Originally Posted By dresswhites wow it seems we have two separte topics in this posting. i don't have enough expertise to talk about leaking, so i will coment on the other topic. i just think turning DCA into an extension or downtown disney is a bad idea. i think there are several attractions that are worth keeping, soaring, grizzly, redwood creek challenge, screaming, the sun wheel, golden dreams, Tower of terror, Animation building, the Hyperion, Muppets, Monster Inc, and bugs life.
Originally Posted By dresswhites the other arguement i will make is not everything WDI has done lately is junk. Soaring over California is very well done. grizzly rapids is also very well done. Mickey's Philharmagic is wonderful/
Originally Posted By tangaroa meh. If Disney thought the leaks were worth stopping they would put the effort out to stop them. If you can assign a monetary loss to the value of the leaks, and weigh that against the cost of persuing and ending the leaks - you can get an idea if it's worth it or not - and I'm guessing Disney doesn't think it's worth it. I'm sure there are managers and directors and such that all post on fan sites in their personal time with their own personal agendas. If there was a fan site disecting every decision you made all day long, how could you keep your mouth shut?
Originally Posted By tangaroa Point is - Al has been around for a long time, and if Disney saw him as a threat they could do something about it. They don't, and Al continues to post. People get up in arms every time he posts something juicy or scandalous - and the only people that seem silent are the execs at Disney who supposedly have the most to lose. To rationalize the silence you must believe either: 1) Disney doesn't believe that Al is a threat worth the cost of perusing. 2) Disney condones and possibly even supports Al in leaking this information for their own purposes.
Originally Posted By jonvn "Al has been around for a long time, and if Disney saw him as a threat they could do something about it. They don't, and Al continues to post. " Yep. There are many avenues they could peruse to stop him, and other sites like him. They don't. Either they don't care, or they use him.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<i don't have enough expertise to talk about leaking, so i will coment on the other topic. >> I thought leaking was a natural human function that we all did ;-) <<i just think turning DCA into an extension or downtown disney is a bad idea. i think there are several attractions that are worth keeping, soaring, grizzly, redwood creek challenge, screaming, the sun wheel, golden dreams, Tower of terror, Animation building, the Hyperion, Muppets, Monster Inc, and bugs life. >> I would venture to say that there are far more REAL Disney quality attractions at DCA than there are at Disney-MGM Studios, DSP or HKDL ... and no one suggests turning them into glorified shopping and dining districts. And DSP is so bad that it makes DCA look like a marvel. Any park that has ToT, Soarin, Animation, Aladdin, Monsters Inc, Tough to be a Bug, Grizzly Rapids and Screamin has got a damn good foundation. Now build off of it ... and stop adding desperation stuff.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<If Disney thought the leaks were worth stopping they would put the effort out to stop them. If you can assign a monetary loss to the value of the leaks, and weigh that against the cost of persuing and ending the leaks - you can get an idea if it's worth it or not - and I'm guessing Disney doesn't think it's worth it. >> Abolutely. <<I'm sure there are managers and directors and such that all post on fan sites in their personal time with their own personal agendas. If there was a fan site disecting every decision you made all day long, how could you keep your mouth shut? >> Again, good point. Although I think an argument can be made that by planting people to throw out the company line and try and control PR damage, Disney is going after the result of the problem vs. the problem itself. <<Point is - Al has been around for a long time, and if Disney saw him as a threat they could do something about it. They don't, and Al continues to post. >> Actually, there is a fairly reliable story (I don't know it as fact, so I won't present it as such.) that Disney did go after Al personally in the late 1990s during the infamous 'Promote Paul Pressler' campaign and it cost him his career and a relationship. <<People get up in arms every time he posts something juicy or scandalous - and the only people that seem silent are the execs at Disney who supposedly have the most to lose.>> Silent? No. They're quite vocal in the offices in Anaheim, Glendale and Burbank. What would you expect them to do? Respond in public? They have no desire to legitimize the man anymore than he already is. They're not ever going to (publically) acknowledge he even exists. <<To rationalize the silence you must believe either: 1) Disney doesn't believe that Al is a threat worth the cost of perusing. 2) Disney condones and possibly even supports Al in leaking this information for their own purposes.>> There is some truth in both statements, but the bottom line is they simply want to pretend -- publically -- he doesn't exist. It's like avoiding the 800-pound gorilla in the room ... what gorilla? I don't see a gorilla? I don't smell bananas! Nope. Not here.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "Hans, I'm just telling you what I know is a fact." I can accept that management would be interested in what is being said here for a variety of legitimate reasons. What I find hard to believe is that anyone within the halls of Disney's various headquarters would take these discussions with more than a grain of salt. I know I certainly don't.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<I can accept that management would be interested in what is being said here for a variety of legitimate reasons. What I find hard to believe is that anyone within the halls of Disney's various headquarters would take these discussions with more than a grain of salt. I know I certainly don't.>> Oh, you're quite right. They take most of what they read with bottles of salt. They're more concerned in gleening information on what the average Disney consumer thinks. They're the bellweather of whether certain decisions are ultimately good for the bottom line (and their jobs) than that of the rabid fan group ... or even management critics, like myself. And just one other note about Al Lutz, I know the parks management take him very seriously because I've been approached by Disney execs in the past (some still with the company today) in my day-job capacity to ask me for stratgies on getting him removed from the online picture.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>stratgies on getting him removed from the online picture.<< Good grief. It sounds like The Sopranos.
