Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORDDU: It's true that it's a matter of opinion as to which changes are for the better and which changes are inferior. But it also doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that there are too many inferior changes taking place right now--all for the sake of saving money. ORWEN: For instance, the Drew Carey abomination at Disney M-G-M being chosen to replace the Monster Sound Stage Show. The Monster Sound Stage Show was always going to be slightly different--due to different guests who participated. You sat there rooting for a total stranger--or possibly a friend or family member of yours--to do a good job at matching the right sounds effects with the right action on screen. It was very immersive. ORGOCH: The dang replacement they got in their, now, ain't worth a sour pickle on a hot day in Alabama!! ORDDU: Plus the very fact that there are so many budget cut-backs--to see if they can 'just get by' with a new attraction--isn't at all what old time Disney fans are used to. But if you're a current management apologist--there is nothing that can be said to convince you otherwise. You're satisfied with mediocre and that's what current management is counting on. Fortunately, there are still plenty of others around who see through the cheap methods current management is using to get by with. ORWEN: I don't believe they'll always be able to get by with it. Just look at DCA out in California. They're not getting by with it out there!!
Originally Posted By disney pete I still love Epcot but got to admit it used to be a 2 day park for me now i find i can fit everything in 1 day,jim n ruth you actually know someone that likes the hat in MGM?
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<there are still plenty of others around who see through the cheap methods current management is using to get by with.>> ...and yet you too are "satisfied with mediocre" if you still go. Complaining is meaningless to Disney if you don't change your own actions.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss Just to clarify my opinions, I do think that some of the changes (or lack there-of) at WDW, and Epcot specifically, have not been good. I too don't like the cookie-cutter merchandise selection in all the stores, that buildings that once housed attractions or other guest facilities now sit empty, and I miss some of the attractions that have been taken away (though JII isn't one of them... I didn't like any incarnation.) BUT... I haven't been to WDW in 6+ years, and I'd go again in a heartbeat if I could afford it.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORDDU: Actually, trekkeruss, duckling--going to a Disney theme park--in itself--doesn't mean that my sisters and I are also settling for mediocre. If we were doing that, we'd remain silent and pretend everything was all right. ORWEN: Each time we go it's for a different reason, too. Sometimes we're invited to meet up with friends who haven't been for a while--or even with friends who go all the time. But it doesn't mean we're settling for anything. Epcot just happens to be the place we're meeting. ORDDU: At other times we go because of a particular event that's taking place--such as the Flower and Garden Show or the Food & Wine Festival which, in themselves, have an attraction for us and other guests all on their own. ORWEN: But we'd go even more often and enjoy the experience all the more IF there were better things to do there. Most of the time we do go, we don't do any attractions. Soarin' is the one thing we DO enjoy--when the lines aren't too long. ORDDU: It's the same with Disney M-G-M Studios. We used to truly enjoy that park--until they took away Super Star Television, Monster Sound Stage, created an inferior Animation Tour experience--and even re-wrote the script for Voyage of the Little Mermaid--taking away the Sebastian animatronic figure and altering the story to a new low. ORWEN: Not that we don't understand the point that you were trying to make. It's just that it doesn't hold water.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORDDU: Oh! And let a witch also add that we wouldn't go to Epcot at all--if we didn't all have passes to get us in, as if for free. We'd never be willing to fork over hard earned money--like a typical Day guest does--until things had vastly improved over what they are now.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<Not that we don't understand the point that you were trying to make. It's just that it doesn't hold water.>> Of course it holds water, because if you go, regardless of the reason, Disney is making money off of you. That to them says are OK with the parks.
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn The vision of EPCOT Center that I see could happen in two years if they attempted it. It would leave every current structure intact, but would change the content of every pavillion - including Spaceship Earth. And no, it certainly would ~not~ turn into that "Time Racers" nonsense. It would be much better that it is today, and NOT insult the valuable Disney fanatic base. Every pavillion would have joint relationships, and each would have a much higher level of meaning. It would become the true Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow all over again, with all of its original pizzaz and more. And just as an added bonus: the first item to go is THE WAND!
Originally Posted By trekkeruss I would try to get a parnership of some kind with the organizational body that does the world's fairs... so there would be an actual world's fair pavilion (or pavilions) in EPCOT.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORDDU: But you're assuming something that isn't true, trekkeruss, duckling. When my sisters and I go to Epcot, no one makes any money from it because we no longer eat there--since we don't like all the menu changes. We don't even buy merchandise there any more. So, again, the argument isn't legitimate where we're concerned.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss Fair enough... so you are entering the park through a CM, and not even buying admission media?
Originally Posted By BlazesOfFire Dont have enough time to go through all those posts but...to me, Epcot is still special. Yes things could be different but people like different things. Epcot is still my favorite park for a lot of reasons! People may not like it for those same reasons, but thats ok!
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<I would try to get a parnership of some kind with the organizational body that does the world's fairs... so there would be an actual world's fair pavilion (or pavilions) in EPCOT.>> The organizational body decides what events it will sanction as a World's Fair. The local community gets the pleasure of paying for it. Try getting the good people of Orlando to pay for a Disney pavilion. Good luck!
Originally Posted By trekkeruss ^^ so it works just like the Olympics then? Who pays for the pavilions? Don't the countries participating foot those costs?
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Who pays for the pavilions? Don't the countries participating foot those costs?>> Yes, I believe individual countries and companies that participate pay for their own pavilions and exhibits. That is the concept that Disney used in developing Epcot, where a major portion of the cost was subsidized by the company sponsoring the attractions (Future World) or the country sponsoring the pavilions (World Showcase). I think one of Disney's problems is that companies increasingly don't see the value in sponsoring Disney attractions. Sponsorship is getting harder to find and keep. I believe the primary reason for the Wonders of Life building closing is that Met Life discontinued their sponsorship of the attraction.
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn no worlds fair. EPCOT Center is not a World's Fair. That what the World's Fair is for. People come to DISNEY for advice on the World's Fair. Not vica-versa.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<I think one of Disney's problems is that companies increasingly don't see the value in sponsoring Disney attractions.>> I don't see how it would be much different than spending money on a world's fair pavilion, IMO, IF it didn't have to be more than a one or two year commitment. I guess what I am proposing would be to bring back something like the Millenium Village thing, but with the pavilion bridging the gap between the permanent nations represented now, and the tiny displays that were done in the Village.
Originally Posted By SJHYM ^^^Agreed. I think there are several forces at work here. First is companies are carefully looking at budgets and the cost of an attraction is very expensive. At one time companies could see a corrolation between their Disney sponsorship and the publics perception of their company. I dont think thats the case anymore. Second, Disney is very difficult to work with. The terms of the sponsorship is very strict and most would say that the terms are favorable to Disney. I worked with several sponosoring companies over the years and most felt that Disney was ultimately inflexible about most things. Third, At one time being associated with Disney was a great thing. It meant something. I dont believe that is the case anymore. Disney had has its share of bad press over the past couple of years, who wants to be associated like that. Sponsorships are now a dime a dozen around the world. Every sporting event, every theme park and just about everything in the world has a sponsor. Disney has not done a good job of creating attractions that are a natural fit for companies. The best sponsorships were things like GE and Carousel of Progress where both the sponsor and the attraction were one. Thats a hard thing. Today GM and Test Track are probably one of the better union of sponsor and attraction.
Originally Posted By LuvDatDisney The changes at Epcot have all been dictated by money and faulty park business models. They have been designed to homogenize the product, simplify it for the masses. Ask the consultants Disney's paid milllions to. Epcot is lacking vision today because its leaders don't have one. All those 'old, boring, AA-filled, long, imersive' attractions pulled in a whole lot more people in the 80s and into the 90s, with much less advertising and marketing, than Test Track and Mission Space do now. That is a fact. But Disney doesn't understand what the numbers are telling them. They only care about this quarter and whether the current Epcot VP (who isn't well-thought of at all amongst the cast) can push the numbers higher via higher prices and smaller portions at the Food and Wine Festival. That's the current reality. The next quarter. Maybe two. That's it. How many dinner packages to the Candelight Procession can we sell? That's why there's no grand plan for the future. That's why Epcot's 'Community of Nations' hasn't grown since Norway was added way back in 1988. That's why they have huge parcels of underutilized land. From WoL, to the second level of Imagination etc. A park created by visionaries is being run by folks who have no vision and are blind to the realities their inaction will have down the line ... beyond the next quarter or next year.
