Do the funky chicken?

[All Aboard]

Well since Landbaron gave the JJ quote an "atta-boy", I have to squeeze a thought in on the Ferrari analogy. Since you didn't just focus on quality, but also price.

Ferrari prices out the vast majority of people in this country. Is that the strategy you suggest Disney take? Eliminate Joe Lunchpail from the WDW Resort equation?

So often I read in threads of this type about how folks "scrimp and save" to be able to afford a WDW vacation. Why is it that some folks EXPECT families to have to do this? Certainly, if the moderate and value resorts were eliminated, many many families WOULD have to do this. In the end, likely spending more money than is really prudent (for them) on a vacation. Is that what we want? Shouldn't the Disney experience be available to as many people as possible?

It's been suggested that Disney has created a caste system with its resorts. I offer that the real caste system (haves and have-nots) would exist if there were only one classification of Disney Resort (expensive).

Disney is too broad of a company to appeal to just the upper echelon of incomes. I don't believe that was ever the intent. It can't be Ferrari, that's not what it's all about. I'm glad it isn't. A strategy of "if you can't afford $200 a night for a room, stay outside" really stinks and I'm glad someone thought it wise to take another path.

 

[raidermatt]

gcurling pretty much beat me to it on this one.

Ferrari prices out the vast majority of people in this country. Is that the strategy you suggest Disney take? Eliminate Joe Lunchpail from the WDW Resort equation?l

Of course, the answer is no.

Certainly, if the moderate and value resorts were eliminated, many many families WOULD have to do this (scrimp ans save.)

Actually, many do scrimp and save just to stay in the Values and Moderates. Take those options away and those people are priced out of the World, and the ones were were merely being fiscally responsible will have to scrimp and save to get into the Deluxes. Eventually, supply and demand ALWAYS take over, and Deluxe prices will rise, making the situation even more difficult.

I offer that the real caste system (haves and have-nots) would exist if there were only one classification of Disney Resort (expensive).

Exactly. Without values and moderates, more people will have to stay outside of the World because they simply cannot afford to stay inside, as opposed to the majority who are simply making a choice in today's environment.

A strategy of "if you can't afford $200 a night for a room, stay outside" really stinks and I'm glad someone thought it wise to take another path.

I agree. I just wish they would take the path that doesn't point to the funky chicken...

 

[Planogirl]

I have to think about this...

Not to pick on you Ms. Planogirl, but I must disagree with your comment that “these standards we bandy about mean very little to good old Joe…” They mean a tremendous deal to him and his family. They might not realize it consciously, they probably wouldn’t be able to articulate it, but they do feel them. Everyone likes having their expectations exceeded. And perhaps that’s the simplest explanation for the unease over Pop Century. People feel that their expectations will not be exceeded.

I think often of a coworker of mine who decided to take his kids to WDW. He wasn't really interested in going himself but he felt like he SHOULD take his family. He asked me why he should stay in one of "those expensive Disney hotels". He wondered if a Holiday Inn or something comparable wouldn't be good enough. Why was it so much better to stay onsite? Why indeed.

I can't claim that the amenities are necessarily better. The location is certainly better but is that enough to justify the extra expense? Not to everyone. If not, then the only other difference I can think of is the Disney magic. So what is the Disney magic? And does everyone get it?

I took my mother to WDW a few years ago. She didn't "get it" and let me know in no uncertain terms. I have relatives and friends who have been and have no real interest in returning. They certainly don't "get it".

So how do I describe this magic especially lately? And how do I describe it at a place such as PC? This is my dilemna and why I choose to believe that the average traveler doesn't really care about this at least not at first. The average traveler who has never been to WDW probably cares mostly about cleanliness, safety, convenience and PRICE. Does he REALLY care about the Disney magic?

 

[YoHo]

Can I just pipe in on the Ferrari thing?

Ferrari is one of the last if not the only major performance car company that IS NOT owned by a larger car company.
Ford owns Volvo, Jaguar, Astin Martin and Land rover.
Crysler own Lamborgini.

