Pop Century

[JeffJewell]

what does it bother you or your vacation for these places to exist

...it bothers me from a business standpoint, in that what was once an obvious line of distinction between the Disney resorts and non-Disney resorts is becoming blurred.

I understand that the idea of the Value was to lure more guests, but the result was to make a Disney resort that was minimally differentiated from non-Disney resorts, instead of making a resort that still offered the unique, "Disney" aspects of the experience that was clearly differentiated from non-Disney.

Anyone can buy a big saxophone... what is it about the All Star Music that would tell you, should you wake up there not knowing where you are, that this is a "Disney" resort? Mickey wake-up calls and Early Entry. Absolutely nothing distinctive about the resort itself.

So it bothers me from a business perspective in that the All Stars (with copious help from minimal parks like AK and DCA, and minimal rides like lightly themed off-the-shelf jobs) are diluting the brand name "Disney."

Most of us know the story about the company who screened their animated movie to generally thumbs-down reviews, then screened it and referred to it as a "Disney" picture: the reviews were much better. The Disney brand name has carried a powerful wallop.

It is my belief that wallop exists because of the enormous Disney/non-Disney differential that once existed. Now that the differential is less (and calculatedly so: they lowered the standard on purpose just to make it cheap), I predict the wallop will do nothing but decrease into the future.

I think that's _bad_ business, business far more likely to lead to financial peril than the more expensive but more brandable Disney Quality type of business.

Jeff

PS:

Crowded early entry and e-nights are the only reasons I can think of, and those aren't valid, because the argument here isn't why disney shouldn't add 6,000 new deluxe rooms

Well, the resort simply wouldn't support that many new "Deluxe" (once called simply "Disney") rooms, that's the thing. They changed the product to fit the price they wanted to achieve. Building 6000 Deluxe rooms is a terrible business decision as well, for different reasons than 6000 Values, however.

But no matter what "level" of rooms you're building, if you aren't improving and expanding your parks and transportation infrastructure at at _least_ the same rate (and I believe they are not), then the extra rooms cannot help but have a direct and detrimental effect on others' vacations.

 

[JeffJewell]

I don't think a sit down restaurant at the all stars would do so well, not because I don't think that people could afford it, but because there isn't much off-site traffic

...cause or effect, here.

The Wilderness Lodge isn't exactly just off of Main Street, USA. And yet Artist Point attracts quite a few off-siters. Roaring Forks, of course, does not. It is not shocking to me that the Roaring Forks type facility at the All Stars ain't pulling crowds from multiple zip codes.

It doesn't have anything to do with where the traffic is at the moment: if you open a restaurant with a distinctive character and quality products, the traffic will come to you.

I think this is a point in favor of the plussing and immersive theming; if you don't put that in, you sell to the people who happen to walk past. If you _do_ put it in, you sell to the people who want those extras, and will make it a point to walk past, for the expressed purpose of buying the plussed product.

Jeff

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Well, over night we added a couple pages to this. So, to keep things going a bit I'll add another post. I sort of need to anyway, because several of my points are a little misunderstood. I think that's because I take a hard line and tend to speak in terms of black and white, disregarding any shade of gray. I find this effective for explaining philosophical differences, but in reality I do accept shades of gray and compromise, however slight, is possible at times.

HorizonsFan writes:

Much like Landbaron, your argument relies on all of us agreeing that the value resorts are ugly. That's a matter of individual taste and not everyone feels as you do. I think they look fun and I had a great time staying there.

No!! You misunderstand my point completely. We don't all have to agree that they are ugly. I can imagine (although it's hard) that someone might think the Poly is ugly. But I think that 99.9% of the people would have to admit it is themed in a Disney style. The same goes for all the deluxe resorts and even the moderates. But there it stops. The All Stars (and future Pop Century) is not themed. At least not themed in the traditional 'Disney' style. It's more like theming for a high school dance! "Our homecoming theme this year will be Disney!!" And the seniors decorate the high school gym with twenty foot icons related to Disney. Not much of a theme when you think about it, is it?

YoHo writes:

There have been a couple other arguments floating around here, but that is my core belief, Disney could have done it MORE right! It could have been even better and yet sacrificed nothing.

I just wanted to say - Right on YoHo!!!

airlarry! Writes:

Just like there is nothing wrong (sorry Baron...for once I disagree with you) with having various levels of hotels on property.

Well, I sort of agree. (See Captain. Even I can change my opinion once in while because of these boards!! ) So now that I will (in my opinion) allow for a shade of gray within the "Disney Standards", the question is: "Where do we now draw the line?" (Boy, this type of argument in much, much easier when a firm "black & white" stance is taken!!)

Because if we take that argument to the logical extreme, only the Grand Floridian type of hotel should be allowed on property.

Ahhh! I evidently wasn't clear enough before. I said that the 'slippery slope' started with the construction of both the Caribbean Beach and the Floridian! BOTH were a clear departure from the traditional Disney standard. On the one hand, Ei$ner wanted to cater to his peer group and on the other he wanted a resort for all the recently displaced souls he caused by the outrageous price increases he instituted at the Contemporary and Poly. In my perfect "black & white" world, neither of them would have been built and prices at the original two would have remained consistent. And in their place we would have seen the Persian, Asian and Venetian! Ahhhh! The glory of the original five year plan!!

It is okay to have one hotel that has Concierge, one hotel that has moderate service but still Disney theming

Not in my perfect "black & white" world. But I will agree that in reality it 'may' be possible. (YES that did hurt )

and one hotel that has value but still Disney theming.

NOPE!!! This is where we part company, even with my newly found shades of gray. There is no theme in the Values!!

d-r asks:

what does it bother you or your vacation for these places to exist

As usual JJ says it all and much better than I could (I suggest everyone re-read it often). But he left out one point. And for me it is very important. The construction of the All Star, complete with huge, primary colored, cartoonish looking icons, and their acceptance by the general public (more for price than for style) is the direct result of why they think that that hideous hat in the Studios and giant hand/wand in EPOCT is a piece of 'Disney Magic"!! Decorating is becoming acceptable in the Disney experience, rather than theme. Take a good look at the clashes going on in Adventureland lately with the addition of that spinning Aladdin ride. And I find that… well… DISTURBING!!!

 

[YoHo]

Thank You Airlarry....And DVC-Landbaron.

My Personal opinion is that in any job that must be done there is an element of fun.........No, Ugh, its still too early here on the Left coast I mean that Anything that Disney undertakes should be done to Disney standards. I don't feel that the Values live up to those standards. They could have been better. They should have been better.
I have no problem with their existance, I just wish they had tried for that 85% instead of 75%

Oh and dscoop, your completely forgetting my theory that the Values exist, not because Disney wanted to create a new market (ie on site cheap hotel rooms) but because Disney guests Demanded a new market. That the nature of the TYPICAL disney vacation has fundimentally and forever changed.

JeffJewell makes a good point about Artist Point. Although I persoanly defy that point, because I'm addicted to the poly (must be the pirate in me. Never Tried CBR though. )
(How many times can I use the word point in a sentence?)
Wilderness lodge is not really easy to get to yet people go to that resturant.

 

[DisDuck]

I have been lurking on this one but now decided to throw myself into the fray. I have stayed at a Deluxe (Contempory - 1986), a moderate (Coronado - 1999) and a value (AllStar Movie -1999). I have visited for meals the Contemporary in 2000, Grand Floridian in 1997, Polynesian in 1986, Boardwalk several years.

