News Disney plans to accelerate Parks investment to $60 billion over 10 years

[MisterPenguin]

I don't think there needs to be one with as many as DL (quibble though: MK due to having a bunch more shows than DL is a lot closer in attraction count than you would expect by counting just rides) so much as they really just need to make each park have a larger amount of total attractions. This is particularly evident at DAK and DHS.

The constant replacement of attractions (e.g. in recent years Cosmic Rewind, MMRR, FAE, Princess Fairytale Hall, SWGE & TSL, etc) as opposed to building new additional attractions (less common like Tron and Ratatouille) has been a huge problem at WDW. Replacing Dinoland instead of adding Tropical Americas elsewhere is a continuation of this problematic trend.

Somehow at DL they manage to make additions without the "blessing of size" (e.g. SWGE, MMRR there)

SWGE and TSL gave us four rides replacing two attractions.

Also, we got expansions and reconfigurations which dramatically increased capacity: Soarin's third theater, TSMM extra track, a much larger foot print with Ellen->GotG, a 'green side' to M:S.

Not to mention that capacity increased simply by having a more attractive attraction (Ellen->GotG and Maelstrom->FEA).

I understand the longing for a brand new ride while keeping everything else the same. But, some attractions become less attractive over time (maybe not to hardcore fans, but to the general public). Not to mention have 'operational issues' that would require the expenditure of what a brand new rethemed ride would cost. This makes the calculus to replace with something less costly to maintain and more attractive to guests appealing to the powers that be.

Who among us hasn't demolished a ride in a theme park simulator that was no longer getting many guests and replaced it with something newer and better?

If it were up to me, I'd give DHS, DAK, and EP each three new rides to make them more ride-attractive while doing only replacements in MK to even them out. The BBTM new land drives me crazy... MK is at its infrastructure limits and they wants to make it more attractive? I guess that means park reservations for ever and much, much higher prices.

 

[abaker1975]

I don't think there needs to be one with as many as DL (quibble though: MK due to having a bunch more shows than DL is a lot closer in attraction count than you would expect by counting just rides) so much as they really just need to make each park have a larger amount of total attractions. This is particularly evident at DAK and DHS.

The constant replacement of attractions (e.g. in recent years Cosmic Rewind, MMRR, FAE, Princess Fairytale Hall, SWGE & TSL, etc) as opposed to building new additional attractions (less common like Tron and Ratatouille) has been a huge problem at WDW. Replacing Dinoland instead of adding Tropical Americas elsewhere is a continuation of this problematic trend.

Somehow at DL they manage to make additions without the "blessing of size" (e.g. SWGE, MMRR there)

Yes, you have put that very well. When I got to visit Disneyland Park (albeit quite a time ago in 2009) I was very surprised just how much there seemed to be to do. As a WDW "regular" I was surprised how much more I felt there was to do compared to how I felt at MK. It feels amazing to me that since then the park has added Star Wars Galaxy Edge and Micky and Minnie's Railway. With DCA just across the esplanade you can do so much with nearly all the major headliners (or an alternative equivalent) from all 4 parks in WDW within a 15 min walk. Can't wait to go back.

 

[UNCgolf]

SWGE and TSL gave us four rides replacing two attractions.

Also, we got expansions and reconfigurations which dramatically increased capacity: Soarin's third theater, TSMM extra track, a much larger foot print with Ellen->GotG, a 'green side' to M:S.

Not to mention that capacity increased simply by having a more attractive attraction (Ellen->GotG and Maelstrom->FEA).

I understand the longing for a brand new ride while keeping everything else the same. But, some attractions become less attractive over time (maybe not to hardcore fans, but to the general public). Not to mention have 'operational issues' that would require the expenditure of what a brand new rethemed ride would cost. This makes the calculus to replace with something less costly to maintain and more attractive to guests appealing to the powers that be.

Who among us hasn't demolished a ride in a theme park simulator that was no longer getting many guests and replaced it with something newer and better?

If it were up to me, I'd give DHS, DAK, and EP each three new rides to make them more ride-attractive while doing only replacements in MK to even them out. The BBTM new land drives me crazy... MK is at its infrastructure limits and they wants to make it more attractive? I guess that means park reservations for ever and much, much higher prices.

Did FEA really increase capacity? There would be a relatively small effect in that a couple hundred extra people are waiting in the queue, but I don't think Maelstrom was ever a walk-on so it was closer to Dinosaur than something like Imagination.

