'Star Wars' Rollout Plan "Extremely Deliberate," Says Disney CEO

[lockedoutlogic]

I think you misread my post. I said attendance at MK was increasing, but at the other parks kit was slowly declining.

It declined during the crash...since it is basically flat or has ticked up a little with inflation.

It's basically flat.

I didnt misread your post...I think you didnt take it far enough.

It may not be that they "want more" it could simply be that they "don't want less"

In 2 years...if studios and EPCOT are flat, ak gets a 5-10% bump, mk gets to 20, and downtown is mobbed...

Do you think the execs would take that?

Bet the farm on it.

 

[DDLand]

Now...it's rare that I almost completely agree with what you're saying...but here I do.

Somebody musta put me in a good mood

But... Where I differ is in thinking that they need rides to Accomplish what the want in Florida. If anything the last 10 years has shown... Is that they actually don't need the rides anymore to sell the merchandise in the ride dump shops. It's an absolute horrible development for the consumer. Their overall attendance has chugged along past 50 mil...including tons of frequent visitors due in large point to their incredibly successful timeshare wing and expanding travel habits in society...but they have not added much since 2000. I'm sorry... But whatever list you come up with is minor compared to what existed in 1999. That isn't even taking into account the philosophy of Disney parks (60 years strong) and what that looks like.

The other thing about Iger not want to be a "chicken" like Eisner...

You might, respectfully, be on the wrong Side of the fence.

Eisner lost it - no dispute - but wdw is nowhere anywhere close to what it is without Eisner, wells, and Roy E...

When the company was reorganized and barely solvent...starting around 1986...they started dumping massive amounts of money (borrowed...unlike today with mcducks money bin) into Florida in an incredible gamble. They were guessing as to how they could shape the travel - at the time American travel resembled the habits of the 60's more than it does today. Most Americans had never been on a plane and vacationing was much more regional...very few limits now.

They gambled and won... Creating a massive, arduously planned and built behemoth. Current board would even think of tolerating the amount spent on infrastructure now...let alone build it.

Iger has inherited a toy... A gift really. And now he does have to decide what the long term value is: status quo profit center or potential for more legacy?

In a way... Two of Disney's biggest profit banks - wdw and espn - are the most stale and need a jolt - lest they trip and fall off a cliff.

Hey, this is unusual!

Well I think we generally agree on the current makeup of the business. We both see problems, and though our solutions are radically different I think we're generally in agreement on the fundamentals.

Hmm, let's see. I get your point that coasting has been profitable. Crazy profitable. However, is it as profitable as it possibly can be? Are numbers maximized? Are they cramming in as many people as they theoretically could? Nope to all three.

Let's think of the risk factors here. DHS is an established market, a large customer base, large customer loyalty, a strong roster of existing attractions, and the entire Resort setup.

Compare that to places like Shanghai that don't even know what Disney is.

Turn a park into the second MK or spend money in an unproven market. DHS looks good.

Is the current mediocrity good enough? Yeah. Could Disney get away with this for another decade? Probably.

It's just the difference between 10 million in gift shops and 14 million in gift shops. Something tells me Disney likes 14 million better.

I'm with you on Eisner during the early years. Then it gets bad. DAK, DCA, WDS, HKDL, etc. All example of potential greatness gone bad. Even attractions like MS and Everest could've been better, but fell on the rocks due to lack of will.

 

[wallrock]

Interesting, but I don't think this is a substantial issue. The buildings can actually be an asset as in the case of TSMM they're able to reuse the buildings for new purposes. I'd say backlot tour is an example of a low density attraction that takes up so much space and actually serves few. Look towards Rivers of America as another attraction like that. I think it can be a pretty speedy in demolition and turn around.

Actually it's quite substantial. While part of the structures could be an asset for current attractions like Toy Story Mania, it’s the potential for the new attractions that’s the holdup. While there is plenty of room in the backlot tour 'space' there is no easy way to govern human traffic flow. Unlike the other parks that have a hub and spoke layout it’s one way in and out to many of the areas at DHS. Putting a significant E-ticket back near Catastrophe Canyon’s location creates a human traffic jam with the current layout. It’s also the smallest of the four parks, so expansion towards Victory Way may be needed, and that means more infrastructure. More buildings, sewer, drainage control, pavement and so on.

