The Spirited Seventh Heaven ...

Tigger1988

Well-Known Member
Sure, if you knew for sure they weren't infected then nobody would be worried. I think the point is you don't know for sure. So let's take the same question up a notch. What if 3 people who you don't know who are wearing Texas Health Presbyterian Hosptial T-shirts are puking on a flight flying in from Dallas. Are you worried then?
I don't deal in hyperbole. Give a realistic scenario and I'll play.
 

CDavid

Well-Known Member
Attitudes like this are part of the problem, it can't happen here well so we don't need to take precautions you may have noticed that I said l'm cutting ALL non-essential travel on public transit as are many of my colleagues we will travel if necessary but the telepresence suites are getting a lot more use these past few weeks.

I understand that you have a greater understanding of infectious diseases such as Ebola and other potential public health and safety risks, and appreciate your contributions to the board, but frankly you appear to be grossly overreacting. Nobody is saying "Ebola can't happen here"; On the contrary, Ebola could strike the community in which you live (with a handful of potential cases) but never be seen within 100 miles of Walt Disney World. Or you could stay home - avoiding leisure travel to "manage' risk - only to have a fatal traffic accident or catch the flu, which despite the odds, proves lethal.

Managing risk is always prudent, but you can never eliminate all risk completely even if you literally lived in a cave. How much of life do you want to miss out on to avoid something that has a very, very slim chance of ever happening anyway?
 

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
Sure, if you knew for sure they weren't infected then nobody would be worried. I think the point is you don't know for sure. So let's take the same question up a notch. What if 3 people who you don't know who are wearing Texas Health Presbyterian Hosptial T-shirts are puking on a flight flying in from Dallas. Are you worried then?

I don't deal in hyperbole. Give a realistic scenario and I'll play.
By now they are probably silk screening those puppies 24/7 to get the sick sense of humor crowd of souvenir purchasers.:joyfull:
 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
I don't deal in hyperbole. Give a realistic scenario and I'll play.

What makes it not realistic for you? That it's 3 people? That was the example the other poster used. If you want to make it 1 person that's fine. Is it the t-shirts? Take those away too. For me it's still the same answer.

My only point is that unless you are intimately familiar with the actions of a person you can't really know if they had contact with the original patient. Your original answer was as long as they didn't have contact with the patient it wouldn't bother you, but what if you didn't know whether they had contact.
 

Cesar R M

Well-Known Member
I didn't say it can't happen here. I said, statistically, there is nothing you
can really do one way or the other to prevent it happening to you.

Someone could get off that cruise ship, fly home, and go to work at the
gas station when you go in to get a bag of chips.

One of my all time favorite quotes:

Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure, or nothing.

-Helen Keller
pretty sure the plane as a higher probability of going down than him getting Ebola..even more if you drive..
but heey.. lets be over-reactive and paranoic!

*edit* nevermind, others already said the same.
 
Last edited:

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
It's a good thing no other infections besides Ebola cause a fever, vomiting and diarrhea...

That is the basic problem, plus the law of geometric progression which is why quarantine is the only effective measure at the moment. Test and quarantine if negative no problem, if positive quarantine and isolate and test everyone person has been in contact with. Nigeria had 20 or so cases, they needed to contact and isolate 19,000 people

As of tomorrow they will be declared Ebola free by the WHO it can be done it just takes a lot of painstaking work and seriously inconveniencing a large number of people to prevent something far worse.
 

ParentsOf4

Well-Known Member
Yeah, the Oriental Land Company is a publicly traded, for-profit business. Tokyo Disney Resort is also their primary venture. Crowds and culture definitely play a part, but the cheaper parks in Japan have pretty much always been more profitable than the American parks. They're continued proof that "quality will out" and that Disney today is leave huge sums on the table because people who don't like theme parks are making the decisions and being cheap.
Your second sentence explains the difference between OLC and The Walt Disney Company (TWDC).

As their primary source of business, OLC's management team is focused on the amusement park business, often with decades of experience built from the ground-up. They understand the business.

Unfortunately, TWDC's Parks & Resorts leadership comes from the "any good manager can manage anything" school of business.

Current Parks & Resorts Chairman, Tom Staggs, was an investment banker at Morgan Stanley before joining Disney.

Jay Rasulo, Chairman before him, came from Chase Manhattan and Marriot.

Paul Pressler came from a toy company and was well-known to be a 'numbers guy'. His post-Disney crash-and-burn performance at The Gap is well documented.

Along with CEO Bob Iger (from ABC), these corporate leaders look at Parks & Resorts from a financial perspective.

All organizations need a steady financial hand.

However, they also need creative leadership at the helm with a strong feel for the core business.

Parks & Resorts has suffered in the last dozen years exactly because none of these folks, or most of the people who report to them, have a good feel for their theme park product.
 
Last edited:

Mike S

Well-Known Member
Your second sentence explains the difference between OLC and The Walt Disney Company (TWDC).

As their primary source of business, OLC's management team is focused on the amusement park business, often with decades of experience built from the ground-up. They understand the business.

Unfortunately, TWDC's Parks & Resorts leadership come from the "any good manager can manage anything" school of business.

Current Parks & Resorts Chairman, Tom Staggs, was an investment banker at Morgan Stanley before joining Disney.

Jay Rasulo, Chairman before him, came from Chase Manhattan and Marriot.

Paul Pressler came from a toy company and was well-known to be a 'numbers guy'. His post-Disney crash-and-burn performance at The Gap is well documented.

Along with CEO Bob Iger (from ABC), these corporate leaders look at Parks & Resorts from a financial perspective.

All organizations need a steady financial hand.

However, they also need creative leadership at the helm with a strong feel for the core business.

Parks & Resorts has suffered in the last dozen years exactly because none of these folks, or most of the people who report to them, have the good feel for their theme park product.
And whenever someone does have the good feel for their theme park product Disney gets rid of them. See: Ouimet, Matt and Burke, Steve. Great business strategy huh?
 

Animaniac93-98

Well-Known Member
Your second sentence explains the difference between OLC and The Walt Disney Company (TWDC).

As their primary source of business, OLC's management team is focused on the amusement park business, often with decades of experience built from the ground-up. They understand the business.

Unfortunately, TWDC's Parks & Resorts leadership come from the "any good manager can manage anything" school of business.

Current Parks & Resorts Chairman, Tom Staggs, was an investment banker at Morgan Stanley before joining Disney.

Jay Rasulo, Chairman before him, came from Chase Manhattan and Marriot.

Paul Pressler came from a toy company and was well-known to be a 'numbers guy'. His post-Disney crash-and-burn performance at The Gap is well documented.

Along with CEO Bob Iger (from ABC), these corporate leaders look at Parks & Resorts from a financial perspective.

All organizations need a steady financial hand.

However, they also need creative leadership at the helm with a strong feel for the core business.

Parks & Resorts has suffered in the last dozen years exactly because none of these folks, or most of the people who report to them, have the good feel for their theme park product.

The one note I will add to this post (which I mostly agree with) is Phil Holmes. He was an opeing day, front line CM (at Haunted Mansion) who worked his way up to park VP. With the same line of reasoning he should be a great VP, but posts here suggest he is not.

That is likely because he reports to these "number guys" and knows how to keep his job, but it could be said it comes at the park's expense.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom