Attendance at Universal declines becasue of WDW's recent marketing

[SoCalKDG]

For some of us the magic has actually increased. Since riding the mules at Disneyland in the late 60's, to my first ride on BTMMR, I started making annual, then semiannual, then eventually monthly trips to Disneyland, then DCA, finally yearly trips to WDW. I've seen an increase in the past 5 years in the magic of Disney.

Why, it was the birth of my first daughter 4 years ago(she is really tall for her age). Riding Small World and Pirates while she was a baby, watching her eyes dart everywhere, to the first rides on Splash, BTMRR, hearing her gleeful laugh, watching her interact with the characters, trust me the magic has increased 10 fold for myself.

Her favorite moment(and one of mine), last year around Halloween, came at a park many love to bash, DCA. It was their Halloween party, very enjoyable. She was all dressed up as a princess, had interacted with the princessess and had pictures taken, grabbed candy, when we rode Mulhulland Madness, a first for her. She rode with her mom first, when they get back she says with a big smile "that was awesome; Daddy, what does awesome mean? Come on dad, lets go again". When I rode with here she screamed in delight, leaving her hands in the air the whole time. This below average ride to me had just increased its entertainment value because it was a favorite of my daughters, capping a wonderful evening of music, spending time with family and friends, interacting with cast members, listening to music, etc.

With new rides opening at WDW in the last few years the only basis I can compare WDW old to new is in reviewing film of some of the older rides. So far I'll take the new ride everytime. I'll take Soaring, Test Track, Mission Space, even the new Imagination.

Here is why Mission Space is amazing. I rode it by myself two years ago and on our past trip talked my wife into riding it with me. After the ride she looks at me as says, "That was incredible, I've never experienced a ride like that in my life". We then discussed the feeling that we felt as we launched, the difficulty of interacting with the buttons due to he G's, and we wondered about how accurate that ride was when compared to the space shuttle. Unlike Soaring, another great ride, this one won't be for everyone, but it does provide an oppurtunity for many people to experience something that for many is amazing.

Whats funny is that in the 100's of visits to DLR or WDW I've never had a bad time with a cast member. Maybe its the smile on my face and the hello I say to them, I don't know, but they are as good as ever and when you consider in general how much of the service industry has changed for the worse, I'm even more impressed with cast members.

 

[YoHo]

D00d I'm sorry, but there's just no excuse for you're love of DCA.

I was there sunday and ran through 2 carnivals on the way up that had the exact same roller coaster as Mullholland madness and they were only a couple bucks, not $50+ Save yourself some money there please. Plus, the only thing that makes that place tolerable is the super short lines. If you keep going, odds are you'll end up in front of me in line and that just cuts in to my magic.

 

[All Aboard]

I have visited WDW (but not Disneyland) during every time period I have referenced.

Peter, my point of reference for when WDW began to regress in some areas was 1995. Would you agree that a 9 year old isn't equipped to formulate a critical opinion on the philosophy under which a theme park is developing, the depth and breadth of attractions, park maintenance or Cast Member training? Certainly, 11 years later he or she is going to have different perspective and maturity and thus have difficulty pinpointing comparisons to when he or she was a child, no? And, clearly that person would have absolutely no first hand experience with the WDW of the 1970's.

 

[Spectro is #1]

I can't disagree on the Kong vs Mummy remark, however its difficult to tell why Kong was chosen to be replaced. One ride replacement doesn't mean Universal is losing its way.

My point is I don't think US or Disney rips down an attraction if people use it or see it. They match total attendance to daily riders and determine the attractions draw. Poor performs that can't justify their pay are axed. People and attractions.

as Donald would say "your fired"

I'd venture to guess that Shrek 3D is more popular than Alfred Hitchcock was, Jimmy Neutron and Spongebob are more recognizable to kids than Hanna Barbera, MIB was a whole new building and done much better and obviously a much larger budget than Buzz Lightyear.

I didn't say US lost its way! I simply comparing parks. Pooh for Toad, Kong for Mummy. I don't post on this board often but when I read this board and this debate comes up Toad is often mentioned as proof on how WDW "jumped the shark." My problem is US did the same thing with Kong and made a big deal about it. Didn't they have some kind of event for AP holders to ride it for the last time? This point seems to escape the debate.

Buzz is just different themeing, they had to use a smaller show building and Buzz was up first so it would be easier to top. I think Buzz is more Kid Friendly than MIB and Buzz might have a larger GPH capacity given the omni mover ride system. I like them both but think of them as apples and oranges, both the same family but different.