Originally Posted By jonvn "ask me for stratgies on getting him removed from the online picture." Um, sue him? Drive him personally into complete bankruptcy? Litigate him into non-existance? These people know that. There should be no reason to ask about strategies.
Originally Posted By jonvn Or, failing that, remove his AP? Remove the APs of his associates? Treat him as a tresspasser if he shows up on a site? Spread false information to certain people to see what leaks and then fire those individuals who spoke to him? Get him on copyright infringement? If these people can't figure out how to do this, they are stupid beyond belief.
Originally Posted By disneywatcher >> If these people can't figure out how to do this, they are stupid beyond belief. << If they're comparable to the geniuses who dreamt up and developed DCA in the first place, then, yes, they're stupid beyond belief. The idea of making DCA a freebie, or sort of like the marketplace area of Knott's Berry Farm, and inserting more hotels around it, is about as bad as the park itself. But if I could see the specific profit-and-loss statistics on DCA, I'd have a much better idea of why such an idea is even floating around out there to begin with. So unless the park is really a flop in terms of revenues and public surveys, I'd describe Tony Baxter's idea for it as being about as weak and exhausted as the idea of not doing anything to the place at all.
Originally Posted By Westsider Tonight I just read over on MI where their resident insider "Marcie" basically confirmed everything Al had to say about the recent DCA saga of tearing out the turnstiles and making it into Downtown Disney South. Although Marcie gave her usual intro about Al missing details, she didn't offer any real new information or correct any "details" and generally just confirmed and restated what Al Lutz had already said about Baxter, DCA, Placemaking, etc. With Marcie's me-tooing of the Al Lutz story, and a few other random message board posts from Company employees that support the Al Lutz story, it really does appear that this DCA plan was floated and seriously considered for a time very recently. DCA is just fine! It just needs better marketing! Al Lutz doesn't know what he is talking about! Just wait until the weather warms up, then DCA will be packed! Wait until the Electrical Parade is brought out of mothballs! Wait until Flik's Fun Fair opens! Wait until Tower of Terror opens! DCA is just fine! Just wait! Or maybe just wait until they turn it into a shopping center with rides. ;-)
Originally Posted By jonvn "DCA is just fine! It just needs better marketing!" It is fine. It did need better marketing. Now it needs more additions. And Al Lutz generally does not know what he is talking about. thank you.
Originally Posted By jonvn BTW, if you are really employed there, you might consider getting another job. Your disloyalty to the company you work for would get you fired immediately in any reasonable place of employment.
Originally Posted By Sweeper <<And Al Lutz generally does not know what he is talking about.>> I used to think that back when I hoped he was wrong about everything but he has been right about a great deal. And if not for Al we wouldn't hear from Marcie to get a better picture of what is coming.
Originally Posted By jonvn Oh brother, he is not right about a great deal. He sometimes gets the large scale general thing right, but not often. The details are almost always wrong. He obviously talks to someone at the company (who should be fired). I used to know the name of a person he talked to at WDI, but never said anything about it, and won't. It's not up to me to try and get people fired. That's what someone else's forte is. It is true about Marcie, though. She only seems to comment in response to Al. She says that she doesn't say anything about a subject unless it is broached online already. So, we're only going to get reactions from her, and not proactive information.
