Mine Train vs. Transformers

[glocon]

I am thinking that as WDW is so huge, there is more of an upkeep expense, so less to spend on expansion.

That being said, I am imagining the 7DMT to be on par with Forbidden Journey in the WWoHP. That is a magnificent castle inside and out, and a destination in and of itself. I hope that the new 7DMT is taking so long to construct because it is just going to be that amazing when it is done, and so worth the wait.

Fantasyland was never a land we spent much time in since my son was never much interested in it after our first visit, and the new "upgrades" there don't hold much interest for my family, but when the 7DMT opens, I hope to be there asap. Can't wait for that!

 

[mesaboy2]

I just crossed to the dark side last year and I'll tell you it's the park dollars that Disney could be losing to US that they should be worried about. There are a ton of things to do at US for all ages of the family.



mesa, I wasn't aware the mine ride was going to be anything extraordinary, so I'll take your word on it. I happen to know you are a US/IOA fan also, so I don't think you need to wear the Disney apologist hat.

If I led you to think 7DMT will be "extraordinary", I apologize. Poster chartle said it better than me by using the word "different". My point all along is that I am not aware of any ride vehicle quite like what is envisioned for 7DMT. That means significant development, engineering, and test effort that Transformers Serial Number 3 needs very little of.

And I happen to think Forbidden Journey will be more advanced than 7DMT. FJ is pretty extraordinary.

 

[glocon]

I can't claim to be a WDW pro, but I think that the 7DMT will be a great addition to MK. I think that is the first new ride there since I have been going (first trip just 10 years ago) and I can't wait~ I'm thinking it just could end up being our favorite ride at MK!

Since Spiderman is one of our faves in Orlando, I think we will love the Transformers ride too. The special effects in the Transformer movies are magnificent!

Next time we vacation in the Orlando area, we plan to do both. It's the best of both worlds...

 

[WDSearcher]

I just crossed to the dark side last year and I'll tell you it's the park dollars that Disney could be losing to US that they should be worried about. There are a ton of things to do at US for all ages of the family.

When you went to Universal, did you buy stuff, too? (Other than food.) I often wonder if Disney is making it's money in the per cap department, so they don't have to worry as much about ticket prices. If Disney is taking in more people than Universal to begin with, and those people are spending more on "stuff" at Disney than they are at Universal, that makes the bite a little softer.

mesa, I wasn't aware the mine ride was going to be anything extraordinary, so I'll take your word on it. I happen to know you are a US/IOA fan also, so I don't think you need to wear the Disney apologist hat.

It always makes me chuckle to read the term "Disney apologist" -- it's more overused on these boards than "precious snowflake". It's a Disney fan board -- it figures that there'll be Disney fans here. But just because someone is a fan and is looking forward to something and may want to add a few positive facts about an upcoming ride or attraction doesn't make them an apologist. They're just adding information because they're a fan.

When I mention how drab and faded I feel the rest of IOA is in comparison to WWoHP, and then someone comes on and talks about how great the rest of the park is and how Seuss Landing was just painted, and how Universal is working on getting everything else rehabbed, etc., no one jumps on them as a "Universal apologist".

 

[larryz]

a "Universal apologist".

Sounds vaguely like some California Cult...

 

[damo]

When you went to Universal, did you buy stuff, too? (Other than food.) I often wonder if Disney is making it's money in the per cap department, so they don't have to worry as much about ticket prices. If Disney is taking in more people than Universal to begin with, and those people are spending more on "stuff" at Disney than they are at Universal, that makes the bite a little softer.


It always makes me chuckle to read the term "Disney apologist" -- it's more overused on these boards than "precious snowflake". It's a Disney fan board -- it figures that there'll be Disney fans here. But just because someone is a fan and is looking forward to something and may want to add a few positive facts about an upcoming ride or attraction doesn't make them an apologist. They're just adding information because they're a fan.

When I mention how drab and faded I feel the rest of IOA is in comparison to WWoHP, and then someone comes on and talks about how great the rest of the park is and how Seuss Landing was just painted, and how Universal is working on getting everything else rehabbed, etc., no one jumps on them as a "Universal apologist".

Here's an analogy of the difference between a Disney apologist and what you are saying should be a Universal apologist (as I see it).

"That woman's hair is usually so awful."

Disney: "Yes, but she has such a nice personality, it doesn't matter if her hair is awful. I'm sure she is just taking her time in planning her next hairstyle, but it will be amazing!"

Universal: "I recently saw her and she looks great. She'd just been to the salon and in fact she just booked weekly hair appointments for the next 10 years."


Anyway, back on topic. A huge difference I see between the construction of the two attractions is that Universal is working around the clock (literally) and every day, to try and get this attraction out asap. Disney, not so much.

 

[waikiki]

Hello,
I am writing from Europe with viewpoints I mastered: an outdoor coaster with inversions advanced technology and cost approximately $ 20 million without decoration (Europa-Park - Blue Fire). The construction period, in Europe, 7 months. Another wooden coaster to cost $ 15 million for six months of construction (Europa-Park - Wodan). The two attractions were built in three years, and have very different technologies and innovative.
2 attractions payback of 3 years operating with many more visitors to the park, and a queue average of 30 minutes.
Now I would like to understand how Disney World need 3 years to build a coaster without inversion and budget 7 times bigger? I wish I had the answer...
(sorry for my crappy english I normally speak french)

 

[larryz]

Hello,
I am writing from Europe with viewpoints I mastered: an outdoor coaster with inversions advanced technology and cost approximately $ 20 million without decoration (Europa-Park - Blue Fire). The construction period, in Europe, 7 months. Another wooden coaster to cost $ 15 million for six months of construction (Europa-Park - Wodan). The two attractions were built in three years, and have very different technologies and innovative.
2 attractions payback of 3 years operating with many more visitors to the park, and a queue average of 30 minutes.
Now I would like to understand how Disney World need 3 years to build a coaster without inversion and budget 7 times bigger? I wish I had the answer...
(sorry for my crappy english I normally speak french)

Wilkommen, bienvenue,

Did you read the whole thread, 'cause we've already discussed this back in the early pages...

 

[Luv2CtheMouse]

It always makes me chuckle to read the term "Disney apologist" --

Maybe because that description fits you to a T! You would be the poster child for this title. you most likely chuckle because you picture yourself and it gives you a bit of joy.

 

[WDSearcher]

Sounds vaguely like some California Cult...

LOL -- it very well may be!

 

[WDSearcher]

Here's an analogy of the difference between a Disney apologist and what you are saying should be a Universal apologist (as I see it).

"That woman's hair is usually so awful."

Disney: "Yes, but she has such a nice personality, it doesn't matter if her hair is awful. I'm sure she is just taking her time in planning her next hairstyle, but it will be amazing!"

Universal: "I recently saw her and she looks great. She'd just been to the salon and in fact she just booked weekly hair appointments for the next 10 years."

Anyway, back on topic. A huge difference I see between the construction of the two attractions is that Universal is working around the clock (literally) and every day, to try and get this attraction out asap. Disney, not so much.

In both of your examples above, there's someone making concessions for the woman having a bad hair day. The Universal person can't guarantee that those weekly hair appointments are going to make her look better any more than the Disney person can guarantee that the next hairstyle will be amazing. But I'll bet the Disney person would be called an apologist even if the comments above were to be reversed. The Universal person never is.

A huge difference I see in the current construction schedules is that Universal needs something new this summer. Disney doesn't. We can go around and around about whether NFL vs. Transformers is a fair fight or which demographic spends the most in which park or why Disney isn't opening anything as big and flashy as Transformers or why Universal gets a pass on opening "a copy of a ride in California" while Disney doesn't.

Take the emotion out of it and look at it from a business POV. Universal is going 24/7 because it has to. Think of how much it's costing them to run a 24-hour, 7-day construction team. They wouldn't be expending that kind of cash if they didn't think it was necessary. They know that New Fantasyland and the new areas of SeaWorld have made Orlando even a more popular destination, but that people still have limited time to spend there. And while WWoHP has kept them buzzing for a couple of years, the Universal park needs a big tentpole attraction now, because Despicable Me: Minion Mayhem isn't really big enough to draw people in for another day, when you compare it to penguins at SeaWorld and princesses at Fantasyland. Something like Transformers needs to be open by summer certainly -- and by Spring Break if they can manage it. Spring Break is Universal's demographic. So ... yeah ... you announce "summer" and then you go full tilt in the hopes of hitting soft openings during April or May.

Disney, on the other hand, seems to be getting it's "new attraction" bump, based on what people are saying about crowds. They seem to be getting the attendance they were hoping for out of NFL so far. It doesn't make sense for them to slam through to get 7DMT open rightnowimmediately because the college audience is far more likely to stream into Universal they would be to speed over to Fantasyland. And having a new family coaster isn't going to really change that. Disney still has a lot of families showing up who held off on their WDW trips until after NFL opened, and those people have got all sorts of new stuff to see. And while all those families are there, they also see 7DMT under construction and start thinking, "We'll have to come back next year".

Each company is doing what serves their business best.

 

[damo]

...

A huge difference I see in the current construction schedules is that Universal needs something new this summer. Disney doesn't. ...

And therein lies the difference between a Disney apologist and a non-Disney apologist. Disney definitely needs something new at DHS, Epcot and even Animal Kingdom.

 

[WDSearcher]

And therein lies the difference between a Disney apologist and a non-Disney apologist. Disney definitely needs something new at DHS, Epcot and even Animal Kingdom.

From a capacity standpoint, would it be nice to have something new in those parks? Yes.

From a business standpoint, do they need to have something new there by this summer to push people to those parks? No.

Again ... take the emotion out of it. You wanting something new and Disney needing something new are two different things.

Would you consider Transformers to be a "need" or a "want" for Universal?

 

[DorianDonP]

I think Springfield (child friendly ride and more restaurants) and Harry Potter Phase II (help even out the crowds between the two parks) for UO is more of a 'need.' I'd say Transformers is more of a cherry on top 'want'. Especially since it didn't replace any current attraction.

 

[damo]

From a capacity standpoint, would it be nice to have something new in those parks? Yes.

From a business standpoint, do they need to have something new there by this summer to push people to those parks? No.

Again ... take the emotion out of it. You wanting something new and Disney needing something new are two different things.

Would you consider Transformers to be a "need" or a "want" for Universal?

A want. With the new Diagon Alley and two new e-ticket rides (Gringotts and Hogwarts Express) coming the end of next year at the same park, Transformers is definitely not a need.

 

[RMulieri]

A want. With the new Diagon Alley and two new e-ticket rides (Gringotts and Hogwarts Express) coming the end of next year at the same park, Transformers is definitely not a need.

agree

 

[chartle]

1. Hello,
I am writing from Europe with viewpoints I mastered: an outdoor coaster with inversions advanced technology and cost approximately $ 20 million without decoration (Europa-Park - Blue Fire). The construction period, in Europe, 7 months. Another wooden coaster to cost $ 15 million for six months of construction (Europa-Park - Wodan). The two attractions were built in three years, and have very different technologies and innovative.
2 attractions payback of 3 years operating with many more visitors to the park, and a queue average of 30 minutes.

2. Now I would like to understand how Disney World need 3 years to build a coaster without inversion and budget 7 times bigger? I wish I had the answer...
(sorry for my crappy english I normally speak french)

1. With out seeing those coasters it would be hard to tell why they were built so quickly. But it may just be that everything was already designed before they started building. Many times they will start to build something before the designs are completed.

2. The coaster Disney is building will have a large amount of decoration or theming as we call it. That is why it would cost so much. Disney even puts a lot of themeing in the queue.

