|   home
News & Updates   |   Articles   |   Our Case Against Management   |   Goals of this Site   |   What Guests are missing out on   |   Disney's California Adventure VS Tokyo Disney Sea   |   Form letters to Management   |   Are Disney Parks Safe Anymore?   |   Disney Sea   |   Suggestions and Comments   |   The Declining Quality of Disney Transportation, and What it Says About the Company Overall   |   Links   |   Legal Stuff   |   Comments
Our Case Against Management


                                                      

Notice any contrast between the quality of the attractions on the top when compared to the quality of the attractions on the bottom?  All of them were built during the Eisner regime.  The difference between the two groups of attractions?
Money!!!!
Which attractions are classics that will endure for decades?  Which ones will be scrapped when guests grow tired of them?  What Eisner and Pressler fail to realize is that a quality 100 million dollar attraction (each of the attractions on the top cost between 100 and 150 million ) is, in the long run, cheaper than having to replace mediocre ones every 7 to 10 years (Journey Into Your Imagination, now in the planning stages of a rehab after less than one year, and Kali River Rapids, already having trouble with it's "off the shelf" rafts after little over a year, cost less than 50 million each, and the entire new Tomorrowland, originally budgeted at about 200 million, barely cost half that.  Rumors are already circulating that the main addition of that project, the poorly received Rocket Rods, will soon be closed because of poor initial design based on time and budget constraints).