Originally Posted By Skellington88 anyone who says Disnyland is anything less than a trailblazer should be considered legally retarded...
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo "Jay's role was to stem the losses at DLP to get the resort to survive. He achieved that with flying colors." I have to agree. DLP was going to hell in a handbasket, then Jay stepped in and turned things around. Also, given the budget and business constraints, WDSP is a good foundation that over time I look forward to seeing grow. The attractions themselves are excellent, and as they add placemaking to it, the park is getting better every year.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo "And the fact that they think ToT and Toon Studios will be silver bullets to cure the park's ills tells me they have learned nothing from DCA's failures." Maybe I am naive, but I believe they just see it as a shot in the arm, a test to see how additions can help, and then the roadmap can continue to develop.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo "Personally I would have preferred an attraction other than ToT but it is exactly the type of E-ticket that will be tremendously popular." I do love TOT, but I too would have preferred an all encompassing Dark Ride. However, thrills are expected in Europe at theme parks and TOT should do well. Sadly though, I think it is a little late given the rip off versions at Phantasialand in Germany and Port Adventura in Spain.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo "The real growth will come from Asia and reinvestment in the US parks just isn't a practical way to get a decent ROI. Shareholders won't appreciate Disney missing the boat as China, India and its neighbors explode towards growth and individual worth closer to the West." Sadly I agree with this from a fiscal perspective, but it really saddens me. More and more companies are forgetting about their USPs and legacy respnsibilities in favor of the fast buck. What happens when these "New Markets" become saturated? There needs to be a sustainable plan that supports both organic growth in existing markets, as well as new ventures that have a solid ROI. In my market place, our existing accounts are our testbeds and references for new business. If our accounts fail, so too do my new propositions. Disney needs to consider this moving forward, treating the existing resorts as their accounts.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo "...the parks (not counting japan) havent had a truely "MIND BLOWING" attraction since Indiana Jones and that was over 10 years ago! why do all the cool innovatie NEW non-pixar tie in rides go to japan and not anywhere else hmmm?" Well that's not entirely true, what about Soarin'? And Mission Space had potential? What about Expedition Everest? And Philharmagic to a lesser extent. Please consider things in equal measure here folks.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo "I haven't looked at numbers, but I've never seen DL struggling to the extent you say, except maybe during the '84 Olympics in LA." Man, we had the best times at DL in summer 1984. We stayed away at 1st because we thought it would be crazy, but in the end we must have gone 10 times that summer. Fantastic memories.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo I really do struggle in some respects with publically held companies. It's funny because I am trying to get mine in the FTSE 100 (we're currently in the 200). In the push for increased ROS and ROI, many organisations forget about quality. I am pleased this is not always the case (my firm really does strive for quality), but in the quest for shareholder value, a lot of the Disney magic has been lost. Now I'm not some whaco fan boy (well maybe a little), but I really feel Disney needs to strike a much bigger balance. Some of their offerings in that past have failed due to them not paying enough attention to quality (e.g. video games, web services, etc.). And although I thoroughly enjoy DCA, there is no denying that the cost model and creative choices made as a result has had a significant impact as well. I realy don't know the full answer, as I can't see our international economy changing rapidly, but I do believe Disney needs to pay attention to it's roots as well as it's new growth. Thankfully, I like a lot of what I see from Iger in trying to redress this. Eisner was very good at this in his early years, let's see what Bob and his exec have up their sleeves.
Originally Posted By leemac <<So why are you down on HKDL all of a sudden? Are you speaking the terms of the deal that Disney made weren't the best? Or the place in general?>> I'm definitely not "down" on HKDL. I honestly believe that Tom Morris and his team did a tremendous job with the cash available for the park. The two hotels are fantastic. The finest examples of their kind anywhere (thanks to Wing). My issue is simply the level of capital commitment that WDP&R put into the park. It should have had more attractions. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but I just wish Paul had pushed Michael for more money. I always felt he was just a little too timid when it came to pushing Michael for support (both professionally and financially). It is only now that they are going back and seeing what they can do to get more people through the gates. That said I blame the local management for the fiasco of the past 2 years. PR disasters abound, a terrible marketing message, no APs, over-reliance on tour groups...the list is endless. Thankfully virtually the entire management team has changed and the only way is up.
Originally Posted By leemac <<That said, Disney is going to have to spend money on its USA parks if it's going to grow the business -- or even, just not lose market share. People stop going when the product becomes very stale (see WDW post-Millennium until the past 18 months or so). And international growth, while the smart choice longterm, is frought with its own perils as Disney has discovered in France and China. Japan was simply an exception because they are so nuts over American pop culture there, and Disney doesn't own the parks so it's not an issue financially anyway.>> It is a heck of a quandry now. I honestly don't know what to say about the US parks. I always felt that a second gate shouldn't have been built in Anaheim (period) and that the focus should have been on a third resort area (either in SoCal or elsewhere like the failed Katy, TX project). WDW is aging and now beginning to suffer the same aches and pains of its older brother on the west coast. I'm not convinced that WDW will ever be able to support a fifth theme park. I just wonder if people expect too much from WDW. In the past few years we have had M:S, PhilharMagic, SGE!, LMA, Everest, Soarin' (and now the Seas and Finding Nemo:The Musical plus the Scare Floor). That is still a lot of CapEx even if it isn't on the level of an Indy Jones Adventure. It is a mixed bag for many people (personally I hate SGE! but have no quibbbles with any of the others and believe that Soarin' is the finest Disney attraction since ToT and Everest is exceptional). I think we will continue to see the US parks supported but I just don't see anything huge happening any time soon. No new "land" or park. I honestly don't think there is the market anymore in the US for theme parks. You only have to look at the woes of NBC Universal and Six Flags to know that people are turning to alternative vacations. DCL, Magical Gatherings and Adventures by Disney are an attempt to shift the reliance of WDP&R away from the traditional theme park model. I guess time will tell.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Before I comment on this post, let me just say out of everything I've ever read of yours in years here on LP.com, I've got to give you props for this post. It's blatently honest and to the point, even if I disagree with parts. I respect you for placing this out there and my advice (not that you've ever wanted it) might be to save this and have it handy when you're arguing a point from your viewpoint. You may not get people to agree, but you'll likely earn a lot of respect.>> Thanks. It is a tough one. It is like all this Imagination pavilion talk. I've honestly heard nothing. Not a jot. Nothing official is going on. I said it and then get castigated for it because other people are saying "Yes, the pavilion will be overhauled by Oct '07 with HISTA being replaced the ride having DF returned". I've not seen or heard anything to suggest that is the case. I don't believe that timeline is even remotely possible even if they started next month. And they wouldn't with the Seas not due to be handed over until mid-October. There is a lot to look forward to from the parks right now. There are more overseas opportunities than we have ever seen. The product coming through is strong like Legend of Mythica and ToT at TDS, the Monsters, Inc. ride at TDL (which is pretty incredible as it currently stands), The Seas at Epcot, Finding Nemo: The Musical at DAK, Subs at DL and a host of other things coming. John is already influencing some things at WDI (such as the Subs where his fingerprints will first show up) and the execs there (and Annie at DCE) are finally being given the chance to flex their creative muscles. The doom and gloom prophesies are well short of the mark IMO. There is a lot to be positive about in the parks arena. But I do appreciate the comments '74. It has always been a uphill battle for me to get my (fairly) unique POV across on our boards.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Sadly I agree with this from a fiscal perspective, but it really saddens me. More and more companies are forgetting about their USPs and legacy respnsibilities in favor of the fast buck. What happens when these "New Markets" become saturated? There needs to be a sustainable plan that supports both organic growth in existing markets, as well as new ventures that have a solid ROI.>> Interesting POV Dave. Sustainability and consistency is definitely becoming the order of the day. Companies just can't chase the short-term buck for fear of being tainted as another Enron or WorldCom. It causes an irratic cycle which investors want to avoid at all costs now. That said I do feel it becomes an emotional issue if you start talking about legacy responsibilities. TWDC is a public company after all and it shouldn't be looking to stretch itself out of shape to maintain a "legacy". As time passes Disney and its brand becomes less and less about Walt and more about the current crop of creatives. Ask tweens today what they think of Disney and it will be High School Musical and Hannah Montana. They are current Disney consumers and will be future consumers too when they grow up and have a family. Walt's touch should always be felt at Disneyland and I'm sure it always will be. That history and nostalgia is a great gift. You only have to look at the 50th to see that. I just want Disney to stand for quality entertainment.
