Originally Posted By RoadTrip I think that WDW would have developed much the same as far as the parks go. Epcot may not have become a park, but I don't think his City of Tomorrow would have gone anywhere. It would have cost way more than he could ever hope to recover in sales and rentals of homes and office space. If he could have completed anything like his original plan, it would have become an enclave for the extremely wealthy. Whether he would have ever adopted the “World’s Fair†concept for Epcot I have no opinion. I think it is very possible that Disney/MGM Studios would have been developed. Since his first love was Disney Studios, a park celebrating that would be something I think Walt would have supported. I think Walt for sure would have approved of Animal Kingdom. I read that Walt originally wanted to have real animals for the Jungle Cruise, but settled on AA's when finding there was no feasible way to do the attraction with real ones. I agree with other’s who said that there would probably be more monorail service. Even if monorails became prohibitively expensive, I think he would have gone with Light Rail before purchasing a massive fleet of stinky diesel busses. As far as development goes... he originally stated that he bought enough property to hold all of his plans. He did not say he bought it to maintain green space. It is well known that he did not like the development that occurred around Disneyland and wanted control over that type of development in WDW. I think having all the hotels, Downtown Disney, etc. is EXACTLY what Walt had in mind. The fact that Disney originally built an airstrip at WDW shows that from the beginning he was thinking of keeping guests on property the entire time they were in Orlando. <<When Walt Disney World opened in 1971, Shawnee Airlines began regular passenger service from Orlando's McCoy Airport directly to Disney World's own STOLport, using 19 seat DeHavilland Twin Otters. The actual flight time was only a few minutes. Shawnee was the only airline ever to fly directly into the Magic Kingdom.>> Source: <a href="http://www.airfields-freeman.com/FL/Airfields_FL_OrlandoSW.htm" target="_blank">http://www.airfields-freeman.c om/FL/Airfields_FL_OrlandoSW.htm</a>
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <It is just great to drive and drive with no WDW in sight.. and come upon the entrance after some high speed driving... > That's what I'm saying pixiedust1. Don't know why your answer is 'not at all.'
Originally Posted By pixiedust1 <<That's what I'm saying pixiedust1. Don't know why your answer is 'not at all.'>> You're right Jim... not at all...
Originally Posted By mrichmondj I don't think EPCOT would have turned out much different than it did today. Walt Disney was a very good salesman, and his vision for EPCOT provided the right sales pitch to get the Florida legislature to turn over all governmental controls on the Disney property to Disney. Without the grand scheme for EPCOT as sold by Walt Disney, the unique government that Disney was able to establish at WDW never would have been established. I think Disney probably realized that his dream EPCOT was even too far beyond even the most optimistic capabilities for a private enterprise to undertake, but if it sold the idea of Disney circumventing local governments in central Florida, it was worth pitching the idea. In the end, I think the EPCOT of 1982, which was pretty much a replica of the 1964 World's Fair that Disney played a large role in, would have pretty much been incarnated in about the same fashion.
Originally Posted By LuvDatDisney VBDAD55, I wasn't suggesting DVC was the problem, although your reaction isn't surprising. I feel it, along with massive overbuilding of all resorts, is a large part of it. You reach a point of diminishing returns. And Kissimmee has become a sewer due to all the low income Disney workers that have come with the massive explosion in Disney growth over the past 20 years. WDW doesn't, as much as Al Weiss and Company may wish it, exist in a its own universe. the 192 corridor wasn't rundown in the 1970s or most of the 80s, but as Disney grew so didn't massive uncontrolled growth. As for happy CMs. Disney didn't seem to have that problem back in the 70s and 80s, back when they didn't have the workforce they did now, back when people could make careers with the company, back before outsourcing and a parttime workforce became in vogue. Why WDW is what it is now isn't a simple answer. But to get back on topic, Walt was a visionary and a dreamer. I doubt that WDW would resemble what it does today if he had lived another 10 years. But we'll never know.
Originally Posted By pixiedust1 <<Company may wish it, exist in a its own universe. the 192 corridor wasn't rundown in the 1970s or most of the 80s, but as Disney grew so didn't massive uncontrolled growth.>> I agree when it comes to 192.. I remember when we stayed on the Maingate East end back in 1982... I dont think the town fathers were prepared for the explosion of tourists and businesses on 192 That was our first and last year to do that only because the speed limit was still 55mph on stretches with not many signal lights, or street lights, it was treacherous.. There was a nightly parade of ambulances up and down 192 for all the accidents from poor tourists pulling out onto 192 and getting broadsided... It was just to scary..
