Are Annual Passholders Evil?

August 3, 2005

In a recent Jim Hill Media article, "Are annual passholders good or bad for the Disney theme parks?" author and suspected Six Flags stockholder Mark Eades made a number of points about, of all things, whether annual passholders are good or bad for Disney theme parks. We at DisneyLies.com were deeply, deeply, horribly offended and upset by this article, and it caused us discomfort nearly to the point of litigation.

We will examine Eades' points one by one and show why, in our humble opinion, he is a drooling sycophant of evil.

The first word in Eades article is "Imagine." Well, what does he know about imagination? Imagination is what Disneyland was built on, and imagination is what keeps it running. Well, imagination and ticket sales, and Eades does point out that passholders pay less for admission into the parks, but that's beside the point. Passholders also spend less money on food and souvenirs -- leaving them more time for, that's right, imagination!

After a lot of tedious introduction, Eades gets to the point of his article -- painting annual passholders as the source of all things wrong with the universe. He begins his assault with a gross generalization about passholders and their enjoyment of: "websites devoted to every minutia of the parks that point out the exact times and locations that characters will show up, to pointing out the paint flaking off the wall two stories up on Main Street." There are so many things wrong with this that it's hard to count! First, "website" should have a capital "W" according to the Associated Press Stylebook and Briefing on Media Law, but that's not all! We also take deep offense at the suggestion that passholders are obsessed with Disney Web sites. Take us for example. How many Disney-related Web sites does the DisneyLies.com staff visit on a daily basis? A quick poll of the staff reveals that the answer is twelve. Is that so many? And, yes, we do run seven others ourselves and are working on a hostile takeover of Screamscape, but does that really sound obsessive? Seven's even a lucky number! We also resent the implication that we point out "the paint flaking off the wall two stories up on Main Street" when that problem was repaired weeks ago.

Another quote: "Annual passholders are not the end all and be all of Disney." Heresy! Nothing more need be said about that!

Eades then blathers on about how passholders ruin the experience for first-time Disney visitors. They bring people down with all of their complaining, he said, and they tell people to run through the parks instead of stopping to enjoy them. Well, first of all, not all passholders complain about the park, just most of them. And second of all, the point of giving visitors a detailed plan of how to spend their day isn't to put pressure on them but to steer them away from the rides and attractions that we passholders want all to ourselves. And far from ruining the experience for first-time visitors, passholders enhance it! Just think of how many first-time Haunted Mansion visitors would completely miss the subtleties of the stretching room speech if there weren't passholders around to say it along with the recording?

Continuing the digging of his own grave, Eades rants that, "annual passholders are worse then religious fanatics. One of the reasons the Enchanted Tiki Room is still the same basic boring show is a large cadre of those passholders think it is sacrilegious to change Walt's original Audio-Animatronics show." Saying that Disney is worse than religion is not even worth discussing. What is worth pointing out is Eades makes two horrible misstatements here. First, the Enchanted Tiki Room is not boring!!! It is a fascinating and entertaining display of avian audioanimatronics that gets more and more enjoyable each time you watch it, particularly if you sit through a full day's entire roster of shows and have been drinking. But has Eades ever tried this? Somehow we doubt it! He would rather that the "boring" show was changed. To what? Some kind of cold, robotic presentation about the glories of Communism and the enslavement of the common man, most likely! But even more despicable is the implication that passholders' love for preserving Disneyland's history is somehow a bad thing. Just think, if there had been an active community of passholders in the park's early days we'd still have the Disneyland Circus and Bathroom of Tomorrow! Yesterland, one of Eades' hated fan Web sites, wouldn't even exist! Oh the joys of imagining such a world!

The next torpedo in Eades screed is a plea for Disney management to start charging thousands of dollars for an annual pass instead of just hundreds. Well, at the current rate of price increases, this is going to happen pretty soon anyway, so we can't complain too much about that.

After a bit more blathering, Eades finishes up with a shocking admission: "Me, I go to the parks once a year... But it is not the center of my life." My dear God -- does this man have any right to even talk about the parks? Annual passholders say no! People like this shouldn't even be allowed into our parks!

Finally, let's look at a few quotes, taken out of context:

"It's unsurprising how many of these people are unattractive loners, completely unable to form a normal relationship or get a date."

"EBay's profits would be cut in half if it weren't for these nuts."

"Annual passholders are a blight on the face of the earth. Shooting in the head is too good for them. They should be strangled and then vivisected in Toontown Square."

"Why can't these fanatics just keep quiet? They even drove poor Cynthia Harris out of a job. Now was that nice?"

"So what if half of Pirates of the Caribbean is broken? It's still a great ride, and twice as good as if three quarters were broken."

Pretty nasty stuff, eh? And if Eades had said any of these things in his article, wouldn't there be an uproar? And can we allow him to hide behind the excuse of not having said them? No!

So in conclusion:

1) Eades is bad.

2) Annual passholders are good.

3) Keep the Tiki Room pristine.

Thank you for listening.

Owner, DisneyLies.com

External Links
You can read the original article on JimHillMedia.com if you really think it's necessary.

This site is not endorsed, approved, or secretly funded by the Walt Disney Corporation (or any corporation with a legal department). All information on this site is, to the best of our knowledge, false. If any significant true information slips through, we apologize for that. Since we don't check any of what passes for facts around here, mistakes are bound to happen. Contents © 2003–2014 so don't go stealing anything, okay?

That's Not At Disneyland, Three!!!
Get a book!

396 Pure, Unadulterated, Dyed-In-The-Wool, 100% Made-Up, Completely Fake Disneyland "Facts"
Get another book!