Why defend Disney

[Maistre Gracey]

People just don't realize... Why not? Disney is still darn good.
The problem? Many new Disney folk just weren't around when there was never a light bulb out, a fingerprint on the glass, a single brown leaf in the gardens.... You get the idea. That just don't have the "old" Disney to compare it to.

MG

 

[KnittingMom]

I think you and I are on some of the same cruise threads. When summer '17 pricing was released I was shocked!! (On the 11 night cruises), as were many others. Being shocked at price is fine. I know I chose another line for a Northern Europe, as many others did as well. But I've yet to see anyone in the DCL section go on a post trip report etc. and tell them that they are wrong for going on said cruise, or that DCL is absolutely horrible and money grabbing.
Maybe my November cruise on DCL will be my first and last. But I don't see a reason to continually bash them just because I don't see the value in certain itinerary pricing.

For me it's simple - if I don't see the value in something then I don't pay it.

I agree -- if the vacation cost cannot be justified, we don't take it. At the same time, like most middle class Americans, our salaries have been flat for about 12-15 years, and 14 years ago was when we took our first Disney vacation, paying about $165 per night for a POR room in the summer season, with tax included. That same room today is at least $233 with tax, or a 59% price increase. People feel squeezed by the increasing costs of 6 nights at Disney, and they themselves are paying more and more while earning about the same. It is worse at the Deluxes. With a postcard code we received, our standard view room at AKL cost us $125 before tax in 2002, and that same room today is over $400.

 

[Davey Jones II]

I agree -- if the vacation cost cannot be justified, we don't take it. At the same time, like most middle class Americans, our salaries have been flat for about 12-15 years, and 14 years ago was when we took our first Disney vacation, paying about $165 per night for a POR room in the summer season, with tax included. That same room today is at least $233 with tax, or a 59% price increase. People feel squeezed by the increasing costs of 6 nights at Disney, and they themselves are paying more and more while earning about the same. It is worse at the Deluxes. With a postcard code we received, our standard view room at AKL cost us $125 before tax in 2002, and that same room today is over $400.

Yes, and that is a legitimate complaint. Personally, I wouldn't mind rapid price increases too much, if the quality of the experience was also improving, or, at the very least, maintained the level of yesteryear.

I've been going on theme park trips since 2007, and always enjoyed them. Overall, despite increased crowding, we felt that we got our money's worth (of course, that took a lot of planning; plus, we have to use a wheelchair, because my g.f. has bad knees. And yes, the wheelchair does have its benefits when it comes to beating some of the lines).

But the recent cutbacks have me fearing for the quality of our future trips -- if we ever dare go back to Disney. To me, it's obvious that the company should be running attractions at maximum capacity, in the face of record crowds. Instead, they are shoving their penny-pinching ways in our collective faces.

They know they could be alleviating the crowding and wait times, but instead, they are aggravating that situation, to save a few bucks. To me, it would be like being in the hospital with a broken leg, and the nurse comes and tells you: "this hospital is wildly profitable, but we want to make even more money, so we're cutting your pain killers. Too bad. Oh, and by the way -- we're going to charge you more money."

Not a perfect analogy, but I think you get my meaning. The situation is difficult, and they are making it worse instead of doing what they can to help. And jacking up their prices while doing so. There's no excuse for that crap.

 

[Kimberly9701]

People just don't realize... Why not? Disney is still darn good.
The problem? Many new Disney folk just weren't around when there was never a light bulb out, a fingerprint on the glass, a single brown leaf in the gardens.... You get the idea. That just don't have the "old" Disney to compare it to.

MG

But that's the thing, I've been going to Disney since I was a 1 year old. My family didn't stay for a full week, our vacations weren't centered around Disney, they were beach vacations and we would then go to Orlando for 4-5 days- WDW and Seaworld and later universal. (We never did AK though, maybe once). Anyway, back then I always remember long lines- this was before any kind of fast pass existed.
And then as an adult I remember long lines as well. I also don't ever remember it being overly "affordable".

Because of those things I just get completely confused when people talk about some Amazing low crowd and low priced WDW. I have never seen it.

I agree -- if the vacation cost cannot be justified, we don't take it. At the same time, like most middle class Americans, our salaries have been flat for about 12-15 years, and 14 years ago was when we took our first Disney vacation, paying about $165 per night for a POR room in the summer season, with tax included. That same room today is at least $233 with tax, or a 59% price increase. People feel squeezed by the increasing costs of 6 nights at Disney, and they themselves are paying more and more while earning about the same. It is worse at the Deluxes. With a postcard code we received, our standard view room at AKL cost us $125 before tax in 2002, and that same room today is over $400.

Oh I won't defend the resort pricing, it's ridiculous. I'll pay it because I want the convenience...I won't say that I like paying it lol. But compared to 2001-2002 everything has gone way up travel wise. I used to get incredible deals to the DR flights and resorts, I also used to be able to fly from MIA- Costa Rica for less than $200. That unfortunately isn't the case anymore. So I can't travel as much now, I also now have a child which makes my finances different as well- disposable income no longer exists for me. I plan accordingly and spend the money where I think it is "worth it".

At the end of the day- I can't fault a business for raising prices when they know they can. Even at the crazy Deluxe resort prices they still sell out. Can you imagine if they were still half the cost? No one would ever be able to get a room.

 

[Kimberly9701]

Yes, and that is a legitimate complaint. Personally, I wouldn't mind rapid price increases too much, if the quality of the experience was also improving, or, at the very least, maintained the level of yesteryear.

I've been going on theme park trips since 2007, and always enjoyed them. Overall, despite increased crowding, we felt that we got our money's worth (of course, that took a lot of planning; plus, we have to use a wheelchair, because my g.f. has bad knees. And yes, the wheelchair does have its benefits when it comes to beating some of the lines).

But the recent cutbacks have me fearing for the quality of our future trips -- if we ever dare go back to Disney. To me, it's obvious that the company should be running attractions at maximum capacity, in the face of record crowds. Instead, they are shoving their penny-pinching ways in our collective faces.

They know they could be alleviating the crowding and wait times, but instead, they are aggravating that situation, to save a few bucks. To me, it would be like being in the hospital with a broken leg, and the nurse comes and tells you: "this hospital is wildly profitable, but we want to make even more money, so we're cutting your pain killers. Too bad. Oh, and by the way -- we're going to charge you more money."

Not a perfect analogy, but I think you get my meaning. The situation is difficult, and they are making it worse instead of doing what they can to help. And jacking up their prices while doing so. There's no excuse for that crap.

There's not an excuse, but there is a reason.

They are a For Profit company. It's that simple.

 

[whiporee]

They know they could be alleviating the crowding and wait times, but instead, they are aggravating that situation, to save a few bucks.

This isn't a fact, and I doubt it's an accurate opinion. Wait times don't help WDW, don't help the bottom line, probably don't even save them money. Even if you're going with a Disney-is-greedy-greedy-greedy mentality, people waiting in lines aren't spending money.

Looking at what's been published -- and even what's been speculated -- the staff reductions are nearly non-existent and the hourly cutbacks were about 2 percent. I don't think it's enough to make a difference at all, but even if you do, you can't think staff reductions can make a big one in terms of wait times. I've hard stories of single tracks running early in the mornings or late at nights, but is anyone really suggesting Disney doesn't run the rides at full capacity during peak hours? If they are, that's something I really would need verification of.

The only thing they could do to alleviate crowding is to shut the doors earlier ( mean let fewer people in) or raise the prices to stop more people from wanting to go. FP+ is an attempt to reduce wait times -- you may not like it, but it's clearly what it was intended to do. I don't think Disney can be faulted for not doing enough to alleviate wait times; a lot of people come to the parks, more than there used to be. Wait times are long (though I'm not sure they are much longer) and that
s what happens when a lot of people come to a place.

 

[Ambear]

The only thing they could do to alleviate crowding is to shut the doors earlier ( mean let fewer people in) or raise the prices to stop more people from wanting to go.

Not true. They could build new rides or expand on current rides like they are with Toy Story. But that's either not happening or taking forever that, if park attendance is increasing every year like some claim, wont impact crowds at all.

I don't think Disney can be faulted for not doing enough to alleviate wait times; a lot of people come to the parks, more than there used to be. Wait times are long (though I'm not sure they are much longer) and that
s what happens when a lot of people come to a place.

This doesn't make sense to me. It's solely disney's responsibility to manage the crowds better. It's a fundamental of the theme park business. Even if lines were just as long in the past doesn't mean it shouldn't be fixed for the future. We should get better right? I don't hate fp+ but I don't think it's helped anymore than paper fastpass. They need to think of more/better strategies to alleviate lines.

 

[Kimberly9701]

Not true. They could build new rides or expand on current rides like they are with Toy Story. But that's either not happening or taking forever that, if park attendance is increasing every year like some claim, wont impact crowds at all.



This doesn't make sense to me. It's solely disney's responsibility to manage the crowds better. It's a fundamental of the theme park business. Even if lines were just as long in the past doesn't mean it shouldn't be fixed for the future. We should get better right? I don't hate fp+ but I don't think it's helped anymore than paper fastpass. They need to think of more/better strategies to alleviate lines.

It's not a "claim". It's a documented fact.

Once upon a time there wasn't even a paper fast pass..
I remember waiting in long lines back then as well.

What is the solution?
The only actual way to stop long lines and crowds is to reduce attendance. I think we can all agree that won't happen.lol

 

[Boski]

3 things:
Just looking at WDW parks...

1. I'm not convinced seasonally adjusted wait times are significantly higher now than they were 8+ years ago (just a convenient frame of reference for me as I started making regular trips to WDW about 8 years ago). Using FP+, they are much lower than when I went as a kid in 1983.
2. The extent to which any of the changes WDW has made recently affects wait times is a mote in the eye compared to the market forces of increased demand. Simply put, far more people are booking WDW vacations now than they were 10 and 20 and 30 years ago. It may not feel like it to some because the recent recession has persisted and sort of become the new reality for so many but as a whole now, as before the recession there is more discressionary spending being paid out on things like vacations than ever before. This trend extends globally. Compared to the early 80s, far more people are able to take WDW vacations now.
3. Last item, it coat tails on the previous one and answers your parting question. Does Disney want to send you to the competition? ... Yes. In a sense. They want happy customers. So if they can fill their parks with people happy to pay $100/person/day for tickets and happy to pay another $50/person/day for a dining plan, and happy to pay for extra experiences like MNSSHP they would prefer to do that even if that means displacing customers who will not be happy to do the same thing. To be fair, Disney has done an amazing amount of market segmentation in order to preserve the traditional Magic Kingdom experience and make it available to such a broad spectrum of income levels. We set up our friends with a 4 night vacation for 3 on property with DDP for Just over $2100, well within their budget and much less than their previous years trip to the grand canyon. At the same time, my family will be in the park and in the resort spending more and staying longer all the while within our own personal comfort zones for vacation spending.

As a side note: I can't figure out what is WDW's local competition. Sea World? Maybe Universal Studios but only if you put rides from the 90s on par with Magic Kingdom's rides ... and forget that the other three WDW parks exist; and sorry, the Men In Black ride is no Peter Pan's Flight. But let's be honest, Universal Studios is the 8th most popular theme park ... so it's not even WDW's competition's competition. The only thing I can come up with that competes against WDW is the Space Center.

Do you read Josh's blog. Hes done some pretty interesting comparisons of wait times in the FP+ era vs. the FP era.

