The Spirited 11th Hour ...

[flynnibus]

Spirit's schtick was pure nonsense. Millenials although for the most part are irresponsible and lack any type of accountability...do not freak me out. I'm actually amused at their outlook on things. No revisiting necessary...thanks for asking.

Sorry you've just jumped on the train 10+ years later. You're seeing the machine that has been in motion for over a decade. If you want the 'intro' version that is softer, less direct, and less extreme... you can use google and read the poster's history and get up to speed.

But no one, including @WDW1974, is going to go back and replay history and evolution for you line by line so you can understand the formula and why it is what it is right now. If you want to be a skeptic, and wonder why there is credibility here, go do your homework on the poster's past. Or you can sit back and observe for awhile and build your own opinion from the current time forward. But if you want to step out into the track and say 'hey, why are you all listening to this?' - well you're gonna get ran over by the train that isn't going to change just for you.

The foundation is sound.. you can observe over time and draw your own conclusions if you don't believe so.

 

[seabreezept813]

Talkin' 'bout my generation.

There really has to be a balance and I think that my generation and today's youth get generalized as unable to appreciate anything for its intellect or creativity. My stepdaughter or husband who is a Brazillian immigrant do not have to watch the Twilight Zone to love ToT for what it is.. and my stepdaughter insists that we listen to the song in the car all the time. She is 12 and still wishes they would keep Maelstrom. But our family also loves some of the new attractions. We loved New Fantasyland, not because it had outstanding attractions, but because it was a beautiful addition to MK and didn't require many rides to be lost.
For us, the current turn off is the way management assumes they are not dealing with an educated audience so they are willing to make foolish decisions to save a buck. Whereas, historically Disney has really made an effort to make smart design decisions. If they can make RoL and the new additions to AK with that mentality, why can't they give the other parks the same treatment?
The 2nd turnoff is obviously cost. For fun , I priced a trip for us in June for 5 days with park hopper, Pop Century, and QS Dining Plan. It would be 3500+ and then plane tickets. If my husband and I want to go to Cancun for 5 days it's 2500 for hotel, flight, booze, excursions, food, etc. That just seems so extreme to us, when clearly you are getting more for less if we head to island territory. We keep an extra vacation savings account, and are not the credit card types. So really Disney only becomes affordable if we go less often so we have more time to save.

 

[GoofGoof]

There really has to be a balance and I think that my generation and today's youth get generalized as unable to appreciate anything for its intellect or creativity. My stepdaughter or husband who is a Brazillian immigrant do not have to watch the Twilight Zone to love ToT for what it is.. and my stepdaughter insists that we listen to the song in the car all the time. She is 12 and still wishes they would keep Maelstrom. But our family also loves some of the new attractions. We loved New Fantasyland, not because it had outstanding attractions, but because it was a beautiful addition to MK and didn't require many rides to be lost.
For us, the current turn off is the way management assumes they are not dealing with an educated audience so they are willing to make foolish decisions to save a buck. Whereas, historically Disney has really made an effort to make smart design decisions. If they can make RoL and the new additions to AK with that mentality, why can't they give the other parks the same treatment?
The 2nd turnoff is obviously cost. For fun , I priced a trip for us in June for 5 days with park hopper, Pop Century, and QS Dining Plan. It would be 3500+ and then plane tickets. If my husband and I want to go to Cancun for 5 days it's 2500 for hotel, flight, booze, excursions, food, etc. That just seems so extreme to us, when clearly you are getting more for less if we head to island territory. We keep an extra vacation savings account, and are not the credit card types. So really Disney only becomes affordable if we go less often so we have more time to save.

The generation thing is pretty funny. I was born in the 70s and so many of the same things were said about my generation growing up. I'm sure it was said about my parents too. You guys will probably be saying it about the next generation as they grow up. Kids will be kids. Some things never change.

Disney is an off the charts expensive vacation. Of course it's going to be way more expensive than an all inclusive in a foreign country that has dirt cheap labor. Even without foreign labor its still more expensive than going to the beach in most parts of the US. It's also way more expensive than going to a national park or a museum like the Smithsonian. Of course the easiest way to save money is to just stay home.

As far as theme parks go Disney is still on the high end, but in the same ballpark as most. You can usually get better discounts for local parks but comparing Disney to Universal or Sea World or Busch Gardens it's pretty comparable. Not these high priced up sell events and not the hotel rooms but just park admission prices (especially with a multi-day pass).

 

[Disneyhead'71]

The generation thing is pretty funny. I was born in the 70s and so many of the same things were said about my generation growing up. I'm sure it was said about my parents too. You guys will probably be saying it about the next generation as they grow up. Kids will be kids. Some things never change.

Disney is an off the charts expensive vacation. Of course it's going to be way more expensive than an all inclusive in a foreign country that has dirt cheap labor. Even without foreign labor its still more expensive than going to the beach in most parts of the US. It's also way more expensive than going to a national park or a museum like the Smithsonian. Of course the easiest way to save money is to just stay home.

As far as theme parks go Disney is still on the high end, but in the same ballpark as most. You can usually get better discounts for local parks but comparing Disney to Universal or Sea World or Busch Gardens it's pretty comparable. Not these high priced up sell events and not the hotel rooms but just park admission prices (especially with a multi-day pass).

My Universal AP is $299. The equivalent WDW pass is $691.

 

[GoofGoof]

My Universal AP is $299. The equivalent WDW pass is $691.

A valid point. You locals were abandoned by Disney a long time ago. The single day tickets are pretty comparable.

 

[TeriofTerror]

Regarding the "Disney is a business" argument:
To paraphrase @lentesta, when a company's sole focus is on pleasing stockholders, you end up with companies dumping nuclear waste in lakes.
I believe for a company to maintain its success, it needs to focus on keeping its customers and employees happy, as well as its stockholders.

 

[zweltar]

Regarding the "Disney is a business" argument:
To paraphrase @lentesta, when a company's sole focus is on pleasing stockholders, you end up with companies dumping nuclear waste in lakes.
I believe for a company to maintain its success, it needs to focus on keeping its customers and employees happy, as well as its stockholders.

What you speak of is a stakeholder philosophy versus a shareholder one. I've been a huge proponent of stakeholder approaches, but they are not as common as I would like.

 

[Mike S]

Regarding the "Disney is a business" argument:
To paraphrase @lentesta, when a company's sole focus is on pleasing stockholders, you end up with companies dumping nuclear waste in lakes.
I believe for a company to maintain its success, it needs to focus on keeping its customers and employees happy, as well as its stockholders.

Absolutely stupid. It'll never work. Go to business school and learn how to do it right

 

[GrammieBee]

The only certainy in life is that things change. Some change is good, some change, not so much. Change just for the sake of change is never a good idea. Certainly Disney has to keep evolving to keep up with current trends, but that should not mean a true classic should be discarded in favor of the movie of the moment. Ideally new attractions are built to enjoy along with the older classics. (This is not to say that all older attractions are classics. Mostly a matter of opinion.)
If you destroy all of the old, you lose part of your heritage. That is why we save historical buildings, why classic musicals are revived on Broadway, why other classic plays, ballets or operas are continually being reshown why classic novels of all genres are read, why classic movies are being preserved and why we listen to classical, big band, blues or jazz music. the original fairy tales and fables are classics. To say that each younger generation is incapable of enjoying a classic and is only interested in the new is doing a serious disservice to that generation.

 

[seabreezept813]

The generation thing is pretty funny. I was born in the 70s and so many of the same things were said about my generation growing up. I'm sure it was said about my parents too. You guys will probably be saying it about the next generation as they grow up. Kids will be kids. Some things never change. I should mention the wedding came with two annual passes for a year!

Disney is an off the charts expensive vacation. Of course it's going to be way more expensive than an all inclusive in a foreign country that has dirt cheap labor. Even without foreign labor its still more expensive than going to the beach in most parts of the US. It's also way more expensive than going to a national park or a museum like the Smithsonian. Of course the easiest way to save money is to just stay home.

As far as theme parks go Disney is still on the high end, but in the same ballpark as most. You can usually get better discounts for local parks but comparing Disney to Universal or Sea World or Busch Gardens it's pretty comparable. Not these high priced up sell events and not the hotel rooms but just park admission prices (especially with a multi-day pass).

I definately understand your point about the islands versus Disney. But the increases are significant. I was married on the Boardwalk in August 2013. For my wedding and a 10 day trip we paid about 8,000-10,000, which was tremendously cheaper than a big wedding at home. So to me a five day trip without a wedding 2-3 years later shouldn't be half that cost.

 

[wogwog]

Studios article about the state of the park.

http://www.aol.com/article/2016/04/03/disney-worlds-least-popular-park-shrinks-again/21337463/

 

[raymusiccity]

I'll probably get worse than those.

Edited to Say: It's just a constructive conversation. Many people on this board, even though they profess to be Disney fans, feel Disney is the Evil Empire. My position is that Disney is a business first, and they will make decisions that take into account the guest experience as well as the financial aspects of said decision. There will always be detractors of every decision Disney makes, but Disney takes a lot of criticism (some fairly so) from both the business and fanboi sectors.....it is impossible to please them both.

Most decisions that are made have very little impact on the actual guest experience. General statements are made about rides (an animatronic malfunctioned, or a rock on Splash was out of place and becoming discolored) but they do little to ruin the guest experience. I have ridden EE numerous times while Yeti wasn't functioning. EE is a roller coaster. Yeti adds to the experience but it does not constitute the entire ride. The fact Yeti was malfunctioning did not diminish the the roller coaster ride because of the 5 seconds of the ride Yeti was to interact. Most people came off the ride saying "that was great". I didn't hear one saying it was a total waste because the Yeti didn't move. Sure I would have liked Yeti to interact. But I didn't come off of the ride with the attitude "I Will Never Ride This Again...Until They Fix the Yeti". Now Disney bears some of that criticism but the ride is still worthwhile....Do they need to fix Yeti....Absolutely...but I'm not pointing at that saying The Disney Empire is crumbling.

