Do the funky chicken?

[JeffJewell]

Chad...

could anyone else ever pull off the creative genius with the financial smoke & mirrors at the same time

...to me, what Walt proved was that there was, indeed, a market for the very best. He proved that putting as much as you can into a product would pay off big in the long run, even if you have some rough times with the pointy-head guys (oops, I'm certain I must have meant pointy-pencil guys, there. Take that, Curling. ) along the way.

Fantasia was not a popular success at the time, but hasn't it pulled it's weight in the long run? Not even Walt was able to please all the people all of the time, but I feel that his way of doing things, his dedication to making a product that was simply and clearly better than everything else available (even if he didn't hit the popularity mark every single time), is the smart way to do things, long-term. Business decisions have ramifications beyond this quarter, and I fear that the last decade of business decisions have weakened the Disney brand, and that the full effect of that weakening is yet to be felt.

raidermatt...

True, the question becomes where to draw the line, and in my opinion, the All Stars is it

...cool, we agree except for where the line gets drawn. I still wish I coule get more folks to see what I mean when I say that both Value resorts were created with the same cost-efficiency first focus... leaving the quantifiable difference between AS and PC to be mostly personal preference. I do try to allow others to have their own preferences, if I'm backed into a corner about it...

its a GOOD business decision because it allows Disney to tap a large population of guests who would not be paying them for accomodations

We could dance around this one for quite awhile. In the interest of brevity (HA!), let me suggest that, capitalists or no, sometimes it's _not_ the best business plan to simply make as much money as you can.

rarely see a bus

The sight of them isn't my real problem. I know I'm just begging for everyone on the boards to post their own interpretation of Disney busses as La-Z-Boys on rocket rails, but my experience includes too many trips with strollers and wheelchairs, carted onto too many standing room only busses, and a 2-hour plus Poly-to-DxL via DD trip after Kona Cafe, one night. The busses have sucked a significant amount Magic out of my vacations.

Jeff

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

What I do believe is that personal preference is the prevailing driver in this thread.

I completely disagree!! Preference has absolutely NOTHING to do with it. (At least in my case!) I evidently haven't been clear enough once again.

Time to try again!

Just today we've seen Landbaron call for the dozers to rip down the Grand Florida for crying out loud!!

To go along with:

If I had to name my least favorite resort, it would be the Contemporary.

I agree!! But the Standard was applied! And that's the difference. Is it a failed attempt at that standard? Perhaps. Does it match my personal tastes. Absolutely not! But the "Walt" philosophy was applied.

Conversely, this philosophy was not applied to the Floridian. Don't get me wrong. I like it. It's kinda cool in it's own way. But it's not "Disney". It's Disney trying to compete with the swankiest four and five star hotels around. And that's NOT the Disney type resort that was conceived many, many years ago. It is the perverted concept of Ei$ner, vying for the big buck crowd. As is his distorted "Disney" decorated PC just a blantant attempt to grab yet another segment of the market. There's nothing "Disney" about them, except by accident and location. They are "Ei$nerized" through and through.

 

[JeffJewell]

HOW can you be a snob if that's the case?

...imagine _my_ surprise, at it all.

AKL & WL are FAR more appealing to me. Yet, those two have been targeted as being "short of Disney Quality" by some in this thread.

I strongly suspect I'm a lone whacko on that one.

Just to further confuse everyone, the Wilderness Lodge is simply my favorite WDW resort... and I still say that it falls short of the Disney standard that the company had trained me to expect. I believe in acknowledging personal preferences, then working to keep them out of the debate, to the extent it's possible.

I'll almost ditto the 'Baron's ditto on the Contemporary. Personally, the Contemporary will always be the flagship WDW resort simply because of the effect it had on a six-year-old me in 1972. It's sad that there hasn't been regular updating, and the Garden Wings and Convention Center are a downright shame. But when it was built, it met (hell, it _defined_) the standard. Hard to blame a guy who died in the sixties for the fact that his "hotel of the future" seems kinda dated, 30-odd years after the fact.

Jeff

 

[raidermatt]

I still wish I could get more folks to see what I mean when I say that both Value resorts were created with the same cost-efficiency first focus...

