DCA, Future Expansion
Topic: Tom Staggs basically confirms the massive upgrade

#	Author	Message
41	jonvn Tue 9/18/2007 5:32p	Means nothing to me.
42	bean Tue 9/18/2007 8:40p	"disneywatcher Tue 9/18/2007 5:16p >> but I just listened to the webcast with Thomas Staggs << Fair enough. If discussions involving the reporter for Associated Press -- and, for that matter, other members of the media -- were limited to the comments you heard via the webcast, and did not involve additional words spoken before or after the recorded segments, then that answers my question. Which opens up a whole new set of questions, such as the one mentioned by Skellington88, that plans for altering DCA may end up being more modest than assumed." Actually the plans are to invest the amount that has been mentioned. Staggs just did not want to get into details because final plans are still not ready. The article posted is one of many that have been used for the last 6 years to make the resort expansion, specifically DCA in a more worse situation than it is. Just take a look at another thread where the poster actually took the trouble of going through articles by different writers that paint the park as a huge financial dissapointment. Some people take these articles as if they were words inscribed in stone. Many are just editorial comments. Many of those comments actually have been brought out by interviewing web masters in some of these site as if they have the full inside information of what really is going on inside the walls of Burbank
43	DlandDug Tue 9/18/2007 9:15p	>>The original post implies very strongly what is quoted is what he said. It's not.<< What? What?? It's a simple quote from the article. The OP implied N O T H I N G. >>It is editorializing on the part of the paper, and the selective quote here makes it look even more so like what was said. A simple and straight forward reporting of information would actually be useful.<< A collection of direct quotes would not be a reported news article. It would be a transcript. Unless the writer has some sort of history of bias on the given subject, there's no reason to assume or imply that he is simply editorializing. >>DLR used to rely on the Asian market for a heck of a lot of its visitors. This all ended in 1997 and 1998 with the Asian financial crises along with the prolonged economic depression in Japan. The dramatic loss in foreign tourist dollars was one of the key motives behind expanding the Anaheim resort and why the urgency to just get the project executed gained a lot of momentum in 1998.<< While this is an interesting theory, it does not align with known history. Resort expansion was announced at the start of the 90s, long before there was any "dramatic loss in foreign tourist dollars." (Remember "The Disney Decade?") >>That coincides with the comments Pressler made about the place becoming an erroding asset. It sounds like they were actually quite worried the place was going to start circling the drain if something drastic did not happen.<< Since it doesn't coincide with the facts, it's hard to then follow this line of reasoning. Pressler's comments are given great irony when one considers he presided over the greatest period of infrastructure erosion in the history of Disneyland. It was not, however, his fault that this coincided with the Disney Company era that placed an emphasis on profit at the expense of all else. (Not the least being two preventable fatalities.) >>Since it is not quoted material, Skaggs did not say that. The rest is commentary by the article writer. This is what you call basic comprehension of the English language and how it is communicated. I suggest purchasing one of these things we call "books," and learning about how it actually functions.<< Actually, the reporter corectly "paraphrased" (look it up) the words of the subject (Tom Stagg). As a reporter, he then printed this "paraphrase," followed by the words, "Stagg said." It's called a news story, not a "transcript." (Look it up.) >>The article posted is one of many that have been used for the last 6 years to make the resort expansion, specifically DCA in a more worse situation than it is.<< Yes... >>Just take a look at another thread where the poster actually took the trouble of going through articles by different writers that paint the park as a huge financial dissapointment.<< Yes... Some people take these articles as if they were words inscribed in stone. Many are just editorial comments.<< And ALL the articles painting a rosy picture of DCA are just editorial comments. All the puff pieces in the world cannot change the fact that ALL dispassionate financial reportage on DCA has painted a gloomy picture. There is no need to go to the blogs to find this stuff; it's all over the real business journals, as many of us clearly understand. Now, as someone here said, earth is a nice planet, why not try living here? (Or is that a paraphrase? You know-- an editorial comment that, apparently, bears no relation to what the person actually said...)
44	Hans Reinhardt Tue 9/18/2007 10:38p	Bias.
45	jonvn Wed 9/19/2007 1:22a	"What? What?? It's a simple quote from the article. The OP implied N O T H I N G." Don't be obtuse. yes he did. "A collection of direct quotes would not be a reported news article. It would be a transcript." No. What I'm talking about is simple, honest and balanced approach to this, whereby a certain false viewpoint is put forth by selective quotes is NOT done. "Unless the writer has some sort of history of bias on the given subject" Are you joking? Of course he has. And it's so extreme as to be laughable. "Since it doesn't coincide with the facts" Actually, it does seem to coincide with the facts, as the Disney decade never mentioned any such expansion, beyond the vaguest of words, in Anaheim to my knowledge. If you want to go back a few years, Walt Disney used to talk about expanding his park into the parking lot, too. So, I guess that negates anything that was actually said when the place was built, too? Most of what was supposed to happen during the Disney decade never occurred. "Pressler's comments are given great irony when one considers he presided over the greatest period of infrastructure erosion in the history of Disneyland." What he presided over was the biggest expansion in the history of the place. And they did that to make sure it stayed open. "Actually, the reporter corectly "paraphrased" (look it up) the words" Actually, that's utter baloney. He didn't paraphrase them at all. He put a lot more into it than what was said. What actually was said has been quoted here, and it is absolutely nothing like what was in the article. "Now, as someone here said, earth is a nice planet, why not try living here? " I do live on the planet. I actually realize what sorts of things go on in big corporations, and why things turn out the way they do. I don't pretend to be able to read minds, nor ascribe foolish motives to things when plainly reasonable and typical ones suffice. But I do like the attitude, in that a few very basic examples as to why the whole DCA SUCKS arguments are basically worthless gets the people who engage in them to wax wroth. I mean, we are challenging people's cherished religious beliefs here. PRESSLER! is evil, Eisner was incompetent, and anything but totally negative commentary about DCA is being a corporate apologist. These are foolish and stupefyingly dull comments, especially considering that they are continued to be made especially considering how out of tune with basic reality they are. They all sound like sad little versions of 19th century melodrama, playing out with well delineated heroes and villians. It's STOOPID, folks. Flat out stupid and unrealistic. And the continued attempts to cobble together evidence that shows these ideas to be CORRECT, cut out of whole cloth such as the first post in this thread, has been the most incredibly pathetic set of activities I've ever seen in my life. Most people here simply don't know what they are talking about at all, and it seems that most of them have never actually really worked in a company bigger than the Shoe Barn, if anywhere at all. To those of you who wish to view this stuff through the single black and white prism you have been trying to force it into for years now, I am going to suggest once again to try, for just a few moments, to have a moment of clarity and try to understand that things in life just are not like that. For once, just once, try and make the Disney online community seem to have some sense. It is so disheartening when people seem to be incapable of logical thought or critical thinking skills. But I suppose that's more of a general problem in this country these days more than anything.
