When are you going to fix that yeti?

[Hayley In Wonderland]

never...insiders. correct me if I'm wrong but it has never had a true refurb of any kind. IE closing for weeks ect.

I don't think its ever had a full refurb, no. So it's long overdue. That would make even more sense for the whole thing to be shut for a few months(?) in order for the ride to get the refurb and love it deserves. Maybe once the crowd has balanced out at AK & hopefully before the 50th?

 

[larryz]

View attachment 240841

I hope that wasn't a trained assistance horse...

 

[matt9112]

I don't think its ever had a full refurb, no. So it's long overdue. That would make even more sense for the whole thing to be shut for a few months(?) in order for the ride to get the refurb and love it deserves. Maybe once the crowd has balanced out at AK & hopefully before the 50th?

as an aside it does give testament to the quality of the tracks and cars.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Then where does my little syllogism fail? I assert that removing it is expensive. That's all. If it was cheap and easy, a single department could have swung the money to remove it, could have slapped up an acceptable band aid, and could have sought reimbursement later on from other department(s) and entities. But if it's expensive to remove, this explains why we've been stuck with disco yeti for 9 years. Cheap fixes get done. It's only the expensive fixes that are left undone for 9 years in a logical world.

Of course, another explanation could be that the greatest entertainment company the world has ever seen is illogical when it comes to one of its headline attractions. But I don't easily buy that conclusion either.

You are conflating access with repair. Being able to relatively easily get to and remove the figure is not the same as fixing it.

The cheapest fix is already in place, B Mode.

You assume a high level of concern. That does not exist and you ignore the implications of assuming responsibility.

 

[Ralphlaw]

Owning stuff doesn’t mean you understand it. Just like with Disney’s long build process you are jumping around and writing essays to justify your preconceived view of what is happening.

There is not a pressing concern or desire to accept fault and spend the money. That is the explanation and that is all that is necessary. They don’t care enough to change what is there. You’re conclusion is not based on logic, it is based on what you want to justify.

But I said I actually helped build a house. Are you saying that anyone who hasn't headed up a multi-million dollar contract has no valid opinion?

And if they don't care about it, then why did they spend the millions and millions to build the yeti in the first place? And why was it so ballyhooed on the big shows and advertising blitzes for so long? Of course they care. It is utter speculation to assume they don't.

Yet if a removal was expensive, we suddenly have logical explanations for everything. By the way, do you have information that a removal would be cheap and easy? Just because it allegedly can be done does not mean it is cheap or easy.

 

[danlb_2000]

Uh, I helped my Dad build a house. I have a plumber working on my building right now. I have represented both builders and customers many times over the years. I own three buildings that have been remodeled and maintained for decades. Let's logic this out:

1. A very expensive headline yeti was installed years ago in EE.
2. It quit working somehow about a year in.
3. Allegedly it was removed and reinstalled shortly thereafter, although I am not truly convinced that that happened.
4. The purported removal and re-install did not apparently close down the ride.
5. B mode is disappointing, and surely a better band aid like a projection could have been installed at some point in the past 9 years.
6. That band aid fix would surely have been easier and doable if the yeti was removed.
7. The installation of a better band aid would likely not have closed down the ride.
8. The yeti is probably Disney's biggest embarrassment over the last decade.
9. Finally, Disney is now trying to make a better band aid.
10. Departmental finger-pointing is the alleged cause of the 9 year paralysis.

Given all that, I maintain that removal of the beast, which few people actually see in disco mode, is both difficult and expensive. Even if they took it out years ago, I assume that that attempt to repair the problem was expensive. It didn't work, so why not remove the thing (if it's easy to do) and put up a projection against a hairy mannequin? The answer: It is probably difficult and expensive.

Note: My conclusion of difficult and expensive does not mean that a big door is not hidden in the back. It does not foreclose the notion that they removed it years ago. It does not mean that the yeti is necessarily unremoveable. My conclusion is based on pure logic given the facts before us, both absolutely known facts and those facts which are perhaps known.

You logic breaks down with #5, this is a matter of opinion. As for #8, I think a very small percentage of guests actually know about this issue. It's very likely that management feels that the current state of the yeti is acceptable.

 

[lazyboy97o]

But I said I actually helped build a house. Are you saying that anyone who hasn't headed up a multi-million dollar contract has no valid opinion?

