LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
I don’t think you understood my post properly.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser to permanently close this fall
- Thread starter DCBaker
- Start date
mightynine
Well-Known Member
It does seem like everyone is avoiding what to me, is the biggest reason this thing closed so quickly - it got great satisfaction scores, but from a pool that had a lot of repeat customers.
In my opinion, Disney thought this thing would be sold-out for years, creating envy and FOMO which would cause people to hand-wave the cost.
Instead, it generated a fervent fan base that didn’t show signs of growing at a pace that would make viable sense long-term, especially for a company that was looking at cuts anywhere and everywhere.
This isn’t a knock on those that enjoyed it, or the quality of the experience one way or the other.
In my opinion, Disney thought this thing would be sold-out for years, creating envy and FOMO which would cause people to hand-wave the cost.
Instead, it generated a fervent fan base that didn’t show signs of growing at a pace that would make viable sense long-term, especially for a company that was looking at cuts anywhere and everywhere.
This isn’t a knock on those that enjoyed it, or the quality of the experience one way or the other.
TheMaxRebo
Well-Known Member
I definitely think that is fair - for those that were into what was provided I think it delivered to a very high level ... It just wasn't an experience that became desirable to a broad base.
I don't think their marketing helped but also the positive reviews were really driven by the experience and immersion provided and not everyone wants that ... Then tie a very high price to that and just reduces the pool too much rather than create FOMO
JD80
Well-Known Member
Don't worry about certain people. It's a great thread for figuring out who you can add to your ignore list.
TheMaxRebo
Well-Known Member
For sure - even if that price was needed to cover all the actors, etc it just wasn't realistic for so many people
Really needed to have different levels/durations/price points to make it more approachable
Epcot81Fan
Well-Known Member
For those that did the the cruise, was this better in person?
Because this looks pretty terrible.
Because this looks pretty terrible.
The same four people keep posting the same four pictures trying to reignite cringegate.
No one answered the last time this was posted last week because no one's taking the bait.
This isn't some rando's nerdgrage YouTube channel.
donaldtoo
Well-Known Member
How would that have worked…?! Different price points…?! Would a one day cruise have been an option at a slightly lower price point…?!
Who wants to take a one day “cruise”…?! Plus, anything beyond two days would have been beyond exorbitantly priced.
Also, with all the singularly shared spaces, that would have made it even more complicated for scheduling and staff. That would have been a total cluster.
Modern ocean cruises are fixed days for all aboard, with multiple dining, entertainment, etc., venues.
That thing was doomed from the moment of conception.
donaldtoo
Well-Known Member
TheMaxRebo
Well-Known Member
Lots of ways to do it, but things wouldn't have overlaps .... Just in a given week you have one or two 2-night cruises like they did then you have one or two single nights and some days are just "day cruises" where people go up for like a meal and an activity, no staying over
They also could have tried other options like longer cruises but less immersion (so more like a regular cruise/regular hotel) so the per day cost is a lot lower
Maybe just anecdotal but I know a lot of people (myself included) that were intrigued by the concept and would have liked to experience elements of it but no way would go for the structure that was provided (due to immersion/larping elements and the price point) ... But let me go up there for an afternoon to check I out and get a meal, do the lightsaber training for like $350-500/person and I would be way more interested
Then it also could be just like a part of a larger Disney/Orlando vacation vs this stay being the main (only) thing you do
Clearly what they had was not sustainable but there were elements that were extremely well received so trying to make part of it more accessible to more people makes sense to me
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
I think the contention is not the walkthrough don’t accurately depict it…but rather the physicality of it once you get there made it more appealing?
You can understand that. I can think of a couple things where I was amazed at how true that was…but to me the Eiffel Tower was signature. “It’s just a building”…until you walk around it and on a clear day…it almost “floats” against a clear blue sky. So much more impressive there. Not the greatest example…but the premise is valid.
But…the “you can’t judge it if you didn’t do it” isn’t valid either…because such a microscopic number actual did it…and they had no bookings…they slammed the door shut on it in record time.
So a fail…is a fail…is a fail. That’s the epitaph in the end. It will be remembered as a disaster. The cake is baked. Cause…humans…and stuff.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
The source material sucks…so they would need to at least address that before they even got fancy with “options”
erasure fan1
Well-Known Member
That's a valid point. I would be willing to bet that if the cruise was old gritty original trilogy era, it would have performed significantly better. I still don't think the super crazy boutique price model will ever work for the long term. So I still think it fades out, just not as fast. But at least if they could see some better overall engagement with it, they would have had the motivation to adjust it, and not just deep six it.
Could you explain why you don't think that?
AEfx
Well-Known Member
This myth that it had these amazing scores in general was debunked a few pages ago because the source of this notion is a paywall backed article that people clearly didn't actually read or click on (if they did, they would have at least seen the opening paragraph where it was explained).
Disney sent a PAID survey ($150-250 bucks a pop) to a select group of people who went on the "last voyages", who were either repeat visitors, or fully well knew what to expect given how well-documented every second of the experience was at that point. Presumably, given how rarely if ever Disney pays for surveys (again I ask - has anyone heard of this before? because it's totally new to me...) they are just trying to data mine this small group of super-fans to salvage something from this boondoggle.
The timing of this survey, and this sudden appearance of people claiming the thing was some massive creative success, is not coincidental LOL.
And since this keeps getting distorted (either intentionally or not) - NO ONE IS ASKING OR DOUBTING THAT THESE SELECT FEW JUST LOVED THIS.
But they do insist the rest of us (the entire population of Star Wars/Disney parks fans in the world) who watched all of this, many of us DESPERATELY trying to find something of value in the experience because we wanted it to be amazing, are just missing it and we can't judge what it was "by a few images online", which is just silliness. Every moment of this thing, every inch, was documented. And they just keep saying "you had to be there" or that there was something we all are just missing and we just don't understand the experience.
No one is asking to justify why they loved what was offered; it's asking what activities/experiences that were offered that the rest of us are supposedly cherry-picking only the "worst" ones for.
That certainly did lop off a big chunk to begin with. Which I don't think was wholly unintentional, given the super-limited capacity. There still would have been an ample audience to keep this thing going, considering that relatively tiny capacity, had they not screwed up every other thing about it.
I posted in more detail previously, but I watched it happen on Star Wars board after Star Wars board. People who went from "Take my money!" when it was announced, to "eh, Sequel Trilogy?", to the price ("Well, it won't be this year, but if this is truly what they say it is, I'll save up a year or two for it" aspirations), to once the truly pathetic commercials came out ("that must just be bad marketing, right?") to seeing the final product ("Why does nothing look like Star Wars? Card games and costume parades? Yeah, I'm all set...").
It's like they literally messed up every step of the way in attracting the massive Star Wars audience to what should have been the premiere Star Wars life-goal attraction of every Star Wars fan on the planet.
TheMaxRebo
Well-Known Member
But it isn't just from those recent surveys after it was closed
This is from Touring Plans, so third party, not Disney and not paid. They had, in total, 4,500 responses and Starcruiser had the highest rating overall (the line is the 95% confidence interval) - so clearly those that participated thought the experience was great
and there is no big mystery, nothing that needs to be explained to you - quite a few people were attracted to what was offered, participated/spent the money, and enjoyed it ... but not enough to keep it going as it was. That's it, doesn't need to appeal to you or to be justified to you. And it is ok if you don't "get it" and ok that other people loved it
Only really relevant thing is where they go from here - what did they learn from it, and how might there be a unique opportunity in the future that other (hopefully more) people would be interested in, be it Star Wars related or something else
_caleb
Well-Known Member
AEfx
Well-Known Member
Were all the respondents who voted confirmed to have actually gone to the experience? Online polls are...online polls. People seem to just be running with this like this amazing reception it's some verified fact.
And yes, it is totally okay that some people loved it. This has been explained over and over. And pretending it hasn't is just trying to play fourm games by constantly mis-framing the discussion (which is why I'm ignoring the usual suspects who habitually do that).
That said, when they then accuse the rest of us of unfairly judging the offerings, decor, and activities, and then can't tell us what offerings, decor, and activities we are judging unfairly, then yes, the onus is on them to explain what it is we are missing, if indeed we are.
Basically, the opposite of this narrative of "people are being attacked because they liked something" is what is happening. The rest of us are being judged for objectively judging the experience based on the massive amount of evidence of what was offered. And I'm not going to clarify this aspect again, because anyone who claims not to understand this is simply not participating in a good faith discussion, and isn't worth any more time.
It's really that simple, and the fact that some folks are trying to make it more complicated than that feels like more forum games - because we all know the answer: every single inch of this thing, every second was completely documented. The rest of us aren't missing anything or unfairly judging what Disney offered.
TheMaxRebo
Well-Known Member
the onus isn't on anyone - didn't appeal to you, cool. Did appeal to others, cool - and to minimize or try to come up with reasons why any of the positive results aren't valid is disingenuous at best and belilitting them at worst
And you aren't missing anything, no one is saying you are. It is what it was - some loved it, others didn't get the appeal. No big deal - it is gone now