Early Entry

[Bstanley]

Well, when I see numbers that don't make something clear to me I start to wonder why. I certainly don't know anything other than what is published.

If someone (an ambitious someone) were trying to make a case for why 'my' people should develop the next park rather than 'those' people that did all the other parks they might do their best to make sure that the impression people have of 'those' people is that 'they missed the mark with this latest park' or 'they did this park the old way and it doesn't work anymore' or even 'they aren't needed anymore - my guys can do a REAL park for the same money'.

Maybe that's all just TOO Machiavellian, but when I look at DCA and compare it to AK I definitely see the cookie-cutter versus the inventive.

 

[Bob O]

I enjoy Ak but the addition of the park hasnt increased the amount of days i stay on site at all. And if it was built(which im sure it was) to increase additional days at wdw im sure it hasnt. It gave people more options to choose from but there are no figures to show that it the masses added days to their stays. As already said, if the park was as profitable as some believe their would be no reason to add onto the park.
And i know im disappointed because wdw sold me a bill of goods that included BK and a full days worth of activites and in that it failed big time. It may meet that goal some day but for me and my family it doesnt now and to be priced the same as MK or Epcot is a joke as you get alot less bang for your theme park buck IMHO.

 

[Bstanley]

Well BobO as Voltaire said, "I disagree with what you say but I defend your right to say it."

 

[DisneyKidds]

Back, holding breath, diving in......

the idea of Animal Kingdom was to INCREASE the number of guest/days overall on property. Not redistribute them. Not to keep them steady. But to increase them. There are far cheaper ways to acheive those goals.

Are you saying that WDW attendance figures would have been the same with or without AK. I know that is what you are saying. But, if you assume that overall WDW attendance would have been down without the AK, and it was static with it, then AK really represented an attendance increase over what would have otherwise been. Is this not possible? If all those people were going to go off property, was there really a far cheaper way to keep them? And even if, why not try and create something new and wonderful, even if it eventually goes on to be misunderstood. I hear so much complaining that the current regime does nothing. Well, they sure as heck tried. If they don't try they are criticized. If they try and fail you say they would have been better off not trying. Is there any station on the Car #3 dial that can keep the occupants happy?

Notice all the cut backs, the delayed hotels, the cancelled expansion plans, the general belt tightening long before 9/11? Are those the signs of success?

Perhaps not. But are they signs of specific Disney failures? Perhaps not either.

A nice thought, but doesn't work for the business.

But the concept is that is the public, not the business, did more of this the business would be better off. And I guess that is a segway into the 'expectations' discussion Mr. Baron would like to pursue.

Not adequate is the perfect way to describe it!

Mr. Baron, now I must quote Matt....

Unfortunately, my misguided attempts at light sarcasm have further muddied my clouded points

and slipped by you. I don't agree that there is anything inadequate about AK - at least not as far as I'm concerned.

It is up to the public, who votes with their pocketbook and attendance. And they are voting – NO!

I think you guys have gone around with Bstanley on this one enough. I'm with he and Matt and don't necessarily agree. Could the numbers be better - they could always be better. But a disaster? I don't think so.

While not every person will like every aspect of a park, if you canmake the statement that it 'reeks Disney Magic' there must be some level of success. Back into our vehicles - I see plenty of reeking Disney Magic in the AK that is very strong, you don't see enough.

But either way you slice it – They’ve got a problem!!

and I don't disagree that there are some problems - just not crumbling, decaying, WDW is good for nothing, the Magic is going, going.....gone type problems.

WOAH!!! Time out!! Let me see if I’ve got this straight. Are you seriously saying that we are setting our sites too high? That we expect too much from Disney? That no matter what they did they could never exceed our expectations!!?? Have I got that right!

No, you haven't gotten that right. You should expect to have a magical, wonderful, entertaining, knock your socks off time at the AK, or any Disney park. I do, and then some - they exceed my expectations for my overall Disney experience. But this happens for me because I don't expect the AK to be a zoo, or a thrill ride par, or a whatever you think it should be. I expect it to be the AK - a unique park that stands on it's own and delivers a heck of a lot. I don't go with preconceived notions and let the park come at me and you know what, it is great. Well up to the Disney standards. "Expectation" when it comes to Disney is a tough word, because the philosophy involves exceeding expectations. But if you expect a Maserati to be a Porche, you may get disappointed - even though they are both wonderful vehicles. Get my point? Probably not.

kenjean - like Triceratops and PW or not - are they not trying to add some of your middle attractions?

