What about the monorail extension?

[raidermatt]

There are very few who EVER thought the monorail was "worth it", yet it was built anyway.

We all know its expensive. It was expensive when it was originally built as well.

You can't just look at the cost and say "too expensive". If Disney had always made decisions based on that, they probably wouldn't have built/made half of what they did.

I really don't get comparing the monorail to roller coasters. Everybody builds roller coasters. I don't think you can say that somebody who is willing to spend money on a coaster has proven they are willing to spend money on transportation resort/infrastructure.

All that said, Bstanley is right that the answer may not be an expanded monorail, but transportation is an issue at WDW. Besides the more obvious practical issues he points out, there's also the idea that the transportation should be more a part of the "Magic", as opposed to the necessary evil it was viewed by Eisner.

 

[Horace Horsecollar]

It's actually closer to a million a mile. Maybe the $12 million figure was how much it would cost to extend it to a specific resort?

The "million a mile" cost has been repeated over and over on the Internet until people think it's true. If Disney could expand the monorail for so little money per mile, they would already have done so.

The new Las Vegas Monorail cost $654 million for just 4.4 miles. That's almost $150 miilion per mile. The Las Vegas Monorail uses the same Bombardier technology and the same kind of track as the WDW Monorail.

I assume the cost in Las Vegas is for double track, all stations, all trains, and the cost of fitting the system into an existing built-up area. So, at WDW, the cost per mile would be lower, especially for a loop track instead of a double track. But it would still be far more than $1 miilion per mile. In fact, it would be far more than $12 million per mile.

Sorry ... I was talking track only. Should have clarified.

I would be surprised if the track itself could be built for less than $20 million per mile. And, of course, a track without stations or trains is meaningless.

 

[DVCconvert]

I would be surprised if the track itself could be built for less than $20 million per mile.

Horace, this may just be that "2%" !

 

[YoHo]

For the life of me I cannot understand why in this day and age a Monorail extension would be so expensive? I would think it would be cheap and easy with the way concrete is all prefab now.

It wouldn't matter if it were $0.50 a route mile. It doesn't generate dime one of revenue it just saps operating expense.
Clearly guests don't care since they've been coming in droves anyway, so no monorail.

If they could get rid of the busses and boats and make you walk, they would.
They (meaning the execs) Don't give a good gosh darn about magic or transportation needs. They care how many $50+ clicks of the turnstyle happen each day and how many Plushes and Snowglobes get rung up at the caszh register. They don't care about the WDW is E.P.C.O.T. concept of WDW.

So Transportation will always be barely adequate, but hey Why don't you rent a car. Isn't that magical?

 

[DancingBear]

They don't care about the WDW is E.P.C.O.T. concept of WDW.

When exactly was this concept in place? Even Walt's E.P.C.O.T., which never really went anywhere (Zehnder argues in "Florida's Disney World: promises and problems that even Walt didn't really plan to carry out the plan to have residents there), was separate from Magic Kingdom.

I guess Eisner screwed up his own plan when he built the Epcot resorts area with all those boats. Or, for that matter, when they extended boat service to Saratoga Springs.

 

[WDSearcher]

I really don't get comparing the monorail to roller coasters. Everybody builds roller coasters. I don't think you can say that somebody who is willing to spend money on a coaster has proven they are willing to spend money on transportation resort/infrastructure.

I think you may have misinterpreted my post. I compared transportation to roller coasters to refute the original poster's idea that the monorail had not been extended because "Eisner never liked the monorail." My point was that he dislikes roller coasters too, but that doesn't mean he's not going to build them. The lack of new monorail track wasn't about Eisner not liking the monorail; it was about the monorails not having a high enough return on investment.

As for the transportation being "magical" -- I know a lot of folks who consider a bus with a fun and chatty bus driver a lot more magical than a monorail with its standard announcements. Monorails aren't "magic" any more -- airports have them, Vegas has them, other theme parks have them. The "magic" card doesn't apply as much as it used to.

 

[crusader]

Heck, who wouldn’t love a new age mode of transport. Fast, efficient, reliable, cutting edge – so awesome, it gets you from pt A to pt B in record time – with no hassle.

But short of this, there is no solution. So it'll be status quo until the rental cars dangerously crowd the freeways and/or the guests stop coming. Neither of which is going to happen.

Right now Disney is offering a free courtesy shuttle to pick you up and transport you direct upon arrival. Not only does that keep the guest onsite, it forces utilization of their transport system. This has to mitigate the rental issue.

But that's not going to cut it for some of us. To me, the hassle of their system far outweighs the free ride from the airport. This is mainly because I don't spend 7-10 days at a time there every 3-5 yrs. anymore. The trips are shorter and more frequent.

But it's not just about my habits. Let's take generation Y into consideration. For them, it better be easy and painless or forget it. The days of leisurely meandering around the world at a 1950's pace are over. The tempo and momentum have changed along with the wants and needs of the guest.

They don't care about the bus. They'd rather not wait for the boat or the monorail. Whatever arrives first and gets them there is fine. It's not about any of this and the company knows it.

 

[Bstanley]

Well Crusader, if the next generation of tourists is that temporally challenged the WDW transportation system is going to cause them to have even more headaches than us old fogies - and that will cost WDW real money.

It all boils down to Customer Satisfaction. If the transportation options aggravate rather than entertain a WDW visitor the odds are now higher that they will not be back - or at a minimum they won't be back as often.

Renting a car costs money - raises the price of the trip, plus the hassle of getting the car, turning it in and finding your way around. And heaven forbid that you run into one of the other 100,000 vehicles trying to find their way around...that's a real vacation fer shere.

I've had very entertaining bus drivers on occasion - but no one I have ever spoken with about WDW has ever mentioned buses in a positive light - virtually everyone mentions the monorail positively though. To the average Tourist (not those of us that are Disney-nerds because we will visit WDW regularly even if they made us ride pedal cars) the transportation options are an interesting part of the decision of whether/when to come back. If getting from the hotel to the park, or DTD, or wherever makes 'ol Dad think he's back at work it may be awhile before he relents for another trip.

A WDW vacation is not cheap - every aspect of it needs a substantial 'WOW' factor to keep the average Joe from questioning whether it's worth it.

 

[crusader]

Ahh.......now you're talking money.

Let's face it - every generation comes complete with its' own rule book and the transportation system is already a hassle on both sides. Maybe it's just become a given and treated as so what. Not enough of an issue.

Deal with it if you want or don't. Spend more for convienence by staying adjacent to the parks with more options or drive down with your own car or rent a vehicle or walk. Whatever. The options are endless and the choice is yours. If you want this type of vacation everybody knows this is one of the details you have to address.

But you're right. When you talk about demand, I think money and the consumer really do become the real issue.

So let's explore this.

The potential Disney consumer is born every day and keeps growing with the population. It was my grandparents visiting Walt in Disneyland - (2 people) which evolved into my mother and her brother taking their families to Disneyworld (14 people) which has now grown to our extended families on both sides buying into the DVC which accomodates over 30 people not to mention everyone else in the group who happens to visit on occasion.

Your theory is that at some point, the system will become such a hassle, the consumer may grow weary and take their money elsewhere.

I'm not so sure about this.

I see the consumer setting aside vacation money every year for all kinds of destinations - whether it be to drop $2500 on a place at the Outerbanks or the Jersey shore - or $3500 to travel to FL to stay at Disney. The consumer has a set price in mind for their entertainment and a predetermined expectation about what they're buying and will budget accordingly.

The busses don't really affect this mentality. It's about the attractions - the themepark - the resort - the amenities. The transportation system is not going to deter anyone in the future, anymore than it deters any of us now.

 

[Plus4206]

First, I don't think the existing transport system is that bad. The biggest problem I see with it is that Disney is letting ANYBODY on the buses. DTD has become the new,free TTC. Go back to asking for resort ID's.

Second, rental cars are not a hassle or that expensive. Granted, the math has changed now that Disney is offering free airport transportation, but prior too that a family of four could rent a car for a week for about the same price as a Mears shuttle.

Lastly, where else can you go on vacation in a "city" the size of San Fran and have free transport to anywhere you wish to go within that city. When my friends tell me about their trips they don't whine about the amount of time they waited or how crowded the bus was, they brag about how cool it was they didn't have to drive anywhere.