46	DlandDug Wed 9/19/2007 11:00p	>>Bias.<< Yup. An awful lot directed toward the OP, who simply posted a link and an excerpt, without comment. Yet this was immediately seized on by certain parties.
47	DlandDug Wed 9/19/2007 11:24p	>>The OP implied N O T H I N G." Don't be obtuse. yes he did.<< No, not really. Go back again, look at the first post, and tell me what he implied. It was a link and an excerpt. Period. >>"Unless the writer has some sort of history of bias on the given subject" Are you joking? Of course he has. And it's so extreme as to be laughable.<< The writer to which I refer is the one who wrote the ARTICLE in question. If you cannot figure out the context of a statement, don't bother commenting on it. >>Actually, it does seem to coincide with the facts, as the Disney decade never mentioned any such expansion, beyond the vaguest of words, in Anaheim to my knowledge.<< Then your knowledge is sorely lacking. The Disneyland Resort expansion was a centerpiece of the Disney Decade. I have videos, newspaper articles, and full color brochures offering a fairly detailed look at this. That mauch of this developed differently is neither here nor there. What my statement addressed was the wrong headed statement that Resort expansion was implemented in the late 1990s in response to a decline in Asian tourism. >>If you want to go back a few years, Walt Disney used to talk about expanding his park into the parking lot, too.<< Really? Really?? Care to offer anything to support this? Because I am genuinely interested. >>"Pressler's comments are given great irony when one considers he presided over the greatest period of infrastructure erosion in the history of Disneyland." What he presided over was the biggest expansion in the history of the place...<< Whether the place expanded or not is not the issue at hand. It is a fact that Pressler's era saw a steady decline in the quality of care given to the physical structure of Disneyland. It is well documented that his policies lead directly to this. And that two guest fatalities (Columbia, BTMRR) resulted. This has nothing to do with claiming anyone is "evil." It was a corporate policy-- which I tend to view as morally neutral in most cases. >>He [the writer of the article] didn't paraphrase them [Stagg's words] at all. He put a lot more into it than what was said. What actually was said has been quoted here, and it is absolutely nothing like what was in the article.<< What was quoted was a single statement that may or may not have been made in the meeting. Until an actual transcript is provided, and then compared with what appears to be a fairly sober recounting of what Staggs had to say, we must assume that the writer is providing a fairly accurate summation of what was said. Unless, of course, a clear bias can be established. And this has not been done. >>It is so disheartening when people seem to be incapable of logical thought or critical thinking skills.<< Yes, yes it is. It's just incredible the way people will rush to attack a simple quote from a newspaper article that challenges their notions of how DCA is viewed in the real, actual business community. Namely, that it has been a failure by most any reasonable yardstick. Simple facts, with no bias or hyperbole.
48	DlandDug Thu 9/20/2007 8:43a	Or,as I said in the past: >>I do not regularly come onto the boards to "bash" DCA. But I am only too happy to offer very cogent arguments to explain why it is so bad. Yes, it is easy to dismiss the repeated tired cry of "DCA sucks." But it is quite another thing to dismiss carefully thought out analysis in the same way. DCA is not "perceived" as bad. It is bad. Simply put, it is a bad theme park by almost any imaginable measure. That is not to say that everyone should villify it. Or that there is something wrong with people who like it. (I will tell you a little secret-- I kind of like DCA. Always have. But I know it is bad.) I even have a succinct statement on why DCA is bad. DCA was cynically conceived and poorly executed. If anyone cares, I would be happy to expand on that statement anytime, anywhere. Indeed, I have written a few lengthy posts in the past on that very topic. The most reasonable response I have gotten from the supporters of DCA is, "Well, that's just one man's opinion." Fair enough.<< http://mb.laughingplace.com/Ms gBoard-T-84198-P-9.asp
49	jonvn Thu 9/20/2007 9:39a	"Go back again, look at the first post, and tell me what he implied. It was a link and an excerpt. Period." By quoting the material in the article in the manner by which he did it, he implied Tom Skaggs said the things that was actually said by the writer of the article. Period. "The writer to which I refer is the one who wrote the ARTICLE in question." I realized after I wrote what I said, but this has no edit feature. Be that as it may, the person who did write the OP does have an extreme bias and has a history of posting things that are taken out of context to make Disney look bad. "Then your knowledge is sorely lacking." No, actually, it's not. The only thing that ever really was built for the Disney decade was the Dick Tracy Crimestopper Diamond Double Cross (or whatever it was called) show. There was only a reference to a second gate in Anaheim. DCA was not built as part of the Disney Decade, which ended up chiefly being about hotel construction more than anything. "Really? Really?? Care to offer anything to support this? Because I am genuinely interested." Then I guess your knowledge is sorely lacking. He had spoken of it in interviews. "It is well documented that his policies lead directly to this. " Well documented by whom? Websites? Rumor mills? "Until an actual transcript is provided" Someone already quoted what the guy actually said. "It's just incredible the way people will rush to attack a simple quote from a newspaper article " No. It's an attack on a biased and slanted series of placements of news articles on the board in a manner to promote a false impression of what has been said. "Namely, that it has been a failure by most any reasonable yardstick." And with that, you fall into the bin with people who really don't even understand the words they are saying. I would suggest to people that if they want to play corporate businessman that they at least have some idea of the meaning of the words they are using. In the meantime, I'll simply state that your opinion that the park is "bad" is your opinion. You wish to state it as fact. It's not fact, and you don't actually know dirt about how well or poorly it is doing or by how much. You take information that is plainly wrong and illogical and think it's right. You need to be able to separate out "facts" from "opinions." The two are not the same, as much as you, and many others, think they are. I would suggest, again, that if you wish to speak about business practices that you actually understand what they consist of. Your comment about how DCA was "cynically conceived" is really a very strong indicator that you think that Disney is supposed to operate on pixie dust and not on P&L statements.
50	danyoung Thu 9/20/2007 12:14p	>Whatever, just as long as this park get something most of the people who have been avoiding like the plaque a reason to go in soon!!!!< I'd just like to say that regular brushing will take care of all the plaque. . . Sorry, some you let go by, and some you just have to swing at . . .

