I am so getting sick of Al using the hack-writer device of a parenthetical pejorative in his updates. Like these examples from this week:

"Originally, California Screamin' (the big coaster) was planned to be closed for ten weeks..."

Or this:

"Over at DCA, the refurbishment calendar for 2003 is still in a bit of limbo. The Maliboomer (Space Shot type ride) will be closed the day after Labor Day..."

Go ahead, look through the past DIG updates. He does this without fail for nearly every ride he can at DCA.

It's petty, and should be beneath him.

By the way, Al has consistently failed to mention that all of the theme parks in Southern California are doing quite badly this summer. Six Flags, Universal, and Knotts are all seeing numbers far below their norms. No, he'd rather just single out DCA to "prove" what a colossal failure it is - as if it existed in a vacuum and was not susceptible to the trends of the entire theme park industry.

Originally posted by SweenyTodd



By the way, Al has consistently failed to mention that all of the theme parks in Southern California are doing quite badly this summer. Six Flags, Universal, and Knotts are all seeing numbers far below their norms. No, he'd rather just single out DCA to "prove" what a colossal failure it is - as if it existed in a vacuum and was not susceptible to the trends of the entire theme park industry.



EXCUSE ME!!!!!! Maybe you should check the information before you put your foot in your mouth, all the major companies just had official financial reports and information, and the numbers are UP!!!

http://mousepad.mouseplanet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8853

Universal Studios Hollywood attendance is up!!

Knott's Berry Farm attendance and in-park spending is up!!

Six Flags Magic Mountain's attendance and in-park guest spending is up!!

So how can they be seeing "numbers far below their norms", once again, the numbers i mentioned are from official company sources (the actual quarterly reports, or the conference call with financial advisors given by the company related to the quartely reports).

We also know that one of the reason that Disney's stock did a dive after their quarterly report came out was due to the conference call, where the Disney folks stated that the attendance and in-park spending numbers are down, and they projected the trend did not look good for the next quarter.

So even after all the special DCA promotions, including much Local TV exposure regarding the "Buy a discountted Adult ticket, and get a Child's free", the Rockin' the Bay Music Series, and other promotions to help bring in additional locals, DCA is the park with the worst drop off in attendance!!!!

So if the trend of the other parks is to have their attendance go UP, it looks like DCA is bucking the trend in the Southern California Theme Parks.....so I guess, to use SweenyTodd's words, that DCA is "doing quite badly this summer. "

I won't deny that Al does what you say, but you have used to terrible examples. I fail to see how calling California Screamin' "the big coaster" is derogatory.

Especially since I've heard several more casual Disney fans confuse the names of California Screamin' and Soaring Over California.

I also don't think that the description of Maliboomer was necessarily derogatory, but I'll concede that it probably wasn't said with fondness.


One thing we've tried to impress on our writers is to remember that not every reader is a three-times-a-month visitor to Disneyland. Especially with DCA being new, the familiarity with the rides may not be there.

I don't know where you're getting your number Darkbeer, but each of the local CA station did a report last week on how Summer numbers are down, down, down for the entire region. There's no international business to speak of as global travel has all but dried up.

Perhaps the numbers are up from the spring quarter, but compared to the last few summers, the numbers are decidely down.

Originally posted by SweenyTodd
I am so getting sick of Al using the hack-writer device of a parenthetical pejorative in his updates. Like these examples from this week:

"Originally, California Screamin' (the big coaster) was planned to be closed for ten weeks..."

Or this:

"Over at DCA, the refurbishment calendar for 2003 is still in a bit of limbo. The Maliboomer (Space Shot type ride) will be closed the day after Labor Day..."

Go ahead, look through the past DIG updates. He does this without fail for nearly every ride he can at DCA.

It's petty, and should be beneath him.

Uhhhh....I think Al has a very snide and sometimes petty attitude in his columns. Its gotten old for me so I don't read them much anymore.

But.... I can't really see how "the big coaster" or "space shot type ride" is a pejorative. Also, I went back (as Sweeny Todd suggested) and looked at old updates. I found several where he refers to California Screaming and other DCA rides without any of the parentheticals. This update (http://www.mouseplanet.com/archive/update44.htm) is one example.

Again, if someone feels Al is snide and petty in some of what he writes, no argument here. But this doesn't seem like much of a way to make a case for it.

Knott's is up 1% percent in both attendance and in-park guest spending this July versus last July, per Knott's senior management on the quarterly report conference call.

From the second quarter report (ending June 30th) of Vivendi Universal.... "Recreation reported.... as lower per capita spending more than offset higher attendance at Universal Studios Hollywood as well as lower management fees from Universal Studios Japan." So this would include the beginning of the Summer schedule (June).

