With so many DVCers, do we need another park?

[goldilocks_63]

It's starting to feel crowded.... (even for off-peak F&W, Dec / Jan).

Do you think WDW will expand to another park with all these Hotels / VCs?

Goldi

[Boston5602]

if Disney thinks it will make them more money , you bet they will.


I always hoped for a park for thrill seekers with lots of roller coasters and such, but I'm getting old enough now that I think I wouldn't be visiting that type of a park much <VBG>

[tjkraz]

While DVC revenue is very important to Disney, we still represent a very small portion of the daily guests at WDW.

With all DVC resort rooms booked and at full occupancy (4/4/8/12), the total DVC members at WDW would be around 15,000. When you factor in vacancies, rooms occupied by cash guests, rooms out of service for maintenance and, of course, rooms not at full occupancy, it's probably closer to 10,000 on any given day.

Spread that out over 4 theme parks, 2 water parks and people who have non-park days (Sea World, US, IOA, DTD, sitting by the pool, etc.), DVC members probably represent less than 5% of guests in a part at any given time.

As a whole, I think it would take a small miracle for Disney execs to ever be sold on a new theme park. They would probably have to stumble across some perceived "can't miss" idea that could not be integrated into a current park.

The problem is that opening a new park adds tens-of-thousands of dollars in daily expenses before you even get to a single ride. You've got to staff for security, parking lot attendants, ticket sellers and takers, park management, custodial, gift shop CMs, dining CMs, and so on.

And one of the lessons that Disney learned with AK is that adding another destination didn't necessarily convince people to add days onto their trip. In other words, most families who averaged 7-day trips before AK opened still took 7-day trips after AK. As such, the park itself didn't necessarily generate any additional revenue--it just moved the revenue from another park. Instead of spending 2 days at MGM, that family would spend 1 day at MGM and 1 day at AK. So, effectively the family is still spending the same amount of money, yet Disney is on the hook for all of the overhead expenses associated with running 4 theme parks rather than 3.

Personally I'd much rather see them add 2 or 3 great new rides to MGM and AK. Give me a reason to spend more time in each of those parks rather than wasting my time trudging over to a new destination.

[dumbo71]

While DVC revenue is very important to Disney, we still represent a very small portion of the daily guests at WDW.

With all DVC resort rooms booked and at full occupancy (4/4/8/12), the total DVC members at WDW would be around 15,000. When you factor in vacancies, rooms occupied by cash guests, rooms out of service for maintenance and, of course, rooms not at full occupancy, it's probably closer to 10,000 on any given day.

Spread that out over 4 theme parks, 2 water parks and people who have non-park days (Sea World, US, IOA, DTD, sitting by the pool, etc.), DVC members probably represent less than 5% of guests in a part at any given time.

As a whole, I think it would take a small miracle for Disney execs to ever be sold on a new theme park. They would probably have to stumble across some perceived "can't miss" idea that could not be integrated into a current park.

The problem is that opening a new park adds tens-of-thousands of dollars in daily expenses before you even get to a single ride. You've got to staff for security, parking lot attendants, ticket sellers and takers, park management, custodial, gift shop CMs, dining CMs, and so on.

And one of the lessons that Disney learned with AK is that adding another destination didn't necessarily convince people to add days onto their trip. In other words, most families who averaged 7-day trips before AK opened still took 7-day trips after AK. As such, the park itself didn't necessarily generate any additional revenue--it just moved the revenue from another park. Instead of spending 2 days at MGM, that family would spend 1 day at MGM and 1 day at AK. So, effectively the family is still spending the same amount of money, yet Disney is on the hook for all of the overhead expenses associated with running 4 theme parks rather than 3.

Personally I'd much rather see them add 2 or 3 great new rides to MGM and AK. Give me a reason to spend more time in each of those parks rather than wasting my time trudging over to a new destination.



I agree with this 100%. The existing parks could be so much better than they are. Adding GOOD new attractions to each park would be my vote. AK alone has so many possibilities and the room for expansion.

My guess is they will go that route long before another theme park. The amount of money they make with the theme parks is very limited. There is only so much money that each park can generate. Now the motion picture/ABC/ESPN and entertainment/marketing side of Disney, that is limitless and where they will likely focus.

[dwelty]

I agree as well, but there is always the possibility of siphoning off from other attractions in Orlando. (think of the way Downtown Disney resulted in the closure of Church Street Station in Downtown Orlando). The only thing I could see would be a Disney Seas type of park (Like in Tokyo Disney) This would pull most of the guests that spend 6 days at Disney and the 7th at Sea World. (Although this would really piss off Disney's Competition in the Orlando area). Overall I agree with Tjkraz, no new parks for a while.