And if they don't care about it, then why did they spend the millions and millions to build the yeti in the first place? And why was it so ballyhooed on the big shows and advertising blitzes for so long? Of course they care. It is utter speculation to assume they don't.

Yet if a removal was expensive, we suddenly have logical explanations for everything. By the way, do you have information that a removal would be cheap and easy? Just because it allegedly can be done does not mean it is cheap or easy.

The people who decide to build the figure are not the same people who choose to make a big marketing splash about the figure who are not the people who maintain the figure. You’re logic is based on incorrect assumptions of how things work and who does what.

 

[ford91exploder]

The overall management philosophy is we must run attractions to failure, then replace as cheaply as possible.

The point no one seems to get is TDO does not care about the parks and sees them only as a means to short term profit.

Current Disney management has adopted the operational philosophy which drove Walt to build DL as a counter to the 'amusement parks' of the time the only difference is instead of wearing a dirty muscle shirt and garbadine trousers todays hucksters wear 5000 dollar suits.

The mindset however is exactly the same. Separate the marks from their money by any means necessary.

 

[montyz81]

many insiders have confirmed mountain was built to remove him without messing with anything else. I also believe there is a large door in the back for this as well.

And it can be done without any downtime at all? I can't imagine they could do that in a single night period. That said, I still feel like they won't do it unless it is part a bigger budget. Unless... there isn't a proper fix that even the stand that it was on in California couldn't solve. My guess is that the one in California was temporary and wasn't meant for the long haul or it is all one in the same and there just simply isn't a fix for it yet.

 

[lazyboy97o]

And it can be done without any downtime at all? I can't imagine they could do that in a single night period. That said, I still feel like they won't do it unless it is part a bigger budget. Unless... there isn't a proper fix that even the stand that it was on in California couldn't solve. My guess is that the one in California was temporary and wasn't meant for the long haul or it is all one in the same and there just simply isn't a fix for it yet.

The figure has been removed in the past.

 

[montyz81]

The figure has been removed in the past.

I stand corrected. Then it is money related or they really don't have a good fix for it yet!

 

[Ralphlaw]

The people who decide to build the figure are not the same people who choose to make a big marketing splash about the figure who are not the people who maintain the figure. You’re logic is based on incorrect assumptions of how things work and who does what.

I respectfully disagree with much of what you say, and time will perhaps tell which version is correct. I tend to think that one part(s) of the company that builds a huge multi-multi-million dollar attraction would not be surprised at the publicity shows and marketing push. One usually follows the other in a very predictable fashion. I assume Rohde pushed and/or welcomed that publicity.

As to the maintenance of the thing, Walt, Roy and Eisner would not tolerate inter-departmental squabbles like this. Perhaps the bureaucracy that is the current company does. I also think that a more logical barrier to removal is that hauling the broken monster out is expensive, and absolutely nobody on these boards has provided information to the contrary. Logic and common sense tells me this is true. Removing a bank safe is possible, but it is also difficult and expensive. Whether they dragged the yeti out before or not, the fact they it's there right now tells me that taking out is indeed expensive. If someone can actually provide facts otherwise, please do so. If somebody can only speculate otherwise, I won't stop you because it's a free country.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I stand corrected. Then it is money related or they really don't have a good fix for it yet!

Part of why the crazy stories like “they have to tear down the mountain” get repeated is because people project their own passion on to the company. People don’t want to accept that there is not enough concern to fix this massive show element so they buy into complicated justifications. Nobody has the political capital to own the fix but not get taken down by assuming the blame when the B show is considered good enough.

I respectfully disagree with much of what you say, and time will perhaps tell which version is correct. I tend to think that one part(s) of the company that builds a huge multi-multi-million dollar attraction would not be surprised at the publicity shows and marketing push. One usually follows the other in a very predictable fashion. I assume Rohde pushed and/or welcomed that publicity.

As to the maintenance of the thing, Walt, Roy and Eisner would not tolerate inter-departmental squabbles like this. Perhaps the bureaucracy that is the current company does. I also think that a more logical barrier to removal is that hauling the broken monster out is expensive, and absolutely nobody on these boards has provided information to the contrary. Logic and common sense tells me this is true. Removing a bank safe is possible, but it is also difficult and expensive. Whether they dragged the yeti out before or not, the fact they it's there right now tells me that taking out is indeed expensive. If someone can actually provide facts otherwise, please do so. If somebody can only speculate otherwise, I won't stop you because it's a free country.

Bank safes are typically built in place, not installed through a door during finishing. They’re not comparable.

 

[HauntedPirate]

You logic breaks down with #5, this is a matter of opinion. As for #8, I think a very small percentage of guests actually know about this issue. It's very likely that management feels that the current state of the yeti is acceptable.

Amen. "They're tourists... Whadda they know?"

 

[Ralphlaw]

Part of why the crazy stories like “they have to tear down the mountain” get repeated is because people project their own passion on to the company. People don’t want to accept that there is not enough concern to fix this massive show element so they buy into complicated justifications. Nobody has the political capital to own the fix but not get taken down by assuming the blame when the B show is considered good enough.


Bank safes are typically built in place, not installed through a door during finishing. They’re not comparable.

I've tolerated your critiques of my knowledge and/or the lack thereof, but I guess I'm really curious as to how you seem to know so much. What background and inside information makes you such an expert on these things? Do you work for Imagineering? Do you own a large construction company that builds multi-million dollar projects? Please don't belittle anyone else's background unless you have a strong one yourself. To an extent, we all live in glass houses. You know my background.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I've tolerated your critiques of my knowledge and/or the lack thereof, but I guess I'm really curious as to how you seem to know so much. What background and inside information makes you such an expert on these things? Do you work for Imagineering? Do you own a large construction company that builds multi-million dollar projects? Please don't belittle anyone else's background unless you have a strong one yourself. To an extent, we all live in glass houses. You know my background.

You’re poor explanations don’t require much in the way of specialized knowledge to debunk. Publicly available information undermines your argument.

 

[RSoxNo1]

Uh, I helped my Dad build a house. I have a plumber working on my building right now. I have represented both builders and customers many times over the years. I own three buildings that have been remodeled and maintained for decades. Let's logic this out:

1. A very expensive headline yeti was installed years ago in EE.
2. It quit working somehow about a year in.
3. Allegedly it was removed and reinstalled shortly thereafter, although I am not truly convinced that that happened.
4. The purported removal and re-install did not apparently close down the ride.
5. B mode is disappointing, and surely a better band aid like a projection could have been installed at some point in the past 9 years.
6. That band aid fix would surely have been easier and doable if the yeti was removed.
7. The installation of a better band aid would likely not have closed down the ride.
8. The yeti is probably Disney's biggest embarrassment over the last decade.
9. Finally, Disney is now trying to make a better band aid.
10. Departmental finger-pointing is the alleged cause of the 9 year paralysis.

Given all that, I maintain that removal of the beast, which few people actually see in disco mode, is both difficult and expensive. Even if they took it out years ago, I assume that that attempt to repair the problem was expensive. It didn't work, so why not remove the thing (if it's easy to do) and put up a projection against a hairy mannequin? The answer: It is probably difficult and expensive.

Note: My conclusion of difficult and expensive does not mean that a big door is not hidden in the back. It does not foreclose the notion that they removed it years ago. It does not mean that the yeti is necessarily unremoveable. My conclusion is based on pure logic given the facts before us, both absolutely known facts and those facts which are perhaps known.

Hold on everyone, he helped his father build a house. That gives him authority on all things related to the intricacies of a theme park attraction based purely on non-fact based speculation.

I contributed to rebuilding the deck on my house. I'd contribute more to this conversation but I need to call Bill Belichick and make a backup quarterback recommendation.

 

[Ralphlaw]

Hold on everyone, he helped his father build a house. That gives him authority on all things related to the intricacies of a theme park attraction based purely on non-fact based speculation.

I contributed to rebuilding the deck on my house. I'd contribute more to this conversation but I need to call Bill Belichick and make a backup quarterback recommendation.

So I can't contribute my two cents worth? And your background?

 

[Ralphlaw]

You’re poor explanations don’t require much in the way of specialized knowledge to debunk. Publicly available information undermines your argument.

So we can safely assume that you have no specialized knowledge.

 

[RSoxNo1]

So I can't contribute my two cents worth? And your background?

You can contribute, but your qualifications in an unrelated field have no bearing on those contributions.