 

[Bstanley]

While it's absolutely true that dealing with the transportation snarl at WDW is not anyone's number one excuse for not going/not going back as soon - it's definitely a contributor.

People don't want to take a vacation and end up dealing with the same sort of tedium that they deal with every day at home, like queueing for and riding buses. People want their vacations to be as effortless as possible - going home worn out kinda defeats the purpose of a vacation. I personally gave up on the buses when it took us an hour and a half to get from The Contemporary back to Dixie Landings one night - via DTD - that was REALLY tiresome.

So when it comes time for a Disney-neutral person to pick where to go on their next vacation it may come down to simply how they felt when they got home from the last trip. If they remember the waiting around more than the 'kewlness' they'll be off to the beach...

 

[crusader]

Good point.

The amazing thing about Disney is that no matter how trying the experience, people tend to forgive this over and over again and replan and revisit.

But since when was a themepark relaxing? Even when we camped in the 70's at Disney it was work and the MK was crowded with long lines in the summer. It's always been about logistics and planning.

You choose it for the all inclusive entertainment factor. Shows, attractions, waterparks, resorts, pools - pure stimulation and a good time. Sure you can kick back and soak it all in, but with children that is extremely challenging in this environment.

You have to be willing to walk away - even if you have park tickets good for 14 hrs.

The beach isn't as sedentary as we all fantasize either. There's weather, needy kids, sand, seagulls, UV rays, biowaste and the undertow for starters.

So in both cases, you opt for the balcony with the view and pay more to ease the hassle.

You're right about the bussing. I stayed at the POR 14 yrs ago and found out the hard way this was no transport for me. Haven't relied on it since.

 

[All Aboard]

Here's a crazy question - Are monorails more time/effort effecient than busses and cars?

Take going from the Grand Floridian to Epcot, for example. A monorail ride involves a stop at MK, a stop at the Contemporary, and then a train change at the TTC before finally heading off to Epcot. AND, on the way home, guests have to do that down one ramp, walk around the outside of the station and back up the other ramp thing at the TTC (or is that on the way TO Epcot?)

So, what would a trip from GF to Animal Kingdom be like in the new world of every resort / every park connected by monorails?

 

[raidermatt]

Last things first:

Here's a crazy question - Are monorails more time/effort effecient than busses and cars?

I assume you mean from a guest pov? For the most part, probably not. As far as a strict "walking distance + time" equation, it probably depends on where you are going and when. Beyond that it gets subjective, as each guests values the effort to drive vs. the effort to board a bus/monorail differently.

But I don't think anyone is really going to argue that the current monorail system is hands down the fastest/easiest way to get from point A to point B.

While it's absolutely true that dealing with the transportation snarl at WDW is not anyone's number one excuse for not going/not going back as soon - it's definitely a contributor.

Exactly. Most people aren't quite as analytical as Crusader makes them out to be. When they return from a vacation, they judge the vacation by the general feeling they have upon their return. When making a decision about whether to repeat a destination, again, its based mostly on their overall impressions from previous visits. That means that EVERYTHING has an impact, and this is something that Disney has always understood. Its why they did things that couldn't be tied to a specific revenue stream.

To a certain extent, we all know they understand it now. Look at something as basic as landscaping around the resorts. Is anyone going to forego their next trip because of shoddy landscaping outside their room? Probably not, but it does contribute to their overall impression, and Disney fully understands this.

Same principle as transportation, only the stakes and costs are higher. What's more, its dangerous to wait until the guests cry out in anger because its not something you can fix in a matter of months, or even a few years.


Then there's the specific question of whether the Monorails have any "Magic" value anymore. I'll agree that they probably don't hold the same mistique they once did, but certainly there is still value there. There's a lot of stories on the boards about guests' reactions to riding the Monorail for the first time, or riding the Monorail up to the Magic Kingdome with tears in their eyes. While certainly there are some who find Magic in chatting with a bus driver, I don't think it realistic to say it comes anywhere close when it comes to the numbers of people who feel it.

I just spoke to a co-worker on Friday about his recent WDW trip, which was his first. One of the first things he relayed to me was the feeling of riding the Monorail up to the MK, and seeing the tears in his wife's and daughter's eyes. Monorails may exist elsewhere, but for whatever reason, they evoke a different reaction at WDW then they do in Detroit.

Now, all that said, I will repeat that I am not saying that the Monorail IS the solution. Certainly if it were to be expanded, it would also probably need some re-working, like having two-way traffic.

All I'm saying is that there should be SOME kind of significant enhancement to the transportation system, and the Monorail should be CONSIDERED as one of the options.

 

[wtpclc]

Monorails may exist elsewhere, but for whatever reason, they evoke a different reaction at WDW then they do in Detroit.

I don't know... Arriving at the Joe for what could be the last game in the Cup series is pretty intense. For the most part, I guess you're probably right, though.

Flip side, though. I was in tears arriving on the bus at 25. I went bonkers over the topiaries of elephants. Are teh monorails a huge part of WDW? yes. Do they make it or break it? I don't think so.

 

[Bstanley]

Personally I want more Steam Trains!

 

[crusader]

Dreamon!

Here's a crazy question - Are monorails more time/effort effecient than busses and cars?

No. Not in their present state. The monorail does have its' appeal. Matt mentions pulling up to the MK but there's nothing like it upon entering EPCOT for the first time. So what would happen if it were to extend all around the place? It would quickly become less favorable. It takes longer to ride and mechanical failures can be a big problem for that guest experience.

I used to make it a point to board every mode of transport Disney had yrs ago. They were attractions in and of themselves to some degree. In Nov., I noticed my son doing the exact same thing. So absent the train, they're all pretty much in operation to this day - and still viewed as something to ride.

Including the bus.

 

[jazstar87]

I remeber reading if they did expand the monorail track, the hotel which the monorail goes to, will increase about 100 or more dollars. Would that be true?
I would like the extension, but can disney afford it? i don't want my favorite company go crashing down because of some extension.

 

[YoHo]

Don't worry, Disney will come crashing down for myriad other reasons before Monorail expansion kills them.

To Dancing Bear's question. I refer you to the book Since the World Began.
When Imagineers and then Disney managment dumped the original E.P.C.O.T. city idea they decided that instead they would make the entire complex a shw case of modern technologies, new ideas and new systems. Hense the incredbly unique and complex water treatment facilities, the monorail systems that were installed and the The Solar systems, the offstage areas in general were all designed and implemented to showcase the spirit of E.P.C.O.T. and E.P.C.O.T. center was intended to be the focal point for all of this. your glimpse into this innovation and technology. and in the early days, much of it was.


As to Greg's question. I'll agree with Matt and follow up that the real question might be just how efficent were the monorails when they were installed? Clearly the parks have expanded, the entire facilities have expanded, more people are moving to more parts of the park then ever before. Yet the Monorail remains unchanged.

And, you have to wonder if the current system has flaws that are unrelated to it being a monorail. For instance, the Hotel loop. Would it not be more efficent to have smaller trains and more frequent trains. Say 5-6 instead of 4?

Blaming the monorail concept for an implementation failure is kind of silly.




And last, to move back to Matt's point, depending on time of day, is it truely that much slower to get on the monorail, transfer stations, go thorugh multiple stops possibly having to skip a train then walk to your room then it is to hope on a tram, find your car, wait in line to leave the park, wait in line to get to your resort, find parking, walk to your room?

It's a far more complex question with no clear cut yes or no answer.

 

[DancingBear]

To Dancing Bear's question. I refer you to the book Since the World Began.
When Imagineers and then Disney managment dumped the original E.P.C.O.T. city idea they decided that instead they would make the entire complex a shw case of modern technologies, new ideas and new systems. Hense the incredbly unique and complex water treatment facilities, the monorail systems that were installed and the The Solar systems, the offstage areas in general were all designed and implemented to showcase the spirit of E.P.C.O.T. and E.P.C.O.T. center was intended to be the focal point for all of this. your glimpse into this innovation and technology. and in the early days, much of it was.

When was that decision made, and where was this philosophy implemented, other than at E.P.C.O.T. Center?