The Six Flags number of SFMM being up 3% over last season is also taken from the financial anaylist conference call.

Once again, these are all "official" numbers being supplied by the official company representatives, and the statements are carefully regulated and monitored by the SEC under the Forward Looking Statement regulations.

These numbers are not taking into consideration Travel, just park attendance, the news stories you saw (too bad they wern't in print, so we could see exactly what they were saying) maybe was mentioning that Airline Flights and Hotel bookings are down (which I don't doubt). But Universal and Knott's have done some good local marketing, and I wouldn't doubt that the mix, especially in Universal's case was more locals than before (which would explain the lower in-park spending, since locals stay less, and will eat outside the park befroe and after their visit, and buy less merchandise). DCA's Marketing campaign hasn't worked as well, even though they directly competed with Knott's and Universal in the local TV market.

So SweenyTodd, before you go say things like "... but compared to the last few summers, the numbers are decidely down." Please do some research and be able to back up your numbers, because the numbers are up at most theme parks in the nation.

The "destination" parks such as the WDW resort are down, but that is due to people choosing not to travel, and visit places within driving range, which helps the non-Disney parks pick up guests that used to fly to Orlando. Sea World in Orlando's newest addition will be focused mainly to bring in the local guests, instead of the international traveler. Also, Disney needs to keep that in mind as they keep expanding their parks overseas, there will be less visitors who will feel the need to travel to Orlando or Anaheim, when they can go to Hong Kong, Paris or Toyko instead....

I agree that while Al can make derogatory remarks in parentheticals, such was not the case in the examples cited. Many people don't necessarily know what each ride is called, whereas it's hard to miss which ride is "the big coaster", and "the Space-shot type" ride is fairly descriptive as well.

Come on, gang. You know as well as I that when all says "Mullholland Madness (Mad Mouse)" or "Sun (Ferris) Wheel" or "California Screamin (Roller Coaster)" or wheatver, he is NOT trying to be helpful or descriptive. What he's saying is "IT'S A CARNIVAL RIDE AND CHEAP AND HORRIBLE AND I HATE IT AND SO SHOULD YOU BECAUSE DCA IS THE WORST THING EVER CREATED BY ANYONE EVER."

A lot to infer from a little parenthetical? Maybe. But considering Al's track record of blind DCA bashing and slanted reporting, it's not to far from the truth. And you all know it.

And the argument that he's being descriptive to help those who have never been to DCA doesn't wash one bit. Lots of people have never been to Disneyland, and don't really know what the rides are. But I've never seen the following:

Space Mountain (Roller Coaster in the Dark)
Splash Mountain (Flume)
Snow White's Scary Adventure (Carnival Dark Ride with Disney Theming)
Peter Pan's Flight (Carnival Dark Ride with Disney Theming)
Pinocchio's Daring Journey (Carnival Dark Ride with Disney Theming)

Get the picture?

While I am grateful for Al's refurbishment notices, I stopped believing a long time ago that he is trying to be "helpful" or "provide a service." He's an opinionated gossip columnist and rumor monger, and not much more. Back in the nineteenth century they called his kind of reporting "yellow journalism." It wasn't meant to be a compliment.

Originally posted by SweenyTodd
Come on, gang. You know as well as I that when all says "Mullholland Madness (Mad Mouse)" or "Sun (Ferris) Wheel" or "California Screamin (Roller Coaster)" or wheatver, he is NOT trying to be helpful or descriptive. What he's saying is "IT'S A CARNIVAL RIDE AND CHEAP AND HORRIBLE AND I HATE IT AND SO SHOULD YOU BECAUSE DCA IS THE WORST THING EVER CREATED BY ANYONE EVER."

A lot to infer from a little parenthetical? Maybe. But considering Al's track record of blind DCA bashing and slanted reporting, it's not to far from the truth. And you all know it.

I would appreciate it if you'd stop telling me what I supposedly "know". If you want to leap to conclusions based on your personal biases, you are free to do so. You are not, however, entitled to drag along any of us who don't happen to agree with you.

You read the message one way. Most of us didn't read it that way. We disagree.

It's Tuesday, Al must have a new column. Here come the inevitable critiques.

From comments about Al's writing style:

Originally posted by SweenyTodd
I am so getting sick of Al using the hack-writer device of a parenthetical pejorative in his updates. Like these examples from this week:

"Originally, California Screamin' (the big coaster) was planned to be closed for ten weeks..."