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Baron, the Golf Inn/resort is an oft-cited example from you of something that did not hit with the people, ie was a failure, BUT is still an example of the Disney philosophy.

HOLY COW!!! HEY!! HEY!! I get it!! Really. No sarcasm. I get it what you’re saying. Finally.

At least I thought I did, until I read my own signature. So, for about ten minutes there, I was with you on the AK pass/fail thing. I could see Disney trying something innovative. Sticking to their principles. But still not quite hitting the mark with the public. And your example of the Golf Resort was perfect. I would add Market Place as well.

But then I read my signature. Yep! My own signature and you know what it says?

From Walt (and my signature):

Give the people everything you can give them.

Did they? Did they give the people the best zoo they could possible give them? Did they include a beastly Kingdom? Did they really do it, as you say, as an “example of the Disney Philosophy”? Sadly no. They didn’t.

Is there any station on the Car #3 dial that can keep the occupants happy?

Yes! I’ve said it a thousands times. Do business in accordance with old time Disney philosophy. I will be happier than pig in… (fill it in!)

Mr. Baron, now I must quote Matt....

Unfortunately, my misguided attempts at light sarcasm have further muddied my clouded points

and slipped by you. I don't agree that there is anything inadequate about AK - at least not as far as I'm concerned.

And evidently mine slipped past you!!

I think you guys have gone around with Bstanley on this one enough. I'm with he and Matt and don't necessarily agree. Could the numbers be better - they could always be better. But a disaster? I don't think so.

I guess I’ll have to throw in with the people who don’t really know. So I’ll leave it with the people who are much more knowledgeable. Say! What does Team Disney think of it? AV? Any input?

While not every person will like every aspect of a park, if you can make the statement that it 'reeks Disney Magic' there must be some level of success. Back into our vehicles - I see plenty of reeking Disney Magic in the AK that is very strong, you don't see enough.

Well, do you think it’s enough? After all the talk on this board and your personal experience do you really think that Disney gave “the people everything you can give them”? I don’t . The bits they gave us do ‘reek’ with that Disney touch. But they didn’t do enough of it.

Suppose EPCOT were just future world. How could anyone argue that it wasn’t up to Disney standards. It ‘reeks’ of Disney magic. No doubt about it!! And these boards would be flooded with wonderful accolades on the brilliant new park. And I would softly clear my throat and shyly step forward and say, “Yes. Quite nice. But… It’s not enough!!!” And the car #1 people would bring out everything from peashooters to cannons to bring me down. I would say how much I really liked what they gave us, but let’s face it people, it’s only a half day park. And AV would tell us about some obscure plan to marry a permanent world’s fair with Future World. And the car #1 people would disregard it, ignore it, or more than likely attack it on the basis of not fitting the theme. And in the end I have to keep telling people over and over again that I like what we have. There’s just not enough of it!!!

 

[Another Voice]

“…then AK really represented an attendance increase over what would have otherwise been. Is this not possible?”

From Team Disney’s viewpoint that’s saying “we just spent a billion dollars to keep things the pretty much like they were”.

I would have loved to have seen the PowerPoint presentation that tried to convince Burbank that was a sound investment strategy. Especially after all the big attendance gains were produced by a vastly cheaper marketing event for the 25th anniversary.

The general rule is that new attractions and minor gates encourage repeat business – the “there’s something new to see!” angle. That’s the strategy used to maintain attendance levels. A whole park is meant to bring more total visitors to the property. WDW did not become a multi-day vacation destination until the opening of EPCOT Center. Before then WDW was really a one-day stop on a swing through Florida for most people. With the opening of Disney/MGM, the property became a self-contained resort. Before said they were going to “Orlando” – after 1990 they said they were going to “Disney World”. Of course the hotels helped, but the main driver were the parks.

The Fourth Theme Park was meant to finalize the “cruise ship” model for WDW. It was supposed to be seven days and you only leave our boat for our ports o’call. In fact, WDW was supposed to be so sealed off that plans for the airport were dug out of storage again. Swooped away from plane to hotel by monorail – most guests would never know that Orlando even existed.