[thirtycats]

I want a Playhouse Disney park. Dedicated to families with very young children. With Boardwalk/Midway type rides. Maybe like an old fashioned carnival/amusement park.

And/Or

a villian park. Open only at night. Maybe sunset until sunrise.

[PrincessJasmine08]

I am so ready for another park, although it doesn't sound like it's going to happen. Even during the off seasons things just seem so crowded. We went a few years ago in October and the place was dead. Now when we went this October it was packed. The same seems to be happening to January. They need another park to spread the crowds out!

[Mtnman44]

Yes. Anything to help with crowds would be such an improvement. If only they could model the parks so as to be profitable without max capacity attendance.

As mentioned, they will likely not build another park until they have so many guests it would be full also. But this is the year of wishes, so maybe we can all sent them some telepathic pleas.

[psu4glory]

Personally I'd much rather see them add 2 or 3 great new rides to MGM and AK. Give me a reason to spend more time in each of those parks rather than wasting my time trudging over to a new destination.
i agree with tjkraz...and i think Everest is a sign that disney is moving in that direction. one-day ticket prices at the gate have gone up, what, $8 (almost 15%) over the past year or so? i'd prefer not to have the additional overhead costs of a 5th park to give them a reason to jack the MYW tix and annual passes up any more than they already have....

[Mtnman44]

More attractions in the same park just bring more guests and bigger crowds. I don't see how that will help. The "low crowd" seasons are quickly disappearing already. I do wish there was a way to spread them out more but there is nothing in the foreseeable future to give any hope.

I know we are all huge disney fans on this site but I have to say, if it keeps getting more and more difficult to visit the parks at a time that doesn't require at least 30 minutes in line to go on a ride or get some lunch, then I may have to say goodbye to the mouse... :(

[paults]

I for one would like Disney to bring back another WATER PARK. When it gets hot the pools get crowded and so do the water parks so LISTEN DISNEY do something over at river country. :goodvibes

[tjkraz]

More attractions in the same park just bring more guests and bigger crowds. I don't see how that will help.

It will help because it give the additional guests something new to experience without adversely impacting the other attractions. If you're worried about not having as much elbow room because there are more people in the parks...well, that could be the case. But it shouldn't be assumed that all of the park's attractions will see substantial wait-time increases.

The "low crowd" seasons are quickly disappearing already. I do wish there was a way to spread them out more but there is nothing in the foreseeable future to give any hope.

I'm not sure I understand the comment. I agree that Disney is making a concerted effort to draw more guests to the parks during the "low crowd" seasons. I read that as Disney actively trying to "spread them out" better throughout the year.

I know we are all huge disney fans on this site but I have to say, if it keeps getting more and more difficult to visit the parks at a time that doesn't require at least 30 minutes in line to go on a ride or get some lunch, then I may have to say goodbye to the mouse... :(

I may not be the most well-traveled Disney guest in the world, but I've been to WDW 5 times in the last 3 years. I have yet to see anything resembling what you describe. We've never waited 30 minutes for an attraction. This past May even the likes of Everest, BTMR and RnR were walk-ons. :confused3

According to TWDC annual reports, even when they run special promotional deals the attendance increases are usually in the single digits (percent.) I'm not sure that overall attendance has even returned to pre-9/11 levels, so I doubt overcrowding is viewed as an issue at this point.

[Mtnman44]

I'm not sure I understand the comment. I agree that Disney is making a concerted effort to draw more guests to the parks during the "low crowd" seasons. I read that as Disney actively trying to "spread them out" better throughout the year.

I may not be the most well-traveled Disney guest in the world, but I've been to WDW 5 times in the last 3 years. I have yet to see anything resembling what you describe. We've never waited 30 minutes for an attraction. This past May even the likes of Everest, BTMR and RnR were walk-ons. :confused3

I just meant that is seems like even the off-season times are getting really crowded in the parks. Crowds at the gates, monorails, restaurants, buses, fireworks shows, parades, and of course the attractions. I'm sure it's not always the case, but it seems to me it is getting worse. I don't expect to be alone of course, but when it's hard to walk around, order lunch within a few minutes, or get on rides within 20 minutes, it really starts to drain the fun out of the day. Our last vistit was the last ten days of January this year. Overall, it was much better than my previous visits in late march or mid december but still there were certain times and places that were just packed. It really ruins things to stand in line 20 or more minutes for lunch and then have to hunt and literally fight to get a table! Bus service was generally excellent at this time however. Many, many of the attractions were still 45+ minutes. Fass Pass was great and allowed some good line skipping, but it doesn't get you through every line unfortunately. I'm not saying it is totally bad right now, I am saying I'm worried about 10 years from now.

