A question regarding the growth of WDW

[MassJester]

Originally Posted by DVC-Landbaron

“Kudos to Walt, or whomever was actually responsible”!!!! Really!! Do you despise Walt that much? We all know that he didn’t actually drive the nails into the wood and he didn’t use his T-square to lay it all out, but COME ON!! Throw him a bone, will ya!!

Which reminds me. Did you get a chance to look at the other ones that were planned for WDW. Pretty good stuff, eh? (If you say yes I promise not to give Walt any credit for it at all!)

I don't despise Walt. I just don't deify him.

[DVC-Landbaron]

hulliechrisp

So when is the Baron's next tour taking place??? I want to reserve a spot!

You’ve got to make them 180 days out. They fill up quickly, so I suggest that you call at 6:00 am. No later!! And if you haven’t made the connection with in three minutes, you’re probably out of luck. You shouldn’t waste any more time on it. Instead, make some reservations for a princess breakfast or Cinderella!!

But seriously, my daughter and her husband know even more about the place than I do!! They are the ones you should talk to about it! I’ll let them know. They live in the area!!

[DRDISNEYMD]

Originally Posted by DVC-Landbaron

WOW!! DRDISNEYMD You are all over the map. And it could be, and Im not sure, but it could very well be that you have the most convoluted logic Ive ever seen!!! OR it may be that you are really lousy at picking analogies!! Or you may just be giving us a hard time! But I must admit. You intrigue me. So&

~Baron, if I come across in that way, I apologize. But, this whole discussion is all over the map! Going forward, I will do my best to reign it in.

~Wow, I "intrigue you" -- given the circumstances I know better than to be flattered -- but really, it is not my intention to give you or anyone else a difficult time. It's just that some of you are kind of grumpy and present a great deal resistance when gently approached with a different perspective. I wonder why that is?

Just one question. Is it your house or are you renting it out? Since you cannot answer me immediately, I will have to answer you both ways.

IF IT IS YOUR HOUSE:
Do whatever you like!! Its your house!! You can sleep on the floor and sit in the closet. I dont care. No one does. Build it piecemeal. I did. I bought a house and several years later I tore off the roof and put in a second floor. Several years after that I put in an addition off the kitchen. Last, just within the past five years we remodeled the basement into a Florida room (themed, not decorated!!!). It was the only way we could afford it. Its a really big house now. When we first bought it, money was a lot tighter. A house, like we have today was simply out of reach. Had to do it piecemeal.

Come to think of it, when we were first married we rented an apartment. We bought a beautiful bedroom set but could afford little else. For several months we used lawn chairs in the living room and a card table in the kitchen! It took a year to buy all the furniture we needed.

~I love it! Wow, that's a lot of renovation, but your home sounds absolutely divine, not to mention, it's such a beautiful story!!! Thank you, Baron. I couldn't have written this better! You have succinctly summarized the message I was hoping to convey! This is my exact sentiment, as it pertains to DHS & AK. I dont see these parks as failures, they were only modest at the beginning -- the notion that they should have never been built, is so defeatist to me. Walt would never approve!

~I don't think Eisner gets the credit he deserves, he made the company profitable. I appreciate how he acted with urgency when Universal came creeping at their doorstep. Eisner wasn't complacent, he knew Universal could become a real threat, & he took this seriously. Eisner demonstrated keen insight in getting DHS and AK opened. I'm sure he understood they were lacking in contrast to Walt's masterpieces. But, somehow Eisner knew that if he didn't at least start the projects, today we would just have two parks, instead of four.

~I agree with you regarding the Values, but only partially. I don't like the motel setup, but the decorations are cute & fun. I really believe we would not have four gates if Eisner didn't seize the opportunity. Today, it would not be feasible.

Keep going& Ill get to the point eventually. OH! LOOK! Here it is!!!! IF YOU ARE RENTING IT OUT:
Did you stipulate that the house was furnished? I suppose you did since the furnishings are somehow your responsibility. How do you think your tenant will like the new place when he finds only a bed and a couch? Do you think hell be angry? Do you think hell feel cheated? Do you think hell be happy with your explanation that in time it will come? Do you think hell get on a renters message board and complain about how shabby management is treating him?