An additional large question is how much rearranging of the furniture Disney wants to do. When DHS was built in the late 1980s the concept of wi-fi didn’t exist, so part of the NextGen buildout included spending a ton of money putting in the wireless computing infrastructure. How much of that do they want to tear up and rearrange to accommodate a massive update that calls for tearing down buildings? Especially since they just completed that upgrade a year ago...

I've said it before...this is the park whose principal function failed. This isn't a theme park, it's a working film/TV/commercial studio whose function has been abandoned and Disney is debating on what to use it for.

 

[Goofy2015]

I just want to have a dance party on Tatooine. Come on, get with it DHS.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

I just want to have a dance party on Tatooine. Come on, get with it DHS.

I had the same idea...

But I checked the list and it is...in fact... Directly on the "bottom" of it

 

[DDLand]

Actually it's quite substantial. While part of the structures could be an asset for current attractions like Toy Story Mania, it’s the potential for the new attractions that’s the holdup. While there is plenty of room in the backlot tour 'space' there is no easy way to govern human traffic flow. Unlike the other parks that have a hub and spoke layout it’s one way in and out to many of the areas at DHS. Putting a significant E-ticket back near Catastrophe Canyon’s location creates a human traffic jam with the current layout. It’s also the smallest of the four parks, so expansion towards Victory Way may be needed, and that means more infrastructure. More buildings, sewer, drainage control, pavement and so on.

An additional large question is how much rearranging of the furniture Disney wants to do. When DHS was built in the late 1980s the concept of wi-fi didn’t exist, so part of the NextGen buildout included spending a ton of money putting in the wireless computing infrastructure. How much of that do they want to tear up and rearrange to accommodate a massive update that calls for tearing down buildings? Especially since they just completed that upgrade a year ago...

I've said it before...this is the park whose principal function failed. This isn't a theme park, it's a working film/TV/commercial studio whose function has been abandoned and Disney is debating on what to use it for.

Nah, actually many dark rides are pretty versatile, and all you need for most of them is a soundstage. Just like they've got a ton of.

First off, look at the likes of DCA for a smaller park that doesn't actually follow a clear hub and spoke design. Heck, look at any Disney Park after Euro Disney and it doesn't follow a true hub and spokes like MK. The Universal Parks are not a hub and spoke design either. I think to an extent Hub and Spoke is old fashioned. Why? 1) Future expansion is limited with few spaces of real estate (look at a map of HKDL and you'll understand) 2) The grand reveal of the hub and spoke at the beginning of the day kills the suspense, whereas a park that you just sort of walk through and discover new things in is favored now (DAK is the prime example, while it is sort of "hubish" especially the main gate is an example of just wandering and discovering something new...by design) 3) Imagineers love those backdrops (Seeing something from a distance and walking towards it is a powerful thing, and everything from Everest to Cars Land is utilizing this)

Frankly I love hubs, but they're seeming to be going the way of the buffalo for a plethora of reasons (and I use that word cautiously lest @clsteve hear) Shanghai seems to be the first Magic Kingdom to be almost completely natural and less sharp. The hub itself is a land, and that helps with the natural reveals.

Issues with proper movement in and out can be addressed by new walkways on the backlot side where Pixar is allegedly coming in. The entire area west of TSMM is fair game. There are multiple points where paths can move through buildings or can be created. With themeing on the rear they can be brought up to standards, and since we're going to be in a richly themed environment that shouldn't be a problem. Though this is their job to figure out, and from what we know TS is the more likely of the two to get done first. Movement back there should be improved dramatically.

All that said, yes of course there will be sewage, power, and other infrastructure upgrades. I'd say that comes with the territory of billion dollar expansions. Somethings that are brand new are going to be destroyed (@rteetz anyone remember the trams?) That comes with the in the budget.

Someone better versed in this than me can comment, but the major infrastructure cost on WiFi/broadband should've been incurred when they buried the cables all around the resort. That's expensive, but I'm pretty sure all of that can stay put. The WiFi routers and smaller more localized infrastructure at DHS can either be replaced for minimal costs or be completely reused for the new project. That comes with the turf of new business moves. Some value is lost from perfectly fine goods, but so long as a worthy value is created in the end it's alright. When they created the Mine Train we lost access to the SWSA (not directly due to construction, but that's how it ended up). SWSA was a perfectly good ride, but Disney was willing to sacrifice it for the good of the total project.

I think they've got the winning formula here. Spend money, and make it great.

 

[dice50]

What does SWSA stand for?