I've heard good things about mid september so we may try that next, although I'm very concerned about the heat and bugs......(The florida humitidy just kills me, hence I enjoy January the best). STill humid but the temps are much better.

You've NEVER waited more than 30 minutes?!!! I evnvy you my friend!

[PrincessJasmine08]

Mtnman44, I definitely agree with you. I have been going to Disney since the 80's and have been quite a few times. It used to be that when we went over Sprink Break it was slightly more crowded, but not unbearable. Now on our last Spring Break I would definitely categorize it as unbearable even with arriving early in the day. Previously "dead" times are picking up more and more. I am sure that is Disney's goal so it doesn't seem like they would choose to build a new park because of that.

[havencruiser]

I, too, have never waited more than 30 minutes for a ride. With well-executed use of FastPasses and knowing what is most crowded when, I have usually just either walked on or waited only a few minutes. I have gone in January, March, April, June, July, August, October, and December...NOT in the same year :goodvibes

[DisDaydreamer]

Have to agree too.

Back in 1993 Disney announced the plans to build a new theme park in Haymarket,VA. A lot of planning and coordination with the state government had taken place and it really looked like a go, but then some historical groups fought and after a while Disney had such a bad taste in their mouth that they withdrew their plans less than a year later.

I don't think the bad taste has left for them. Expansion is what will happen for a good while longer.

[cobbler]

I would much rather see them update the parks and put more money into making things look nicer and up to date than build another park.

COP needs a rehab bad (I don't know if they have but I haven't been there in almost a year now).

EPCOT needs to be more updated. Their house of the future in Innoventions isn't very futuristic at all. In fact my mother has about half the items that are supposedly the future.

I'd also like to see more of those street sweeper people, I remember when you hardly saw any trash on the grounds at all because they were right there to clean it up, not so much anymore.

And AK has a lot of potential.

[rogerram]

The problem now is the parks are overcrowed even in the so called slow times. This makes for problems. People with small children are waiting longer and kids are hard to keep happy even when things go better. many of these families will not have a magical time and decide to go elsewhere(beach, islands,etc.). My kids are not that young, but when you have a hard time moving around, you tend to want to rethink your vacation plans. I have been at all different times of the year and this happens in all of them. Disney is adding more DVC members in new resorts(SSR alone at capacity or close will affect park capacity because it adds more people from a new resort that weren't there before) and more than likely other area resorts will keep adding more people to these parks as they continue to build elsewhere. Either expansion to overall area and rides to existing parks( and I do stress AREA) or another new gate. If it is a new gate, then that will ease the overcrowded current parks, as long as it is a must see destination, and will ultimately bring more people and another 10 years or so after that park is open, people will be again asking for more because it will start to be crowded again. Whatever is done, the one thing that must be stressed is quality and not done on the cheap. That will always keep people wanting to come back again.

[starbox]

My DS10 is really counting on working as an Imagineer on the Disney Villians Thrill Park that will open (with his help of course) in 2020!

:rotfl: :rotfl:

He's promised to get me opening day passes, so I am jazzed. :3dglasses

[SoCalKDG]

Its funny that I think back to my trips as a kid to DL waiting in line for over an hour for pretty much every ride. Now with FP and the extra parks 45 minutes is a long wait.

No matter how crowded it is when you combine FP of 3-4 rides a day with the many shows and rides that have less than 20 minute waits due to the high capacity of the attraction you can easily do 15 attractions in an 8 hour period as well as have a nice, sit down lunch that you have an ADR for.

I'd be more worried if the parks were never crowded. Our DVC might not be as valuable if the WDW was having financial trouble.

[tjkraz]

The problem now is the parks are overcrowed even in the so called slow times. This makes for problems. People with small children are waiting longer and kids are hard to keep happy even when things go better. many of these families will not have a magical time and decide to go elsewhere(beach, islands,etc.). My kids are not that young, but when you have a hard time moving around, you tend to want to rethink your vacation plans. I have been at all different times of the year and this happens in all of them.

