Locked is right - it is a good coaster - not great but fun. Certainly EE was needed in the park. And, I feel they did a GREAT - NO - a FANTASTIC job of making a 200 foot piece of Concrete look like Everest! Something I love to look and stare at!
Attention to detail is what has set Disney parks from the others (though many have caught up). But, in other posts I have asked: Does the attention to detail hold them back? In other words, did the damn Yeti have to be the focal point of the story to begin with?
I have rode the thing 20 times - never walked off and said: LOVE THE STORY! I loved the thrill - the ride. They did 50 things right. I think they achieved what they were after with or without the Yeti!
They most likely spent 10% of the budget on the silly Yeti and it is now an embarrassment. If it is not fixed, they are thumbing their nose at all of us that pay for this stuff. Unfortunately, the fix, no matter what it is will end up costing us in new rides, new reasons to go.
Here is what WILL NOT HAPPEN TOMORROW when I read the financial news: Disney has announced that they will take a $50 Million hit on the Yeti and build the thing right and profits will suffer. Are you nuts? Would cost them Millions in bonus money?
Far more embarrassing, IMHO, is walking through Epcot and seeing empty buildings, buildings desperately needing new carpet / a fresh paint job and landscaping which is under-loved!
Currently on these boards we are discussing Carsland, Avatar, Monster Inc. Coaster and a theoretical Australia expansion to the AK. We deserve all of them - we may be stuck with Avatar, a shoppers paradise in Fantasyland, no paint at Epcot and increased ticket prices.
In the last 10 years Universal and Sea World have outspent Disney on R&D, new rides, new attractions. Despite that WDW out-draws them 5 to 1 combined in attendance. And the guys in Burbank actually puzzle over why attendance numbers are flat?
I just got done watching a
YouTube with Joe Rhode talking about the AK. He talked about how management cut the park in half. But, it means they have tons of extra land to build on. Where do they build Avatar? On existing land with existing infrastructure so it saves them from expanding. And, we the guest lose a popular show and a nice shady Character area for the kids.
Many here snub there nose at the Six Flags of the world - I do understand why - not the same Disney experience. Regardless, these folks spend the money and consistently pump out new rides every other year. That is why my family in Atlanta get 4 AP's each year - at virtually the same price as one WDW AP!
Sorry to all for the rambling diatribe - I love WDW but - darn it you guys who run this thing: WAKE UP!