As Mr. Bstanley’s number clearly show*, WDW was not overrun by millions of new guests flocking to the new park. Instead AK’s attendance was being draw directly from the other parks. At the “big picture” level, no one Burbank saw the bottom line growing like they had been promised. And at the “little picture” level you now had three VPs who saw their guests (and their bonuses) being sucked away by this upstart. Worse for them, all the wonderful new rides and shows that had been planned for the original three parks were cancelled to fund this new place. Suddenly the swell gig running the Magic Kingdom didn’t seem like swell anymore.

To me, I don’t think Disney really tried with Animal Kingdom. They had a chance to do something truly extraordinary, something so revolutionary that people would have be AMAZED. It should have been the “place you just have to experience”. And a lot of those ideas existed too. But instead we got the very tried and the very tested and the very focus grouped. Instead of mind-blowing, we get what the most ardent supporters of the place telling people they have to accept it for what it is and not have any expectations.

How disappointing.

And Sea World took a Disney concept and has overflow crowds of people dropping over $250 PER PERSON. Those guests should have been at Animal Kingdom.


* - yes Mr. Stanley, there is always a lot of corporate politics swirling around the numbers. And some of it even made its way into California Adventure. That doesn’t meant the explanation of numbers is wrong. Of course, those DCA people have a lot more to answer for than the AK crowd does now.

 

[DisneyFanGuy]

I know that this has been said already, but.............

My Family loved Animal Kingdom. For half a day.

We can look at the pretty animals at some beautiful zoos near us. I CANNOT IMAGINE spending a full price ticket on the place. It works fine as a park hopper.

Disney Quest works ok as part of a package too. It doesn't mean that I will spend 32 bucks per person on it.

The Safari is an incredible, amazing, wonderful attraction that is worthy of the Disney Brand.

The Festival of the Lion King is a wonderful, amazing, incredible show that is worthy of the Disney Brand.

Dinosaur and ITTBAG are wonderful, amazing attractions that are worthy of the Disney Brand.

Kali River Rapids has a beautiful waiting area, and then you get 90 seconds actually on the water. It's OK.

Add up these attractions, and you get about 1 & 1/2 hours of fun, plus standing in lines. To us, the other stuff isn't very interesting. Brookfield Zoo in Chicago is bigger and better. So is the Milwaukee Zoo. So scratch the animals for this family.

The shops sure are pretty though.

The AK, for good or bad, has some really wonderful attractions. We actually have a pattern. We go at open, go on the safari, get the kids faces painted, see Bug, see Dinosaur, Eat at Rainforest, and then go to another park. Every time we have more than one day at the World. We are in at open, and out by 1:00.

If they had a really fun area like BK, we would stay longer. If they had evening events, we would like that too.

Coulda Woulda Shoulda.

I like Baron's theory that they made a choice. Go the DCA route with lots of cheap attractions, or have less, but make them really special.

Maybe the economics of these big parks just isn't working anymore. I keep hearing about IOA losing big money, even attracting 7-8 million visitors a year.

AK could have been the most incredible, wonderful, amazing place in the World. It isn't. Kind of a clear example of everything that Disney is doing these days. It's good but it should have been great. Disney is acting like a great painter who chooses to sketch in pencil instead because it's quicker, easier, and less expensive. Talent and resources put to little use. A shame.

 

[hopemax]

I like Baron's theory that they made a choice. Go the DCA route with lots of cheap attractions, or have less, but make them really special.

It's not even a theory, Rick Barongi alludes to it in the "Making of Animal Kingdom," book.

"When (inevitably) the budget was cut, Barongi's philosophy was to take out an entire concept, 'rather than nickel-and-diming habitats.' We lost hyenas and wild dogs on the African safari due to budget. But I didn't want to make compromises across the board."

BTW, while I was poking around I found that Rick is now the director of the Houston Zoo, when did he leave Disney and does anyone know why?

 

[JeffH]

Tasha spends more than 1 & 1/2 hours at the Boneyard (playyard) alone, loves Tarzan, Lion King, Pocahantas, the Safari and the parade. We rarely have enough time to take the train to CS, which Tasha also loves to visit. You'd be hard pressed to experience everything there in the short day it offers. Of course, before Fantasmic opened, MGMs day ended pretty early as well.
AK is our favorite park, for what it does offer.
But like the rest of WDW, it all a matter of taste.

