Happy holidays to everyone! In this week’s edition of the mailbag, Mouse Tales author and MousePlanet staff writer David Koenig answers letters generated by his two most recent columns, “Enigmatic Ed” and “Walt Lives.” Merlin Jones writes:
Thanks for your “Ed”-itorial.
Even with all of my corporate cynicism, I was shocked to read in the Orange County Register that Grier had absolutely nothing of substance to contribute in his first interview. He read like a relic of the Eisner Strategic Planning era. Already an ostrich.
How long can he possibly last with all the churning forces at his drawbridge begging for attention?
Thanks, Merlin. I suspect the Register has been pursuing Disney for an interview for four months and took whatever they could get, which as we see was very little.
Unfortunately, based on past history, Senator Ed could have another three years ahead of him, based on past history (Jack Lindquist was president 3 years and a month, Paul Pressler 3 years and a month, Cynthia Harriss 3 years 10 months, and Matt Ouimet 2 years 9 months). Interestingly, one retired, one fled, one was forced out, and one found a better offer. Is it too early to speculate on Ed’s evacuation plan?
Bob writes:
Great post-OC interview crit. I think your observations were right on. I sure hope we aren’t sliding back into a “caretaker” period.
Thanks, Bob. I’m fearful of the same thing, that the park is placed in the hands of an otherwise competent executive with no vision.
Tom Sinsky writes:
Thanks again for always writing so well. You’re closer to George Will than Al Lutz.
I particularly liked the article, except the one line “We may never know.” We’ll know. I hope he’s wise and brave enough to read MousePlanet and Miceage, and I hope he reads your story/editorial! Maybe I’ll mail it to him.
“Was he, like Ouimet, a tireless problem-solver, who recognized the daunting challenges ahead and did everything he could to tackle them head on?
“Or was he, like Cynthia Harriss, a powerless communicator, able to talk and hug her way out of any tight spot, but unwilling to fight for improvements?”
I meant no ill will toward the fellow. I’m just concerned that our park may be in the hands of someone looking ahead to the next promotion, his eyes on trying to please his bosses, rather than being an advocate for Disneyland, in tune with its unique strengths and needs.
Greg writes:
After reading both articles it appears that Mr. Grier really likes to say the word “so.” He says it in nearly half of all the sentences he makes.
Why does this observation matter? The answer depends on how you define the word “so.”
In a corporate environment, where politics and rhetoric are as plentiful as bad coffee and bagel Fridays, interpersonal communications reign supreme as the litmus test for leadership and effectiveness, and therefore language and “text” establish the outlines of a manager’s character and perceived trustworthiness.
“So,” a word that can be used to bridge thoughts or create a thread through subjects, is not a powerful nor effective term for its intended purpose. Better, stronger words include “therefore,” “thus,” “respectively,” and many more descriptive and pointed terms.
Even if it is not great, “so” still could mean what the speaker wishes, unless it is obvious that “so” is being used as a time killer, a vamp, a way to think out the correct phrase before saying something “wrong.” There are better words to use than so—uh and well not included.
Someone in a leadership position that uses the word “so” as often as Mr. Grier faces a challenge from the intellectual groups they must interact with. His relationship with this adverb displays a regretful defensiveness in his character, a need to protect whatever power he has.
But those below Mr. Grier and those that communicate to him horizontally will be happy to know that he is so easy to read. “So what, the guy says so a lot.” They posture. “So do I.”
Bravo! Or should I say, So insightful!
Gary Gramling writes:
After the departure of Matt Ouimet, I too, wondered about the new President of the park. Your article, and my subsequent reading of the article to which it refers, has convinced me of one thing.
We are in for a lot of disappointment at Disneyland. This guy has demonstrated that he is nothing more than a puppet. He is there as a scapegoat to get fired. No more, no less.
Jay Rasulo (or another higher up on the food chain) has a big secret to hide. I predict it won’t come out for a while, but it will come out.
I hope the damage isn’t unfixable.
Thanks so much for pointing out the OC Register article and your always-perceptive comments.
After the interview, I had to recalibrate my expectations for Senator Ed at an even lower level.
Dan Rendant writes:
I’ve enjoyed your last two articles in MP—without Ouimet around I’m a little worried that Disneyland will revert back to the Pressler era—I’m not too confident in the present management team in the Team Disney Building right now, and the new guy from Tokyo Disneyland may have not been the best choice. Hope your Orlando trip was enjoyable (didn’t hear any stories about you being put in “Mickey cuffs”). A Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you and your family.
Thanks, Dan. The “Ramble in Roy’s Footprints” tour in Florida was indeed a surprisingly security-free experience. Very refreshing! Have a wonderful Christmas.