Since I haven't stayed at the AS, and probably never will, you are far more qualified than I to judge its standards. I guess I am more behind the concept, and focusing on the positive comment from many who have stayed there. (By the way, its not that I wouldn't stay at AS, lord knows I've stayed a few roach motels in my day...)

capitalists or no, sometimes it's _not_ the best business plan to simply make as much money as you can.

I absolutely agree. I think it just gets back to whether we think AS/PC degrade the Disney brand. With AS, I give a qualified no. With PC, I will reserve judgement, but its certainly not looking good. Even if the amenities and service are at least equal to AS, the outside appearance itself maybe enough to do some damage.

The sight of them isn't my real problem...but my experience includes too many trips with strollers and wheelchairs, carted onto too many standing room only busses, and a 2-hour plus Poly-to-DxL via DD trip after Kona Cafe, one night.

I didn't mean to imply the sight of a bus was a problem to you. I only meant that I don't see that many of them at home, so I don't immediately tie them to the outside world (not that you do...).

Admittedly, my experience with the WDW bus system has been limited to a 9 day trip to CBR in 9/00. We didn't make any resort-to-resort trips, which probably explains in part why I didn't have a problem. Also, we tend to start our day a little later than the bulk of the crowd, and then we either leave a park well before closing, or we stay until they kick us out (almost). So we miss most of the crowds. So while I share your desire for improved transportation, it just hasn't taken away much Magic for me. But your reasons are definitely valid for you, and I would probably have the same issues given your experience.

 

[All Aboard]

Landbaron, I'll agree with Pirate, your contempt for Eisner may be just an eentsie weentsie driver in this conversation. I'm not sure there's anybody else who feels that the Grand Floridian is not "Disney" quality.

So, is it safe to say that the only "Disney" hotels in your opinion are the Contemporary and Polynesian? If so, I struggle to understand what makes the Contemporary "Disney" and not the other deluxes. Save for the fact that the two listed were "originals". [Oh how I fear a Landbaron post about the Asian and Venetian coming.]

If "putting you in a place and time" is the standard. Then how doesn't the WL, AKL, BC/YC & Boardwalk not do this? I never stayed at a Florida resort at the turn of the century (lat one that is), so I'm not sure if the Grand Floridian recreates that experience well or not?

You're a DVC member. Where do you stay? OKW? Is that "Disney?" I think so. Having been to the real thing bunches of times, OKW does a good job of recreating the "best" parts of the Key West experience to me.

Just what makes a "Disney" resort "Disney?" Merely being part of the original plans isn't a good enough answer. And, I still don't get why you don't think GF fits the bill. It's done on a Grand scale (npi). It takes you to a place and time. It doesn't scrimp on lavishness. It's not ugly. It has wow-factor. It's special, it's Magical. (I'm trying to come up with all the reasons folks have bashed the moderates and values here.)

 

[JeffJewell]

I'm not sure there's anybody else who feels that the Grand Floridian is not "Disney" quality.

...I think the 'Baron's point was not that the GF falls _short_ of Disney quality, rather that its target market represented a different demographic than the historical Disney market. I think he's saying that it was another example of fiddling with the formula because someone (oh, no... I'm not putting _my_ foot in your Eisner-basher bear trap) smelled some money somewhere that Disney wasn't making.

There's something to his stance, in that the GF failed to garner the five star rating they were looking for. I personally don't see that the GF de-values the brand, or serves to lower the public's expectations from Disney, so I'm okay with it.

DVC, I feel bad about it, but you're on your own, on this one. The GF left me pretty flat (just not my thematic cup of tea), but I can't fault them for taking the cheap, sub-Disney way out, in this case.

Jeff

PS: Not you, Greg, but I've seen some of the same folks defend the Values on the basis of Disney reaching a previously untapped market, and in other threads hope for the copyright extension so Mickey won't start showing up in pornos. Right off the bat, I've got to say that some of you must have made the acquaintance of some particularly peculiar masturbators, if you've detected a huge market for "Spankin' the Mickey." But beyond that, if there _is_ such a market, would you similarly support Disney doing what it can to expand into _that_ untapped market, too? Or is "finding an untapped market" a good thing only if you're included in that market?