 

[WDSearcher]

A want. With the new Diagon Alley and two new e-ticket rides (Gringotts and Hogwarts Express) rides coming the end of next year at the same park, Transformers is definitely not a need.

Amazingly enough, I don't agree. Transformers is a need for this year ... if for no other reason than to not have Universal as the only major Central Florida theme park to not have something new opening. Disney, SeaWorld, Busch, Legoland ... everyone's got new stuff opening in FY13. As a business, Universal doesn't want people to say, "Oh ... I can skip it this year. They're not doing anything new." They probably could have gotten by with a much smaller and less-expensive new thing, but Universal has built its identity as a thrill ride park. So Transformers makes more sense, particularly since they have both the Singapore and California attractions as precedent. Transformers gives them a lot of very safe bang for their buck.

When you look ahead to 2014 ... that's when Disney is in the position Universal is in now. Disney will need the Mine Train to be able to have something new to offer. And they'll need a lot more than just that, IMO. Whether they'll add anything on to that to make it more substantial -- a new show or parade, new fireworks, new technology somewhere, etc -- remains to be seen.

 

[Magical Kingdoms]

It looks like Universal is doing a lot, but do all of these really interest people? I mean, honestly, I couldn't care less about Simpsons stuff, and a Transformers ride would be cool, but nothing new and exciting like the Mine Train. Jurrasic Park isn't as fresh anymore. Really Harry Potter is the only thing that interests me there. I'm not trying to be a Disney-apologist but I just don't know if Universal's new things are all that interesting compared to what Disney is doing with Fantasyland.

There are a LOT of people who like this stuff. Universal has always been about keeping with the new and modern trends, and Simpson is a long-running (And still running) and rather popular TV series. Jurassic Park is getting a reboot, and Harry Potter is a huge franchise. There's also been the sweep of Dr. Seuss movies, and that's a big thing among many kids.

Teens and many adults like Universal because it caters to their interests. I went to Universal in May of last year and didn't really enjoy anything outside of HP, because that's all I'm interested in. The rest of the park was really bleh to me.

Disney's advantage is that it's a more family-oriented brand and people know it. Universal's not as family-oriented. Their parks are known as thrill parks. Most teens and up prefer to go to Universal because it's got the thrill rides and has characters they're familar with.

I've never been really into the kind of stuff Universal's got, and have always preferred Disney because it has a kind of timeless quality that appeals to me. Harry Potter was the only reason I really wanted to go over to "the dark side", and I really thought of that as a one time thing.

I really wouldn't compare the two as they are miles apart. Their target groups are different, and they are different. Even Universal's own campaign to compare themself to Disney was weak because 1, they're two different companies with completely different target groups, and 2, it was rather biased to Universal.

Speaking of Transformers, wasn't that just a line of toys that was pushed by a TV show when it started? I still wonder why it's a big franchise when it was all started just to sell toys.

 

[damo]

Amazingly enough, I don't agree. Transformers is a need for this year ... if for no other reason than to not have Universal as the only major Central Florida theme park to not have something new opening. Disney, SeaWorld, Busch, Legoland ... everyone's got new stuff opening in FY13. As a business, Universal doesn't want people to say, "Oh ... I can skip it this year. They're not doing anything new." They probably could have gotten by with a much smaller and less-expensive new thing, but Universal has built its identity as a thrill ride park. So Transformers makes more sense, particularly since they have both the Singapore and California attractions as precedent. Transformers gives them a lot of very safe bang for their buck.

When you look ahead to 2014 ... that's when Disney is in the position Universal is in now. Disney will need the Mine Train to be able to have something new to offer. And they'll need a lot more than just that, IMO. Whether they'll add anything on to that to make it more substantial -- a new show or parade, new fireworks, new technology somewhere, etc -- remains to be seen.

Universal Studios will have the new Simpsons area opening this summer as well. They still would have had something new even without Transformers.

What is WDW opening this year?