Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<So... nothing yet on these new projects, Spirit?>> Nope, sorry. I heard that decisions were to be made this week. It's only Monday ... well actually Tuesday now.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<You notice how some of the Magic has slipped away, and we are all Disney Dweebs discussing it in a Disney forum. That speaks volumes in itself. Spirit would call it WalMarting, I don't know if he has a copyright on that word >> I need to get my legal team on it. <<so I'll just refer to it as over comercialization, and promotion of the Disney Magic. It just seems kind of artifical to me now rather than a feeling I use to get when I went there.>> Yeah. That is exactly how I feel. It's like they decided instead of allowing real magic (yeah, Jon, I know magic doesn't exist ... yada, yada, yada) to happen, they'll market the hell out of plastic, manufactured Disney Magic (if I knew how to make the little 'tm' I'd put that trademark deal at the end)! <<This thread has really kind of gotten off track, like so many that Spirit starts. No one has attacked him so far, so I kind of feel obligated >> Thanks. At least you do realize that I am often the object of spirited attacks. <<Hey SPIRIT next thread you start could you try to be a little more ambiguous! >> This wasn't on purpose. I really am not sure what is going on/down and I haven't had the time to try and find out.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Last year at Walt Disney World the Magic Kingdom looked tired. It really needs a lot of upkeep. Many shops, restaurants and even attractions were closed because of low attendance. This was NEVER Walt's philosophy.>> Nope. The reason those facilities are closed have nothing to do with attendance at all. Nothing. It's all about cutting costs at all cost. And the MK is not only the No. 1 most-visited theme park in the world, but it's current numbers are great. Nope. It's all about $$$. Ask Phil Holmes or Erin Wallace or Al Weiss ... they'll tell you all about it. (nah, they won't, I just wanted to name-drop the three folks with the most power to improve the MK)
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<I don't like all of the trade-offs that have been made. On the other hand, the Democrat in me loves the fact that WDW today is much more accessible than it was back in the "glory years". The Spirit may not be terribly far off when he talks about the Wal-Marting of WDW. But is that necessarily a terrible thing? It has allowed many more people to enjoy a Disney vacation than could 20 years ago. Does anyone besides me understand what I am trying to say here? (I recognize that I have not communicated it terribly well.)>> I understand it, Tripster. I just disagree. First, I disagree with your premise that WDW was just for the upper middle class and above. It was always a mass-market product, except perhaps for its hotels. And even its moderate and value 'resorts' are quite pricey now. Ticket prices have gone through the roof in the past 15 years. And that's the most costly item about a WDW vacation because you don't have to stay onsite to have an amazing vacation. I'd venture to say there are far more pricey dining options now than 20 years ago. From Victoria and ALberts to Jiko to Flying Fish to California Grill to Shula's to Artist Point etc ...again, food wasn't such an expense back in the good, old days. As for merchandise, the WalMarting has more to do with Disney's current business model than changing tastes or incomes/demographics. If you think people who pay $400 a night want throwaway tees and glowswords, I ain't buying it. Finally, I'd disagree that lower priced resorts bring in a lower class of people or 'messier' people ... that's almost a REPUBLICAN comment, you crazy old liberal. I have witnessed more pigs with no class at the GF, WL, BC and BW than I have at the All Stars or Port Orleans. Money doesn't buy class. And not having money doesn't mean someone doesn't have class, manners or high intellect. So basically I guess what I'm saying is -- I ain't buying what you're selling.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo >>> >The 2 hr commutes when staying on property really erode the fun at WDW for me.< Where on earth did this come from? Are you taking the slowest bus you can find? It should never be longer than 20 minutes or so to get anywhere, unless you're going from hotel to hotel. And because of that I always rent a car and just zip right to where I want to be.<<< Animal Kingdom Lodge. I kid you not, it was about an hour each way from front door to gate for almost all the parks except DAK. In the end we resorted to using cabs it was so bad. I WILL NEVER GO TO WDW WITHOUT A CAR!!!! In fact I don't know if I will ever bother staying on WDW property again when Marriott and many others offer a far superior service and I can probably get around quicker than WDW transport. To say WDW transport sucked in Dec 2006 would be an understatement in my books.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Which is why DAK is converting half of their rooms to DVC. Great place. Lousy location. They hope us DVC rubes won't notice.