 

[Peter Pirate]

Someone (some folks) earlier mentioned the new Vegas hotels & the theming & wonders they've done lately vs. the Disney offerings. While not wanting to go into the Vegas vs. WDW debate, I will say that Vegas offers developers huge opportunities to make these ridiculously expensive, ornate & surprisingly real reproductions of places (real or imagined) as Resorts. I am all for this and in a shaded response to the earlier posed question, it is my belief that Disney should jump into Vegas at the first opportunity with a glitzy Disney hotel, gaming & all that goes with it. The future is there. Hell, perhaps they can move out of the city and open an adjoining 'Mickey's Bordello'. The upside merchandise tie-ins are great...Dealer Mickey, Showgirls Minne & Daisy...Not to mention the ability to market Shows & spectaculars and an even bigger way to part the guest from his money than they have experienced in the past! Gambling money could then be routed to help the poorer sister (DL, WDW & ABC)...

 

[All Aboard]

Well, you managed to make me laugh and bring some much needed humor to the board. Doubt it will survive the moderator filter, though.

Anyhow, even though the analogy is clever and funny, it's off base. And I'm sure you know that. The "market" in our case is "people travelling to Central Florida to spend some time at theme parks." What Disney wants to capture is the lion's share of their dollars spent on things Disney offers. Disney offers resorts, and has since day 1. By offering value resorts, Disney tapped the "I'll go to your theme park, but I have to spend my nights elsewhere cuz I can't afford your hotels." That's a legitimate parallel market to tap. Just as is offering a wide variety of restaraunts to allow all the guests dining needs to met on-site. It makes all the sense in the world to me.

I'm still not sure I understand the down-side risk of including value resorts at WDW (not just value, but THE value resorts they've built.) Other than irritating the diehard fringe (and I'm convinced that's what Disney views most of us as). The All Stars and Pop Century haven't become the "new standard" for WDW. Since All Star Sports and Music opened, the Boardwalk, Coronado Springs, AKL, WL Villas and Beach Club Villas have all opened. Even if I didn't like the All Stars, I don't think I'd see them as a disturbing trend.

 

[raidermatt]

But beyond that, if there _is_ such a market, would you similarly support Disney doing what it can to expand into _that_ untapped market, too? Or is "finding an untapped market" a good thing only if you're included in that market?

First, let me say that your comments prior to this quote had me lol. I hope you don't mind, but I'm stealing your idea and will have the domain name registered by tonight...

But, to answer your question, whether I'm in the untapped market is irrelavent. I'm not in the AS/PC market, and I must add, neither am I in the StM market. Should Disney market to all those who would buy the "unprotected" Mickey products? Of course not, but you bring up a good point. For all of the talk about Disney sacrificing quality for the sake of market expansion, the reality is that the target market has not changed all that much. Its still families, its just now expanded to some that are a little lower on the economic ladder, and with the GF, to those who are further up that ladder. In the big picture, that's not much of a change, considering some of the other markets you mentioned.

AS does not represent a profits at all costs philosophy. Its merely a subtle broadening of focus.

 

[YoHo]

Just A comment on grand Floridian. I can see Landbaron's point. It isn't the Themeing itself (oh, I know he wanted the Asian and Venitian or what have you that so captured his imagination, but we don't always get what we want)
Its what Disney Tried to do. They tried to create a 5 star resort and that is NOT what Disney was all about. Ironically, I don't think this failed due to flaws in the resort so much as there were no customers for the resort they wanted.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Sorry Scoop. You gotta wait till I get home. I already had this ready to go!!!

Greg:

I'm not sure there's anybody else who feels that the Grand Floridian is not "Disney" quality.

I don't mean to quibble, but I said that the Floridain was not built using the Disney "Standard". Not without Disney "quality". The two are not mutually exclusive, they are definitely not the same!! And you are right. I think I will be alone on this one for a while at least. It is a very hard concept to explain. It's much easier to bash a 40 foot guitar or a purple (I believe the color is) motel 6.