I'm not positive about that, though.

 

[Andrew25]

Did FEA really increase capacity? There would be a relatively small effect in that a couple hundred extra people are waiting in the queue, but I don't think Maelstrom was ever a walk-on so it was closer to Dinosaur than something like Imagination.

I'm not positive about that, though.

Technically no, but it did increase the number of riders who experience an attraction.

Maelstrom was sending out empty boats throughout the day... FEA fills out every single seat from open to close.

 

[Gusey]

Did FEA really increase capacity? There would be a relatively small effect in that a couple hundred extra people are waiting in the queue, but I don't think Maelstrom was ever a walk-on so it was closer to Dinosaur than something like Imagination.

I'm not positive about that, though.

Didn't they "extend" the track by removing the show and moving the unload station so more guests are on the ride at a time?

 

[doctornick]

Technically no, but it did increase the number of riders who experience an attraction.

Maelstrom was sending out empty boats throughout the day... FEA fills out every single seat from open to close.

I don't think Maelstrom was ever sending out "empty" (or even not fully filled) boats. The ride consistently had a queue and decent waits - not to the degree of FAE, but 30-45 minutes was pretty typical as a minimum on even less busy days. When people make comments like this, I really wonder when exactly they ever saw Maelstrom as a walk on.

There was however a small amount of capacity increase with FAE as they start the ride at park opening as opposed to later in the day when Maelstrom would open with the rest of WS.

 

[Andrew25]

I don't think Maelstrom was ever sending out "empty" (or even not fully filled) boats. The ride consistently had a queue and decent waits - not to the degree of FAE, but 30-45 minutes was pretty typical as a minimum on even less busy days. When people make comments like this, I really wonder when exactly they ever saw Maelstrom as a walk on.

There was however a small amount of capacity increase with FAE as they start the ride at park opening as opposed to later in the day when Maelstrom would open with the rest of WS.

Never said Maelstrom wasn't popular, but there were often days and times during the day were it was just a walk on or sending a handful of guests per boat.

Don't get me wrong, Frozen should have been an expansion not a retheme, but there are certainly far more people experiencing FEA than Maelstrom.

 

[celluloid]

Never said Maelstrom wasn't popular, but there were often days and times during the day were it was just a walk on or sending a handful of guests per boat.

Don't get me wrong, Frozen should have been an expansion not a retheme, but there are certainly far more people experiencing FEA than Maelstrom.

For sure, but it would be because other than opening Disney never spent any money promoting that it was there.

And of course, Frozen is very popular in property so it would be promoted well.

Also, for most of Maelstrom's life cycle, there was more things to do at EPCOT for guests, and very much so no height requirement ones.

Frozen also has a slightly lower capacity.

 

[UNCgolf]

Technically no, but it did increase the number of riders who experience an attraction.

Maelstrom was sending out empty boats throughout the day... FEA fills out every single seat from open to close.

That's what I was asking -- I know FEA didn't increase theoretical capacity. I was under the impression that Maelstrom rarely sent out any empty boats and almost always had a decent wait.

That would mean FEA has had very little impact on capacity beyond the extra people waiting in the queue, which isn't nothing, but is minor overall.

It's also why I mentioned Dinosaur as a comparison. The Indy retheme may result in a better attraction, but it's not going to actually increase capacity for DAK because Dinosaur isn't underutilized. I don't think Maelstrom was underutilized either.

 

[peng]

Yeah, Disney needs new additions more than endless rethemes at this point, parks are still overcrowded and Epcot and AK still have a ton of expansion pads that are unused. Ratatouille is probably the only addition as of late that wasn't a replacement for another ride since Everest.

 

[duncedoof]

Me, personally? I hope none of that report's true because Brayden teased further updates at the end using a picture of the Tower of Terror and I don't even want to know where that's going.

 

[DisneyDodo]

Yeah, Disney needs new additions more than endless rethemes at this point, parks are still overcrowded and Epcot and AK still have a ton of expansion pads that are unused. Ratatouille is probably the only addition as of late that wasn't a replacement for another ride since Everest.

Tron

 

[Rich Brownn]

It sure would be nice if Epic opens big and popular, considering how the first two parks had botched openings.

USF is not my favorite, and definitely in danger of being "dropped" in favor of Epic, but it's far from a horrible park. It just has some "dark areas" they need to clean up (which, they have plans for).


