First CARS @ AoA-Now CARS LAND @ DHS!?

[pilferk]

Have read this thread and all the related points about extra vacation days, east coast vacationers, bottom dollar money, etc are all interesting and valid points.

But as a WDW veteran who has now been to Carsland (returned last week), I wanted to chime in just a few of my own feelings. Just my feelings, by the way.

Purely speaking from a selfish standpoint and putting aside the bottom line - We would love to see a Carsland in Orlando and here's why. Two reasons:

We have been to WDW many many times (myself as a kid, me and DH for honeymoon, with our son, etc). We just love it there. We feel lucky that we are able to figure out ways to visit often. It's our vacation place.

We've been to California twice - my sister lives in LA and both visits included a stay at DL as we are big Disney fans. I'm not going to debate whether DL or WDW is better. They are different and similar in many ways. For us, we love WDW and like DL. But we all LOVED carsland. It was amazing. My son was beside himself. He is a *huge* cars fan. I'm talking knows every character from both movies, including all of the international spies and lemons.

First REASON: I truly feel that the WDW visitors would appreciate Carsland so much. There really is a difference between most WDW visitors and their vacations and most DL visitors and their DL trips. I can't explain it (yes, locals vs. vacationers is part of it) but there's something else. Maybe it's the complete immersive feeling you get in WDW that you really don't get in DL, no matter how well they theme it. For me personally I love to escape on vacation and in DL I am always reminded that I'm at a park. Even staying at a Disney hotel, there are huge crowds of locals in DTD that you walk through to get to the hotel. From the monorail, you can actually see how one-dimensional Cadillac Range is at the back of Carsland, with buildings right behind it. In WDW everything feels so large and encompassing. In DL/DCA I very often feel crowded. (And yes, I'm quite familiar with Easter and New Years crowds in WDW).

Carsland itself was created in a way that if you wanted to, you could feel like you were in Radiator springs. Except I always felt that same feeling that, "right over there is anaheim stadium and a building." I never feel that in WDW. It's not really Disney's fault - it's mostly just a space issue.

So my general point is that I think many WDW fans also appreciate the immersive feeling of WDW. And thus, they would really enjoy a land that was built in such an immersive way. WDW nuts (er, fans) love the crazy attention to detail that defines Disney and Carsland was so detailed! I just think WDW fans would love it.

SECOND REASON: I don't know the figures on how much money Disney makes off the Cars franchise. I know that they make quite a bit just off my son . However, I can tell you that as the mother of one boy, no girls, we are happy to see the Fantasyland expansion but are not booking a trip just to see it. We DID book a trip just to see Carsland. But we will probably not go back, despite our love of Carsland. Traveling across the country is just not our cup of tea. It was more expensive. It took a whole day vs two. Time change was not easy. At this point in our vacationing, we don't really want to travel around to other cities for attractions - we want to stay put, no driving, be entertained, relax and that it. We did not find enough variety (especially in dining) to fill a week and it could definitely cost us more for less days at DL than it would for WDW. So for us, to return often to DL is just not going to happen. But Carsland would make us THAT much more excited to return to WDW - just a short 2 hr flight in the same time zone.

ONE MORE: And for those people who think that Disney has everyone staying on property for 7 days and buying tickets for that and have maxed out people's vacation time. Well, I have several friends who go there with the idea that they will go for just a few days (4-5), and then go to Sea World or Legoland, or just swim. Adding more content like Carsland to make DHS a two-day park (or full day, for some) would change at least a few of their plans I know (many of my friends also have young boys).

I am big fan of DHS as it is, so I'd prefer it if they just expanded vs. replacing something else. Well, I wouldn't mind if they actually had animators there again, or if they brought the monsters' inc ride in, or re-opened a sound effects stage. The MI ride at DCA is a little cheesey (typical dark ride) but next to Carsland, it was my DS's favorite.

FIRST REASON: I get it. It's cool, and I'm sure there are TONS of WDW guests who would enjoy and appreciate it. I 100% understand why people WANT Disney to clone it at DHS. I, myself, would love to see it there.

But that's not enough of a reason for Disney to actually build it.

SECOND REASON: Rather than address reason 2, I'm going to point you to your own statement:

We DID book a trip just to see Carsland.

ONE MORE: Anecdotes are nice, but they really don't paint a great picture. Individuals do lots of crazy, unpredictable, wacky things...let chaos theory abound. BUT, as a homogenized group...all that crazy, unpredictable, wackiness disappears.

And that's what Disney looks at. What is the herd doing. And, from all accounts, and by every bit of info we have (which, admittedly, isn't complete), by every bit of historical evidence we have....they're doing pretty much what lockedoutlogic and tjkraz have laid out in their previous posts.

 

[Figment1990]

They want the bucks from those who don't care how much it costs, flood the giftshops, and gobble up overpriced food and drinks...
That's the target

Then they would love to have WDWers at Carsland - you should SEE how much merch and cozy-cone-contained food they are selling in CL.

In a way, that's partially what I was saying about my "WDWers would love Carsland" feeling. Sometimes I think when we go to WDW, all of our restraint flies out the window. Somehow this absurdly amazing land would be a great fit since to so many WDWers, Disney is just "unbelieveably amazing!" (jaw dropped, etc).

 

[pilferk]

Then they would love to have WDWers at Carsland - you should SEE how much merch and cozy-cone-contained food they are selling in CL.

In a way, that's partially what I was saying about my "WDWers would love Carsland" feeling. Sometimes I think when we go to WDW, all of our restraint flies out the window. Somehow this absurdly amazing land would be a great fit since to so many WDWers, Disney is just "unbelieveably amazing!" (jaw dropped, etc).

Which is actually what Disney is trying to do.

Because that lack of restraint isn't specific to Disney. You see it at many tourist-centric destinations, amongst vacationers. You see it on cruise ships and at their ports of call. You see it in the touristy sections of the Caribbean/Bahamas. You see it in Cabo, in parts of Rio.....all over. Not specific to WDW.

Disney is trying to turn DLR into THAT kind of place. Right now, it's much more local focused, with near a million AP's. Those types of guest...closer to home, more grounded in day to day life, tend to show a lot more fiscal restraint.

They want more "WDW-type" guests going through the turnstiles at DLR.

I always turn to the bottle of water example. At home, a $5 bottle of water sits on your local grocery stores shelf gathering dust. At your local theme park, it might move a bit faster, but I'd bet they're still not selling all that many. At vacation destinations like WDW? They'd sell like hot cakes. And you would hear "Ah, don't worry about it honey..WE'RE ON VACATION" more times than you could count.

 

[Figment1990]

Which is actually what Disney is trying to do.

Because that lack of restraint isn't specific to Disney. You see it at many tourist-centric destinations, amongst vacationers. You see it on cruise ships and at their ports of call. You see it in the touristy sections of the Caribbean/Bahamas. You see it in Cabo, in parts of Rio.....all over. Not specific to WDW.

Disney is trying to turn DLR into THAT kind of place. Right now, it's much more local focused, with near a million AP's. Those types of guest...closer to home, more grounded in day to day life, tend to show a lot more fiscal restraint.

They want more "WDW-type" guests going through the turnstiles at DLR.

I always turn to the bottle of water example. At home, a $5 bottle of water sits on your local grocery stores shelf gathering dust. At your local theme park, it might move a bit faster, but I'd bet they're still not selling all that many. At vacation destinations like WDW? They'd sell like hot cakes. And you would hear "Ah, don't worry about it honey..WE'RE ON VACATION" more times than you could count.

Well, honestly, they are probably making MORE money off locals at the Mad T Party or whatever it's called in the Hollywood part of DCA. At least, if my 20-something year old sister is any evidence!

 

[Sweettears]

Which is actually what Disney is trying to do.

Because that lack of restraint isn't specific to Disney. You see it at many tourist-centric destinations, amongst vacationers. You see it on cruise ships and at their ports of call. You see it in the touristy sections of the Caribbean/Bahamas. You see it in Cabo, in parts of Rio.....all over. Not specific to WDW.