All I'm saying is that they deviated quite a bit from the standard that they set for themselves when they built the Floridian. And it helped dilute the standard we all came to know. Not make it worse or better but instead blurred what we should expect from Disney. Before that Resort went up, everyone paid the same for the same Disney Experience, be it futuristic or South Seas. And that should have included the "Florida" experience as well. But they chose to do away with that concept and said to their guests, If you pay more, we will give you more. I personally don't see the difference between this concept and charging for a fastpass.

Later they did the same with a Caribbean experience. In essence they said, If you pay less, we'll give you less. In other words, "less" Disney experience. And I was naive to think that there was only one Walt Standard. Well. I guess there was before Ei$ner got involved and sniffed out those other markets. Which may very well be the "business' move, but that is for a different thread. Here we are talking philosophy.

(as an aside, I'm about to lose JJ, who I think may have agreed on some of the less esoteric themes of my argument.)

So, is it safe to say that the only "Disney" hotels in your opinion are the Contemporary and Polynesian?

Not at all!! Although they did set the standard. The resort concept that was not based on industry standards and industry pricing. They were not amenity driven. And most importantly they didn't reflect, copy or conform to what a hotel in New York may do or charge.

You are forcing me to think, in concrete terms, something that has been nothing more than a gut feeling for some time now. Time for a quote while I ponder the next paragraph.

Oh how I fear a Landbaron post about the Asian and Venetian coming.

This has nothing to do with the central issue, but I had to slip it in somewhere!!! OH! How I wish they would have done them!!!! OK! Back to business!!

If "putting you in a place and time" is the standard. Then how doesn't the WL, AKL, BC/YC & Boardwalk not do this?

They all do!! And to me, that's all that matters. Sorry JJ, but it doesn't have to have a monorail. However, it MUST offer some sort of "alternative" transportation. It must 'feel' Disney. It must not 'cater' to a certain economic class. Price also enters into the equation somewhat. It only has to be what it is. A complete Disney experience. With one, evenly applied (as much as possible) Disney Standard. There are not two Magic Kingdoms, with two Pirate rides. One that applies the Disney standards we all know and love and one that uses cardboard cutouts for the economy set. And there certainly isn't a solid gold one for the money set, where you can converse with an AA pirate as you ride. NO!! How absurd!! So what's the difference?

The All Stars and Pop Century haven't become the "new standard" for WDW.

No! Of course not. It's not a new standard at all! It destroyed the standard and replaced it with "you get what you pay for based on current industry trends and prices". Want more Disney? Pay more. Want less Disney? Pay less. There is no more Disney Standard when it comes to the resorts at all!!!!

Thank you YoHo!!! I was afraid I would explain it so poorly that no one would see it!!!

 

[All Aboard]

Before that Resort went up, everyone paid the same for the same Disney Experience, be it futuristic or South Seas.

With all due respect (as you say right before you slam someone ) you've got to be kidding, right!?

That's the "Disney Standard" - a uniform pricing model???

With a grand total of 2 (count 'em, two) hotels, it pretty easy to price them the same. But wait, they weren't really priced the same, now where they? Doesn't the Contemporary have (and always did have) suites and deluxe rooms up there somewhere within the monolith? Haven't the rooms right on the water always been more expensive at the Poly than the ones facing the parking lot? So, within the resort you could (if you chose) decide to buy a somewhat better or somewhat worse Disney Experience at a somewhat different Disney Price.

I guess when the Golf Resort opened a couple of years later (same for the Village offerings) and were priced differently (each offering an experience far different from either Contemp or Poly), that didn't bother you? That wasn't a variation from the Disney Standard?

So, am I to believe that from 1973 - 1989 the good folks at Disney didn't build anymore resorts because they thought they might have to charge a different price? [I'm borrowing Pirate's tounge and his cheek (since I'm not very good at that sort of thing - despite what Safari Steve says.)]

 

[Another Voice]

Ah. Mr. Pirate. If you think Mickey’s casino is so far fetched wait until you see the plans for ABC daytime soaps to go topless in two years (and I’m not joking).

Disney “magic” is not simply a recreation of the past. It is not mountains of details and it’s not lots of money thrown to architecture and design. Disney “magic” is not being a perfect recreation down to the number of rivet holes in the Eiffel Tower or bragging about where the furniture is imported from. That kind of decor is Vegas. It’s very uncreative and most often comes off as nothing but garish.