Our children are currently 5 and 3. We've visited WDW 7 times since our oldest was born and have yet to experience any crowding that would discourage us from visiting. Our trips have fallen in the months of January, February, March, May, September and December. As previously stated, we've never waited more than 30 minutes for a single attraction. With proper use of FastPass and an informed approach to the attractions (i.e., don't try to hit Dumbo or Tomorrowland Speedway mid-afternoon), there's just no reason to wait.

Still, I have no doubt that people leave WDW very disillusioned. Reasons probably include too busy, too expensive, not enough slow rides, not enough fast rides, and so on. Still, Disney isn't going to spend BILLIONS of dollars to address each of these complaints.

Disney is adding more DVC members in new resorts(SSR alone at capacity or close will affect park capacity because it adds more people from a new resort that weren't there before)...

Let's keep things in perspective here. Saratoga Springs will have a little over 800 rooms when complete...most of them Two Bedroom villas. If we assume that all of the rooms are occupied and all at maximum capacity, SSR will be home to about 6600 Disney guests. Spread over the 4 theme parks, that's an average of 1650 additional guests per park. Even on a slow day that's about 5% of the guests in a park at any given time.

And that's a high estimate. The resort will not be consistently at 100% occpancy...the rooms will not be consistently at 100% occupancy...all of the SSR residents will not visit one of the four theme parks every day, etc. You also seem to be making the assumption that SSR guests are all new business (guests who are ONLY at WDW because of DVC/SSR), which is far from the truth. If not for DVC, many of these people would still be at the parks--they would just be staying elsewhere.

If it is a new gate, then that will ease the overcrowded current parks, as long as it is a must see destination, and will ultimately bring more people...

Sounds good in theory...and that's the logic they used to justify building DAK. The problem is it didn't pan out. People didn't use DAK as impetus for planning a trip to WDW or for extending a planned trip--instead they just cut a half-day out of their Magic Kingdom or MGM touring and can easily hit everything of interest at DAK.

I'd be willing to bet you get equal or better response by spending millions on a single can't-miss attraction (Everest, Soarin) as you do spending billions on an underwhelming theme park.

Besides, Disney already has an even bigger problem on its hands in the form of California Adventure. According to the numbers published in Amusement Business, WDW's MK had average daily attendance of 44,000 per day in 2005. Epcot's average was 27,000. DCA's average was less than 16,000 per day--and that's with it sitting right next to DL, the second most visited park in the US (39k per day.) That kinda shoots a hole in theory that people are really worried about overcrowding, eh?

IMO, attraction quality is what draws people to WDW and what will keep them coming back. And the best way to deliver quality is to use capital improvement budgets wisely on new attractions--not parking lots, sewer lines, landscaping and all of the other expenses that would accompany a 5th gate.

[BeccaG]

Just to throw some fuel on the rumor fire!! I read somewhere, and to be honest I don't remember where, but there was a rumor that they WERE planning another theme park and it was going to be a thrill based Villan Theme Park. AKV was part of the report, so maybe, just maybe, it will be true!

[Olaf]

Back in 1993 Disney announced the plans to build a new theme park in Haymarket,VA. A lot of planning and coordination with the state government had taken place and it really looked like a go, but then some historical groups fought and after a while Disney had such a bad taste in their mouth that they withdrew their plans less than a year later.

You should see what's there now? Poor planning has resulted in a huge number of McMansions, with inadequate roads, highways, and schools. Really stupid. The people screaming the loudest back then didn't even live in the county. I think Disney could have done it right.

[Slakk]

Have to agree too.

Back in 1993 Disney announced the plans to build a new theme park in Haymarket,VA. A lot of planning and coordination with the state government had taken place and it really looked like a go, but then some historical groups fought and after a while Disney had such a bad taste in their mouth that they withdrew their plans less than a year later.

I don't think the bad taste has left for them. Expansion is what will happen for a good while longer.

That had to be the DUMBEST move ever made by Disney execs...how anyone could think building a theme park over a battlefield where thousands of Americans died would be a good thing? I for one am so happy that it went away.

[kdzgon]

...I'm not sure that overall attendance has even returned to pre-9/11 levels, so I doubt overcrowding is viewed as an issue at this point.

According to my Disney guide, 2006 attendance and reservations have returned to pre-9/11 numbers for the first time.

