View Poll Results: Is WDW to big for it's own good?

Voters
57. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    9 15.79%
  • No

    36 63.16%
  • Sort Of

    11 19.30%
  • Other (please specify)

    1 1.75%
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 40
  1. #16

    • Inappropriate
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    1,418
    Okay, i don't know if we're talking about the property itsself or how many parks/other things to do... okay i do know we're talking about parks and stuff but i'm going to feign ignorance and talk about the property size. You know what i really like about the size of the property? While dirving in between the parks, whether it be by bus, car, or monorail, there's really nothing to see except really tall trees and miles of swamp. I always think "THIS is Disney World?" I start looking for signs that a park is near, and then suddenly BAM! The park is right in front of you and you're totally immersed in awe! Anyone else ever feel this way? I love it!

    Click the banner! ^^^^
    Follow us on Twitter
    @mickeymutineers and on Facebook
    Mickey Mutineer Podcast now available in the blog and on iTunes!

  2. #17

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    274
    Quote Originally Posted by BigDaddyKyle
    I don't think that WDW could ever be big enough. I really enjoy spending my vacations there, and I think that the bigger it gets, the better it will be!
    Well said.

    WDW is an ideal size and we're lucky to have it!

  3. #18

    • Senior Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,871
    less is bad, too much is never enough

    anywho

    I'd say that while WDW is just the right size for a family on vacation to spend a full week doing whatever they want (and this even accounts for peoples varied tastes I think you can seriously find more then enough to do)

    that said I can't help but think that for Disney the COMPANY they may have built WDW a bit too big then what they're willing to commit too

    at AK we have the problem of a park that is too small and guests don't have enough to do, this wouldn't be a problem but all the money that's going into AK is seriously messing up what should be happening, AK was built while Epcot was needing to undergo a major recreation of about half the park and I'd still say that while MGM has grown alot it's still not were it should be (they have what? three Eticket style ride rides and a tram tour? the rest is basicaly a nice suppliment of shows *I do enjoy Muppetvision and the Honey I shrunk the Kids playground*)

    right now it seems that Disney has three parks that need alot of work to bring up while their ever present anchor park that holds the other three together is dealing with maintenance issues

    it would have seemed wiser to me to finish the Epcot fix and then add a couple more rides to MGM keeping up maintenance on all of them before adding another park

    I dunno it seems unwise that Disney is creating more then what they're willing to spend on keeping up, small additions arn't going to do much and it is going to take a ton of them, I'd rather have seen Epcot or MGM maxed out more

    honestly if WDW wants to keep growing it needs to start formulating a plan that makes it so not all vacations go through the Magic Kingdom so that way they can take pressure off of it enough to keep the maintenance up and guests happy even if everything isn't open all the time

    they need another anchor I think

  4. #19

    • Inappropriate
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    1,418
    Quote Originally Posted by Jspider
    less is bad, too much is never enough

    anywho

    I'd say that while WDW is just the right size for a family on vacation to spend a full week doing whatever they want (and this even accounts for peoples varied tastes I think you can seriously find more then enough to do)

    that said I can't help but think that for Disney the COMPANY they may have built WDW a bit too big then what they're willing to commit too

    at AK we have the problem of a park that is too small and guests don't have enough to do, this wouldn't be a problem but all the money that's going into AK is seriously messing up what should be happening, AK was built while Epcot was needing to undergo a major recreation of about half the park and I'd still say that while MGM has grown alot it's still not were it should be (they have what? three Eticket style ride rides and a tram tour? the rest is basicaly a nice suppliment of shows *I do enjoy Muppetvision and the Honey I shrunk the Kids playground*)

    right now it seems that Disney has three parks that need alot of work to bring up while their ever present anchor park that holds the other three together is dealing with maintenance issues

    it would have seemed wiser to me to finish the Epcot fix and then add a couple more rides to MGM keeping up maintenance on all of them before adding another park

    I dunno it seems unwise that Disney is creating more then what they're willing to spend on keeping up, small additions arn't going to do much and it is going to take a ton of them, I'd rather have seen Epcot or MGM maxed out more

    honestly if WDW wants to keep growing it needs to start formulating a plan that makes it so not all vacations go through the Magic Kingdom so that way they can take pressure off of it enough to keep the maintenance up and guests happy even if everything isn't open all the time

    they need another anchor I think
    You know what's ironic? You're right about Animal Kingdom being too small and not enough to do, hence the reason it closes early. Yet at the same time, Animal Kingdom is the largest park property size-wise. It makes me laugh maniacally!

    Anyway, though i don't think they shuold not have built Animal Kingdom (for it is a great park) i strongly agree that they need to build up/fix up the other three. It still bugs me that at the studios, the two most popular ride are side by side and the crowd just lingers there all day, while the main attraction in the middle of the park gets blocked by a giant sorcerer's hat and is left to slowly die. (Though i really do think the hat looks cool, it would just be better somewhere else in the park.)

    And juts oout of question, what would you propose as another anchor? Your idea here intrigued me.

    Click the banner! ^^^^
    Follow us on Twitter
    @mickeymutineers and on Facebook
    Mickey Mutineer Podcast now available in the blog and on iTunes!