Disney “magic” is when you say to yourself, “I didn’t think a place like this could really exist”. Doesn’t matter the time, doesn’t matter the expense. The Contemporary had it back in 1971, Hotel Mira Costa at DisneySea has it today. Dixie Landings has it too. The “magic” is not in how the place looks – it’s in how the place makes you feel.

The country is filled with hundreds of hotels that are more elegant, more luxurious, and have better service than the resorts at WDW. But few are designed with the filmmaker’s ability to produce an emotional response. The best WDW resorts are designed, intentionally, using the same techniques used to design movie sets. That is what is supposed to be the difference between a Disney resort and a Motel 6.

And that’s how they should be judged, in my opinion. I don’t care how much they cost. I don’t care who stays in them. I don’t care if I take a bus or a moped. I only care if the place makes me stop and experience something new.


And this whole “Walt pried the fillings from Lillian’s mouth and sold off Ward Kimble’s kidneys to keep the studio away from the mobs of angry creditors” thread here. What utter bunk. Post war Hollywood, all the way through the 1980’s, was not filled with stable businesses because the movie industry is not a stable industry. Watch one of those documentaries on AMC about the history of 20th Century Fox, Paramount, MGM, Columbia, RKO, etc. – all those places that weren’t run by Madman Disney. They all went under, Disney didn’t. Only Disney remained independent and that was able to so because of all those “risky schemes” he insisted on: re-release of quality movies, television, foreign markets and Disneyland.

The entire thought that “Disney can’t do it right because times have changed” is in the same vein as Robert Iger’s comment that the good animated movies in the past were “nothing but an aberration” and can’t be repeated. It’s the typical excuse given by lazy people who no longer even want to put in the effort. If people don’t want to make good work, they need to get out of the business and make room for the people who do have the talent and the drive.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Out of all those wonderful words in that finely crafted post, clearly depicting the 'feel', ambiance, theme, time and place criteria and all those other esoteric, profound and mystical things that go into a Disney experience (or standard) you choose to show that there was a ten dollar difference between a garden view and a lagoon view at the Contemporary!!! Ahhhhhhhhhh!!!! I'm just not getting through, am I.

Price is only a consideration in that Disney gave you solid gold carrousel, for less than you would expect. It gave you a Disney experience for less than "industry standard". It was certainly higher than the local carnival or amusement park. But nowhere near what the ratio or an accounts books would have had it! Don't let the price thing get in the way. It is the standard that is important. Cost (or price) is a consideration, but only a minor one in the grand scheme of things.

If it's that important, re-read the post and leave the price thing out. Everything else is still just as valid.

PS: I thought you never took your tongue out of your cheek!!!



Oh-oh!! Just checked and AV has posted.

The country is filled with hundreds of hotels that are more elegant, more luxurious, and have better service than the resorts at WDW. But few are designed with the filmmaker's ability to produce an emotional response. The best WDW resorts are designed, intentionally, using the same techniques used to design movie sets. That is what is supposed to be the difference between a Disney resort and a Motel 6.

Thanks for putting my feelings into words!!!!

 

[Peter Pirate]

That my tounge does tend to fill my cheeck on occasion, but apparantely you take me for a fool...That's ok, I take me for one too, but I do have serious consideration that Disney should look at the Vegas Market for a Resort/Casino/Theatre. Make Vegas magic? Aww, who cares if Vegas is magic, I'll bet Disney can still be magic even when taking your money at a casino - They may even be able to court the upper eschelon & forget the dweebies & cheapskates altogether...

As for ABC going topless, well it's about damn time! TV titilate's, exploits & sensationlizes just about everything. I think a couple of boobs are probably all that seperates ABC and the #1 rating (are those boobs Eisner & Iger or the other?? Well, you decide).

Disney magic is when you say to yourself "I didn't think a place like this could really exist."

You don't think many people feel that way about Mandalay Bay or Venitian or Bellagio???

And all of the qualities that should fill what a Disney Resort that you mention get my thumgs up. Disney could do that in Vegas, Disney can do that in any number of different realms (CSR, AKL or even AS). As I keep repeating, who made us the judge of what others find magical?

