Generally when you talk about a private business "acknowledging" something, it means admitting to outsiders, like reporters, that there is a problem. DHS's attendance went up, WDW is doing record business . . . there is nothing for the company to coverup with DHS. Currently, it is benefitting from the improvements in the economy, and other factors.
I guess I'll file this under the "DHS is failing like DCA" rumors . . .
You know, I must say, you are one of the most obtuse posters I've ever had the annoyance of reading around here. You drink up the company Kool-Aid and preach it as gospel while dispelling the news you don't want to hear from established, reputable insiders who have built credibility over years of correct insider information. And really, you should be happy - DHS will be (hopefully!) getting the attention it needs.
Iger isn't going to say DHS is failing if he doesn't have to. He can use the wonders of aggregate data to paint a prettier picture for investors. The park attendance statistics you keep screaming about have been mere estimates for years now...and they (given some pretty simple examination) really don't make a lot of sense. In DHS's case, as many have already pointed out ad nauseum (and you've yet to address this point, by the way), in order to reach the number of the reported attendance, the park would have to be at or near capacity pretty much every day of the year. That isn't anywhere near realistic or true.
And consider this - if WDW had nothing to hide about its theme park attendance data, in that DHS WAS actually growing to the degree the reports claim (and that you keep shouting), why don't they just publish the official numbers? Disney has taken steps to hide that information rather than make it more transparent. One has to wonder, why?
Of course, none of this matters when you consider that attendance doesn't mean crap if no one is buying anything. I can personally attest that the "3 hour stay" argument is pretty valid, as I've done it quite often - and I know several families who went recently that either only spent an hour or two there to ride ToT & RnRC, or skipped it entirely. That means no meal sales and almost no merchandise sales from that customer, but hey, DHS gets the turnstile click so it must be doing fabulously, right?
You keep acting like we're saying DHS and DCA have the same problem and are thus getting a "reboot" of sorts - this isn't accurate and you keep grossly misrepresenting what a lot of people are saying to suit your (seriously) slanted argument. DCA's problem was it was a crap park compared to Disneyland without enough quality attractions to draw sufficient attendance. It needed attendance, badly. DHS has attendance, as you've pointed out again and again and again. The issue is the lack of spending once there and duration of stay. If you bolster the presence of two of Disney's master properties, Star Wars and Cars, you've got enough new, extremely-appealing attractions to keep people there for at least one meal and probably enough interest to buy a Cars or Star Wars toy (or anything else, really). Let's not kid ourselves - Lights Motors Action and the Backlot Tour aren't selling toys right now. Cars and Star Wars will. Thus, DHS and DCA both need (and will hopefully get) its reboot - but for entirely different reasons and with entirely different end goals.
Finally, to address your "this is armchair imagineering!" claim, I counter by saying you're being a bit of a hypocrite. You seem to know what's better for the park by offering your own ideas on where expansion pads and where things should go (parking lots, etc.). If someone told me five years ago that Universal would tear out the JAWS ride and adjacent Amity area, put more Potter in, and link the parks with a train, I would've told them they were nuts and that was probably just some stupid armchair imagineering. (In fact, if I looked back far enough, I probably did say something like that.) It's not that far-fetched that Disney would be interested in tearing down the useless Streets of America, Backlot Tour, and LMA (the latter two of which are very resource-consuming and expensive to run) in favor of more relevant, popular attractions. Seriously, I really find it hard to believe you can't understand this argument. I think you're calling it "armchair imagineering" because you don't like the plan and it doesn't make the most efficient use of space to you. (And I might even agree. But that's not the point.)
Now, I know you'll ignore every logical point I (and everyone else) just made and continue in your little dreamland where Disney does things per your wishes, @
Lee and the @
WDW1974 don't know what they're talking about, and the removal of the Osborne lights would be a national catastrophe (seriously?). But I just could not handle your seemingly forced ignorance any longer and felt compelled to say something.