Why?
Because it makes good buisness sense to cater to the entire market.
The Performance Car analogy breaks down when you realize that these car companies are doing exactly what you claim they aren't

The trick is as someone else pointed out expectations.

A Ford Escort CAN exceed expectations. It is in Ford's Best Interests to do so. Just as it is in Disney's Best Interests to exceed their guests. All Stars and By all means Pop century do NOT exceed my expectations. I would bet that they don't exceed anyone's expectations by much. Which isn't to say that no one likes them or to dismiss those that do like them.

they did not exceed expectations and Exceeding Expectations is what Disney Used to do best.

 

[Brian430]

Actually, the Ferrari analogy is spot on. And not because I think Disney should price people out of WDW. But because understanding and living up to a brand's mission is what great brands do, and why over-anxious, shortsighted brands ultimately fail.

Companies cannot be all things to all people. They select their niche and position themselves accordingly. And like it or not, Disney has spent the last several years marketing itself as an upscale hotelier (regardless of the price tag for the room).

This isn’t an issue of being an elitist pushing for only $300-a-night hotel rooms. I haven’t heard one person argue for the elimination of the moderates. The concern I hear being voiced is over how low Disney is willing to go down the quality food chain. Critics of PC seem concerned about a crass, tacky mega-budgetel being plopped next to a nicely themed (and fairly priced) moderate resort, which was once surrounded by berms and forests.

The CBR view is now changed to a 40-foot bowling pin and a 2-ton yo-yo that look like they we’re stolen from a Paul Bunyon all-you-can-eat buffet.

I'm sure there’s a certain percentage of the population who wouldn't mind sleeping in the parking lot of the Magic Kingdom ala the Dead Heads. If they could charge for it, should Disney do it? If they don't, are they locking out the "down-trodden who deserve a vacation as much as a Grand Floridian guest?" Would I be a
snob for objecting to it?

Disney could also make money with a bungee-jumping platform in the Seven Seas Lagoon. They could turn Discovery Island into a putt-putt course and go-kart track. Should they do it?

Plain and simple, PC does water down a quality standard that Disney has spent millions trying to achieve – and that guests now understandably expect. I didn’t impose high standards on Disney and its hotels. They marketed themselves as such.

Forget about the eye soar that CBR guests have to endure. What about the additional burden on WDW's already over-taxed transportation system? What about another 20,000 guests within striking distance of Downtown Disney? DTD is a retail development that’s already at its limit from a parking and foot-traffic standpoint. How will they accommodate so many additional guests without further *******izing what was once a peaceful lakeside shopping village?

Which brings me to overall land use – which, in my mind, is the most important topic of all.

I know there are debates about how much land WDW has, but the figures I quote come from Eisner's book which says Disney has 9,000 acres to build on. And many of the problems we’re all debating seem stem from the fact that WDW still has a 27,000-acre view of their property. Maybe they can continue to develop forever, but only at the expense of the open and relaxed atmosphere WDW once had.

Would Pop Century be so objectionable if they had positioned it away from the rest of the "World" like the All-Stars?

The problem is WDW no longer has the room to properly space out their projects. So they will continue to build new developments on top of each other. And the end result is your African-themed hotel is now next to a highway; and your Polynesian-themed resort now has a blaring race car track in the parking lot; and your Caribbean-themed resort will now sit smack dab next to yet another 5,000-room budget motel.

I, for one, think Universal Orlando is well produced, but I don’t enjoy spending much time there because it’s far too urban for my taste. I don’t go to WDW simply for the rides, I go for the overall atmosphere and experience. You would think a company like Disney, which has been more interested in producing world-class resorts than world-class rides, would understand this point of view. I like the feeling of having my hotels and the theme parks nestled deep in the pine forests, like WDW once did. But slowly WDW is feeling more like a small city than an enchanted forest.

Personally, I think by converting half the "resort" into a residential district (read Celebration), WDW has sold off it's long-term ability to grow at what it does best.

I think it’s ironic because Walt purchased 27,000 acres to insulate his resort from crass, tacky commercial operations encroaching on the fantasy he was trying to create.

Now, the poor taste and over development are coming from the inside – from Disney itself: McDonald’s franchises; stock car driving franchises that seem more suitable for the Wisconsin Dells; mall-style restaurants and store franchises now all lease WDW land. It’s a mall mentality where Walt’s land is open to the highest bidder regardless of how well the development fits into the Disney culture/experience (or at least my own perception and expectation of it).

In the end, not only will the WDW landscape and experience change, but I also think the Imagineers will one day feel as hemmed in Florida as Walt did in California.

And as a DVC member, I’m starting to wonder what my "home away from home" will look like in 10 years. My fear is that it’ll be a lot more crowded, and not with imagination.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

WOW!! Another guy that knows how to shove a noun next to a verb!!!

And he's right on the money!!

Nice post Brian430!!!

 

[Lesley]

And here I thought I was going to get flamed! LOL

Ah, I wish I had the time and energy to get really involved on this board...what fun!

 

[JeffJewell]

airlarry!...

I don't see a problem with a resort that costs less but still delivers the same, admittedly subjective, magic.

Ah. Well that's the tricky part, isn't it?

Subjectivity makes it so hard to discuss some of these things meaningfully. The gang has occasionally gotten into threads where we all define what "Disney Magic" means to us... then all aitch-ee-double-hockey-sticks breaks out as we all ruthlessly defend our own stances.

Through this painful process, I've settled on just a few things that are my requirement for a "Disney resort." The one that currently disqualifies most resorts on Disney property has to do with why it's called Disney World. It was a vacation world absolutely removed from the real world... that's why the thousands of acres. A perceived failure of Disneyland was that the real world ending up intruding too much. So I believe that to be a true Disney World resort, you must not have to re-enter the real world until the vacation is over.

If every day of your vacation starts with riding the bus, you're still in the real world. I believe that allowing buses to be the exclusive Disney transportation for a resort both turned a back on one of the foundations of the Magic, and eliminated a product feature that was uniquely Disney.

If alternative transportation was provided from all resorts to at least one park, and all the parks and Downtown Disney were connected by monorail, then I'd only have a problem with the values, for precisely the thematic reason you describe.

Greg...

Shouldn't the Disney experience be available to as many people as possible?

...sure, in precisely the same way that a Ferrari "should" also be available to as many people as possible. But the reality is putting that much into a product costs more, pricing some portion of the population out of the market. And besides, even with the values, there are plenty of people who can't afford to go to Disney. Your argument could just as validly defend Disney assembling army bunks under the Boardwalk and bussing in the homeless. Maybe a noble idea, in some sense, but not much of a business strategy.

I offer that the real caste system (haves and have-nots) would exist if there were only one classification of Disney Resort (expensive).

Two things: as mentioned, the haves and have-nots issue exists, just the same... the line just happens to be drawn a little further towards the fat part of the bell curve. And I (at least as far as I'm willing to try to argue on the DIS, at any rate) am not against a less expensive resort that still meets the standard.

A strategy of "if you can't afford $200 a night for a room, stay outside" really stinks

If you really think that's an accurate summary of what I'm saying, it's agree-to-disagree time.

Jeff

PS: Oops, I go off to see a show in the middle of posting, and come back to find I'm largely superfluous. Nice post, Brian430.

 

[Peter Pirate]

If you really think thats an accurate summary of what I'm saying...

Well Jeff, for what it's worth, that's what I see when I read you explanation, as well...

You may think there's a caste system at WDW now, but to expect or call for an exclusivity system flies in the very face of what Walt wanted to accomplish. To exclude 60-70% off the population in the name of creativity or escapism? I don't know what WDW you guys visit but my WDW provides me with all the escape I've ever had...Oh sure, I noticed the roof & sign of a neighboring hotel at AKL, but it was well off in the distance, landscaping HAS been installed that will mature-out the view & you know what? I don't find the need to stare at a Days Inn sign and lament the loss of Disney magic.

Brian, I too wouldn't mind visiting JJ world or Landbaron world or AV world, but those places never existed except to these folks maybe and never will. Our own personal perceptions make or break our enjoyment of WDW and Landbaron harkens to a time when things were all roses...Of course there was no internet to discuss all of the faults and it was a new experience without todays expectations. How many here would be happy to go back to the days of just the MK with two or three deluxe hotels, operated as you remember them at the expense of all that we have today? Not me. I like Epcot, MGM & AK. I like the AKL, BC/YC, CSR, WL & (yes guys) even the S/D. I love the water parks & the golf courses. Of course most of this wouldn't exist were it not for the courting of the little guy, the proverbial joe schmo and thats what continues today. They must pay the piper, or the bills as it were, or suffer the consequences. A business must grow or die & Disney grew. I for one have loved it all.

The future is admittedly a jumble, but then it always has been. Disney has been so cyclical that it shouldn't worry us. The pendulum will swing back. Scoop outlined the Walt days very admirably. He was brilliant and succeded. But it was a struggle frought with many unwise business decisions that could have just as easily banckrupted the company for good. Walt was a creative genius with a great businessman for a brother and a lot of luck on his side. To expect modern day Disney to buck demographic trends too much is not reasonable. As much as I'd like BK now or Bald mt. now it just isn't going to happen until the spreadsheet says it must happen. Until the surveys say it must happen, until it is clear to Disney management that it is both economically sound and fiscally responsible, it will not happen.

Sorry that PC strikes such a bad chord with you all. I don't like it, don't think about it & have discussed it way too much on this thread. I say this because I won't stay there and it dosen't bother me to see it as I drive by, quite the contrary it is quite humorous in a sick & demented sort of way...

 

[JeffJewell]

but to expect or call for an exclusivity system flies in the very face of what Walt wanted to accomplish

...what Walt wanted to accomplish was to create entertainment of the highest possible quality. Disney did accomplish that at one time, then decided they could make more money by deleting the quality.

I want the quality back. I understand that quality sometimes costs more and I'm willing to pay that. If you don't want to pay extra for quality, that's fine, you don't have to.

What's the percentage of US citizens that actually get to go to WDW in a year? In their lifetime? What're those percentages out of the world population? The value resorts allow a margin-of-error sized increase in those percentages, and you try to take the moral high ground as the defender of the down-trodden everywhere? What a crock.

Hey Chad, this is why the Jewells won't be at the May shindig. I try to talk about concrete aspects of a product, and the response is what an elitist snob I am for having the gall to miss what Disney used to supply. Why the hell would I want to come let people take those shots at me from close range?

I apologize for the weakness displayed in my addiction to both WDW and posting. It feels as though I'm realizing that the only way to quit them is cold turkey; like most addicts who one day realize they've been wasting their lives and money shooting junk that just doesn't make them feel good, anymore.

Jeff

 

[JeffJewell]

...I have no personal problem with anyone, including Tom and Greg, whose posts have most gotten my dander up recently. It's the thought that we'll get down there and instead of talking about whether or not the quality has slipped, there'll be talk about what a snob I am; how evil I am for hating WDW until I get around to mowing down value resort vacationers with high caliber weapons.

When the All-Stars opened, I took a lot of the "snob" crap when I complained that they were built with the primary focus being low-cost rather than high-quality, and suggested that if we accepted this process as the Disney standard, we were likely to get even less in the future.

Somehow, I've avoided saying "told ya so" now that Pop Century has managed to offend an even wider spectrum of WDW guests by taking the concept to its next level.

I can agree to disagree with people who stay at the Values... hell, they're already built, it's not like boycotting them will suddenly imbue them with the missing Magic. Go, stay, have a spiffy vacation. Other people's vacations play no part in my assessment of WDW.

There's a difference between desiring high-quality products and desiring to exclude human beings from an experience. I'll do everything I can to reasonably discuss whether producing low-quality products was a good business plan. But reducing my legitimate complaint to a character flaw is just going to piss me off.

