Originally Posted By WorldDisney Damn right Jonvn, damn right! The eye shadow thing has me just as relieved as knowing 70% of DCA will be changed for the better. *Whew* Guess the TPTB are really cleaning house over there ;D.
Originally Posted By jonvn I hope it's changed for the better. We'll see how it goes. Some of the things he was saying in that article didn't sound plausible. But I don't want to go into it.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney Well, I think we ALL learned that you take Al's articles with a grain of salt until the bulldozers show up . But, like I said, if SOME of this is true, its certainly a step in the right direction . There is honestly nothing I saw in that article that made groan, so that's a good start at least. Again, we have to wait for it all at the preview center, unless that's not true .
Originally Posted By jonvn I don't want to see another dark ride based on a cartoon. It's enough of that style. And, yes, a grain of salt. Because he's almost never right. The thing to realize is that just because you spend a lot of money does not mean you will get a good result out the other side. If we get 5 cartoon based dark rides out of this, it's going to really not be very good.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "Again, we have to wait for it all at the preview center..." Even then the plans may materalize. How many years did the models for Discover Bay and Circusland sit in the old DL Preview Center before they were removed?
Originally Posted By 2001DLFan <<jonvn: "My stocks had taken a huge hit because of Eisner." The problem with this story is that it's kind of false. Here's a page with a chart of Disney stock growth: <a href="http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=DIS&t=my" target="_blank">http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc? s=DIS&t=my</a> It has been a pretty constant rise until it took a hit in 2001, like everything else. It is still not back up to pre-2001 levels. >> Disney’s stock maintained a fairly consistent increase until ’98. Most of that growth was due the collaborative efforts of Eisner AND Frank Wells. After Wells’ untimely death in ’94, Eisner became a loose cannon and started making decisions that weren’t tempered by a more reasonable mind. The stocks climb in the ensuing four years, before it began to falter, was due mostly to the momentum of successful projects (films and theme park initiatives) that had been in production before Wells’ death. (Not dismissing the OCCASIONAL successful move by Eisner during the period.) During the years between ’98 & 2001, the stock began to stumble, with a couple of short respites. The opening of DCA didn’t do anything to improve the situation, and then the events of 911 hit. The stock dropped dramatically for a short period then seemed to stabilize for a bit. Eisner’s decisions and strategies caused numerous problems and caused the creative potential of the company to deteriorate. From mid ’02 until Eisner’s resignation, the stock generally slipped to the lowest point it had been for 8 years. Iger has been able to recoup most of the damage done over the past decade. So, we’ve essentially lost a decade’s worth of growth. Unless the company can achieve the kind of growth the company achieved in the 80’s (not very likely), we’re going to have to accept that loss and just move on from here. <<I really enjoy how some people seem to think they can read minds. Some people go on about what "senior staff" had to say when they have absolutely no way of knowing that, and now we have you telling us what Roy Disney would have done. The rest of us just have to go by what actually happened. >> Well, you seem to have the same ability at times. You don’t know who has knowledge of what goes on at executive levels. While they don’t identify themselves, there are probably some that post to these discussion boards that are either Disney employees (at whatever level) or know of some. What actually happened MAY or MAY NOT have been due to selfishness, but someone apparently feels that it WAS. <<"Both of you provide (at least I THINK) credible info from the inside." Bean does. I don't see it coming from anyone else.>> Shows how little you really see.
Originally Posted By jonvn "During the years between ’98 & 2001, the stock began to stumble" And how is this compared to other similar stocks at the time? Again, the analysis is pretty one dimensional. "You don’t know who has knowledge of what goes on at executive levels. " No, and I never claimed to. However, this does not mean that this should translate into some ridiculous fantasy that is unrealistic in the extreme. "Shows how little you really see." I see quite a bit. Your posts are ridiculous and implausible.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << And how is this compared to other similar stocks at the time? Again, the analysis is pretty one dimensional >> Exactly. Every "old media" stock was in the doldrums during this period, as Wall Street was throwing all of the money at the dot com bubble. If you didn't have dot com in your name, your stock was languishing. All of the movie studios/media conglomerates suffered during this time frame. That's what led Time Warner to be bought out by AOL. In addition, the Asian financial crisis that hit hard in 1997 and 1998 led to a prolonged disruption in tourists from Asia that was a severe problem for the Disney theme parks -- DLR in particular. Without the Asian tourists spending big $$ in DL, the business model there just sort of fell apart and it rippled throughout the Disney parks & resorts. The macroeconomy impacts Disney's bottom line and stock price more than any single individual.
Originally Posted By jonvn "Every "old media" stock was in the doldrums during this period," Yep. That's the sort of thing that makes a lot of the posts by the business whizzes here pretty silly. They, as a matter of course, simply look at one tiny aspect and act as if it has occurred in a vaccum. And no matter what, DCA SUCKS is at the base and all things eventually end up pointing to that one concept, and nothing else.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy You also have to consider that Wall Street was "down" on Disney because Michael Eisner was adamantly opposed to having Disney bought out by an internet dot com. The Wall Street bankers that salivate over the huge fees they get to merge and break up companies, were eternally frustrated by the fact that Michael Eisner wouldn't allow Disney to be gobbled up by the likes of AOL or Yahoo!, or bought and sold a half dozen times like Universal Studios. Wall Street cares very little about business fundamentals when it all comes to it, and care more about how a company can make more money for Wall Street bankers instead.
Originally Posted By disneywatcher >> I am looking forward to the day the bulldozers arrive. They can't hide them from my camera, there are too many options (Sun Wheel and Screamin') to prevent it. << That moment won't arrive a second too soon. However, the fact some of the schlocky game booths remain intact and fully operational even as Paradise Pier's new attraction is being built right next to them isn't too reassuring. As far as I'm concerned, if any of the Six-Flags type of junk remains in DCA well into the future, then its makeover won't have really occured or certainly gone far enough.
Originally Posted By bean "That moment won't arrive a second too soon. However, the fact some of the schlocky game booths remain intact and fully operational even as Paradise Pier's new attraction is being built right next to them isn't too reassuring. As far as I'm concerned, if any of the Six-Flags type of junk remains in DCA well into the future, then its makeover won't have really occured or certainly gone far enough." don't worry, its staying for awhile then ..........
Originally Posted By Darkbeer 4 out of the 7 Games are still remaining at DCA, they closed four, and moved one. The three on the west end will more than likely not reopen (at least 2) to provide backstage access and emergency exits for TSM!.
Originally Posted By bean the ones that were removed, last i checked, will be for queue space for TSM and backsatge access
Originally Posted By lesmisfan hey bean, any truth of the rumor going around dca that the sun on the sunwheel will be replaced with some sort of mickey mouse silloute that can be used to project images for the new water show?
Originally Posted By k_peek_2000 Why would they need that when they were testing 2 huge waterscreens in the lagoon.