I do not find the themeing very immersive at the Contemporary. Except for the Monorail running thru the lobby how does one consider sharp angles, straight lines, lots of glass and chrome Disney. I liked the Poly and I guess if staying there the Island theme is very nice. I liked the Boardwalk area as it reminders me of Coney Island of my youth and it is pretty to look out over the lagoon at night. Coronado was nice but somewhat of a disappoint to me. The buildings are so spread out that unless you are 'on top' of the lobby it is quite a hike to the main building and pool area. The sit-down restaurant was way to expensive while the food court did have a nice style to it. But the hotel decor was more decoration then theme to me. AllStar was nice, noisy (only complaint) but decorated just a nice as Coronado and had more 'color' than Contemporary. My daughter 14 at time (and me) agreed that when staying on-site the AllStar's were for us. The additions and decoration at Deluxe or Moderate did not justify FOR US the price defferential. She was thrilled with the Icons especially Perdie. I liked the Fantasia theme of the main pool and liked the Mighty Ducks decor of the quiet pool. Even the laundry building was designed to look like something other than a laundry building. Some may consider that minor but instead of skimping at looking like a Motel 6 laundry some imagination was applied.

If Disney had not built the Floridian & Caribbean and left the Contemp & Poly as the standard they still could not have kept the pricing 'stable'. Just the rising cost of doing business in the last 20 years would have necessitated price increases in room rates to the point where they are now. This would have left the World with just Deluxe resorts (except for the old Disney Inn/Institute/Shades of Green and Fort Wilderness). Now how is that 'good business'. Allow the off-site world to capture your audience by pricing the majority of the people out of your market. Instead they tiered there resorts so that all tastes and pocketbooks could be accomodated and did it in a better fashion then the off-site places did. In fact, if not for the fact that I bought first at Vistana, I would have bought a DVC. So even the rise of off-site timeshares were countered by Disney to grab that segment of the market.

Finally, ugliness or beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I have seen only the pictures posted here on Pop and first hand viewing of AllStar's. I like AS and will await judgement until Pop completed and I can see it up close.

 

[JeffJewell]

...I don't really disagree with anything you said, but your comment about the Contemporary and immersive theming made me want to add a thought.

About thirty years ago, the Contemporary was a part of the story of Tomorrowland... you could easily see the C from Tomorrowland and it fit into the theme of that land (The Poly was the "backdrop" for Adventureland, although to be honest, I don't remember ever being able to see the Poly from the park, even in the early days. The stillborn Persian was to serve a similar function for Fantasyland). The then futuristic styling ("Contemporary" means "of the same time," not "of the future." Even the name of the place only made sense if it was to be considered as an extension of Tomorrowland) has not weathered the test of time particularly well, but the attempt at story-immersion is there.

I think those are two very different questions: asking "where, along the way, did the Contemporary fail at story-immersion" is one thing, but asking "why was story-immersion completely disregarded when planning the Values" is quite another.

Jeff

 

[JeffJewell]

...I seem to have rolled my post odometer.

Is there some kind of cash prize for which I should be checking my mailbox?

Jeff

 

[All Aboard]

Congrats JJ - welcome to "Club K"!

We got a long way to go. There's somebody named nativetxn with about 25,000 posts out there!

 

[Another Voice]

The hotels on property are developed by the Disney Development Company, not WDI (airlarry, please choose your croissant). DDC (by whatever name it goes by this week) is really nothing but “supervision” for the project –the majority of design, construction and interior work is created by outside companies. I do not know who is directly responsible for the ‘All Star’ and ‘Pop Century’ designs.

The Moderate and Value resorts were not created because the guests were “demanding” them directly from Disney, it was the fact that Disney saw a lot of money being spent on International Drive. Money that Disney thought should be theirs. The Company was reacting to the market, there was neither a noble goal of providing affordable accommodations so that more people could afford a “Disney” vacation, nor was there a sinister plot to justify huge price hikes at the “Deluxe” resorts.

Most people view a hotel as only a place to sleep. Themeing and amenities are nice but the typical guest is there to see Disney World, not lobby art. They make their choices appropriately.