 

[Bob O]

I would agree with AV that it seems disney could have built a truely amazing/mind blowing park but instead crunched the numbers and put in a couple of excellant attractions and then added a couple of things just to get by. They believed just because it is disney the people will come, and while some did they did so at the expense of the other 3 parks. Now to fix AK they have to take away money from the other parks and spend it at AK. And then they repeat the same mistakes at DCA.
And i would agree whole heartedly with DVC "there just not enough of it" But it was built that way intentionly and we should be glad eisner didnt build epcot because we probably would have only had half the park instead of both sides as we have now.

 

[DisneyKidds]

OK, I've been trying to avoid doing this, but let the hard core blasphemy begin . Maybe even my Car #1 compatriots will toss me out of the car and banish me from the kingdom. But I say - people, and apparently ideas, have a way of becoming something more than they might really have been after they are gone.

Let me elaborate - and don't get me wrong, Walt was an incredible showman with revolutionary ideas and a new approach - he did develop a great philosophy and a wonderful empire.

However, when did the cannonization take place? The 'Walt can do no wrong' line of thinking is probably only slightly more valid than the 'evil Eisner' conspiracy.

Yes, Walt had a vision, followed his dream, blew people away and created something wonderful. He wowed everyone. The world was enthralled. Give a great experience and throw on a tag line - "Give the people everything you can give them". But do you really believe that it was a be all end all mantra. Damn the torpedoes, bottom line smottom line, we have to do THIS. Are you saying there wasn't anything that could have been better in what Walt delivered? Walt did put forth better than the current Disney regime, but to say he didn't hold anything back, didn't look at it like it was the business that it was and is - a bit naive I say .

So Baron, I'll take that 10 minutes and be content. We'll get another 10 later. Just as you feel Disney is crumbling (when things are really only being chipped at most) I feel the Car #2 and 3 resistance crumbling (ok - only being chipped away at most). We've got you relying on your signature line, an idea that is now something more than it might really have been now that you feel it is gone .

Did Disney give EVERYTHING it possibly could have in the AK? Perhaps no. Perhaps yes, considering ALL the relevant factors. I would say the same of Walt and the beloved MK. The one thing I do know is that what they did give has most definitely added to the Magic, something uniquely Disney that will make my family happy for countless years to come and will only get better with time. Maybe current management isn't so far from the old philosophy - only no one can see that in this day and age of scrutiny and accountability for every nit and nat. As I said before, it is a much different business environment than it was 20 years ago. However, they are still churning out abundant Magic that (dare I say again) you all STILL ENJOY IMMENSELY

So, in case you didn't infer my answer to your question, I do think it is enough, but that isn't to say it is wrong to ask for more. But just because it is ok to ask for more doesn't mean it isn't enough (a bit of a circular reference, but hey, if I get you going in circles maybe I can squeeze out another 10 )

AV, I know I will always be on the short end of the attendance discussion. You do know much more than I. However, all of your discussion about the attendance issue assumes a steady baseline. In business that is not always the case. Perhaps the 'Hindenberg Principle' would have applied and the baseline you assume prior to AK just wouldn't have been there. You are right, no one sold the park on "hey, this will keep our numbers where they are". However, in business, like life, not everything works out the way you map it on a sreadsheet or in a PowerPoint presentation.

BTW - I never intended to say that people shouldn't have expectations. They should, high ones. They should expect an incredible time. They just shouldn't expect the AK to be something it wasn't designed to be. I know where people got their expectation of having a Magical time (which I feel the AK delivers). Where did they get their expectation for what they thought the AK was supposed to be?

You know, I was just going to say - lets agree to disagree. That JeffH is right (which he is) and it is all a matter of taste. But then I thought of Baron out there, staring at a blank screen. So on I go.......

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Maybe even my Car #1 compatriots will toss me out of the car and banish me from the kingdom.

Not to worry!!! There’s always room in my car for you!

Walt was an incredible showman with revolutionary ideas and a new approach - he did develop a great philosophy and a wonderful empire. However, when did the canonization take place?

For me it was 1998. The year they cut the hours and I started my quest to find out just what went wrong at Disney. I devoured histories, trying to understand what it was that made Walt’s philosophy so popular and why it was that Ei$ner’s philosophy didn’t capture me the same way.

