MousePlanet writer Steve Russo has been receiving a lot of mail in response to his column, so we have another batch of letters for him in this week’s mailbag. To start off, the first few letters are in response to his thoughts from June 24 on “Fantasmic! Cutbacks” at Walt Disney World.
Jim P. writes:
My wife and I try to get down to Walt Disney World once a year for a week or so. We’ve stayed at the Wilderness Lodge for many years now, and like you, we traditionally go during the slow time, but we go the week after Labor Day. Over the years I have loved most of the new additions, but I always felt that Fantasmic! was greatly overrated as a complete production, especially for adults.
The waiting to get in, more waiting in your seats, technical delays, and the mass exodus afterwards were always big drawbacks in regards to the package experience. While it’s a good show, I always felt it wasn’t a good enough show to merit everything involved so it’s not something I am going to miss all too much with cutbacks. We prefer to hit Illuminations at Epcot where we’re able to walk around, have a drink and not be mired with the structure of an amphitheater event.
Our first year down there we went to Pleasure Island, and other than dining I never cared for it. The attractions and nightlife “on paper” were fine, but far too much of a “townie” populace. I always felt it would have been a better atmosphere if it were split up amongst the resorts for more structured themed nightlife versus an outdoor public mall as it stands now.
My wife and I are in our mid-30s and have no plans for kids, and have loved Disney’s attention to the needs of our “market segment.” We try and pick up Birmbaum’s “Disney Without Kids” every other year, and, like you, they aren’t fans of Stitch’s Great Escape, whereas we find it entertaining enough that we’ve never agreed with the panning it takes. It’s not great, but it’s a decent enough attraction for before or after Space Ranger Spin. That’s one man’s take.
Our differing opinions of the attractions at Walt Disney World is what, in my opinion, makes the place special – there’s something for just about everyone. I prefer Illuminations as well but I’ve always considered Fantasmic! top notch and it’s always on our must-do list. Like it or not, the cutbacks will affect everyone because some of those 7,000+ people that would have been at Fantasmic! will now be at Epcot clogging up the good spots for Illuminations. They’ve got to be somewhere.
Andrew S. writes:
Like you, I made my first family excursion to Walt Disney World in 1984. My wife and I and our grown sons still go there. The reason why we still go back is that Disney seems willing to provide what we want.
The announcement of the cutback in Fantasmic! performances has left me wondering what business model current Disney executives are using. I have a terrible feeling that they are following the lead of General Motors. GM’s approach to profitability appears to be wholly based in reducing staff, reducing capital assets and producing fewer products. Their competitors succeed by asking customers what they want and then providing it in whatever quantity is demanded. I’ve never been to a Fantasmic! performance that wasn’t at or near maximum attendance. If I were a Disney executive, the first thing I would do is ask customers if they want 80 percent less of the Disney Magic and then react appropriately to the answer.
Obviously, I can’t answer your question and we can only speculate on the reasons behind some of the management decisions. I would suggest that, at their heart, they all have shareholder interest at the forefront. What I hope is that management is not limiting themselves to what seems like a very short-term view of those interests. The foundation of Walt’s company was always providing what the guest wants – the revenue and profits would follow.
Nadine M. writes:
I think your analysis is right on; I don’t think the Fantasmic! cutbacks are only about cost cutting. It could be a first step towards turning Fantasmic! into a revenue generating event, such as a Fantasmic/Mickey Sorcerer party like the Very Merry Christmas with its special shows etc. They could create great demand for it by reducing supply and then make you pay if you want to see it with easy access.
In the meantime we will be there at the end of January and are dreading the crowds for the limited engagements, which seem to be on Mondays and Thursdays; Monday is already a very busy day for Hollywood Studios.
Aaron writes:
Thanks for the article about Fantasmic! Just my thoughts, but I’m guessing the reason we are seeing night time options disappearing from the Disney World lineup is because another evening option will soon be announced.
Disney is notorious for removing options in preparation for a bigger announcement. For example a few years ago when we started seeing menu choices removed from restaurants all over property, weeks later Disney unveiled the Dining Plan. Disney uses this method a lot. Many times pullbacks provide us a glimpse into the future. Is Night Kingdom or some other larger evening entertainment option soon to be announced? Possibly.
Sometimes the answers to Disney’s future can be found in the decisions they’ve made in the past.
You make some excellent points and provide some good conjecture. Is this a prelude to Nightly Kingdom? Only time will tell.
I will say that I’m not crazy about the example you cited. The loss of menu options leading to the Dining Plan is, in my opinion, two negatives! I’m hoping the Fantasmic! cutbacks don’t lead us to a $200 per night hard ticket for nighttime entertainment to replace it.
Bill B. writes:
First let me just say thank you for all of the great pieces that you have contributed to this site. I really enjoy reading your columns. I have a question, and am hoping you can help. Maybe six months or a year ago I remember reading a great piece comparing staying on-site versus off. I was thinking that you wrote it, but maybe I am mistaken.
It contained a great phrase, that I would like to be able to quote, but can’t exactly remember how it read. Something to the effect of staying on-site gives you a Disney vacation while staying off-site gives you a trip to Florida with some Disney thrown in. The column was very articulate in making some comparisons and distinctions, and I was hoping to share it with some family of mine that can’t understand why we pay to stay with Disney instead of renting a condo in Kissimmee.
Thank you for those kind words. Unfortunately, I didn’t write that line. I do have a book (what a shameless plug!) where I devote quite a few words to the on-site versus off-site debate but, I haven’t yet done a column about it. There are some older articles on MousePlanet (one by Brian Bennett) but I couldn’t find that quote anywhere.
I’ll keep looking and let you know if I come up with it. In the meantime, you may have given me an idea for an article…
Scot writes:
I just read your article, “The Interview” (June 13), and enjoyed it very much. I have one thought to add on the subject of Animal Kingdom. I think that something that they got terribly wrong at Animal Kingdom. The walkways are all too narrow, and some of the ride entrances and exits are so overlapped that there are often crushes of people, and extremely congested areas. This situation is worse than any of the other parks, except maybe Disneyland. It seems that the lessons learned at the other parks were forgotten in the planning of this one.
I do agree with your comments about the pathways at Animal Kingdom. I’ve especially noticed that in Camp Minnie Mickey when going to and from the Festival of the Lion King.
Melanie writes:
We’ve been on vacation so this isn’t a very timely email but we loved your article about what you would do if you ran Disney! We are Florida natives and have been going since the opening and often think of what we would change. You have covered many of the ideas we had. A few things we would do:
Extend park hours – especially the water parks. It would be fun to go sliding down the water slides at night and it wouldn’t be so crowded during the day. It would cut down on sun exposure as well.
Change the Soarin’ movie to a Florida based one. We have just as much to show off as California does. It would be so cool and great for Florida tourism.
I’m not going to be popular but I’d limit the Dining Plan a little more, or at least make it so that it’s possible to get a same day reservation at some of the Epcot restaurants. Even on days that aren’t that crowded you can’t seem to get a reservation anywhere and have to eat at the counter areas. That seems to have started with the popularity of the Dining Plan. Maybe they can just set aside some reservations for those that walk up. It seems a paying customer would be better than a no-show reservation.
Give more variety of kids’ meals. It always seems to be a choice between chilled chicken or a hamburger. If they expand the selection, people will buy them.
I could go on, but you did such an excellent job it would be redundant. Keep up the great work!
Thanks for those kind words. We’ve all heard the rumors about Soarin’ and how it could easily be changed for new films. It would be great to see some different ones but, I’m a huge fan of Soarin’ regardless. I also agree with your comments on the Dining Plan.
