"The Spectacular Failure of the Star Wars Hotel" and more Galactic Starcruiser Discussion

I thought that @RussellMeyer’s coverage on this site was pretty damn comprehensive and fulsome as well. I never had the chance to stay there, and admittedly probably wouldn’t have made it a priority anytime in the near future either only because of its price point, but one thing that I’ve gleaned from several of the reviews that I’ve read is that this experience more than anything else was dependent in most ways on what each guest brought with them to the experience in terms of how much participation they were willing to immerse themselves in. For those just wanting a passive affair that was thrilling and “magical” without engaging they ended up feeling slighted by the whole thing. I applaud Disney’s ambition and as has been noted here on this site before, it’s been documented that certain compromises had to be made due to the conflation of Covid and cost overrun. I can neither argue for or against the experience, having never been, but IIl be quite curious and hopeful to see whether Disney will take the lessons learned from this bold swing and use them as building blocks to make something even better down the line. @Juan: thanks for the heads up on the video. I’ll have to parse out my viewings in about 25 different sessions due to a 3-year old being afoot but I look forward to this review.

To me the biggest problem was the fact that this was not a luxury hotel. The price was always going to be high for what they offered and I think hard core Star Wars fans truly loved it and didn't mind spending the money. That was a very small percentage however and the vast majority of people that could afford it would need a bit more then what they offered.

At that price point the rooms should have been much larger and every amenity a hotel in that price point should have been available. I mean why was there not a pool or a spa?? This was to be a luxury liner anyways so it's not like the size of the rooms needed to be small or needed to have bunk beds to stick to the theme. They could have just as easily had huge comfortable rooms. As a passive Star Wars fan I would have been tempted to try it had the hotel actually been a luxury property with the bonus of having a Star Wars experience. With that huge part missing we took it off our list.

So I went down the rabbit hole and watched the entire video. I do feel like a lot of what I wrote and the essence of my full review of the Galactic Starcruiser does mesh with what this vlog highlights in excruciating detail. As I mentioned quite frequently over my multi-part series on the project, this experience was going to be highly variable and a fear of missing out (FOMO) was going to be a massive drawback for guests, especially when you're paying a premium price. In order to charge what Disney did for the Galactic Starcruiser, they had to hit home runs at an unsustainable and unrealistic rate, and as this video noted, whether it be stubbornness, hubris, or simple financial reality, Disney was unwilling or unable to make significant enough adjustments to the price and/or experience when they realized it wasn't hitting home runs every single time with every single guest.

What I definitely agree with is Disney's overall dramatic change in their approach to customer service. For decades, Disney was all about building goodwill and being best-in-class when it came to customer service, often taking losses for failures that may not have even been the fault of their efforts or staff. Over the past decade, it's been a constant parade of cost-cutting, incremental monetization of formerly free services/activities, and overall decline in quality that has degraded some of the goodwill the company had built up over the years. That's the thing that I think is the ultimate lesson from the Galactic Starcruiser, and one that Disney should take to heart as they move forward. Customer goodwill and loyalty is expensive to buy, but very easy to throw away/lose. It's critical when you're leaning into deep-rooted goodwill to spend thousands of dollars for a 3-day experience where very little is known about. Disney was expecting guests to take a leap of blind faith by leaning into their love of Star Wars (and expectation that a company like Disney could deliver) and would be accepting of something that they knew was not as good as it could have been, and had plenty of criticism (beyond the exorbitant price) to indicate the experience was not living up to expectation. When you have a self-contained revenue center that succeeds or fails solely on its vacancy, it's easy to evaluate where the project stands and what might need to be done to improve returns. While Disney seemed reluctant to do anything with the Starcruiser, I would hope that they see that simply just because people WANT to pay for something doesn't necessarily mean that they like it or that continuing to spend more and more money is not degrading that long-earned goodwill. This should go for EVERYTHING associated with their parks and experiences division from ever-increasing hotel and admission rates, new costs associated with visiting WDW (parking at resorts, Genie+/ILL, and others), and all new experiences that rely on tapping into long-standing goodwill and how much of that precious resource is remaining in their loyal customer base.

FWIW, I still stand by my final assessment that I would have been willing to spend the price to experience the Galactic Starcruiser again. We're actually taking a bit of a splurge on our upcoming trip to Europe by booking a stay at the Hotel Charles Lindbergh at Phantasialand, which from a distance looks a bit like a Steam-punk version of the Starcruiser minus the role playing. That experience will cost nearly $800 for my family of 3 for a single hotel night, and while it's not quite as exorbitant as the Starcruiser, it's more than double the cost of our other hotels during our 2+ weeks across Europe, which includes our stay at Efteling.

It was a very niche concept that would appeal to a very small group of people, and the price was way, way too expensive. I am as big of a Star Wars fan as any. For example I immediately went to the trash cans to see if they had the trash compactor door number on it (they did). I love going through Galaxy’s Edge and spot all the Easter eggs which are many. I have seen all the films countless times; however, I just don’t want to play dress up or be around other adults doing so (great for kids). Further, I could never justify spending that kind of money on such an experience.

I thought they lost their minds when the end product was announced. The parks division really need to focus on improving the guest experience instead of things such as that. Certainly Disney has many expensive niche things to do like diving with the sharks or VIP tours, but the Star Wars hotel was a bridge too far.

I would imagine that some executive said they had a very bad feeling about this. I wonder what happened to that person…

Do we really need a 4 hour video to say expecting people to pay $5,000 to be trapped in a dank, depressing, three-day prison experience was not going to work from a business perspective?

@the_man7: When did you experience the Galactic Starcruiser?

Yeah, if creative efforts are gonna be judged by whether or not they are "going to work from a business perspective" Van Gogh would never had picked up a paint brush.

There should be a bold line drawn between the success of the Halcyon as a business model and as a theatrical production. I give great credibility to those who actually experienced the trip.

As for the people who claim that the voyage was "a dank, depressing, three-day prison experience", I would suggest you read David Cobb's extensive review of the Starcruiser on the Medium site:

https://medium.com/@davecobb/together-as-one-ebc446549cdd

Or better yet, listen to his assessment on the 'Heroes of the Halcyon' podcast.

David is a friend of TPI, and a creative leader in themed entertainment (Men In Black, creative executive that oversaw construction of Warner Bros. World Abu Dhabi, etc.). His assessment of the Halcyon as theater is extraordinary.

As for the four hour video thing (didn't watch it) David noted that: "72,000 people did Starcruiser. In her (Ms. Nicholson's) 'deep dive', she found 68 people who were dissatisfied that she could screenshot. 0.09%"

Oops.

Also a nice writeup from someone who worked there.

https://screenrant.com/star-wars-galactic-starcruiser-hotel-what-everyone-gets-wrong/

@MikeW:
Yes, and I'm sure this puff piece is in no way a paid response to her video. Just like this gizmondo article:
https://gizmodo.com/star-wars-galactic-starcruiser-disney-parks-immersive-1851497909

That also suprisingly showed up shortly after she posted it. What a weird coincidence, that so many sites suddenly had so much positive to say about failed Star Wars Hotel, hm?

Yeah ... A guy with the rocket-scientist handle "Grid" floats a conspiracy theory related to Nicholson's tabloid thumbnail, Disney-bashing, clickbait vlog cliché the day after he registers on TPI.

"What a weird coincidence ..."

Hardly a conspiracy theory, when it happens more than once, and all at the same time on several different pages, and right after she posted her video. Why suddenly all of them rush to Disney defense, a good year after it closed down? Just a random coincidence?

Also in her video, she discusses far more, than just "rawr, atraction bad, me no like". She talks about marketing, logistics, behind the scene stuff and many other things, that probably led to closing it down. And there were a lot of things that she did like about it. She spends a lot of time prising the actors, for example.

And what's wrong with my handle, mister "Creative"? :D

IMO, the problem stemmed from marketing and branding. It should have been branded as a Star Wars Experience with accommodations. Marketing it as a hotel gave the impression the Starcruiser would include all of the perks a normal Disney hotel has like pools. Also, they really should have made costumes mandatory and the experience should have been three days. This would have given the guests more time to acclimate.