Or this:

"Over at DCA, the refurbishment calendar for 2003 is still in a bit of limbo. The Maliboomer (Space Shot type ride) will be closed the day after Labor Day..."

Go ahead, look through the past DIG updates. He does this without fail for nearly every ride he can at DCA.

It's petty, and should be beneath him.

To this name calling:

While I am grateful for Al's refurbishment notices, I stopped believing a long time ago that he is trying to be "helpful" or "provide a service." He's an opinionated gossip columnist and rumor monger, and not much more. Back in the nineteenth century they called his kind of reporting "yellow journalism." It wasn't meant to be a compliment.

I've commented before about these types of predictable "Al is bad" posts and I'll say it agin. If you don't like the writing, don't read it. If you don't think he's trying to provide a service, maybe he isn't. Al has a column in which he gives information, commentary and the truth as he sees it. There are plenty of other sites that do the same things with different end results. You take it for what it is, or leave it be.

I guess I wonder what the point of never-ending Al critique threads is. Just what is the motivation? I think it is interesting that he stirs up so much passion on this and other sites. The power of the pen is indeed strong.

The motivation for my criticism of Al can be summed up in one flippant question: "Who does this guy think he is?"

But before I elaborate, let me explain where I'm coming from. I've spent a good chunk of my adult life "Critiquing the Critics" as it were. Let me ask you: Does it ever bother you that someone who reviews music for Rolling Stone may never have held a musical instrument in their hands? Or that someone who reviews movies has never even attempted to write a screenplay (never mind direct or produce)? In my opinion, reviews should be written by someone who knows of what they speak from a participatory point of view - not just of the view of a "fan" or a "consumer." Again, this is MY OPINON (to which I'm often told I am entitled). I feel the opinons of those who have experience in production is far more valid than those who are just consuming it.

So, with that in mind, I often look at Al's columns with an attitude of "Who does this guy think he is?" Has Al ever managed a theme park? Has he ever designed a ride? Has he ever been involved with guest services of a major hotel from a management perspective? Near as my research can tell me, Al's only brush with the entertainment business has been in some vague past in the "Music Industry." Al wields a lot of power in the Disney Fan Community (probably too much power). With that power comes a responsibility towards objectivism and to know of what he speaks.

This is where my harshness towards Al is concerned. There's an arrogance to his reporting - an undeserved arrogance.

Originally posted by cstephens
I agree that while Al can make derogatory remarks in parentheticals, such was not the case in the examples cited. Many people don't necessarily know what each ride is called, whereas it's hard to miss which ride is "the big coaster", and "the Space-shot type" ride is fairly descriptive as well.
I agree with cstephens. I think they are there for clarity. Maybe he got a suggestion or something about readers being confused about his references. (???)

In my last post about Al, I was wondering why he didn't respond to reader mail that often or why he didn't read MousePad. I think I get it now... I would rather him do his investigating and reporting rather than take the time to read some of the really off-color and insulting comments people have said about him here on MP.

I do my fair share of ranting. But not before putting myself in someone else's shoes first... Maybe people (and this is not directed at anyone) should take more time to do the same w/ Al. He's crunchy, but he means well. I am positive that he is as much in love with the park(s) as we all are...

:)

ST, just a few things inresponse.

Regarding a critic. I worked in the art/museum world for over 10 years and knew may of the artl critiques. Most of them were not artists by trade or hobby. However, they were knowledgable about the PROCESS of making art. Their job as a critic was to look at the results and see how effective they were. The opinion of an informed outsider is often the most objective and of the most value. I think that Al fits that description. It is hard being objective when you are too close to things, you oftentimes can't see the forest for the trees.


Al wields a lot of power in the Disney Fan Community (probably too much power).
Al has a much power as the fan community and yourself are willing to give him.

The motivation for my criticism of Al can be summed up in one flippant question: "Who does this guy think he is?"

The same question could be asked of you, or me for that matter.

Originally posted by SweenyTodd
I am so getting sick of Al using the hack-writer device of a parenthetical pejorative in his updates. Like these examples from this week:

"Originally, California Screamin' (the big coaster) was planned to be closed for ten weeks..."

Or this:

"Over at DCA, the refurbishment calendar for 2003 is still in a bit of limbo. The Maliboomer (Space Shot type ride) will be closed the day after Labor Day..."

Go ahead, look through the past DIG updates. He does this without fail for nearly every ride he can at DCA.

It's petty, and should be beneath him.

By the way, Al has consistently failed to mention that all of the theme parks in Southern California are doing quite badly this summer. Six Flags, Universal, and Knotts are all seeing numbers far below their norms. No, he'd rather just single out DCA to "prove" what a colossal failure it is - as if it existed in a vacuum and was not susceptible to the trends of the entire theme park industry.