Originally Posted By idleBrain <<I never looked at it this way...I have low blood pressure and low blood sugar-- so I guess next week I am going to have to thank my company for keepingmy role stressful all these years...a silver lining I would never have seen..LOL !>> LOL vbdad55! Yeah... it's difficult to grasp the concept of a stress-induced job being helpful, isn't it? But I must admit, that a bit of stress and several cups of caffeine does help reduce my need for Strattera, which is now more than $3 per pill! =8^0
Originally Posted By ChiMike >>My issue is simply the level of capital commitment that WDP&R put into the park. It should have had more attractions. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but I just wish Paul had pushed Michael for more money.<< That has been the core problem with the company and it's representatives. They can only identify these problems after-the-fact with hindsight. I'm glad you said this now Lee because I clearly remember arguing about this with you and being told that Disney funding level for HKDL was appropriate because they were properly managing risk. My counter-point was, "Well if they were more concerned with the management of risk, why do HKDL in the first place then!" >>That said I blame the local management for the fiasco of the past 2 years ... Thankfully virtually the entire management team has changed and the only way is up.<< Another core problem with the company, it's representatives and lately the fanbase is the thinking that these mid-level exec changes as well as the reliance on marketing changes will be enough. Not subscribing that directly at you Lee, just venting. Going into HKDL, they obviously didn't take -certain- lessons from EuroD with them. This to me is reason enough to wish that some decision makers just leave the company and spare us. It would be nice to go back to when the company relied more on FORSIGHT rather than paying these guys to politick all day and learn theme park 101 (via hindsight) on our dime. They obviously are out of their element. Going forward, they need to look at Paris' history and realize that competent management is crucial, but actual product is even more crucial. >>It is a heck of a quandry now. I honestly don't know what to say about the US parks.<< I whole-heartily agree. >>I always felt that a second gate shouldn't have been built in Anaheim (period) and that the focus should have been on a third resort area (either in SoCal or elsewhere like the failed Katy, TX project).<< I think this would have been the absolute worst approach. I hope this isn’t part of your consulting! -- ;-) -- The quandary you identify earlier has been partially brought about because of the U.S. labor market and the U.S. tourism market. How in the heck is Disney going to be able to support additional infrastructure and employment that would otherwise be duplicitous and unneeded if Disney built up their existing locations instead. Furthermore, an operation outside of WDW and SoCal, I believe, would have had issues with the mass-scale quality "Disney-esque" performance by all of it's employees. Like the concepts for Disney Regional, I think it would have been hard to keep that Disney Difference in check. By keeping things tight on a leash in Florida and California, I do believe management has an easier time controlling standards. Like Disney films, Disney merchandise, etc., the more variations flooding the marketplace the more dilutive value they carry. For me, the theme park issue is the same. The theme parks are less 'special when they become more common-place. WDI's artistry becomes more common-place. Less special. This is why, to this day, I still do not understand why Disney wants to expand with more locations in Asia before capping-out HKDL. Might be a decent strategy in this short-term growth opportunity but I believe it shall end up being more harmful to Disney's intangibles in the long-term. I know it's not the same as dealing with growth in an international marketplace, but Six Flags is trying to shed their multiple locations and Disney is trying to bulk up on them. I think there still is a lesson to be learned with Six Flags’ overexpansion. When Asia calms down 15 years from now I can't see Disney successfully running three non-Japan parks half-way across the globe in less than stable areas. For me, it once again comes back circularly to Disney primary motivation being to cash-in quick on a fad. To be impulsive for immediate results. They rushed into the internet growth fad (Go.Com) and the CGI growth fad (Dinosaur) and the 300 channel distribution fad (ABC Family) and the niche-storefront fad (Disney Store) and they still haven't learned their lesson. I guess, to sum up, what's the rush this time? Why not nurture HKDL? They don't have an endless supply of funds. China is not going anywhere. Cost of capital has already begun to quickly escalate. >>WDW is aging and now beginning to suffer the same aches and pains of its older brother on the west coast. I'm not convinced that WDW will ever be able to support a fifth theme park.