As a Star Wars fan, I really wanted to do this. My biggest hang up was that Galaxy's Edge wasn't offered in the way that it should have. Guests of the experience should have been given access the area and Hollywood Studios during non-park operational hours, like Disney's afterhours event. This would have been a great incentive to go.

As for marketing, they invited too many social media accounts. It was overwhelming. Just think of how many of them would have paid to have the experience on their platform, instead they received it for free. And on top of that, everyone of them basically said the same thing, as if scripted. It was difficult to find an honest review. (This was another contributing factor on why I never did it. I kept wondering, "What is Disney hiding?")

@MischiefManaged - That was one of my thought too the fact that they didn't schedule time for guests to be able to go to the park was a huge miss! Ideally after hours without lines would have been amazing but even scheduling it during the day would have been fine. They could have had pre-reserve time slots for guests to skip the line of the rides.

You bring up some good points @MischiefManaged. I think Disney was pretty clear at marketing the Starcruiser as much more than a hotel (they continuously referred to it as a "space cruise"), however, they should have been far more proactive about clarifying misconceptions from the public. Disney was quick to pull marketing material and ads that were rejected or mocked by fans, but they rarely put out new information to correct the narrative during the build-up to the opening of the experience. Honestly, I think a lot of the reasoning behind it was that the experience was a constantly moving target and the marketing side of the shop couldn't put out accurate information because the development/operations side of the shop didn't know exactly what the experience was going to be until just before it opened. Because of the bleeding edge nature of the entire Starcruiser Experience, Disney was play testing just 1-2 months prior to the media previews, and the team was constantly working out bugs and figuring out how to manage everything even during the first few paid experiences. I really think marketing knew as much about the Starcruiser as the fans, which is always a problem when you're trying to develop a campaign for an experience that is as bold and revolutionary as Disney wanted it to be. You saw this in the lack of continuity in the ads and promotional materials and the constant lack of details regarding the experience itself. Guest who booked the Starcruiser for those first 1-2 months of voyages were booking completely on blind faith and love for the IP (and Disney as a whole), not based on the marketing, which is probably why there were a notable number of cancellations in the runup to the Starcruiser's debut. I don't think Disney was necessarily "hiding" anything, but I do think there was a serious amount of uncertainty about what the experience was and how it might evolve over time. Also what might be appealing to some guests might be massive turnoffs to others, so keeping information vague and general ("Live out your Star Wars Story") was Disney's way of trying to cast the widest possible net and allow guests to mold the experience to their personal taste.

As far as the length of the experience, I think the 2 night/3 day model was about right, and the check-in/check-out times were essential to allow the crew to turn the entire facility over for the next set of guests, a process that took 3-4 hours. When you think about it, it's pretty impressive that the crew was able to turn the Starcruiser over so quickly and efficiently. As I noted in my review of the experience, we were exhausted at the end of the media voyage, so trying to add another night to the schedule, would probably exceed the tolerance for most guests, especially those who were not as active in cos-playing aspect of the experience. Guests got a half-day in Galaxy's Edge along with ILLs to the 2 rides (RotR and MFSR), and had access to held-back booking slots for Droid Depot, Savi's, and Oga's if they wanted. I actually liked the integration of the Starcruiser with the park experience, but did think there was some more they could have done to make the stories of the Starcruiser play out on Batuu. I noted on my review about the constant FOMO that the Starcruiser created, and the on-ship activities during the excursion to Batuu was a tricky conundrum to balance.
I noted this in my initial impressions of Galaxy's Edge back in 2019, but I really thought exploring Batuu would be more like going to an intergalactic Renaissance Festival, where guests cos-play around the land with either personal or rented costumes - I actually suggested the possibility of Disney creating a costume rental store at the entrance to the land that would likely generate some serious revenue. However, with the park prohibiting cos-play, it was pretty much a non-starter until the Starcruiser opened. However, instead of allowing guests to rent costumes (or heaven forfend have costumes included as part of the absurdly high cost to book the Starcruiser), Disney leveraged Shop Disney to sell pre-designed costumes in addition to the ones sold in the ship's store. From what I saw during our media voyage and from other personal accounts, it appeared that more than half of the guests participating created their own costumes for the experience (many with multiple outfits). It was cool to see all the creativity from individuals on the Starcruiser, but it did seem like a bit of a slap in the face that guests were expected to spend thousands of dollars for this experience, and then spend a bunch more money to buy costumes (FWIW, we took the thrift store approach, and spent less than $200 on our costumes).