Oh usre, they ARE (other South Califonian Parks) doing horrible, but . . . they look like they are booming successes compared to DCA (that park in the parking lot). And that's the truth (not a lie).:p

Originally posted by SweenyTodd
But before I elaborate, let me explain where I'm coming from. I've spent a good chunk of my adult life "Critiquing the Critics" as it were. Let me ask you: Does it ever bother you that someone who reviews music for Rolling Stone may never have held a musical instrument in their hands? Or that someone who reviews movies has never even attempted to write a screenplay (never mind direct or produce)?

No. No. and No.




In my opinion, reviews should be written by someone who knows of what they speak from a participatory point of view - not just of the view of a "fan" or a "consumer." Again, this is MY OPINON (to which I'm often told I am entitled). I feel the opinons of those who have experience in production is far more valid than those who are just consuming it.


The product is made for the consumer - not for the other people in "production". If the consumer likes it, does the artist care that his buddy in production doesn't? Does the guy in production know more about it? Perhaps? Does it matter? Not really. People like what they like.


Do I have to have worked in a restaraunt to know whether or not I like the food and the service there?

Do I have to have to be an artist to know what art I like and what I don't?

Do I have to play an instrument to enjoy some music and not enjoy other kinds of music?

Do I have to be gangster or have been the victim of gang violence to know that gangs are bad?

Do you have to have to be a webmaster to know what websites you like and what you don't?

Do you have to be a journalist to know if you enjoy Al's style and content of writing?

OF COURSE NOT.


You're a critic. I'm a critic. Everyone's a critic.

You are absolutely correct, Sweeney Todd.

My whole problem with Al has always been that MP projects him as a public service for people that want information about Disneyland, to make their trip better or just to keep up to date on Disneyland, since we can't all live within a few miles of the park. That's why Al and MP still call his column "Disneyland Information Guide," as if it is some sort of "just the facts" pamphlet that's handed out.

Al is an opinionated columnist. He is not there to present news in an impartial manner. No one figured out the DIG not only meant Dland Info. Guide, but really a dig on DL and DCA!!

So, MousePlanet, it's simple. Change the name of the column. Give it a name that truly means what it's called. Naming a column the "Disneyland Information Guide" and then putting in a small blurb to the right that Al will be opining on the very subjects he's covering isn't very helpful. I think that is where alot of the hostility is coming from.

Originally posted by club33az
You are absolutely correct, Sweeney Todd.

So, MousePlanet, it's simple. Change the name of the column. Give it a name that truly means what it's called. Naming a column the "Disneyland Information Guide" and then putting in a small blurb to the right that Al will be opining on the very subjects he's covering isn't very helpful. I think that is where alot of the hostility is coming from.

Thank you, thank you, thank you. That's been my point in the past. It's not "Information." It's "Some information and lots of opinion." And the little disclaimer that there's "a bit of editorializing on my part" is a joke. It's a lot more than a bit. It's his projections of what will succeed and what will fail. It's the entire tone of the column from the parenthesis that triggered this thread to "Buy-bye Paradise Pier." Can you honestly tell me you can't hear a snickering tone there? There's an attitude that belies any level of impartiality. Want to read something impartial? Read any AAA travel guide. That's what a real "info guide" is. Putting Al in the same category is dishonest. Rename the column to something more truthful and most of us "Al Bashers" might just be okay.

How about renaiming the column ALDIAGACA? "Al Lutz's Disney Information And Gripes About California Adventure." Okay, that's silly. But how about DRG "Disneyland Resort Gossip?" Or just DOG (Disneyland Opinion Guide). Or even something clever like "An Ear to the Ground?" (Get it? Ears? Mickey has big ears... get it?) Ahh... I can't think of anything right now.

Hey Mouseplanet - how about a "Rename Al's Column" contest. Winner gets a T-shirt or something.

Originally posted by SweenyTodd
Winner gets a T-shirt or something.

Or a choir robe.

AVP

Originally posted by club33az
So, MousePlanet, it's simple. Change the name of the column. Give it a name that truly means what it's called. Naming a column the "Disneyland Information Guide" and then putting in a small blurb to the right that Al will be opining on the very subjects he's covering isn't very helpful. I think that is where alot of the hostility is coming from.

Actually, if you click on the Disneyland Information Guide, you'll end up here. (http://www.mouseplanet.com/al/docs/) This page has quite a bit of stuff on it, not just Al's column. The column that he writes is actually called "Al's DIG Update." Then if you scroll down, you get older columns and links to still other "updates." Then, finally, you get the table of contents of what contains (primarily) information about Disneyland. Hours, attractions, shows, etc.

