So Comcast was the highest bidder for FOX, but FOX picked Disney instead...

[Castle Cake Apologist]

Disney is no longer just a small company run by Walt, where Walt can just say go do it. And it gets done without any thought about the money because Roy just found a way to take care of it.

Disney is now a large corporation with large budgetary requirements. As such budgets are put in place for things like maintenance. Its how all large corporations work. Disneyland is an old park with lots of attractions and areas that are older than many of us here. Which requires a large maintenance budget. There is only so many projects that can be fit into that budget. So yes some projects slip like TT and its paint. The hope is to try and tackle those projects either in the next budget or when a large scale project can be budgeted. Its why WDI pads a lot of their budgets to try and tackle some of these smaller projects that get pushed.

Thank you, but I'm well aware that Disney is a large corporation. They were also a large corporation in the late 80s and early 90s, and still managed to hold themselves accountable to their own standards. They have more money now than they've ever had, yet the parks rot.

Bad show is never acceptable, no matter how long you want to spend going on about corporate budgets. This is literally the company that invented themed entertainment and good show. They are one of the richest companies in the history of the world. They can afford to replace the peeling TT backdrops and fix the roof of the castle.

 

[Disney Irish]

Thank you, but I'm well aware that Disney is a large corporation. They were also a large corporation in the late 80s and early 90s, and still managed to hold themselves accountable to their own standards. They have more money now than they've ever had, yet the parks rot.

Bad show is never acceptable, no matter how long you want to spend going on about corporate budgets. This is literally the company that invented themed entertainment and good show. They are one of the richest companies in the history of the world. They can afford to replace the peeling TT backdrops and fix the roof of the castle.

Thank you for your opinion, and I appreciate it. I'm not saying its what I like or what should be acceptable to fans, all I'm trying to do is explain the complexity of corporate budgets. So maybe some would understand better why some decisions are made. The company is not the same company it was even 15 years ago. Its a different corporate structure. All I can say its a lot more complex than just getting someone to slap some paint and replace a roof.

 

[Castle Cake Apologist]

Thank you for your opinion, and I appreciate it. I'm not saying its what I like or what should be acceptable to fans, all I'm trying to do is explain the complexity of corporate budgets. So maybe some would understand better why some decisions are made. The company is not the same company it was even 15 years ago. Its a different corporate structure. All I can say its a lot more complex than just getting someone to slap some paint and replace a roof.

I think the biggest issue with all of this to me is that the TT Backdrop has been an issue for a very long time. The castle as well, but maybe not for quite as long. Even if quarterly budgets are the issue, why is this not being budgeted for? The castle is essentially the icon of the entire resort, so it seems completely unacceptable that it has been allowed to look the way that it does for so long. Heck, some would say it's the icon for the entire company. Perhaps they need to be asking for more money, considering other arms of the company are able to drop literal billions of dollars on acquiring the content of another company.

Is there not a secondary amount budgeted for routine maintenance and unexpected issues? If not, that seems idiotic at best.

I worked Ops at WDW for many years. Generally, if we noticed a glaring show or maintenance issue, it was reported and fixed that night 9 times out of 10. Why is it not this way at Disneyland?

 

[Deleted member 107043]

They were also a large corporation in the late 80s and early 90s, and still managed to hold themselves accountable to their own standards.

Not disputing this, but I have to call this out. TWDCo bares little resemblance to the company Eisner oversaw back in the 80s and early 90s. It's grown exponentially since Iger took over, and 20th Century Fox is only going to make it worse bigger. According to the Googles Disney currently has an estimated 195,000 employees in 45 countries, with multiple lines of business - and that's without the Fox merger. I could never defend Disney for bad show at its parks, but it's not surprising considering how greedy they are and how massive the operation is that they are trying to scale.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Disney is no longer just a small company run by Walt, where Walt can just say go do it. And it gets done without any thought about the money because Roy just found a way to take care of it.

Disney is now a large corporation with large budgetary requirements. As such budgets are put in place for things like maintenance. Its how all large corporations work. Disneyland is an old park with lots of attractions and areas that are older than many of us here. Which requires a large maintenance budget. There is only so many projects that can be fit into that budget. So yes some projects slip like TT and its paint. The hope is to try and tackle those projects either in the next budget or when a large scale project can be budgeted. Its why WDI pads a lot of their budgets to try and tackle some of these smaller projects that get pushed.

I caution too much of a comparison with a typical nyse company and Disney...

Disney is not a “speculator” or dabbling in an “emerging market”...and they don’t sell “product” in the traditional format.

Their entire business model is tied to sentimentality on a level perhaps never seen. At least not going on 100 years.