 

[Boski]

This isn't a fact, and I doubt it's an accurate opinion. Wait times don't help WDW, don't help the bottom line, probably don't even save them money. Even if you're going with a Disney-is-greedy-greedy-greedy mentality, people waiting in lines aren't spending money.

Wait times don't help the bottom line, but you know what does? Cutting staff, park ours, and running the rides at lower capacity. That does help the bottom line and as a by product, increases wait times. People waiting in line don't spend money, but when they rolled out FP+, MDE, etc. we all knew it was to gather data. Maybe after they've reviewed all of that data they found out that if someone wasn't waiting in line for SDMT because they got a FP+ for it they'll be waiting in line to ride IASW. So if the people aren't going shopping because they want to ride rides or see shows at an amusement park what can Disney do to help line their pockets? Cut down on operating costs and start offering/charging more for "special events".

 

[GPC0321]

Saying somebody is an apologist is not name calling or an insult. I also did not say anybody was wrong.

a·pol·o·gist
əˈpäləjəst/
noun
noun: apologist; plural noun: apologists
a person who offers an argument in defense of something controversial.
"an enthusiastic apologist for fascism in the 1920s"
synonyms: defender, supporter, upholder, advocate, proponent, exponent, propagandist, champion, campaigner;
informalcheerleader

Yes, but as the inclusion of the word "controversial" and the example sentence after the definition indicate, usually one uses the term "apologist" to describe someone who is defending something generally considered controversial or negative (like fascism).
One would not expect that defending Disney on a Disney message board would be controversial. A "Disney advocate" sounds much nicer than a "Disney apologist". The latter is definitely not meant in a nice way.

 

[Maistre Gracey]

Yes, but as the inclusion of the word "controversial" and the example sentence after the definition indicate, usually one uses the term "apologist" to describe someone who is defending something generally considered controversial or negative (like fascism).
One would not expect that defending Disney on a Disney message board would be controversial. A "Disney advocate" sounds much nicer than a "Disney apologist". The latter is definitely not meant in a nice way.

I don't see how a Disney advocate is the same thing as a Disney apologist.
In my apologist days I would, for the most part, blindly defend everything Disney did. I would tailor my reasoning to fit the outcome.
Don't get me wrong, I still like Disney. It's just now I freely admit it's not the company that I wish it was.

MG

 

[Davey Jones II]

Wait times don't help the bottom line, but you know what does? Cutting staff, park ours, and running the rides at lower capacity. That does help the bottom line and as a by product, increases wait times. People waiting in line don't spend money, but when they rolled out FP+, MDE, etc. we all knew it was to gather data. Maybe after they've reviewed all of that data they found out that if someone wasn't waiting in line for SDMT because they got a FP+ for it they'll be waiting in line to ride IASW. So if they people aren't going shopping because they want to ride rides or see shows at an amusement park what can Disney do to help line their pockets? Cut down on operating costs and start offering/charging more for "special events".

Exactly, and there HAVE been multiple reports in these boards and elsewhere of rides being run at reduced capacity. The new parks chairman, Bob Chapek, is known for cost-cutting; that's pretty much the list of his "accomplishments" right there. He ordered that the parks cut at least $500 million from their operating budgets. The main reason was to cover up cost overruns related to Shanghai, and present a good-looking quarterly earnings report to Wall Street. Better to have miserable guests than a dip in the stock price. Never mind that any dip would be temporary, and that the price would just bounce back later.
Anyway, check out articles such as the ones below:

http://micechat.com/125762-disneyland-budget-cuts/

http://micechat.com/122782-disneyland-cutbacks/

Yes, they are both about Disneyland, but maybe that the cuts are felt more acutely at a smaller resort, with only two parks.

We are not making this up; we are going by what we are reading from multiple sources. So, all of them are making it up?? Reduced hours, for example, is fact, and easy to compare from one year to the next.

