Robbing Peter to pay "PAUL"

[Peter Pirate]

Yoho, I accept your apology. I think of us all as friends on this board and I certainly am not trying to antagonize anyone. I'm sorry for your job situation and that admission makes your recent demeanor a little more understandable. Good luck...

ww52, sorry for misquoting you, but your quote actually worked fine for my needs, as well. Just imagine if Pearl Harbor & Atlantis are blockbusters...Will not Disney's movie division once again reign supreme?...AK, any comment (be nice, remember we're playing 'what if' here). Oh, and ww52, I agree with your scenerio as well. I disagree about the DCA premise, though. Both of mykids are dying to go (they're 7 & 11, but also confirmed Disney nuts, as well)

Yoho, my opinion on your question is yes they have become less focused and I see that as being caused by issues far removed from Theme Parks...Namely technology. Disney was not able to tame the internet...Their failures were well reported (netscape, go.com). At the same time they were being sued by everyone and uncharacteristically losing. But the proliferation of the 'Internet' companies, Microsoft, AOL, Yahoo & the huge upheavel of the market and these crazy overvalued stocks all of a sudden had Disney in jeopardy of not only being an also ran in the entertainment industry but being a division of some Internet company. Now things have stablized and only AOL/TWX emerged as a threat from that level but other Companies hitting them from other directions that were perhaps unexpected emerged...Vivendi bought Universal...Universal pictures got hot...Dreamworks got hot (excluding animation)...They are changing the rules.

Further, all of the buyout/merger/acquisition remors with everyone from Rupert Murdoch to Ted Turner have just muddied the big picture which IMO makes it very tough for Eisner to worry about the quality of Superstar Limo very much.

Lastly, I would like to say that I think Disney will buy Yahoo should the price become right. I personall, would love to see this (I can hear LandBaron crying), but I believe this would solidify Disney's status as a complete player and allow them to concentrate on 'Disney quality' as we all would like.

There you have it! It's only my opinion and it'ssubject to change. I hope it was at least a little interesting to read!

 

[larworth]

It would be a great shot in the arm for both of these movies to do well. However, it seems that they would reign supreme for only a little bit, since they have stated they will de-emphasize both of these formats (feature animation and big blockbusters) in the future.

Acquiring a larger internet presence seems logical. However, acqusition integrations are a tricky thing and demand a lot of attention. I think the uncertainty and volatility of operating in the e marketplace will only demand more management time and will lead to even more lose of focus on the parks.

Creative oversight for the parks should be a full time job. Even if Eisner was good at it, he doesn't have the time to do it justice. He needs to let the ego go and put someone creative in place that has at least the same power as Pressler (business side guy) to manage the parks.

I've had the same thought as YoHo. It seems that Disney started getting this new conservatism around 1995. Yet, we were in the middle of this unprecedented period of economic growth. You would have thought, if anything, they would have committed the sin of overbuilding in the good times. Instead we got half parks and short-cuts?

To be fair their capital spending budget was at record levels through the end of the decade. Maybe the problem wasn't that they were willing to invest, but rather they forgot DVC's motto of do it right or don't do it.

 

[DisneyFanGuy]

Back in school when I studied economics, one of my professors said that companies who have succeeded over the long term have followed a very simple pattern.

They have ridden the positive trends by spending as little money as possible, and then when things were tight they have had the discipline to invest in more training, research, etc to prepare for the next upturn.

Looking at the posts, isn't that what Disney did during the last recession? That's when they were building and revamping and were at their peak in creativity. That really sparked their ability to dominate in the mid to late 90's.

It seems to me that what we are feeling now is two things:

First, why aren't they building or changing more in their parks? The answer is that they don't have to. They are still looking at their situation as an economic expansion. As my professor said, put as much money as you can in the "bank" when things are good so you can dip into it when things go "south". In other words, guest trends haven't changed significantly enough for them to react. Looking at their history, they have always done this.

Second. (This one affects me much more.) They seem to be less concerned with building industry leading attractions.

What I have always loved about Disney is that they have chosen to either build, or not to build. When they did "pour the concrete" I was always impressed with the results. If they chose not to build, then I still loved their past efforts.

This is the first time that I have ever seen them build "just ok" attractions. Maybe they did it when I was younger and I missed it. But not in the past 30 years that I have been paying attention.

Stuff doesn't have to cost a fortune to impress me. I can just as much enjoy a boat ride as a "cutting edge" very costly, state of the art, break the bank attraction.
Vision, and then execution.

But their stuff lately...... I go there and feel like I am experiencing great ideas that have been half-way executed. I NEVER remember seeing that before. And that makes me nuts.

Not everything new is bad. I like many parts of the AK. It just bores my kids after about 6 hours. So it works ok as part of a "multi park" day. If the other parks keep closing earlier though.......I may never see the AK again unless they add more things to do.

But Kali River Rapids makes me really crazy. You are in the water for two minutes after you leave the dock, and a big chunk of that time is going up that first ramp. As a guest, I think it's a total waste of time and I LOVE RAFT RIDES.

RRC. I LOVE that ride, but why is it 1:30 seconds?

JIYI, spinners, etc. I have never seen them build everyday stuff before. That's what depresses me. The Aladin Carpets are fine, but do we have to lose other attractions to get them?

And my apologies to Sarangle, my impression of DCA is that I would go and sort of enjoy myself, and then say "That was a nice experience" It doesn't look terrible, but it looks like the result of a very long argument that found some middle ground. But the restaurants and shops look awesome. I just don't go to parks for only restaurants and shops. I DO enjoy them, but I want sit my butt in little cars that move in a variety of ways past fun and entertaining scenery. I also enjoy shows. It just doesn't look like it would offer me (everyone likes different things) much other than a roller coaster (always fun), and a new simulator experience, and a nifty mountain raft ride. I would eat cheap (It's not like EPCOT where the restaurants are part of the experience) and so 43 dollars is a lot for me. Now if I had a park hopper, I would go there in a heartbeat. I don't stay 4 days out in CA tho, and that's a big difference.

But I will still go to my favorites. For example, after we were aghast at the JIYI, we can go next door and ride "The Land". After 1/2 in AK, we can finish our day at MK (If they choose to stay open....LOL!) We all make choices. I just keep choosing the older stuff.

And I STILL love most of what Disney does. Don't ever mistake me for a DB (Disney Basher). I am squarely in the DL (Disney Lover) category.

Later.

DFG

 

[ww52]

I shouldn't have generalized in saying no one has a desire to go to DCA. I was thinking mainly of my own kids - who in a few years will one by one become working, taxpaying, vacation dollar spending adults. I would think Disney would be thinking of this market (kids of baby boomers). Actually, they do a good job of that with the Zoog-Disney programs - at least for girls.

Maybe my kids aren't typical - but if they are then Disney should be worried. As I said, even with the promotion that Zoog-Disney has for DCA in the breaks for their shows, none of my kids have any desire to go there.

Our last trip to WDW was in 1998. They couldn't wait to see AK, so we did it on our first day. They were disapointed (I was too). My kids said if we go back, they'd rather skip AK in favor of IOA. Now maybe they'd be disappointed in IOA, but at least Universal has created something they want to see.

If BK got built, then they'd probably want to skip IOA and give AK another try.

So when they start planning vacations themselves - will Disney's new reputation of building disappointing new parks hurt them? Maybe - maybe not. I know they are dying to get back to WDW for MK, Epcot and even the Studios. But we've been seeing other parts of the country the last few years, and we've even said we could scale back out next trip to WDW to five days. Somewhere I sense that Disneymay be losing losing a bit of their reputation - maybe not with us but with the next genertion.

 

[DisDuck]

ww52.. I have a 16 yo daughter who absolutely loves AK and can spend pretty much the whole day there. Considering its ours of operation, it is not truly an all-day park. How many of us want to get up at 6or 7am to get there by 8am.

I have been to AK 3 times and it is always a must see on my trips. On schedule AK at 8 or 9 to 4 or 5 then onto another park or back to my resort, relax and then onto Pleasure Island. It is the perfect park to fit into a more relaxing WDW day rather than a commando day (how much can we see in 1 day kind of thing).

This year has given us the opportunity to go West so in November its off to DL and DCA. My daughter has seen the ads and brouches and wants to go. (My wife is not as fanatical about Disney).

Then next year back to WDW for trip 20 (or is it 21).

 

[ww52]

DisDuck - we have at least one thing in common: my wife is not fanatical about Disney either (though she loves GF, where we've stayed 3 out of our 5 trips).

I'll be interested to hear what your daughter thinks of DCA. We were out at DL during a California trip a couple years ago and may get back there (my oldest loved LA) - so maybe we will end up giving it a try in a couple of years.

 

[larry_poppins]

I've been to DCA. In fact I have an annual for DCA. I agree that there are more things
to do at DCA then at MGM. Like many people who ENJOY the current DCA, we still wish
there were more signature attractions there that could not be found anywhere else.
Like Tower or Terror for example. The amount of off the shelf rides at Paradise Pier
bothers me if for no other reason that the space they occupy could have been
used for an E ticket.

Just my opinion,

Larry

 

[Another Voice]

One of the pains of living in Southern California is that family members from the frostier parts of the country tend to pick your house as the destination for biannual vacations. For the last two days (and only three to go), I’ve be visiting Disneyland – er – The Disneyland Resort – and I’ve fallen behind reading these posts. I thought I’d add some on-the-scene observations on “Robbing Peter”.

The attendance gap between Disneyland and California Adventure is staggering. Disneyland is running along at a strong spring clip, DCA seems like its operating in the slowest of the slow part of January. Any DCA attraction that can run at reduced capacity is being run that way – three trains at most on the main coaster, one or two towers of the three available on the space shot ride, even ‘Soarin’ was running using only 2/3 of the available seats. There were some posted 45 minute waits, but these were not due to the overwhelming crowds. Many, many of the eating spots have been closed throughout the day and most of the rest seem to be closing early. 'Mulhulland Madness' is closed once again, but a single riderless car is put through the paces from time to time for no visible reason (maybe testing to see if the Animal Kingdom version can be built correctly).

Visiting with people from out-of-town has given me one major insight. Park Hopping between Disneyland and California Adventure is a vastly different experience than hopping between parks at WDW, and it's going to lead to some very interesting guest dynamics. At WDW, hopping to a different park is not very quick and involves a fair amount of travel. It’s generally not done on a whim, and there’s a definite sense of different experiences – the Magic Kingdom “feels” different than Epcot does – and the travel between the two parks gets one adjusted to that feel. You recognize that all four of the different parks are very different places from one another.

Here in California, changing parks is a matter of walking out of one gate, about fifty paces, and walking through another turnstile. You can change parks just as easily and you can walk from WDW’s Tomorrowland to Fantasyland. The two parks start to blur into each other with just a ticket & hand stamp formality in between. If park hopping were to become wide spread, I think this would simply decimate DCA. Its numerous weaker offerings won’t be competing against each other, now they’re competing against the full load of attractions across the plaza (and the same can be said for older, less popular Disneyland attractions loosing audience to DCA’s thrill rides). The average guest’s experience would change from the planned full day in each park into a two-day visit to Disneyland with a quick skip to see the highlights at the other park. Trying to sell DCA as a separate park, worthy of extending your vacation a day, may have just become infinitely more difficult. Sarangel, I’d be interested in hearing your comments on this and if you’d had a chance to bounce between the parks yet.

This hole keeps getting deeper at every turn.


P.S. Landbaron, thank you for your post. Perhaps if there’s ever a carpool get together (the opening of ‘Mission:Space’ anyone?) I can explain some of the backstory. I’m neither the seventeen year-old nor the grandmother, just someone who spent too many years of my life trapped behind the mouse-topped wrought iron gates. In gratitude and to catch up with everyone else who’s been posting, let me pass on to you this rumor – the first park to get a version of the ‘Soaring’ ride system isn’t even open yet, but its owners understand the importance of building a full-size theme park, filled with the imagination and detail that Disney is recognized for. We’ll just have to sea – er – see if the deal for this one comes together.

 

[Mooobooks]

It does seem that Disney made an odd choice in building a park about California IN California WHEN the majority of visitors are Californians. It would have made sense if, as is the case in Florida, most of the visitors are not locals from the state in which the park exists.
Californians who are used to visiting Disneyland Park, and who have never been to WDW in Florida, do not yet understand that a park does not have to be Disneyland or the Magic Kingdom in order to be a successful "Disney" Park. That seems to be a great part of the psychological dynamic at work regarding DCA. It's not Disneyland Park, and it's confusing people.
Also, the majority of rides at DCA take place outdoors, subjecting the rider to cold, wind, and rain (all of which have taken place in abundance this spring). The successful opening of a park requires psychological momentum, and the poor weather has taken a toll. Even though the weather is now nice, the damage is done. At Disneyland Park, by contrast, MANY of the rides take place indoors so weather is less important to the experience you have on any given day.
So, when you take those issues together (1) California in California; 2) Californians form the majority of the visitors; 3) Californians don't understand that a park can be a "Disney" park without being Disneyland; and 4) bad weather during the opening season) you can see some of the problems facing DCA that are going to be hard to overcome no matter what they do to the park itself.
One of the solutions is to convince more people to come from outside California, turning the ratio of park visitors into something approaching that of WDW, where the majority are from out of town. THEY will approach DCA without the predjudices of Californians who can see no farther than Cinderella's Castle. I think that's why they're moving ahead with the third park so rapidly. With more hotels and THREE parks, people are much more likely to THINK about going to California from out of state for a multiple day visit.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

The average guest's experience would change from the planned full day in each park into a two-day visit to Disneyland with a quick skip to see the highlights at the other park.

