Originally Posted By leobloom >> I'm sure you're right!! There would be huge demand for hotels and timeshares in the tropical swamps of Florida without the theme parks. << That's not the point I made, RT, but why am I not surprised that you illogically responded to something else?
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Get with the program K2M... it is all about disliking ANYTHING that Disney does!
Originally Posted By leobloom RT, if you can be rational for a moment, can you honestly say that you believe WDW is as interested in their parks as they are in their timeshares and hotels? You really believe the parks are being given adequate attention in regards to upkeep and additions?
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<That's not the point I made, RT, but why am I not surprised that you illogically responded to something else?>> Your statement was absurd. If they didn't care about Theme Parks why would Disney have built the Studios and Animal Kingdom? Frankly, they could have probably filled their hotels and timeshares just as well with only the MK and Epcot.
Originally Posted By leobloom >> Your statement was absurd. If they didn't care about Theme Parks why would Disney have built the Studios and Animal Kingdom? << Are you drunk? You're pointing to parks that were built 20 and 15 years ago as evidence that WDW is interested in investing in their parks today? Okay! Err...whatever you say, dude.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<You really believe the parks are being given adequate attention in regards to upkeep and additions?>> Yes, I do. If you look at ALL the WDW parks and not just the MK, WDW has probably had as many "D's" and "E's" added over the past half dozen years as Disneyland has.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip WDW got the Studios and Animal Kingdom. Disneyland got DCA version I. Need I say more? WDW has done just fine.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I'm still waiting for someone to explain why this particular thing, having Palmer Golf run their courses (and pay a lease and split the revenue), is a downgrade?
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Hey... I don't think WDW is the end all and be all. In fact I decided against going to WDW following my Disney Cruise this fall because I felt it was overpriced for a short stay and am going to Universal Orlando instead. But in my opinion WDW takes far more criticism than it really deserves. Like it or not WDW's MK still attracts more visitors than any other Disney park!
Originally Posted By leobloom RT, all I can say is if you think WDW is managing its parks adequately, then you must have some investment that colors your vision. It's abundantly clear to me that the last 10 years have, for the most part, been a bust for WDW's four parks.
Originally Posted By leobloom >> Like it or not WDW's MK still attracts more visitors than any other Disney park! << Which proves nothing. The old ad populum argument. Billions of people eat at McDonald's. Doesn't mean what they're serving is particularly impressive. Same goes for MK. They've added little of importance for twenty years. The place is stale, which is fine if you're a once-a-decade visitor. Apparently that's the market Disney wants to court.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan This topic, though, is about the WDW golf courses. How is this particular 20 year agreement a downgrade for guests or the company?
Originally Posted By Manfried <<Disney makes a move to improve the quality of the Walt Disney World Resort, and you all bitch and moan.>> Yep, that's all they do.
Originally Posted By Manfried Do you really think having Arnold Palmer's company run the golf courses is a downgrade? Mostly employees try to use them with a discount. So, now maybe the discounts will go away too.
Originally Posted By sjhym333 I think that on one level no one has an objection to Arnold Palmer's group taking over the golf course. Will there be a noticeable change to the day to day operations of the courses? Probably not. I think the concern is the possible domino effect. Whats next to outsource? Disney has been outsourcing things for years. I first noticed it as a CM. Disney used to run all of its CM cafeterias. They outsourced them to an outside group and the quality went down and the cost to CM's went up. There are lots of things that Disney used to do in house that are now done by outside groups including some guest foods and such. I think the question is can quality be maintained and that concerns me as a Disney fan. The reason most companies outsource is so that they can make money and not have to worry about the daily operations of something. But the question is...how does the other company make back the money they are paying for the priviledge of running the operation. Many times its by either lowering their costs or increase their revenue. Both of which can have an effect on the experience for the guest. The old Decline by Degrees thing. If Disney outsources golf courses today is there any reason not to think it could outsource just about anything it wants on property? Transportation? Hotels? Operations? Its not the golf course that worries me. It's what follows. Also it concerns me that Disney is looking for ways to maximize its earnings by handing off parts of its business. Under that mindset anything is possible.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Well, as much as I hate to say it, in Disneyland Paris, the outsourced restaurants were usually better quality than the Disney owned. I think this partnership makes sense, and I am serious, the service is the Disney hotels are very poor. Having a proper hotelier take them on would be a much better experience. And fwiw, this is not new. When Disneyland opened, a number of shops and restaurants (as well as the hotel) were operated by outside vendors, and I thing the tapestry was richer for it.