Jeff

PS: Having "good taste" does not make a person inherently good, having "bad taste" does not make a person inherently bad. I have horrible taste in clothes, because they just aren't important to me. Should some maven of haute couture sniff at my decrepit jeans, that means we value things different, it doesn't mean I'm an inferior human being. Even if I've ever said "everyone who stays at the All-Stars has bad taste," (which I don't believe I ever did) that's an expression that people value things differently, not a comment on the underlying nature of each individual involved.

 

[Lesley]

I say this because I won't stay there and it dosen't bother me to see it as I drive by, quite the contrary it is quite humorous in a sick & demented sort of way...

AH! But this is my point! Disney entertainment is not of the "sick and demented" variety.....there is plenty of that out there in the world...I even enjoy some of it....but it does not belong as part of the WDW experience. If we extrapolate the possibilities in this direction....will Disney buy "South Park" and start showing it late at night on Toon Disney? Will they put the Opie and Anthony show on Radio Disney? Is it really turning into 'anything for a buck!' ?

I originally made the comment about PC being akin to South of the Border. You know what? I like driving by South of the Border on our way to WDW...its something fun to look at (in a sick & demented way) and makes me realize what a beautiful place I'm heading to. If PC were off-property I'd have no problem with it....I'd still never stay there...but it would be "that really wild hotel out there near Kissimmee" or whatever.

Where does the line finally get drawn? And who is going to draw it?

Personally I'd love to get together with the car 3 crowd (and everyone else as long as it doesn't turn into a battle royale! Oh geez, I'm imagining the old Miller Light commercials..."less filling" "tastes great" LOL) Anyone going to be around WDW at Thanksgiving?

 

[All Aboard]

If you really think that's an accurate summary of what I'm saying, it's agree-to-disagree time.

Perhaps not you, but a World without moderates and values with the application of supply and demand does (says) just what I am describing. And I think that's a very bad business decision.

Your argument could just as validly defend Disney assembling army bunks under the Boardwalk and bussing in the homeless. Maybe a noble idea, in some sense, but not much of a business strategy.

Agreed, but having a resort pricing strategy of high price only is not much of a business strategy either. Maybe for a niche player like Ferrari, but not for a player the size of Disney.

Ford owns Volvo, Jaguar, Astin Martin and Land rover.

Yes! Excellent point YoHo. And Disney owns the Grand Floridian, Caribbean Beach and All Star Sports. Strong strategy, in my opinion.

...I have no personal problem with anyone, including Tom and Greg, whose posts have most gotten my dander up recently. It's the thought that we'll get down there and instead of talking about whether or not the quality has slipped, there'll be talk about what a snob I am; how evil I am for hating WDW until I get around to mowing down value resort vacationers with high caliber weapons

Trust me, you won't get any of that from me. There's a HUGE difference between posting on a message board and a personal conversation. I'd bet that most people who read this thread that aren't "regulars" must think that you and I hate each other. How much futher from the truth can that be?

And I can't tell you how much I would enjoy having you as a part of the meet. I have a suggestion (and hopefully Landbaron reads this) ask DVC how the meet went that had him opposite the two folks you referenced in the above paragraph. Just the three of us. The driver of car 3 v the drivers of cars 1 & 2. Ask him how much fun it was, ask him how productive and entertaining our conversation was. Ask him how little any of us wanted to end it after a full three hours of conversation.

 

[airlarry!]

Jeff J:

I would love to get to the meet. Maybe just maybe, if I can work out somethings.

But, just because I don't agree with you on whether or not there should be a three-tiered pricing system for resort accomodations, does not mean I will jump all over you there. In other words, let us make 'Disney Snob' another amusing appellation for those of us who desire *only* the best in something...in another thread I consider myself a Disney Snob when it comes to Feature Animation.

In fact, after reading your last post on the transporation issue, I bet there is room for you right here on the connection between car #2 and car #3...