The problem with people is they expect perfection..........."Show me something you feel is perfect and I will spend the next 10 minutes telling you why its not"....This is the mentality here.

Agree wholeheartedly ! You're even being generous regarding the '5 seconds' of a Yeti encounter. He literally goes by in a flash. Great and unique ride, nonetheless

 

[GoofGoof]

I definately understand your point about the islands versus Disney. But the increases are significant. I was married on the Boardwalk in August 2013. For my wedding and a 10 day trip we paid about 8,000-10,000, which was tremendously cheaper than a big wedding at home. So to me a five day trip without a wedding 2-3 years later shouldn't be half that cost.

The increases lately have been relentless with no end in site, but to be fair WDW was not a cheap vacation in 2013 either. It was still very expensive compared to a lot of other vacation options. If you compare all the way to the 80s or even the 90s the increases are much worse. In the pre-Eisner era Disney park tickets were actually under priced compared to the market. I'm sure @ParentsOf4 has some stats or charts that show how extreme the price increases have been.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

You can revel in your 78 year old book all you want...but then let's take into account that Snow Queen (which is what Frozen is based on...read the book...which you probably haven't) was published a 172 years ago. Now to an 8 year old ask them...Is Frozen a New Movie. Keep living in Never Never Land. Maybe Pan will come visit you soon.

Jeg har læst Andersen på Dansk. -_-

 

[Nubs70]

Absolutely stupid. It'll never work. Go to business school and learn how to do it right

Business schools are teaching this. It is known as the Triple Bottom Line" the intersrction of People, Planet, Profit. Where the goal is striking a balance between the three.

Idealistic? probably.

The key is getting shareholders to accept this concept.

 

[GoofGoof]

Business schools are teaching this. It is known as the Triple Bottom Line" the intersrction of People, Planet, Profit. Where the goal is striking a balance between the three.

Idealistic? probably.

The key is getting shareholders to accept this concept.

In my experience Wall Street accepts this as long as the bottom line stays healthy. The minute there is some sort of financial hiccup the people and planet go bye bye and the focus shifts right back to profits.

 

[TeriofTerror]

In my experience Wall Street accepts this as long as the bottom line stays healthy. The minute there is some sort of financial hiccup the people and planet go bye bye and the focus shifts right back to profits.

Call me an incurable optimist, but this is how I try to conduct myself every day - balancing what's best for my customers, coworkers, and employers. Which may explain why I'm always butting heads with management.

 

[Nubs70]

And thus is the paradox of management.

I pointed out to my prof that if there is no profit there can be no planet nor people.

But this is why there needs to be balance. The primary concern must be profit. Once profit is achieved, then the other 2 aspects come into play.

However, this is in conflict with the singular focus of current agency theory which us reinforced by stock based incentive programs. It will take a company President/CEO, backed by BOD, to explain there philosophy to share holders. If share holders disagree, the share holder is free to invest elsewhere.

 

[GoofGoof]

And thus is the paradox of management.

I pointed out to my prof that if there is no profit there can be no planet nor people.

But this is why there needs to be balance. The primary concern must be profit. Once profit is achieved, then the other 2 aspects come into play.

However, this is in conflict with the singular focus of current agency theory which us reinforced by stock based incentive programs. It will take a company President/CEO, backed by BOD, to explain there philosophy to share holders. If share holders disagree, the share holder is free to invest elsewhere.

There are some large shareholder groups that will require some level of concern for the planet and worker conditions. For example, in recent history some large University endowments have decided not to invest in the stock of a company that isn't at least attempting to be a responsible corporate citizen. There are also large government pension funds that could do something similar. Some times companies will just add window dressing to appear to be focused on things other than profit, but it's at least a move in the right direction.

 

[RSoxNo1]

I get it. But it's an evolution. What I'd give for one afternoon at RC or another ride on Toad. Hell, Bring back Skyway to Tomorrowland for a night... But if you told told my daughter they were tearing down Seven Dwarfs Mine Train to put in a "Submarine Ride"......(which was 20's original location..It wouldn't be good)

Yeah, we lost a lot of favorites. A lot of things have changed, but we gained some new favorites. If they Re-themed ToT it would stink for me..but it would probably better for my kids (they love it now anyways, but when G2 and likely G3 get released in theaters, what makes an imprint on kids Rod Sterling? or "Rocket Racoon"? It is a smart business decision )....If Rock N Roller Coaster became re-themed to "One Direction"...I'd get it. Look I'd give my right arm to see the Eagles play one more show...but sadly, now it will never happen. There's a new generation, and an evolution. People need to learn to not hold on to the past. It's fiscally irresponsible for them to do so.

Don't confuse evolution with laziness.