. It is amazing though, that you and I can use the same post as ammunition in our arsenal 
. I, too, would look to Pig Pen's post as clear evidence that AK is most certainly NOT a half day park. Get all that crazy math (is that the new math the kids are always talking about 
) out of your head and go back and read the post with a clear mind. 
.Nice try, but no. First off, there is not much walking time factored into my numbers. Second, no little legs to factor in. Even with the kiddies, we move around by stroller. Perhaps you can move a little faster than my stroller, but I defy you to make it from Lion King to Tarzan in much less than 5 minutes, even if you have Paul Bunyan strides. I didn't figure bathroom breaks. Fact is, there is very little skewing my numbers, and I once again refer to the Pen.
Ah, Baron. I bet I could get a half dozen posts out of you by virtue of my non answers, but it isn't too late so maybe I'll give you something this go around
. But not just yet..........I'd like to see that plan. We are seasoned vets who know how to move around a park. We don't waste time, and I can assure you that "all but one or two before four" is, quite frankly, impossible.
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.
.Snacky has hit on a key here I guess. I also know your answer to the problem, that the park should offer more. You didn't need to go on about attraction counts for me to agree that AK is less of a park than MK. Yeah, it has less attractions. So, if quantity is your measure, AK is less of a park. But I don't know that I like the answer to solving this problem of the diverse audience, and that is building more parks like the MK. The MK has no less than 53 attractions. However, that spans not just different lands, but lands that cover half a dozen different genres. AK is ONE genre. Do you really think that they could get 53+ attractions into the AK? Not with the concept, which was to have a park that was dedicated and focused on rides, shows and attractions based on a single genre - animals. I don't know that I want Disney building more Magic Kingdoms with a different theme, do you?
.
Exactly NOT. This only makes it a half day park for those who choose to make it so. It is a very individual thing. AK is a full day park that people only choose to see half of. Why don't you talk about why that is, rather than just hurling the half day insult? Half day park for them, but that is far different from half day park in general.
Been a while since I saw any attendance analysis, but I don't think the numbers I recall bear that out. Maybe that happy and sure to be gloating Raiders fan will help us out here.
In case you missed it, I agree on quantity that it is less of a park, but that is for reasons more than just cheap, I believe. No way the AK could support 53+attractions given the limited theme.
I have very little time factored in for walking. If I did an analysis on the MK I'd have to allow for time to get from Splash to Space - you have to. And you are going to to do better than this same old, same old
.I'll wait until you stop saying the same thing over, and over, and over.............to determine what is or is not in my favor
. Show me what your have, besides a desire to throw insults at a park without attempting to understand the park and it's problems. Come on, show me what you've got 
.
Then mea culpa.
Show me some reilable numbers..................and if you quote numbers incorrectly???? then what? Is it like that old Monty Python sketch "Stake your Claim" where the guy claims to have written all of Shakespeare's plays until he is asked how he could have written plays performed before he was born--so he just says "well, this is where my claim falls to the ground...".
Feel free to move past the first concept any time you like, and on to discussing the real causes for the problems. And if you want to continue on this point - a rather simple one that AK physically contains enough entertainment to keep a guest busy for a day plus - you can shed some light on why you think people choose not to avail themselves of it. Furthermore, my point isn't about how long it takes me to tour the park, it is about the amount of entertainment that is provided in the park. Step back and stop looking at what you like to do in the AK and assess how long you think it would take you to see most of what is offered. Then tell us why you choose not to see it. Is that why many guests choose not to see the attractions? Really talk about the root causes for the problems. One of which is not that.............
Really, do you think one additional area (land) with a couple of rides, a show and a few other attractions would have changed the landscape of the AK that significantly? That is such a common refrain from those who don't care for the AK, but I just don't see it. I believe that AK's problems run deeper than that, but I really don't know why. If AK had Beastly Kingdom next year I'm sure it might extend your time in the AK by a marginal amount. You'd ride whatever E ticket was provided and see a couple other things, and extend your 4 hour AK visit to maybe 6. But is Beastly Kingdom going to make you, or others, suddenly want to experience all the things in the AK that you didn't choose to see before? Stop looking for the obvious answer and the easy way out.
Get real
. Ok, maybe it is only 2 or 3 attractions that you want to do but let's not throw out baseless, exaggerated insults.Stating that AK has attendance problems, stating that it has less attractions than another park, stating that you think there is a lack of quality in some of the attractions, etc, etc. would be your description of what you believe the parks failures to be. Talk some more about those. However, while these things might make it a half day park for you, calling the AK a half day park in general is an insult, IMHO.
Is the answer that all parks have to be created like the MK or Epcot? Maybe it is, I really don't know. However, I like to see Disney take some chances and do new things. I don't think frugality was the main reason why AK was made the way it was. Sure, to save they cut out Beastly Kingdom, but I really don't see that that would have helped to prevent the problems that AK has. Unfortunately the public doesn't always embrace new or different ideas.
Maybe this is part of the problem, that Disney conditioned it's guests to look at things in a certain way. Camp MinnieMickey is not a "land". I don't believe Disney calls it a "land". However, you (and others) view it from that perspective and get insulted that is isn't as comprehensive as Adventureland in the MK. Again, does everything have to be like the MK?
It has nothing to do with soft spots. I simply take my family to the Disney parks and we do what everyone in the family enjoys. We choose to avail ourselves of most of what each of the parks has to offer our group, and the AK simply offers a days + worth of entertainment. For others it doesn't - different strokes I guess.
Choose to read things however you like, but this is not what I am doing. Did you miss all that talk I have in my last few posts about problems at the AK? I originally had one simple point that still stands. If you look at all of the entertainment that is offered in the AK, there is a full days + worth of things to do. As such, AK is not a "half day" park, or a park that has no more attractions than could fill a half day - that is clear. No one is wrong, and I didn't say they were, about the fact that people don't want to see much of what is offered. So let's talk more about that now.
), but I know you love this stuff . Thanks for the banter.................................and keep it coming.
)Go back and look at my last few posts. That's what I've been TRYING to do. While you may have conceded that other point, not everyone has
.
Yes, but the responses you are quoting are not aimed at you
. Now let me quote myself (in context)..........You see, I have moved on.............and so have you. Any reasonable person would
, agreeing that AK is a full day park that some people just choose to spend a half day in. But so long as people (yourself not included) claim that you can see the whole park in a half day - I'll keep beating the drum .As the Baron might say................YES!!!!! FINALLY!!!!!!!!!!
Unfortunately they do, and unfortunately that is not what was intended to be the focus of the AK. If you primarily want rides that are contained within a zoo setting, go to Busch Gardens. I believe AK was trying to be something different. Unfortunately it wasn't what people want.
No, they don't. However, most zoos aren't free. Zoos like the Bronx Zoo and Philadelphia Zoo might be half the price of the AK, but I do believe that AK is worth more. I can spend a day plus at the Bronx zoo - there is that much to do. I can spend a day plus at the AK - there is that much to do. I do think that the AK is worth more when you look at the offerings. Yes, zoos are relatively cheap, but even adding 5 rides and 5 shows (to the zoo elements that the others have) warrants a higher cost, IMHO. While a day at the Bronx Zoo is fun and interesting, a day at AK is much better.
That very well could be. As I always say - expectations are everything. If someone goes expecting rides, doesn't find them, and proceeds to skip what is there - they will only spend a half day - but they miss so much.
Ask and ye shall receive...
