Spirited News, Observations & Thoughts IV

[Goofyernmost]

This is a problem too in the way it is handled by Disney today. It's becoming more about parents having a vicarious enjoyment, and not their own enjoyment. It means they're being pushed aside once their kids grow up and they have even more disposable income.

I agree with what you are saying but I don't think it is entirely Disney's fault. I think it is a combination of people taking themselves way to seriously in this day and age and unable to relax enough to enjoy what they see. They don't see the greatness of it. It is also connected in the way that they are unable to feel comfortable going unless they can say that the love seeing it through the kids eyes. If they say they also enjoy it on it's own merit, they feel that they will be looked at like they have three heads. Old age peer pressure.

I, was lucky, I never saw it through my kids eyes or my grandkids eyes before I saw it through my own.

 

[GoofGoof]

This is a problem too in the way it is handled by Disney today. It's becoming more about parents having a vicarious enjoyment, and not their own enjoyment. It means they're being pushed aside once their kids grow up and they have even more disposable income.

There is a big and lucrative market for adults without kids. I'm not even talking about teens and young adults. Anyone with kids will tell you that those little buggers are expensive. I have a few aunt/uncle couples in my family who never had kids for various reasons. They have the most disposable income. There is also a market for adults traveling without their kids (either as a getaway or for business). Disney in the past would focus somewhat on these guests with PI at night and some high end restaurants. Unfortunately PI is gone and the signatures are watered down by DDP and lack of enforced dress codes. They really should probably look for ways to attract and keep these guests.

 

[StarWarsGirl]

It's not whether they have it or not, it's whether they have it in levels that work for an operation like a theme park resort. You want Annual Passholders to be people who still spend a good bit on other items, otherwise they're a loss. This was part of Six Flags' problem, they lowered prices to attract more teens and young adults but they never spent money once there. For right or wrong, the increased presence of teens, as well as the increased focus on rides that appeal to that market, also alienated other groups with more disposable income that were also spending more money in the parks.

Teens and college students. The older teens who would likely come through are (In general) not going to act like the younger groups. And college students, for the most part, are more understanding of adults and potentially being annoying, especially the ones who are in a professional environment and therefore have the money to spend.

And yes, they will be buying other things. I can guarantee you I'll spend some dough when I come to WDW in January and my last trip to Hershey I spent more on food and other stuff then I did on the ticket for the day (which was discounted but still). So I respectfully disagree on both counts.

 

[StarWarsGirl]

There is a big and lucrative market for adults without kids. I'm not even talking about teens and young adults. Anyone with kids will tell you that those little buggers are expensive. I have a few aunt/uncle couples in my family who never had kids for various reasons. They have the most disposable income. There is also a market for adults traveling without their kids (either as a getaway or for business). Disney in the past would focus somewhat on these guests with PI at night and some high end restaurants. Unfortunately PI is gone and the signatures are watered down by DDP and lack of enforced dress codes. They really should probably look for ways to attract and keep these guests.

When PI closed, my parents thought it was because of a potentially unwanted crowd. What do you all think? More of a way to cut costs or get rid of unwanted crowds? I wouldn't know as much because I was too young to visit PI

 

[lazyboy97o]

I agree with what you are saying but I don't think it is entirely Disney's fault. I think it is a combination of people taking themselves way to seriously in this day and age and unable to relax enough to enjoy what they see. They don't see the greatness of it. It is also connected in the way that they are unable to feel comfortable going unless they can say that the love seeing it through the kids eyes. If they say they also enjoy it on it's own merit, they feel that they will be looked at like they have three heads. Old age peer pressure.

I, was lucky, I never saw it through my kids eyes or my grandkids eyes before I saw it through my own.

There was a time when Disneyland and Walt Disney World were considered great, respectable places for adults to visit. That was very much the aim of parks.

Teens and college students. The older teens who would likely come through are (In general) not going to act like the younger groups. And college students, for the most part, are more understanding of adults and potentially being annoying, especially the ones who are in a professional environment and therefore have the money to spend.

