If Multi-day Tickets Didn't Exist...

[morethananyonex]

DHS and AK (and to a lesser extent Epcot), are often thought of as parks that are greatly benefitting from the draw of the MK and multi-day tickets. If 1 day tickets without hopping were the only tickets available for purchase, which WDW parks would you visit on your vacation? Assume the cost per ticket is the same as it is now for a one day ticket (around $100).

Basically, which parks do you feel are worth $100 a person to spend the day at?

 

[jade1]

Another good poll would be-would you prefer AK and DHS remain as stand alone parks (that can always be improved/expanded)-or that they were added on to EPCOT and MK similar to HP at US/IOA.

That way you wouldn't have to regrettably choose which one to visit.

Also-would you prefer HP was 3rd park and much larger/spread out/expandable, or the current squeezed in/loss of individuality situation.

Good polls.

 

[JennaDeeDooDah]

DHS is my favorite park and I am not one of those people who can only do a half day there. I need at last 2 full days. Epcot and Magic Kingdom are also parks where I need full days, and usually multiple full days. Animal Kingdom is the only park I have never been able to make a full day out of. I struggle to make it past 1:00 if I get there for rope drop. My family and I usually spend about half a day here every other trip or every third trip. People just have different preferences, I guess. That said, if I wanted to go to Animal Kingdom, I'd still buy a ticket and go. Even if I knew I wouldn't be there all day, I'd still buy the all day ticket to get in my half day.





Oh, but I do have some ideas for how DHS can be improved upon. Just because it's my favorite park doesn't mean that I'm ostriching myself over here into believing that it isn't going through an identity crisis. I don't think it needs to be added to Epcot or MK, but do believe some changes could be made to make it a truly fantastic park for the majority of guests.

 

[morethananyonex]

I had a hard time answered my own poll because of DHS.

I love DHS, we spend almost equal time between MK, Epcot and DHS, with only a day spent at AK. AK was easy to cut out. $300 for my family of 3 is too expensive for a day at AK. MK and Epcot were no brainers for me, Epcot is my favourite and MK is, well, MK. I'm still unsure if DHS would be worth $300 for my family to enter.

 

[lovin'fl]

If there were no hoppers we would do a day at AK, 2 days at MK and 2 days at Epcot and have 2 no park days where we'd do pool and DtD. i'd actually prefer to do that now...it's DH that just has to hop and get in the most he can (and no pool or DtD days for him...just go, go, go).

 

[BuckeyeBama]

I would not pay $100/day/person to visit any park anywhere in the world. Too many great options for far less money.

 

[pbrim]

I typically go every other year for about 10 days, staying on site. If tickets were $100 per day, I wouldn't be going at all. $1000 for tickets? Get serious!

 

[sethschroeder]

I highly doubt a ticket would be $100 to each park... Also if I was going to WDW I wouldn't skip a park because of it, it would likely just limit how many times I would ever visit WDW I the future.

1.) Disney would never do away with multi-day tickets if anything they would expand the days
2.) If they did away with multi-day tickets they would likely have demand based ticket pricing ($50 for a ticket middle of the week September / $200 for a ticket at Christmas)

 

[mrsbicewdw]

Right now with my kids ages it would be MK and AK, hands down. Epcot and DHS would be added as they got older, and drop MK to every other trip or something. But luckily the multi day exist.

As for HP - should have been a standalone park, and they would have made a killing. The section they have is nice but they had to fit so much into that space and some things just don't make sense. But as a Potterhead, I love it anyway.

 

[lovin'fl]

I didn't catch on to the $100/day/park/person thing...I wouldn't pay that either. I was thinking 5 day park tix w/out hoppers. For the $100, we may do 1 Epcot and 1 MK day and that's it...and then hop over to US for a few days.

 

[Tarheel girl 1975]

I would not pay $100/day/person to visit any park anywhere in the world. Too many great options for far less money.

Ditto. I don't think we would go at all if they didn't have multiday tickets. I'd have a hard time justifying spending $400 for my family to spend one day in the parks. It's probably why we don't take short trips either.

 

[jade1]

Yea part of the reason they discount the more days, and hopping helps is because of additional parks-not just "in-park" expansion.

Best of both worlds for us guests of WDW.

 

[RnbwSktles]

I've paid for just 1 day at MK a few times and would do it again. EPCOT may actually be my favorite park, but only because I like the atmosphere/food/beverages of the World Showcase. I would never pay a $100 cover charge for that

I like all of the parks, but once you put that kind of price tag on them, they become less desirable. Ak just becomes a $100 zoo to me!

Also, if I was able to, I would rather spend $200 for 2 days at Disneyland and DCA. You would get a lot more for your money there.

 

[Brian Noble]

Basically, which parks do you feel are worth $100 a person to spend the day at?

Any of them. $100 isn't a bad price for a day's worth of entertainment, and any one of those parks could easily occupy a day.

I'm spending more than that to attend an exhibition match between the Tottenham Hotspurs at the Chicago Fire. I have to buy tickets on the secondary market for the Manchester United v. Real Madrid match at the Big House, but I'll probably have to spend at least that much for halfway decent seats. These are both about two hours long, though there will probably be some tailgating, etc. as well.

 

[HM]

I chose DHS and MK. We seem to get the most bang for our buck in those parks.

 

[morethananyonex]

Any of them. $100 isn't a bad price for a day's worth of entertainment, and any one of those parks could easily occupy a day.

I'm spending more than that to attend an exhibition match between the Tottenham Hotspurs at the Chicago Fire. I have to buy tickets on the secondary market for the Manchester United v. Real Madrid match at the Big House, but I'll probably have to spend at least that much for halfway decent seats. These are both about two hours long, though there will probably be some tailgating, etc. as well.

Comparing the parks to a sporting event is kind of interesting, I've never thought of it like that.

We easily spend $100 a ticket for NHL games, the cheapest ones available are still around $60 per person. I guess the difference is we don't spend 10 days going to a game everyday like we do with WDW. In a season we would go to maybe 2-3. Thinking of it as a few days of entertainment spread out over the course of a "season" instead of a lengthy vacation makes the $100 a day seem alright for any of the 4 parks as a day trip.

 

[Indio]

I chose No Parks. For us, that would be $500 per day for 1 park. If we did 4 parks, that would be $2000. I guess that would be the proverbial point of no return for us.

It's about to choke me to pay close to that for 7 day hoppers!

 

[mkarizona]

In reality we would probably never return to WDW; we would go to DL instead. If we did go to WDW then AK would be first followed by MK or HS. Epcot would not even be in the running.

 

[lroger01]

People complain about paying $96ish to go to a Disney park. I just paid $95 per person for a full day rafting trip in Colorado! That includes 5 hours driving in a van over the continental divide and back, 4-5 hours on the water and a riverside lunch! Disney really isn't a bad deal for one day.

 

[amg35]

So each park would cost $100 each day?

I guess I would pay for 2 MK days, 2 AK days, and 1 Epcot day. DHS would have to be the casualty. And this would be a rare trip, very expensive that way.