Yes they were at the Minetrain event, but they say it is getting difficult for them because they are not 100% positive (even if they are generally far more pixie dusted than the average poster on a Spirit thread here...).
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
The Spirited Seventh Heaven ...
- Thread starter WDW1974
- Start date
Yes they were at the Minetrain event, but they say it is getting difficult for them because they are not 100% positive (even if they are generally far more pixie dusted than the average poster on a Spirit thread here...).
Omnispace
Well-Known Member
I think I first started visiting here to catch up on the breaking news about Horizons. It was suddenly closed, then rumors that the press was riding it, then it was closed again, and finally the news they were tearing it down. I still don't know if there has been any definitive word on why it closed. Rumors of sinkholes, the building starting to become unstable, and selling the ride system to a park in Mexico were the norm of the day. There was also the more mundane, it was cheaper to tear it down than to re-purpose such a specialized building. Anyone have the definitive reason or do we have to wait till the Freedom Of Information Act to have the documents declassified?
I really enjoyed Laughing Place for the series of articles they had with Bob Gurr. Lots of fascinating information! Then the website was redesigned and with the information overload of the news feeds I lost interest. I prefer to have a bit of a filter.
GLaDOS
Well-Known Member
Because it's been and still is an active construction zone.
CDavid
Well-Known Member
Thank You!!! I agree wholeheartedly.
We're presumably not talking about people wearing their Sunday best clothes or a particular uniform such as found in a school dress code, but rather a set of guidelines as to what is and is not acceptable attire. That sort of thing is completely workable though, as @the.dreamfinder notes some people will initially put up a fuss.
In the parks you could prohibit shirts with offensive slogans or graphics, bathing suits, and the like and be fairly consistent. It is harder to enforce attire which is too revealing, as it involves a judgement call, but it is worth doing. Dress shirts and the like should absolutely be required for some venues, and that is even easier to enforce than a park-wide dress code.
I believe the gist of the story, from posters here with a well deserved reputation for inside information, is that tearing Horizons down for Mission:Space is what the sponsor wanted and was willing to pay for. No sinkhole.
It has also been reported there were plans to have updates Horizons. Oh, what could have been...
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
While we are at it, let's all jump into our time machines and flash back to 1952. Seriously, accept that times change and work with it. It will probably, at some point in time, come full circle. In the meantime, wear your long pants, white shirts, and sport coats along with a narrow black tie and go to the parks. I think you will realize really quickly why that isn't done anymore.
I do believe that reason should be used in what can be worn in public, but, those are pretty easy to distinguish.
DinoInstitute
Well-Known Member
It made me tear up!!
True, and the UAE is a damaged BRAND, no matter how many 110-story hotel towers they build. It's like I've said about Dubai being a desert mirage. People look at what they build for rich westerners and forget that it is propped up by oil money, ties to terrorism and by horrible human rights records.
As folks point to the 25-year anniversary of the Chinese massacre in Beijing, no one seems to realize that some of those amazing oil rich 'friends' of ours are incredibly repressive toward anyone who isn't an Arab male or a foreign businessman (obviously with a strong preference for non-Jews). How women and gays are treated is disgusting ... and, yes (here comes the promised opinion), I find it disgusting that TWDC is helping perpetuate the lies and the myth of the UAE by bringing Star Wars filming over there simply because they got a deal.
With the value of the Star Wars IP and its appearance in Disney Parks worldwide set to explode in the years ahead, on its face, it just appears to be a poorly thought out decision by TWDC to take that vaunted franchise and pimp it for Abu Dhabi's tourism bureau. We should note that Alan Horn aggressively sought this deal as a means of subsidizing what he knew would be another massive tentpole spend. Beyond what the industry trades have reported, Abu Dhabi has made guarantees to Disney taking the 30% guarantee against costs far above that number.
Abu Dhabi, and its extraordinarily repressive regime, gave Horn and Disney complete discretion with regard to accounting for money spent to bring the production halfway around the world. This is territory Horn knows well because Lord of the Rings brought a 40% uptick in tourism to New Zealand after Peter Jackson filmed there.
I just wonder whether driving Abu Dhabi's tourism industry by bringing production and Disney's seal of approval to the Emirates will open the company up for legitimate criticism given the horrendous human rights record of its host nation.
But I'm sure we won't see this in the NY Times anytime soon ...
... and I doubt Mark Hamill (with human shield Gary Buchanan at his side) will be asked about this at his SWW appearance.
Like I said, Heat in six ... but I don't see them winning tonight. Spurs will be pumped on homecourt.
BTW, and I don't want a massive sports thread, but isn't it interesting that almost always you see the top two teams in the NBA make the Finals (and the top four in the Conference Finals)? How many times do you see a team that was just very good make the Super Bowl? Or the Stanley Cup Finals?
BTW, and I don't want a massive sports thread, but isn't it interesting that almost always you see the top two teams in the NBA make the Finals (and the top four in the Conference Finals)? How many times do you see a team that was just very good make the Super Bowl? Or the Stanley Cup Finals?
So the TWDC basically put their morals aside to get more than $300k in return for every million they spend in the UAE?True, and the UAE is a damaged BRAND, no matter how many 110-story hotel towers they build. It's like I've said about Dubai being a desert mirage. People look at what they build for rich westerners and forget that it is propped up by oil money, ties to terrorism and by horrible human rights records.
As folks point to the 25-year anniversary of the Chinese massacre in Beijing, no one seems to realize that some of those amazing oil rich 'friends' of ours are incredibly repressive toward anyone who isn't an Arab male or a foreign businessman (obviously with a strong preference for non-Jews). How women and gays are treated is disgusting ... and, yes (here comes the promised opinion), I find it disgusting that TWDC is helping perpetuate the lies and the myth of the UAE by bringing Star Wars filming over there simply because they got a deal.
With the value of the Star Wars IP and its appearance in Disney Parks worldwide set to explode in the years ahead, on its face, it just appears to be a poorly thought out decision by TWDC to take that vaunted franchise and pimp it for Abu Dhabi's tourism bureau. We should note that Alan Horn aggressively sought this deal as a means of subsidizing what he knew would be another massive tentpole spend. Beyond what the industry trades have reported, Abu Dhabi has made guarantees to Disney taking the 30% guarantee against costs far above that number.
Abu Dhabi, and its extraordinarily repressive regime, gave Horn and Disney complete discretion with regard to accounting for money spent to bring the production halfway around the world. This is territory Horn knows well because Lord of the Rings brought a 40% uptick in tourism to New Zealand after Peter Jackson filmed there.
I just wonder whether driving Abu Dhabi's tourism industry by bringing production and Disney's seal of approval to the Emirates will open the company up for legitimate criticism given the horrendous human rights record of its host nation.
But I'm sure we won't see this in the NY Times anytime soon ...
Nemo14
Well-Known Member
What morals?
TalkingHead
Well-Known Member
I just did. Seemed very milquetoast. Gnashers versus foamers seems sorta simplistic to me. So Yee is the wise man in the middle. Cool.
You don't have to be a "gnasher" to say the value of WDW entertainment has dropped over the past 15 years.
Just like you don't have to be a "foamer" to say that SDMT looks like a nice, short ride.
What was the point of his article, that everyone should play nice?
Re: Heat/Spurs. I just hope it's as competitive as last year. Miami's playoff series have been snoozers so far this year.
Last edited:
asianway
Well-Known Member
I read it. His columns aren't what they used to.
71jason
Well-Known Member
^ Agreed.
Also, I don't see the need to bring Universal into the debate once again (and while I agree Universal has problems, I don't think they remain the problems he brings up). Ultimately my opinion of Seven Dwarves or the Villain Party or anything else has nothing to do with Universal.
Omnispace
Well-Known Member
Kevin seems to get an unfortunate bashing whenever he brings up anything critical about WDW. His articles now seem to go more out of their way to placate anyone accusing him of being negative. I wonder if this article is meant to address that once and for all. Unfortunately, as others here have mentioned, it's almost too simplistic in its argument. I appreciate that he has always been thoughtful in his essays, and his "declining by degrees" approach is worthy of more examination of WDW, but I think he will be much more effective if he really puts it out there like he and Al used to for DIG.
Edit -- perhaps someone here can give him some mentoring in snarky editorial.
PhotoDave219
Well-Known Member
I didnt see where Kevin offered any evidence to support that Disney is always spending money on upkeep, maintenance and rehabs.
WDWFigment
Well-Known Member
Kevin seems to get an unfortunate bashing whenever he brings up anything critical about WDW. His articles now seem to go more out of their way to placate anyone accusing him of being negative. I wonder if this article is meant to address that once and for all. Unfortunately, as others here have mentioned, it's almost too simplistic in its argument. I appreciate that he has always been thoughtful in his essays, and his "declining by degrees" approach is worthy of more examination of WDW, but I think he will be much more effective if he really puts it out there like he and Al used to for DIG.
Edit -- perhaps someone here can give him some mentoring in snarky editorial.
He definitely has had several articles like this that are all variations on the same idea. I know he's used that Rodney King line before in such an article.
With that said, I still think Kevin Yee is the most well-spoken and balanced Walt Disney World critique-blogger. I don't think it's so much a matter of him 'losing it,' as it probably is growing tired of the criticism he receives from both sides of the fan community. Given his position as an influencer, a wide array of people read his articles, and any given article that he writes causes at least one segment of fans to vocally criticize him because they disagree with what he has to say. I wouldn't be surprised if his recent attempts to show that he is the 'rational middle ground' are partly written (as you say) out of a desire to placate. Some people can handle (or even enjoy) being a lightning rod for criticism. Other people can't handle constant criticism of everything they do. I'd certainly prefer for more of an edge one way or the other, but I think the quality of his posts remains high.
doctornick
Well-Known Member
Because, of course, Tunesia has a perfectly spotless record when it comes to human rights.
yeti
Well-Known Member
I tried.
Phil12
Well-Known Member
Thanks for providing that detail. For sure, the Tiki Room had an insanely high price when it first opened. At the time, the Tiki Room had two big pluses. Hawaii had become a state in 1959 and main-landers were very curious about Polynesian culture. The other big selling point about the Tiki Room is that all the birds were controlled by computers! In 1963 that was a big deal and Walt heavily advertized the computer controlled birds on his weekly TV program.
Walt Disney owned the Viewliner (later replaced by the monorail), steam train, horse drawn streetcar and the Tiki Room. He also owned a percentage of the some of the Disney film releases, a percentage of merchandise sales and naming rights (the company had to pay him for the use of his name). That was one of the reasons why Roy O. Disney (Walt's brother) insisted on the name "Walt Disney World". The naming rights made a huge amount of money for Walt's family. His company hired staff to run those attractions and the money collection was separate from Disneyland. It was passed on to his family and heirs via "Retlaw".
Walt's estate sold the naming rights, monorail, Tiki Room and the other park stuff back to TWDC in 1982. Roy E. Disney (Walt's nephew) put up a big stink saying that TWDC paid the family members (Walt's side of the family) too much for Retlaw. There has always been a lot of bad blood in the Disney family.
Yes you're right. ATIS did end up going from free to a ticket attraction. I had forgotten about that change. I remember ATIS from the late 1960's when it was free. When they started charging for ATIS I avoided it after that time because I'm cheap!
Last edited: