Originally Posted By ImTempest My husband and I want to do a WDW vow renewal. I would love that - overlooking the Castle from the Grand Floridian Wedding Pavilion!
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 Usually, I don't quote myself ... I think that's not a healthy way of giving oneself attention, but in this case I need to make an exception because this really bothers me. Even if it doesn't directly (one might say indirectly) as well speak to the thread's original intent. So ... here's the quote by me quoting King Iger and then some comments: <<But I couldn't help but think of a quote by Bob Iger recently in the O-Sentinel when he was talking about the struggling Adventures By Disney venture. It jumped out at me because it does suggest that (especially in Orlando) Disney really only cares that you visit once. <a href="http://www.orlandosentinel.com...14.story" target="_blank">http://www.orlandosentinel.com...14.story</a> And here's the quote: "You know, a lot of people who visit our parks don't come back, and yet they continue to take family vacations," Disney Co. Chief Executive Officer Bob Iger said last year, after being asked about Adventures By Disney at a conference. "We would like to capture a little bit more of that spend with an experience that has all the brand attributes of the experience they might have when they go to our parks." My real reaction is WTF?!?! I understand that Adventures By Disney is struggling bigtime. It is very expensive (makes most WDW vacations seem cheap by comparison) as it targeted a more affluent, more sophisticated traveler. Of course, said traveler is smart enough to realize what an incredibly costly proposition in terms of money vs. value ABD actually provides. I get that they're admitting they've already cut back 40% of their schedule (and I'd expect it to wind up being closer to 60% when all is said and done) ... and that Iger wants to prop up this 'newish' business unit. But what was Iger and his handlers thinking when he said many people visit the parks and don't return? Is is true? Of course. But so is the fact many people think Disney parks are overrated crap. I sure wouldn't want the head of my company spouting that to analysts and reporters. What he should have said was something along the lines of 'We want people to be able to have a Disney-quality experience in non-traditional environments, to take the reknowned Disney service and magic that we provide in our parks and resorts and take it on the road to all sorts of amazing world-class destinations.' That would have made sense. That would have been smart. But to state that many people visit WDW/DL and don't return as a reason why ABD exists and should be successful is kind of like a Chevy dealer talking about why people leave their showrooms and go buy Toyotas. The bottom line is Chevy doesn't provide that product. And Iger is reinforcing a negative. Because I'll bet you an E-Ticket at WDW, if you think the vast majority of one-time and 'thanks, but no thanks' Disney park and resort guests are the ones making plans to tour with ABD. Just a very dumb statement by an ostensibly very smart man.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<I know if they had done this to me in my situation, if they had made me sign the papers and then renegged on what they had promised me, my first call would have been to the Orlando Sentinal and then probably the Dallas Morning News and then CNN and then whatever other outlet I could find that would listen to me, and I would generate as much negative press as I possibly could. And believe me, that would cost Disney far more than it would have cost them to keep up their end of the bargain.>> Got news for you, Danny. Disney reneging on an offer wouldn't make a blip on today's media landscape. Media has contracted at an alarming pace. Even prior to that, the chances of any legit media deciding that your situation was worthy of coverage was incredibly minute. Just way too small and insignificant, no offense. But I KNOW media. Also, when you think about what your damages were worth, take Disney out and replace it with some other company's name and ask if you'd have been as happy with the outcome. People are willing to put up with more and accept less from the Mouse in my experience.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Trippy thank you for sharing. Our daughter did the "big production" & it was indeed lovely but exhausting. BTW what wonderful pics.>> Yes. And nice that she consented to have you flaunt them here on our little board of Disney nuts! <<It's been suggested that the OP is an employee of the company, and not a run-of-the-mill CM, but someone in a position of authority. The OP himself suggests that he knows more than he is able to divulge, i.e. "With disturbing regularity..." So it doesn't make much sense to me why he would need to mine a fan board for his own information. >> Who knows what the deal is with the worm dude? But since Disney itself mines these boards all the time why would it be strange for someone to see how frequently these things happen? My strong hunch is this person has witnessed or been a party to some of these ugly situations and is starting to become concerned that what he/she/it has witnessed happens with frequency. Of course, being a conspiracy theorist I can also wonder why this individual, who seems to hail from Burbank, came forward just before Disney launched its own blog designed to steal people away from sites like this and topics like this to where they can be controlled via pixie dust 24/7. Then again ... also weird that the LP.com boards were down almost the entire day Disney launched its blog too. There probably isn't a topic heading at least (if not subject matter) Disney would least like to see on a fan site then this one ... well, at least until I come up with another great thread of my narcissistic own! ;-)
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<I have to disagree. Every time someone slips and falls at a park doesn't mean it's Disney's fault. The guest has some responsibility to watch where they are going. Especially in the food court tray situation, it seems highly unlikely that Disney would put a tray on the floor in the middle of a walkway. Much more likely is that a guest drops one there for whatever reason. Now, if it is just ignored for hours on end, that's one thing, but if a guest drops a tray in such a location and wanders off and then a few minutes later someone trips on it and breaks their hip, it's not at all clear why Disney should be responsible for this. Yet, you say "there is no denying liability." I deny it.>> You may deny it, but any court would likely find in the guest's favor. Trays don't belong on the food court floor (regardless of how they got there, excepting the absurd situation where one member of a group leaves it so another can trip over it in which case that individual would probably wind up in jail). It's Disney's property and it is their responsibility to make it safe. And that means cleaning up messes that prior guests leave that could become safety hazards for other guests and CMs as well. It's a very basic cost of doing business deal. Guests can't and shouldn't expect food serving trays on the floor of food courts and if they slip on one and are injured, it's all on Disney. <<Even in the case of the guest whose hair caught on fire during the fireworks show, I don't see that it's automatically Disney's fault. I guess I view such a situation more akin to an inherent danger as a spectator at a baseball game or golf tournament: there's a small but non-zero chance you'll get popped in the head with a ball, and it's not necessarily anyone's fault if it happens. Now if there's something Disney should be doing and isn't, or is acting wrecklessly, then that's another story, but no mention of any such thing was made.>> Again, I disagree. Disney is expected to put on pyro shows in a safe manner. Raining down flaming embers on guests wouldn't qualify. And they often run Illuminations on nights when wind really should cancel the show. I have often run from embers and/or had ash in my hair (or what's left of it!) or eyes. I have never caught on fire. And I have never even complained on record when I've had to dance away from embers. But Disney makes a choice on such nights that the comps that it will give out for canceling the show (I don't believe they should do this at all, but that's another topic) outweight the risks of a few folks complaining of ash or embers, or even the very rare (I hope) instance where some ornery old Texan has his head go aflame (that might actually spark some activity though!) But again, the liability is all on the Mouse if people are standing or sitting in areas deemed 'safe' by Disney. And I don't believe Danny was on the other side of any WS railing when his head flamed up. <<Having said all of that, there's a lot in this thread that's been very informative, if not disturbing. It may sound like I'm all on Disney's side here, and I'm not - what I said above is limited to the specific issues I was talking about and were not meant to be broad statements.>> That much, I agree with. This thread has been fascinating from the start to Danny's burning head to Trippy's wedding pics to my issues with Bob Iger's quotes. Who knows where it will go next? But at least we can have this discussion, such as it is, versus on say Disney's new sanitized for their protection 'fan' blog/mind control site!
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<I think the actual issue here is how is Disney dealing with bona fide issues that are their responsibility (which may be different than the evening news would define them), and are they dealing with guests in bad faith? Even though most of what birdsNworms describes sounds bad if not draconian, the more I think about it, except for the possible issue of making courtesy offers they have no intention of keeping, I don't really see a big problem here.>> But isn't that the crux of the original issue? And isn't that bad enough? The family I helped out in Anaheim had no intention of suing the Mouse (probably wise, but not something they likely should have said) ... and when Disney gives you an offer that says 'You come back, we give you a free room for two nights and tickets for four people for three days' they should back it up. Period. Not an after-the-fact retraction with an underlying 'sue us if you'd like' because Disney had done some data-mining (what I think is the KEY issue here and one that even the OP is staying pretty clear of) and determined everything from the income of the guests, their credit scores, how often they've visited in the past, the affluence of the area they reside in ... and many other factors that I am too tired to go into tonight (fought my own battle today with a major souless corporation, no not Disney, but I won!!!) BTW, this affects how Guest Service Recovery is handled at the resorts as well as with countless major companies today ... and it is scary because everyone's lives are no longer private. NOTHING about your life is private is our Internet/post 9-11 world. And what a basic search can find will likely determine how your issue is handled whether at the local Ford dealer, the local CVS drugstore, your airline of choice and, yeah, your Disney P&R. And for Mouse fans, Destination Disney took things to a whole new level.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Spirit, I interpreted that entirely differently than you did. Rather than not caring if you visit more than once, it seems to me that Iger is saying that the reality is that even though they may have a positive experience, a certain set of guests will visit WDW only once. And, by offering Disney vacation opportunities outside of the parks and resorts, there's an opportunity with Adventures by Disney to capture additional spend from those guests.>> Nope. I don't see anything from Iger that even hints that guests who don't come back enjoyed their one and only visits. Or, worse as a shareholder and fan, that Iger even wants them to come back. You may be interpreting it that way, but I think it's akin to some of the translating I saw in China last year ... you know for things like sexless chicken on the menus! ;-) And even though I stand firmly behind my opinion on his quote, just the fact it is open to any kind of interpretation suggests he clearly got the wrong message or a muddled one out. I would never pay for an ABD tour. For what they charge for a week in say Europe, I could stay for at least a month ... and do so at very nice hotels and eating well too. But if he's trying to get that market, I'd suggest that Disney is doing a piss poor job with the follow through. BTW, Waldorf-Astoria opens tomorrow at WDW! That should ratchet up the need for Disney to raise standards at its deluxe properties. (yeah, heading in yet another direction)
Originally Posted By Mr X ***Guests can't and shouldn't expect food serving trays on the floor of food courts and if they slip on one and are injured, it's all on Disney.*** It depends. As SD said, there would have to be some provable negligence involved. If the tray were dropped on the floor and someone immediately slipped on it, how can it be reasonably claimed that it was Disney's fault? Of course, it would also depend on the judge and jury and quality of the lawyers (I would think Disney would have the advantage on that one). Here's an interesting story as far as that's concerned. I was teaching a drum corps from Florida back in the day, and Disney sponsored them. In fact, we travelled around Florida in Disney transports, which was kinda neat. The corps asked Disney if they could make use of the buses for their national tour, but were told that the buses needed to remain in Florida for "control" purposes. I won't speculate too much about what that means, but certainly it points to the fact that Disney has a lot of clout and influence around the state should something bad happen (like a bus full of kids crashing?).
Originally Posted By Mr X ***Nope. I don't see anything from Iger that even hints that guests who don't come back enjoyed their one and only visits. Or, worse as a shareholder and fan, that Iger even wants them to come back. You may be interpreting it that way, but I think it's akin to some of the translating I saw in China last year ... you know for things like sexless chicken on the menus! ;-) And even though I stand firmly behind my opinion on his quote, just the fact it is open to any kind of interpretation suggests he clearly got the wrong message or a muddled one out.*** I read it the same way SuperDry did. Seems to me you are reading into it, and sort of twisting the meaning around to come off as negative to suit your own opinions. I also find it funny that your retort is "nope", as though nobody could possibly see it any other way than your way. *shrug*
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<I read it the same way SuperDry did. Seems to me you are reading into it, and sort of twisting the meaning around to come off as negative to suit your own opinions. I also find it funny that your retort is "nope", as though nobody could possibly see it any other way than your way.>> Last post on this thread for the night ... I actually want to check in on 'my' thread. But corporate speak 101 is NEVER reinforce negatives about your company or product with the media. The idea that a guest could come to WDW just once with his/her family and never return can't be spun as anything but a negative. Disney's product is its theme parks and resorts and WDW is No. 1. And even in the context Iger was speaking, ABD is simply an off-shoot of P&R ... to possibly get something back that he is admitting they have already lost. That's not me reading into anything or spinning (and yeah, Iger is on my Pooh List for the way he handled Dick Cook among other things), but c'mon let's be honest ... he'd take that quote back in a heartbeat and replace it with the one I wrote above or something very similar if given the second chance.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< But isn't that the crux of the original issue? And isn't that bad enough? >>> Of course it is. That being the case, why the need to pile it on, with the notion that now that Disney has been determined to be a bad company, work backward from there and find all of the various things that could be interpreted as being wrong and post about those as well? If the real issue is Disney making offers in writing without the intention of honoring them, then let's have a thread about that and cut out all the crap. <<< The family I helped out in Anaheim had no intention of suing the Mouse (probably wise, but not something they likely should have said) ... and when Disney gives you an offer that says 'You come back, we give you a free room for two nights and tickets for four people for three days' they should back it up. >>> If things are as you say above, absolutely they should. <<< Period. >>> Exclamation! <<< Not an after-the-fact retraction with an underlying 'sue us if you'd like' because Disney had done some data-mining (what I think is the KEY issue here and one that even the OP is staying pretty clear of) and determined everything from the income of the guests, their credit scores, how often they've visited in the past, the affluence of the area they reside in ... and many other factors that I am too tired to go into tonight (fought my own battle today with a major souless corporation, no not Disney, but I won!!!) >>> I don't really have a problem with any of that, as long as it's done up front, before any offer is made. As I said before, what the guest may see as, say, an injury that is Disney's fault and a potential lawsuit, Disney may see as an accident that isn't their fault, but is willing to listen to the guest's side of the story and offer something based on the customer's worth. None of the criteria you mention are things that couldn't be instantly ascertained, so I don't see the need for Disney making offers to everyone and then only honoring certain ones based on scoring criteria later. Plus, even though no single one is a big legal liability, each additional slip of paper where they make a specific, written promise that they fail to keep is one more piece of kindling on a pile that might eventually catch fire. If that sort of thing that you and birds describe (the part about the offer made then later rescinded after a waiver is signed) is happening on any large scale, that would be very disturbing to know, and I think reflect negatively on TWDC. As to the rest of the stuff, I think it's just ordinary business practices these days, perhaps slightly on the leading edge.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< Seems to me you are reading into it, and sort of twisting the meaning around to come off as negative to suit your own opinions. >>> That's exactly what I was thinking - I couldn't have put it any better myself. This goes back to having decided that Disney is bad for one particular reason, then working backward from there to find all the various ways they do wrong. This pattern repeats itself with disgruntled customers and/or message board posters with an agenda an endless amount, and is quite easy to spot. <<< The idea that a guest could come to WDW just once with his/her family and never return can't be spun as anything but a negative. >>> I disagree. Consider how many families go on vacation one year to London, Paris, or Egypt. If they go only once, and then subsequent years go to one of the others destinations they haven't been to yet, would you say that that can't be spun as anything but a negative? Actually, it doesn't even have to be spun at all to come to a different interpretation - just interpret it naturally. I suspect there are a great many families that treat a WDW destination vacation much as any of the other places I mentioned, or Mexico, or Hawaii, or Washington DC, or any number of other places. That is, we all have a list of places we'd like to see one day, including families collectively. And, I suspect that for a great many families, WDW is on that list right alongside the others: that is, no matter how much fun they had and what a great experience it was, next year they may want to go to a place they haven't been before, instead of going back to the same place every year or every few years. That doesn't at all reflect negatively on WDW, even if it's not the ideal guest profile that Disney would like. It's quite clear that Iger was saying that for that type of guest, especially if they were impressed with the standards of care and CM treatment at WDW (which is increasingly becoming a problem, but that's a separate thread), they might very well be enticed to pay a bit extra for the "Disney Difference" when going on next year's vacation to the next place on their list they haven't been to yet. And, considering that the target audience for Iger's comment seemed to be Wall Street, I can especially see that message resonating there. Not having any statistics at hand (but I'm certain they Disney does), it would not surprise me at all if the typical analyst's personal family is more toward what I describe above than the family that just comes back to WDW each year. So, I don't at all agree with the notion that Iger would retract his statement if he could. I think you're trying too hard for whatever reason to see negative things about Disney in every thing they do. <<< Disney's product is its theme parks and resorts and WDW is No. 1. And even in the context Iger was speaking, ABD is simply an off-shoot of P&R >>> Yep. Why shouldn't they try to cash in on good will they build up with a certain guest segment that had a great time, but simply doesn't go back to the same place each year for vacation?
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<That doesn't at all reflect negatively on WDW, even if it's not the ideal guest profile that Disney would like. It's quite clear that Iger was saying that for that type of guest, especially if they were impressed with the standards of care and CM treatment at WDW (which is increasingly becoming a problem, but that's a separate thread), they might very well be enticed to pay a bit extra for the "Disney Difference" when going on next year's vacation to the next place on their list they haven't been to yet.>> EXACTLY!! And perhaps something that is difficult for die-hard fans like us to realize. The number one question I get from people about our repeated vacations to WDW is WHY? They've been there a time or two, enjoyed it, but can't understand why we would want to keep doing the same thing over and over. I always answer it by saying we always go on at least two major vacations a year, with one of them being NON-Disney. That way we enjoy our Disney "home" while still being able to experience what the rest of the country has to offer. I'm sure not everyone has the opportunity to take two major vacations per year and can understand why they would not want all-WDW all-the-time.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< I'm sure not everyone has the opportunity to take two major vacations per year and can understand why they would not want all-WDW all-the-time. >>> Yea, not everyone has/had a cush "gubmit" job RT, I think what you're saying is spot on. I also try to balance Disney vs non-Disney travel. What's interesting is that mostly through LP, much of my Disney travel ends up not being time spent in the parks, but rather an opportunity to spend time with friends, or just get out of town. Keep in mind that there are three world-class, very famous cities outside the US with a Disney resort, and there's plenty non-Disney stuff to do in each of them.
Originally Posted By MPierce >> You may be interpreting it that way, but I think it's akin to some of the translating I saw in China last year ... you know for things like sexless chicken on the menus! ;-) << If they keep them caged seperately there's no way they can have sex before they become someone's dinner.
Originally Posted By MPierce >> But at least we can have this discussion, such as it is, versus on say Disney's new sanitized for their protection 'fan' blog/mind control site! << When are you going to start a thread on that?
Originally Posted By MPierce >> The corps asked Disney if they could make use of the buses for their national tour, but were told that the buses needed to remain in Florida for "control" purposes. << I would imagine a big consideration had to be that the bus was not liscensed outside ot the state of Florida nor did it have the proper fuel permits.
Originally Posted By MPierce >> If the real issue is Disney making offers in writing without the intention of honoring them, then let's have a thread about that and cut out all the crap. << I'll vote for that.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<If that sort of thing that you and birds describe (the part about the offer made then later rescinded after a waiver is signed) is happening on any large scale, that would be very disturbing to know, and I think reflect negatively on TWDC.>> I have no idea how much it happens. I'd love to know. I do think one time is one time too many, though. <<As to the rest of the stuff, I think it's just ordinary business practices these days, perhaps slightly on the leading edge.>> I don't disagree. But what qualifies as 'ordinary' these days is very scary to me as a citizen and consumer in our Wall Street run/post 9/11 world. Data-mining is never good for anyone but the company doing so. And the info that's available to these companies is staggering when people are supposed to have a right to basic privacy. As to Disney, as a friend said today when this topic was broached at lunch 'imagine if Obama wanted to fingerprint every child, yet when Disney does it for ticket tags, no one sees any issue' ... and that's what biometrics are as applied by Disney. How innocent is it? The data-mining becomes an issue when Disney (or any company) can simply pull out any personal information on you and make a judgment as to how they're going to treat you ... and that DOES happen daily. That was the original goal behind data-mining. To be able to pre-determine your worth to a company and your potential as both a customer and, if something goes wrong, an adversary. It's Orwellian. And people can defend it, but I'll shout them down with my last breath. In practice, a good example can be found by reading simple hotel reviews on sites like TripAdvisor. If you read reviews of some great 5-star hotels (take Disney out of this completely) you'll usually find glowing praise, but then you'll run across one where it seemed like the (fill in the blank world class hotel) guest had a disasterous stay and no matter who he/she spoke with at each and every ladder step up the chain, they were met with complete disinterest and disregard. One of the common threads is often the person was there for a truly once in a lifetime visit (be it anniversary, honeymoon, celebration etc). They had been 'sized up' but in a completely modern 1984ish invasive way. The hotel knew it had nothing to worry about and therefore it didn't matter what the guests experienced. Two decades ago, they didn't have the technology to do things like this and the mere notion would have been met with thoughts that it was immoral, unethical, possibly illegal and, more to the point, bad for business. The result was that everyone got the same consistent service whether at that 5-star hotel ... or the airport Holiday Inn. Now, Disney is applying it on a much greater scale to the mass market. You can't even get a hotel rate quote without supplying your name, address, phone number, times you've visited, last stay etc ... it's incredibly invasive just to find out whether you can get an AP rate at Coronado Springs for next weekend. The real catch here is that people defend it and say they have no concern, much like none of us care about giving up freedoms at the airport or the bank or shopping mall, so long as it makes us all safer. Hey, none of us has anything to hide, right? People never think the data-mining (or let's profiling because that's what it is) applies to them. Disney keeps tabs on Spirit, but certainly not Roadtrip or Mr. X or VBDAD or etc ... guess what? WRONG.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 Disney has more info on me than I like to think about - from letters written, to stock purcahses - to DVC purchase - to Ap's and WDCC and now D23 clubs - disney shopping, credit card purchases, surveys etc...heck maybe they even have my original MMC club card my Mom got me when I was a toddler -- however so does Mastercard - Visa - Jewel(albertsons) ( grocery chain here) -- facebook - yahoo -- google etc... of course most of these places are so disorganized they likely can't sort out all they have and what gets sold to them by credit card companies - your state DMV and everyone else... add to the the gps in my car- the gps in my iphone and who knows whose watching. I've decided there is nothing I can do about it short of hermiting myself away in the woods somewhere..I'll pass