Karin Hubbard-Luster writes:
David, I just finished reading your “Walt Lives” article on MousePlanet. Bravo! Well done, quite poignant and well timed. I agree with everything you said about how the company used to be run and how it’s run now.
Thank you for your insightfulness. If it’s true that some of the higher-ups at Disney read the articles on the Internet about their company, I can only hope they take more than a few seconds to ponder this article and think to themselves how right you are.
As a new DVC member, my husband and I are eager to take advantage of our newfound ownership of part of the magic in Florida. However, living on the West Coast, we don’t anticipate we’ll be able to take time too often to get over to WDW, but when we do we plan to be as vocal there, as you pointed out in your article, as we have been as annual passes at Disneyland.
I’ve never e-mailed regarding an article I read on MousePlanet and I just wanted to take a few minutes to let you know how dead-on I think you were with your article and congratulate you on it and thank you for it.
Thanks, Karin! Our challenge as DVC’ers is to become vocal yet reasonable, without becoming obnoxious. As we’ve seen with Disneyland and AP’ers, we don’t want to become so nit-picky and overbearing that the park just tunes us out.
Patrick Germain writes:
Your 19 December article on Mouseplanet.com titled “Walt Lives” is an outstanding example of Disney fan journalism at its very finest. Thank you for taking the time to write and share your views and experiences. I always enjoy, and greatly appreciate, your articles. The “Walt Lives” article is a diamond among many gems.
Your examples of how the Walt Disney Company has changed since Walt’s death were spot-on. The Roy Disney memo included in your article also very plainly illustrates a change in Disney culture. Roy’s memo on the passing of his brother was amazingly sincere, well written and to the point. This is in stark contrast to today’s Disney culture where executives speak in nonsensical circles while rarely saying anything. Compare Roy’s memo with the recent Orange County Register Ed Grier interview and it’s painfully apparent the new Disney management are little more than spread sheet monitors. When these people speak, they sound like the teacher in Peanuts animated specials. (“Wha-wha-whaaa-whaa-whaa…”)
Great pick up! I’m hoping others will make the connection between Roy’s heart-felt words and Grier’s empty paragraphs. I enjoy your musings on the discussion boards, as well. Keep up the great work!
John writes:
Nice column—excellent reminder of Walt’s philosophies. There is genuinely no reason, other than sheer ego, that they can’t be carried out today—they built a company that grew at a faster, more astounding pace that most Blue Chip companies today; they resulted in innovation at a speed that would dazzle most of today’s organizations; and they created a culture that, to this day, most companies dream of having. Too bad most of those philosophies have been forgotten and/or abandoned.
As much as I appreciate your comments about the Vacation Club, I have to disagree with your hope that it will continue to grow. Twenty years ago, the “cost of entry” to being a diehard Disney fan was $10: It was simply a matter of obtaining a Magic Kingdom Club card and buying a subscription to Disney News. Almost overnight, that morphed into a fee-based “fan” card and a more expensive (now no-longer-in-print) Disney Magazine. Then, that concept gave way to the Disney Visa card, which is hardly a bargain for any of us. It also ultimately became the Disney Vacation Club. Now, if I want to “prove” that I’m a Disney fan, I need to damage my credit score, get a fee-based card I don’t really want, and make a $10,000 to $20,000 investment.
Moreover, a minimum-wage worker (of which there are many in Southern California and Central Florida) needs to work more than a week to be able to afford to take two adults and two children to Disneyland … and that’s just for admission. I don’t believe the basic concept of Disneyland was to make it be an experience only the elite could enjoy.
I’m disappointed at how far Disney has strayed from Walt’s ideals … particularly because, even if he wasn’t the best businessman, Walt Disney was a visionary of the sort that most of today’s CEOs think they are but never, honestly, will even come close to being. When your company was founded by a creative and commercial genius, you’re really rather ill-advised to move along a path too different than the one he set.
I absolutely agree with your main point, but have three minor points of disagreement:
- There is genuinely one reason why Walt’s ideas aren’t carried out today at large companies like Disney: they don’t have someone like Walt in charge.
- I think you’re confusing the Disney Vacation Club with Chase Bank’s Disney Visa Card, the two of which have absolutely nothing to do with each other. DVC is Disney’s timeshare-like pre-paid vacation club. It is expensive (a minimum of about $13,500 to join plus annual dues of $600 and up), which is exactly why at some point Disney is going to have to start paying attention to these people.