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo >>>><<When we got home I realised not as much fun as usual or other Disney trips, and then when we went to DLP in June, I realised we had a lot more fun at DLP than WDW in the main. Sad but true.>> Why is it sad? Not only is DLP the most spectacular and detailed MK built yet, a true 21st century template that should have been followed in Hong Kong, but one of the world's most spectacular cities is 35 minutes away by train!<<< It is sad because after spending so much more time and money to go to WDW I felt duped. Millions of rubes go to WDW tand walk away thinking it is the best theme park experience on the planet. People that have never been to DL, or DLP or TDL. And that frustrates me. Something that markets itself as the Disney flagship should be the benchmark setting the standards for the others. A MK that has all it's interesting counter service restaurants shuttered, filthy floors and tables, sub standard maintained attractions, and poor (compared to DL and even DLP) cast members leave a real bitter taste. I have said many times we had a fantastic time at Epcot, DAK, AKL, and especially the LP meet, but I have an even better time at DL and DLP, for a lesser cost. To me WDW does not mean more = better. I am not an elitist at all, but I have a basic level of acceptability of a Disney park quality experience and the MK certainly did not deliver that. The transport was abysmal. And I think closing the MK almost every night we were there for an upcharge Christmas party annoyed me even more. I didn't hate my time, not in the slightest. We had some amazing experiences at AKL, DAK and Epcot, as well as a wonderful cast member piece of magic for my son on Star Tours (that is making me smile as I write, and I will never forget about), and some great Christmas experiences at Osborne Lights as well as Marie Osmond at Candlelight. And to be with my Family, UKFAN, Doobekah, Kennessaw Tom and Joe, -Em and many more friends was priceless. So did I have an awful time??? No. But I did not feel I got as much value for the WDW experience as what the other Disney resorts offer. As for the weather, we were there in November/December and that was bad enough, I don't think I could cope with Summer in Florida.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<I'd venture to say there are far more pricey dining options now than 20 years ago. From Victoria and ALberts to Jiko to Flying Fish to California Grill to Shula's to Artist Point etc ...again, food wasn't such an expense back in the good, old days.>> I would not dispute that. I also think there are far more low end dining experiences than there were 20 years ago. As I said... Disney looking to expand its demographic base. I guess I'm just not up to a good-old jonvn rant because I really don't give a darn. I really enjoy WDW, and that is the only thing that makes me any difference. When I stop enjoying it, I'll stop going.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Hey Roadtrip, I don't think DVC members are rubes (we even were going to buy last year, but when we had a better time at DLP than WDW - we opted for the MArriott Vacation Club instead - but interval will still allow us to trade for DVC if we want). I think DVC for AKL could work out well if you have your own car, which I suspect a number of DVC owners will. My issue is the lack of frequency of buses and the traffic. But it made the commute with a newly potty trained kid quite stressful.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip But Dave... You are coming from the other side of the pond. Look at my situation. It would cost me far more to go to DLP than to WDW. Especially now that the U.S. dollar is valued somewhere around the Mexican peso. You may see it as an either/or type situation. Most of us in the U.S. do not.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Hmmmm interesting point Roadtrip. I like WDW, but I love the others more. For me, WDW is a 1/2 lb burger, DLP is an 8oz steak, and DL is filet mignon. For me I prefer steaks, especially FM, but I do eat burgers occasionally too. The burger may be bigger and more filling, but I find the steak and Filet much more satisfying.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Indeed, but even if I lived in the midwest, I would be more inclined to go to California than WDW. But I will admit as a native Californian that I am biased ;-) Ironically though, I find DL is a more affordable option, even traveling 6000 miles compared to the 3000 miles to WDW.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<I would not dispute that. I also think there are far more low end dining experiences than there were 20 years ago. As I said... Disney looking to expand its demographic base.>> That's true. Disney wants to be all things for all people and do/provide all services. That's very different from how things were run for the first 20-25 years. And I don't think it's a change for the better. <<I guess I'm just not up to a good-old jonvn rant because I really don't give a darn. I really enjoy WDW, and that is the only thing that makes me any difference. When I stop enjoying it, I'll stop going.>> And I hope that never happens, Trippy Oh, and Al is an ignorant slut. That might get Jon over here!