If your argument is that building resorts which ONLY have transporation to parks via bus offends your Disney ideal, heck, I agree with that!

Why can't we have:

a. monorail primary hotels (big bucks, lavish services by country mice standards, etc)

b. Park proximity hotels with water (like Beach Club and WL) taxis. Get the AKL a water taxi to AK, with monorail service from AK to the hub or to Epcot. Done!

c. Moderates and Value would have some kind of unique transportation back and forth to a nearby park...I imagine the All-stars with buses that look like safari vehicles heading to the AK (gets folks going there and adds to the theme.) Just an idea, but you get the drift...

Don't think they can do or will do this? Check out Marc Borrelli's pix of the unique Disney transporation at the new hotels at Disney Seas over at www.laughingplace.com\

It all goes back to my point that Value Resorts = good idea. Ei$ner's implementation = bad idea.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Agreed, but having a resort pricing strategy of high price only is not much of a business strategy either. Maybe for a niche player like Ferrari, but not for a player the size of Disney.

You see, that's where I disagree. You think in terms of "High Price", when you should be thinking in terms of "Disney Price". I know this is an elusive concept, but it is very important. Consider what the "sage from the west" our own AV said a couple pages back:

In fact, I don't consider the "amenities" offered at the deluxe hotels all that special. Maybe because I travel too much, maybe I'm too familiar with WDW - but the resorts don't offer all that much compared in "hotel stuff" that hundreds of other hotels don't offer. I've eaten in plenty of hotel restaurants that are better or more unique. There are many, many hotels with larger and better rooms. Even Vegas resorts offer more detailing and decor than WDW resorts.

I totally agree!! Disney resorts started life as being unique. Both in concept and in price. They were not created in competition with similarly priced hotels throughout the country. Yes, there were things that Disney resorts did that mirrored the industry, but it was more or less accidental. They had beds in the rooms. They had full service restaurants. They had swimming pools. And I know we've been round and round on this, but they had slightly (ever so slightly) higher prices than the moderates!!! (Hey! It costs for 'Disney Standards!)

When Ei$ner & crew took over, they did away with the "Disney Standard" for resorts and replaced it with the "Industry Standard". A very sad day indeed!! (Although I have to admit at the time they even sucked me into the hype. I liked the idea.) And the final nail in the coffin was not the construction of the Caribbean Resort. It was the concept, in both amenities and cost, of the Grand Floridian. You see, we get muddled in diatribes regarding the lower end because they make an easy target. A fifty foot bowling pin is hard for even the Captain to miss !! But the higher end should really be included in the discussions because they have equally (if not more so) diluted the concept of the "Disney Standard".

Take the car analogy. Maybe a Ferrari is shooting a little high for illustrative purposes only. Maybe a Lincoln or Cadillac would be a better model. Disney never even tried to do the Five Star type resort. What they had was unique. Now you wouldn't expect a Cadillac to lower it's standards to that of a gremlin. On the other hand they never aspired to be more than they were and go head to head against the Ferrari. They have found their niche and their price range. And that corner of the market is not driven by cost, or marketing to the lowest common denominator. It is driven by they standards they have set for themselves!

Ford owns Volvo, Jaguar, Astin Martin and Land rover.

YES!! Exactly!! But they do not carry the FORD brand! That is the difference! If Disney wants to set up some other company to build high or low end resorts, then by all means let them do it! BUT NOT WITH THE DISNEY BRAND ON IT!!! It's like their movies. Disney=Disney Standards. Touchstone=anything else! And it is impossible for them to do that on WDW property!

I have a suggestion (and hopefully Landbaron reads this)

I read everything!!

Ask him how much fun it was, ask him how productive and entertaining our conversation was. Ask him how little any of us wanted to end it after a full three hours of conversation.

It was the worst three hours of my life!!! Just the thought of those two pompous people, prattling on and on…

No! Only kidding. In fact it was most enjoyable. One of the better times I've ever had. The time literally flew by. I am really looking forward to doing it again this July with whoever wants to attend. But this time we have to allow more time! Maybe an entire evening or something. A dinner perhaps. With spouses.