@Francis- Thank you!

@Russell- Wow! Thank you! Also, thanks for giving us some insight to your experience. It was very interesting. I see your point. I agree with you on the costumes. They should have been provided or minimally available to rent. Operationally, I know it would have been a nightmare to have the park open at night after closing on a regular basis, but there was something lacking there. They needed to provide something special for the Starcruiser guests in the park excursion besides ILLs, that didn't clash with on-board activities but integrated Batuu with their mission.

@MischiefManaged - There were activities in Galaxy's Edge for Starcruiser guests beyond the ILLs. When you arrived on Batuu, you were given a special Starcruiser pin to wear so CMs and characters could identify you as not just a regular theme park guest. If you visited Oga's, CMs in the bar had special lines to say to you and provided you with special coasters that had a QR code on them to use within the Datapad app. Now, during peak capacity days, it was reported that even Starcruiser guests were unable to secure reservations in Oga's, so CMs at the host stand would give you the coaster outside the bar since you couldn't physically get in the bar. CMs across the land were also "supposed" to tailor their interaction with Starcruiser guests to incorporate the characters and stories on board when they spotted the pins. Guests were also given special activities to do in the Datapad app that integrated with the stories on the Starcruiser - characters from the ship would "text" you through the app to complete missions (similar to the ones that regular park guests could do) and they would provide information or additional missions to complete. The number of missions you completed would supposedly impact your story path when you got back to the ship later in the day, but from observations and reports those missions and story paths were not always consistent.

I think it would have been nice to get some "exclusive" park time. FWIW, if you got an early excursion to Batuu, you could enter Galaxy's Edge during the 30 minutes reserved for resort guests, so if you worked it right you could ride RotR and/or MFSR while the lines were really short and then use your ILLs later in the day to bypass the longer midday lines (when we did the media voyage, we wanted to ride MMRR, which had opened shortly after our previous WDW visit, so we spent that early morning time to ride the park's newest attraction). The thing about giving Starcruiser guests exclusive park time is that you're talking about somewhere between 300-500 people doing the experience at any given time, so to even give guests the run of just the Galaxy's Edge section of the park, you're talking about needing at least 40-50 CMs (in addition to those already working on the ship) to manage the land, so it just wouldn't be feasible to do that for such a small group of guests who are already getting an exclusive experience on the Starcruiser. Also, the evening of the second night is when the grand finale occurred, which was actually integrated into the second dinner service, so the Starcruiser stories end after that show (which ends @9 PM). Sending guests into the park after the finale would be incredibly anticlimactic and pretty meaningless to the stories on the Starcruiser.

@Russell - I think you highlighted one of the major flaws, Starcruiser guests not being given special perks in Galaxy's Edge. To pay those rates, and not be afforded a guarantee to get into Oga's is crazy to me. I think most people would have expected an "excursion" to the planet surface, and been treated like "cruise guests" when visiting a port of call. I get that the staffing and cost makes that unattainable, but I think most people expected those Perks."

As someone who loves Star Wars, and potentially had the financial wherewithal to be a Starcruiser guest... the value just wasn't there. Add in the disastrously received and widely mocked promo during the Holiday parade special (with the kid from the Goldbergs), it became a hard pass, even for this Star Wars fan. When the "technology" seems the equivalent of a flip phone, when everyone already has iPhones, Disney really had no chance of pleasing fans.

@Russell- Thank you for laying that out for me and explaining how the Batuu visits worked. I'm glad they included activities and ways to make the guests feel special. Too bad they didn't convey that better in their marketing strategies. (Maybe they did and I have forgotten about it.) Yes, 30 minutes prior to park guests would have been nice. Ugh! Now, I wish the hotel was still open.