<< Once again. Two thumbs WAY up. You're right on Lee. Whose to blame? Let’s name someone. It certainly isn’t the consumer. Well, hold on, let’s back-up. Those ingenious marketing studies did say the guests wanted more of this and more of that. It must be the guests’ fault after all. Who can blame Disney for giving the guests more of what they want? All Disney did was follow those scientific, relevant and uncorruptable surveys. All Disney did was listen to the guest! How could that not work-out? Sounds like an outcome Kronk would be surprised by. >> I just wonder if people expect too much from WDW. In the past few years we have had M:S, PhilharMagic, SGE!, LMA, Everest, Soarin' (and now the Seas and Finding Nemo:The Musical plus the Scare Floor). That is still a lot of CapEx even if it isn't on the level of an Indy Jones Adventure.<< It sure is. Almost too much. I think your example aptly proves that some of us don't really need to "chill out". That the idea of focusing on one strong addition every 5-6 years might be the better strategy now that it isn’t 1989 anymore. However, it is not the guests who clamor for all of these pinprick changes and additions. It is Disney's own management & Disney's expensive consultants who all need to justify their own existence within the company. When WDI (and the Disney synergy machine) were smaller, like it hopefully will be a year from now, there was no need to have so many rather ineffective changes made to the parks. Where at one time it was an issue of freshening up things in 1986, the pendulum has completely swung in the other direction and they now can't sit on their hands for a minute. That is not what the market is demanding. It stems from the demand of having such a large payroll to justify. The heroin monkey effect ascribed to DCA could very well be given to WDI and the higher-ups over the last 12 years. Up through Eisner’s tenure, strategic planning was like some alien race coming down and strip mining Earth (Disney) of all of it’s resources and then moving onto the next exploitation. Ironic, the very fate Eisner supposedly saved the company from in 1984. Change. Change not to prevent a museum setting, but change so that people can keep their 6 figure salaries and people can keep writing books or producing featurettes talking about how WDI & Disney have never been better. What quandary?!?! >>It is a mixed bag for many people (personally I hate SGE! but have no quibbbles with any of the others and believe that Soarin' is the finest Disney attraction since ToT and Everest is exceptional).<< I think Soarin' is a neat little D-Ticket. It will be nowhere near as popular 12 years from now as ToT is now or Everest will be. I question the thinking that Soarin' & M:S were the best two back-to-back additions to Future World for the next 10 years. Soarin' is no doubt a success, and I think it works a little better for DCA, but for Soarin's own longevity Future World better see a non-VR circuit ride after Nemo. >>I think we will continue to see the US parks supported but I just don't see anything huge happening any time soon. No new "land" or park. I honestly don't think there is the market anymore in the US for theme parks. You only have to look at the woes of NBC Universal and Six Flags to know that people are turning to alternative vacations.<< To go back to Asia, it is because of decentralization. >>DCL, Magical Gatherings and Adventures by Disney are an attempt to shift the reliance of WDP&R away from the traditional theme park model. I guess time will tell.<< I think the last two are a waste of breath and another example of Disney not focusing on their core competencies. Not that encouraging groups to visit WDW is bad, but I just question how much of a DIRECT return Disney benefits from on these marketing/partnership gimmicks than a better return on putting the money towards something tangible. If there is one area that needs to be cut back it is certainly the various marketing channels. To prove my point, look at DCL vs. the other two. What’s the difference? Could it be that DCL is an additional product that embraces the Disney culture. That it isn’t like the other two that basically rebrands or shifts product that was already there? This brings me to my 3rd identification of a core problem. Disney, through it’s bloated and overpaid executive pool (that couldn’t draw a cartoon or design a dark-ride) could only create by finding new ways to market. The endless celebrations and daytime parades are perfect examples of their limitations.
Originally Posted By ChiMike >>Thanks. It is a tough one. It is like all this Imagination pavilion talk. I've honestly heard nothing. Not a jot. Nothing official is going on. I said it and then get castigated for it because other people are saying "Yes, the pavilion will be overhauled by Oct '07 with HISTA being replaced the ride having DF returned". I've not seen or heard anything to suggest that is the case. I don't believe that timeline is even remotely possible even if they started next month. And they wouldn't with the Seas not due to be handed over until mid-October.<< Lee, I hope you did not feel my comments were part of your horrific loss. I simply objected to the notion that everybody at WDI was completely dumbstruck with the very idea of this occurring. I do agree with you, immensely, that the rumor as well as the facts have been completely blown out of proportion. The way Disney operates now there is NO WAY a project like this could plod through all of the phases and be completed so quickly. >>John is already influencing some things at WDI (such as the Subs where his fingerprints will first show up) and the execs there (and Annie at DCE) are finally being given the chance to flex their creative muscles. The doom and gloom prophesies are well short of the mark IMO. There is a lot to be positive about in the parks arena. But I do appreciate the comments '74. It has always been an uphill battle for me to get my (fairly) unique POV across on our boards. << I think ’74 properly outlined why some might believe that there is a lot to be negative about in the park arena. I would say that I deep-down hope you don’t consider me as one who squelches your ability to share your (very) unique POV across on here. I gain a lot of insight from your views Lee. >><<Sadly I agree with this from a fiscal perspective, but it really saddens me. More and more companies are forgetting about their USPs and legacy respnsibilities in favor of the fast buck. What happens when these "New Markets" become saturated? There needs to be a sustainable plan that supports both organic growth in existing markets, as well as new ventures that have a solid ROI.>> Interesting POV Dave.<< Me too. A very excellent summation Dave. >>As time passes Disney and its brand becomes less and less about Walt and more about the current crop of creatives.<< HA! There are just so many angles to a reply here Lee. I’ll save my blowhard antics and just say this: Didn’t stop them from exploiting Walt’s legacy from 2001-2006. Almost to a point to fill in the void left by the LACK of any creative additions by the current crop of personnel. >>Ask tweens today what they think of Disney and it will be High School Musical and Hannah Montana. They are current Disney consumers and will be future consumers too when they grow up and have a family.<< Does that mean that trend concepts from decades ago like Mousercize (sp?) and the 70’s Mickey Mouse Club were gems in the Disney crown? Simply because they spoke to the current kids of those years? Do you think kids who experienced Pooh Corner or Dumbo’s Circus are incapable of enjoy Disney of 2006 because those productions weren’t kept alive for 25 years? Do guests who were raised by the Disney of the 60’s have a mutually exclusive set of appreciation for Toy Story or POTC I? My point being that I disagree with the idea that it is o.k. to judge products based on some future nostalgia effect rather than on the actual product’s merit. I haven’t seen the two you mention so I can’t say one way or the other. But I don’t see anybody wax’nostalgic about the Unidentified Flying Oddball, even if that was their first introduction to Disney.
Originally Posted By idleBrain <<And they wouldn't with the Seas not due to be handed over until mid-October.>> Oh really? What happened to the plan for Nemo's Undersea Adventure's opening to coincide with Epcot's 24th anniversary on Oct 1? Wasn't that the date of the big media whoring festival, where the plans for Epcot's 25th celebration were going to be unveiled? Now the ride's opening has been pushed back? Why? Are they behind schedule? Or are there other reasons that have nothing to do with production? I find the timing very interesting indeed. The Kim Possible Improv test was originally slated for the UK area of WS, according to some other posters on that "magical" WDW discussion board. Then leemac posted it was originally slated for Innoventions. No telling what the original plans were for the four-week test, but it would appear that the Imagination pavilion is now it. I still find it odd, that this area would be chosen for their test, given how difficult it is to access this area of Imagination, whether it be the old ImageWorks upstairs, or the meet-n-greet area with Figzilla. Either one is not as accessible as UK or Innoventions. Don't quite understand what they're hoping to prove with the test, if it takes so much effort to locate the KP Improv troupe.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Please let me clarify about the legacy requirements. Guiness do not stop making stout, or fiddle with the formula. Ferrari still make fantastic cars, and stand for quality. P&O cruises still stand for a luxury experience. Why do these brands last? Because even when they diversify, they do not forget their roots. However, when I first went into business, Walmart was heralded as the model for business (and I believed it), but that view is not so much held today (just look at the boards). When I talk about Disney legacy, I don't mean we should all just look at the past Silly Symphonies, and I'd rather watch Cars (which I loved!!!!) than Snow White. But I don't ever want Disney to lose sight of quality. That the parks are kept clean and attractions are made for the whole family. Or movies do not play down to kids (after all Walt said too many kids were too smart). It's fine to find cheaper ways to do things, as long as quality doesn't suffer. Sadly, we have seen a mixed bag these days (but that's not new either - I remember the Disney films of my early childhood were very dubious). What I worry about though is Disney going to market and forgetting it's roots in the US. It would be like the body shop selling soap tested on animals all of a sudden. There is an appeal of a legacy brand, where consumers expect a certain pride and upholding of the company legacy. I do question whether Disney still uphold theirs? I'd like to think so.
Originally Posted By ChiMike >>Don't quite understand what they're hoping to prove with the test,<< I think you nailed it the first time around. Having this setup at JIYIWF&#SGDYGGDYHSG is a painless, cheap way to get more traffic to the armpit of WDW.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo I hope that Disney still continues to make quality decisions, and that we don't have as many parks as Jim had...
