Originally Posted By AutoPost This topic is for Discussion of <a href="http://www.LaughingPlace.com/Latest.asp?I1=ID&I2=3027" target="_blank"><b>Latest: Through Jim Hill Imagineer responds to fan criticisms</b></a> JimHillMedia.com has an anonymous letter from an Imagineer striking back at fans who complain about recent efforts from Walt Disney Imagineering including Toy Story Mania. <a href="http://jimhillmedia.com/blogs/jim_hill/archive/2008/05/05/monday-mouse-watch-wdi-complains-about-all-those-complainers.aspx" target="_blank">Click here</a> to read.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Well, it is basically saying what I have said for a long time in response to criticisms regarding Pooh Playground, DCA, Small World and other things. The "loyal fan base" is but a mere fraction of the paying guests and they aren't who Disney is catering to. Is that the right way of doing it these days? That is irrelevant. It is the way it is being done. And, if you really think about it, what are the odds that you are going to please EVERYONE who makes up that small percentage of your loyal fan base? Basically 50/50. So, should they really concern themselves with what 50% of their small "loyal fan base" thinks when they are criticizing every move online?
Originally Posted By Mickeymouseclub Sometimes I think my disappointment should be directed at the original sin which was the Disney family selling out!!! Is that how this all began? Is that the root of our problem. It hurts to discover the Imagineers do not care about online opinions. The in park guest surveys needs a survey to see how effective that type of survey really is.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Is that really the issue? I don't think so. I think we have a generation right now growing up with unbelievable video games and other technologies that they have immediate access to in their own homes. It doesn't surprise me at all that kids would be drawn to Buzz Lightyear's Space Ranger Spin or this new Toy Story attraction. Now, it isn't necessarily what I like, but then again, I grew up with Pong and the Atari 2600. I am sure that the in-park surveys get the most unbiased views of the parks. You certainly cannot only listen to what online opinion is. How many guests in the park on a given day have ever heard of LP? My guess...a very small percentage. Same for Jim Hill Media or any of the other sites. How many of you have heard of a site called Coasterbuzz? If you like roller coasters I bet you have. Otherwise, you probably have not. So, when a Six Flags is building a new ride should they concern themselves with what 99% of their guests might think or the 1% that happens to visit Coasterbuzz?
Originally Posted By demderedoseguys >That's what I think your readers need to understand. When it comes to Walt Disney World, we're not out to please the annual passholders. Our goal here is service the tens of millions of other guests for whom a Disney World vacation is a once-in-a-lifetime experience. < Not out to please the AP holders? Huh? Is there something I'm missing here? The thought process should be that if WDI pleases the AP holders, that the one time guest will automatically have a better experience.
Originally Posted By Mr X "update some tired old Epcot ride" Nice. I would say this guy is definitely a mediocre type, considering that instead of taking pride in making things perfect he's angry that people are "bitching" about what's wrong with the ride (an imperfection he himself admits exists). What a crybaby. And a horrible lack of respect for the legacy of the place, if he sees Epcot as nothing but tired and old (who's fault is that, anyway?). By the way, in case he's reading, I would say that I absolutely do NOT bitch or complain when they get stuff right. Like, really right. There's a whole park like that. It's called DisneySea. Perhaps he's heard of it.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 "I am sure that the in-park surveys get the most unbiased views of the parks." Are you kidding? Have you ever taken one of those in park surveys? I have, and let me tell you, those things are not designed for complaints. They are most definitely skewed towards getting an answer they want. If the Imagineers are relying on these things to get an accurate picture of guest satisfaction, then things at WDI are far worse than I thought.
Originally Posted By Mr X If what that guy is saying is true, that the millions of guests are absolutely giddy with satisfaction and it's just a small percentage of internet nutcases who are bitching...why would he care so much anyway?
Originally Posted By Mr X "I am sure that the in-park surveys get the most unbiased views of the parks." Those things are most definitely skewed. They aren't used to gauge customer satisfaction, they are used to justify what has already been done by providing a mountain of backup data to bring to the next big meeting. Actually, the internet probably IS the best gauge actually.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper I did in park surveys for another company and that information absolutely was looked over by managers at various levels including the CEO. While a lot of the "general questions" are, granted, skewed, the meet of those things is usually the end when they ask you if you have any comments good, bad or otherwise. When someone takes the time to think about those answers and gives feedback of any nature then it is certainly considered valuable. X, are you trying to argue that the posters at LP, Mice Age or wherever are a fair and reasonable sampling of the typical grouping of parks guests? I don't believe that for a minute. I'll use another example. Geauga Lake Park in Ohio was closed permanently at the end of last season. There has been a lot of online buzz about what will happen with the old rides, including a classic 1926 wooden roller coaster. While the online community might be asking for that coaster to be preserved in some form I can assure you that millions of residents in NE Ohio aren't expressing their view one way or the other. Should the company that owned Geauga Lake be concerned about what, at most, might amount to a few hundred people? Do those few hundred represent the millions of Ohioans? I don't think so.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***X, are you trying to argue that the posters at LP, Mice Age or wherever are a fair and reasonable sampling of the typical grouping of parks guests?*** No, of course not. But neither are those polls. Granted there is a comments section, but I'm not convinced that a lot of people bother to make use of it. I could be wrong on that one, but I don't think so. What the online community does provide is an extremely harsh forum for constructive criticism. Something I'd say the company is in sore need of these days.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>They never seem to like anything that WDI does anymore.<< Perhaps because so much of it is "Let's stick a character in this "tired old ride" rather than create something new and innovative. Disney built it's theme park reputation not on character-based attractions so much as things that were fresh, innovative, unique. Just because some people see the "dumbing down" for what it is, don't get your feelings hurt about it. Rather than crying to Jim Hill about it, why don't you guys look to the giants that set a higher standard and try to aim for that. You have done some amazing things, WDI. And recently, too. But if your idea of freshening up a tired old ride is going to be add a bunch of characters, well, it won't be only cranky old APers and geeky internet fans who start to notice. Do better.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper I agree that there is constructive (and unconstructive) criticsm online. But in the case of these sites it is coming from an extremely narrow sampling of your guests. Should they be monitoring it? Yes, and it is very evident that they do. Should their decisions be dictated by it? No, I don't think so. But, another aspect of this is the blurry line that has become the press. The press, both conventional and the "online version" now uses online feedback as a tool when writing stories. So, when they point to MiceAge or LP as a source when writing a story about the negative feedback in regards to X attraction then it is very, very misleading. To me it is similar to the way the movie and tv critic industry works. You have shows that are "critical darlings" so the networks keep them around longer than they would otherwise. It is a bad economic decision because the real ratings don't justify keeping the show...advertisers don't want to pay for the commercials...etc. And, of course, you have shows or movies that critics hate but have mass general appeal and make the network or studio a ton of money. I guess there needs to be a balance and I think...on the whole...Disney tries to maintain that balance. Dinoland USA may not thrill hard core Disney fans but I see a lot of happy faces running around there. Similarly, a typical roller coaster rider probably could care less that the YETI makes X number of movements but Disney purists seem to like the detail (and expense) that went into building Everest.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 "Dinoland USA may not thrill hard core Disney fans but I see a lot of happy faces running around there." You also see a lot of happy faces at Six Flags - should Disney just design their parks that way? No - Disney has set a standard for themselves, and they should live up to it. That's why they can get away with charging the prices they do, and that's why people pay thousands of dollars to fly to WDW and spend an entire vacation there. If Disney offered nothing but the level of quality found in Dinoland, no one would be flying in to see it. Disney has set standards for themselves and have advertised those standards ever since Walt's time. So, when they don't live up to those standards, they have to expect their fans to complain - that's the nature of the game. They should be intelligent enough to weed through all the complaints and focus on the legitimate concerns - not ranting at their fans for complaining too much!
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I guess what this Imagineer would like to see is the online community gushing over no matter what they do. Just cheering no matter what. So, blow off the criticism you read online. No one here could possibly understand the Disney theme park legacy, so it's nothing but a "b-fest." I'm turning over a new leaf. DL's Pooh is the end-all-be-all of theme park innovation. The placement is perfect, and it's so much better than that tired old Country Bears. It's very modern to have stiff, non-moving department store window figures instead of all those pesky audio animatronics. Besides, little toddlers like it. It's colorful. That's good enough.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***Should their decisions be dictated by it? No, I don't think so.*** Since most of the bitching has basically been along the lines of what K2M just said (boiled down it's just "do better"), sure they should base their decisions on it. Look at it this way, if they listened to the criticism online and really knocked stuff out of the park on a consistent basis, how could that NOT also please the rest of the guests who are now okay with "good enough"? And I also agree with K2M that even recently they've done some incredible stuff. And I think they know that. And the funny thing is, there is little to no online bitching about that stuff (Everest and DisneySea, for example).
Originally Posted By Mr X ***So, when they point to MiceAge or LP as a source when writing a story about the negative feedback in regards to X attraction then it is very, very misleading.*** What's misleading about it, if they cite the source?
Originally Posted By Mr X ***Similarly, a typical roller coaster rider probably could care less that the YETI makes X number of movements but Disney purists seem to like the detail (and expense) that went into building Everest.*** You're starting to confuse me. Based on what else you've written, I can only gather that you think they SHOULDN'T bother with such details, since such a small and insignificant group actually notice?
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan As to gearing stuff for kids, Disney ought to dust off this quote and hang it on a wall somewhere... "We have respect for our audience. ... We operate on the conviction that it is composed of young children of potentially good taste, and that this taste should be developed." -- Bob Keeshan, TV's Captain Kangaroo