@MLB - I'm not sure what could have been done to improve the "shore excursion" other than to allow guests to sign up for "tours" that would be akin to plaid vest access to Galaxy's Edge (cost more than $50/person/hour assuming groups of 10), which couldn't be feasible considering they'd need to arrange 30-50 VIP tour guides for a 4-5 hour "tour". I do think Disney took the "cheap" way out by relying on the Datapad to drive the experience and for Galaxy's Edge CMs to fill in the gaps, which has been Disney's M/O with the land as a whole since it opened. That's been the criticism of Galaxy's Edge since it opened, that CMs, getting paid standard wages, were expected to go above and beyond a normal CM role by also doing the double duty of playing a character/actor within the land. This is the biggest conceit of the land that has always rubbed a lot of critics the wrong way, because Galaxy's Edge CMs are not paid any more than other CMs around the resort filling similar roles, but are expected to do more because of their assignment. CMs have been selected to work inside Galaxy's Edge as if it were some type of privilege, but it's not like they're being paid a premium though have the added responsibility of being more or less a character actor while they're working (for far longer consecutive hours than character actors typically work too).

I think the biggest issue was that the Datapad interactions that Starcruiser guests did were not that much different from what normal park guests could do. The only real difference we noticed was that tasks were guided and directed by digital interactions from specific characters on the ship (and perhaps referenced by those live characters when you got back to the ship), not just generic prompts normal park guests see when the use the Datapad inside the land. Beyond that, the gameplay is very similar with puzzles and scanning of QR codes with an occasional ah-ha moment when stories from the Starcruiser interconnect with stories on Batuu, which would only pay off for guests that had visited Galaxy's Edge previously and recognized that the Starcruiser stories were embedded within Galaxy's Edge from Day 1 (like Gaya playing in Oga's and seeing the Halcyon while riding RotR).

As far as reservations, I do think they should have done more to make sure every Starcruiser guest could get into Oga's during the shore excursion, but given the uniqueness of the experience, there was no way for Disney to tell how many guests were going to play out stories in the land. I don't think it would have been that disruptive to block out enough reservations within the bar for every Starcruiser guest at least up until 2 weeks prior to their visit, because all of those unused reservations would have been immediately snapped up once they went unclaimed. I also think Starcruiser guests should have gotten some type of discount or other incentive to visit Savi's and/or Droid Depot - we already had a droid and lightsaber prior to visiting the Starcruiser so had ZERO interest in spending another $200/$100, respectively, again in the hope that Starcruiser guests maybe got something that tied into the Starcruiser stories (maybe if you could have built the personalized hilt sold in the ship's store inside Savi's that would have attracted some buyers at the full price of the experience). Again, I think Disney really underestimated the type of people that wanted to do this experience by trying to make it widely accessible, essentially dumbing it down for the superfans.

I will also note that guests were given lunch while on Batuu (in addition to the lunch served on the ship - if you timed it right, you could do both), which actually included an alcoholic drink (all alcoholic drinks cost extra on the ship), but it wasn't something that was widely advertised and we saw very few guests during the media voyage that were eating in Galaxy's Edge (though many bought drinks in Oga's - to be fair Disney did provide gift cards and on-ship drink vouchers to media for use during the event, I used most of our gift card for dinner at Citrico's the night before), possibly because they were saving their appetite for the on-board food.

Grid: "Hardly a conspiracy theory, when it happens more than once, and all at the same time on several different pages, and right after she posted her video.

Me "Several"? Where?

Grid: "Why suddenly all of them rush to Disney defense ..."

Me: Because her video got a ton of press making it more visible than the other "bash-Disney-clickbait-headlines" on the web.

Grid: Also in her video, she discusses far more, than just "rawr, atraction bad, me no like".

Me: Which has nothing to do with my criticism. Ms. Nicholson chooses a headline for her video that bashes Disney. The reason she chose to do this is because there is a successful YouTube model (and media model) where a headline that attacks Disney generates clicks.