Jeff, I urge you to go. It's funny to watch the Captain talk with his tongue firmly implanted in his cheek! And if you can't make it for theirs, how about July? They crowds are bad then, but you do get later hours and that makes up for it. OH! No! Wait! I just slipped back into 1996! Sorry!

 

[Peter Pirate]

Trust me, you won't get any of that from me.

Gee Greg, Kid of left me out to dry didn't you? Do I really seem like the Bill O'Reilly, in your face type person to you??? - LOL! Just kidding...

Not to beat a dead drum, which is better than the more well known but not PC statement generally thought of (notice how I threw 'PC' in there, too?...Just to muddle up an already muddled post).

On our first meet Greg, Baron & I barely threw any punches at all. If 'shorty', I mean Baron hadn't thrown that drink in my face and called me 'Eisner lover' we probably wouldn't have been asked to leave the Dophin in the first place!...

Seriously, though we don't get too in depth as we're mostly just being friends & face to face is a lot more civil...Unless Baron calls me 'Pressler boy' again...Oh, then it'll get ugly!

 

[raidermatt]

I think at this point, my only additional comment is concerning some "taking the moral highground" in spite of it being a bad business decision. What we are saying (or at least what I am saying), is that its a GOOD business decision because it allows Disney to tap a large population of guests who would not be paying them for accomodations otherwise.

True, the question becomes where to draw the line, and in my opinion, the All Stars is it. If PC offers the same amenities and service as AS, then I guess technically it does not cross the line. I'm just not convinced the bowling pin motif is going to sell.

Jeff, I understand your point about the busses, and I guess its all a matter of perspective. The busses don't make me think of the outside world, but maybe that's because I live in the 'burbs (barely), rarely see a bus, and pretty much only ride them when at WDW. We do have BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit) in the general area, and it looks very similar to the Monorail, just not as sleek. So the monorail doesn't quite have the same novelty. That doesn't mean I wouldn't like to see other forms of transportation expanded, only that the current format does not remind me there is an outside world.

 

[Brian430]

Peter, who is suggesting 60 to 70 percent of the population should be excluded? Have 70 percent of the population been unable to visit Mickey Mouse until the value resorts sprung up?

Until lately, Disney has done a good job in expanding its on-site resort locations without cheapening the overall experience. I think the moderates not only made WDW more accessible, but they did it in a very classy and Disney-like way. And you’ll notice the moderates never sparked this kind of backlash. I think PO, DL and CBR are some of their best resorts. Dixie Landings, in my opinion, is the best-landscaped hotel at WDW. (Although I think Coronado Springs comes off like a major land-clearing project than a well designed resort: Weak theming, minimal landscaping the first roadside location for a moderate. To tell you the truth, I’d like to see CS razed as much as Pop Century. It’s part of the quicker-cheaper development approach we’re all lamenting.)

Yes, there should be a premium charged for staying on property – it’s a benefit, a luxury. And sometimes not everyone can afford luxuries. If you’re at a point in your life where you can’t afford to pay that premium, then stay off site or delay your trip for a year. I have.

And who is suggesting we go back to a day of two or three deluxe hotels? All anyone is suggestion is WDW grow at a standard they’ve set and followed for years. Wilderness Lodge and Dixie Landings are good examples of that.

You mentioned Disney has to cater to all income ranges in order to offer all of the recreational activities they do. But the water parks, golf courses and other recreational offerings existed long before the value resorts, and they existed quite profitably.

Finally, as you say, it’s true that "businesses have to grow." But growth doesn’t have to be disfiguring. And turning a profit shouldn’t come at any cost.

 

[JeffJewell]

Greg...

a World without moderates and values with the application of supply and demand does (says) just what I am describing. And I think that's a very bad business decision.

...I agree with you that fewer people are both willing and able to afford the highest quality of anything, I just don't see that as a reason to declare that quality is therefore equivalent to snob appeal, and something to be despised. I also disagree that sticking to the philosophy that put your company head and shoulders above the competition is a bad business move. On the contrary, I think changing your business philosophy such that you are more similar to your competitors in content and price point is actually the bad decision.

"Ford owns Volvo, Jaguar, Astin Martin and Land rover."
Yes! Excellent point YoHo. And Disney owns the Grand Floridian, Caribbean Beach and All Star Sports. Strong strategy, in my opinion.

This touches on something I've always thought someone would bring up on the boards, but no one ever really has. Although Ford owns those brands, you don't see Ford whiting-out "Jaguar" and selling both the XJ series and the Escort series under the same brand name. There is undeniable value in having a brand that is synonymous with high quality.

The contrast is that Ford chooses to go out and buy the "quality" brands and sell them under the original brand names, whereas to a great extent, Disney has chosen to go out and buy lower quality items and paste their once-meaningful brand name on them.

The Downtown Disney resorts are on property, too, but I don't feel that I have much of a leg to stand on in complaining about them, because there wasn't such a flagrant attempt to cash in on the tradition of the Disney name. If I must be an unrepentant snob, I'm at least going to be a consistent and principled unrepentant snob.

I'd bet that most people who read this thread that aren't "regulars" must think that you and I hate each other.

And I'll bet even some of the regulars are starting to wonder, at this point...

airlarry!...

It all goes back to my point that Value Resorts = good idea. Ei$ner's implementation = bad idea.

In this particular time and space, I'm going to agree with you completely on this. I like all your ideas except the one where you seem to imply that a suitable paint job might make a bus Magical. Think high-capacity WEDway, and you're more in my neighborhood.

Landbaron...

they did away with the "Disney Standard" for resorts and replaced it with the "Industry Standard".

I like that turn of phrase to describe what I've been refering to as "becoming less Magical and more like their competitors."

But they do not carry the FORD brand!

Dammit, I _really_ have to start reading all the posts in a thread before I reply to the first new one I read...

And if you can't make it for theirs, how about July?

Well, it's not a can/can't thing (I've not yet got around to actually cancelling the room reservation), it's a want to or not thing. Despite the amount of posting I've done recently, I'm mostly in Car 4 at this point... the October/November trip is a family thing that just happens to be going to WDW, as far as I'm concerned. If I've sounded more abrasive recently in my assessment of Disney's management, it's likely just the bitterness of dealing with the fact that my heart has finally given up on them (once my stupid head catches up, you all won't have to slog through all these offenses to brevity and clarity, anymore). The only reason we'd be going down in May is to attend the meet, and when it started looking like the meet was going to end up unsettling and disappointing to me, as well...

Jeff

 

[All Aboard]

it started looking like the meet was going to end up unsettling and disappointing to me, as well

I'm not sure what I can do to assure you that this will not be the case. Clearly, it's up to you at this point.

Also, while it may seem like it, I'm not calling you a snob. I can't stand places like the Sun Inn on US 192. It seems like a disgusting, dirty place I'd never dream of sleeping. I don't think I'm a snob. But, I'd bet there are lots of people that stay there who would say I am. You've stayed at the All Stars before, and I believe you said you'd have no real aversion to staying there again in a pinch. HOW can you be a snob if that's the case?

What I do believe is that personal preference is the prevailing driver in this thread. Just today we've seen Landbaron call for the dozers to rip down the Grand Florida for crying out loud!! And Bryan is calling for the destruction of my favorite moderate - Coronado Springs. By the way, the theme of the Ranchos is excellent. Much more appealing that CBR, in my opinion. If I had to name my least favorite resort, it would be the Contemporary. Sure the monorail goes through it. And (if you can afford certain rooms) you get a great view of the Magic Kingdom. Outiside of that, it doesn't do much for me. AKL & WL are FAR more appealing to me. Yet, those two have been targeted as being "short of Disney Quality" by some in this thread.

Given this vast array of opinions and tastes, it's safe to say nobody will completely agree with anybody here.