say.

I do agree that the standards have declined, but those standards have to be accounted for somewhere. Currently, they are not, which is why they suffer.

Disney does charge a premium... those other guys charge those prices in the vacuum behind Disney. They charge those because Disney charges more and they can creep up behind Disney and still look 'cheaper'. The only park that dares charge more then Disney is USO - and they can do it because they can target a different demographic (more thrill) and they are the top of the heap in the area for that.

Disney charges a premium at the gate... in their hotels... in their merchandise... in their food... everywhere.

People pay the Disney premium because of historically what Disney has delivered and what they promise to deliver now. The flaw is what they are delivering now is weak compared to their track record - and are erroding that premium grace consumers give them.

Your question might be rephrased as.. 'Would you pay more in admission to have Disney of today live up to Disney of yesterday?'

To which I'd argue - if the price reflected an increase in quality.. probably. But as we see with the various properties on-site today.. the relative increase in cost isn't really mapping to quality improvements. Compare the quality of the deluxe vs the moderates, etc. There are differences, but are the deluxes really offering higher show standards, customer sat, or cleanliness? No. They are charging for differentiators - not quality bumps. The food tiers are marginal as well when you move up the price ladder.

The problem isn't Disney margins can't afford these standards - it's Disney's standards are lower and aren't willing to make finances follow success.. rather putting finances first. It's the curse of the modern public corporation and Disney isn't willing to fight it. Compare it to the Google founders who have from the start.. taken the opposite approach with being a public company.

The evolution of WDP into TWDC and the global conglomerate it is now.. will never allow the P&R division to live in the 'show first' attitude it had under Walt and his direct successors.

 

[flynnibus]

Just a point on the angler fish. There seems to be a lot of arguing about this, but the reality is we don't know what the issue is. Perhaps it was looked at immediately and they are waiting for a part, or perhaps there is a larger issue than something that can be simply fixed by an overnight crew.

Well.. Nemo has been open for roughly 4 years. Has it taken that long to get their replacement part? This effect has been notoriously unreliable from the start - and here we are years later and the problem persists. The issue is not 'parts availability' for the night crew.. and if its flawed, is 4 years not enough time to fix it?