Therefore, the column that Al writes is only part of the Disneyland Information Guide, not the whole thing. And it seems like Disneyland Information Guide is a pretty fair name for the whole thing. Since "Al's DIG Update" is not very descriptive, you can read the explanation/note on the right of the update and I think it pretty fairly represents what the update columns contain.

And let's face it. Most people's "hostility" comes from the fact that they don't like Al's negativity and sarcasm or they think he lies or gives grossly inaccurate information in his updates. Changing the name isn't gonna change that.

Excuse me, EandC, but doesn't "Al's DIG Update" mean "Al's Disneyland Information Guide Update"? And I was only talking about the update section. Fine. Call the entire thing "DIG" as a whole if you want, but his "updates" are anything but. It's 10% REAL information, and 90% Al-bitching on why something won't work. That's not an update. That's ranting. And that's fine. I absolutely agree that there is a time and place and, in Disneylands current state, a need to have an opinionated column.

But call it what it is. To use a thought Sweeney Todd had, don't make it look like its a AAA info guide then lay into DL and DCA about how wrong and stupid they are.

You know, it's just the name of one section of one column on a website...

You're right, cstephens, so it shouldn't be a problem to change.
:)

Shouldn't the fact that it's called "Al's DIG Update" be a hint that it's his opinion? I mean, if it were a number of sources contributing things, it would be different -- The DIG, perhaps? But seeing as it's got one name ahead of the title, that implies -- to me, anyway -- that it's an update that is written as an editorial, and not as an impartial witness.

Anyway, I find that yes, Al does rant and rave and go on negative spins all the time, but I figure it's his column to do so as he wishes. And whether or not the information is 100% correct, he reports on what has been passed on to him, right? Which could be classified as an update on the information he receives on a regular basis, right? Sounds like "Al's DIG Update" is an okay name to me.

I'm not saying I agree with everything he says all the time, but I know what I'm in for when I read his column. And I suspect for someone who hasn't read the column, they pretty much know what they're in for after one reading.

Originally posted by Cooie
I'm not saying I agree with everything he says all the time, but I know what I'm in for when I read his column. And I suspect for someone who hasn't read the column, they pretty much know what they're in for after one reading.

I hope you're right about that. But not everyone "gets" that Al is just a cranky columnist. Many see him as an "unnofficial insider voice."

I know I was surprised at how much fun *I* had at DCA the first time. I'd read Al's columns for months, expecting some kind of miserable experience. Some time around 1:00 the day I went I started saying "Hey, this ain't that bad." Then I went on Soarin' and California Screaming, etc. By the end of the day, I said to myself "Well, Al Lutz's credibility is crap. This place is actually pretty good." $45 worth good? No. Maybe $30. But certainly not the ungodly and "hostile" environment he describes.

By the way - "hostile" is his word from the most recent DIG, describing the theme of the park. Hostile. Like it was a mugger hanging out in an alley ready to smash in your brains and take your money. Hostile. He actually used the word hostile to decribe a THEME. And people wonder why I think his opinion is worth less than a toenail full of sand.

Originally posted by SweenyTodd
I hope you're right about that. But not everyone "gets" that Al is just a cranky columnist. Many see him as an "unnofficial insider voice."

SweenyTodd, you're fine as long as you're stating your own opinion. As soon as you start speaking for others, ("not everyone gets..." and "Many see him...") you're overstepping the bounds of posting ettiquette. You don't have knowledge of what "not everyone gets" or what "many see".

The line to watch for is when you stop speaking your opinions or observations and start using statements that appear to be factual.

I would rephrase your statements as "I don't think everyone gets..." and "I think many see him...".

Please try to speak for yourself and let others do the same. Thank you.

I know I was surprised at how much fun *I* had at DCA the first time. I'd read Al's columns for months, expecting some kind of miserable experience. Some time around 1:00 the day I went I started saying "Hey, this ain't that bad." Then I went on Soarin' and California Screaming, etc. By the end of the day, I said to myself "Well, Al Lutz's credibility is crap. This place is actually pretty good." $45 worth good? No. Maybe $30. But certainly not the ungodly and "hostile" environment he describes.

By the way - "hostile" is his word from the most recent DIG, describing the theme of the park. Hostile. Like it was a mugger hanging out in an alley ready to smash in your brains and take your money. Hostile. He actually used the word hostile to decribe a THEME. And people wonder why I think his opinion is worth less than a toenail full of sand.

I note that your last two paragraphs here are just fine, as you are stating your own experiences and opinions.