All times are Pacific Time (US)

Note: Information on the discussion boards is sometimes based on rumors or incorrect information and should not be assumed true. Messages do not necessarily reflect the opinion of LaughingPlace.com or its editors.

More messages:	1-10	11-20	21-30	31-40	41-50
	51-60	61-70	71-80	81-90	91-100
	101-110	111-120	121-130	131-140	141-150
	151-160	161-170	171-180	181-181

< Previous Topic

Next Topic >

You must be a registered user to post messages.
Click here to register.
After registration you will automatically be brought back to this topic

Theme Park DVDs at
The LaughingPlace Store
The LaughingPlace Store carries theme park DVDs from Jeff Lange and many others featuring the best of Walt Disney World and Disneyland past and present.

What's on
The Latest
Video: World of Color paper animation
THR: Chris Evans Offered Role of Captain America
Catch Special Primetime Handy Manny Episode on Disney Channel 3/20
The Worlds of Fairies and Humans Converge for the First Time in an All-New Magical Adventure
Radio Disney and Nintendo Team Up to Offer Oceans of Fun at Georgia Aquarium
Disneyland Resort Expansion Continues with New Parking Lot Opening
EW: Captain America Possible Starring Roles
Mediaweek: Flash Forward Return to ABC Respectable
Fess Parker who played Davy Crockett and Daniel Boone on TV, dies at 85
StarWars: Star Wars Weekends 2010 guest list

Click here for The Latest