Disney had expected the Value resorts to draw people from I-Drive exclusively. What it has found is that a significant number of guests have been “downgrading” from the Deluxe and Moderate resorts. The trade-off is that these guests are returning more often, but the demand for Deluxe rooms has fallen and several planned additional resorts have been cancelled. It’s also interesting to note the expected demand for very high-end rooms never materialized. Even the price difference between the Grand Floridian and the other Deluxe resorts is far less now than it was when the GF first opened. The impact of All Stars on off-property resorts has been very slight. In fact throughout the summer, the decline at WDW resorts was more than twice than the decline at off-property resorts.

As for the look of the All Stars and Pop Century, I always follow one basic law: Imagination is more important than Budget. Had the designers shown the same drive and creativity that the accountants had, I think the end result would have been pleasing to more people.

 

[YoHo]

So We're both wrong?
there was no malaice in the pricing scheme,
But they did want a bigger chunk of the profits.

I can accept that.

Are the Deluxes really seeing a significant loss of guests?

 

[d-r]

Originally posted by JeffJewell
...cause or effect, here.
....
I think this is a point in favor of the plussing and immersive theming; if you don't put that in, you sell to the people who happen to walk past. If you _do_ put it in, you sell to the people who want those extras, and will make it a point to walk past, for the expressed purpose of buying the plussed product.

Jeff

Jeff, I understand what you are saying, but I'm not sure I agree. I just don't know. I think the closest tests of this are Bonfamille's (because it had a more unique menu plus more unique breakfast buffet; Bonfamille's was famous for breakfast, but who is going to go all the way to PO for breakfast?), Maya grill (which is often noted for its innovative menu, but is off the beaten path at Coronado Springs) and Boma / Jiko (AKL is hard to get to).

I think that Artist Point isn't as off the beaten path as any of those four - it is easy access from ft. wilderness and contemporary, plus easy access to MK. Plus, many guests like to visit the WL just to check out the resor (and some of them are grabbing a burger at roaring forks for a picnic lunch, but not many). Honestly, I think that Artist Point may be struggling for that matter - last May it was empty at dinner, and they've canceled the pooh breakfast. I think AKL is similar to WL in that many guests just want to check it out - but I think it is more off the beaten path than WL. Time will tell how Boma and Jiko do (the fact that you can't get a meal at AK helps them).

I'm not sure which is the chicken and which is the egg, but I am really skeptical about how well a sit down would do at all stars - just my opinion of course.

DR

 

[d-r]

Originally posted by DVC-Landbaron
d-r asks:
As usual JJ says it all and much better than I could (I suggest everyone re-read it often). But he left out one point. And for me it is very important. The construction of the All Star, complete with huge, primary colored, cartoonish looking icons, and their acceptance by the general public (more for price than for style) is the direct result of why they think that that hideous hat in the Studios and giant hand/wand in EPOCT is a piece of 'Disney Magic"!! Decorating is becoming acceptable in the Disney experience, rather than theme. Take a good look at the clashes going on in Adventureland lately with the addition of that spinning Aladdin ride. And I find that… well… DISTURBING!!!

I just wanted to say that I get what you two are saying. I'm not sure how I feel about it - in a lot of ways I agree, but I keep coming back to the idea that if the values were as well themed as the deluxes, why would anyone stay at the deluxes, and that reminds me that I'm glad that the values are there so that a.) families who prefer lower cost accomodations can stay on site, and b.) Disney can make money from them. So I'm caught in a circle on this one.

DR

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

DisDuck writes:

I do not find the themeing very immersive at the Contemporary. Except for the Monorail running thru the lobby how does one consider sharp angles, straight lines, lots of glass and chrome Disney.

I think you described a contemporary building perfectly (at least for the '70's). It's not supposed to be 'Disney'. It's supposed to be Disney's version of a Contemporary Resort. And to that end (the monorail alone does it) they succeeded!

In speaking about Coronado Springs:

The buildings are so spread out that unless you are 'on top' of the lobby it is quite a hike to the main building and pool area.

Yep! That's one of those little compromises that enter into a decidedly gray area, in my opinion. But one I am willing to put up with for the sake of 'economy'. I don't think it takes away from the Disney Standards a great deal.

If Disney had not built the Floridian & Caribbean and left the Contemp & Poly as the standard they still could not have kept the pricing 'stable'. Just the rising cost of doing business in the last 20 years would have necessitated price increases in room rates to the point where they are now.

I did not say that prices today would be 'exactly' the same as 1972. But, adjusting for inflation, the could have been comparable. However, Ei$ner & crew decided early on that the pricing structure was all wrong for the their resorts. So the price hicks went into effect, thus raising the price to equal what they thought a 'luxury' resort should charge. This was the first step to the lowering of Disney Standards (building the moderates) and the caste system that we see today (augmented by the Floridian). Before it was one Disney experience. Period! Nothing more, but certainly nothing less. Today we have different Disney experiences for different amounts of dollars!

Now, on another thread, we can, and have, argued the merits of doing this from a guest experience perspective or a business perspective or a combination of both perspectives. But that's not what we're talking about here. I simply offer the history for what it's worth. It happened. It's a fact.

Note: The above was written before AV checked in. And while I am probably AV's biggest fan, on this little tidbit I really have take issue. There may not have been any malice, but there sure was a lot of opportunistic money grabbing practices employed. I found it very strange indeed that back around the time Ei$ner took over, one year had me staying in the Poly (stretching finances a little, I'll admit) and the next year finding that the Poly was way beyond my means but, low and behold(!) the Caribbean Beach fit quite nicely into my plans!! That's one heck of a coincidence!!

In fact, if not for the fact that I bought first at Vistana, I would have bought a DVC.

And if you had you would be immersed in a wonderful world of Disney, very, very reminiscent to the old Disney standard that I'm always on about. It is truly magical!!!!

Finally, ugliness or beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I have seen only the pictures posted here on Pop and first hand viewing of AllStar's.

Ya see Dis. This is where the confusion sets in. We're not talking beauty vs. ugly. We're not talking about personal taste. We're talking about theme, story telling, and doing things right or not doing them at all. We're talking about Disney standards.

JJ:

...I seem to have rolled my post odometer.

Congratulations!!

Is there some kind of cash prize for which I should be checking my mailbox?

No. It means you should get a life!! Just like I should.

But it sure is a fun diversion, ain't it!!!

 

[All Aboard]

The Moderate and Value resorts were not created because the guests were "demanding" them directly from Disney, it was the fact that Disney saw a lot of money being spent on International Drive.

But, AV, that's "market demand." And the fact that WDW fills them every night proves that they were being demanded from Disney. Circular logic, but it takes you back to the same place.

I always follow one basic law: Imagination is more important than Budget.

Blasphemy to this sharp-pencil guy. Hey, can we agree that an "imaganitive budget" is ideal?

As always, thanks for your insight.

 

[JeffJewell]

But it sure is a fun diversion, ain't it

...yeah, it really is.

I thought it would be a good moment to mention how pleased I am with this thread. We've gone 'round in some circles, and we've found some places where some of us simply don't agree, but that's fine. I sometimes find it difficult to express some of the points I've made in this thread simply because some of them are difficult to articulate without my sounding snobbish; or as though I'm out to ruin some families' vacations. That can put people in a defensive mode, one where I never intended to corner them.

We seem to have had good luck all around in disagreeing while continuing to make points, and avoiding the all-too-familiar "is not, you fathead/is too, you yet-fatter-head" posts.

Jeff

PS: d-r, I know what you mean about being caught in a circle. Greg has occasionally displayed a talent for tipping me off my ledge and into that circle; just turn the question from "what went wrong" to "okay, smart guy, how do you suggest we fix it." My best plan for that involves horseplay with a time machine, and CEO shananigans that some people might narrowly view as "murder." Perhaps a less practical plan than I'd like to present, but that's what I've got. At this point, some of the missing Disney pieces I lament are simply irreparable without such violations of the laws of man and physics, so I circle around what should/could be done.