Disney is trying to turn DLR into THAT kind of place. Right now, it's much more local focused, with near a million AP's. Those types of guest...closer to home, more grounded in day to day life, tend to show a lot more fiscal restraint.

They want more "WDW-type" guests going through the turnstiles at DLR.
I always turn to the bottle of water example. At home, a $5 bottle of water sits on your local grocery stores shelf gathering dust. At your local theme park, it might move a bit faster, but I'd bet they're still not selling all that many. At vacation destinations like WDW? They'd sell like hot cakes. And you would hear "Ah, don't worry about it honey..WE'RE ON VACATION" more times than you could count.

So how do you reconcile this with DLR limiting the tickets to 5 days?

 

[ChipnDale79]

I keep reading that more attractions and/or more parks is something WDW wont do because it doesnt extend the average stay of a vacation.

I think one thing you guys are missing when you state this, is capacity. I have zero numbers to back this up, it's just a complete guess, but what these parks/attractions/and new resorts do is add more capacity and will draw more people to WDW. Does it extend the average stay above 7 days? No, probably not. But over all attendance probably increases, you've got more hotel rooms and more attractions to actually place people and entice people to come to WDW, therefore WDW is able to reap the benefits from adding new attractions, resorts, or parks.

There's a theme park less than 2 miles from my house called Carowinds, if Disney does not pump money into WDW every now and then, then they run the risk of just being another Carowinds. Old and stale. Everyone wants new and exciting things, if you don't offer these things, then people don't come as often.

And as far as growth potential at WDW, unless you are closing the parks every single day due to full capacity, or every single hotel room is booked, there is growth potential.

 

[pilferk]

So how do you reconcile this with DLR limiting the tickets to 5 days?

I don't see any juxtaposition, since the context was spending?

WDW-style spending when in the parks <> WDW LOS.

As for why they limit tickets to 5 days...I'd guess they recognize their usual LOS is less than that. Which makes sense when you're talking 2 parks vs 4 (+ 2 waterparks, a shopping district, a family entertainment district, etc).

Not to mention there are AP options (for out of state guests) for as little as $180 more than the 5 day tickets run you.

 

[pilferk]

I keep reading that more attractions and/or more parks is something WDW wont do because it doesnt extend the average stay of a vacation.

I think one thing you guys are missing when you state this, is capacity. I have zero numbers to back this up, it's just a complete guess, but what these parks/attractions/and new resorts do is add more capacity and will draw more people to WDW. Does it extend the average stay above 7 days? No, probably not. But over all attendance probably increases, you've got more hotel rooms and more attractions to actually place people and entice people to come to WDW, therefore WDW is able to reap the benefits from adding new attractions, resorts, or parks.

Because those rooms that are filling up aren't "new guests". That's the thought. They're just moving their digs from one hotel (Disney owned, possibly, with DVC...."off property", possibly, for new hotel rooms) to another.

Why is that the thought? Because construction of other DVC additions and resorts, since AK opened, haven't resulted in massive spikes in total admission at the 4 parks. There has been steady growth, but not related to construction of new room inventory.

Which goes back to the point that WDW isn't really a growth market.

There's a theme park less than 2 miles from my house called Carowinds, if Disney does not pump money into WDW every now and then, then they run the risk of just being another Carowinds. Old and stale. Everyone wants new and exciting things, if you don't offer these things, then people don't come as often.

But you have to recognize the difference between investing and refreshing..and 750 million bucks.

They've put 300+ million into FLE. They've reported they're going to spend about 400 million on "Avatarland" at AK, with groundbreaking in 2013.

I'm sure there will be some other attraction "refreshing" over the next 2 to 3 years, too. Mostly minor stuff, maybe one major. And they could add a "one off" here or there.

And as far as growth potential at WDW, unless you are closing the parks every single day due to full capacity, or every single hotel room is booked, there is growth potential.

Spare capacity does not mean growth potential. Not in that industry.

In manufacturing, it's not about how many you can pump off the line. It's about how many you can sell when they come off the line.