And yes, they will be buying other things. I can guarantee you I'll spend some dough when I come to WDW in January and my last trip to Hershey I spent more on food and other stuff then I did on the ticket for the day (which was discounted but still). So I respectfully disagree on both counts.

It doesn't matter what you do, it's about the larger group.

When PI closed, my parents thought it was because of a potentially unwanted crowd. What do you all think? More of a way to cut costs or get rid of unwanted crowds? I wouldn't know as much because I was too young to visit PI

Mismanagement.

 

[StarWarsGirl]

It doesn't matter what you do, it's about the larger group.

Sorry, I really think you don't understand teens or college students at all. Considering that I am one, I have a pretty good idea of what the general college population is doing

Mismanagement.

Explain

 

[lazyboy97o]

Sorry, I really think you don't understand teens or college students at all. Considering that I am one, I have a pretty good idea of what the general college population is doing

You shouldn't make assumptions.

Explain

Night entertainment is a dynamic, changing field. There is very, very little room for long standing classics. Disney did not want to put in the effort to keep the Island up to date. The problems were compounded when the West Side was a mix of demographic appeals that did not work. The decision was to go with cheaper, easier third party operators and booted the clubs before any deals were signed, assuming business would flock to be at Walt Disney World.

 

[GoofGoof]

When PI closed, my parents thought it was because of a potentially unwanted crowd. What do you all think? More of a way to cut costs or get rid of unwanted crowds? I wouldn't know as much because I was too young to visit PI

Someone should write a book some day. There are many conflicting theories.
1) The economic theory is that Disney looked at the clubs on a revenue per square footage basis. They were huge spaces so not making enough. Their grand plan was to bring in outside vendors and have them run the clubs and just pay Disney rent. Nobody stepped up to assume the huge rent they wanted. They decided to close the clubs.
2) The family values theory is that the clubs didn't represent the "family values" WDW represented. Drunks, petty crime and general lude behavior were on display (and that was just the cast members who hung there). Once they took the gates down there were reports of crime and drugs and even suggestions of gang activity (yep, bloods and crips with red or blue Mickey ears). I never witnessed any of this personally (except for the drunks, but they mostly amused me and I was one of them). The story is they closed the clubs to keep out certain "undesirable" elements from the local community.
3) Theory #3 is the official Disney line that they conducted guest surveys and guests wanted the clubs shut down and something different to replace it. I bet nowhere on the survey did they tell you it would take a decade to actually build anything to replace the clubs.

IMHO it was a combo of #1 and #2. I do believe the place didn't fit the demographic that Disney was targeting but in the end economics probably were a bigger driver.

 

[lazyboy97o]

3) Theory #3 is the official Disney line that they conducted guest surveys and guests wanted the clubs shut down and something different to replace it. I bet nowhere on the survey did they tell you it would take a decade to actually build anything to replace the clubs.

The survey also asked about more retail and dining, not retail and dining replacing the clubs.

 

[StarWarsGirl]

Someone should write a book some day. There are many conflicting theories.
1) The economic theory is that Disney looked at the clubs on a revenue per square footage basis. They were huge spaces so not making enough. Their grand plan was to bring in outside vendors and have them run the clubs and just pay Disney rent. Nobody stepped up to assume the huge rent they wanted. They decided to close the clubs.
2) The family values theory is that the clubs didn't represent the "family values" WDW represented. Drunks, petty crime and general lude behavior were on display (and that was just the cast members who hung there). Once they took the gates down there were reports of crime and drugs and even suggestions of gang activity (yep, bloods and crips with red or blue Mickey ears). I never witnessed any of this personally (except for the drunks, but they mostly amused me and I was one of them). The story is they closed the clubs to keep out certain "undesirable" elements from the local community.
3) Theory #3 is the official Disney line that they conducted guest surveys and guests wanted the clubs shut down and something different to replace it. I bet nowhere on the survey did they tell you it would take a decade to actually build anything to replace the clubs.

IMHO it was a combo of #1 and #2. I do believe the place didn't fit the demographic that Disney was targeting but in the end economics probably were a bigger driver.

I'm going mostly with 1 and 2 as well. For one, nightclubbing is something you can usually do at home so I can see why they wouldn't be making enough. I can also see how it would not fit in with their values, but I was much too young (still probably am actually at legally-an-adult-but-not-free-to-drink-yet age) to go and therefore know for sure

 

[Goofyernmost]

Someone should write a book some day. There are many conflicting theories.
1) The economic theory is that Disney looked at the clubs on a revenue per square footage basis. They were huge spaces so not making enough. Their grand plan was to bring in outside vendors and have them run the clubs and just pay Disney rent. Nobody stepped up to assume the huge rent they wanted. They decided to close the clubs.
2) The family values theory is that the clubs didn't represent the "family values" WDW represented. Drunks, petty crime and general lude behavior were on display (and that was just the cast members who hung there). Once they took the gates down there were reports of crime and drugs and even suggestions of gang activity (yep, bloods and crips with red or blue Mickey ears). I never witnessed any of this personally (except for the drunks, but they mostly amused me and I was one of them). The story is they closed the clubs to keep out certain "undesirable" elements from the local community.
3) Theory #3 is the official Disney line that they conducted guest surveys and guests wanted the clubs shut down and something different to replace it. I bet nowhere on the survey did they tell you it would take a decade to actually build anything to replace the clubs.

IMHO it was a combo of #1 and #2. I do believe the place didn't fit the demographic that Disney was targeting but in the end economics probably were a bigger driver.

Personally, I'd go with none of the above. It became much more of a hangout for low income CM's that didn't spend all that much once they got inside. Those places required a lot to keep going. Lot's of overhead and people needed (CM's) to run them. I spent a couple of hours in Adventures Club one time and I, for some reason unknown by me, started to notice that even though there were what seemed to me to be a couple hundred people in there, the bartender was leaning against the back counter with nothing to do. People, at best, were buying one drink and then parking themselves for a couple of hours watching the entertainment. It boiled down to no money, no show.

#1 would be the closest answer, but, even then if that attitude carried over to the rest of the places...clubs etc, and I know for sure the Comedy Warehouse when I was there might just as well been in a dry state. This place ran on alcohol and apparently there was an embargo at the time that I went. Not much in the line of alcohol was flowing. Yet, many seemed a tad on the drunk side. I wonder how that happened!

 

[GoofGoof]

I'm going mostly with 1 and 2 as well. For one, nightclubbing is something you can usually do at home so I can see why they wouldn't be making enough. I can also see how it would not fit in with their values, but I was much too young (still probably am actually at legally-an-adult-but-not-free-to-drink-yet age) to go and therefore know for sure

In my day PI was 18 to enter 21 to drink so even the college crowd under 21 could enjoy the clubs. It was also a gated attraction so you had to either pay for a ticket or have a park pass from that day. It was unlike club scenes back home and had a pleasant, Disney feel to it. There was music and drinking, but it felt safe and not at all seedy. They had unique experiences like the Adventurers Club and it was New Years Eve every night so at midnight they had a countdown and a full celebration including fireworks and confetti. It was really cool. I made a trip with a group of friends in January when I was 19. It was the week after New Years so the little kiddies were back in school, but not colleges yet. We wanted to go to WDW for the parks too, but I don't know if we would have done it if PI wasn't there. We may have gone somewhere else. But we also weren't high end customers either. We ate mostly counter service meals and stayed in the value resorts.

 

[GoofGoof]

Personally, I'd go with none of the above. It became much more of a hangout for low income CM's that didn't spend all that much once they got inside. Those places required a lot to keep going. Lot's of overhead and people needed (CM's) to run them. I spent a couple of hours in Adventures Club one time and I, for some reason unknown by me, started to notice that even though there were what seemed to me to be a couple hundred people in there, the bartender was leaning against the back counter with nothing to do. People, at best, were buying one drink and then parking themselves for a couple of hours watching the entertainment. It boiled down to no money, no show.

#1 would be the closest answer, but, even then if that attitude carried over to the rest of the places...clubs etc, and I know for sure the Comedy Warehouse when I was there might just as well been in a dry state. This place ran on alcohol and apparently there was an embargo at the time that I went. Not much in the line of alcohol was flowing. Yet, many seemed a tad on the drunk side. I wonder how that happened!

It was a CM hangout too. Those college program kids knew how to party back then.

 

[PUSH]

As a college student, I can say that 90% of the people here and in surrounding areas do not have much disposable income, and they are not helped out much by mommy and daddy, and they do not have jobs that pay more than minimum wage. And that small income they do have goes towards college loans, future expenses, school supplies, car payments, etc. From my very own standpoint, I do not have the money to buy a ticket for myself, nor do I have the money to buy things in-park, especially the overpriced junk Disney sells. Last time I went to Six Flags I paid to get in and spent $4 for lemonade, and everyone else I was with (probably 6 or 7 people) spent a total of $5-10.

Just my two cents.

 

[Goofyernmost]

As a college student, I can say that 90% of the people here and in surrounding areas do not have much disposable income, and they are not helped out much by mommy and daddy, and they do not have jobs that pay more than minimum wage. And that small income they do have goes towards college loans, future expenses, school supplies, car payments, etc. From my very own standpoint, I do not have the money to buy a ticket for myself, nor do I have the money to buy things in-park, especially the overpriced junk Disney sells. Last time I went to Six Flags I paid to get in and spent $4 for lemonade, and everyone else I was with (probably 6 or 7 people) spent a total of $5-10.

Just my two cents.

So that would be a total of $10.02 correct?

 

[PUSH]

So that would be a total of $10.02 correct?

 

[misterID]

When PI closed, my parents thought it was because of a potentially unwanted crowd. What do you all think? More of a way to cut costs or get rid of unwanted crowds? I wouldn't know as much because I was too young to visit PI

Personally, I thought PI nightlife was lame. The only time I went to Disney after dark was to see a band at House Of Blues. I think a lot of younger locals thought that way.

And College kids are usually a fantastic demo to target for nightlife who typically do have disposable income (or at least enough), depending if you're in a college town... I don't think Orlando fits that, at least not like Nashville, Knoxville, Tallahasee and Gainesville. Tally was voted #1 party city in America when I was younger.

 

[StarWarsGirl]

Personally, I thought PI nightlife was lame. The only time I went to Disney after dark was to see a band at House Of Blues. I think a lot of younger locals thought that way. At least the cool ones.

And College kids are usually a fantastic demo to target for nightlife who typically do have disposable income (or at least enough), depending if you're in a college town... I don't think Orlando fits that, at least not like Nashville, Knoxville, Tallahasee and Gainesville. Tally was voted #1 party city in America when was younger.

UCF is right around the corner, so it might. But I don't think it's considered a "party school"

 

[Turtle]

In FL Parks (Best of):Shooter Game - Men In Black: Alien Attack (USF)Immersive Attraction - The Haunted Mansion (MK)Drop Ride - The Twilight Zone Tower of Terror (DHS)Rapids Ride - Popeye's and Bluto's Bilge-rat Barges (IOA)Technologically Advanced - Harry Potter and the Forbidden Journey (IOA)
Themed Coaster - Expedition Everest: Legend of the Forbidden Mountain (DAK)Night Spectacular - Universal Cinematic Spectacular (USF)Flume Ride - Splash Mountain (WDW)
Overall Ride - Harry Potter and the Forbidden Journey (IOA)

 

[StarWarsGirl]

The UCF frats and sorority girls can party pretty freaking hard.

I applied for hospitality, so...