DEBATE: Debunking the AK "half day" myth.

[PKS44]

Originally posted by DisneyKidds
. I'll continue to follow the Ak poll over on the Theme Parks board, but so far over 90% of those that voted like the AK. So, no - I don't know that I'm ready to concede that I am in the minority.

With the attendence shrinking every year- your "majority" will have be down to a minority, eventually.

Paul

 

[DisneyKidds]

How is a whole family supposed to enjoy Dinosaur, Primeval Whirl and Kali- I am not talking about sitting out with the baby- I am talking about toddlers who just don't measure up or many of them don't like getting soaking wet- that is not their idea of fun- that eliminated over an hour of attractions by your count right there that the family cannot enjoy together. The Boneyard is hardly enjoyable to the parents and older kids so there goes some more...ITTBAB is a great 3D movie but many a screaming child is taken out of there and I know many younger kids want nothing to do with 3 D movies -oops there goes another half hour...now you are down by your count to about 6 hours and most of it is shows and looking at animals not much different from a zoo....so for the family with the 4 and 6 year old how is that worth it to spend $20+ or more than the Bronx Zoo?

Just like the "whole family" won't ride Dino, Whirl, and Kali at the same time, niether will the same family ride Space, Splash, Thunder, Alien, Pirates, Haunted Mantion, etc. at the same time. It just isn't feasible to make a park where all people will do all things. However, it seems that you want to heap that expectation upon AK. So my wife and the baby wait on the bridge and make the elephants squirt us as my 4 yo daughter and I come down Kali, or look at the dinosaur skeleton as I ride Dino, or we grab a rest while the kids enjoy the boneyard. That is no different than the MK. The only point I was making in the post you referenced was that in the MK your family theoretically could split up, with everyone on a ride or attraction every minute for a full day. However, that is niether feasible (as parents have to stay with their kids), nor what people actually do (as the polls I put up on family touring trends indicated that the vast majority of families stay together in the parks). Sure, this means that one family member might be bored by a particular attraction they end up doing, or a few might have to take in the scenery while other grab a ride - but that is the same at any park.

On another note, we actually enjoy the AK more now that we have kids (currently 1 and 4). The 4 yo can do just about everything but Whirl (not that we do them all - and we still spend a full day ). Having young kids who aren't just looking for a ride and can appreciate the walking trails and other exhibits has made us appreciate the AK more. AK is actually better if you are a family with a 4 and 6 yo than if you had no kids, IMHO. With young kids we definitely find the AK to be worth $20 a day more than the Bronx Zoo because you not only have the zoo aspect that they love, but you have some great shows and a number of rides - but that is us.

Disney designed it to be a park they knew the public wouldn't pay full price for.

I'd be curious to explore this idea of the multi-day park hopper pass coincident with the opening of MGM (a by design "half day", as in less than the MK and Epcot but not literally a half day park). Was the sole reason for the park hopper pass to give the guest the ability to go elsewhere as Disney knew they would only spend 4 to 6 hours in MGM, or was it just something that made sense in general to give the guest the flexibility to come and go in a 4 gate destination?

In other words, is it a COMPELLING reason to go to WDW? Disney felt they already had the compelling reasons, and they just wanted to add something that could get you to stay longer while you were there, and still charge what they do for the truly compelling parks they already had.

Maybe, maybe not. You keep throwing out COMPELLING, but that is a personal thing as well. Our longest trips of the year is extended to 9 days. There are other factors that have contributed to that extension (more vacation time, more vacation $$, etc.), but prior to the AK opening our longest trip was a week. But again, the answer to the question of whether AK extended your trip is going to be different for every family.

 

[WEDWAY100]

By Mr. Kidds’ narrow definition, I agree with him that it would take a full day to experience everything at AK. But for me, an enjoyable full day park is about choices. I may choose to experience many of the things a park has to offer, while deciding not to do other things at the park. With AK, if you want to spend a full day there, you have no choice. You must experience everything they offer, or you will not be able to fill up your entire day.

Raidermatt said

Most of the people that go to AK don't hate it. But there's just not enough that truly LOVE it to have any kind of positive impact on WDW's overall attendance. If you want people to stay 7 days instead of 5, or 8 instead of 7, you have to give them a darn good reason. AND further, you have to give them a darn good reason to keep spending the same amount of time in the places they were already going.

Amen. Why is that so hard for them to understand?

