DEBATE: Debunking the AK "half day" myth.

[Cricket2]

Originally posted by DisneyKidds
Good idea. Care to take a stab?

No way! It's your post and I work here.

Originally posted by DisneyKidds
Would you say that Epcot is a half day park for everyone, or just for you?

I would not, nor would ever say either. I cannot quantify or qualify what others would think of any attraction. When anyone is stating if something is "worth their time", the notion of "what I think" becomes implied because it is "their time" and not "everyone's time.

Removing the food, fireworks and parade from the equation, I would say that to many returning guests, much of the park (EPCOT) would be skipped.

Many other non-Disney parks are plaigued with early exits. That's why they offer "after 4" tickets and late night laser shows or whatever. EPCOT is no different. Eliminate those three things mentioned earlier and EPCOT would be a ghost town after 6 PM (at least that's what I think).

JC

 

[Cricket2]

On a side note, I might just stay late at EPCOT to look at the fiber-optic sidewalks, but I'm weird like that.

JC

 

[PKS44]

Disney defined what a theme park experience SHOULD be originally. Now they are trying to re-define it...and in doing so they have desperately tried to define it down...down in size, scope and expense (to them) This has failed.

AK did not become a lesser park (half-day) by accident...it was a strategic decision...the same as the decision to build MGM smaller, DCA smaller, Paris studios smaller--why? Because the investments in DisneylandParis, and Epcot did not pay off quickly enough (the reasons for that differ but nevermind)...they figured if they just lowered the initial outlay for new parks the low pay off seen with those other parks would equal profits instead of loss since they would invest less initially...they stated as much in the old DCA article raidermatt posted a few days ago---they have miscalculated apparently 3 times now and still no sign that they get it...(rumor has it they mocked Oriental Land Company for investing so much on Disney Seas-again a miscalculation)

They do not understand the idea of investment for the future and the importance of protecting your brand identity--they do not understand their core competancies their strengths or how to build on them....

AK < the other WDW parks--not because anyone says it appeals or does not appeal to enough people---it was designed to be that way..in this they succeeded.

 

[disneychrista]

To fully experience AK it takes in my opinion at least one day from park open to park close and likely you will still need more time. But this is to "fully experience" the park. Meaning going on all the rides, seeing all the shows, doing all the walk throughs etc etc etc. I agree 100% that you can not say you saw all of AK in less then 6 hours. Sure you can experience what you want to in that amount of time but not the entire park.


There is no such thing as a "half-day" park because no park, is open for that long

 

[DisneyKidds]

Originally posted by PKS44
Disney defined what a theme park experience SHOULD be originally. Now they are trying to re-define it...and in doing so they have desperately tried to define it down...down in size, scope and expense (to them) This has failed.

AK did not become a lesser park (half-day) by accident...it was a strategic decision...the same as the decision to build MGM smaller, DCA smaller, Paris studios smaller--why? Because the investments in DisneylandParis, and Epcot did not pay off quickly enough (the reasons for that differ but nevermind)...they figured if they just lowered the initial outlay for new parks the low pay off seen with those other parks would equal profits instead of loss since they would invest less initially...they stated as much in the old DCA article raidermatt posted a few days ago---they have miscalculated apparently 3 times now and still no sign that they get it...(rumor has it they mocked Oriental Land Company for investing so much on Disney Seas-again a miscalculation)

They do not understand the idea of investment for the future and the importance of protecting your brand identity--they do not understand their core competancies their strengths or how to build on them....

AK < the other WDW parks--not because anyone says it appeals or does not appeal to enough people---it was designed to be that way..in this they succeeded.

CLAP........CLAP...........CLAP.....................CLAP.......................

Bravo. Well said. I don't necessarily disagree. However, the question at hand is not whether AK is as much of a park as MK, or if AK is a success, or if AK was a strategic mistake. We can talk about those.

But................can you "do" AK in a half a day? That is my only question/point right now. We'll move on to the rest after we resolve this point. I will define "do" as a family experiencing together the majority of the major rides and attractions that the AK has to offer and getting a true taste of what the park is all about.

