When is it fair to report on the upkeep of New Fantasyland?

[Tim Lohr]

Point well taken. But they had a hard decision to make: Keep that side of ETwB open, or double the length of the line, meaning that some guests wouldn't get to see Belle. In a perfect world, they'd have repair crews waiting around the clock to repair and evaluate the animatronics. Sometimes something breaks and you can't just wave a wand and make it work.

The audioanimatronics Disney invented decades ago aren't the same type used today. I'm pretty sure that Madame Wardrobe uses electronic actuators, as opposed to a pressurized system, and was probably built by Garner Holt as it is not a very advanced animatronic.

We also don't know that the animatronic "broke", it could be maintenance/construction they delayed with duct tape until after the opening, or perhaps a guest threw something at the animatronic and it needed to be cleaned. Hard to say.

If you don't know about Madame Wardrobe (most first guests to ETwB probably don't), then maybe the face cover they have isn't that big of a sore thumb, making her just another piece of furniture.

The reason it's called "show business", is because if you don't put on a good show you won't be in business very long

But here they're putting business before the show, the real problem is the simple fact that it was ever allowed it to get to be this way, because their whole business revolves around putting on shows

It'd be like going into a shoe store, and having them tell you "sorry, we don't carry shoes in your size" or that "the only shoes we do have are old and beat up and full of holes"...

There are some pretty basic things you need to anticipate and fulfill in any kind of business, not doing these things isn't necessarily wrong, or immoral, it's just really dumb

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

Doesn't require a perfect world. That was once standard Disney procedure. AA went down, ride closed, call went out, techs came and fixed it, ride reopened. (Like in RCT.)
No reason that can't be the case now, except Disney won't pay for it.

At one time, they kept enough spare parts on hand to practically build a replacement AA or ride vehicle from scratch.
But, in the late '90s someone (I've heard it was a dastardly gentleman named Irby) decided that it was wasteful to do it that way. Henceforth, if a ride broke down and needed a replacement part, it very likely had to be ordered, requiring several days wait for repair to happen.

In any event, the attraction should never open with something as major as the wardrobe down. 101 city.

I meant to say that if they had a special repair crew in the next room constantly monitoring Madam Wardrobe, with require software engineers and specialists ready to go at a moments notice then theoretically the downtime might be minutes. Of course there is maintenance, but it might take them a bit to go over there, my point is that even in Walt's day stuff would break down and the ride would go 101.

Madame Wardrobe might also require some sophisticated work beyond what any repair crew could complete in a day. Such as reprograming. She's not a pressurized system like the animatronics of days gone by, some ways easier to make repairs, compared with something more sophisticated.

Outside of maintenance issues (I know that maintenance on animatronics in Splash is horrible etc . . .), you've got a decision to make, keep the ride open in less than optimal condition so that the "must-see" guests can experience the attraction, or go 101.

If the auctioneer pirate went down, then Pirates would go 101, though if a minor character is having a glitch which is barely noticeable . . . what do you do? Open, and let 3,000 per hour see the attraction they are dying to see, or go 101 for a day.

At some point a decision has to be made, and it not always black and white in that the right answer is to always have everything 100% show ready and never open when ever the slightest hair is out of whack.

The scene with Madam Wardrobe is a nice little prelude, but it can also be performed by a castmember, IMHO, so I don't think show quality suffered horribly is an exaggeration.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

The reason it's called "show business", is because if you don't put on a good show you won't be in business very long

But here they're putting business before the show, the real problem is the simple fact that it was ever allowed it to get to be this way, because their whole business revolves around putting on shows

It'd be like going into a shoe store, and having them tell you "sorry, we don't carry shoes in your size" or that "the only shoes we do have are old and beat up and full of holes"...

There are some pretty basic things you need to anticipate and fulfill in any kind of business, not doing these things isn't necessarily wrong, or immoral, it's just really dumb

I think your analogy is an exaggeration, as is Lee's assertion that the Wardrobe going down means close the ride.

Here's what little girls love/want to see with ETwB:

1. Belle face character.
2. Storytime with Belle
3. The Beast
4. Lumiere
5. Inside of the castle, which I guess would include Wardrobe, though she sure isn't the headliner.

See how far down the Wardrobe is? Sure, she is a great part of the pre-show, but this attraction is different from others in that you get 99% of the magic which happens in the room with Belle. I personally think Lumiere's effect is much more wowing, and magical, than the Wardrobe who is a little over the top. Plus, if a castmember can perform the same role, big deal. I would guess that most guests unaware of the Wardrobe's role would still think the attraction is great.