 

[All Aboard]

Crowd patterns are also indicative of what percentage of the day folks feel the park is worth. The closing time for the park has been pulled back to 5pm during most times of the year. Prior to the parade, the place would be virtually vacant after about 3pm. They were even offering Florida Residents discounts at the counter service restaurants (which virtually never happens) if we dined after 4pm.

When comparing the attendance data amongst the parks, there is another important note. I read here somewhere that within those figures, a guest is only counted once per day. At the first park he/she arrives.

Rarely does anyone hop "to" AK since it closes earlier than all of the other parks. More likely, folks hop "from" AK to Epcot or MK on any given day. Therefore, the variance between number of guests who visited AK v. Epcot or AK v. MK is very likely greater than what is shown in those numbers.

 

[PKS44]

Originally posted by DisneyKidds
Just like the "whole family" won't ride Dino, Whirl, and Kali at the same time, niether will the same family ride Space, Splash, Thunder, Alien, Pirates, Haunted Mantion, etc. at the same time. It just isn't feasible to make a park where all people will do all things. However, it seems that you want to heap that expectation upon AK. .....(SNIP) Sure, this means that one family member might be bored by a particular attraction they end up doing, or a few might have to take in the scenery while other grab a ride - but that is the same at any park

No it is not the same at any park because at MK you can eliminate all of those rides and STILL not do everything..because they give you choices...as noted by WEDWAY you HAVE to do all of it to fill the day at AK and that is not even possible if your kids are too short-so AK gets this "heaped" on it because it fails to offer ENOUGH for EVERYONE- (I believe I said this in my first post on this subject)

You listed all the wonderful entertainment offered at AK and wanted to know reasons WHY people did not choose to partake all of it...I have told you at least one major reason...too little of it is designed to appeal to a whole family touring the parks as most do-together. (I did not even touch on the narrow appeal of Character meets to families of mixed ages, Pocohontas's limited appeal beyond the toddlers... we're gettting down to very little beyond the zoo aspects.)

Given the facts that AK is underperforming (or do you dispute that) what do you think will happen to this park? What would you do to fix it? Just try to educate the public to see it as you do? If that is your proposed strategy- that trial balloon floated here on this board popped about 60 posts ago...

Paul

 

[DisneyKidds]

ENOUGH for EVERYONE

What exactly does that mean . Does that mean enough for every individual? Does that mean enough for everyone as a collective family? Let me try this illustration...........

....DW.................Me.................DD
......................Primevil..................
......................Dinosaur................
Tarzan.............Tarzan....................
Safari..............Safari...............Safari
Lion King..........Lion King..........Lion King
Parade...........Parade...............Parade
......................Asia Trail..........Asia Trail
......................Africa Trail........Africa Trail
......................Tree of Life......Tree of Life
......................Kali..................Kali
.............................................Pocahontas
.............................................Planet watch
.............................................Triceratops
.............................................Boneyard

So, for my DW individually the AK only has 4 attractions (not much of a park), for me individually there are 10 (a half day?), and for our DD individually 11 (half day?). There are only 3 overlapping attractions. However, for the family as a whole, experiencing the park together, there are 14. Add in some of the things on the map that I didn't include in my initial list for this thread and it probably grows to 17 or so. So how many attractions would you say we should see - only the 3 that appeal to all three people? No, we do the full compliment to keep eveyone happy. And guess what, DW and I even enjoy the things that might not be on our list. If my wife went alone, or me, or our DD - the park might be a half day, but when we go together, and everyone sees what they like while we are together, the park has ENOUGH for EVERYONE. Of course that is just for our family, and every family is different. I won't say that AK has enough for the PKS family, but you cant say that it doesn't have enough for everyone in the Kidd's family.

That is where the appeal, and particularly the theme and nature of the attractions comes in. It is about more than the number of attractions. Even with limited attractions, it isn't very hard to get to the point where a family collectively wants to see most of those limited attractions - if they appeal to members of the group- which fills quite a bit of time.

 

[raidermatt]

Just like the "whole family" won't ride Dino, Whirl, and Kali at the same time, niether will the same family ride Space, Splash, Thunder, Alien, Pirates, Haunted Mantion, etc. at the same time.

Unless I forgot one or two, MK has 5 rides with height restrictions:

Splash, Space Mt, Big Thunder, AE, and Goofy's Barnstormer (a low height requirment yes, but still a requirement).