But do you really believe that it was a be all end all mantra. Damn the torpedoes, bottom line smottom line, we have to do THIS. Are you saying there wasn't anything that could have been better in what Walt delivered? Walt did put forth better than the current Disney regime, but to say he didn't hold anything back, didn't look at it like it was the business that it was and is - a bit naive I say

I say this with all due respect, but I think you may be the one that is a little naive. That second sentence there is exactly what he did. I think you may need to read a few books about Walt (and the dynamic that he had with his brother Roy). I will not give my patented stories about backyard trains, chandeliers, cars parked in Frontierland, free admittance into Disneyland, or any of the other hundreds of stories I’ve written here in the past. I’m very afraid that if I do, all the cars may band together to form a lynch mob!! Suffice to say that I think you may want to get a good biography of Walt and read it. You may then begin to understand that he was no businessman. He was a showman. And there’s quite a difference!!

Did Disney give EVERYTHING it possibly could have in the AK? Perhaps no. Perhaps yes, considering ALL the relevant factors.

What relevant factors?!?!? The relevant factor of doing as little as possible for as much return as possible? If there’s another ‘relevant factor’ please let me know!

I would say the same of Walt and the beloved MK.

WHAT!!!! You’ve got to be kidding!!!! You just wanted me to use capital letters and the bold function, right? You are just yanking my chain, aren’t you? Please tell you’re kidding. Or you better get specific!!! Cause I haven’t got the faintest idea what you could possibly mean.

As I said before, it is a much different business environment than it was 20 years ago.

Yeah, you’ve said it before and I never made an issue of it. But I really have to ask now. How? Just how is it different? Just saying it, doesn’t make it true.

However, in business, like life, not everything works out the way you map it on a sreadsheet or in a PowerPoint presentation.

Well that’s a step in the right direction. Now if we can only get the current administration to see that we may get somewhere!!!!

Where did they get their expectation for what they thought the AK was supposed to be?

From Disney!!! Where else??

You know, I was just going to say - lets agree to disagree. That JeffH is right (which he is) and it is all a matter of taste. But then I thought of Baron out there, staring at a blank screen. So on I go.......

Thank you!!!!!

 

[DisneyKidds]

Sorry Baron, if they throw me out of the car I will be driving bike #1 all the way to the gates - but thanks for the offer.

Well, you have finally tuned into a level of ignorance I do have . I have not read the bios and all the books. Perhaps you can point me to the single best OBJECTIVE source of info, preferably written during the 70's as WDW was exploding. You know how I feel about the way many look back upon deceased people.

However, I stand behind everything I say. I know a bit about business, and I know a bit about human nature, and I know a bit about WDW (but not as much as some others around here). I know Walt was a different breed - but he wasn't from another planet.

Damn the torpedoes, bottom line smottom line, we have to do THIS.

exactly what he did.

Now I was trying for the life of me to find it in one of these thread and can't seem to. However, someone pointed out a number of the truely Magical things in WDW that our beloved Walt would have done differently, or wouldn't have done at all. Perhaps it was someone who possessed that little layer of ignorance that I do, or maybe they are right. I will try and learn more and speak intelligently from fact when I have time to compose more for you to think about. But I would ask this - do you think if Walt was alive today, operating in todays business environment, that all his decisions would be diametrically opposed to those of the management teams since he departed? I know, your answer is yes - but is that a knee jerk response? Mull it over for a while.

I was a kid in the 70's and only know the business environment from the history books. However, I do believe that Walt had more freedom to operate his way in the 60's and 70's. Things were cheaper, even in relative dollars. Accountability to stockholders, Wall St., banks, etc. was not what it is today. I think it was easier for Walt to put his plans into place then, and I don't know that, if he had to do it all over agin in todays environment, it could be done again the same way. I don' t know that a strict showman could pull it off today. I know that probably isn't enough to appease you, but I do believe it is more than just words - that is is so.

The relevant factor of doing as little as possible for as much return as possible?

Come on now - this is a bit extreme. I have agreed that current management doesn't do things as good as Walt did, but to this extreme? As for relevant factors - well, there certainly weren't the same competitive pressures back then. Also, while I know you will say it is part of your downfall of Disney, the company wasn't as complex back then, was it? Disney management needs to be cognizant of probably half a dozen business units today that are as large as Walt's company was back then. Come on someone in Car #1 - help me with some numbers . Is this because current management are bumbling idiots? (again, I know your knee jerk answer) - or is it because there are many more people to answer to today then there were back then.