 

[flynnibus]

I meant to say that if they had a special repair crew in the next room constantly monitoring Madam Wardrobe, with require software engineers and specialists ready to go at a moments notice then theoretically the downtime might be minutes. Of course there is maintenance, but it might take them a bit to go over there, my point is that even in Walt's day stuff would break down and the ride would go 101.

But in Walt's day.. they felt it appropriate to be able to repair the stuff themselves. They built up the skillsets, had the tooling and resources to maintain most of their own gear.

Now, Disney outsources, does not maintain inventory, and deems it acceptable to trade extended periods of reduced show quality for the cost savings of not 'being prepared' by reducing their own investment to the absolute minimum.

Why have divers on staff when I can just contract them as needed..
Why have this trade on staff when I can just contract them as needed..
etc

Makes great sense on paper once you've accepted the fact you no longer put pride in ownership and putting on the best possible show.

 

[Patricia Melton]

I was at this month old restaurant yesterday. I had an expensive meal there yesterday. $120 each, four persons.

It was crap.

There is nothing whatsoever that should make me wait six months for them to get their act together. Uh-uh, no way. They need to serve me a proper meal or else they need to give me my money back. When you charge money, you are open for business, and you get judged as a business.

As someone who was in the restaurant industry for many years, I highly doubt you were served "crap" at any restaurant. Maybe you didn't like your meal, but health codes prohibit a restaurant from literally serving you "crap". So that's an exaggeration on your part.

$120 for four people breaks down to $30 each, which is also technically a moderately-priced restaurant; $120 for two people would have pushed it into a truly expensive tier. But $30 per person might indeed be more than you are used to spending so I will give you that one.

You don't happen to mention what, if anything, you did to let the restaurant know you felt your meal was "crap" (as you elegantly put it). Did you ask to speak to a manager and let him or her know there was a problem while you were still at the table?

Did you tell your server you didn't like the food after it was brought to you?

Did you stop eating because it was such "crap" and ask for the food to be taken away...or did you just eat it anyway? In which case, you're admitting that you willfully ate "crap". So, either you choose to eat "crap" now and again or the food really wasn't "crap" after all.

I just can't imagine a restaurant where things break down to $30/person wouldn't jump to address a problem with you if you only let them know there was a problem. Even now, after you've eaten all the "crap" and have digested it and it's been some time later you can still write to the restaurant and let them know what you thought of your meal there.

Be fair and give a restaurant a chance to rectify whatever problem you feel you had...instead of just going around telling people you ate "crap" (but not noting whether or not you told the restaurant about it).

 

[Patricia Melton]

About the stuff missing from queues...when I rode Mermaid, there was a family in front of me in the queue, and one of them reached out and tugged on everything she could reach. I mean TUGGED. Like she hoped to leave with a little souvenir...I wonder if that's what's been happening with missing starfish and such...

That's exactly what that woman was doing...she wanted to break something off to take it home as a souvenir.

The gut reaction to this is to think "how terrible people have become!" but I've read enough books about Disneyland to know that people behaved this way back when that park first opened, too. People used to throw garbage anywhere more than they do today...they enjoyed throwing it into water from heights like on the Liberty Belle especially. They had a big problem with that and that's why no mint juleps could be served on the boat the way Walt wanted (all the cups would end up in the Rivers of America).

People enjoy breaking pieces off of something so they can take that home and show the dunderheads back there "Lookit what I got! It's a starfish that was part of the line at Mermaid!". It's something they couldn't have bought at a souvenir shop so it's something extra special that they were able to steal it.

The funny thing is that these are typically people who have the money to spend in s store, too. It's not people who are poor who are doing this...it is people who live in nice houses in the suburbs but who want the thrill of taking something that was part of an attraction just because they could pry it loose and abscond with it. It's something the neighbors can't ever get and they get to return home from the vacation with this unique thing that no one could have bought.

All those books on Disney history show people have been doing this since Day One in the parks...so Imagineers should always build everything so that it's impossible for people to break-off and steal things...because they will.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

As someone who was in the restaurant industry for many years, I highly doubt you were served "crap" at any restaurant. Maybe you didn't like your meal, but health codes prohibit a restaurant from literally serving you "crap". So that's an exaggeration on your part.

$120 for four people breaks down to $30 each, which is also technically a moderately-priced restaurant; $120 for two people would have pushed it into a truly expensive tier. But $30 per person might indeed be more than you are used to spending so I will give you that one.

You don't happen to mention what, if anything, you did to let the restaurant know you felt your meal was "crap" (as you elegantly put it). Did you ask to speak to a manager and let him or her know there was a problem while you were still at the table?

Did you tell your server you didn't like the food after it was brought to you?

Did you stop eating because it was such "crap" and ask for the food to be taken away...or did you just eat it anyway? In which case, you're admitting that you willfully ate "crap". So, either you choose to eat "crap" now and again or the food really wasn't "crap" after all.

I just can't imagine a restaurant where things break down to $30/person wouldn't jump to address a problem with you if you only let them know there was a problem. Even now, after you've eaten all the "crap" and have digested it and it's been some time later you can still write to the restaurant and let them know what you thought of your meal there.

Be fair and give a restaurant a chance to rectify whatever problem you feel you had...instead of just going around telling people you ate "crap" (but not noting whether or not you told the restaurant about it).

Would you be surprised to read that we did not, in fact, visit any restaurant in the first place?

It was an analogy. It serves to make a particular point by avoiding the side-issues and emotions that invariably end up cluttering the actual subject of any public debate.

 

[Patricia Melton]

But in Walt's day.. they felt it appropriate to be able to repair the stuff themselves. They built up the skillsets, had the tooling and resources to maintain most of their own gear.

Now, Disney outsources, does not maintain inventory, and deems it acceptable to trade extended periods of reduced show quality for the cost savings of not 'being prepared' by reducing their own investment to the absolute minimum.

Why have divers on staff when I can just contract them as needed..
Why have this trade on staff when I can just contract them as needed..
etc

Makes great sense on paper once you've accepted the fact you no longer put pride in ownership and putting on the best possible show.

This is all a result of Disney hiring MBAs fresh out of school who come in and want to make a name for themselves and get noticed...so they look for things to cut so they can be heralded as "the whiz kid who found all the savings!".

Only...those "savings" end up costing more long-term. The MBAs don't care, though, because they've already left Disney after 2-3 years so they won't be there when the problems start happening because not having the maintenance crew the parks used to have catches up with everyone. The MBAs are at another company by then, like locusts who have moved on to a new field.

I noticed this first start to happen in the late-80s to companies I dealt with a lot. In the 90s it really heated up...but in the 2000s there was a big explosion of this. I think the current economy has slowed it somewhat because it's harder for these MBAs to jump from one job to another every 3 years...and as a result they have to be more careful about what they do in their current position, so they are a little less likely today to set up a disaster for the company a few steps down the line that could manifest while they are still in their current position.

 

[Patricia Melton]

Would you be surprised to read that we did not, in fact, visit any restaurant in the first place?

It was an analogy. It serves to make a particular point by avoiding the side-issues and emotions that invariably end up cluttering the actual subject of any public debate.

To be honest, I was most surprised that you called something "crap" when in other posts you wedge references to Cincinnatius or Jungian theory or whatever else you are currently studying in school into something just so you can use those fancy words.

So, it was jarring to see you call something "crap".

 

[flynnibus]

The blame the MBAs for everything gets old... especially when you don't do any research about the company @Patricia Melton

A lot of this comes mentalities from external consultancies - not fresh hires. And much of the change of the guard at Disney came from the non-theme park management in TWDC that saw the parks as a resource to be exploited.. because at the time it was the only healthy performer year over year when the studios was on the ropes.. and they saw even more potential in the parks as under utilized. The new management at the top - not fresh MBAs... set the tone of efficency and 'more with less, show be damned' attitudes.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

To be honest, I was most surprised that you called something "crap" when in other posts you wedge references to Cincinnatius or Jungian theory or whatever else you are currently studying in school into something just so you can use those fancy words.

So, it was jarring to see you call something "crap".

It was used for deliberate literary effect! That's why it received it's own short paragraph too. To draw attention.

Holy crap, like this.

You can't not read it, not even when quickly glancing over this post. It draws attention to itself, draws the eye of the reader to it like the north pole pulls a magnet. This post uses the same scheme. Three parts. The first act sets the stage. The second act is the one-line punch, the crowdpleaser. The third act then resolves the tension between act one and two.

 

[Ignohippo]

My goodness Patty! I believe this may be the first time you've said anything negative about TWDCo....EVER. It's refreshing to see you say something balanced for once.

I'm of two points of thought on this:

On one hand, these are handmade pieces of cutting-edge technology. Things are going to happen. Regardless of how much you may pay to get into the park, you have to be patient and expect that things will break down from time to time.

HOWEVER...