I wish it wasn't happening, and I can scarcely believe that the WDC could have such contempt for its own guests. But the reality now is that booking a Disney trip is quite a gamble. You could plunk down thousands of dollars and end up having a miserable experience because of this deliberate reduced capacity. Meanwhile, the ads show deliriously happy people traipsing around a half empty park.

Yes, they can't help being popular, but they could do what they can to reduce the endless queues. And they're choosing not to, all to pad their already bloated bottom line. I think people need to know about these shenanigans, before they blow their hard-earned vacation budgets.

 

[GPC0321]

I guess for me, the reason I defend Disney, is because there are enough things in this world and my life I can complain about. Money, getting older, getting fatter, my profession (in public education...plenty to complain about), everything in the news...
But Disney? I don't want to turn Disney into something else to complain about.

 

[GPC0321]

I don't see how a Disney advocate is the same thing as a Disney apologist.
In my apologist days I would, for the most part, blindly defend everything Disney did. I would tailor my reasoning to fit the outcome.
Don't get me wrong, I still like Disney. It's just now I freely admit it's not the company that I wish it was.

MG

I agree...advocate and apologist are not the same thing. That was exactly my point. An apologist usually defends something thought of as "wrong" or "bad" while and advocate simply...advocates. Much more positive. So calling those who defend Disney on here "apologists" definitely has a more negative connotation than "defenders" or "advocates".
I don't think I blindly defend everything either, but I've seen so many complaints on here that were either due to a poster's own error or misunderstanding.
I mean for goodness sake. Someone emailed guest services because there wasn't a trumpet player in the mariachi band in Mexico one day. Come on.
And honestly, I think the existence of message boards like this one fuels the negativity. People can come here, and many do (even while standing in line to meet princesses!) and instantly publish their gripes for all to see. So people see all these complaints, and thy respond to the complaints, and soon everyone seems to have a complaint they want to post about, and then it's sort of the "thing" to come on the DIS and gripe. It really blows things out of proportion, IMO. It's just too easy to come here and vent. That's what the internet is all about.

 

[whiporee]

@Davey Jones II I appreciate the links. But it and your comments make my point. There's not a single quote in there. Not a single actual number. Just a bunch of suppositions and inferences, a lot of hyperbolic statements and fun verbs like slashing or saying a parade's been cut not for the reason Disney says, but because of cost cutting. There's a statement saying Iger has ordered 500 million in operating cuts be made, but the only reference I can find for that is the same micechat article. It's just something someone says.

And you present it like it's fact. The only published reports say that staffing has been cut about 2 percent. There's only anecdotal evidence that rides are at reduced capacity, but you're presenting no only as a given that it's happening, but also that it's a deliberate design to increase wait times.

And you might be right about all of it. But there's no -- absolutely no -- actual, empirical proof of what you're saying. None. So when anyone makes these kinds of arguments, I want to show that there MIGHT be another side to it.

Eta. It does look like the June calandra loses a late night hour that first week at DLR. I don't call that drastic, but it would be unfair not to mention it.

 

[whiporee]

Wait times don't help the bottom line, but you know what does? Cutting staff, park ours, and running the rides at lower capacity. That does help the bottom line and as a by product, increases wait times. People waiting in line don't spend money, but when they rolled out FP+, MDE, etc. we all knew it was to gather data. Maybe after they've reviewed all of that data they found out that if someone wasn't waiting in line for SDMT because they got a FP+ for it they'll be waiting in line to ride IASW. So if the people aren't going shopping because they want to ride rides or see shows at an amusement park what can Disney do to help line their pockets? Cut down on operating costs and start offering/charging more for "special events".

There's no proof that's happened, though. Operating Hours haven't been reduced yet -- they might be for DAH, but haven't yet. Staff reductions appear to be about 2 percent. I don't know what they do with the data, so you might be right, but it's not a given what WDW is doing with those numbers.