Your last paragraph...Well, I disagree but I have to go & the reply could takeawhile. Suffice to say, Scoop & I are on the same page here and if he wants the mantle, it's his...Otherwise I'll be back!

 

[YoHo]

If people don’t want to make good work, they need to get out of the business and make room for the people who do have the talent and the drive.

This is fundimental. this means more then anything else said in this thread. Possibly on this board in a long time.

It looks like Disney no longer has the Desire to do what it does. Everything that comes out of them is tainted by this.

whether or no Disney should be building Value resorts is a minor issue.
The fact that Disney as a whole from the managment level lacks the drive to create quality Taints everything they do.

Its a corporate thing not an individule thing.

 

[YoHo]

So when the Disney Cruise Stops in Nassau you get the chance to take a good long look at the Atlantis hotel and Casino.

Now for those of you without cable and the travel channel, Atlantis is the largest casino in the Caribbean and a rival to anything in Vega. This place is amayzing although given time I could come up with a million things about it that don't match up with what disney could do.

Large number of cruise passengers, especially the older ones made a beeline for Atlantis to throw their money away.
Frankly, I think its in Disney's best interest to continue with its more subtle extortion.

 

[raidermatt]

However, it MUST offer some sort of "alternative" transportation.

Says who? (rhetorical question...)

The Disney experience is defined by the guest, not by Disney. As every guest is different, it follows that resorts can have different qualities. To use the above example, a guest who insists on driving his car everywhere, regardless of what kind of transportation is offered, really dosn't give a mouse's patoot where the monorail or ferries stop.

Some people love the feeling Disney movies have given them, and the feeling they get in the parks. Moreover, they want the convenience of staying on site, and they want Disney service. Maybe they aren't looking to get lost in their resort, or maybe having a 40 foot Dalmation outside captures their imagination so much that they do get lost. As long as Disney still gives me what I want, be it at the BW, GF, or CBR, my experience has not been injured one iota, and I cannot make a good business case for Disney to ignore the other guy.

Now, there are going to be some who stay at AS and say "what's the big deal? Its just a Motel 6 with some color". But there are those who stay at the BW, Contemp, etc, and say "what's the big deal? Its just a Holiday Inn/Hyatt/etc. with some landscaping/architecture." Both of these groups are groups that Disney should by and large ignore when it comes to their resorts. "Magic" is Disney's core product, and that should not be compromised under the Disney name. But catering that Magic to the individual is a wise decision.

 

[Peter Pirate]

Wonderful post raidermatt!

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Says who? (rhetorical question...)

Me, of course!!!

The Disney experience is defined by the guest, not by Disney.

And here is where we part company! It is most definitely defined by Disney! Not the guest! The guest can choose to accept what Disney offers or reject it, but the concept is dictated by Disney. I know that all of us (yes, all of us) accept it. And I know many people who reject it outright. Too crowded. Too commercial. Too expensive. Too… Well, you get the picture. But the picture is provided by Disney. If it were truly guest defined, we’d all have ‘magical’ experiences at Six Flaggs.

To use the above example, a guest who insists on driving his car everywhere, regardless of what kind of transportation is offered, really dosn't give a mouse's patoot where the monorail or ferries stop.

WRONG!!! Or I am truly an anomaly. I drive everywhere I can when in Disney. The transportation options are still very important to me. I can’t explain it. It has no direct effect on my experience. But just knowing that the launches are traveling to and from the Poly makes my heart glad. When I see them, I smile. Maybe it’s the ambience. Maybe it’s memories. But it is VERY important to me.

Now, there are going to be some who stay at AS and say "what's the big deal? Its just a Motel 6 with some color". But there are those who stay at the BW, Contemp, etc, and say "what's the big deal? Its just a Holiday Inn/Hyatt/etc. with some landscaping/architecture

Exactly!! Which is why it is soooo very important to let Disney set the standard and the guest can buy into it or not! The way things are now, the tail is definitely wagging the dog!!

But catering that Magic to the individual is a wise decision.

I disagree. But that is a business discussion and I have been talking philosophy.