 

[DDLand]

What does SWSA stand for?

Snow White's Scary Adventure. It was shut down to make way for the Princess Fairytale Hall after Mine Train was announced to be taking the place of a new planned meet and greet.

 

[dice50]

Thanks. I'm still sort of a newbie. Did they have to take out SWSA to use the land for the Mine Train?

Also my mom always talks about how her favorite ride was the Mr. Toad ride, what took it's place?

Thanks

 

[DDLand]

Thanks. I'm still sort of a newbie. Did they have to take out SWSA to use the land for the Mine Train?

Also my mom always talks about how her favorite ride was the Mr. Toad ride, what took it's place?

Thanks

No problem! Alphabet soup is what this place can be sometimes!

So like I added after my initial post, Disney's original plans for New Fantasyland Called for keeping SWSA, but using the land that now hold Mine Train as a Meet and Greet. When the new head of Parks and Resorts Tom Staggs took over he decided there weren't enough new rides in New Fantasyland, so he replaced the meet and greet location with mine train.

That created a problem. One of the main points of New Fantasyland was to be able to meet the characters from your favorite films. Seeing the redundancy in having two Snow White Rides so close together they closed SWSA and put the meet and greet there instead. So they sort of traded a big meet and great and a small ride, for a big ride and a small meet and greet.

Mr. Toad is now the Winnie the Pooh attraction.

@dice50 This may help too: http://www.wdwinfo.com/abbreviations.htm

 

[wallrock]

Nah, actually many dark rides are pretty versatile, and all you need for most of them is a soundstage. Just like they've got a ton of.

First off, look at the likes of DCA for a smaller park that doesn't actually follow a clear hub and spoke design. Heck, look at any Disney Park after Euro Disney and it doesn't follow a true hub and spokes like MK. The Universal Parks are not a hub and spoke design either. I think to an extent Hub and Spoke is old fashioned. Why? 1) Future expansion is limited with few spaces of real estate (look at a map of HKDL and you'll understand) 2) The grand reveal of the hub and spoke at the beginning of the day kills the suspense, whereas a park that you just sort of walk through and discover new things in is favored now (DAK is the prime example, while it is sort of "hubish" especially the main gate is an example of just wandering and discovering something new...by design) 3) Imagineers love those backdrops (Seeing something from a distance and walking towards it is a powerful thing, and everything from Everest to Cars Land is utilizing this)

Frankly I love hubs, but they're seeming to be going the way of the buffalo for a plethora of reasons (and I use that word cautiously lest @clsteve hear) Shanghai seems to be the first Magic Kingdom to be almost completely natural and less sharp. The hub itself is a land, and that helps with the natural reveals.

Issues with proper movement in and out can be addressed by new walkways on the backlot side where Pixar is allegedly coming in. The entire area west of TSMM is fair game. There are multiple points where paths can move through buildings or can be created. With themeing on the rear they can be brought up to standards, and since we're going to be in a richly themed environment that shouldn't be a problem. Though this is their job to figure out, and from what we know TS is the more likely of the two to get done first. Movement back there should be improved dramatically.

All that said, yes of course there will be sewage, power, and other infrastructure upgrades. I'd say that comes with the territory of billion dollar expansions. Somethings that are brand new are going to be destroyed (@rteetz anyone remember the trams?) That comes with the in the budget.

Someone better versed in this than me can comment, but the major infrastructure cost on WiFi/broadband should've been incurred when they buried the cables all around the resort. That's expensive, but I'm pretty sure all of that can stay put. The WiFi routers and smaller more localized infrastructure at DHS can either be replaced for minimal costs or be completely reused for the new project. That comes with the turf of new business moves. Some value is lost from perfectly fine goods, but so long as a worthy value is created in the end it's alright. When they created the Mine Train we lost access to the SWSA (not directly due to construction, but that's how it ended up). SWSA was a perfectly good ride, but Disney was willing to sacrifice it for the good of the total project.

I think they've got the winning formula here. Spend money, and make it great.

If the circular hub and spoke concept is so yesterday then why are the 1 billion dollar plus parks that are under construction around the world following the concept? Take a look at Shanghai Disneyland and Universal Studios Beijing.

Park owners aren’t interested in killing suspense, they just want you to be able to move freely and efficiently for quicker access to those spots that money can be spent. Hub and spoke has proven efficient for years. Even new city planning concepts overseas are looking at this type of layout.