- Single-day admission to Disneyland for a family of four is $232. Starting January 1, minimum wage in California increases to $7.50 an hour, at which point a week’s paycheck will not only cover four tickets to Disneyland, but have enough left over for either parking or bus fare. They will have to pack a sack lunch.
Hope to hear from you again,
Michael writes:
Hi there, Dave, always enjoyed your books. I have to rebut this little paragraph, though:
“In some ways, the parallel phenomena of annual passholders and online communities have detracted from the Ideal Disneyland Experience. Side effects include increased crowding and turning visits from annual events into weekly appointments. However, these communities have also been the greatest forces at keeping Disney from becoming complacent. A decade of whining and complaining has helped bring about a renaissance at Disneyland. Once again the park appears to be safe, well maintained, and regularly introducing something new.”
I do appreciate that, unlike some people who insist the magic never fades even though they experience it 20+ times more often than the average visitor, you’re willing to admit that the AP explosion (and thus the online gabfests that followed) have changed the tastes at Disneyland and maybe not always for the better.
However, to say that it has a cumulatively positive effect because of the online watchdogism that keeps the company honest or straightforward, well, to me, that doesn’t make much sense. You know as well as I do that before the AP boom, Disneyland operated fine for decades (aside from that one period where upon the company was threatened with a breakup, quality took a visible dip then.) The fact of the matter is that the decline in quality at Disneyland in the ’90s and the growth of regular AP visits (mostly from Southern Californians) has moved along pretty steadily.
Finally, when the park was the focus of a 50th anniversary campaign that included national television ads and invited guests all across the country to walk through the turnstiles, the park suddenly began looking its best in years. I can tell you that if Mr. and Mrs. John Doe from Omaha traveled all the way out to Anaheim and found Disneyland circa 2002, they’d have felt ripped off.
Curiously, now that the 50th logos are gone and the folks unfamiliar to Disneyland have left the place to its regular visitors, the online forums are once again sounding off with suspicion that the Disney experience is being eroded again.
The people who do the loudest complaining, the ones with blogs and message boards who lament how disappointed Walt would be if he saw the parks today, what have they “given up” in the name of quality over the bottom line? During the Paul Pressler tenure, even the most well known of the online Disneyland upkeep watchdogs kept renewing his AP every time it came up. What message does that send?
This is just my opinion, but it seems the online folks who are crazy about Disneyland, run their AP through the entrance fairly regularly, and like to keep tabs on every little development by collaborating online are just too attached to the place to leave. Visitors and other locals who lack a strong interest in Disney can sense when they’re not getting their money’s worth and leave, while the loyalists will still pony up to “walk where Walt walked,” even when the facades are almost falling apart.
Just a little food for thought. If you have reason to disagree, I’d love to hear it.
Thanks for the well reasoned note. Although we’ll never know for certain exactly how much effect online AP complaints had on the rejuvenation of Disneyland, it would be naive to think they had no effect at all, considering new management corrected (and Roy Disney echoed word-for-word in his SaveDisney campaign) the exact same problems they were targeting. And, in a sense, your argument agrees with mine. I contend that if Disney provides an inferior product, we should not only complain but we should also shop elsewhere. If we continue to buy our APs and DVC memberships and DVDs, then remain silent when quality dips, we’re actually encouraging them to provide lower quality products in the future.
Frank Catalano writes:
I own two of your books and visit MousePlanet when I can (I’ve lived in Seattle the past 25 years, so don’t get to the parks as much as I used to when I was raised in Santa Barbara). I even used to run non-profit bus trips—as a teenager—from the Santa Barbara YMCA to Disneyland. When I later was in broadcasting, I did TV live shots and long-form talk radio interviews with Imagineers from the openings of Star Tours, DCA and various Disneyland and WDW events.
So while I’m not as much of a Disney insider or aficionado as others, I mention this just to point out I have more than a passing interest is Disney’s work.
With that in mind, I couldn’t be more in agreement with your assessment of what has happened to the Disney vision in the 40 years since Walt’s death. The parks, to me, were a kind of living virtual reality where storytelling was woven in and you “read” the story by your path through the parks. The films were likely to always be at least enjoyable and have a timeless quality and depth.
In essence, though Walt was in many ways both a visionary and popularizer, he set a standard that was absolute, not relative. He, and his organization, didn’t seem to excel when they were merely trying to be better than the competition. They had to define the field.
It is telling to me to go back and watch some of the original Disneyland TV shows on DVD—such as the series of shows on space exploration—and see that Disney wasn’t satisfied in just following fads. He wanted to propel trends.
In any event, great essay. I’ve already suggested to several colleagues that they read it. Happy Holidays to you.
Thank you, Frank. I remember some of your earlier work, as well!
