Disneyworld needs updated to better attract tweens and teens

[Jacquie668]

There's certainly nothing wrong with planning or building headliners. Where does anyone get that people are saying 'don't add anything'?

A ride does not have to be a thrill ride to be a headliner. Look at Soarin'. Look at some of the most enduring rides in MK.....Thunder Mountain is hardly a thrill coaster and it's one of the most loved.

Disney knows what they're doing. They know if they completely change the timber of new attractions, they will change who comes to the parks. They don't want to alienate families. And they know they can continue to attract teens and young adults with creative and brilliant rides. And yes, they will continue to develop rides with 'thrill' components, like Mission to Mars, while also maintaining the imagination and other kinds of attractions that define who Disney is.

Disney is not Universal Studios. I don't get cranky at the car deaerlship because I can't buy a motorcycle there. They are different things.

Agree!

As for "Where does anyone get that people are saying 'don't add anything'?" I think people either don't take the time to read or they are just wanting to argue for the sake of arguing. Maybe a little of both...

 

[North of Mouse]

There's certainly nothing wrong with planning or building headliners. Where does anyone get that people are saying 'don't add anything'?

A ride does not have to be a thrill ride to be a headliner. Look at Soarin'. Look at some of the most enduring rides in MK.....Thunder Mountain is hardly a thrill coaster and it's one of the most loved.

Disney knows what they're doing. They know if they completely change the timber of new attractions, they will change who comes to the parks. They don't want to alienate families. And they know they can continue to attract teens and young adults with creative and brilliant rides. And yes, they will continue to develop rides with 'thrill' components, like Mission to Mars, while also maintaining the imagination and other kinds of attractions that define who Disney is.

Disney is not Universal Studios. I don't get cranky at the car deaerlship because I can't buy a motorcycle there. They are different things.

Definitely agree!

 

[Love Tink]

Thunder Mountain is hardly a thrill coaster and it's one of the most loved.

Thunder Mountain is absolutely a thrill ride. There are seven attractions at WDW theme parks that I would consider thrill rides - rides that include speed and/or drops - and every single one is just dripping with Disney Magic.

 

[Mad Hattered]

Thunder Mountain is absolutely a thrill ride. There are seven attractions at WDW theme parks that I would consider thrill rides - rides that include speed and/or drops - and every single one is just dripping with Disney Magic.

Or crumbling.....it depends on how you look at it.

 

[ThreeBeans]

Thunder Mountain is absolutely a thrill ride. There are seven attractions at WDW theme parks that I would consider thrill rides - rides that include speed and/or drops - and every single one is just dripping with Disney Magic.

It's certainly not a thrill coaster; not compared to what the OP is referring to, the terrifying stuff you can find at US or Six Flags. BTMR is preschooler and grandma friendly.

 

[bcrook]

They only really like splash mountain and big thunder mountain railroad at Magic Kingdom, TOT and Rockin Rollercoaster at the Studios. They are finally telling me they don't really care to go to disney anymore which is heartbreaking for me as I love the place.

The OP used Tower of Terror, Rockin Roller Coaster, Splash Mountain and BTMRR as the exemplars here. No mention of big scary rides. I think a lot of "thrill" seekers really want New Technology. The opposite of the new Little Mermaid ride. Cutting edge stuff. That is what Disney was known for.

 

[DorianDonP]

It's certainly not a thrill coaster; not compared to what the OP is referring to, the terrifying stuff you can find at US or Six Flags. BTMR is preschooler and grandma friendly.

Where did the OP make mention of terrifying stuff?

 

[Planogirl]

I clicked on this thread and I have to say the reposnses really shock me. They are so overwhelmingly one way...and it's the opposite of what logic would dictate.

The responses seem to be saying that Disney should be magical for everyone...so we shouldn't add anything. Huh? If we really want it to be magical for everyone, adding things can only help in that pursuit. Nothing is lost by gaining.

I couldn't care less for signature restaurants or really any table service meals. But I would never say that because they aren't for me and my family, they shouldn't be part of Disney. We don't bother with most shows. They aren't what Disney is about, for us. I would never suggest that therefore, others are "wrong" and shows shouldn't exist. More is better.

Also, how exactly are thrill rides un-Disney? Space Mountain and Expedition Everest and Tower of Terror seem pretty darn Disney to me. Weird.

Voice of reason. No one is wrong, we just have different tastes.

I realize this topic has strayed a little from the original teen/tween appeal in Disney but I wanted to briefly comment on that.

As a late teen (19) who just returned from a trip to Disney, I can say that I don't think Disney needs to focus on appealing to teens/tweens. The parks are designed to appeal to the child in us all, and I have no shame in admitting that's why I love the World so much. I still love riding the Dumbos just as much as I like EE, or ToT.

I choose to spend my money to go to Disney for an experience. It's not just rides, food and shows and I think most hardcore Disney fans can agree with that.

As for all the talk of improvements, changes, etc I think there will always be people who want to see something different and Disney realizes that. As Walt hoped, Disney will never be completed and will always be changing to offer something new to its returning guests. That being said, there will always be people who are unhappy with the changes. You just can't please everyone. The way I see it is if you don't want to see the Mine Train, or the proposed Avatarland, then don't visit those.

Another voice of reason. People can simply skip what they don't like. Most of us probably do that now already.

There's certainly nothing wrong with planning or building headliners. Where does anyone get that people are saying 'don't add anything'?

A ride does not have to be a thrill ride to be a headliner. Look at Soarin'. Look at some of the most enduring rides in MK.....Thunder Mountain is hardly a thrill coaster and it's one of the most loved.

Disney knows what they're doing. They know if they completely change the timber of new attractions, they will change who comes to the parks. They don't want to alienate families. And they know they can continue to attract teens and young adults with creative and brilliant rides. And yes, they will continue to develop rides with 'thrill' components, like Mission to Mars, while also maintaining the imagination and other kinds of attractions that define who Disney is.

Disney is not Universal Studios. I don't get cranky at the car deaerlship because I can't buy a motorcycle there. They are different things.

I love your last comment and hope that you don't mind if I borrow it. I love both WDW and Universal and I think that your comments sum up my feelings quite nicely.

 

[tiggger1]

I am guessing that they hired their own vet staff and they probably have all major equipment they need, with as little outsourcing as possible.

 

[dadddio]

My info didn't come from a wiki page, Jacquie668's did.

I checked their SEC filings.

At least some of us do our research. Attributing the increase in visitors solely to the economy is not based in fact. Stating there are still "big problems" is contradictory to their just announcing a ten-fold increase in stock dividends. If those are problems, I'd like more of them.

JUST SAYIN'.

Do you see their revolving door management to be a good thing, also?