Summation:
Now! Follow this please!! The first instance you are doing the best you can do and the ONLY person in the world that is affected is YOU. And YOU can do whatever you like.

In the second scenario you are charging rent for a FURNISHED house!! You can build the house anyway you like. And it might take years to pull in all the furnishings that are required. So what? It doesnt matter! You are affecting no one but your empty pocketbook, because you arent collecting rent!

BUT!! If you charged full rent for just a bed and a couch, well& You are CHEATING your tenant!! And thats what were talking about. Disney could build all the theme parks they like. And they can take years to put on the finishing touches. But when those gates open for the first time and they demand a full ticket price to get in, then it better be furnished with something more than a bed and a couch!!

That has got to make sense to you, doesnt it? SO& Either concede the point or think of a better, less convoluted analogy and/or argument.

~Nice spin! Well its clear, hes renting one of my smaller studio units. Unfortunately, the bed and couch is all that space will allow. If he wants to pay more, I have a ton of available units with more upscale accommodations and features. However, he should choose carefully, my value units are very popular, and as such, availability is scarce. My upscale units are never full.

~I would hope that he wouldn't be angry or feel cheated. I would also encourage him to explore beyond the confines of his personal space to enjoy the pristine, well kept grounds and amazing complex, that he has been granted exclusive access to. He is now a member of a world class community. The market is saturated with other similar accommodations for far less, but none can provide a complimentary mass transit system that can rival any major city, hundreds of dining options to suit any palate, world class entertainment, golf, water parks, shopping and so much more. I dare him to compare and comeback with a better option!

~Scenario: You have to find a new place to live and there are only two available options.

~Option one: is a huge, super affordable, well-appointed apartment in an isolated non-gated community - the grounds are not maintained, and there is no pool or workout facility. The majority of the surrounding area is oppressive, full of blight, visible trash strewn about, no mass transit, notable crime rate, no nearby dining, entertainment, or shopping areas.

~Option 2: is a small unfurnished apartment in a gated community, with full 24 hour onsite staff. There are wonderful themed pools, a large workout facility, golf course, boardwalk, world class entertainment, an endless array of dining choices, several mass transit options. The community is vibrant, clean, safe & thriving.

~What would you choose? Option 1 well-appointed huge apartment or Option 2 world class exclusive community (both options assume the same expense)?

WDW was. In its entirety! Sure they plussed it afterwards and add new things, but it was a Day and a Half park, at least, when it first opened.

EPCOT was. In its entirety! Sure they plussed it afterwards and add new things, but it was a 2 Day park, at least, when it first opened.

Do you see the difference now?

~I agree. Disney should not charge a full ticket price for a half day park. But, Disney has structured the ticket options to include access to all four parks one price for four parks. So, you definitely win *half* of your argument.

~Eisner definitely had his share of faults but here is some of Walt's philosophy on how we should reflect on those kinds of situations.

~To some people, I am a kind of Merlin who takes lots of crazy chances, but rarely makes mistakes. I've made some bad ones, but fortunately, the successes have come along fast enough to cover up the mistakes. ~Walt Disney

~Never get bored or cynical. Yesterday is a thing of the past. ~Walt Disney

~Get a good idea and stay with it. Do it, and work at it until it's done right. ~Walt Disney

~Think beyond your lifetime, if you want to do something truly great. Make a fifty-year master plan. A fifty-year master plan will change how you look at the opportunities in the present. ~Walt Disney

[hulliechrisp]

Originally Posted by DVC-Landbaron

hulliechrisp

You’ve got to make them 180 days out. They fill up quickly, so I suggest that you call at 6:00 am. No later!! And if you haven’t made the connection with in three minutes, you’re probably out of luck. You shouldn’t waste any more time on it. Instead, make some reservations for a princess breakfast or Cinderella!!

But seriously, my daughter and her husband know even more about the place than I do!! They are the ones you should talk to about it! I’ll let them know. They live in the area!!

i've actually done their AK tour...it might not "WOW" everyone, but it sure is magical!

[DVC-Landbaron]

MassJester
Thanks for the link of the Contemporary back when it first opened.

http://waltdatedworld.bravepages.com/id224.htm

Did you look at the pictures? Pretty hideous, don’t you agree. I cannot believe that the décor and style shown there was EVER in style! But it was!! It was the height of fashion! It was very, very modern. Or maybe “contemporary’ would be a better term!

Of course I cannot believe that the Leisure Suit was, for one very short period of time, the epitome of fashion. Or for that matter anyone would have worn a Nehru Jacket! But they did. Not only that, but I actually owned one Nehru and two (YES! Count ‘em – TWO!!) Leisure Suits!! And (GASP!) one was all white, with jet black belt and shoes!!! I was “STYLIN’!!” Pretty lame, but the very personification of “contemporary” fashion at the time.

So to look at the Contemporary Resort through 2013 glasses is highly unfair of you. Put on your 1971 glasses and take another look. And the people I blame for us having to use our “time” glasses at all are the people in charge when the place started to look dated. Until it not only looks dated, but has become a joke. And I agree, it is a joke! The same way Epcot Center has become a joke! Thanks to the wonderful team of Ei$ner & crew!! And the current administration hasn’t done any better.

I don't despise Walt. I just don't deify him.

I don’t think I deify him. I respect the heck out of him, and I do (semi) deify his business philosophy. I really don’t see how anyone who likes Disney can’t feel the same way. It’s his business practices that produced what we have today. Even if what we have today is nothing but a watered down version of the original.

On another note… I see that you are very good at forwarding your agenda. But you seem to forget or ignore my direct questions. Any reason for this?

[DVC-Landbaron]

i've actually done their AK tour...it might not "WOW" everyone, but it sure is magical!

GOOD!! Not quite sure how an AK trip can be 'magical', but to each their own, I guess!!

Now, how do stand on the Walt vs. Ei$ner business philosophy debate!!??

[raidermatt]

Originally Posted by MassJester

I don't despise Walt. I just don't deify him.

The fact that you would make this statement shows a profound misunderstanding of what has been said.

[DVC-Landbaron]

The fact that you would make this statement shows a profound misunderstanding of what has been said.

Where is the "Like" button on message boards?

[raidermatt]

~Eisner definitely had his share of faults but here is some of Walt's philosophy on how we should reflect on those kinds of situations.

I'll bite.

~To some people, I am a kind of Merlin who takes lots of crazy chances, but rarely makes mistakes. I've made some bad ones, but fortunately, the successes have come along fast enough to cover up the mistakes. ~Walt Disney

Well, I doubt anybody ever accused Eisner of being a Merlin who takes lots of crazy chances, so we're already off the track on that one.

~Never get bored or cynical. Yesterday is a thing of the past. ~Walt Disney

Absolutely. Certainly nobody here has ever said Disney should have stayed as it was when Walt was alive.

~Get a good idea and stay with it. Do it, and work at it until it's done right. ~Walt Disney

Hmmm. Eisner opened 1/2 day parks and "worked them" only when the public rejected them. He gave the people as little as he thought he could get away with and only gave them more when he had to.

You can applaud that business strategy if you like. Certainly Eisner is/was not alone in that kind of thinking in corporate America. In fact, he's probably part of a significant majority.

But one thing we can't do is apply Walt's philosophy to that strategy. They are polar opposites.

~Think beyond your lifetime, if you want to do something truly great. Make a fifty-year master plan. A fifty-year master plan will change how you look at the opportunities in the present. ~Walt Disney

Thinking of the future is exactly what we are doing. The easy thing to do would be to look at Disney's financial success and say everything is fine and always will be. In fact, the more dismissive posters around here tell us exactly that.

The challenge is to ask if that success is all it could be, and where it will go in the future.

[MassJester]

Originally Posted by DVC-Landbaron

Of course I cannot believe that the Leisure Suit was, for one very short period of time, the epitome of fashion. Or for that matter anyone would have worn a Nehru Jacket! But they did. Not only that, but I actually owned one Nehru and two (YES! Count ‘em – TWO!!) Leisure Suits!! And (GASP!) one was all white, with jet black belt and shoes!!! I was “STYLIN’!!” Pretty lame, but the very personification of “contemporary” fashion at the time.