So someone might not like animals, so they might not like the walking trails or safari. However, to truely "experience" the park, to "do" the park, they still have to see them. If they don't see them, they are in no position to judge the park. Now, if they see them and don't like them, and never see them again - that is a different problem, and one we can discuss further - but first things first.

 

[Cricket2]

Originally posted by DisneyKidds
But................can you "do" AK in a half a day? That is my only question/point right now. We'll move on to the rest after we resolve this point. I will define "do" as a family experiencing together the majority of the major rides and attractions that the AK has to offer...

No, you can't.

...and getting a true taste of what the park is all about.

Yes, you can.

I think you had made your point valid right up 'till that last part there.

"Is that a Yak? Yup, it's a Yak. Next!"

JC

 

[All Aboard]

We are about to embark on our annual 8 day January trip to WDW. I'm estimating that we will spend around 50 hours in theme parks during that time. The plan is to spend about 4 of those 50 at AK. In that time we'll experience everything we want to do there and have no reason to return during this trip. Whatever you want to call it, that's the value of AK to us.

---edit----

OK, I went into my spreadsheet to look at the daily plans and have estimated the following time spent in each park"

MK - 17 hours
Epcot - 16
Studios - 6
AK - 4
USF - 4
IOA - 4

Total - 51

The USF/IOA day will just be my daughter and me since we did not renew my wife's annual pass.

 

[Cricket2]

Originally posted by gcurling
...we will spend around 50 hours in theme parks during that time. The plan is to spend about 4 of those 50 at AK...

Oooooh! Real life entrance poll sampling numbers. I like it!

JC

 

[DisneyKidds]

Yes, you can.

IMHO - that is just silly. Back to that person who doesn't like animals and doesn't do the walking trails or the safari. They got a true taste of the park? Pish!!!!

In that time we'll experience everything we want to do there

As I always used to get beat over the head with , leave likes and dislikes out. It is fair that you will see everything you want to see in those 4 hours, but would you not agree that there is a whole lot more that you could do in the AK if you were so inclined? The fact that you don't want to do it is a different problem.

While we might spend more than 4 hours in Epcot, the majority of that time is seeing the same things more than once. Add up the individual things we want to see in Epcot and we wouldn't get to more than 6 hours, but I'm not about to call Epcot a half day park. I know better and realize that, while I may not want to do it, Epcot has more to offer. I don't think many give AK that same consideration.

 

[raidermatt]

But................can you "do" AK in a half a day?

I will define "do" as a family experiencing together the majority of the major rides and attractions that the AK has to offer and getting a true taste of what the park is all about.

If you are the perceptive type, you can get a true taste of what just about any park is all about by reading the descriptions, taking a stroll through the place, and experiencing a few attractions.

Using your "new" definition, as opposed to the "every attraction" definition, yes, it is very possible to "do" AK in a 1/2 day, even if required to experience a majority (more than half) of the MAJOR attractions. Of course, crowds are a factor in this.

But even if you disagree, or go back to the "every attraction" definition, WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE? (not shouting, just emphasizing...)

Everybody has already pointed out that "1/2 day park" is a subjective term, and if you try to use it objectively by counting attractions, it doesn't work. You can count attractions to say it is "less" of a park, but even that doesn't matter that much, because APPEAL is just as important (and really even more important) than QUANTITY.

 

[DisneyKidds]

If you are the perceptive type, you can get a true taste of what just about any park is all about by reading the descriptions, taking a stroll through the place, and experiencing a few attractions.

How do I say this without being offensive, because this is all in good fun................This wins my rediculous statement of the Disney Decade award. Remind me never to tour the parks with you .

As for polling, our post Thanksgiving trip probably includes about 60 hours of park time over 9 days. 24 MK, 12 each MGM, Epcot, and AK.

Matt, you are right, appeal, attendance and $$$$ are all that matter in the end. So, if people don't come back and spend time, there is a problem. I agree that AK has problems. However, I don't think adding another 10 attractions is going to solve those problems, do you?