The reference to Hong Kong Disneyland is a bit confusing since that park in fact follows the hub and spoke layout. The only Disney park that doesn’t is Hollywood Studios.

The limitations you refer to with Disney California Adventure and Harry Potter are that way because they share a common issue – suburbia is at their doorstep. They grow where and how they can. Hollywood Studios doesn’t have those constraints. The only real constraint they will have is Burbank's willingness (or not) to spend the cash to make a substantial upgrade happen.

 

[Lucretia]

It declined during the crash...since it is basically flat or has ticked up a little with inflation.

It's basically flat.

I didnt misread your post...I think you didnt take it far enough.

It may not be that they "want more" it could simply be that they "don't want less"

In 2 years...if studios and EPCOT are flat, ak gets a 5-10% bump, mk gets to 20, and downtown is mobbed...

Do you think the execs would take that?

Bet the farm on it.

so are you saying that Disney is happy with attendance at WDW right now? If not, what do you think would satisfy them?

 

[DDLand]

If the circular hub and spoke concept is so yesterday then why are the 1 billion dollar plus parks that are under construction around the world following the concept? Take a look at Shanghai Disneyland and Universal Studios Beijing.

Shanghai Disneyland is a modern take on hub and spoke while trying to incorporate the push for totaly immersive and deeply detailed lands. Like I said, Shanghai Disney's lands are significantly softer in appearance to those of the Traditional MK theme parks. Whereas in some places the differences between lands can be quite jarring in MK, Shanghai is much more fluid and natural. Instead of a Park built inside a rail road, this park just sort of flows.

I think these two pictures showcase how radically these two parks are being designed:

The hub and spokes design is very clear, everything is visible and is somewhat inviting you to move into the park.

Disneyland is even better:

A totally beautiful example of hub and spoke. Not only that it's very tightly packed, and allows for maximum visibility but it also allow very deep access into all areas of the park.

Now contrast this with Shanghai Disneyland:
Totally different feel. While there are paths coming off of the hub, there're not straight or immediately easy to spot. Heck, the Tomorrowland Access looks nearly invisible (it's covered in greenery). Whereas before hubs existed in order to help guests not to get lost, now guests want to get lost...in the theme. The new hub is no longer about simplicity, but is about the next generation of Rohde's Discovery Island. A place you can discover and learn about what this park is. Instead of the straight shot Main Street USA you have just a vast garden. This is totally different more akin DAK. I described that as "hubish" and think that's about accurate.

I don't know if you've actually looked up renderings of Universal Bejing, but it appears to be centered around a lake World Showcase style. Which ones did you see?

You'll likely never see a park the traditional MK model again. This is in lay men's terms "not your grandpa's hub."

Park owners aren’t interested in killing suspense, they just want you to be able to move freely and efficiently for quicker access to those spots that money can be spent.

I'm cynical and all, but you do realize that their entire business that they're in is telling a story. The entire WDW is one massive story teller. If they're not worried about the little things, then they might as well declare defeat. Plus I know there are people on these parks that are artists. They do care about breaking suspense, character, and setting theme.

Hub and spoke has proven efficient for years. Even new city planning concepts overseas are looking at this type of layout.

In theme park design the 1950s version is rather dated. It's more about spontaneous, and peeling back the layers of the the onion.

The reference to Hong Kong Disneyland is a bit confusing since that park in fact follows the hub and spoke layout.

Yes, but I don't know if you're following what's happened. It's been transformed. They've added three new lands around the original, and it now appears to be a traditional hub with lands around the periphery. That's a large chunk of the park that now longer is serviced by the hub and spoke. Those lands are all about just wandering and discovering more.

The only Disney park that doesn’t is Hollywood Studios.

I'm hard pressed to really assign Tokyo Disney Seas a true hub and spoke design, as that's also just about wandering. DAK is more randomized, not traditional whatsoever. Shanghai is a next gen take. HKDL was a great example, and then lost focus. DCA too.

The limitations you refer to with Disney California Adventure and Harry Potter are that way because they share a common issue – suburbia is at their doorstep. They grow where and how they can. Hollywood Studios doesn’t have those constraints. The only real constraint they will have is Burbank's willingness (or not) to spend the cash to make a substantial upgrade happen.

Look at the design of WestCot too. Not a clear hub and spoke design, and perhaps the first one that broke the paradigm.