Originally Posted By ssWEDguy Here's one for you. Walt envisioned a commercial airport right on WDW property. It would have been on the southern 1/3 of the overall property, below 192. (This is not the same thing as the STOLPORT strip up closer to the Contemporary) Do you think this airport ever would have happened? Maybe the original idea had to do mostly with the fact that there was no big commercial airport in Orlando back then. I just can't imagine the air traffic that such an airport would have caused over the current property holdings.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <VBDAD55, I wasn't suggesting DVC was the problem, although your reaction isn't surprising. I feel it, along with massive overbuilding of all resorts, is a large part of it.< Ok, I admit I am lost in this statement -- not suggesting DVC is the problem, but it is a large part of it ??? The amount of rooms available per guests there remains a ratio: 4 parks and 2 water parks = many more hotel rooms than MK alone. Why would they want those people to stay at other locations and spend their money there ? While you say my response isn't surprising - tell me where it is incorrect as opposed to just not surprising. How many times does Universal have to change ownership - suffer financially etc to understand that without the income from the timeshares and hotels, the parks cannot survive as a stand alone entity. <As for happy CMs. Disney didn't seem to have that problem back in the 70s and 80s, back when they didn't have the workforce they did now, back when people could make careers with the company, back before outsourcing and a parttime workforce became in vogue.<< Welcome to the world of croporate America 2006 -- Disney is not alone in this by any stretch -- nor could they afford a full time workforce the size needed to support WDW. The 50,000 or 60,000 ( I have seen bothnmbers ) is because you are now supporting 4 major parks - 2 water parks and DTD --the concept of finding that many CM's that are all happy regardless of FT and PT is slim and none. And while I will admit the 'average' CM may have been happier in the 80's -- there were still good ones and bad ones....now there are more of each-- with more CM's the odds of running into a bad one is higher.
Originally Posted By ssWEDguy Say what you want about whether Walt would have liked Studios. But I gotta tell you -- I think he would have been proud of Tower, Rockin', and Soarin'.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost >>>Epcot may not have become a park, but I don't think his City of Tomorrow would have gone anywhere. It would have cost way more than he could ever hope to recover in sales and rentals of homes and office space. If he could have completed anything like his original plan, it would have become an enclave for the extremely wealthy.<<< I know I'll get killed for this but someone has to say it. Walt Disney (Saint Walt) was a very clever man with a huge number of wonderful insights to his credit, but, he also failed with many of his over the top ideas. Not everyone was a winner. Had he lived long enough to insure that EPCOT became exactly what he envisioned there is a very real possibility that Disney would now be bankrupt and WDW and Disneyland would only be a distant memory. Toward the end Walt wanted to build a utopia. It was a hugely ambitious project but in today's world, not very doable in a practical sense. There was a reason that Roy had to pull in the reigns every now and then. Believe me, no one admires Walt Disney more than I but he didn't always make the right choices or see reality. A good case in point is the orange grove surrounding Disneyland. A large influx of people demands services. Way more services than the park alone could provide. It was inevitable that all the growth around the draw would happen, yet Walt himself expressed how blindsided he was by that. Goodness, how could he have not thought of that. Walt's personality was that of a big picture man. Focused only on his goal and not what may or may not be an outcropping of that goal. If it wasn't part of his plan it just didn't exist. So with that in mind I am convinced that he would have had many good ideas but it was really possible that there could have been some crippling failures along the way. Logic and Ego are not always compatable. Walt knew from his experience with Disneyland that Kissimmee was going to become a jungle. That is why he purchased so much land. He wanted Disney World to be so far away from it that it could not possibly be seen by guests in his kingdom. If it were far enough away he really didn't care what it looked like out there.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper What's with the harsh criticism of Kissimmee? Every town has some less desirable locations but Kissimmee has a ton of great features but you need to get into the town (and off 192) to see them. The Vacation Club is enormously popular. Why wouldn't they expand as the demand warrants? The facilities are very nice and certainly don't distract from the property. And I ditto the comments about hiring "happy" cast members. Hiring 65,000 vs 10,000 is a different beast all together. And, Disney's challenges in this area mirror the challenges of every other business. McDonald's employees were happier in the 80's than they are today. To me that is more a product of the generation working than it is the employer.
Originally Posted By DVC_dad Concerning the Original Post: I think that the Hotel Resorts would have been themed in a more international getaway theme. I do not think we would have ANY of the ALL STAR resorts. Ofcourse I could be wrong as ten more years would change little about what we see today at WDW. I honestly don't think there would be ANY super value priced resort hotels at all. I would guess that half of the people who stay on property in the All Stars would splurge and stay in a moderate if that were the only choice.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper I completely disagree. The people who stay in the value priced resorts would either not stay or would find cheaper accommodations off property. I do think the hotels around Epcot might have more of an international flare to represent the various countries but, you have to remember, the Swan and Dolphin were Disney's way of testing the feasibility of more on property resorts. If they knew then what they know now the Disney Marketplace resorts would all be "Disney" resorts as would the Swan/Dolphin.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost >>>What's with the harsh criticism of Kissimmee? Every town has some less desirable locations but Kissimmee has a ton of great features but you need to get into the town (and off 192) to see them.<<< If it was my criticism of Kissimmee that you're refering too, I see what you mean. I didn't mean to imply that I personally thought badly of Kissimmee or even 192, for that matter. I was refering to the neon and glitter that Walt was trying to avoid being visable from his fantasy locations. What happened there is a natural progression when located near a major tourist draw. Services are required. When that many people are funneled into one area and that means competition and that means neon and glitter. It is part of the whole experience for me and it doesn't bother me at all. I will gladly stay on the strip and pay a reasonable price for a nights lodging and family meals. For many years that was the only way I could afford to bring the family to WDW. Without that option I never would have been able to "feel the magic" inside the parks.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <What's with the harsh criticism of Kissimmee?> I lived in Kissimmee in summer of 1986, and even then, it was pretty small town with not much there. I wouldn't think of it as 'ghetto' or anything, but it was pretty basic. It was a ranch town.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper If it wasn't for Disney that is all the Orlando area would still be...small, ranch, agricultural towns. But, Kissimmee has one of the nicest Parks and Recreation departments in the Country, a quaint downtown area (off of 192), the lake with a ton of special events, etc. If you only look at 192 when you think of Kissimmee then I could see why people would think it is...oh, I don't know...Anaheim.
Originally Posted By pixiedust1 <<I completely disagree. The people who stay in the value priced resorts would either not stay or would find cheaper accommodations off property.>> I completely agree with you... Disney needed to introduce value resorts so familys could afford to even go to Disney... Even now you can still find better values offsite.. I know Disney thinks that $107 to $130 is budget.. Disney has no problem filling those rooms to capacity 24/7 ... and when and if they open more value resorts they too, will be booked solid... Not everyone can afford the DVC or the higher end resorts...
Originally Posted By DlandDug Goofyrnmost pretty much stated what I believe in post #30. The issue at hand is not whether Walt's ideas were good or bad, but rather, what if he had lived ten more years to implement them. In ten years he almost certainly would have managed to create the EPCOT he envisioned. And don't mistake the fact that he had very clear and detailed plans. To Walt, EPCOT was more important than anything else. Imagineers working on the Magic Kingdom often expressed frustration that Walt had so little interest in the theme park. He answered most questions by telling them to just copy Disneyland. This is one reason why the MK ended up a bit more chaotically organized-- Walt just wasn't as interested as he was in Disneyland 1955-60. So, many decisions were made by committee, rather than by a single focussed individual. The biggest hindrance to EPCOT's potential success was the element of control. Walt wanted control over every aspect of it-- including the people's lives. It is, indeed, just possible that if he had been able to build his utopian city of tomorrow, no one would be willing to live there. And that, indeed, could have bankrupted Walt Disney Productions.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj <<< I do think the hotels around Epcot might have more of an international flare to represent the various countries but, you have to remember, the Swan and Dolphin were Disney's way of testing the feasibility of more on property resorts. >>> Actually, the Swan and Dolphin were the result of Disney being strapped for cash after spending massive amounts of money on EPCOT. The Swan and Dolphin were a real estate deal designed to inject cash back into the coffers. They weren't necessarily part of any master plan or an experiment in more on-site hotel. Disney needed money, and didn't have the extra cash flow to build its own new resorts at the time.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA Biggest issue with Swan and Dolphin? They peak out over the horizon at World Showcase!!! What a dumb place for that hotel!