AK has 3.

Dinosaur, Kali, and PW.

True, some very young ones find HM and Pirates too intense, but not many, and certainly the Bug 3d would also fall into this category.

So using the earlier attactions counts of low 50's for MK, and low 20's for AK, that still leaves MK with over twice as many things for entire families to enjoy. So even if AK's attractions were considered by guests to be equal in appeal, it would fall well short in numbers.

It just isn't feasible to make a park where all people will do all things.

But it is very possible to come darn close. The problem is, its harder to impress people without resorting to physical thrills. Guess which route Disney is taking?

Was the sole reason for the park hopper pass to give the guest the ability to go elsewhere as Disney knew they would only spend 4 to 6 hours in MGM, or was it just something that made sense in general to give the guest the flexibility to come and go in a 4 gate destination?

(MGM made it a 3-gate destination)
Certainly the flixibility is a plus for guest's who want it, so "sole reason" is probably not accurate. Driving force is probably more accurate. Or do you really think that Disney execs though MGM was of equal value to MK/Epcot, and that guests would think so as well?

Maybe, maybe not. You keep throwing out COMPELLING, but that is a personal thing as well.

I have almost been exclusively talking about the Disney audience taken as a whole, not about what I or my family thinks is compelling. That's why I reference attendance figures and hours of operation instead of passing on what my wife or son think, and its those numbers that I use to say that things either are or are not compelling. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.

As I've said before I LIKE AK. If we drilled down to all of the factors that determined how long we stay at WDW, we probably do add a day or two because AK is there. Most or our party ranks it either just above or just below MGM. But that has very little relevance to the debate/discussion, if any.

 

[raidermatt]

Scoop, there's definitely some truth in what you say. If AK had received more appealing additions, we probably wouldn't still be talking about how it should or shouldn't have been opened.

Yeah, some still site MGM as a failed philosophy. But the fact that Disney followed up with the plan to expand and add had largely removed it from anyones active complaint list.

Until AK was opened in the same manner, and then NOT followed up on.

Also, comparing a full IOA to a full, true "Disney" park is a mistake. The philosophy behind them is different, and the audience is different. Or at least it should be...

In the end, the reality is that Disney's "healthiest" park overall is Orlando's Disney-MGM Studios (MK certainly has more attendance but its operational costs are quite a bit more).

Dangerous thinking, my man. MGM may generate a greater rate of return than MK on a daily basis (taking your word for it), but which do you think convinces more families to travel to WDW? Which is responsible for more hotel rooms being booked, and restaurants being filled? (If we can't agree its MK, then we can't go on until you come to your senses )

So, isn't it POSSIBLE at least, that if MGM were expanded to MK proportions, it could actually be more profitable for WDW as a whole than it is today?

 

[All Aboard]

DinseyKidds, I think the fact that your wife only enjoys four attractions at AK speaks volumes. It flies squarely in the face of one of Walt's chief objectives when he set forth to change the world of theme parks.

For my wife, it's even worse. Knock at the Tarzan show, she hates it. She's down to three attractions. She'll put up with riding Dinosaur once, but will sit out if Nat & I want to ride an additional time or two (which is generally easy since the queue is almost always empty when we visit.)

Given this, my wife really doesn't even want to go to AK. She'd much rather spend time at a park where all of us can enjoy the majority of attractions together. That describes MK & Epcot and, to a lesser degree, (but greater than AK) the Studios.

As time goes by, many AK attractions have lost their "repeat value" on us. It's rare that we even "do" the safari any more. We never visit the two "trails", nor do we venture out to Conservation Station.

When it's hot, Nat and I will get there at opening, ride Kali until we are tired of it (usually 4-6 times), take a couple of spins on Dinosaur, one trip on TriceraTop, and catch the Lion King before departing for another park. If it's cold, delete Kali and we are there even less time. One other important note - we rarely ever spend any $ at AK on anything. We usually grab a late lunch at Park #2.

Only personal preferences, I know. And it doesn't really contribute much to this discussion. But none of this can be said for our family vis a vis the other three parks.

 

[stlphil]

Well here is another only-occasional poster about to jump into the fray. First let me say that I like Animal Kingdom and look forward to going to it.