Yeah, and I think they will. You think Disney is going to sit on a low risk gold mine?

Not me.

 

[Josh Hendy]

I've said it before...this is the park whose principal function failed. This isn't a theme park, it's a working film/TV/commercial studio whose function has been abandoned and Disney is debating on what to use it for.

I don't think it was built because Disney wanted a working studio in FL. It was built (in a hurry) in order to duplicate what Universal was doing in Orlando. Similarly, Animal Kingdom is a knockoff of Busch Gardens. The principle function of these parks was to lock people in for a whole week and keep them out of the Universal/Anheuser-Busch and SeaWorld spheres of influence.

The reason why the parks are so unfinished-seeming and also why no production takes place at DHS is that finishing the parks and maintaining DHS as a real studio were found to be entirely superfluous to the requirement to lock people in for a week at a time. And also I assume that both Disney and Universal found that trying to produce film and television 3 time zones away from the executive offices in California was just too big of a pain and in any case not essential to selling theme park tickets.

DHS is still a necessary part of the equation to lock in guests for 1 week, so it definitely has a purpose. But Disney execs are obviously intrigued by the concept of finding out what is the absolute minimum sized park that is required in order to induce most of the people, most of the time, into booking into WDW for a week.

There appears to be no debate at all over DHS ... slow speed ahead for the foreseeable future.

 

[rteetz]

I don't think it was built because Disney wanted a working studio in FL. It was built (in a hurry) in order to duplicate what Universal was doing in Orlando. Similarly, Animal Kingdom is a knockoff of Busch Gardens. The principle function of these parks was to lock people in for a whole week and keep them out of the Universal/Anheuser-Busch and SeaWorld spheres of influence.

The reason why the parks are so unfinished-seeming and also why no production takes place at DHS is that finishing the parks and maintaining DHS as a real studio were found to be entirely superfluous to the requirement to lock people in for a week at a time. And also I assume that both Disney and Universal found that trying to produce film and television 3 time zones away from the executive offices in California was just too big of a pain and in any case not essential to selling theme park tickets.

DHS is still a necessary part of the equation to lock in guests for 1 week, so it definitely has a purpose. But Disney execs are obviously intrigued by the concept of finding out what is the absolute minimum sized park that is required in order to induce most of the people, most of the time, into booking into WDW for a week.

There appears to be no debate at all over DHS ... slow speed ahead for the foreseeable future.

I listened to a Jim Hill podcast today yes I know Jim hill but he brought up an interesting point. Universal bought their land for their theme park in 1980-81. Eisner was Paramount CEO at the time and was asked to bring properties into their orlando studios park. Also Universal Execs approached disney to go in jointly I a studios project so it would be Disney MCA studios. Ron Miller the Disney CEO at the time was all for it but needed to get the board to approve. He soon had his departure and then Eisner stepped in. He knew they were doing this studios style park so when Universal came back to ask for the partnership Eisner said no not interested and MCA was flustered of course. Disney then pushed through plans for MGM. Which opened in 89. Universals park was originally slated for 84 but got pushed back several times and MCA was ready to drop the park altogether and then sell the land. Then Spielberg came in and after seeing what Lucas did with star tours Spielberg told MCA instead of a full on working studio tram tour why not attractions. That basically revived the project. If disney did the deal we could have a joint park today instead of two separate ones.

 

[andiraye]

Taking this back to Sept 4 for a second, does anyone think think that the product launch will have an impact on crowd levels at DHS that day? We were planning on visiting that day for the sole purpose of taking my DS4 to Star Tours (his favorite ride) and both of my boys to Jedi Training Academy.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

so are you saying that Disney is happy with attendance at WDW right now? If not, what do you think would satisfy them?

I'm saying that I believe it's not a black or white issue...

They want it to grow, but only to the point that they can still manage it on their terms.

Limiting terms would include no new overhead, employee reductions, no new traditional hotel construction, etc

It was easier in the 90's because the goals were pretty obvious/less complicated...

Very foggy now

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Taking this back to Sept 4 for a second, does anyone think think that the product launch will have an impact on crowd levels at DHS that day? We were planning on visiting that day for the sole purpose of taking my DS4 to Star Tours (his favorite ride) and both of my boys to Jedi Training Academy.

I think it's very unlikely you'll see a huge bump for product...

People will not fork $103 bucks to buy product that is widely available/ lesser quality than what they can get at target