  5. #20

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Within 78 miles of WDW...
    Posts
    8,864
    Quote Originally Posted by Pizzapants
    You know what's ironic? You're right about Animal Kingdom being too small and not enough to do, hence the reason it closes early. Yet at the same time, Animal Kingdom is the largest park property size-wise. It makes me laugh maniacally!

    Anyway, though i don't think they shuold not have built Animal Kingdom (for it is a great park) i strongly agree that they need to build up/fix up the other three. It still bugs me that at the studios, the two most popular ride are side by side and the crowd just lingers there all day, while the main attraction in the middle of the park gets blocked by a giant sorcerer's hat and is left to slowly die. (Though i really do think the hat looks cool, it would just be better somewhere else in the park.)

    And juts oout of question, what would you propose as another anchor? Your idea here intrigued me.

    Reason for that.... they built a substation there near TOT due to if TOT and RNRC went at same time.. MGM would pull an epcot and loose all the power... so it needed their own substation..... otherwise you would ahev high transmission lines running to where RNRC would be...

  6. #21

    • Behind the refurb walls..
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    7,925
    Blog Entries
    1
    The only reason I think it's too big is, they dont spend as much time as they could each day cleaning and making the park beatiful. Trash stays on the ground forever! I think it just may of grown up to fast, so they were'nt ready to deal with it, and have enough janitorial staff etc.






    ~ Here you leave today and enter the world of yesterday tomorrow and fantasy
    ~

  7. #22

    • Senior Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    4,035
    Quote Originally Posted by Pizzapants
    Okay, i don't know if we're talking about the property itsself or how many parks/other things to do... okay i do know we're talking about parks and stuff but i'm going to feign ignorance and talk about the property size. You know what i really like about the size of the property? While dirving in between the parks, whether it be by bus, car, or monorail, there's really nothing to see except really tall trees and miles of swamp. I always think "THIS is Disney World?" I start looking for signs that a park is near, and then suddenly BAM! The park is right in front of you and you're totally immersed in awe! Anyone else ever feel this way? I love it!
    WOW! You are soooo young, soooo young. This is how I USED to feel back when there was only the MK, then EPCOT Center ... waaaay before your time.

    But imagine driving down US 192 because it was the only entrance to WDW. On both sides of the road, after you head over I-4, cows and trees where Celebration and WWoS now stand. You took World Drive in and there was no huge arch, no purple signs or billboards ... nothing but miles of trees everywhere. No stoplights, no intersections, because the other roads that you've grown up with didn't exist.

    Finally, you'd see a VERY small rectangular, brown sign that said simply 'Welcome to Walt Disney World' ... then another that said 'Radio Information Ahead' ... then the voice of WDW Jack Wagner would come on an AM station talking about hours, parades, fireworks, special events, room availability on property etc ... then by about late 1980 you'd see a new monorail spur parallelling you on World Drive and one huge billboard with John Hench's Epcot Center rendering proclaiming 'The Newest Wonder of the World' Opens Oct. 1, 1982 ...

    I could go on and on, but in those days WDW really felt HUGE and MAGICAL and you didn't need anyone from PR and Marketing forcing it down your throat at all because the reality exceeded any PR BS.

    I guess you can see where I'm going with this, but for any of us who grew up with WDW in the 70s and 80s, there's NO way WDW isn't way too big now. Because in overdeveloping the Florida property -- and make no mistake about it, even Bob Iger has said Disney built 3-4 resorts too many -- Disney started lowering quality across the board, the resources were spread too thin. It went from exceeding guest expectations to not really caring about even meeting guests' cynical reduced expectations.

    CMs went from being the pick of the litter of Central Florida to any refuse that walked into the Casting Center and was willing to work with no benefits for $7 an hour. Upkeep fell alarmingly. Things that would be dealt with immediately were left for days, months and sometimes years.

    Disney still talked the talk, but more often than not, couldn't walk the walk.

    What's worse is that parks that once seemed vast and too full to possibly suck in every Disney detail became empty in spots as shops, dining locales and restauants closed and were often left. This destroyed many aspects of the first three Florida parks. You once could spend a few hours in pavillions like World of Motion, Living Seas and Journey Into Imagination but they were allowed to decay and replacements were shorter, less innovative, less magical.

    Basically, as WDW grew bigger, it really got smaller, less special.

    When I hear folks talk about 'parkhopping' to 3-4 parks in one day, I know I'm right even if they don't. It's become about quantity, not quality.

    In the old days, I could spend a day from 9 a.m. until well after midnight at the MK and not get bored, and not simply ride one ride (Space Mountain for example) 10 times because there was so much to see and do and experience and even shop. Now, I can go to the MK, have an ice cream, ride Haunted Mansion (while I wonder if they will EVER fix the audio tracks), watch Wishes and leave. It's not me that's changed, it's Disney. And I do feel a profound sadness over the fact that current management simply has ZERO respect for the company formed by, and the legacy left behind, of Walter E. Disney and Roy O. Disney.

    Keep your timeshare and tacky motel kingdom. Stick those pins where Al Weiss sits, without the backs naturally. Just give me back the Vacation Kingdom of the World.

    Is that too much to ask?

  8. #23

    • Inappropriate
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    1,418
    Yes....er...no? Ahh! I've done this before and I'll do it again, but i'm gonna plead ignorance on this one. Yeah it seems it was a different place back then, but i still like Disney World. I think you still like it, thogh you have complaints... Haha it's late and thta was a lot of reading. But i really like the points yuo make

    Click the banner! ^^^^
    Follow us on Twitter
    @mickeymutineers and on Facebook
    Mickey Mutineer Podcast now available in the blog and on iTunes!

  9. #24

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Orlando
    Posts
    14,940
    >>Basically, as WDW grew bigger, it really got smaller, less special<<

    No truer statement has ever been said about WDW as it is right now. Well said WDW1974. Thank God for DLR and TDR. Great things come in small packages.

  10. #25

    • Behind the refurb walls..
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    7,925
    Blog Entries
    1
    Indeed, they expanded too quickly, and they weren't prepared for it. Now they've let the parks go on rampage, the great movie ride is falling apart, phillarmagics seats are ripped, theres gum on splash that hadn't been cleaned up the night it happened! They aren't taking care of the park like all the others do. GO to any other disneypark, and if you drop something on the ground, it will be gone so fast, I've seen it. It took under 5 mins for it to be gone! (THERE WATCHING US I TELL YOU, THERE WATCHING US)






    ~ Here you leave today and enter the world of yesterday tomorrow and fantasy
    ~

  11. #26

    • Senior Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    4,035
    <<Yes....er...no? Ahh! I've done this before and I'll do it again, but i'm gonna plead ignorance on this one. Yeah it seems it was a different place back then, but i still like Disney World. I think you still like it, thogh you have complaints... Haha it's late and thta was a lot of reading. But i really like the points yuo make>>

    I still love the place. But it is a vERY different place than it was before. A less grand one, a less awe-inpiring one, a less special one, a less magical one.

    That's not the cynic in me talking. That's the realist.

    I just spent a wonderful week in Orlando, mostly at WDW except for a day at Universal Studios. I enjoyed myself a great deal. Only dealt with ONE obnoxious CM the whole time (of course having the parks and resorts 80% staffed by college kids and Hong Kong CMs likely played a role). I saw many improvements. Many things I greatly enjoyed. But it isn't the same place it once was and, ultimately, it is simply too big ... therefore a smaller overall product.

  12. #27

    • Senior Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    4,035
    Quote Originally Posted by TDLFAN
    >>Basically, as WDW grew bigger, it really got smaller, less special<<

    No truer statement has ever been said about WDW as it is right now. Well said WDW1974. Thank God for DLR and TDR. Great things come in small packages.
    I agree. It would be great if Disney stopped its absurd notion that every theme park it builds has to be a destination resort. How about NO third gates in Paris, Tokyo and Anaheim?

  13. #28

    • Junior Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    27
    Wow, How could it ever be too big? I correlate the size of WDW to the richness of the experiences the parks and resorts provide. It could only get too big (for me) if the quality of the experiences diminshed too much.

    With the state of disrepair they are overcoming and the recent crop of rides that don't really excite me, I agree that WDW was getting thin on quality. I'm hoping that the upkeep for the 50th celebration won't end after the celebration is over. I remember one of the magical things about the parks for me was how clean and sparkly new it seemed everytime we went. I guess we'll just have to see about the quality of the new rides and upgrades. Though I haven't experienced it yet, Stiches' conquering of Alien Encounter doesn't sound like the right direction nor does Cinderellabration. On the other hand, the stunt show sounds neat and so does Expedition Everest.

    I love the resorts. The themeing makes them almost of fun as the parks to go to. I could spend a day resort hoping just to soak up the ambience of the themeing.

    The parks should at least keep me busy for a full day ... ideally there should be too much for one day. Right now MK and Epcot are each a full days entertainment for me. MGM and AK are a half a day. In my estimation both MK and Epcot could use a little bit more added while AK and MGM need alot more to keep me there the whole day.

    As to adding another park, I have mixed feelings. Yeah, I would love to see a new Disney park but I'd rather see the other parks "quality" increased before that happens. (Let's get some new countries in Epcot!!!!!)

    So, I guess for me as long as they maintain a certain level and amount of quality experiences then they can make it as big as they want and I won't complain.

    -Gostone

  14. #29

    • Inappropriate
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    1,418
    Hmmm.. i'm going to sum up all my feelings right here: I don't think at all that it is too big. That's why it's called Walt Disney WORLD. But it seems management is too small. There. I think that about covers it.

    Click the banner! ^^^^
    Follow us on Twitter
    @mickeymutineers and on Facebook
    Mickey Mutineer Podcast now available in the blog and on iTunes!

  15. #30

    • Junior Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    27
    PizzaPants: "But it seems management is too small."


    Do you small minded? or short sighted? I'd agree with that but I disagree that there are too few chiefs at Disney. Seems there are too little creative people in high places to me.

    -Gostone

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •