Originally Posted By disneywatcher >> Any time you do something mediocre with your brand, that's a withdrawal. California Adventure was a brand withdrawal. << So DCA wasn't a failure. No, it was a "brand withdrawal." Or, more precisely, it was a very, very mediocre brand. I read awhile back that Barry Braverman still claims the public just didn't get the park he had a major hand in creating. That they just couldn't figure out what he and his colleagues were trying to do. Oh, my. I'd have some respect for him -- or others responsible for DCA -- if he instead said: "Yes, we developed a mediocre park. Yes, I'm embarrassed by it. But we in the DisCo were faced with too many limitations to do any better!" I bet if he had the mindset that would allow for that kind of response, the park probably wouldn't have been so half-baked -- or mediocre -- to begin with.
Originally Posted By Yookeroo "It must be much more now. Or they could build a line into LA for no more than it cost to build Pooh, or run it to Amtrak or Anaheim Stadium for relative peanuts." The monorail in Las Vegas cost more than $600 million. For less than 5 miles. And while Disneyland's wouldn't be nearly as expensive per mile (it's smaller gauge for one thing), I think it would be much more that $1 million/mile.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 It would have to be. I actually do remember hearing the "$1 million a mile" number in the 60's and 70's, which would actually make sense (the 3 1959 E tickets cost about 2 million each IIRC, even though the monorail wasn't extended to the hotel until a couple of years later).
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>But "spin" indicates an ulterior motive behind the "spinner"...<< Maybe for you. For me, it just means "spin." As in, reading the tea leaves and coming up with Shakespeare. >>It's an attempt to dismiss the opinion as motivated by something other than honesty...<< I don't believe there is anything inherently dishonest about spin, if that helps. >>And the "silly" part didn't help.<< But it fit... >>You've never heard of terms like "qualified success," "partial success," "artistic success but commercial flop" (or vice versa), etc. etc. etc.?<< Sure I have. I've also heard of the term "failure," and know when it applies. Nu. >>No, the facts point to a mixed bag...<< For you. For me (obviously), they point to a failure.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>If a student tries for an A in chemistry, but winds up only earning a C, that is not failure. An F is failure.<< Exactly. And when a student fails in Chemistry, he will likely be counseled to study harder or change his major. DCA studied a lot harder from 2001 to 2009, to no avail. So, last year DCA definitively changed its major. (By George, that is a great analogy!)
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>I've also heard of the term "failure," and know when it applies.<< Does it apply to a student who aims for an A and gets a C? Is that how you define failure?
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>DCA is a failure for all the delusional people who keep asserting that is.<< And some people get upset if their arguments are refered to as "spin"...!
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>And when a student fails in Chemistry<< He didn't fail. He got a C.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>Does it apply to a student who aims for an A and gets a C? Is that how you define failure?<< Asked and answered. (See post #65.) DCA gets an F.
Originally Posted By DlandDug No one views a "C" as a failure. The argument (quite a good one) is that "F" is for failure. And when a student gets an F, they don't terminate him. At least, not right away. But they do spend a lot of time trying to figure out how to get him up in the success column.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Asked and answered.<< No, you moved the goal post. That isn't answering the question.
Originally Posted By DlandDug No, the issue is of failure. I am not arguing that a "C" is a failure. But I am certainly arguing that DCA is no "C." What is done for "F" students? The ones that fail? A lot of extra TLC. Extra study. Maybe even an effort to team them up with a successfull classmate. In the end, the decision may be made to change the student's major. Analogy clear? Extra TLC and study: Immediate addition of new entertainment. Discounting programs. Summer promotions. New attractions. Teaming up with a successfull classmate: As in, considering making DCA an addition to Disneyland, to the point of having WDI work on the details. A change in major: DCA's extreme makeover.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Well, we'll agree to disagree. I don't agree with your definition of "failure" and you're not going to change your view, so we'll have to leave it at that.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>Well, we'll agree to disagree. I don't agree with your definition of "failure" and you're not going to change your view, so we'll have to leave it at that.<< Exactly. (And that means nothing more than "exactly!")
Originally Posted By barboy2 As a guest if I were grading DCA prior to the massive overhaul based on expectation(carrying the Disney brand) and overall enjoyment I'd give it a "Big fat D", maybe a D-
Originally Posted By Manfried "I read awhile back that Barry Braverman still claims the public just didn't get the park he had a major hand in creating. That they just couldn't figure out what he and his colleagues were trying to do. Oh, my. I'd have some respect for him -- or others responsible for DCA -- if he instead said: "Yes, we developed a mediocre park. Yes, I'm embarrassed by it. But we in the DisCo were faced with too many limitations to do any better!" I bet if he had the mindset that would allow for that kind of response, the park probably wouldn't have been so half-baked -- or mediocre -- to begin with." Barry admit a failure? Did anyone ever tell him that "Body Wars" didn't work so well either?
Originally Posted By DlandDug My ds (15) pointed out that an "F" doesn't always mean that the student got every single thing wrong-- just enough to fail. So... the analogy rings truer. (And I agree that anyone is welcome to give DCA whatever grade they want. I say "F!")
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt I think your analogy doesn't really work Doug simply because your premise depends on DCA rating an "F" across the board. Like it's been said before, DCA was really a mixed bag. Some things worked, some things didn't, and some things were a home run.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>I think your analogy doesn't really work Doug simply because your premise depends on DCA rating an "F" across the board.<< Asked and answered in post #78. "Just enough to fail."