Sept 2006 was my first return to WDW since Sept 1988 (I know, I know...but "life issues" intervened). We were also there in Dec '85 and Nov 86 (Thanksgiving). I remember thinking how even the "off" season was SO crowded (ithey were running special pricing for Fl residents in Sept), I wasn't sure we'd be returning often, especially at the ticket prices. Even with the free dining offer, Sept '06 was nothing like '88 - it was much less crowded. Now, obviously the add'l parks makes all the difference, but my point is people kept coming, and Disney modified as necessary.

As to the increase from DVC, I agree these are mainly guests that would be attending anyway, but I would argue that they might attend more often as DVC owners. I also agree that although they are on site at WDW, they (as a group) spend less vacation hours at the parks themselves; their style of visiting is different, and often less hurried.

My take on the reason for AK is a little different. While I'd agree perhaps Disney did factor in the possibility of longer trips, I think the low price to add days 8,9 & 10 is a greater incentive for this than AK alone. I do believe that the addition of AK DOES encourage some people to extend their trip a bit, but I think AK was designed to draw a different kind of guest, giving that added incentive for some (especially "new" visitors) that might perceive WDW as simply an "amusement park". Plus it can add a bit of "justification" to taking kids out of school, and it increases revenues incrementally, just in added character meals, pins, collectibles, etc.

[Olaf]

That had to be the DUMBEST move ever made by Disney execs...how anyone could think building a theme park over a battlefield where thousands of Americans died would be a good thing? I for one am so happy that it went away.

Right. Far better for a bunch of huge houses to be built, offering little in the way of a commercial tax base for the county. And with the county having to pay for the roads and schools, which are woefully inadequate already.

Here you can buy a home there now. This is just one of many developers who are working on the site. Prince William County has approved the building of over 2,000 homes on the site.

http://www.realtycouncil.com/haymarket.shtml

As far as DVC members go? We're just a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of things.

[kdzgon]

That had to be the DUMBEST move ever made by Disney execs...how anyone could think building a theme park over a battlefield where thousands of Americans died would be a good thing? I for one am so happy that it went away.

I don't really understand this style of thinking. War is never pretty, but better things should come of it than leaving entire areas as "shrines". I have three Ds and three SILs (plus 2 former SILs) either active duty or just finished active duty service (2&2 USN, 1&1 USMC). While neither they nor we would want to see them lose their lives, most of them were in situations (more than once) where the likelihood was certainly there. I am POSITIVE none would want to be placed "center stage" in this way should they have given their lives to our country, though.

While a theme park is not for everyone, there is no question if done well (as Disney does) it brings revenues and employment to an area. A revitalized area is a much better tribute to those that gave all than vacant land or housing developments, IMO.

[salmoneous]

If Disney isn't careful, it'll be just like Yogi said:

Nobody goes there anymore; it's too crowded.

[Horace Horsecollar]

That had to be the DUMBEST move ever made by Disney execs...how anyone could think building a theme park over a battlefield where thousands of Americans died would be a good thing? I for one am so happy that it went away.
You are mistaken about the location of the site for Disney's America. The Walt Disney Company did not propose "a theme park over a battlefield where thousands of Americans died."

Disney's America in Haymarket, Virginia, would have been located 3.5 miles from the Manassas National Battlefield Park. The Disney site did not have historic significance, and no knowledgeable person claimed that it did. The concern was not that Disney was actually planning to build on a battlefield or other historic site, but that Disney's project would lead to urban sprawl and more traffic in the area.

A coalition of local landed gentry and national historians opposed Disney's America. When Disney had enough of the bad publicity, Disney gave up on the site.

I understand that urban sprawl and more traffic came to the area anyway.

For a map, see http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/mana/map3.jpg

[Mtnman44]

Sometimes it just blows me away the sheer genius of the Walt Disney Company. They are marketing masters. Can anyone disagree? All of us nuts pay large sums of money to travel there, pay top tier prices for lodging and very expensive admissions prices all for the privilege of what? To enter and shop of course! All of the park locations are nothing retail, retail, retail sprinkled in amongst the rides and scenery. Ha. Ha. genius.

I have to admidt. The addition of Animal Kingdom did make me extend my trip. I try to allow for one to two days per park, including universal, to my trips. With one less park I would most likely subract a day or two. However, the marketing masterminds as Disney came out with this new ticket structure that almost forces me to buy a 10 day ticket! I'm mean come on, it only $30 more or something for the extra days! genius!

[Olaf]

I understand that urban sprawl and more traffic came to the area anyway.

For a map, see http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/mana/map3.jpg

I'll say. You should see I-66 at rush hour. Makes I-95, through the mixing bowl, look like a piece of cake. :sad2: