For $2 Billion Disney could have built 16 major attractions instead of fast pass+

[magicbob]

I believe that OLC was able to secure exclusivity clauses in their contracts for certain attractions. This was sort of an incentive to invest. I believe some attractions do have expirations to their exclusive rights. The same thing holds for Shanghai and Hong Kong.

I would love to have some of these attractions in the US.

Agreed.

New attractions don't have to be "thrill" rides to be thrilling. Ratatouille in Paris is wonderful. Tokyo's version of 20K Leagues at DisneySea doesn't require a huge lagoon. Mystic Manor in Hong Kong is astonishing. Even though MM is HK's "haunted mansion" it shares nothing in common with HM and wouldn't be redundant (especially if added at DHS with it's upcoming non-studio identity).

All of the above are highly themed "non-thrill" rides that would be awesome additions to WDW.

Here's another thought... How about spending some of those billions on repairing stuff that doesn't work any more? I know that fixing Betty Yeti is a bridge too far because they would have to close the ride for a long time. But how about getting simpler animatronics working again in rides like Splash Mountain, Pirates, etc.?

In Disney's "golden age" you would never see a single lightbulb out. Now when stuff doesn't work any more, they just say "The ride is good enough whether the character moves or not." And, besides, the all-important first-timer won't know the difference anyway, right?

Even those who like thrill rides agree that Disney is not Six Flags. It pains me to see them take a Six Flags approach when it comes to sacrificing many of the little details that set them apart. But alas, those details cost money and the only ROI is the guest's experience.

 

[MrInfinity]

Do you work for Disney? That's a serious question.

No. But I believe they are so profitable because they are a company run by brilliant people that operate by pioneering new things. McDonalds is a similar company for fast food. I remember the parks dearly from youth, think they're worlds more amazing today, and we love going and having fun. That's why we keep going. Meanwhile there's the same 5 or 10 people that are constantly out here complaining, and if you say you like Disney world people will insult you, say you're drinking cool-aid (?), do not see the truth, or work for Disney. It's kind of depressing. So my views of Disney are not depressing, so you see them as I must work there since I differ from you.

The theming of Fantasyland was nice but the rides were a disappointment. Little Mermaid could have been so much more. A lot of people expected more from the 7D mine train (I don't think its a bad ride but it could have been more).

You mean the rides could have been more thrilling. They were never meant to be! They could have been yellow too. They could have been built out of sheep. You could name an infinite number of things they could have been that they were never intended to be. So you would have built something else. Great. Be disappointed. I, and judging by their soaring stock, ticket prices, and attendance the majority of the rest of the world, think the EF is pretty darn cool.

Would I have done anything different? Sure. But I don't think what they did is bad.

What expectations do you have that Frozen at Norway will be a fun ride? Frankly, I'd be surprised if its nothing more than a boat ride with some frozen characters dancing around the screen (similar to the boat ride in Mexico).

I said on the Frozen thread I thought Frozen was worthy of revamping the entire Ellen's Energy pavilion for and building an ice palace, not just turning Norway into Arendelle.

Test Track refurb was a massive disappointment. I like the car design but the ride itself just has some neon signs. Nothing changed.

You say this... But it WASNT. We never rode TT or Imagination pre-refurb, and those are two of our absolute favorite rides not just at Disney World but among all parks everywhere! Our kids LOVE it. Based on the lines, and the fact that the Dis recommends ppl take a FP+ for it or ride single rider, the rest of the world thinks this too. So they skinned it for GM cuz GM infused some cash. Why does this bother you so much?

What do you mean "Soarin 2014." I have no idea what that means.

Soarin getting a 3rd theater (rumor) and new film (confirmed) instead of showing the Cali Disneyland film.

Avatarland - Remains to be seen

True, but the concept art is great. Boat ride thru Pandora will be amazing, and flying-type ride will have to see how it is differentiated from Soarin.

Star Wars Land - So far away not even worth discussing right now

It's not as far off as you think. I'm guessing this will not be as much of an earth-moving ordeal like at the EF and Pandora. So these rides will go in quicker, plus they will want this to open in phases shortly after the movies come out.

 

[FLchick415]

Nope. Just some unbiased posters are getting a little tired of fuzzylogic trying to ram down our throats how awesome FP+ is and how Disney can do no wrong.

Just like I'm sure there are a number of people who are a little tired of hearing "FP+ sucks! Everything is awful!"

 

[MrInfinity]

Nope. Just some unbiased posters are getting a little tired of fuzzylogic trying to ram down our throats how awesome FP+ is and how Disney can do no wrong.

Wow! This is pretty inappropriate! I mean... I like a good honest debate as much as anyone, and some people share some strong cases that make for an interesting discussion. But if this is how you feel you should really go reset. It's a forum.

So your whole argument is those who don't like the SDMT are "unbiased posters" but someone who shares a counter view is trying to "ram down your throats." Yeeeeeeah oookay.

I've never once said anything negative about you. I respect your opinion. Perhaps you should consider the same.

 

[MrInfinity]

Test track refurb was so-so. Nothing fabulous. As far a Soarin, what refurbishment? I've heard rumors, but nothing else. Same with DHS and Star Wars.
I just don't understand how you can be excited by nothing but rumors. Based on your statements, it seems that you'll be happy with anything Disney does even if it turns out that they do nothing.

They're not doing nothing. They've done SO MUCH.

I don't see why people who want thrill rides keep coming back to "Yeah but Disney didn't make SDMT to be what I wanted it to be - finally a world-class thrill ride coming to Walt Disney World! That would be immensely grand!" NO. It was never meant to be that! It's a family coaster with low 38" requirement that is advertised as having quick turns and a dark portion. This IS incredibly valuable to families who will go vacation there, and it's not what it was never meant to be.

Meanwhile I've reiterated that in the 5 year period from 2012-2017, they will have done major work at all 4 parks from ride refurbishments to complete land constructions, gutted DTD, and added and majorly remodeled several hotels - and some folks will just come back to how I can be excited about nothing.

To some people, yes, until they see a thrill ride, anything else will be construed as nothing but that is just those people. Disney has done, and will do so much in that 5 year period it's hard to believe they've fit it all in while adding a technological MyMagic+ system at the same time. They did not do MyMagic+ in lieu of attention to parks... they've majorly remodeled or at least refurbished several rides at every park and built MM+, and raised their dividend to investors too!

 

[Laketravis]

I believe they are so profitable because they are a company run by brilliant people that operate by pioneering new things. McDonalds is a similar company for fast food.

I think you just summed up why some of us are concerned. Not mad, not hateful, but concerned.

McDonald's is in a world of hurt right now. Why? Because they are the inverse of Disney - Mickey D's does well when the economy is not and people want a cheap meal; Mickey M does well when the economy is better and people are comfortable spending large $$$'s on a vacation.

But now Mickey D's has to compete with fast casual (Chipotle, Panera, etc) and they've been losing ground over the last several years. They moved away from what made them successful (cheap, fast, acceptable quality) by trying to compete with Starbucks/Ethnic/Sandwich shops in an economy where people are willing to spend a little more for better quality. But they are still McDonalds, and sales are flat. (this same economic/market scenario currently applies to Walmart as well).

Anyway, back to Mickey M - sure, in terms of revenue and market capitalization they are doing well right now. But that has just as much to do with an economy full of people willing to spend money as it does 7DMT or a new restaurant opening on Boardwalk.

To some of us, it seems like WDW is riding this wave but not standing up on the surfboard. They don't appear to be making investments in collateral that will hold them up when the next economic cycle appears in terms of being a draw for people who are looking for more for their money. If what we've seen them do during periods of record revenue and wide profit margins is the best they can do, there is concern over what they would bring to the table when margins are tight, there's nothing available for cap-ex, and fewer guests demand more at lower prices.

I don't know how to explain it any better than that.

 

[MrInfinity]

To some of us, it seems like WDW is riding this wave but not standing up on the surfboard. They don't appear to be making investments in collateral that will hold them up when the next economic cycle appears in terms of being a draw for people who are looking for more for their money. If what we've seen them do during periods of record revenue and wide profit margins is the best they can do, there is concern over what they would bring to the table when margins are tight, there's nothing available for cap-ex, and fewer guests demand more at lower prices.

I don't know how to explain it any better than that.

You can't explain it better than that, because to you, what they're putting in is just not what you want out of a theme park. I could list out 50 major things that range from pretty good to revolutionary to the bulk of visitors, and you would reply back in bullet form...

* sucks
* lame
* this does not appeal to me
* they do not need more of this
* same old
* uninspiring
* just a paint job
* see now that's fuzzy logic
* I can eat for less
* I don't need to shop
* this is not the ride I wanted them to build
* money from this should have been spent on a ride for me
* don't need more hotels
* food is great but we need a thrill ride
* who cares

Even tho Disney is in a period of major renovation, and I think, a really wonderful time to have kids and be visiting the world, you are just not inspired cuz they have not focused on YOU. If I could point out 50 awesome things and you have nothing nice to say about most of them, then really I think Disney World is just not your ideal park for you and your family. There are parks out there that put in a bunch of cheap high-thrill roller coasters that are more up your alley.

 

[JanaDee]

Wow! This is pretty inappropriate! I mean... I like a good honest debate as much as anyone, and some people share some strong cases that make for an interesting discussion. But if this is how you feel you should really go reset. It's a forum.

So your whole argument is those who don't like the SDMT are "unbiased posters" but someone who shares a counter view is trying to "ram down your throats." Yeeeeeeah oookay.

I've never once said anything negative about you. I respect your opinion. Perhaps you should consider the same.

Negative about Money82? No, but you sure have about other posters that have a different opinion than you.

 

[Laketravis]

You certainly do have a habit of attacking the individual rendering an analysis, rather than focusing on the subject of the analysis. That's not a "good, honest debate".

Which is really ironic, because on some levels you agree with me. In another thread you had this to say about Frozen:

They could have done so much more with this.....I would have put Frozen in place of Ellen's Energy, and built that pavilion up into a crystal palace....ditching a junk ride instead of a moderately popular one.....instead of killing off Norway.....would alleviate the feelings of Tier-2 being worthless.

 

[Cyrano]

Moving to TP community

 

[Laketravis]

.....

 

[Suvadoo]

They're not doing nothing. They've done SO MUCH.

I don't see why people who want thrill rides keep coming back to "Yeah but Disney didn't make SDMT to be what I wanted it to be - finally a world-class thrill ride coming to Walt Disney World! That would be immensely grand!" NO. It was never meant to be that! It's a family coaster with low 38" requirement that is advertised as having quick turns and a dark portion. This IS incredibly valuable to families who will go vacation there, and it's not what it was never meant to be.

Meanwhile I've reiterated that in the 5 year period from 2012-2017, they will have done major work at all 4 parks from ride refurbishments to complete land constructions, gutted DTD, and added and majorly remodeled several hotels - and some folks will just come back to how I can be excited about nothing.

To some people, yes, until they see a thrill ride, anything else will be construed as nothing but that is just those people. Disney has done, and will do so much in that 5 year period it's hard to believe they've fit it all in while adding a technological MyMagic+ system at the same time. They did not do MyMagic+ in lieu of attention to parks... they've majorly remodeled or at least refurbished several rides at every park and built MM+, and raised their dividend to investors too!

I didn't say anything about thrill rides! I don't care what kind of attraction Disney creates, as long as it's well themed.
My comments were about you spinning Rumors into Facts:
1. None of us know what Avatarland will be like or what will be built, until it opens. You can speculate, but it's not fact.

2. Soarin' : there are rumors again about an additional glider, but that's it Rumors. As for the new film, no one has a clue when that will come to the US parks, so again you're speculating. And on this one you said 2015, but this is a guess, not a fact.

3. DHS and Star Wars is another rumor. Yes, Mr Eiger said it would be a presence in the parks. Did he say which parks? No Did he say when? No

Ok so how can you make all of these statements about how fabulous WDW is going to be based on a bunch of rumors? I wouldn't have even brought it up if you had prefaced your comments with, "I think dinsey will be great if..." But your post makes it sound like all of these projects are facts and they're not. They may be in the future, but not right now.

Additionally, you say that it's the same people who are criticizing Disney, and I agree. It's also the same people who are always praising Disney. There are a limited number of posters on these boards. It's always going to be the same people who have differing opinions.

 

[MrInfinity]

Let's take just one example of the disgruntledness of some: Tangled.

One set of people likes to mock this and say things like "oh but Rapunzel got a bathroom". Yes a functional element (bathroom) got some awesome theming. Great! Yet, other people look at the new parking lot (another functional element) and complain about how it was not themed. So-- You theme it, ppl will complain that they wasted money theming something unnecessary instead of building a ride. You don't theme it, ppl will complain they missed the magic. Which do you want?

Some folks complain both ways about exact opposite views. Such are forums! Lots of completely opposite viewpoints.

If they made the parking lot themed to Wreck-It-Ralph and added some neon and made it feel like you're in a video game people would be happy? No. THen people would complain, like Rapunzel, that "Wreck-It-Ralph got a parking lot". And they would say it's just neon and cardboard like Test Track. Well what else is decorating - especially to theme Wreck-It-Ralph?

But you see to me, the bathrooms go so beyond that. Becuase at a Six Flags, you'd find a barren bathroom with plain tiled floor and (hopefully) working blowers. Disney does up the bathrooms in a grand scale, and people complain about it.

I think they took the most prominent part of Tangled (the tower) and they put that at Disney World. It's right there! Great photo op. My kids liked seeing it. It triggers the movie in your mind. So it's not just the bathrooms, but an entire tower too. We sat on the wall by it and ate our LaFou's Brews. "but that's not a ride"... Well if they made it an attraction where you go up in the tower and look at all of Rapunzel's artwork (dramatic turning point of the movie) would you then be inspired? If it was like the Robinsons Treehouse? Go up, look, be in awe, go down? Still no. It would be a "meh" thing to the same 10 ppl out here who are not inspired by it being anything other than a thrill ride.

Had they made it a barren bathroom, ppl would complain that it's barren. Then ppl complain about not incorporating movies, but then they bring in the movies and ppl still complain.

I don't look at anything they did w Tangled as bad ~in any way~. They built a bathroom, they incorporated a movie, they built Rapunzels tower, there was some play feature outside the bathrooms my kids hung out at while we waited for each other.

It was nice! Plain and simple. Well themed, served its purpose. Sure it was not a game-changer "hey let's go to Disney World to see the bathrooms" moment, but it was VERY consistent w the general practice of doing everything nicely themed, such that otherwise mundane experiences are set to a nice backdrop, nice magic.

While all this is about just 1 very simple thing (theming an area that is not related to a ride which any other park would completely skip over) I think they did it very well. If you don't like it, that's totally cool w me, but I did.

It was just a tiny bit of magic and at a very high cost I'm sure - but these mundane things being themed so well is what sets Disney apart from other parks.

 

[Laketravis]

I think at this point it's obvious you've convinced yourself that everything Disney is awesome and if somebody doesn't agree with you they have a problem and belong at Six Flags.

I'll check back with you in a couple of years and we'll compare notes.

 

[Andtototoo]

I think so much of this debate is about value and understanding that personal preferences (value) are not universal truths.

The value of any product or experience is based on the individual's estimation of enjoyment divided by price (money and time and perception of important qualities). There is no right or wrong, truth or falsehood when it comes to value. Value of a product or experience is not universal. It can be general, but not universal. And it's certainly not a black and white TRUTH. It's just a taste, opinion, preference.

As an example: My sister and I both I like X brand of coffee. We buy it at a cost of $10/box of cups. We both find value in that taste at that price.

Then the company raises the price to $11/box. Now I have to decide if my enjoyment of X is worth the additional price. Okay, it is. But then, I don't get a raise at work. So X is costing me in real terms -- based on MY income -- more than it did before. Do I keep drinking X? I decide to keep drinking X because I still like that coffee!

Then the company decreases the amount of coffee in each cup while not decreasing the price. This move surprises me in an unhappy way. First is the price issue: Now X is costing me -- based on MY income -- even more than it did before. At this point, I have to ask myself if I'm getting a good value for MY money in MY opinion. Secondly, the coffee, while still good, is weaker than it was before and it is not my top preference. Thirdly, I may also dislike the principle of decreasing the amount of the coffee in each cup while keeping the higher price and that dislike may affect my actual enjoyment of the coffee. At that point, I decide to stop buying X coffee and look for another brand.

Meanwhile, my sister who also drinks X coffee says she'll keep buying that coffee no matter what because it's far and away the best coffee she's ever tasted and she doesn't mind the weaker taste. Plus she doesn't care that the amount of coffee is smaller but the price is the same. So the value for her remains high and the price is worth it.

Her opinion and taste preferences are totally irrelevant to my decision-making as mine are to hers. My choice is based on the value I find in that product, as hers is to her. Neither her nor my value or preferences or taste are absolute truths for everyone. They are only our individual value judgments that inform our individual choices about how to spend our money and/or our time.

 

[JanaDee]

I think at this point it's obvious you've convinced yourself that everything Disney is awesome and if somebody doesn't agree with you they have a problem and belong at Six Flags.

I'll check back with you in a couple of years and we'll compare notes.

Now that the thread has been moved to the TP CB, the discussion is over anyway. This is where threads go to die.

 

[MrInfinity]

Now that the thread has been moved to the TP CB, the discussion is over anyway. This is where threads go to die.

Yep. I'd never even seen this category before... Seems it's mostly people sharing pictures?

Well... When in Rome!

Sitting outside the Rapunzel bathrooms. Clearly the takeaway was "this is terrible why wasn't a ride right here instead!"

 

[johde]

They're not doing nothing. They've done SO MUCH.

Meanwhile I've reiterated that in the 5 year period from 2012-2017, they will have done major work at all 4 parks from ride refurbishments to complete land constructions, gutted DTD, and added and majorly remodeled several hotels - and some folks will just come back to how I can be excited about nothing.

The trouble is your looking at 3 years of hopes and dreams that other than Avatar and the Frozen ride (can you count Frozen as major) haven't been formally been announced. If you look at the reality of the last 5 years 2010 - 2014 (yes thats 5 years) and look at all of the wonderful things in the parks.

Magic Kingdom.
New Fantasy Land. I'll give you this one. 2 nice new rides, new themed restaurants, moving and expanding dumbo, several expanded meet and greets.
A bunch of interactive Queues

EPCOT
Test Track test "Tron" makeover
Captain EO return to Imagination
Agent P replace Kim Possible
Musical WS performers replaced

DHS
Disney Jr. on Stage
Frozen Sing Along
Back Lot Tour closes
Legend of Jack Sparrow Opened and Closed

DAK
New home for Festival of the Lion King
New Street Performers.

5 years 2 new rides, 1 major rethemed rides, 1 minor ride retheming, several new restaurants and shop, 1 1/2 "new lands" (New Fantasyland, Storybook Circus)

Compare the list above at 4 theme parks to the list below at the 2 theme parks of Universal

USF
Diagon Alley, complete new land with 2 rides, shops, restaurants and shows, all incredibly themed.

Expansion of Simpsons ride into Springfield land with rethemeing of surrounding restaurants and area and adding of kiddy ride.

Adding Transformers Ride.

Retheming Jimmy Neutron ride to Despicable Me.

IOA
Hogsmead, Rethemeing/New land with a new ride and shows.

2 themeparks: 5 new rides (4 of them "D or E" ticket), 1 major ride retheming, 2 minor ride rethemings, several new restaurants and shops. 2 1/2 new lands (Hogsmead, Diagon Alley, Springfield)

People are very much of a "what have you done for me lately". In the 1990 - 2003 WDW had that in spades. These last 5 year you've had FLE and a lot of fluff, rumor and promise for the future. In contrast, the early 2000's in a lot of way were dark for Universal.

 

[Suvadoo]

I think so much of this debate is about value and understanding that personal preferences (value) are not universal truths.

The value of any product or experience is based on the individual's estimation of enjoyment divided by price (money and time and perception of important qualities). There is no right or wrong, truth or falsehood when it comes to value. Value of a product or experience is not universal. It can be general, but not universal. And it's certainly not a black and white TRUTH. It's just a taste, opinion, preference.

As an example: My sister and I both I like X brand of coffee. We buy it at a cost of $10/box of cups. We both find value in that taste at that price.

Then the company raises the price to $11/box. Now I have to decide if my enjoyment of X is worth the additional price. Okay, it is. But then, I don't get a raise at work. So X is costing me in real terms -- based on MY income -- more than it did before. Do I keep drinking X? I decide to keep drinking X because I still like that coffee!

Then the company decreases the amount of coffee in each cup while not decreasing the price. This move surprises me in an unhappy way. First is the price issue: Now X is costing me -- based on MY income -- even more than it did before. At this point, I have to ask myself if I'm getting a good value for MY money in MY opinion. Secondly, the coffee, while still good, is weaker than it was before and it is not my top preference. Thirdly, I may also dislike the principle of decreasing the amount of the coffee in each cup while keeping the higher price and that dislike may affect my actual enjoyment of the coffee. At that point, I decide to stop buying X coffee and look for another brand.

Meanwhile, my sister who also drinks X coffee says she'll keep buying that coffee no matter what because it's far and away the best coffee she's ever tasted and she doesn't mind the weaker taste. Plus she doesn't care that the amount of coffee is smaller but the price is the same. So the value for her remains high and the price is worth it.

Her opinion and taste preferences are totally irrelevant to my decision-making as mine are to hers. My choice is based on the value I find in that product, as hers is to her. Neither her nor my value or preferences or taste are absolute truths for everyone. They are only our individual value judgments that inform our individual choices about how to spend our money and/or our time.

Nice comparison. I just don't find value in what is supposed to happen. I find value in reality, not a bunch of expoectaions.

 

[Money82]

No. But I believe they are so profitable because they are a company run by brilliant people that operate by pioneering new things. McDonalds is a similar company for fast food. I remember the parks dearly from youth, think they're worlds more amazing today, and we love going and having fun. That's why we keep going. Meanwhile there's the same 5 or 10 people that are constantly out here complaining, and if you say you like Disney world people will insult you, say you're drinking cool-aid (?), do not see the truth, or work for Disney. It's kind of depressing. So my views
of Disney are not depressing, so you see them as I must work there since I differ from you.

Funny you compare Disney to McDonald's which is currently in a world of pain. Perhaps Disney will soon join them if they don't start giving the people what they want instead of what they didn't ask for.

You mean the rides could have been more thrilling. They were never meant to be! They could have been yellow too. They could have been built out of sheep. You could name an infinite number of things they could have been that they were never intended to be. So you would have built something else. Great. Be disappointed. I, and judging by their soaring stock, ticket prices, and attendance the majority of the rest of the world, think the EF is pretty darn cool.

Would I have done anything different? Sure. But I don't think what they did is bad.

I didn't say thrilling, you did. Stop making things up.

I said on the Frozen thread I thought Frozen was worthy of revamping the entire Ellen's Energy pavilion for and building an ice palace, not just turning Norway into Arendelle.

An ice palace? LOL yea that will be the day that Disney does that. That isn't going to happen. You're praising things that haven't even been built yet. Frozen will likely be just a boat ride through "magical" waters with the characters dancing on the screen singing "Let it go." I'm sure you will say awesome, absolutely fabulous once that "magical" boat ride is built.

You say this... But it WASNT. We never rode TT or Imagination pre-refurb, and those are two of our absolute favorite rides not just at Disney World but among all parks everywhere! Our kids LOVE it. Based on the lines, and the fact that the Dis recommends ppl take a FP+ for it or ride single rider, the rest of the world thinks this too. So they skinned it for GM cuz GM infused some cash. Why does this bother you so much?

Test Track was extremely popular before the refurb as well. Just because your family didn't ride it doesn't change that fact.

Why does a change in theme bother me so much? Because the current theme isn't as nice as the old one. That's why. Why do you think that your opinion is the right one and everyone else's is wrong unless they agree with you?

Soarin getting a 3rd theater (rumor) and new film (confirmed) instead of showing the Cali Disneyland film.

You included a Soarin rumor as part of your evidence that Disney World is doing big things in the park. Why? We haven't seen the film and the 3rd theater remains to be seen. If Disney successfully does the film and builds a 3rd theater, I will praise the move.

True, but the concept art is great. Boat ride thru Pandora will be amazing, and flying-type ride will have to see how it is differentiated from Soarin.

The concept art of many things has been great. We need to wait till implementation.

It's not as far off as you think. I'm guessing this will not be as much of an earth-moving ordeal like at the EF and Pandora. So these rides will go in quicker, plus they will want this to open in phases shortly after the movies come out.

It's far enough off to reserve an opinion on the matter.