WOW!! I hadn't thought of that before. So in essence DCA becomes another land. Advetureland, Frontierland, Fantasyland, Tomorrowland and DCAland!! Hmmm. They should probably change that to Californialand!!

You've really got to wonder what they are thinking (if anyone is actually thinking) out at TEAM DISNEY. Now, I'll admit that the thought hadn't occurred to me before Voice brought it up. But I'm not getting paid double digit (sometimes triple digit) MILLIONS to think of these things. In fact, my thinking about Disney takes away from my real job!! How utterly inept can they be?

We'll just have to sea - er - see if the deal for this one comes together.

Ahhhh, You just gotta love this guy. What writing style!!

Mooobooks.

The successful opening of a park requires psychological momentum, and the poor weather has taken a toll. Even though the weather is now nice, the damage is done.

Let me get this straight. If I understand what you are saying, you believe that it was rotten weather and rotten attitude (of the locals regarding theme) which has caused this failure. And it has nothing to do with Disney opening a park of poor (or at least sub-standard) quality? It has nothing to do with a price/value ratio? Do I have that right?

So it wouldn't have mattered if they had opened a full park in an old fashioned Disney style, say like they way they opened EPCOT or even WDW itself. It wouldn't matter that by opening a full park there wouldn't have been so many complaints of having little to do. Or that of the few rides that are there, nearly half were lame. And it wouldn't matter that they would have built a park that kids as well as adults (WOW! What a concept!) could enjoy.

It was the weather. Plain and simple. And those stubborn California attitudes. Disney didn't do anything wrong at all. (well maybe the theme, but really, it's good!) If the Spring had been more sunny, DCA would have been a hit!! Did I misunderstand?

I've got to say that reading many of the posts in this thread is really mindboggling: a lot of bigmouths yaking about how terrible DCA is

You imply that we have no right to talk about something we haven't seen. That we are nothing more than big mouths. Well, I've never been to the south pole, but I know it's cold. I've never been to London, but I know they drive on the wrong side of the road and talk with an accent. We all gather information as best we can. We consider it, digest it and ponder the big picture. We think about these things from our own perspective, colored as it is with personal preferences, sense of history and even with a certain amount of prejudice. We consider the source of the information, taking it all in with a grain of salt. And funny as it sounds, personal opinions start to form. Are these as good as personal experience? No, of course not! But does it also mean we cannot carry out some sort of logical discussions based on what we have learned? Again - No, of course not!

To me DCA is just another example (although a big one) of everything that is 'wrong' with Ei$ner. He just doesn't get it. The Institute was another example. I wasn't on the Internet at the time, but I did tell everyone who cared to listen (hmmm, not many come to think of it) that the Institute was a rotten idea. If I had posted that here many would have crawled out of the wood work to name me an Ei$ner-basher!! Disney-hater!! And I assure you, nothing could be further from the truth. It was just Ei$ner not getting it!!

I think if you got to know me (as well as all the other you lumped together), you would quickly find out how schizophrenic I really am about MY (yes I claim ownership) Disney!! And how sad I feel about the road they are on. Check out some earlier threads. Go back to the old boards and see some of the stuff we discussed. Bigmouths? Maybe. But please don't be too dismissive because of it. We like it this way!!

Another Voice

Perhaps if there's ever a carpool get together (the opening of 'Mission: Space' anyone?)

That sounds good to me!!!!

 

[DisDuck]

Hey, Land... did you try to count to 10 first. Seems like there was smoke coming out of my PC while reading your post.

Yes, some sound thinking on your part. But while I may have some reservations about DCA from what has been posted. I am leaving my final decision to my visit in November.

I tend towards the I will see first then judge rather than judge first and not see.

Maybe a quick dip in the lake could cool you off.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Hey, Land... did you try to count to 10 first.

You know, it's funny. I not only counted to ten I waited until the next morning. The one thing I didn't want to do was sound "ticked-off". I wanted to explain, strongly, but in as friendly a manner as possible, that while first hand experience is by far the best, it does not preclude all other forms of information and/or discussion. And I had a smile on my face THE ENTIRE TIME!!!! Really!! I wasn't mad at all!!! I've even re-read it and can't see how you smelled smoke (just goes to show how different things come out without voice inflection and body language). I really didn't know how else to make my point!! And I really do apologize if I offended ANYONE, especially Mooobooks.

I tend towards the I will see first then judge rather than judge first and not see.

I agree! That is surely the best way. And I look forward to your review. I value your input very much. Unfortunately, a west coast trip is NOT in my foreseeable future. I leave it to you to be my eyes and ears! (Hmmm. I just pictured you walking around DCA with rose sun glasses and Mickey ears!!) lol

Maybe a quick dip in the lake could cool you off.

HEY!!! WAIT A MINUTE!!! Is that just a nice way to tell me to "Go jump in a lake!!"?

 

[DisneyFanGuy]

I really don't think that DCA bashing is the point. It's true that I haven't been there. The point is that many people like myself find the concept and execution not very interesting. It's the first time I have looked at a Disney park and said that I am really not very interested.

Why?

Because I have been underwelmed by recent Disney creations. That has never happened before. I was really eager to see the AK and was very disappointed in it. Many other examples. So I was primed and ready to pass on a trip to DCA when I was in CA this past month.

So I still think the issue is that Disney is changing the way people think of their brand. We are becoming suspicious of quality. They have created this response through a series of clearly less than exceptional products being introduced into the market.

Imagine this: If DCA had opened 6-7 years ago, people would have been much less suspicious of the finished quality. I betcha the initial attentance would have been much better.

One other decision that they made really strikes me as a turn-off. I have visited DL 10 times over the past three years and have watched DCA rise in the lot. The lack of a berm allowed me to see everything in the park as it was being built. I love the feeling of exploring a new theme park, being surprised and delighted at the sights and sounds found within. The WDW parks are (or were) isolated as they were built, making a berm unnecessary. Even though I was disappointed in AK, I was still drawn there by the "mystery" of a new park. I have seen all of DCA's mysteries and I have felt no desire to expore it. Why didn't they use a berm?

So the bottom line is that I think that Disney almost needs to "over deliver" on anything that they present to the public for awhile. They have lost our confidence that quality is a major concern. Even if DCA is good, it needs to be AMAZING to draw the crowds. Mission Space needs to blow us away.

 

[YoHo]

Just some spin on DCA based on Another Voice's post. I think your downplaying how DCA being actually another land could help the park. I bought a 5-day pass for Disneyland last Christmas and struggled to see everything I wanted to. The park hopping Dynamic could be the only thing that saves DCA until another e-ticket is built. Remember, every time you go through the turnstyles, you are a guest in the park, so attendence will skyrocket.

Lets say there's half a day's worth of rides and a couple of resturants worth picking up in DCA. That's at least a full day's worth of trip. remember, Fastpass will still force you twiddle your thumbs for hours waiting for your slot and during peak times like christmas, there didn't seem to be such a thing as an unpopular ride.

Then as the corrective steps are hopefully taken, time spent in the park will increase yadda yadda.


I'm not suggesting that this is a boone for DCA and all their problems are solved, merely that it could have a positive effect on the park as well.

 

[swinginevilmike]

Another big mouth checking in....I've been to DCA several times I have Cast member friends who work at DCA. I was offered a job at DCA but couldn't take it because of the commute. While DCA may have more attractions than the Disney Studios or Animal Kingdom the quality of the attractions is severly lacking. You could find any of the attractions at any of the state fairs local fair and even your local community churchs festival. The only 2 attractions with any real thought put into it was Soarin over California and Grizzley River Run and 2 attractions does not make a theme park.

 

[Neville]

O.K. I know this is probably beating a dead horse, but...


Consider for a moment which parks are the "cash cows" of the theme park division in the U.S. -- MK in DW and Disneyland. Both of which were designed, built, and financed through Walt himself. They are the draw, the revenue generators and Walt's legay. Consider for a moment if DW did not have the MK, how many people would go? If Walt had started his theme park division with DCA/Studios/AK, we would all be going to AOL World.

For present management, I wish they would consider using the Magic Kingdom as a guide for capital spending. Yes, Walt probably did overspend, and his brother had to reel in the reigns. However, the end product was great and has continued to be the anchors of the division. I realize that Waltesque spending is not in vogue today. However, I feel that the spending on theme parks for the last 10 years (beginning with Studios) was geared more towards short term revenue generation (get the $40 vs. build a park which will keep people coming back). This short term thinking has also resulted in a glut of mediocre-themed hotels -- let's just worry about getting the people in the door. I suspect that if Disney had taken the cash spent on DCA, Go, and part of Eisner's bonus, they could have built a magnificent park that would be the talk of the industry and a revenue generator for years to come (similar to MK/DL).

The problem that I see is that they have ended up tainting the brand. Just ask the domestic car companies how difficult it is to restore that. I don't think they will feel the full effect of this short-term mindset until we have a serious recession. Once the revenue drops, more shows will be canceled, resulting in even less to do -- it is a slippery slope which I fear has begun.

I for one would probably spend more money in three complete parks, than the admission for the fourth half-day park -- not to mention the hour it takes to get between the two (need for monorail boys). I feel cheated when I leave AK/Studios/ and I suspect I would feel that way at DCA. The result, I plan to spend less time and money at Disney in the near term. They are making it so that the savvy travel (which I am not) can pack all the parks in three days.

I give Eisner credit for saving the company in the 80s with creative thinking and good revenue management. However, I believe the game has passed him by and his recent track record proves it. The problem is, who is the replacement? No one sitting on the bench. I believe they will have to go out and get a relatively unkown entity to take the reigns (similar to how Eisner/Wells got the job).

Sorry for the rant/whine, but I couldn't take it anymore.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

… never stopped me. I’m good at it!!

Consider for a moment if DW did not have the MK, how many people would go? If Walt had started his theme park division with DCA/Studios/AK, we would all be going to AOL World.

WOW! What a concept. And what a way to put it!! I wish I had thought of it. Of course, that’s really what we all have been saying; it was just never put so succinctly before.

For present management, I wish they would consider using the Magic Kingdom as a guide for capital spending. Yes, Walt probably did overspend, and his brother had to reel in the reigns. However, the end product was great and has continued to be the anchors of the division.

Man, this guy keeps getting better and better!!!!

Sorry for the rant/whine, but I couldn't take it anymore.

Well, after the second paragraph I stopped quoting. NOT because there was nothing else to quote. Quite the opposite. I found that every sentence was very true and very, very quotable. So instead I ask everyone to reread it. It is perfect. And I also ask Neville to join the car pool and rant away as much as you like. It leaves every day and usually hits heavy traffic around two in the afternoon. It’s fun!!!!!

Captain, DisDuck and all the others. Does this, put in these terms, make more sense?

 

[lrodk]

I usually contact guests directly via email in cases like these. Unfortunately however, Moobooks has chosen not to receive email messages in his profile. As such I'm afraid I'll have to reach out to him on this thread.

Moobooks, based on the number of posts you've made here on the DIS it seems that you're new to our neighborhood. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, please realize that this is a discussion forum, and as such everyone is entitled to their opinion regardless of whether you agree with them or not, and first and foremost so long as it doesn't attack another guest personally. By making assumptions that certain guests here had not visited the park you unfairly made a defensive accusation based on your personal experience. Suffice it to say, you're perfectly welcomed to share your own opinions on DCA or any other Disney Rumors topic here, just please do adhere to the rules of the boards and respect your fellow Disney enthusiasts. These boards are all about having fun. As you can see, there are many folks here who have been to DCA, and so their opinions are perfectly justified.

In case you or anyone else has missed the link, I've pasted the posting guidelines url for the DIS below. I want to be perfectly clear when I say that this is not an uncensored no-holds-barred-Yahoo-type forum. It's all about sharing ideas and hopefully learning something about our favorite subject in the process. There's no need to get defensive just because you don't agree with someone elses slant on things.

http://www.wdwinfo.com/guidelines.htm

 

[larry_poppins]

It is true that the Magic Kingdom is the anchor for WDW, but I love EPCOT.
I would travel to WDW just to see EPCOT. It is not a 1/2 day park like the Studios
or Animal Kingdom.

 

[Captain Crook]

Just goes to show how perspective is so personal. Larry responds defending Epcot (as a full day Park) and I agree, but then he disses AK & MGM as 1/2 day Parks. IMO, AK is 3/4 day Park and MGM can certainly be all day (if you need to see all of the shows), ending with Fantasmic (wonderful!)...