WHAT!!!! You’ve got to be kidding!!!! You just wanted me to use capital letters and the bold function, right? You are just yanking my chain, aren’t you? Please tell you’re kidding. Or you better get specific!!! Cause I haven’t got the faintest idea what you could possibly mean.

I mean exactly what I said in the context of the discussion . I may be a bit naive to some things, but please. Can you tell me there was not one decision made by Walt as he built his empire that wasn't in some way based on dollars, or something other than what would be the ABSOLUTE best thing for the guest. I still maintain that THAT is a bit naive. He never said, 'yeah, I think that would be great but it is just too expensive'. Come on, everyone has a wish list, and even Walt couldn't have gotten all of his.

I am glad that got you going though, after what you did to Scoop .

Is that little heart of yours racing a bit? Did your breathing increase ever so much? Are you pounding your fists into the desk, or worse into your temples? Are you pulling out you hair? Sorry! I couldn’t resist.

As for AK - I know people got the expectation to have their expectations exceeded from Disney (and they do that for me ). However, did Disney give the expectation that AK would be THE best zoo, THE best theme park (rides, shows, etc.) all wrapped up into one? I don't think so, and we have been there from the beginning - AP preview and all. It is that misplaced expectation that leads to so much AK disappointment, despite the fact that it is a wonderful park - but I'm giving up on getting any of the #2 and 3 folks to grasp that.

BTW, you are welcome .

One observation as I was searching through old posts looking for things. You, Mr. Baron hop easily to Car #1 while in the World, but revert when you get home and look back to the past. We had you for 10 minutes until you looked to your signature line from the past. See a theme here. You are always looking back, and there is nothing wrong with that, it is part of the Disney legacy and Magic - unless it clouds your enjoyment of the ever present magic today .

 

[hopemax]

I was a kid in the 70's and only know the business environment from the history books. However, I do believe that Walt had more freedom to operate his way in the 60's and 70's. Things were cheaper, even in relative dollars. Accountability to stockholders, Wall St., banks, etc. was not what it is today. I

Even Walt had to fight off potential shareholder lawsuits. It's touched upon in the Bob Thomas biography.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Perhaps you can point me to the single best OBJECTIVE source of info, preferably written during the 70's as WDW was exploding.

There are many. Scoop, JJ and AV have a pretty good recollection for these things. Unfortunately I don’t. And ironically I own very few. Most were borrowed from friends or the library. The Bob Thomas one comes to mind, but I’m sure that we can find some good ones for you. Tell you what. I’ll start a new thread (I’m not sure how many are following this thing currently).

I know Walt was a different breed - but he wasn't from another planet.

Read the bios. He may not have come from Mars, but after you read about his business philosophy, you may think so.

You know how I feel about the way many look back upon deceased people.

Strangely, I usually feel the same way, unless, of course, we’re talking about a philosophy of doing business and not necessarily an individual. I know it’s easy to confuse. And I have a habit of taking a short cut when writing these posts. Instead of saying ‘The founding philosophical concepts upon which the company was based’, I say, ‘Walt’s idea’. Sorry for the confusion.

Now I was trying for the life of me to find it in one of these threads and can't seem to. However, someone pointed out a number of the truly Magical things in WDW that our beloved Walt would have done differently, or wouldn't have done at all.

OH!! I’m quite sure I would agree!! We wouldn’t have the EPCOT we know and I’m quite sure we wouldn’t have the Studios or AK. And the resorts would be quite different. Now that I think about it, we may have nothing in central Florida but a failed experiment of a city. Oh yes! Things would have been much different.

But I would ask this - do you think if Walt was alive today, operating in today’s business environment, that all his decisions would be diametrically opposed to those of the management teams since he departed? I know, your answer is yes - but is that a knee jerk response? Mull it over for a while.

I know where you’re coming from on this. I think you’re asking that if for any reason Walt got it into his head to build a zoo (and let’s face it folks, that’s the main concept here) would he have done things differently than current management, or would he be forced into the same decisions that were made because of modern business practices and the reality of the world today? Isn’t that it?

Well, I think there’s really no need to think about, or mull it over, as you say. If Walt had a notion to do something he did it right (as much as his business and personal finances would allow) or he didn’t do it at all! Plain and simple. We would, I’m quite sure, see a park that you may not like personally, but no one could ever even have a thought of calling it a half-day-park.