 

[raidermatt]

How do I say this without being offensive, because this is all in good fun................This wins my rediculous statement of the Disney Decade award. Remind me never to tour the parks with you .

Ah, but I never said this is how I tour parks. This just means that there hasn't been a park where I couldn't get a decent read on what the park is about by reading about/looking at the attractions, soaking in a bit of atmosphere, and partaking of a few of the attractions.

That does not mean other individual attractions cannot WOW me, or that I skip everything else. Its just that I have a decent idea of what the park is about by that time. It also does not mean I know what to expect on every attraction either. Again, it just means I have a "feel" of what the park is about.

I agree that AK has problems. However, I don't think adding another 10 attractions is going to solve those problems, do you?

If its 10 more of the same, then no. It gets back to my analogy of a library. If people don't want to read, they aren't coming to the library no matter how many books you have. Likewise, if people (in general) don't like what AK has or is about, adding more of the same won't change that.

10 more of the same would have some positive impact on attendance, because those who do already like the park would likely spend more time there. Those who don't like it don't go anyway.

But the positive benefits would be much greater by doing additions/replacements that are in tune with what the Disney audience wants. Geez, even 2-3 of these could have a very significant positive impact. That wouldn't "finish the job", but it would definitely help.

My personal opinion is that the look and feel of AK isn't that far off the mark from being a very successful park. However, there isn't enough in the way of attractions that do hit the mark, and the DR addition is a huge step in the wrong direction.

All of this goes back to an attempt to give the guests a park with minimal investment, and then incorrectly evaluating the response. Its the product of a bad philosophy, and then the problem is compounded by poor execution. Only the fact that there are/were some imagineers and others that were creative and tried their best saved the place from an even worse fate.

Unfortunately, because of an incorrect diagnosis of the problem, Disney went even further in the wrong direction with DCA.

 

[Bob O]

i would agree with HB2K and the points made by PKs44.
Now if you want to walk around in a slothlike manner you can easily spend a whole day at the park. But as evidenced by the attendance the park gets and the waits in lines and how the park empties out way before park closing the people go to the park see what they feel are good attractions and then fleee the park where they go and spend their time on things they feel are more important!!!! If this wasnt the case the park wouldnt have attendance problems nor have the rest. go beggin for customers near closing time.
While some may wish the park was a full day for most people, that doesnt ,make it the case and attendance numbers dont lie!!
Now if the park would have been built properly like it was planned for the park would easily have a full days worth of activities and wouldnt have the attendance problems it has. But of course disney built it on the cheap and got rid of whole area's of the park under the belief that if they build it people will come. Which hasnt happened at AK and the same holds true for DCA. AS both a zoo and a theme park it fails in both catageroies and doesnt nkow really what it wants to be when it finally grows up into a full days theme park.

 

[PKS44]

An attempt at another analogy- Restaurants---I want a hamburger---I can get one at some express place that only offers a limited menu or I can get one at a restaurant with a more full and varied menu---I may enjoy the hamburger at both places BUT they are not both FULL restaurants....AK is not as limited or narrow in the themepark world as say McDonald's Express is at the airport...but the idea is the same....the term half-day is but a short-handed way of saying it does not measure up to a full experience expected at a Disney themepark...and it does not invite the lucrative repeat visits a park needs the way the more fully developed parks do...so can you do EVERYTHING in a half a day?- no..so what? And yes, I do think that 10 additional attractions would help IF they were of Disney quality (old time)-innovative, whimsical, clever, well themed-not ever done on the cheap. A Beastly Kingdom addition, Australia and or South America additions would be a huge help. But NOT just more animal exhibits...zoo like additions are not what this park needs or is lacking...it needs to distinguish itself from a zoo...my local zoo is FREE and it's newer animal exhibits are every bit as themed and as good as the trails and exhibits at AK--even if you disagree- there is no way the difference is worth $50/day.


Paul

 

[Cricket2]

Did you just say "Pish"?