Is AK a half-day park? Of course it is; it least it certainly was when it first opened. If you remove from DK's original list all the activities that weren't there when the park opened, you are down to less than 6 hours, and this is to "see it all" according to his own time table. Six hours equals less than a half day park. (I would argue that even 8 hours is a half-day park, although this is a quibble. But thinking that 8 hours is a full day just because the park is only open that long is to be falling for Disney marketing.)

I also know this from personal experience. Does anyone remember the show on ABC that Drew Carey hosted to promo the park just before it opened? They really struggled to fill the hour showing what there was to do. I figured that there had to be a lot more than what they showed.

Then my wife and I visited the park not too long after its opening. We got there early (before 8am) because we'd heard the safari animals would be more active early in the day. We were out of the park by a little after 2pm. This included a sit-down lunch at Rainforest Cafe, watching the restorers work on Sue the T.Rex, and a >30 minute wait for that lame boat ride that no longer exists. We did all the rides, shows, and walks. We even rode the train and checked out Conservation Station and the petting zoo. All we missed were the kiddie fossil dig, and some of the exhibits on Discovery Island.

So half-day-park was my reality, and I essentially did it all. I also was not shy about telling others afterward that it was a half-day park, and thank goodness for Park Hopper tickets because there was some really good stuff there.

So now they have added a tacky carnival area, a show or two, a parade, a short/disappointing raft ride, and a really nice animal walk. Hardly compelling stuff. The real Sue is gone, replaced by a plaster cast, and so is the lame boat ride (which could have been something special if Imagineering had their way). So now it is MAYBE a 3/4 day park. Except that I did it all in 6 hours on that first trip and know now that I don't want to see several of those attractions again.

And so we still leave by 2pm.

One final point about comparisons to a zoo- our local zoo is the St. Louis Zoo. It is a great zoo, and is absolutely free. It has some animal trails that are incredibly well-themed and comparable to AK, including small but important features such as animal tracks in the pavement like you find at AK, and exhibits about conservation that rival AK. So while it may not be general and only affects me and others from this area, the animal exhibits (other than the safari ride) do not add significant value for me when determining whether I got my $50 worth at AK.

 

[d-r]

Originally posted by DisneyKidds
d-r, do you realize that you only listed 7 attractions - and think that it would take 5 or 6 hours? Well, there is your half day, and as the Stacky one would say, you only hit 30% of the park. See a theme here folks? First off, AK - the whole of it - takes a lot longer than anyone realizes. Problem is, not enough people want to see the whole of the AK.

No disney kidds - I listed 7 in one sentance, and then a couple of sentences later I listed three more that I said we usually walk right on. That's ten - and what I listed as one thing some lists might include as two - like counting the train and conservation station as two things, I only think of that as one "going to conservation station." Or counting every kiddie ride in dinorama as separate, or just saying "dinorama." I don't count walking through the Oasis on the way to Africa as an attraction even if I do stop to look or something, or going through the tree of life gardens on the way to tough to be a bug, etc. But that doesn't mean I don't enjoy those things. That isn't 30 percent of the park. We may not go to every single thing every time - sometimes we don't bother with Kali if we don't want to get wet, for instance. That is because Kali sucks - it is too short and it gets you drenched. If it was grizzly river we'd probably never skip it. Also, I doubt if we would ever go to both the lion king and tarzan in the same day it is just too much sitting, and after you've seen tarzan a couple of times it just isn't that good really to sit through if you've already sat through something. So if we skipped one show and kali that would be 30% of the park - that is a problem right there. And please don't count things like standing in line to see characters as an attraction! We would never do that! We don't have children and so we don't go to the boneyard or the spinner.

I don't doubt that if you did ever single thing there you could spend the time there from opening to close, but even that is an eight hour day, not much for a theme park.

I really like AK and have always felt satisfied every time I visited - but we've never come close to being there from opening to close. I look forward to going there Monday - we are flying back Monday afternoon and will have to leave at 2 or 3, a perfect day for the AK-

DR

 

[raidermatt]

Problem is, not enough people want to see the whole of the AK.

I do agree that this is a problem. A related problem is that apparently too many people don't see enough things as having repeat value. The fact that there is less to do in the first place compounds the problem.

So, setting aside what we think Disney will or will not do, what is YOUR proposed solution to this problem? Anyone else?

 

[d-r]

Originally posted by raidermatt

So, setting aside what we think Disney will or will not do, what is YOUR proposed solution to this problem? Anyone else?

Are you asking what people would do, wether or not disney would do what they did?

DR

 

[raidermatt]

Are you asking what people would do, wether or not disney would do what they did?

Yes. To me, this is much more interesting than just trying to predict what Disney will do.

 

[PKS44]

Originally posted by DisneyKidds
What exactly does that mean . Does that mean enough for every individual? Does that mean enough for everyone as a collective family? Let me try this illustration...........

....DW.................Me.................DD
......................Primevil..................
......................Dinosaur................
Tarzan.............Tarzan....................
Safari..............Safari...............Safari
Lion King..........Lion King..........Lion King
Parade...........Parade...............Parade
......................Asia Trail..........Asia Trail
......................Africa Trail........Africa Trail
......................Tree of Life......Tree of Life
......................Kali..................Kali
.............................................Pocahontas
.............................................Planet watch
.............................................Triceratops
.............................................Boneyard

So, for my DW individually the AK only has 4 attractions (not much of a park), for me individually there are 10 (a half day?), and for our DD individually 11 (half day?). There are only 3 overlapping attractions. However, for the family as a whole, experiencing the park together, there are 14. Add in some of the things on the map that I didn't include in my initial list for this thread and it probably grows to 17 or so. So how many attractions would you say we should see - only the 3 that appeal to all three people? No, we do the full compliment to keep eveyone happy. And guess what, DW and I even enjoy the things that might not be on our list. If my wife went alone, or me, or our DD - the park might be a half day, but when we go together, and everyone sees what they like while we are together, the park has ENOUGH for EVERYONE. Of course that is just for our family, and every family is different. I won't say that AK has enough for the PKS family, but you cant say that it doesn't have enough for everyone in the Kidd's family.

That is where the appeal, and particularly the theme and nature of the attractions comes in. It is about more than the number of attractions. Even with limited attractions, it isn't very hard to get to the point where a family collectively wants to see most of those limited attractions - if they appeal to members of the group- which fills quite a bit of time.

Now try your little table illustration at the MK-then you may understand what it means to have ENOUGH for EVERYONE-you will see as matt pointed out that overlapping are alot more than 3 or 4 things...you may realize why families don't try out "all" that Ak has to offer throughout the day- because they could be spending quality time someplace else.


As for scoop joining the fray-I assume he is just being facetious or absurd to stir things up...His argument about MGM and IOA is so ridiculous....IOA had an increase in attendence last year- one fo the few theme parks to do so...as matt noted IOA also is addressing a very different market- it is not for families and that is why it has taken it a few years to find its market. Families have discovered that it is NOT a full day park for those with younger children--not ENOUGH for EVERYONE there either...but definitely enough for the teen/thrill seekers and they are a growing market... they are finding this park and its attendence is growing with great word of mouth and promotion-- meanwhile at AK-as more and more people have a chance to see the park and tell their friends about it fewer and fewer folks come to AK...so if Disney thinks like scoop- the company is headed for more such "success"-like matt I would like to hear others ideas including Mr Kidds for what needs to be done to fix the AK problem- or is it fixable or does he yet even admit there is a problem--his posts continue to argue or at least suggest that the guests are the problem not the park...

Paul

 

[DisneyKidds]

So, setting aside what we think Disney will or will not do, what is YOUR proposed solution to this problem? Anyone else?

You know, I really don't know. I've gone on record that I don't think Beastly Kingdom and a few other new attractions would solve the problem. That might entice a few people to spend another hour or two, but that isn't going to make all the things that aren't COMPELLING now all of a sudden COMPELLING. Furthermore, to maintain the concept, it wouldn't make sense for a new area (like BK) to just be rides. The park is about georgaphy, history, ecology, etc - including exhibits and shows. BK most certainly would include some exhibits and shows dedicated to lore and myth. Is more of that type of entertainment going to get it done, even though it might be very good? Probably not. As Snacky has pointed out, people want rides - but that isn't what AK is all about.

So, does Disney abandon the idea and concept of the AK that people haven't embraced? They could go ride heavy and people might like it. They could further push the "zoo" to the background by dropping the supposed concern for the animals and extending the park hours and nightime offerings. As Disney is good at doing, they could throw in a spectacular evening show. However, I do think that Disney prides themselves on the quality of the animal environment and care. Should they abandon that for a buck? That would be selling out, and might make it a "full day" park, but it would be a shame IMHO.