I may be a bit naive to some things, but please. Can you tell me there was not one decision made by Walt as he built his empire that wasn't in some way based on dollars, or something other than what would be the ABSOLUTE best thing for the guest. I still maintain that THAT is a bit naive. He never said, 'yeah, I think that would be great but it is just too expensive. Come on, everyone has a wish list, and even Walt couldn't have gotten all of his.

Oh I’m sure there are some ideas that weren’t feasible because of technologies or even price (even Walt had a finite amount of money). But he gave it whatever he could. Always!! Just like my signature says. “Give the people everything you can give them.” That doesn’t mean you can always do everything you can think of, but everything you have!! Did Disney do that with DCA or AK? I don’t think so!!

After you read some of the bios you’ll learn that he didn’t use a spreadsheet to see what he could put into Disneyland. He used his own money instead. He also was forced to go into partnership with ABC, something he clearly did not want to do!! No, his business philosophy is very far apart from the current administration. And that’s why we get ride closings without replacements, DCA, Pop Century and DCA to name but a few.

If you were asking if Walt would have given us any of the above, I don’t thank that would spark much of a debate even from the car #1 folks. A sure-fired one page thread. HE WOULD NOT!!

I think it was easier for Walt to put his plans into place then, and I don't know that, if he had to do it all over again in today’s environment, it could be done again the same way.

Sure it can. Again, I ask why not. The only difference I can see is that the general public (you and I) are much more aware of Wall Street and the meaning of it. But the key financers were always there. They were constantly breathing down Walt’s neck. He often said that if it weren’t for Roy he’d have been imprisoned for passing bad checks!! No. I don’t think there’s a much different business climate today than back then. It’s just that we are all more aware of it!!

Is this because current management are bumbling idiots?

YES!!

It is that misplaced expectation that leads to so much AK disappointment, despite the fact that it is a wonderful park - but I'm giving up on getting any of the #2 and 3 folks to grasp that.

Maybe because it just isn’t true.

You, Mr. Baron hop easily to Car #1 while in the World, but revert when you get home and look back to the past.

This is something that simply baffles me. JJ has posted on it more than I. Why can’t you understand that Walt left such a legacy (a wall if you will) that much of it still remains. And even the current administration lucks into a hit every now and again (DVC for one). But we are greatly concerned that if the current trends continue, I will not have that great “wall” of magic to show my grandchildren. And that bothers me!!

 

[HB2K]

However, did Disney give the expectation that AK would be THE best zoo, THE best theme park (rides, shows, etc.) all wrapped up into one? I don't think so, and we have been there from the beginning - AP preview and all. It is that misplaced expectation that leads to so much AK disappointment, despite the fact that it is a wonderful park - but I'm giving up on getting any of the #2 and 3 folks to grasp that.

Hey I didn't create the expectations....Disney did. Whether they printed the words "best" on the brochure doesn't matter. Over the past 3 decades Disney has positioned their brand name to be synonomus with wholesomeness, family, and QUALITY. I didn't do it. Disney did. They set the standard. Now they have to live up to it every time they come out with something new. When they don't (DAK as it stands, DCA, Return to Neverland, etc) it shows, and the majority of the public sees it.

 

[DisDuck]

Baron you should go over to the Surprise Mornings or Disney Decade thread (can't remember which one I found it on) but a poster called...space listed 3 parks that should be considered 1/2 parks. Studios, AK & DCA. Interesting, huh.. Studios a 1/2 day park. Anyone else agree??

I countered that if Studios is 1/2 then so is Epcot because unless one wanders thru the shops in World Showcase all the rides can be done by 1pm (or earlier). So by the definition used by some to indicate that AK is a 1/2 day park then so is Epcot.

 

[Bob O]

The studios was a half day park when built. I was their the first year and know first hand it was a half day. But it has grown into a full day park(with some dated attractions that should be removed). Epcot on the other hand was built as a full day experience from day one, unlike mgm/DCA/AK.

 

[DisneyKidds]

My good Baron....

No. I don’t think there’s a much different business climate today than back then. It’s just that we are all more aware of it!!

Substitute 'WDW' for 'business climate' and you get what I believe is a fundemental Car #1 belief (Magic wise at the least) and the reason why so many #2 and 3 people are in those cars - and I know, 'I don't agree', 'its not true'...... I could probably start writing threads for you (basic response, without the wit of course ).

he did it right (as much as his business and personal finances would allow) or he didn’t do it at all!

Is there no possibility that management since the man is doing this, sans the personal finances of course, and maybe the 'not at all' bit? Maybe some things ended up being wrong, but could they have thought they were doing something right? Again, I know your answer, but I pose the question anyway. Furthermore (me writing your response again ) even if the motivations were good, it is the outcomes that concern the 2's and 3's. (how am I doing writing as the Baron?) See, I do understand how you guys think and where you are coming from. However, even if you beat me into submission on this one I still maintain that it has no bearing on the Magic

We would, I’m quite sure, see a park that you may not like personally, but no one could ever even have a thought of calling it a half-day-park.

Ahhh, but the ONLY reason people call todays AK a half day park is because they don't like it personally. That means a couple of things. 1 - AK is not a half day park, and 2 - Even if Walt was developing something today he would not be able to escape the current criticisms and may not have been any more successful. Could it be that you actually found my point about the 'todays environment' issue without knowing it?

If you were asking if Walt would have given us any of the above, I don’t thank that would spark much of a debate even from the car #1 folks. A sure-fired one page thread. HE WOULD NOT!!

Not disagreeing with you or trying to start that one page thread(some things are real stinkers ), but did Walt ever envision WDW being the behemoth that it is today? I wonder how he would have handled the way things developed, because not every hotel on property could be a deluxe, even with Walt pulling the strings.

Maybe because it just isn’t true.

NOT. (yes, I have resorted to sticking my tongue out at you )

Why can’t you understand

I do understand, but that doesn't mean I have to agree. So, is this where we agree to disagree? After all, do any of us really want to make anyone change cars anyway?

and HB2K.....

Over the past 3 decades Disney has positioned their brand name to be synonomus with wholesomeness, family, and QUALITY.

I agree that this is the expectation that Disney created in general, and lived up to in the AK. And my point is not about the 'best' part of my position on this one. Try and separate the 'AK concept expectation' issue from the general 'Disney quality expectation' issue and maybe you will see my point about what is driving a lot of the current disappointment with the AK. People never had their expectations about what to find in the AK concept set correctly. They expected to find something that no one would ever be able to find because they didn't know what concept was being delivered. They also had an expectation of a wonderful time and a quality experience - which could easily be found by all if they weren't walking around saying 'but the place isn't......(insert whatever it is they thought the concept was supposed to be)'. I know, I thought I gave up .

 

[HB2K]

Ahhh, but the ONLY reason people call todays AK a half day park is because they don't like it personally. That means a couple of things. 1 - AK is not a half day park, and 2 - Even if Walt was developing something today he would not be able to escape the current criticisms and may not have been any more successful. Could it be that you actually found my point about the 'todays environment' issue without knowing it?

People call the park a half a day park because that's how long they stay (I'm talking about the majority of guests...). It's a half a day park because as it stands it is incomplete. When the blueprints were drawn out park planners counted on adding another land...thus DAK is a half a day park.

Walt would meet some criticisims today just like anyone else, but he had his pulse on his customers and he knew what interested the MAJORITY of them. That's why he was successfull & why the current management concepts are struggling. Disney has lost sight of it's customer's wants. All that matters are the exec's wants.

I agree that this is the expectation that Disney created in general, and lived up to in the AK. And my point is not about the 'best' part of my position on this one. Try and separate the 'AK concept expectation' issue from the general 'Disney quality expectation' issue and maybe you will see my point about what is driving a lot of the current disappointment with the AK. People never had their expectations about what to find in the AK concept set correctly. They expected to find something that no one would ever be able to find because they didn't know what concept was being delivered. They also had an expectation of a wonderful time and a quality experience - which could easily be found by all if they weren't walking around saying 'but the place isn't......(insert whatever it is they thought the concept was supposed to be)'. I know, I thought I gave up .

OK you lost me. You're saying that Animal is a failure because it does nothing right? (It's not a good zoo, and it's not a good theme park....what is it then???)?

Or are you saying we're making Animal into a failure because we don't like it for what it was intended to be (which what the heck is that??? I thought Disney was attempting to build a theme park with an Animal theme.)

Help.