But it's a stretch to think that this is deliberate. I think it's a factor of people more than corporate manipulation a.

 

[yulilin3]

@whiporee I understand your point of having no proof or numbers on anything, the thing is that Disney protects these numbers at all costs, this is why we don't know the exact number of capacity for any parks, or, when they sell different packages you will never know how many tickets they are selling.
I will leave you with my own experience and background. I have live in Orlando for 18 years , have been a passholder for 15 years and before I would visit the parks multiple times. Now I visit the parks at least 2 times a week. I have family members and friends working for the company.
I have seen Disney pre fp, when lines were hours long, I have seen Disney go through 9/11 and how brilliant marketing (Year of a Million Dreams and other promotions) and impeccable service brought it back up from years of low attendance.
I can tell you, from experience, that management has gone down in quality. In many areas, it started when they cut down on the number of days CM would get their Traditions (class that teaches new CM about the history of the Company and Walt's story) classes. What used to take 4 days to complete, now it's done in a day and a half.
They used to have job fairs every 3 months, now they are heavily relying on College Program kids that work for only 6 months a year, and many of them are excited to be here, but others are just looking for something to put on their resume, they are very poorly paid and it shows.
The current hour cuts are real. When full time CM are only getting half of what they are promised, part timers only work 1 or maybe 2 days a week. You can see it when you go to the parks and managers in plain clothes are doing jobs that a costumed CM should be doing.
When you are waiting longer than usual for meals at QS because they closed half of the kitchen and/or because they are under staffed.
It's real and no, you will probably not find any newspaper article talking about this, one because again Disney protects their numbers and two because Disney is the driving economic force of Orlando and Central Fl.
I'm not saying it's all bad, it's not. There is still plenty of magic left, but the turn that management has taken is worrying. When they expect the guest to book rooms months in advance, plan months in advance, but cannot give operating hours 3 weeks in advance, that's a problem, and no amount of sugar coating will fix that.

 

[Boski]

There's no proof that's happened, though. Operating Hours haven't been reduced yet -- they might be for DAH, but haven't yet. Staff reductions appear to be about 2 percent. I don't know what they do with the data, so you might be right, but it's not a given what WDW is doing with those numbers.

But it's a stretch to think that this is deliberate. I think it's a factor of people more than corporate manipulation a.

• Disney Pixar Short Film Festival: will now close at 7pm instead of its previous 9pm close
• Journey into Imagination: Will now close at 7PM instead of its previous 9PM close.
• Agent P's World Showcase Adventure: Will now close at 6pm, from its previous 8:15pm close
• The Living with the Land: Now closes at 7PM daily, instead of at 9pm.

http://www.****************.com/new...lt-disney-world-and-beyond-week-february-8-14

"The theme parks were unexpectedly crushed this past week with Disney expecting 52,000 guests and receiving over 70,000 at Magic Kingdom. Add in already significant staffing reductions that began in February, shorter operating hours, and less entertainment and the Park easily “felt” as busy as it would have during the days leading up to Christmas."

http://www.easywdw.com/easy/blog/ma...vice-menu-joy-where-does-the-line-start-4616/



I'd like to see the article you are referencing with the 2% number. I did a quick glance through the post but couldn't find it. Also I don't think they are doing it deliberately, I think its by-product of budget cuts.

 

[whiporee]

The articles are on the first two pages. Ariel found a Sentinel article. The others are from a blog.

The only numbers I could find are ones that said 20 percent of employees were finding hours cut 2-4 hours a week. That's less than 10 percent of a 32 hour week (which they maintained for ACHA reasons) but I rounded up.

.2 x .1 = .02. That's where the 2 percent comes from.

As for the rest, lines were longer because more people came. And they had made their seasonal reductions, which employees even agree is what they do every year.

You could blame them for being caught off guard, but according to what I've read, the staff fact that there was less staff during Jan-Feb is a seasonal norm.