Originally posted by DisneyKidds
Pish!!!!

Why yes, you did just say "Pish"! What's up with that?

On my first visit, I gave AK the benifit of the doubt and did everything I could. Did it take me more than a few hours, yes.

Was it worth me spending more than a half day there, no.

My perception of it's "true taste" was correct in the first hour or so, which validates my point. Sure AK had more time consuming activities to fill my vacation hours, but I did not need to be there more time to determine that.

I'd rather play golf, and I don't play golf.

JC

 

[PKS44]

As Mark Twain is rumored to have said: "Golf is just a good walk, spoiled."

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Day off of work, Mr. Kidds? Or perhaps we just didn’t take our meds today! Anyway, you certainly hit the mark (if your intent was to stir the pot a little, as I guess it was). You even brought me out of semi-retirement. But not to argue your tired (and rather slanted) position. No!! Instead a little sentence caught my eye a couple of posts ago.

I agree that AK has problems.

Care to delineate those problems from your perspective?

And…

However, I don't think adding another 10 attractions is going to solve those problems, do you?

Why wouldn’t “adding another 10 attractions” (assuming of course they were “Disney” attractions) help?

 

[SnackyStacky]

I'll bite. If we use your figures (which I think are flawed, but like I said...I'll bite) sure, Animal Kingdom is a full day plus park.

BUT, that's in theory. (Once again, a very flawed theory) In practicality, it is a half day park because not everybody likes everything that's there. The big difference is that in someplace like the Magic Kingdom, if you don't do the stuff you don't like, there's still plenty of choices!

If you don't like 50% of what's available at the Magic Kingdom, that still leaves about 25 choices to do things. (I recall reading at one point that attraction count at the magic Kingdom was about 55 or so?) If you don't do 50% of what's available at Animal Kingdom, that's about 9 attractions. NINE?! And that's including character greetings. Calling character greetings an attraction is a REAL stretch.

Let's face it, no matter what they do, even if they have 200 E-Ticket rides, not every ride is going to be for everybody. There are VERY few people who do each and every last attraction in every park.

 

[gbxxxi]

Hi!

I have been reading these boards for quite a while, but never quite felt like posting a reply until now (some of you can be a tad intimidating! ). So - I figured, I might as well chime in on this topic.

I do not think that it is possible for any of you to determine what is a "half-day" park for everyone else. A half-day park for me may not be the same as a half-day park for you and vice versa.

That is what makes Disney so special! There is something there for almost everyone - except for maybe the hardcore thrill seekers....

For my wife and I, AK is at least a full-day park. The Studios would be the only non-full-day park for us and even that is an 6 to 8 hour park for us when we go.

It is a personal feeling as to what constitutes a half-day park or not. It is not something that is so cut and dry that a park can be labeled a half-day park for everyone. Just my two cents.....

Mark

 

[disneefamily]

Disnee Dad Says............................. How did you calculate the numbers on the first post? We waited less than 5 minutes for the Safari and it seemed about 20 minutes long, not 40. Rode Kali River Rapids twice in 20 minutes, and didn't even have to get out of the raft. Rode Primevil Whirl 3 times in 20 minutes. Tricera Top Spin in about seven minutes. Waited about 15 minutes for Lion King and still had great seats Got FP for Dinosaur,before Primeval and TriceraTop so walked on and the ride is only ten minutes including the preshow. Did 62.5% of the park in half a day. Skipped Rafiki's PLanet Watch, thats 4 "attractions" You can do in less than hour. I guess I could stare at " Discover the Stories Behind the Magic" for five minutes, same thing for "The Oasis Exhibits" Walk through JUngle Trek and Exploration Trail and hit Pocahontus on the way out. That's 92% of the park in six hours, skipping only the parade and Tarzan rocks. I'm sure many people consider 6 hours in a park only half a day. I'm in at 8, out by 2 and can spend 6 hours at EPCOT. Wait, add 20 minutes to eat lunch. So it's a 3/4 day park to see every little thing they have.