+ add that Universal is tinkering with the idea of pulling a Disneyland SWGE and possibly only allowing single-day tickets to access Epic for the first few months.


$100M... more like $1B lol

While possible, I can't see them offering Epic as a stand alone, as that basically gives people to skip IOA and USF a priority - something Universal definetly does not want. I could see the reverse - 1 day not being available for the first few weeks, only available with a 3 or 4 day pass/

 

[flynnibus]

I think a park should cater to everyone’s needs. Not just one group of people.

If I wanna go to Animal Kingdom and fill my day with only rides, I can’t.

If I wanna go to Animal Kingdom and fill my day while avoiding rides, I can’t.

If I wanna go to Animal Kingdom and fill my day with everything the park has to offer, I absolutely can.

Animal Kingdom should let people only ride rides all day if they want to only ride rides.

You can probably spend two full days only doing rides at Disneyland before you get to any of the entertainment offerings. Having a more diverse park, with a depth of diversity, only makes the park better.

I think your post confuses SCALE with 'diversity'

DAK and DHS do have diversity of offers - what they don't have is a TON in each category. Your story uses Disneyland as the counter point.. which is probably one of the highest density of rides in any single park anywhere, and that's why it fits your story... not because 'it caters to everyones needs' or has 'diversity' compared to others.

I don’t think it’s an outlandish claim to say Animal Kingdom is a full-day park, but only a partial day park to a lot of people, and I don’t think that’s a fault of the people visiting.

No, but what people should say is "It's not something that keeps me occupied for a full day" -- Not "It's not a full day park"

That's like me saying Country Music isn't popular... because it's not popular to me. To call it that solely because of my preferences is self-centered and obtuse to the world around me.

 

[celluloid]

I think your post confuses SCALE with 'diversity'

DAK and DHS do have diversity of offers - what they don't have is a TON in each category. Your story uses Disneyland as the counter point.. which is probably one of the highest density of rides in any single park anywhere, and that's why it fits your story... not because 'it caters to everyones needs' or has 'diversity' compared to others.

I don't think I would say Animal Kingdom has a diversity in offering when people speak of attractions that are not animals.

There is not a lot for a three year old to ride. Nav River Journey, Safari and Triceritops Spinners. Only one of those is likely seen as great. Second is meh and the third is a spinner.

With Tough to be a bug counted, which will be closed for a while soon... as the show is reported to change.

Then you are really about to have a hard sell to be charging kids 3 years old 100 plus bucks a day.

 

[flynnibus]

Then you are really about to have a hard sell to be charging kids 3 years old 100 plus bucks a day.

Kinda like charging grandma $100 a day to visit a thrill heavy park? Yet, they still gotta pay to play tag along.

3yr old kids aren't really a 'ride heavy' audience in the first place. Not a very compelling argument

 

[DisneyDodo]

3yr old kids aren't really a 'ride heavy' audience in the first place. Not a very compelling argument

They may be true at most amusement/theme parks, but certainly not at WDW. In MK, I would expect most 3yos spend the majority of their day riding rides. Same probably goes for Epcot.

In DHS and DAK, that’s not possible due to the lack of offerings. But that doesn’t mean the demand isn’t there.

 

[celluloid]

They may be true at most amusement/theme parks, but certainly not at WDW. In MK, I would expect most 3yos spend the majority of their day riding rides. Same probably goes for Epcot.

In DHS and DAK, that’s not possible due to the lack of offerings. But that doesn’t mean the demand isn’t there.

Exactly. And the parents having fun while their 3-4 year olds(a lot of kids don't have 40 inches until after that and many more won't hit and 44 for the two biggest Animal Kingdom attractions until 6.

 

[DisneyDodo]

Exactly. And the parents having fun while their 3-4 year olds(a lot of kids don't have 40 inches until after that and many more won't hit and 44 for the two biggest Animal Kingdom attractions until 6.

Yup and many kids aren’t necessarily ready to ride these thrill rides even by the time they reach the height requirement.

 

[UNCgolf]

You don't think adding new low to no height requirement rides have kids with family enjoyment as a reason?

odd.

I think it would be a lot easier to make this argument if Disney was actually doing that.

It's just Encanto (and while I assume it won't have a height requirement and would be surprised if it did, we don't know that for sure). They aren't adding anything else that's different from what currently exists. The potential Coco carousel is just replacing another no height requirement attraction in TriceraTop Spin.