Originally Posted By ChurroMonster If you listen to speeches by John McCain or Mitt Romney or John Edwards or Joe Biden they all gush with how they will run the country. It's the same thing with corporate executives when a large investment starts to see returns. Everything is rosy. Even when they know it will never be rosy.
Originally Posted By jonvn "Of course we do - OF COURSE WE DO!!! " No, we don't. You know what is internet rumor. "How many times does it need to be mentioned that DCA opened under the theory that it would be so incredibly successful that AP's wouldn't be needed." And how many times does it need to be told that you have no real source for that information? You are going by retreaded junk that makes no sense, is not logical and is often contradictory. For example, this: "The park was going to sell out every day with full price single gate tickets." The park was supposed to sell out at something like 38,000. That's the figure I've heard online. If it sold out every day, that would be close to 14 million people visiting for the year. And yet, we're also led to believe that the place was supposed to get 7 million. So which is it? Hmm? You don't know, neither does anyone else. It's all nonsense. Certain people just want to pick whatever argument they can at the time to make the place look as bad as possible. But no one really knows for sure what all the varying degrees of success have been for all the different aspects of what the place was supposed to do, based on what Disney wanted it to do. "There is absolutely no question to any intelligent person who has studied the facts of the park's birth that the park didn't live up to early expectations." Acutally, there are a lot of questions, and any intelligent person would understand what those are and why there are questions. Apparently one of us is not intelligent. "Is that failure? Well, that's a semantic call." Actually, no, it's not semantic. If the place was a failure it would close. "either the park has been sucking and is in need of some serious cash quickly before it fails completely" Ten years is not "quickly." "unless you're high up with the Mouse, you'll never know for sure which one's correct." Yes, so trying to proclaim something is a certain way, and that way only is rather presumptuous.
Originally Posted By jonvn "look guys there are no "all sorts of angles to this"." Not when you can only view the entire place through the one dimensional idea of DCA SUCKS and little else, no it does not. But for anyone who is actually interested in reality and how things may really work, there is.
Originally Posted By jonvn "Jon, TDA did expect the place to be filled to the rafters every day when it opened. Really." The problem with that idea is that it does not work out numerically with what the supposed stated projection was. Maybe some people did hope for that, and even planned for that in case it happened, but that's not what everyone else has said. At 7 million for the year, daily attendance would have been under 20k a day, on average. That would include days both in summer and winter. So in the summer, the numbers would be higher, and winter, lower. Much lower than 20k, and you get a pretty empty 55 acres. This does not mean that some people in TDA were expecting massive crowds. I'm sure there were. But think about this: They had to plan AS IF there would be massive crowds, just in case they showed up. If they didn't, it'd be a massive problem. So there are different ways to look at that, too. I don't know, I don't talk to these people. But if I were them, I would have made sure that if 40000 were going to show up, there'd be a place for them to go, or my job would be toast.
Originally Posted By Mr X >>No, we don't. You know what is internet rumor.<< Internet rumor is the greatest source of info on the planet (if you can figure out who to trust and who is full of it). I've made a great deal of money trading the stock market thanks to NOTHING more than internet rumor (of course, I do my own research AFTER that before buying or selling...but the rumor's the thing).
Originally Posted By Mr X ***"How many times does it need to be mentioned that DCA opened under the theory that it would be so incredibly successful that AP's wouldn't be needed." And how many times does it need to be told that you have no real source for that information? You are going by retreaded junk that makes no sense, is not logical and is often contradictory.*** Jon, in this case I believe you are wrong. I've read numerous press releases and cast member publications that indicate UNEQUIVICALLY that the upper management was, in fact, saying just that. Til they opened, of course. Were they lying and hyping the place? Sure. Most definitely. They'd have to be idiots to believe their own hype...but they did, in fact and indeed, say just such things before DCA opened. Tell me you don't believe me and I'll dig up the links (I really don't want to be bothered, but I will if I have to).
Originally Posted By Mr X **Acutally, there are a lot of questions** There are certainly lots of questions as to why the upper management lied about expectations, OR were too stupid to know that the general public wouldn't spend their bucks on a cheap looking Disney product. Other than that, I don't see too many questions at all. It appears that you do, but it's pretty obvious to the rest of us. But, I see this clear as day now that I'm an expert on corporate greed and stupidity, and I've been profiting greatly thanks to that (I short stocks...it's a great business to be in...Disney is on my radar soon, but not yet). WHY, if I may ask, do you defend this half-assed attempt by Disney to build the cheapest place they could manage and still expect people to show up?