 

[DancingBear]

For the record:

Soarin's a blast, though I'm not crazy about the airport entryway and I wish it had more "story"

Lights Motors Action is a cool show, but the aluminum bleacher seating seems cheesy to me (compared to the ampitheaters for Fantasmic and Indy for example).

I love visiting AKL, although I've never stayed there. Boma and Jiko are two of my favorite restaurants on property, and I think the animal viewing areas and lobby are terrific.

Enjoy Philharmagic.

Enjoy Pooh as a pleasant "C" ticket ride (but wish WDW had Tokyo's version).

I like Test Track and Mission:Space, although I wish M:S had more to it, and having those two right next to each other (with UoE and closed WoL next door) makes FW feel unbalanced to me.

I like all of AK, except for Dinorama and the lack of a sit-down restaurant.

And I really enjoyed the Disney cruise.

 

[peter11435]

"You don't respect others opinions"
"You're wrong about everything because I say so"

You're a hipocrit and I'm fed up with it.

Nice one.

Nowhere in this tread have I been a hypocrite.

 

[DancingBear]

I believe what YoHo was referring to is that you keep asking for evidence to back up everyone else's opinions but present your own statements as conclusive. I for one tried to address in detail the issues and you've completely ignored my posting.

 

[dbm20th]

Everyone expresses their opinions as fact here, and I am sure Yo-Ho would admit he is as guilty of this as the rest of us. After all, we are discussing our opinions here and there is no reason not to stand behind them. Some folks love the new things WDI has done, some prefer the old way. This will go on like this forever. Embrace it and have fun...or the boss will shut it down

 

[peter11435]

I believe what YoHo was referring to is that you keep asking for evidence to back up everyone else's opinions but present your own statements as conclusive.

I never meant to state by opinion as conclusive. And I did provide examples of what the "magic" is to me.

My problem is not with their opinions. I understand that not everything is for everybody. And I agree that the WDC has made some poor decisions over the years. I also agree that they have built some very poor attractions in recent years (stitch, imagination, sounds dangerous, etc.). My problem is simply that they seem to pre-judge everything the WDC does and decided it is bad purely because it was done in the Eisner/post-Eisner time period. Even in Yoho's list off things he likes he took shots at them cloning Soarin' and said he does another often just because it is so dumb.

But the biggest issue I have with them is that they don't seem to think it is possible that someone could experience WDW in 1971 and 2006 and not see a decline in the "magic." I have no problem with that being their opinion. But they don't simply have a different opinion they try to tell me that I either never experienced WDW of the 70's or that I am ignorant simply because I don't share their opinions.

 

[DancingBear]

I believe that the reference to ignorance was in the sense of "lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified" as opposed to a general condition. I think A-V said his experience in discussing these matters is that the view that there has been no decline generally comes from those who did not personally experience WDW between, say, 1971 and 1984.

Believe me, I've shared your frustration with A-V and Yoho from time to time. But they do have something worthwhile to contribute to these discussions. Again, I think we get bogged down talking about individual attractions and such--the "Philosophical" issues regarding the structure and emphasis the Company is employing is much more interesting.

 

[dbm20th]

I think A-V said his experience in discussing these matters is that the view that there has been no decline generally comes from those who did not personally experience WDW between, say, 1971 and 1984.

And there is where things are subjective, though sometimes expressed as objective. There are people, me among them, who have experience WDW at that time and think that it is even better now. Great hotels, new thrill rides, great restaurants, etc., etc., have all been added since that time and that is why I still go and keep going. The "purist" view is simply that, a view. It is only fact in one's mind

 

[DrTomorrow]

Two comments:

1. Magic - whether Disney, Middle Earth or Hogwarts variety - is NOT quantifiable. There's no objective tool - a magicometer? - to definitively measure how much magic there is in a theme park. As such, there is simply no sense in making statements along the line of there is more / less / the same magic now than X years ago. 'Tis all subjective, all personal opinion, and carries whatever weight someone's opinion carries.

2. IMHO, there is no inherent magic at WDW; it is in the hearts, minds and souls of those who go there. Grind up every brick of the castle, titrate every drop of water in Seven Seas Lagoon, autopsy every stuffed animal in every store - you won't find a shred of magic. But simply take a look at the faces of many folks as they enter the MK; see the smiles of children on Dumbo; see the grins of amazement from those leaving M:S (the ones who aren't puking, that is ) and that's where the magic is.

IMHO - YMMV - Be well!

 

[Another Voice]

IMHO, there is no inherent magic at WDW; it is in the hearts, minds and souls of those who go there.

So if we gathered all 14 million people in an empty field, charged then $62 per head to stand there, and all scream “DISNEY!” we’d all be as happy?