So to look at the Contemporary Resort through 2013 glasses is highly unfair of you. Put on your 1971 glasses and take another look.

I don't agree. The point, I thought, was to bring the idea of the "future" forward by having the resort extension of Tomorrowland. A splash of what might have passed for contemporary styling doesn't do anything to forward that story.

Although Top of the World night club might have been contemporary (and TotW was the second occupant of that space, not the original) it didn't speak to the future. Whereas at the Poly, the character dining, entertainment, and other interior aspects all faithfully (and creatively) brought the story forward, that just isn't the case at the Contemporary.

I agree with you that the architecture and the monorail were positively brilliant. I just think that the rest of it came up short. The mural, the some of the desert southwest styling elements were nice enough, but out of place.

Originally Posted by DVC-Landbaron

On another note… I see that you are very good at forwarding your agenda. But you seem to forget or ignore my direct questions. Any reason for this?

Didn't realize I had an agenda. Of course I'm getting older and may have misplaced it--heck, I've needed to order two AARP cards. Please send me your copy.

I also didn't intentionally skip over any of your questions, although given the volume of text i suppose I could have missed it.

[DRDISNEYMD]

Originally Posted by raidermatt

I'll bite.

&.the dust, eventually. j/k

Well, I doubt anybody ever accused Eisner of being a Merlin who takes lots of crazy chances, so we're already off the track on that one.

~Eisner has made some poor choices, but the successes have come along fast enough, to forgive those mistakes. For the record, I don't consider DHS & AKL to be mistakes. I love both parks & they have a lot of untapped potential. Walt admits that he has also made mistakes, but he emphasized the success & fixed the failures!

Absolutely. Certainly nobody here has ever said Disney should have stayed as it was when Walt was alive.

~There is an insurmountable amount of cynicism expressed towards almost every creation post Walt. It is so AWESOME to see that you don't share that same sentiment!!

Hmmm. Eisner opened 1/2 day parks and "worked them" only when the public rejected them. He gave the people as little as he thought he could get away with and only gave them more when he had to.

You can applaud that business strategy if you like. Certainly Eisner is/was not alone in that kind of thinking in corporate America. In fact, he's probably part of a significant majority.

But one thing we can't do is apply Walt's philosophy to that strategy. They are polar opposites.

~I don't applaud that kind of business strategy, but I do like to look at the whole picture. There were several other construction projects underway and Eisner probably had to stretch every dollar. I see it as an investment for the future by establishing the framework, knowing beforehand, that you or someone else will eventually work at it until it's done right. I agree that it is terrible to charge full admission for ½ day parks. But, I don't agree that DHS & AK should have never been built.

Thinking of the future is exactly what we are doing. The easy thing to do would be to look at Disney's financial success and say everything is fine and always will be. In fact, the more dismissive posters around here tell us exactly that.

The challenge is to ask if that success is all it could be, and where it will go in the future.

~I don't know about that, they certainly don't embrace anything post Walt. This thread is completely void of enthusiasm for the future, and don't try to express any or else. So, from my perspective it is one & the same!

Originally Posted by MassJester

I don't agree. The point, I thought, was to bring the idea of the "future" forward by having the resort extension of Tomorrowland. A splash of what might have passed for contemporary styling doesn't do anything to forward that story.

Although Top of the World night club might have been contemporary (and TotW was the second occupant of that space, not the original) it didn't speak to the future. Whereas at the Poly, the character dining, entertainment, and other interior aspects all faithfully (and creatively) brought the story forward, that just isn't the case at the Contemporary.

I agree with you that the architecture and the monorail were positively brilliant. I just think that the rest of it came up short. The mural, the some of the desert southwest styling elements were nice enough, but out of place.



Didn't realize I had an agenda. Of course I'm getting older and may have misplaced it--heck, I've needed to order two AARP cards. Please send me your copy.

I also didn't intentionally skip over any of your questions, although given the volume of text i suppose I could have missed it.

Excellent post!!!

[DVC-Landbaron]

I don't agree. The point, I thought, was to bring the idea of the "future" forward by having the resort extension of Tomorrowland.