I guess what I'd do is build AK out to what it was originally intended to be. Add BK, with the same mix of rides, shows and attractions that the other "lands" have. In doing so Disney could quell the criticism that they got cheap and cut the park short. From there I would stand the high moral ground and maintain the concept as originally envisioned. Have the zoo aspect of the park be a testament to what can be done in a zoo to give the animals a top notch, authentic environment. Mix in a few more quality shows like Lion as people do seem to appreciate that. All in all it might not increase the attendance by leaps and bounds, but I bet they could live with that. Of course it isn't my money, so that is easy to say. I also enjoy the AK now and would continue to - without the long lines and extra crowds that might be generated by selling out the concept.

 

[PKS44]

I just remembered something else about park hoppers-someone correct me if I remember things wrongly but first there was MK then Epcot- You could at that time buy one park one day passes or 3 day park hopper passes- there was not a 2 day park hopper. I remember this was also a time when only resort guests or those with park hoppers could even ride the Epcot/TTC monorail- single day tickets were not good enough to get on it...then came MGM and the 3 day tickets were discontinued- I know this is true because I went the first year of MGM on a package that promised 3 day hoppers and they no longer existed and the package just gave us 3 separate one day park tickets instead-much to my consternation- since we still could not get on the monorail-something I really wanted to do! So once they added the 3rd park they "insisted" you needed at least 4 days to see the parks...then came AK...and guess what???you still can get 4 day hoppers- Disney is not only owning up to the fact that AK is not a full day park- it has not added a day at all to the system as every other park did when they added it! Now I am being facetious and I do miss those 3 day hoppers- and I bet Disney is glad to force people to buy that 4th day...and yet fewer people are using that extra day to go to AK every year...

Paul

 

[DisneyKidds]

Now try your little table illustration at the MK-then you may understand what it means to have ENOUGH for EVERYONE-you will see as matt pointed out that overlapping are alot more than 3 or 4 things...

Don't think I haven't - but typing it all out would bring back that carpel tunnel syndrom Baron brought upon me before he went into hiding .

Seriously though, the overlap in the MK (for us) would be 7. Not that much for a park of 53+ (same % wise to AK in fact). Again, collectively, we probably cover 70% of available attractions. That brings up another key point, and an aspect where many just don't care to give the AK the time. The overlap of 7 for the MK would primarily be due to my DW's fairly short list for the MK - and of those 7 two would be parades and one the fireworks. What does that show? Well, it shows that, while Snacky may be right that he and his clan want rides, not everyone wants rides. We love atmosphere. We love to walk around the park and take in the sights, stroll down Main Street and soak it up, etc. We also love the AK because we don't view the paths from one area to the next as a way to get from here to there, but an attraction in and of itself, just like Main Street is. Yes, AK has a problem because people haven't embraced that. That doesn't mean the people are the problem - you build a park for the audience and you have to make it appeal - so ultimately the poark is the problem. In the end I don't know that it is a problem that warrants a complete overhaul, changing the landscape and nature of the park.

 

[DisneyKidds]

DinseyKidds, I think the fact that your wife only enjoys four attractions at AK speaks volumes.

Yes, it does. It speaks volumes about the potential appeal of rides and attractions to the individual. However, as I stated earlier, I don't believe that Disney, even Walt, built parks for the individual. Family appeal is the key.

Beyond that, you have to look at the appeal that things other than attractions generate. You see, my DW loves the AK, even though she would only have 4 items on her favorite attraction list. First and foremost, she loves the atmosphere and setting of the AK. That is an important aspect in all the Disney parks. Again, I believe the parks are, and should be, about more than the rides. Secondly, while many items might not be on her Ak list if she were to go alone, she enjoys doing most of the things we do together as a family, things she might not choose to do otherwise.

 

[David in Manassas]

"""2. Here's an interesting figure I was once told about DS (at my visit last May): DS is the most visited park for one day visits. Apparently, alot of adults who are in Orlando for whatever reason, end up at DS with one day tickets. The shows are generally considered to be the cause of this (after all MK and Epcot don't really have any live shows directed toward adults with the possible exception of some of WS's music and the Saloon show)."""

Well my wife and I just returned from our first solo trip to WDW for Marathon weekend and to be honest ...MGM shows for adults??? (Besides Indy what is there....now that Hunchback is gone...)

BTW...we spent the majority of our 4 days in the Animal Kingdom and EPCOT. It's amazing when you don't have your kids how much you find you have missed!

David