Sorry, but this is far from reality. Yes, there are cuts on the way--and yes, there are some seasonal changes on the table, but none are as drastic as you have made them out to be.
Actually, I'm afraid they may even be more drastic based on some recent conversations and correspondence.
WDI has not cut any projects already under preparation or work (meaning Space Mountain, Hall of Presidents and Stitch's Dance Party [or whatever it is called] are still a go) and there are plenty of projects still awaiting the green light. Star Tours specifically is still happening. ILM, Lucasfilm and WDI are too far into production to put the project on hold. If anything, the opening will be delayed, but the fact is that Tokyo's (and eventually Shanghai's) Tomorrowland(s) will be using the new film as a staple in their opening(s)--meaning that these resorts are driving the progress of the new film, regardless of the economic conditions. The worst case scenario for that project is that the film won't be stateside first...
So much ... where to begin? I didn't say Space or HoP had been cut. I specifically said I was trying to ascertain what their current status was. I do know that all future (i.e. NEW) WDW projects are not happening at this time. Do you have some knowledge that contradicts this?
As to Stitch's Whatever ... I didn't even think WDI had any part in that at all.
Star Tours falls into the category of when again, not if. But if Disney decides to hold it back for years, that's not exactly a good thing considering it took almost a decade of talking (and not!) to get it done.
You seem to have a lot of inside knowledge (so unlike the typical reaction here, I won't attack you, just question).
When last I had heard Star Tours 2.0 was only a given for the US parks. I have heard rumors that the OLC was about to greenlight a redo of their T-Land. Has this happened? That would make sense if ST is a go, but it would be pathetic if it opened there first in 4-5 years and not here within the next two.
And interesting comment about Shanghai. Last I heard Disney still wasn't close to a deal with the central government and I spent the summer working in China and spoke with officials dealing with The Mouse.
And at this stage of development, it doesn't make sense to say that Asian parks (including one that may not happen and, even if it does, is many, many, many years away) will drive the progress of the attraction. Besides, all the real development/prep work is done or close to it.
Much like Universal and Seaworld, Disney is keeping the projects necessary to keep attendance up while it holds others that were lesser in necessity. They need the newer attractions to couple with their many campaigns for lessened prices and deals.
I'd say Disney is doing nothing of the sort. At all.
American Idol isn't going to be a major, long-term attendance driver for magical WDW vacations.
And what else is opening? Nothing.
Even if HoP and Space Mtn get done, they aren't new. They're simply old, tired attractions that are finally getting some TLC ... Disney used to call that 'plussing' and 'refurbishing'.
It's not the same as Sea World opening a water park that likely will be ranked first in attendance after its first year. It's not the same as the new expensive attractions going into the Universal parks and Sea World. It's certainly not the same as the Wizarding World of Harry Potter.
Where are the new attractions?
Oh yeah, still on the drawing board ... the board that Rauslo and Staggs stuffed into the closet.
But I agree, Disney needs new attractions.
Cutting quality and raising prices overall (deals aside) isn't a smart way of running a creative enterprise no matter what state the economy is in.
The World Showcase won't likely see a later opening time as a whole, though the American Adventure may have its earliest show cut out to decrease some extra costs. Some pavilions may have staggered openings but not by more than a half hour at most. With Kim Possible now in the World Showcase, they are locked in for lengthier hours in the daytime, as the experience was not designed to operate past sunset.
As I said, WS opening 30-60 minutes later is under consideration. Considering how cheap Disney is, though, I could see them doing an AA late start. It's an every penny deal. Amazingly ignorant way of running the business. And considering some analysts have been saying it's time to dump Disney stock anyway, the Mouse will just look to cut even more.
The problem is Disney cut all the fat in the past decade, along with some muscle ... now, they're down to the bone in places and folks like Rasulo and Staggs still want to cut more.
Animal Kingdom management is not prepared (or willing) to relinquish its newly claimed "full-day" status, regardless of the economy. Animal Kingdom will not drop hours anytime soon (except for a possible 5:00 pm closing on some weekdays).
Not a newsflash here, but take a look at the schedule for next year. For most of the next three months the park is closing at 5. They would never close it earlier. However, if you stagger opening and closing 2/3rds of the park you can cut a lot of labor and save more pennies. So what if sections of the park may only be open six hours. That's a full day to Disney execs!
Some resorts have been targeted for potentially staggered closings but none will be shut down for more a period of a few months at a time. The goal is to keep all of the resorts active for as much time as possible so as to allow them to remain conditioned for full service when the economy picks back up (whenever that may be).
I'm over halfway through your response to mine and you've yet to substantially disagree with anything I wrote.
I never said Disney would close a resort for a year or years.
In regards to those two major members of WDI leaving, there have been talks but they have been nothing more than talks. And truth-be-told, both members in question have been considering leaving on their own accord for quite some time. If they leave, it will be a loss, but it won't be the end of Disney or of WDI.
Well, I'm not naming the individuals here, although I think most people can figure out one of them at least.
And whenever Disney loses big talent at WDI, it hurts.
Some of us are dreadfully tired of the Dueling Divas (aka Tony & Tom) and don't believe WDI can truly be a Dream Factory when it loses some of its best people.
Personally, until any piece of this "news" goes live officially, I take it with much salt. If there has been anyone able to withstand economic strife, it is Disney, and they will do what they have always done to adjust to the times. While I mean no offense in my response, I personally feel that the OP may be overacting; claiming Armageddon at the hands of two executives taking the brunt of the blame for a set of decisions that run far higher than them.
I don't take any 'offense' to your post. I love dealing with rational, intelligent people who have some sense of what is going on inside Disney. Clearly, you have some clue. And I'll repeat it again, but I don't see you disagreeing with most of what I said.
And I am not claiming Armegeddon, but I am stating that Disney is running its Parks and Resorts Division in a way that I don't believe is in the best interest of the guests in general, cast, shareholders, Disney's legacy and am I leaving anyone out? ...oh, and fanboys too! And I disagree with your point, except for Bob Iger, no one has a greater influence on what happens at WDW than Rasulo and Staggs ... followed by WDW's Marketing Machine and then its exec 'leadership' team.
Do I place the blame with Bob?
Ultimately, hell yeah I do. He has made some smart moves since taking the helm at Disney, but I think many people so reviled Michael Eisner (again, I don't quite get all of that but ...) he was given way too much credit for knowing what he's doing.
I'm not at all convinced. And with P&R, he has no special fondness for the product (which Eisner did), so he lets his numbers hacks run them.
Economic situations can only get worse with signs of alarm and panic such as these, so rather than freaking at the first sign of proactive motion within the parks, we must take the time to look at the issues on a more in depth, informed manner to find that what is going on is a progressive movement by the company to protect itself and the integrity of its parks. So again, I say that this original claim isn't "reality," rather a set of negative rumors based around more positive information.
Look at these protective actions as a sign of wise decision and company strength--not as weakness or impending doom. Though cuts may seem sad, they are made to protect the "larger picture," and in this situation, that is a good thing.
OK ... you had me until the very end. 'Protect the integrity of the parks?!??!' Even my buddy/WDI gadfly Lee MacDonald of LP.com wouldn't utter such a line ... well, maybe he would. Do you work for Disney?
Because you're spinning this like an expert here -- and no offense is intended, I'm just telling you how the above reads. I know there is nothing progressive about Disney and these cuts show a total lack of regard for the big picture and the integrity of Disney. Instead, they are small-minded moves designed to improve the bottom line for the next quarter and make sure tomorrow's stock price doesn't drop a few dimes. There is no long-term vision. If there was the MK wouldn't be so tired and stale when the last few years have been so good (and the 90s were great financially too!)
So now it's cut, cut, cut ... to and thru the bone ... and if long term the 'brand' suffers, so what? Rasulo and Staggs and Iger and all their minion WDW execs are pretty set for the rest of their lives (even guys like Phil Holmes have made loads on their exec compensation packages and stock over the years to live quite comfortably sans work) ... Disney will go on when these guys are dead and buried. The question is what kind of damage will they do and how long will it last?
Again, Busch and Universal have all sorts of difficulties yet they keep investing.
Disney is outsourcing business centers ... it's taking foamheads from the LTT (a move I would laud if it were done for the right reason) ... it's going to be laying off people who make tiny salaries ... etc ... etc ... it's all about saving pennies at a time when a visionary company would take advantage of the low cost of labor, supplies and construction to have its parks in amazing shape come 2-3 years down the road when the competition will look better than ever.
But visionary and Disney are two words that I don't place in the same sentence very much these days.
