Originally Posted By Mickeymouseclub Yeah but I am now thinking the musical Hall of chairs where the presidents have afterhours fun. It could be a new interactive computer generated activity to increase interest for all the guests that find history boring.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<Why isn't he the one being groomed for higher positions?>> Because he doesn't have an important daddy in the company.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Also I like some of the dining changes Dan brought to Epcot (La Casa de Tequila, Via Napoli) and would mind seeing similar in DHS.>> I think folks don't quite grasp what the park veeps are there for - they are solely responsible for in-park operations - getting the gates opened and closed with the right level of casting and no hitches. Decisions over expansions, new licensees etc. are not made by park veeps - those decisions are taken by cross-park functions (like F&B and Business Development) and the resort executive committee. Park veep roles are important but ulrimately they are about this week rather than next year.
Originally Posted By magic0214 <<<I hadn't heard this before, but I'm guessing this Figgy999 (I love Twitter, like being stuck in the eyes with cocktail forks!) is reputable or Doobie wouldn't have put this out.>>> Just to let you know Spirit, figgy999 is Fanboy from the podcast and from the blog.
Originally Posted By dshyates From what I am understanding the addition of the new dining at Epcot WAS Dan's doing because the DDP over stressed the offerings and that negatively impacted park operations. I don't know if Dan had anything to do with the type of new offerings. But I do know that he demanded some relief from the over stressing the DDP was causing.
Originally Posted By ChiMike In reaction to Lee's post, I will say that's why I asked in this thread what folks think Dan was responsible for improving at Epcot. Not being snarky, but I am seriously interested to learn of his efforts.. I am all ears. My buddy stands by the claim that when discussing this move to MGM he supposedly suggested strongly that money be found to allow F! to go daily for summer. That could be absolute b.s. Otherwise, my only opinion on this thread was that this was to help both of them grow their experience levels with the resort
Originally Posted By ChiMike That's good to know dshyates. Exactly the sort of thing I was interested in hearing
Originally Posted By MPierce >> I think folks don't quite grasp what the park veeps are there for - they are solely responsible for in-park operations - getting the gates opened and closed with the right level of casting and no hitches. Decisions over expansions, new licensees etc. are not made by park veeps - those decisions are taken by cross-park functions (like F&B and Business Development) and the resort executive committee. Park veep roles are important but ulrimately they are about this week rather than next year. << Have the Park VP's been known to lobby Food and Beverage, Park Development or the Resort Executive Committee in an effort to obtain a new attraction or restaurant LeeMac? Or do they strictly stay out of those areas, and let the money men have complete control?
Originally Posted By sjhym333 My understanding, and I could be wrong and leemac will correct me, is that the VP's are mostly asked opinions about the parks needs but the decisions are out of their hands in terms of new attractions, resturants, etc. I think we have seen times when a VP has stepped up and made a decision about adding something to a park...my most recent memory would be Jim McPhee and the EPCOT 25th exhibit.
Originally Posted By Manfried Disney theme park VPs are the most overpaid, under decisive executives in the world. It is the ultimate Peter Principle in action.
Originally Posted By leemac <<My buddy stands by the claim that when discussing this move to MGM he supposedly suggested strongly that money be found to allow F! to go daily for summer. That could be absolute b.s. Otherwise, my only opinion on this thread was that this was to help both of them grow their experience levels with the resort>> That is an operational decision so the park veep would be expected to approve that. Now it may be discussed at WDW Co. level as shows like F! are very high fixed costs. However park veeps are allocate their on-going entertainment spend however they like.
Originally Posted By leemac <<From what I am understanding the addition of the new dining at Epcot WAS Dan's doing because the DDP over stressed the offerings and that negatively impacted park operations. I don't know if Dan had anything to do with the type of new offerings. But I do know that he demanded some relief from the over stressing the DDP was causing.>> Definitely wrong - those licensed F&B locations are managed by three completely different teams that work across all parks - park veeps have limited say on what happens when a location closes or when a new location opens. Products & Services, F&B and the licensee groups will make those decisions.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Have the Park VP's been known to lobby Food and Beverage, Park Development or the Resort Executive Committee in an effort to obtain a new attraction or restaurant LeeMac? Or do they strictly stay out of those areas, and let the money men have complete control?>> Yes - it happens albeit rarely. Beth Stevens had an ability to be heard and get stuff done for DAK but she was a rarity (and arguably it is an easier park to program anyhow due to the limited options in most categories). Park veeps will be consulted to determine the operational implications but it rarely extended beyond that. There is a reason why WDP&R hasn't been run by an operator for a long time. Green, Pressler, Rasulo and now Staggs had little or no ops experience.
Originally Posted By MPierce Thanks for the insight LeeMac and sjhym333. That certainly puts things in a different perspective for me.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Just to let you know Spirit, figgy999 is Fanboy from the podcast and from the blog.>> Thanks. I now have a clue
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<My buddy stands by the claim that when discussing this move to MGM he supposedly suggested strongly that money be found to allow F! to go daily for summer. That could be absolute b.s. Otherwise, my only opinion on this thread was that this was to help both of them grow their experience levels with the resort>> <<That is an operational decision so the park veep would be expected to approve that. Now it may be discussed at WDW Co. level as shows like F! are very high fixed costs. However park veeps are allocate their on-going entertainment spend however they like.>> I have been told that Rilous and Ray never wanted to cut Fantasmic from nightly showings, but that came from above because of the show's cost. I also would doubt Danny had/has anything to do with it going to seven days if he hasn't even begun his new position yet. Now, he'll likely get credit in the fanboi community, much like George K gets credit for all that is happening in Anaheim now even if much of it was approved of and begun by good old Invisible Ed! So, Lee ... how long before Danny winds up running WDW ? (much like Georgie, he knows how to play the fan community too!)
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Yes - it happens albeit rarely. Beth Stevens had an ability to be heard and get stuff done for DAK but she was a rarity (and arguably it is an easier park to program anyhow due to the limited options in most categories).>> Funny (or not) how much better DAK was run when she was there versus Kev. <<Park veeps will be consulted to determine the operational implications but it rarely extended beyond that.>> But they can have sway into major projects in the parks ... whether it was Phil Holmes being against the NBC makeover for Mansion ... or Brad Rex pushing for dollars for Soarin (when MK could have gotten a major attraction instead). They have certainly been marginalized as Disney has grown. <<There is a reason why WDP&R hasn't been run by an operator for a long time. Green, Pressler, Rasulo and now Staggs had little or no ops experience.>> One might say the problem is P&R has ben run by a string of operators. I really don't know what to think of Staggs just yet, but I don't see major changes from JR's tenure.
Originally Posted By ChiMike >>I also would doubt Danny had/has anything to do with it going to seven days if he hasn't even begun his new position yet. To be clear. The story goes.... In his discussions with the leadership team about moving to MGM, he brought up what he found to be an issue with the park. He strongly recommended that he would like to see it return (I guess as a short summer experiment, i dunno) to nightly shows. So, I do not see it as a conflict that the F! decision was made prior to the official announcement of his transition. Especially considering the urgency with getting it to summertime crowds.
Originally Posted By ChiMike >>much like George K gets credit for all that is happening in Anaheim now even if much of it was approved of and begun by good old Invisible Ed!<< That I would agree with. Good point
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<To be clear. The story goes.... In his discussions with the leadership team about moving to MGM, he brought up what he found to be an issue with the park. He strongly recommended that he would like to see it return (I guess as a short summer experiment, i dunno) to nightly shows. So, I do not see it as a conflict that the F! decision was made prior to the official announcement of his transition. Especially considering the urgency with getting it to summertime crowds.>> Interesting ... I suppose possible, but I'll remain skeptical. I had heard talks of it happening as far back as ... I guess winter since it was after I was back from Asia ... because they anticpated larger crowds with Star Tours reopening.