Same thing, different industry. It doesn't matter how much room they have in the parks. It doesn't matter if they have some number of unbooked rooms at some points during the year. They have to convince people to book those rooms and buy those tickets. The ability (and maybe that's the wrong word...maybe "possibility" works better) to do THAT is what really marks growth potential.

 

[ChipnDale79]

They have to convince people to book those rooms and buy those tickets.

That's actually one of the points I was trying to make, by adding new attractions or new resorts, what does it do? It peaks people's interest, and instead of going to the beach this year, that family might go to WDW for their vacation.

If investments are not made at WDW it becomes old and stale, like almost every other theme park in America, and loses its magic.

Quite honestly you guys believe that WDW is maxed out and Disney wouldn't spend money to attract people.

Personally, I think thats wrong, Disney has been always been one step ahead of the other theme parks, its because they try new, innovative things and aren't afraid to spend the big bucks to do it right. If that practice changes, Disney is just another Carowinds.

As long as people have expendable income, WDW has grown potential.

 

[tjkraz]

While the 7 day cap rule may apply, not everyone stays that long. Making AK and HS full day parks may induce folks to stay an extra day.

I don't have much more to add to what the others have said.

Just think about your personal situation. Even if Disney replicated Cars Land at DHS, would that be enough for you to add more time to your own typical vacation? Not just one trip but consistently. Whether you go for 6 days...7 days...8 days, is Cars Land going to take you to 7, 8 or 9 days?

I don't see how anyone could honestly answer 'yes' to that. As great as Walt Disney World is, we all know you can't see everything in one trip. If giving a Cars Land its due means one less afternoon in Adventureland or walking aimlessly through Innoventions, that's exactly what folks will do.

Moving off-site vistors to on-site defines revenue growth to me. Don't confuse attendance number with actual revenue. Disney could care less about attendance numbers if it doesn't translate to revenue growth.

Oh, I agree completely here. Building new hotels is definitely about growing revenue. They want to pull business away from non-Disney lodging. No question.

But is Cars Land going to similarly grow revenues in the parks? I have my doubts, given how tapped-out consumers already are. Cannibalization seems more likely.

 

[Disco]

Well, reading about the 7 day cap and it makes sense that parks are built around it. However, when they add on at WDW it entices me to go more often even if I don't stay longer. I haven't been to WDW in 6 years because I have done it all and there wasn't anything really new to see. Quite the opposite really they've done nothing but shrunk. They closed PI, WOL, Galaxy Theater along with many other minor features and details.
Now that they're renovating FL I'm thinking about returning. Unfortunately, most of that desire is to take a trip to US though really.
My last trip was actually to DLR. It's a 9 hour drive for me and I hate doing that. Flying would be a lot nicer but it is way cheaper to go to WDW so I would rather do that.
All the new rides at DLR were the new ones at WDW (ST and LM (Cars wasn’t open yet)). Now that I've ridden them there is no overwhelming desire to go to Florida even with the new FLR. Maybe when the SD mine ride is done or maybe even when Avatar Land is done?
Even when the FL renovation is done WDW will still be a "smaller" park than in years past. It will take Avatar land or an expansion at HS to really excite me. Not that the Avatar theme really excites me that much, it would just be something new at least. My only other desire is to take my kids just so they can see it all.

 

[Figment1990]

One more thing for me to add/clarify re: why I think Carsland would be a nice addition to WDW.

It really was well-done. Seriously. It was impressive. I am always happy when Disney impresses people because that is what Disney did for me on our first trips, and why I keep going back. So I would like Disney to add something impressive, like CL.

I would like to say that I think it would take a serious amount of land for them to bring Carsland to DHS. People have mentioned things like replacing LMA, or the backlot tour (what's left of it). Even that, I'm not certain it's enough. The main street of RS is sort of small (and that surprised me). But Cadillac Range and RSR are really HUGE. They probably could do it, but it would be a major change.

 

[pilferk]

That's actually one of the points I was trying to make, by adding new attractions or new resorts, what does it do? It peaks people's interest, and instead of going to the beach this year, that family might go to WDW for their vacation.

Except...they have added attractions (and a whole park), in the past...and it hasn't made a difference in attendance. And by attendance, I mean "total attendance at all 4 parks". Not attendance at a specific park.

So...new attractions/lands aren't doing it.

Which means there are likely other factors (like..those that can afford it and are interested are already coming...those that can't or aren't, aren't likely to change their mind based on "more Disney") at work.

If investments are not made at WDW it becomes old and stale, like almost every other theme park in America, and loses its magic.

And no one is implying it should stop.

But there is a difference in "refreshing" and 750 million dollars.

Quite honestly you guys believe that WDW is maxed out and Disney wouldn't spend money to attract people.

Personally, I think thats wrong, Disney has been always been one step ahead of the other theme parks, its because they try new, innovative things and aren't afraid to spend the big bucks to do it right. If that practice changes, Disney is just another Carowinds.

Not "we believe"....like there's no basis for it.

"History has shown".

There's a big difference between the two.

As long as people have expendable income, WDW has grown potential.

I'm assuming you mean "disposable"...which is fine, I just want to make sure I'm assuming the right thing.

I have a feeling you're failing to see the irony (and the fact you've hit on the biggest issue) in that statement.

 

[Disneyfreak44]

I know a lot of people probably disagree with me on this but I really hope this doesn't happen finally DCA has something very nice and very unique to make it a Disney worthy park and now the what I would say most magnificent thing Disney has ever created is being copied to DHS. Just knowing that route 66 runs through California just makes it that much better Cars Land fits right in to California. Having a Cars Land in Florida doesn't even make sense so I say don't let the beautiful Cars Land be copied!

 

[Sweettears]

I know a lot of people probably disagree with me on this but I really hope this doesn't happen finally DCA has something very nice and very unique to make it a Disney worthy park and now the what I would say most magnificent thing Disney has ever created is being copied to DHS. Just knowing that route 66 runs through California just makes it that much better Cars Land fits right in to California. Having a Cars Land in Florida doesn't even make sense so I say don't let the beautiful Cars Land be copied!

Not disagreeing but how does Soarin' fit in Fla?

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Not disagreeing but how does Soarin' fit in Fla?

Soarin is the kinda quick cloning that we should be adamantly against...

The answer is soarin DOESN'T fit in WDW...the fact that it is a film about California...built for California Adventure...makes it not fit.

But hey, they build copies and we swallow them...

In fact, Disney is building a tower of terror behind the McDonald's down the street from my house now.

 

[Sweettears]

Soarin is the kinda quick cloning that we should be adamantly against...

The answer is soarin DOESN'T fit in WDW...the fact that it is a film about California...built for California Adventure...makes it not fit.

But hey, they build copies and we swallow them...

In fact, Disney is building a tower of terror behind the McDonald's down the street from my house now.

I think that based on its initial popularity it made sense to clone it and bring it to WDW. However as a long term attraction, despite it's continued popularity, as has been discussed on the DIS for some time it needs to be updated at WDW. I think the same approach should, and will be taken, with Carsland at DHS. By the time the addition of CL would actually take place wevarevtalking at least a few years. However I am al in favor of adding an enhanced version of TT to DHS as some have described it. Many have complained about the need for an additional E attraction at DHS. What better than a proven hit with the guests.

 

[ChrisFL]

I think that based on its initial popularity it made sense to clone it and bring it to WDW.

YES, but CHANGE the MOVIE!!

 

[DizCaptain]

I'll keep this short and sweet:
1. I hate the fact that so many rides are just becoming homogeneous clones.
2. I don't support the idea of bringing Cars Land to WDW, something that was tailored for CA and has in large been successful to the park.
3. Where the heck is the Monsters Inc. coaster?!

 

[Disneyfreak44]

I'll keep this short and sweet:
1. I hate the fact that so many rides are just becoming homogeneous clones.
2. I don't support the idea of bringing Cars Land to WDW, something that was tailored for CA and has in large been successful to the park.
3. Where the heck is the Monsters Inc. coaster?!

Totally agree with you and I hope the monsters inc coaster comes soon