“Disney Magic” is the response to the artistic arrangement of sights, sounds, colors, smells and textures intentionally created to produce strong emotions. A theme park is like a movie, a play, or a story that moves the audience to feel and experience emotions outside of their everyday live.

The “magic” is very tangible, very concrete, and very real. It also is extremely difficult to make, harder to maintain, and impossible to recreate once it is lost. The issue is to what degree the Disney company is willing to spend the resources and the efforts to create this "magic", and how much they want live off of past successes. It's not by accident that all the fireworks show are named "Remember...".

The people who create “the magic” know it exists. It exists because of their hard work. To dismiss it as nothing but a brand name – which is all Disney has become these days – really is to be ignorant of how and why Walt Disney World works.

 

[MJMcBride]

But since "magic" is different for each person, it can not logically be quantifiable. What one person finds magical in an attraction (like the smell of oranges in the old Horizons attraction) means nothing to the next person.

 

[Sylvester McBean]

The people who create “the magic” know it exists. It exists because of their hard work. To dismiss it as nothing but a brand name – which is all Disney has become these days – really is to be ignorant of how and why Walt Disney World works.

perfectly worded.

 

[ChrisFL]

But since "magic" is different for each person, it can not logically be quantifiable. What one person finds magical in an attraction (like the smell of oranges in the old Horizons attraction) means nothing to the next person.

Ok, Im going to add this idea to see if this helps the discussion.

When I think of what Disney magic means, it means the way Disneyland was built in the 50's and what kind of experience it gave people. When you create something so well that the outcome makes it more than the sum of its parts, and in turn, takes the guest to something they've never experienced before, or can at any other park, that is what I consider to be magical.

Space Mountain is an example...off the shelf coaster when its out in the open, simply put it inside a dark building, project stars and asteriods all over, add some space themed elements and bam, you have an experience you couldn't get anywhere else and it felt like nothing else. Sometimes making it magical is simple, sometimes it isnt.

Disney continued to raise the bar. I still think their greatest achievements are before 1995. Splash Mountain is a huge, long and overall very well themed and fun ride. Tower of Terror (the original) is IMO the pinnacle of theming of a ride. I'd ride it even if it didnt have more than one drop, the rest of the ride is SO GOOD. From the entryway, the types of foliage, the hotel itself outside presenting a very stale and old feel, to the inside with expertly made spiderwebs and real props from the shows.

 

[All Aboard]

I still think their greatest achievements are before 1995.

If I could edit and ad the words "in the U.S. parks" after achievements, I completely agree with you.

And, that shouldn't be the case. The early 1990's were extremely promising to me with Temple of the Forbidden Eye, Splash, Tower, Wilderness Lodge, the artist renderings for Animal Kingdom, etc. But, then, it has been largely disappointing with a few exceptions since. The same can be said for Feature Animation.

 

[YoHo]

And there is where things are subjective, though sometimes expressed as objective. There are people, me among them, who have experience WDW at that time and think that it is even better now. Great hotels, new thrill rides, great restaurants, etc., etc., have all been added since that time and that is why I still go and keep going. The "purist" view is simply that, a view. It is only fact in one's mind

This is not entirely true and I bristled earlier when you claimed I state my opinions as facts.

There are facts, and their are my opinions and my opinions come from those facts.

The problem is that we're not talking about facts that are universally known. Not everybody has read say Disney War or Storming the Kingdom and even some people that have read those books, read them in Isolation with no other knowledge. Some people actually know more about the company then others.

I base my opinions of attractions and the direction of these parks and this company based on the FACTS about the company that I have. Because of what I know about the Walt Disney Company, I'm disinclined to be forgiving when they do something like clone a ride or build half a theme park.
Some others either are ignorant by choice or not or refuse to believe the facts, or have no faith in the facts because they don't want to. They're doubting thomas's. That doesn't change anything.

And I try to back up my opinions with fact such as oh, newspaper articles.

 

[YoHo]

But since "magic" is different for each person, it can not logically be quantifiable. What one person finds magical in an attraction (like the smell of oranges in the old Horizons attraction) means nothing to the next person.

See this is true, Not everyone likes action movies or Scifi movies or romantic comedies, but there still may be magic in them.

Obviously, not everyone responds to the same stimuli, but the point AV made, the point that any of the original imagineers would make is that Magic is about Art. There is no art in what Disney builds anymore.

 

[MJMcBride]

See this is true, Not everyone likes action movies or Scifi movies or romantic comedies, but there still may be magic in them.

Obviously, not everyone responds to the same stimuli, but the point AV made, the point that any of the original imagineers would make is that Magic is about Art. There is no art in what Disney builds anymore.

But like magic, art is in the eye of the beholder, too. You may think there's no art anymore, but many others feel there is.