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Indeed, but even if I lived in the midwest, I would be more inclined to go to California than WDW.>> We've been to California a couple of times in the past few years. I love Disneyland Park. I'm even so darned warped that I love California Adventure too. Disneyland though just isn't a good destination for more than about 5 days IMHO. Since our Disney vacations usually run 7 - 12 days the variety of WDW is a more enjoyable vacation for us. Part of the reason for that is since we have now been to WDW more times than I can count; the dining and entertainment options actually mean more to us than the quality of the parks. And when it comes to dining and entertainment options, WDW kicks DL's butt. (PS… WDW has DVC Resorts… DL does not… yet)
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo I understand. I suppose a week in DL and a week in Nor Cal or San Diego is a more satisfying experience. Also, we spend 13 days at the Grand Californian in 2002 and had a better time than any trip to WDW. But diversity is the spice of life!
Originally Posted By dshyates Trippy , I couldn't disagree with you more on WDW and economic accessability. WDW is far more cost prohibitive now than it ever has been. Yes if, you wanted to actually stay at 1 of the 2 Disney resorts it was very expensive back in the day. But most people who went to Disney World didn't stay on Disney property. In the late seventies, if you wanted to stay off-property it was cheap. But no one wanted to stay off property because it was cheap tacky hotels and long bus commutes. Kinda like the all-stars. Its just now Disney is operating the cheap tacky motel which is still more expensive and tackier than the 192 choices. And on top of that the parks were way cheaper even taking inflation into consideration. It now cost about $300/day for a family of 4 to visit 1 park. How many ticket books could you get for $300 a day?
Originally Posted By demderedoseguys >It now cost about $300/day for a family of 4 to visit 1 park. How many ticket books could you get for $300 a day?< That statement, while not untrue, is misleading unless you were to go into one park for one day only. For people who vacation for a week or more the cost is less than $300 for a whole week with a park hopping option.
Originally Posted By dshyates "For people who vacation for a week or more the cost is less than $300 for a whole week with a park hopping option." Yeah but for a family of 4 your still looking at close to $1200 in just park tickets.
Originally Posted By gaston lives Let's see...one week trip...family of four: Airfare from Colorado: roughly $250-$300/person=$1200 6 nights at the bottom resorts=$90/night=$540 Assuming you ride all Disney transportation=$0.00 Food=$20-25/meal for breakfast and lunch, $40-50/meal for dinner=$175+350=$525 Souvenirs=$50-75/person=$300 Right there we're staring down about $2565.00 before any extras or miscellaneous shopping/snacking. Add in a possible rent-a-car for a side-trip and you're just adding to the issue. Oh yeah, and that $2565 is WITHOUT park hopper passes. Add in $1200 for park hopper passes from the above post, and you're looking at $3765.00! Upgrade to a mid or high level hotel and the price becomes ridiculously high. this is why we stay at the cheap resorts. The kids love them, and they're all we can afford! Now when I take my wife back for our anniversary without the kids...I'm giong all out at the Floridian (many, many years away).
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Also, we spend 13 days at the Grand Californian in 2002 and had a better time than any trip to WDW. But diversity is the spice of life!>> 13 days at the Grand Cal? I thought only Leemac was rich enough to afford that ;-)