Originally Posted By Mr X >>At 7 million for the year, daily attendance would have been under 20k a day, on average. That would include days both in summer and winter. So in the summer, the numbers would be higher, and winter, lower.<< Interestingly, they didn't even come close to that. Obviously, the management was trying to hype the place (it'll be packed every day!). Jon and his interesting calculations prove that they weren't expecting anything close to that though. It's funny when you actually do the math, some of these press releases (not only from Disney) prove that a) the company is stupid or b) the company is lying... Based on all the evidence this past year on how American companies are run, I'd go with choice "A"...they probably had no freakin idea what they were talking about, and nobody actually did the math. Morons. Plain and simple.
Originally Posted By Mr X Wow...to think that, if I'd attended the right college and met the right people (with the backing of rich family, of course)...I, too, could be royally screwing up a major corporation or even a whole industry as we speak!! Wow! (I think I'll put my Disney short sale up sooner than later, the more I learn...)
Originally Posted By danyoung >You know what is internet rumor.< Jon, now you're arguing just to argue, and it's getting old, so I'm almost done. I will say, as Mr. X alluded to above, that there were plenty of published articles, in the LA Times, Orange County Register, and many other papers, that there were no AP's or 2-park tickets when DCA opened, and that Disney was completely surprised that the single ticket crowd wasn't going to be enough. Whether they really thought the park would max out or would at least get enough people to make the park an instant success isn't the issue. The point is that they thought there would be no room for AP's or 2-park tickets. The fact that they initiated those two admission media within weeks of park opening is plenty of proof that the park was not performing up to Disney's expectations. There's no other way to spin it. Even Iger himself had said that the park has been "challenged". No, you're just entrenched in your own opinion, and no logic is going to sway you. So have fun in your own little world, Jon. See you on another thread.
Originally Posted By dshyates I don't even know what we are arguing abuot now. Are you supporters saying that DCA is performing just fine? And are you detractors (of which I would be one) saying that DCA is an abject failure? As for performance, even Disney has said several times that DCA is underperforming and has from opening day. And seeing that DCA is one of the top ten highest attended parks in the country, well I would love to fail like that at anything. What I see is DCA fell short not only guest expectation but in Disney's financial projections. Given that DtD and the Grand exceeded expectations in both respects the 2001 expansion project was overall a whopping success. But it seems now that that the 50th is over Disney is turning its attention to DCA. And from what I gather they are not only going to be adding some cool stuff but are going to correct some of the mistakes the park was born with. DCA was born with a mixed bag of tricks. The rock work of Grizzly Peak and it's blending into the Grand is stunning. Then there's Mulholland. HPB is neither a replica of Hollywood or a movie set. It a weird artistic representation of both all mashed together. Soarin' has a fantastic ride system and a stunning film, but they had to slather on a nonsensical theme of an experimantal prototype hang glider appearently with a hyperspace button. I like EPCOT's version better where they leave it at OOOhhhh, pretty. They dumped Eureka! Lost Wolfgang and Mondavi. ToT even with its artistic detractors is nothing but a great big plus to the park. And low and behold fits beautifully with the theme. SF still sits empty and Route 666 is, shall we say, unsatisfying. Definitely time to regroup and move forward. There is little doubt that given the bones the place has it can easily become a fantastic park. But as it sits today, well, I won't be back for a while.
Originally Posted By danyoung dshyates, I don't quite understand the argument either. As I said earlier, it's either DCA is a complete failure and we'd better kick some major money in right now to fix it, or DCA has progressed to the point where it's a good investment to kick some major money in to plus the place. Or maybe some point in between those two extremes is true. I don't really care - I'm just glad that major changes are coming to DCA. For me it's been a park with a few high points (Soarin', the Animation courtyard) and some glaring shortcomings. I've never spent longer than 3 or 4 hours in the park, as there just isn't enough there to keep my attention. Hopefully the current regime can fix the problems and increase the value of the park. And Jon, forgive my snottiness in my last post - hadn't had my coffee yet.