It’s a strength AND a weakness...in many ways.

 

[Disney Irish]

I think the biggest issue with all of this to me is that the TT Backdrop has been an issue for a very long time. The castle as well, but maybe not for quite as long. Even if quarterly budgets are the issue, why is this not being budgeted for? The castle is essentially the icon of the entire resort, so it seems completely unacceptable that it has been allowed to look the way that it does for so long. Heck, some would say it's the icon for the entire company. Perhaps they need to be asking for more money, considering other arms of the company are able to drop literal billions of dollars on acquiring the content of another company.

Is there not a secondary amount budgeted for routine maintenance and unexpected issues? If not, that seems idiotic at best.

I worked Ops at WDW for many years. Generally, if we noticed a glaring show or maintenance issue, it was reported and fixed that night 9 times out of 10. Why is it not this way at Disneyland?

I don't know when you worked at WDW, but I do know that WDW was/is known to have its own issues reported by insiders. I can't speak specifically about the actual budgets as I'm not an insider with access to that information. But I have worked many corporate jobs my entire adult life. So I do know the corporate budgetary issues very well.

For TT I can say that its really an issue that requires constant attention. And because of that its hard to budget for it. Basically after the last time they refreshed TT it was already looking worn less than a couple months later. There is no shade over there, so no protection from the elements. Its just the nature of being beaten by the SoCal sun day after day. Which is why I hope with the Mickey ride being rumored to come and take over the area that they find a way to bring shade. Because with some shade to those backdrops would help minimize how quickly it gets worn.

As for the castle, most of the issues are not seen by the public unless they are specifically looking for it. Like that dent that MC likes to point out, unless you specifically know where to look and use a camera to zoom in you'd miss it. Also a lot of the issues came from the 60th anniversary fixtures. It damaged some of the underlying supports from what I understand. As such is going to require a lot more budget to fix than just the normal maintenance would account for. So will likely get a refurb here in the near future. Until then they just appear to be trying to patch it and make it presentable.

I know that fans like to point out the flaws of management, but a majority of what the fans point out are not noticed by the public. As such are not glaring show issues that some appear to make it. That is not to say it shouldn't be fixed, because it should. But to me its at least understandable why some of that stuff slips off the priority list.

 

[Disney Irish]

I caution too much of a comparison with a typical nyse company and Disney...

Disney is not a “speculator” or dabbling in an “emerging market”...and they don’t sell “product” in the traditional format.

Their entire business model is tied to sentimentality on a level perhaps never seen. At least not going on 100 years.

It’s a strength AND a weakness...in many ways.

Externally it may look like its business model is tied to sentimentality. But the internal corporate structure in terms of budgetary concerns is just like any other Fortune 100 company. Specifically when compared to its contemporaries like other media conglomerates.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Externally it may look like its business model is tied to sentimentality. But the internal corporate structure in terms of budgetary concerns is just like any other Fortune 100 company. Specifically when compared to its contemporaries like other media conglomerates.

That wasn’t my point...I’m saying their success isn’t as cut and dry analytics as the apples, googles of the world.

 

[Disney Irish]

That wasn’t my point...I’m saying their success isn’t as cut and dry analytics as the apples, googles of the world.

Actually I would say its almost exactly like Apple, as they both have a fan base specifically devoted to their products and nitpick every aspect of those products.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Actually I would say its almost exactly like Apple, as they both have a fan base specifically devoted to their products and nitpick every aspect of those products.

Nope...but we shall see longrun

If Disney want to run off quarterlies forever...then Uncle walt will be having breakfast with Thomas Edison and George Eastman permenantly

 

[Disney Irish]

Nope...but we shall see longrun

If Disney want to run off quarterlies forever...then Uncle walt will be having breakfast with Thomas Edison and George Eastman permenantly

Not sure I understand your point. Again you're speaking in references that you think others understand, but we don't.

Disney is run as a Fortune 100 corporation now. Its not run as the same company that Walt started 95 years ago.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Not sure I understand your point. Again you're speaking in references that you think others understand, but we don't.

Disney is run as a Fortune 100 corporation now. Its not run as the same company that Walt started 95 years ago.

The point is...and it doesn’t matter if you get it because you’re adamantly, non objectively opposed to it...is there is peril in Disney operating “like anyone else” that can be explained by a newspaper or entry level college textbook.

That’s a prediction...but one grounded in the real world. We’ll see where it goes.

 

[Disney Irish]

The point is...and it doesn’t matter if you get it because you’re adamantly, non objectively opposed to it...is there is peril in Disney operating “like anyone else” that can be explained by a newspaper or entry level college textbook.

That’s a prediction...but one grounded in the real world. We’ll see where it goes.

I'm being objective which is why I can see Disney is run like a corporation.

If you speak clearly and not in some obscure inside joke references that you tend to do. Then I would be happy to have an intelligent conversation with you.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I'm being objective which is why I can see Disney is run like a corporation.

If you speak clearly and not in some obscure inside joke references that you tend to do. Then I would be happy to have an intelligent conversation with you.

And again...you didn’t get the point. Your understanding of markets and business practices is always impressive...but there’s always more to the game. Disney has always been one with natural advantages...a big one being somewhat recession proof. Not all “fortune 100” companies are. There is an inherent Difference to it. Just one thing.

Now they are run by dividend chasers who have altered that formula. It’s something to watch

 

[Disney Irish]

And again...you didn’t get the point. Your understanding of markets and business practices is always impressive...but there’s always more to the game. Disney has always been one with natural advantages...a big one being somewhat recession proof. Now they are run by dividend chasers who have altered that formula. It’s something to watch

I don’t get your points most of the time because your points are never clear and include some obscure reference which are never understandable. Like Edison and Eastman having breakfast with Walt. No clue what you meant by that. Trying to guess what you mean makes it hard to have an intelligent conversation.

Sure there is more to the business game. But in this thread we were speaking about a specific topic within business which is budgets and why some projects aren't getting the attention fans think they deserve. Budgets within large corporations are fairly uniform and standard across the majority of Fortune 100 companies. So we can speak intelligently about budgets when it comes to Disney and their practices because it'll be pretty much the same at any large corporation.

As far as Disney having a natural advantage, please clarify what you mean by that.

 

[VJ]

I don't know when you worked at WDW, but I do know that WDW was/is known to have its own issues reported by insiders. I can't speak specifically about the actual budgets as I'm not an insider with access to that information. But I have worked many corporate jobs my entire adult life. So I do know the corporate budgetary issues very well.

For TT I can say that its really an issue that requires constant attention. And because of that its hard to budget for it. Basically after the last time they refreshed TT it was already looking worn less than a couple months later. There is no shade over there, so no protection from the elements. Its just the nature of being beaten by the SoCal sun day after day. Which is why I hope with the Mickey ride being rumored to come and take over the area that they find a way to bring shade. Because with some shade to those backdrops would help minimize how quickly it gets worn.

As for the castle, most of the issues are not seen by the public unless they are specifically looking for it. Like that dent that MC likes to point out, unless you specifically know where to look and use a camera to zoom in you'd miss it. Also a lot of the issues came from the 60th anniversary fixtures. It damaged some of the underlying supports from what I understand. As such is going to require a lot more budget to fix than just the normal maintenance would account for. So will likely get a refurb here in the near future. Until then they just appear to be trying to patch it and make it presentable.

I know that fans like to point out the flaws of management, but a majority of what the fans point out are not noticed by the public. As such are not glaring show issues that some appear to make it. That is not to say it shouldn't be fixed, because it should. But to me its at least understandable why some of that stuff slips off the priority list.

Of course Sleeping Beauty Castle can go without a refurb! It's not like it's been a world-renowned icon for 62 years or anything, and it's definitely not the crown jewel of Disneyland itself.

 

[Disney Irish]

Of course Sleeping Beauty Castle can go without a refurb! It's not like it's been a world-renowned icon for 62 years or anything, and it's definitely not the crown jewel of Disneyland itself.

I'm hoping they'll do a small refurb when switching over to Christmas Castle, and then after they remove it in spring 2019.

 

[BrianLo]

Again, I'm not talking about level of investment, but overall quality of investment. I'm not so ignorant as to say that Disney isn't doing "enough" in Anaheim. But maybe outside of Battle Escape at SWL, (I can't comment on Marvel Land, but I have concerns), the quality of investment in the parks has been Six Flags-level at best.

Perhaps some of you folks have hang ups over simulators, but the Millenium falcon ride isn’t even in the same Universe as a Six Flags level investment. Or the rest of that land in general.

 

[George Lucas on a Bench]

Some of us are just tired of going to these theme parks and looking at screens.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Perhaps some of you folks have hang ups over simulators, but the Millenium falcon ride isn’t even in the same Universe as a Six Flags level investment. Or the rest of that land in general.

It’s another sim though...and likely a short one because of capacity issues.

It’s not that they can’t do these well...they can...but Isaac Newton was right occasionally....it can’t be all trackless, spinners and simulators.

A semi ballsy Star Wars ride is now over 40 years overdue...but it’s becoming clear that Disney just doesn’t get Star Wars - just my opinion.