Originally Posted By trekkeruss I know that DCA isn't the success that anyone wanted, but it's not an outright failure either. That aside, the entire expansion project has some great success as well. The GCH and DtD are excellent additions to DLR... and I'm pretty sure they were brought to us by the same management team of talentless hacks.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt trekkerus, you are right. The success or failure of DCA isn't simply the result of a single decision, or the personal tastes of the designers. It's far more complex than that. You know, I strongly suspect that there are a lot of people posting on various Disney fan sites who project intimate knowlege about goings on within the Disney organization, when in fact, they are simply fronting. How many people here actually attended the infamous meeting in Aspen? The troubling part is that fans with chips on their shoulders, take these legends as absolute fact, repeating them over and over until they become the "truth" for many people.
Originally Posted By arstogas >>>How many people here actually attended the infamous meeting in Aspen?<<< I know I was in Cabo at the time...
Originally Posted By arstogas However, Hans, having friends within Imagineering prior to, during and after DCA's opening, I KNOW the grief and gripes about constant dumbing down (for money) of designs and concepts, even after they'd been approved. This the subject of many "life sucks on this project" talks after hours. I can't tell you exactly where the blame lies, except that much of it goes to Pressler's seeming penchant for dropping the axe, and Braverman wasn't much of a cheerleader for bold ideas or for holding back on the cuts. THIS is not an issue, it's not "legend". It's what happened.
Originally Posted By disneywatcher >> Most elementary school teachers I've known in my life understand people very well, << I hope they're the ones who at least realize if students aren't rated or graded, because to do so might bruise their precious little egos, they won't know whether they're doing well academically or not. I think DCA was put together by people who believed that no one should be graded, scored or rated. In their minds, everything was hunky dory.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt arstogas, with all respect, that may be the experience for those you know within Imagineering. However, if you asked someone on the other side of issue you’d probably hear a different perspective on how and why things transpired the way that they did. Just take a look at the exchange here between idleHands and leemac. They have two completely opposing views on what took place during DCA’s planning. Who am I supposed to believe? The truth, as they say, probably lies somewhere in the middle. The arguments the DCA detractors use against the park primarily appear to be based on some personal bias towards a particular individual within the organization. These arguments have been typically been handed down from some so-called “insiderâ€. I've noticed that these people put a lot of weight on Pressler's ineptitude, Braverman's personal tastes, Eisner's ego, etc., to support their theory that DCA’s is an utter failure. While management should take responsibility for the resort expansion’s shortcomings, the constant posturing on both sides of the issue causes me to question the trustworthiness of most of the insider reports.
Originally Posted By disneywatcher >> Cue...Disneywatcher's latest analogy... << >> So much comes down to TASTES...... T.A.S.T.E.S. !!!!! << Tee-hee. 5 years later. And, yet, in a few days, weeks or months, someone will insist that DCA's shortcomings has to focus on tight budgets and the dilemma of compromised logistics (e.g., Anaheim doesn't have the tourism, or money, or land found in Orlando or Tokyo!, they'll say). >> Every single one of them thought that DCA was the right concept and executed as best as could possibly have been. << I wonder how many of them thought DCA was better than DisneySea? >> I find it hilarious (and sad) that these discussions about DCA always spiral down into an office politics debate. << That's because if this thread, in particular, doesn't illustrate the power and importance of that -- when it comes to DCA and probably many things in life in general -- then the fundamentals of "Why Things Go Bad" or "Why Things Do Well" must not grab your interest or curiousity.
Originally Posted By leemac <<I wonder how many of them thought DCA was better than DisneySea?>> The problem with that comparison is it is apples and oranges. You cannot seriously compare a $800m park with one that was over $2bn. Hans, your point is spot-on. When you have hundreds of individals working on ayn given project you will have that. That is why consensus is so important.
Originally Posted By disneywatcher >> You cannot seriously compare a $800m park with one that was over $2bn. << I don't know why you're raising the issue of dollars when it comes to a person's gut reaction to the two parks. I know you've stated on several occasions that you prefer DCA to DisneySea, which merely illustrates to me the importance and power of things that have *nothing* to do with money and budgets.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>And, yet, in a few days, weeks or months, someone will insist that DCA's shortcomings has to focus on tight budgets and the dilemma of compromised logistics (e.g., Anaheim doesn't have the tourism, or money, or land found in Orlando or Tokyo!, they'll say).<< And Disneywatcher will be there. He'll be all around in the dark - he'll be everywhere. Wherever you can look - wherever there's a fight, so hungry people can eat, he'll be there. Wherever there's a cop beatin' up a guy, he'll be there. Disneywatcher will be in the way guys yell when they're mad. He'll be in the way kids laugh when they're hungry and they know supper's ready, and when the people are eatin' the stuff they raise and livin' in the houses they build - he'll be there, too.
Originally Posted By leemac <<I don't know why you're raising the issue of dollars when it comes to a person's gut reaction to the two parks. >> Because the majority of people who claim TDS is superior over DCA point to the extensive theming and better quality of attraction. That all comes with a price tag. It is not the only thing to consider but a significant issue. To suggest there is no correlation between the two is just stupid. It is like comparing King Kong with Cheaper by the Dozen.
Originally Posted By arstogas >>>However, if you asked someone on the other side of issue you’d probably hear a different perspective on how and why things transpired the way that they did.<<< Their conversation didn't go to THAT place, Hans. There's no secret - on either side - that Pressler's reign on this project was notorious for a series of cuts on designs already approved. I was talking about this long BEFORE the park opened. WHEN it was happening. What part of that don't you get?
Originally Posted By believe Both Pressler and Harriss are obviously smarter then all of us. Can you imagine getting paid millions of dollars for screwing up over and over again? ie Disney Store basically doesn't exist anymore because of overexpansion, DL Resort had the most guests deaths in a short period of time (IMO due to budget cuts), and the worst maintained era. Now that the GAP is doing poorly, Pressler and Harris will probably get another golden parachute. And after that, they'll get another high paying job. So where did I (we) go wrong in my career?
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "What part of that don't you get?" *Sigh* Here we go again. Pressler did not stand alone. You make it sound as if he was some sort of mindless dictator. Surely there must have been many above and below him who agreed with his perspective, otherwise the project would still be on the drawing boards. If things transpired as you say, there must have been some consensus on the reasons behind cutting costs. There's no way that it was Pressler against everybody else.
Originally Posted By disneywatcher >> That all comes with a price tag. << Of course, they do. But if DCA's planners could look at the quality of a DisneySea and the quality of a DCA and think, hmm, well, not only is DisneySea not necessarily better than DCA, but in some ways DCA is *better* than DisneySea, it is far likelier they'd therefore compromise on their work, shrug at going the extra mile, and believe that a more elaborate formula was a waste of time and money.
Originally Posted By disneywatcher >> So where did I (we) go wrong in my career? << Not enough brown nosing, schmoozing, and -- as with schools that still believe students should be rated in a traditional manner (by handing out an A, B, C, D or F grade) -- a willingness to ruffle people's egos now and then.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt People need to stop looking at these parks as solely creative enterprises. They are viewed in the industry as long-term business investments. Therefore, it's really pointless to make generalizations about the comparative costs of DCA and TDS.
Originally Posted By disneywatcher >> Therefore, it's really pointless to make generalizations about the comparative costs of DCA and TDS. << And that, Hans, is why it's important to understand the perceptions, preferences and, yes, tastes of the people who are making the decisions and influencing the agenda.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "And that, Hans, is why it's important to understand the perceptions, preferences and, yes, tastes of the people who are making the decisions and influencing the agenda." But why stop there? Why do you continually harp on only these points without considering all the considerations that must have been addressed regarding everyone impacted by the two expansion projects - from guests to employees to investors - all with divergent interests. Why don't you discuss and evaluate the different strategic formulation processes that went into addressing these issues when the two parks were conceived? And how about regulatory issues that differ between Anaheim and the Tokyo region? How did they impact the decision making process? What about the financial advantages of borrowing money in Japan vs. the US? The cost of capital at the time of TDS development was far less than here in the States; therefore the potential for return on investment was far greater which justified the expense.
Originally Posted By leemac ^^ A common trait amongst Japanese companies is to have levels of gearing that would be unacceptable for Western corporations. OLC is debted to the eyeballs but has very preferential borrowing terms.