WOW!! You are being MUCH to literal, or purposefully obtuse, I don’t know which. The “A” frame structure, with the monorail running into it served as a nice backdrop for Tomorrowland, which I think you already agreed to (but I’m really not sure anymore, but I suppose I can re-read this whole thread to find it). Anyway, that is as far as it went. The resort was NOT called ‘The Futurist” or “The Tomorrow Resort”. It was call “The Contemporary”!! It’s call “The Contemporary” because it’s supposed to be well… ah… I don’t know… maybe… CONTEMPORARY!! Modern! NOT the future!

A splash of what might have passed for contemporary styling doesn't do anything to forward that story.

Good grief!! A splash!!?? Did you really look at those pictures from 1971, 1972? To me, it looked so dated that I felt I was back there, in that time. The whole place reeked of late ‘60s, early ‘70s. That’s what brought to mind the Nehru Jackets and Leisure Suits. As soon as I saw the pictures my brain made an instant connection to that part of my life. It’s like seeing someone in a t-shirt, a pack of Luckys rolled up in his sleeve and a DA hair cut! BAM!!! Instant 50s!! And the Contemporary pictures hit me with a – BAM!!! Instant 70s!!

Tell me – And here is one of those questions that get lost – What would you consider more than ‘a splash’? What should it have been?

Although Top of the World night club might have been contemporary (and TotW was the second occupant of that space, not the original) it didn't speak to the future.

Again, it wasn’t supposed to speak to the future. It was supposed to be ultra-modern or “contemporary”!!! (and please tell me what was there before "The Top of the World"? I didn't visit there until July of 1972. Was something there before Top of the World?

Whereas at the Poly, the character dining, entertainment, and other interior aspects all faithfully (and creatively) brought the story forward, that just isn't the case at the Contemporary.

My turn to be obtuse. What story? What story does the Poly bring forward from the Theme park? Is there a Polynesian land that I’m unaware of? Can you really stretch the Tiki room as the sole connection to the resort? Maybe, but it’s pretty thin! And an overall Adventureland carry over seems way more than just a stretch!!

The mural, the some of the desert southwest styling elements were nice enough, but out of place.

We we’re just shy of the sixties. This kind of stuff was VERY in!

Didn't realize I had an agenda. Of course I'm getting older and may have misplaced it--heck, I've needed to order two AARP cards. Please send me your copy.

Are you trying to say that you saw the place in person in 1971, or that you were definitely old enough to have done it without being in diapers? Why not just answer – It one of the unanswered I referred to earlier – Did you see it firsthand in 1971?

And the other question that I can think of without re-reading the whole thread is – Did you like the link to the other planned, but never built, resorts? And if you did look at it, what is your reaction to them?

[MassJester]

Originally Posted by DVC-Landbaron

WOW!! You are being MUCH to literal, or purposefully obtuse, I don’t know which. The “A” frame structure, with the monorail running into it served as a nice backdrop for Tomorrowland, which I think you already agreed to (but I’m really not sure anymore, but I suppose I can re-read this whole thread to find it). Anyway, that is as far as it went. The resort was NOT called ‘The Futurist” or “The Tomorrow Resort”. It was call “The Contemporary”!! It’s call “The Contemporary” because it’s supposed to be well… ah… I don’t know… maybe… CONTEMPORARY!! Modern! NOT the future!

No need to be rude.

I did, in fact, agree that I love the architecture in the post directly above. Should be easy to find.

I realize what the resort was called, and I'm saying that theme--such that it is--is a poor extension of the park, and was destined to become poorer with every passing year. Such a decision fails to measure up to the best examples of Disney vision.

Originally Posted by DVC-Landbaron

Good grief!! A splash!!?? Did you really look at those pictures from 1971, 1972? To me, it looked so dated that I felt I was back there, in that time. The whole place reeked of late ‘60s, early ‘70s. That’s what brought to mind the Nehru Jackets and Leisure Suits. As soon as I saw the pictures my brain made an instant connection to that part of my life. It’s like seeing someone in a t-shirt, a pack of Luckys rolled up in his sleeve and a DA hair cut! BAM!!! Instant 50s!! And the Contemporary pictures hit me with a – BAM!!! Instant 70s!!