In the case of the wardrobe AA, knowing WDI, this thing probably cost them multiple millions for each one (I remember hearing Ursala cost $3+ million - someone please correct me if I'm wrong). At that price, there's absolutely no excuse for them to be down more than a few days. Experts can be flown down and parts can be machined in days. Having them non-functioning for weeks on end means that there simply isn't a priority on show anymore - and for that, there's no excuse.

I would also think something as intregal as the wardrobe would have been tested non-stop for months. If they weren't, then that's just utter stupidity on WDI's part.

As for the starfish, etc. missing, those things should be able to be made in a day or two. Anyone who makes props knows there simply isn't anything that would take that long in re-creating them. More than a week and it simply means there's either (A) too much red tape for anything to actually ever get done, or (B) there's a complete lack of caring at TDO (I would think though that if TDO actaully cared anymore, these things would have been fixed immediately and additional back stock of these parts would be ordered so that they can be replaced immediately in the future).

 

[Ignohippo]

Doesn't require a perfect world. That was once standard Disney procedure. AA went down, ride closed, call went out, techs came and fixed it, ride reopened. (Like in RCT.)
No reason that can't be the case now, except Disney won't pay for it.

I would have to respectfully disagree with this statement (in part). If the Lincoln AA goes down, I would hope the Hall would be shut down until it was fixed. But this isn't the same situation.

The wardrobe is like Mr. Potato Head at TSMM. The wardrobe may be a bit more intregal, but neither are the main focus of the attraction. You can't shutter TSMM just because the fathead may not work, just as you shouldn't shut down Storytime just because the wardrobe isn't functioning.

 

[marni1971]

Perhaps the 'robe is just symbolic of the poor show quality and upkeep in all the parks.

 

[kittybubbles]

I think folks can state their opinion anytime they'd like to and there is no time frame as to when someone can state said opinion. If you were to ask me what stands out to me as to recent decisions made for the Orlando Resort it might look something like this:

How long did it take before the one tomb in the HM cemetery stopped having bubbles come out of it as an effect? I saw it working a few times, but not for my last four visits or so.

Why did anyone pay for the design/build on these bounch pads in the Pooh queue that anyone could tell was a bad idea so they could be open for what, a half day or so before they were removed for a meet and greet?

The one ride in the new area was open and running on the West coast while being built here, you couldn't work out the bugs then and adjust before opening here? I didn't know that eels should move, but it is sad that they never worked here. It's ok that the eyes should be different colors, but why not light the other eye up? I just think it looks broken by only having one eye light.

Wardrobe seems similar to Mr. potato head so haven't you had enough time to get it worked out? If it is the software that runs the eyes, maybe they need to build some shades to cover them for times they do not work...maybe they are over designing stuff, my daughter got $60 dollar Furby for the holiday's and its eyes do all shorts of animated things.

I enjoyed my dinner at BoG and the place is beautiful, I liked the food, but (in my opinion) imagineering made some mistakes. I did not like the look of the second floor of the ballroom, I can tell it is too small, maybe there is not enough up there for a forced perspective to work...it's not like they have smaller bricks or smaller windows to sell the perspective, maybe they need miniature furniture or something to make it look more realistic. I do not get the lights going brighter and dimmer, I gas it is suppose to simulate candle/gas light as opposed to electricity, but I think it just looks like the lights get brighter from time to time as opposed to a flicker you would get from fire. I also think it is sad that the knights are behind a railing...I understand the need to do this, but I doubt it would stop anyone from putting there kids over the rail for a picture

 

[celluloid]

The reason it's called "show business", is because if you don't put on a good show you won't be in business very long

But here they're putting business before the show, the real problem is the simple fact that it was ever allowed it to get to be this way, because their whole business revolves around putting on shows

It'd be like going into a shoe store, and having them tell you "sorry, we don't carry shoes in your size" or that "the only shoes we do have are old and beat up and full of holes"...

There are some pretty basic things you need to anticipate and fulfill in any kind of business, not doing these things isn't necessarily wrong, or immoral, it's just really dumb

Yep. Show before Efficency. Disney still preaches this in training, yet they don't practice it.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

In the case of the wardrobe AA, knowing WDI, this thing probably cost them multiple millions for each one (I remember hearing Ursala cost $3+ million - someone please correct me if I'm wrong). At that price, there's absolutely no excuse for them to be down more than a few days. Experts can be flown down and parts can be machined in days. Having them non-functioning for weeks on end means that there simply isn't a priority on show anymore - and for that, there's no excuse.

I would also think something as intregal as the wardrobe would have been tested non-stop for months. If they weren't, then that's just utter stupidity on WDI's part.

As for the starfish, etc. missing, those things should be able to be made in a day or two. Anyone who makes props knows there simply isn't anything that would take that long in re-creating them. More than a week and it simply means there's either (A) too much red tape for anything to actually ever get done, or (B) there's a complete lack of caring at TDO (I would think though that if TDO actaully cared anymore, these things would have been fixed immediately and additional back stock of these parts would be ordered so that they can be replaced immediately in the future).

I think the price of anything, be it a $150 million dollar Dreamliner to 5 cent backstratcher, doesn't mean much when it comes to things breaking. In fact, the more expensive something is, quite often the harder it is to maintain. So, if they paid Garner Holt $600,000 to manufacture Madame Wardrobe, then this implies that the quality of the piece should be so high that it never breaks? Even super expensive airplanes need maintenance, and even then they sometimes fall out of the sky.

The part that "broke" was most likely one of the few moving parts, most likely in the mouth articulations. Well, I'm sure Holt, WDI, or whoever was relying upon a linear actuator having a certain life span, and perhaps one failed prematurely. As to why they don't have backups parts of the stuff that will eventually break, I have no idea. It obvious that Disney doesn't pride itself on meticulous upkeep, at least as far as WDW is concerned, like they did the in the past.

WDW's upkeep of animatronics is horrible, look at Splash and the problems with CBJ that went uncorrected for years.

How long had Madame Wardrobe been down?

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

As someone who was in the restaurant industry for many years, I highly doubt you were served "crap" at any restaurant. Maybe you didn't like your meal, but health codes prohibit a restaurant from literally serving you "crap". So that's an exaggeration on your part.
$120 for four people breaks down to $30 each, which is also technically a moderately-priced restaurant; $120 for two people would have pushed it into a truly expensive tier. But $30 per person might indeed be more than you are used to spending so I will give you that one.

You've been in the "restaurant" franchise business for years and never heard anybody refer to poor tasting food as "crap"?

Price of the food/restaurant doesn't necessarily correlate with quality and taste. Pop into almost any place in Paris and you can get a great tasting meal which is relatively inexpensive. Best meal I had in Paris was near a train station in a little place that charged me a ridiculously low price for real food, i.e. a chicken dish made with real fresh ingredients.

Similarly, I could have spent the same thirteen bucks on an overly salty turkey leg and a diet Coke at WDW. Even if cooked as well as it comes, I would still refer to a turkey leg as "crap" food at WDW. Slow roasted, way overly salty, fatty turkey leg.

Real food, which often involves cooking fresh vegetables, meats, and using the juices to make real sauces means that somebody will skill cooked the food, isn't served very often at WDW. And the fast food is often greasy and not very healthy.

 

[BigThunderMatt]

Not that I'm excusing TDO on this, especially since there are two Madam Wardrobes after passing through the mirror as there are two identical show areas.

No there aren't. There are two libraries. There is only one Madam Wardrobe.

 

[Ignohippo]

I think the price of anything, be it a $150 million dollar Dreamliner to 5 cent backstratcher, doesn't mean much when it comes to things breaking. In fact, the more expensive something is, quite often the harder it is to maintain. So, if they paid Garner Holt $600,000 to manufacture Madame Wardrobe, then this implies that the quality of the piece should be so high that it never breaks? Even super expensive airplanes need maintenance, and even then they sometimes fall out of the sky.

The part that "broke" was most likely one of the few moving parts, most likely in the mouth articulations. Well, I'm sure Holt, WDI, or whoever was relying upon a linear actuator having a certain life span, and perhaps one failed prematurely. As to why they don't have backups parts of the stuff that will eventually break, I have no idea. It obvious that Disney doesn't pride itself on meticulous upkeep, at least as far as WDW is concerned, like they did the in the past.

WDW's upkeep of animatronics is horrible, look at Splash and the problems with CBJ that went uncorrected for years.

How long had Madame Wardrobe been down?

You missed my point ENTIRELY. My point is, as it is such an expensive piece, flying an expert down and getting new parts machined is relatively a minimal expense. It makes no sense to have such an expensive AA and then not pay whatever it takes to ensure that it is back up and running as quickly as possible (and I guarantee you, WDI paid much, much more for the wardrobe than $600,000).

My other point was that such an expensive and intregal piece should have been tested for months before opening there's no way to know for sure, but it seemed Ursala at DCA was still being programmed up to a month or two before TLM opened there. It doesn't sound like they're doing the extensive testing they need to be doing on these things before relying on them 20/7.