Originally Posted By jonvn "Jon, in this case I believe you are wrong." I suppose it can happen on the rare occasion. "I've read numerous press releases and cast member publications" I've read a bunch of stuff too. But a lot of that is also puffery. You have to take that into account as well. You couldn't expect Disney to say to its staff "we built this thing basically to wring an extra few bucks out of the suckers." "WHY, if I may ask, do you defend this half-assed attempt by Disney to build the cheapest place they could manage and still expect people to show up?" Oh come on, I think the Studio park in Paris is much more of a half-assed attempt. Give it that, at least. But I'm not actually DEFENDING the place. What I'm trying to talk about is a more comprehensive set of reasons that would go towards better explaining what goes on, and not just have as a one dimensional idea that people want to put forth. "Jon and his interesting calculations prove that they weren't expecting anything close to that though." No, they were not, if the seven million figure is to be believed. BUT! They had to prepare for it in case it did. When Disneyland first opened it got so many more people than they EVER expected, it was a disaster. I think all the talk about no APs, crowds, etc was in case that happened. Because according to their own projections there was absolutely no reason for them to do these things at all. The only other reason I could see them doing this for would be marketing puffery again. It's so great it's going to be mobbed! To stir up interest and make people want to go. Those are the ONLY things that make any sense given what LITTLE information we have. "Jon, now you're arguing just to argue" I don't think I am. I'm trying to keep the ideas moving forward. "Disney was completely surprised that the single ticket crowd wasn't going to be enough." But given the numbers they themselves leaked out, I don't see how that is possible. The figures simply contradict that story. "no logic is going to sway you" Actually, logic is the only thing that does tend to sway me. Logic and evidence. I have seen just about everything you all have seen, but am putting it together in a different manner that makes real world sense to me. And I'm explaining why I feel the way I do about things, and I don't think anything I am saying is not logical. "Are you supporters saying that DCA is performing just fine?" I don't know if I'm a supporter or a detractor. But I have NO IDEA if it is performing just fine or not. I suspect that Disney feels it is doing just OK, but that additional investment will yield a great deal more. "Disney has said several times that DCA is underperforming" That does not mean it is an abject failure. As you said, I'd love to fail like DCA has, or have a bad career like the multimillionaire PRESSLER has had. "What I see is DCA fell short not only guest expectation but in Disney's financial projections." Maybe it has. But, again, by how much and why, and in what areas? It's not just a simple little DCA SUCKS sort of thing. There are all kinds of different factors involved. "They dumped Eureka!" That was a shame, really. "It's either DCA is a complete failure and we'd better kick some major money in right now to fix it, or DCA has progressed to the point where it's a good investment to kick some major money in to plus the place." It's probably neither of those, as you say. The place may not have done as well as they thought, but probably by not that much. On the other hand the 50th and all the people visiting have shown the people at the top that maybe there is a lot more money to be made here if they invest more heavily in the property. "And Jon, forgive my snottiness in my last post" Oh for goodness sakes, don't worry about what you say to me. I make the nicest people in the world absolutely crazy with anger. It's my gift.
Originally Posted By bean "I don't even know what we are arguing abuot now. Are you supporters saying that DCA is performing just fine? And are you detractors (of which I would be one) saying that DCA is an abject failure? As for performance, even Disney has said several times that DCA is underperforming and has from opening day. And seeing that DCA is one of the top ten highest attended parks in the country, well I would love to fail like that at anything. What I see is DCA fell short not only guest expectation but in Disney's financial projections. Given that DtD and the Grand exceeded expectations in both respects the 2001 expansion project was overall a whopping success. " i think someone finally understands. DCA did under perform from what was originally expected. Some of the projections were purposely overinflated and the park was over hyped purposely towards the last month of park opening. There are several reasons why they believe the park did not fit projections. One of course being that power that be decided they could do what has been done with WDW's third and fourth gate which was start small with some temporary attractions then expand as demand rises. Secondly, holding off any major campaign for the park because of fear of cannabalizing Disneyland's summer and Christmas attendance in 2000 by International tourist willing to wait for the second gate. In reference to the question, is DCA doing just fine? DCA is doing well, its operating expenses are much lower than Disneyland. Attendance wise the parks numbers are higher than they have been posted since year one. Is the park doing as well as Burbank would want it to do? NO, its numbers are lower than what management would want them to be after 6 years. Yes the park has under perform to what Burbank wants but that does not mean that the park is failing. For a park to be failing it needs to be costing more to run than what it is bringing in and that is not the case. DCA is not in any financial problems. Burbank and TDA see the potential for DCA and feel that they need to take advantage of that now. The one thing that DCA's projection came true is in expanding international tourist stay. Hotel occupancy rose both in the Disneyland hotel and Paradise Pier hotel and the Grand has had a significant high hotel rate.
Originally Posted By jonvn Thank you bean for post 573. It sort of is pretty much what I'm saying, more or less. It's a completely reasonable and realistic viewpoint. I still don't like the Lone Ranger, though.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "Secondly, holding off any major campaign for the park because of fear of cannabalizing Disneyland's summer and Christmas attendance in 2000 by International tourist willing to wait for the second gate." This is absolutely one of the dumbest things I have ever seen Disney do. How incredibly short sighted. There was barely a peep outside of Southern California about all the development that was going on just outside DL's front gate in the years and months leading up to the completion of the resort expansion.
Originally Posted By danyoung > make the nicest people in the world absolutely crazy with anger. It's my gift.< I just didn't want us to get into a downward spiral. >Yes the park has under perform to what Burbank wants but that does not mean that the park is failing.< I think a lot of this thread has been over the use of the word failing. Did DCA underperform? I think most of us are now saying yes. Did it fail? Depends on your point of view. As someone (Darkbeer?) posted a few days ago, by the strict definition of the word failure, a case could be made. I don't see it that way - I think they've made great strides in trying to bring the park up to spec. And now with the bazillion dollars, they're doing more. It'll be interesting to hear Disney management years from now, and if they'll ever admit that they went too small with the DCA design.