Tell me – And here is one of those questions that get lost – What would you consider more than ‘a splash’? What should it have been?

Again, it wasn’t supposed to speak to the future. It was supposed to be ultra-modern or “contemporary”!!! (and please tell me what was there before "The Top of the World"? I didn't visit there until July of 1972. Was something there before Top of the World?

The Mesa Grande Lounge was in place before Top of the World and the Pueblo Room was down on the 4th floor--which later became part of the Chef Mickey's restaurant. This Southwest styling was out of place and didn't speak to either a "Contemporary" or a "future" theme.

Originally Posted by DVC-Landbaron

My turn to be obtuse. What story? What story does the Poly bring forward from the Theme park? Is there a Polynesian land that I’m unaware of? Can you really stretch the Tiki room as the sole connection to the resort? Maybe, but it’s pretty thin! And an overall Adventureland carry over seems way more than just a stretch!!

I don't agree that it is a stretch, and that's ok, we need not agree.

Originally Posted by DVC-Landbaron

Are you trying to say that you saw the place in person in 1971, or that you were definitely old enough to have done it without being in diapers? Why not just answer – It one of the unanswered I referred to earlier – Did you see it firsthand in 1971?

And the other question that I can think of without re-reading the whole thread is – Did you like the link to the other planned, but never built, resorts? And if you did look at it, what is your reaction to them?

I was not there in 1971. I am, like you, in my 50's. However, I'm content to appear younger.

I'm not sure what you are referring to as far as plans. I've seen concept drawings, which I thought were very nice. but beyond that I am unaware of any plans.

[DVC-Landbaron]

No need to be rude

Sorry!! I was perhaps a little too verbose!! I never meant to be rude? I NEVER mean to rude! Sorry.

I realize what the resort was called, and I'm saying that theme--such that it is--is a poor extension of the park, and was destined to become poorer with every passing year. Such a decision fails to measure up to the best examples of Disney vision.

Oh yeah! I can agree with that, no problem at all. Not the best example of forward thinking. But did you know that the rooms were modular. The concept was as the building aged these modular units could easily be replaced. Ah but! Lousy Florida soil and heartless gravity somehow twisted things a bit out of shape (or something like that, I don't know all the details) and it became impossible for that concept to work.

Now. I said, not the best example of forward thinking. Not that it failed in it's original theme. That of 'modern' and/or 'contemporary'. It was indeed doomed to be outdated rather quickly. Walt always had a hard time with that "tomorrow" theme. Or up-to-date theme. Just look at CoP. Or Tomorrowland itself. But as far as theme of Contemporary, at the time, I thought it was great. It hasn't aged well at all. But as an extension, or at least a backdrop for Tomorrowland - Wonderful. But both our points of view at this point in our conversation is highly subjective.

And again, you didn't answer one of my more interesting questions (at least I thought so). So I'll ask it again:

Tell me  And here is one of those questions that get lost  What would you consider more than a splash of what might have passed for contemporary styling'? What should it have been?

The Mesa Grande Lounge was in place before Top of the World

Thank you. The name sounds familiar, but I would have never guessed it in a million years! Totally forgot about it! It must have changed names rather quickly. I do remember that there was a place, a lounge, right off the elevators and next to The Top Of The World, the name eludes me at the moment, where they served drink named after monorail colors.

I'm not sure what you are referring to as far as plans. I've seen concept drawings, which I thought were very nice. but beyond that I am unaware of any plans.

Up until the time Ei$ner took over they planned several different resorts. Do you remember where The Walt Disney Story was in the MK? I think it is the photo place now, I hardly ever go in there. At any rate, there was a sort of preview center which laid out the 5 and 10 year plan for WDW. It had a HUGE scale model of WDW and all the future plans were on display!! It was GREAT!!

Anyway, I thought you might get a kick out of the resorts that were planned. The Asian Resort, The Venetian Resort, The Persian Resort, Cypress Point Lodge and Wilderness Junction/Buffalo Junction Resort.

I linked you to a site before that had some of their original plans. Here it is again:

http://www.disneydrawingboard.com/WD...ea/MKArea.html

Now that you've seen them, what do you think? To me they all look better than what has been built since. Don't you think so?

And that was part of what this thread was all about. Have they used the land to the very best of their "DISNEY" ability!?


--

[MassJester]

Originally Posted by DVC-Landbaron

Sorry!! I was perhaps a little too verbose!! I never meant to be rude? I NEVER mean to rude! Sorry.

No worries. I get caught in my arguments from time to time (but then what lawyer doesn't?)

Originally Posted by DVC-Landbaron

Oh yeah! I can agree with that, no problem at all. Not the best example of forward thinking. But did you know that the rooms were modular. The concept was as the building aged these modular units could easily be replaced. Ah but! Lousy Florida soil and heartless gravity somehow twisted things a bit out of shape (or something like that, I don't know all the details) and it became impossible for that concept to work.

Now. I said, not the best example of forward thinking. Not that it failed in it's original theme. That of 'modern' and/or 'contemporary'. It was indeed doomed to be outdated rather quickly. Walt always had a hard time with that "tomorrow" theme. Or up-to-date theme. Just look at CoP. Or Tomorrowland itself. But as far as theme of Contemporary, at the time, I thought it was great. It hasn't aged well at all. But as an extension, or at least a backdrop for Tomorrowland - Wonderful. But both our points of view at this point in our conversation is highly subjective.

And again, you didn't answer one of my more interesting questions (at least I thought so). So I'll ask it again:

Tell me  And here is one of those questions that get lost  What would you consider more than a splash of what might have passed for contemporary styling'? What should it have been?

I would have dumped the southwest themed eateries and entertainment, and although I love the mural--but I would have done something with astroimagery (which was really starting to get spectacular at the time). The character presentations at breakfast have always been off theme too, and I would change that.

Originally Posted by DVC-Landbaron

Thank you. The name sounds familiar, but I would have never guessed it in a million years! Totally forgot about it! It must have changed names rather quickly. I do remember that there was a place, a lounge, right off the elevators and next to The Top Of The World, the name eludes me at the moment, where they served drink named after monorail colors.

There was the Grand Canyon Lounge and the Gulf Coast Room -- one of those perhaps?

Originally Posted by DVC-Landbaron

Up until the time Ei$ner took over they planned several different resorts. Do you remember where The Walt Disney Story was in the MK? I think it is the photo place now, I hardly ever go in there. At any rate, there was a sort of preview center which laid out the 5 and 10 year plan for WDW. It had a HUGE scale model of WDW and all the future plans were on display!! It was GREAT!!

Anyway, I thought you might get a kick out of the resorts that were planned. The Asian Resort, The Venetian Resort, The Persian Resort, Cypress Point Lodge and Wilderness Junction/Buffalo Junction Resort.

I linked you to a site before that had some of their original plans. Here it is again:

http://www.disneydrawingboard.com/WD...ea/MKArea.html

Now that you've seen them, what do you think? To me they all look better than what has been built since. Don't you think so?

And that was part of what this thread was all about. Have they used the land to the very best of their "DISNEY" ability!?


--

I have a vague memory of that place--but nothing specific. The link was very interesting though. I was very enamored of the Persian and Asian concepts--although the Venetian one seemed lacking (I'm have been a relatively frequent traveller to Venice and so perhaps my expectations are unfairly high).

As for the Parks living up to their potential, no, I think not. I am not as gloomy about it as some. Walt Disney was a visionary, charismatic and driven leader, and for whatever flaws he or his work product had, he created great pass times. It is unreasonable to expect that he would be replaced by a series of like leaders--simply because history shows us that such leaders stand out as exceptions rather than exist in long lines of other great leaders.

Additionally, it's unclear (to me) that he would have been a good long term steward of his own projects. My understanding of his career is that he liked to move on to the next project, and updating/refurbishing/repurposing (at least insofar as the Disneyland property is concerned) wasn't really a strong suit. I think we could have expected great new benchmarks from Disney had he lived a longer life, but I'm not sure what would have become of the projects he had completed in the past.