Here is an example of how videos posted by one YouTube channel's attacks on Disney generates clicks on one YT channel:

Disney World Has Gotten Too Expensive (2.8 Million Clicks)
Disney’s Newest Luxury Resort is Not Worth the Money (1.3 Million Clicks)
Disney World’s Awful $970 Hotel Room Review (1.2 Million Clicks)

And then, by contrast, a video from the same channel with an implied positive narrative gets only 183,000 clicks -- Staying in Disney World’s Best Hotel – Honest Review

At this point, this YouTube schtick of bashing on Disney in a video headline and thumbnail to chum the water and attract the attention of the “hate Disney at-all-costs” internet crowd has become a hackneyed, overused model.

Ms. Nicholson has, in the past, published videos with objective headlines, such as 'Star Wars Land: An Excruciatingly In-Depth Prequel'. She could have titled the Galactic Cruiser video the same way 'Star Wars Hotel: An Excruciatingly Examination of Its History'. But she went with the "kick 'em while they're down approach" to rake in traffic. It's a fair point of criticism.

She called it a failure, because it was. If it wasn't, it would still be open and full of guests. There is no lie. And you already have example of two different clickbaity pages, who rushed to Disney defense right after she posted her video. Want more, go look for it. Also it's hardly a schtick, when there's so much wrong with Disney. Not my fault, that you're ok with it and want to defend all of their crappy decissions.

And I'm still waiting to hear what's wrong with my nick.

I think it's a combination of what both TH and Grid have stated. Ultimately, Disney's Galactic Starcruiser was a failure because it lasted for a grand total of 18 months, and it was clear from the timing of the closure that Disney shuttered the experience for financial reasons - not only because Disney likely wasn't making the desired revenue from the project, but allowed them to write the development and asset costs off as a loss in their year-end financial report. However, TH is also dead on in highlighting the sensationalism of Disney stories to generate clicks/attention (and subsequently $$$).

Having actually experienced the Starcruiser and followed its development and eventual closure, I think this video presented a pretty fair criticism of the project and while it was presented in excruciating detail, it really helped viewers who never personally experienced the Starcruiser understand what it was and why it didn't necessarily hit the mark for a lot of guests.

Grid: "She called it a failure, because it was. If it wasn't, it would still be open and full of guests. There is no lie."

Me: Where exactly did I accuse Ms. Nicholson of lying?

There are now unsettling reports of Disney executives being harassed because of their affiliation with the company. To dismiss concerns that the echo chamber that's amplified by the "bash-Disney-for-clicks" "vlogosphere" over on YouTube is naive and dangerous.

Where are those reports? Please provide some links to them, I'm interested to read it. Still, Disney as a company was bashed by various youtubers (and other outlets) for almost a decade now, for how they handle Star Wars and MCU. You're telling me that only NOW they're getting any comeuppance? Nothing happened before? Again, what a convenient timing, that all of this "save poor Disney!" happens right after her video...

Apologies if I don't feel sorry for "poor" millionaires. They will manage, I'm sure.

Grid: "She (Jennifer Nicholson) called it a failure, because it was. If it wasn't, it would still be open and full of guests. There is no lie."

Me: Where exactly did I accuse Ms. Nicholson of lying?

By calling her videos clickbait, you imply that she makes stuff up or exagerates for clicks, i.e. lies.

Now about those reports?

Grid: "By calling her videos clickbait, you imply that she makes stuff up or exagerates for clicks, i.e. lies."

Me: I never implied that "she makes stuff up". I pointed out that in previous videos she used "objective headlines, such as 'Star Wars Land: An Excruciatingly In-Depth Prequel'. I suggest that she added the word failure in the headline because there is a widespread, YouTube business model wherein negative, sensationalist anti-Disney titles/headlines generate clicks. A longstanding TPI writer concurred that this business model exists. But I never directly or indirectly said Ms. Nicholson lied.

Also that's not how you spell "exaggerates".

I see we're entering the semantic stage of this discussion, where you'll be nitpicking about misspelled words (my "sincerest" apologies for English not being my native language), and moving goalposts on what you meant.

And for the third time, I'm waiting for any examples of "Disney executives being harrased". Or will you try to change the subject again, by nitpicking about something irrelevant?

How did I move the goalposts? I never said Jennifer Nicholson lied about anything.

Yup, knew it. You got nothig, and just gonna avoid the topic. Even if I answers your question, you just gonna find something else to nitpick, while avoiding answering mine.

"There are now unsettling reports of Disney executives being harassed because of their affiliation with the company."

Could you provide a link or source to these reports? I'm curious what their status in the company is. Are these executives C-Suite? EVPs? Middle-managers? Is the harassment the standard-issue "eat the rich" discourse that's been driven at all business executives since at least 2015?

@MyHandsDontScan: I won't provide links, or names because I don't want TPI to become a platform that provides a spotlight for this type of activity. I will say that Disney has taken legal action (court filing) earlier this month and that some of the activity has parroted rhetoric found in anti-Disney videos and commentary. Articles related to the situation have been posted on multiple platforms -- some as recently as June 8th.

You're already talking about it, so either prove it or don't bring it up, acting like its common knowledge. Quick google search doesn't find anything anywhere, so I don't know what "platforms" you're talking about.

@Grid: Didn't one of your last posts end with the word "Bye"? Oh wait ... I see where you edited that post after you saw mine. I suppose you wanted to take another swing at me.

You might want to go back through what you've written and take advantage of that edit function. In one of your posts the word "its" should be spelled "it's". In another of your posts, the word "nothig" should be spelled "nothing". Also, in another one of your posts, the word "od" should be spelled "of".

If a person can't manage elementary spelling, I'm not sure that they are qualified to do a proper Google search.

(Chuckle)

Disney continue to overpromise and under deliver with most of their recent investments. It is exacerbated by Disney's marketing and push to get influencers to oversell the product.

I think that is why there is a sense of disappointment among theme park enthusiasts recently. There's also concern from us enthusiasts that love Disney and are sad to see the quality of the experience being eroded for increased profit margins - of course this is how business works but the scale of value vs profit feels like it has tipped way too far towards profit.

What also damages their product is previously "free perks" are now sold at a premium - fastpass / genie+ being a prime example. They recycled concepts from Galaxy's Edge that hit the cutting room floor and repurposed them into the hotel. Which is fine, but they look cheap, not really up to the past Disney standards. So understandably, people are upset that we are now paying more (plus upsells / add-ons) for less. What happened to the plussing of the past?

Galaxy's Edge was meant to be a hive of activity with character actors and droids providing an immersive experience. Instead there are 2 rides, an undersized restaurant that even the premium paying hotel guests couldn't get into and some shops. The interactive / immersive elements look like they have been scaled back to mainly being via an app.

Galactic Starcruiser - was meant to be a fully immersive premium experience. From the coverage I have seen it appears the interactivity was relying on the app where you scan QR codes plus a handful of actors that get mobbed during busy times and are following a generic storyline. The marketing sold this as making your own tailored adventure, overpromising again.

Pandora - The World of Avatar - Love FoP, River Journey feels like another victim of cost cutting. What happened to the promised actors etc?

EPCOT - What happened here? Looks like a victim of cost cutting as a result of covid downturn. Guardians looks good but Journey of Water being overhyped by Disney didn't really help temper expectations.

Tiana's Bayou Adventure - Looks to be genuinely a well done re-theme with multiple Audio Animatronics!

@TH Creative:
Like I said, English is not my native language, and you're pathetic trying to discredit me this way, nitpicking words. And yes, I did edit that out from previous message. I didn't expect someone else to join this discussion, and was hoping you're ready to give some answers, rather than continue to be childish like that. As always, you ignore the parts you have no answers for, and go for low hanging fruit. Oh well. You do you, if this give you some sense of superiority.

Fact is, unless you provide some proof, there are no reports of "Disney execs harassment" anywhere.

So while I agree that the SW hotel was a bad idea, I disagree that the recent investments are not great. At WDW you have Tron, Guardians, Remy, Slinky Dog, Star Wars, and those are all new e-tickets. There are also the re-themes, both new and on the way. they improve on some things? Sure, but those recent additions are amazing. It also seems there is much more to come. The main thing is the negatives out there are most definitely irrelevant. People are still arriving in droves. I also believe the new investments at Universal will just bring more to Disney, so it will be a win-win for all.

"There are now unsettling reports of Disney executives being harassed because of their affiliation with the company."

@TH -- I found a few news articles that, I believe, report on the court filing you mentioned. However, none of them mention anything about Disney executives being harassed. Can you please provide a link, an article, or anything that delves into what is happening? I understand you don't want to add fuel to the fire by highlighting the behavior of malefactors, but in order to call out and condemn the behavior we need to establish that it's occurring.

Again, I believe that harassment is deplorable. But a contingent of users on X, formerly known as Twitter, spamming Bob Iger's account calling for his resignation because he "ruined Star Wars" is not at the same level as "swatting" or flooding a home phone number with death threats, in my opinion. I think we can condemn both sets of behavior, but the former is much more benign, and indeed may come with the territory of being a CEO/public figure.

Having experienced the Starcruiser myself and followed its development and eventual closure, I found this video to offer a pretty fair criticism of the project. Despite being presented in excruciating detail, it effectively helped viewers who never personally experienced the Starcruiser understand what it was and why it didn't necessarily hit the mark for many guests. The thoroughness of the review really paints a clear picture of its strengths and shortcomings. Did you find any specific points in the video that particularly resonated with your own experience?

Once again, I am reminded that delusional Disney apologists will do or say anything to stay in their good graces and refuse to admit a lot of their ideas and execution are garbage.

I just watched a video of shill on YouTube claiming the Epcot expansion, namely the empty dining hall is going to be the answer to Epic Universe. I'd be embarrassed to be on the same team as these people.

"Do we really need a 4 hour video to say expecting people to pay $5,000 to be trapped in a dank, depressing, three-day prison experience was not going to work from a business perspective?" - Nope, just the people using common sense when this was first announced.

I gave it a year, and it's lasted just a bit longer. What was the plan here? To get people to do the Starcruiser, then go to another Disney hotel, and do another 4-5 day stay with park to park tickets after they checked out?

Excellent article filled with valuable information! Keep up the fantastic work and continue sharing insightful updates with everyone. Thank you!

@NB - Yes, I think that's what they were hoping. In fact, when we did the Starcruiser Media Event, Disney put us up in the Grand Floridian the night prior to Starcruiser check in (and was willing to give us an additional night on either end of our overall stay), and gave us up to 2 days of theme park admission (we actually went to Sea World for a day and only popped into MK for a half day after we checked out of the Starcruiser). So, I'm pretty sure the concept was supposed to be supplemental to a longer WDW vacation. I do know that some Starcruiser guests could only afford just the 2-night 3-day experience, but considering the financial means for most people who could afford the Starcruiser, it was not unreasonable to expect them to stay another 3-5 nights in WDW and spend another 3-4 days in the parks.

For me, it wouldn't be so much about the financial strain, but the overall emotional strain created by the Starcruiser. As I noted in my review of the experience, the Starcruiser was exhausting, so I don't think I would want to go from those super intense/emotional 3 days and then jump into touring the rest of the WDW parks without taking some sort of rest. The Starcruiser was draining, and I would have probably needed a solid day at the pool or just chilling around a resort before trying to deal with the chaos and intensity of touring the WDW theme parks. Perhaps that says more about what it takes to visit the WDW theme parks nowadays than it does about the Starcruiser, but that's just how I felt after our experience (granted, we were not only experiencing the Starcruiser, but also trying to document and review our experience as well as collect interviews and comments from WDI).

@Russell - Agreed the financial cost of the Star Cruiser was not its downfall. This experience was always going to be expensive. I've mentioned this before but they would have attracted a lot more people if it had been designed as a true luxury liner with all the amenities expected of a 5 star hotel. We aren't hardcore Star Wars fans but we thought it was a very interesting concept and would have bene willing to try it. We were however not willing to spend that much money and not have a "luxury" experience when it came to room sizes, no pool, no spa, no gym. I think they would have attracted way more people like us who were on the fence had they had those things.