PPS: Jiko is _definitely_ worth the trip to AKL. Perhaps my view of how far off the beaten path lies restaurant X is skewed because I often have a car. Disney transportation between resorts and to Animal Kingdom is abysmal, sez I, and because one of my own favorite aspects of WDW is the choice of fine restaurants, I find the car to be a huge time- and aggravation-saver. I don't think of AKL being much farther than Wilderness Lodge (well, at least from my usual stomping grounds of one of the Boardwalk area hotels). Sometime after December 9th, I'll let you know if Boma's breakfast is worth the hike...

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Blasphemy to this sharp-pencil guy. Hey, can we agree that an "imaganitive budget" is ideal?

Hmmm. In Chicago an "imaganitive budget" is what puts most politicians in jail!

I thought it would be a good moment to mention how pleased I am with this thread.

I couldn't agree more!! I think it's GREAT!!!

 

[All Aboard]

I see we are all at roughly the same level of "Friday productivity" today.

JJ, Boma's dinner is absolutely out of this world. The flavors were so unexpected, man was it outstanding.

Baron, it's not the imaginative budget that gets you in trouble, it's the imaginative financial statements.

JJ, agreed that we have done a fine job of "fat-head" free discussion. I'd chalk it up to the fact that all the folks in this thread are basically now drinking buddies. (although I need to officially lift one or two with the rest of youse.)

 

[airlarry!]

AV: Don't forget the Community Coffee while we are at it.

My family has stayed at the AS twice (for budget reasons) and we always agree that it is great to have the Disney experience instead of the I-drive experience, but at $79-109 a night (which is what it used to be) there must have been much imagination left on the table after they were created. They are just missing those tangibles and intangibles (except for table service that are necessary to be Disneyfied.

Baron: I reread our posts...we actually seem to agree on everything except whether or not table service is a necessity to the Disney experience at a hotel...for your perfect world, it is (and rightly so in a perfect world) in my pragmatic world it isn't.

I said:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and one hotel that has value but still Disney theming.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Baron said:

--NOPE!!! This is where we part company, even with my newly found shades of gray. There is no theme in the Values!!

No, no. I agree with you. I mean that there *should* be Value hotels with Disney theming. I agree that the AS's do not have the same theming as you and I envision. Value in that the price is lower (not low by normal human standards) and the amenities are lesser, but with the same theming, customer-friendly service, complimentary transportation to the parks (but not water or monorail of course) that the other hotels have.

It is perfectly okay for Disney to classify their *hotel* guests into different levels -- not the park guests of course -- just the hotel guests who can be put into different levels of amenities depending on their budget. But that doesn't mean that you don't immerse them in the Disney Experience.

Huge metal boots and tennis balls and yo-yos and jukeboxes do not scream at me "DISNEY." A working water wheel or a Mayan pyramid or a Lighthouse? That is "DISNEY."


PS: The most important thing? Baron, notice that we have converted Yoho to the Dark Side?

 

[All Aboard]

PS: The most important thing? Baron, notice that we have converted Yoho to the Dark Side?

I don't think that you have, but I'll let YoHo answer that himself. The "dark side" of this topic (in my opinion) is that the existence of "value" level accomodations should be "beneath" Disney standards. I think (like me) YoHo disagrees with that contention.

Anyhow Baron knows (and said it himself) that YoHo and I take rides in all 4 cars dependent on the subject.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

No, no. I agree with you. I mean that there *should* be Value hotels with Disney theming.

Ahhh! But now your on that same slippery slope that Disney found itself on when the mere concept of the Values was introduced. How do make the difference obvious to the paying customer? You've already taken away the refined "Disney" amenities. What can you possibly take away other than theme?

PS: The most important thing? Baron, notice that we have converted Yoho to the Dark Side?

Yes! (breathing noise) Check your feeling YoHo… (breathing noise) You know it's true… (breathing noise)… I am your…. (breathing noise) ….

Anyhow Baron knows (and said it himself) that YoHo and I take rides in all 4 cars dependent on the subject.

You guys sure do!! My head spins sometimes with you two!!!