A Spirited Valentine ...

CaptainAmerica

Premium Member
I can see kids enjoying the trails, Safari, and entertainment.

But you tell me how many of the under-5 crowd enjoy Dinosaur, Everest, Kali, Bug's Life, Primeval Whirl, and Avatar. That's most of the rides in the park.

Maybe the concern is because all of the trails and entertainment shut down at night leaving a bunch of stuff that doesn't appeal to pre-K kids. But that's just a sign of poor long-term planning.
You're conflating "rides" with "things to do." They're not the same thing. Disney is at its best when they're giving you things to do that aren't rides, IMO.
 

rushtest4echo

Well-Known Member
You're conflating "rides" with "things to do." They're not the same thing. Disney is at its best when they're giving you things to do that aren't rides, IMO.

I tend to agree with you most of the time, but Animal Kingdom is the doldrums for those under 6 at night. Especially at a park where you can comfortably do all of the rides/shows during the day. Most of the shows are done well before sundown, and unless someone specifically stops the kiddies from riding stuff during the day in order to "save it" for evening when the Animal trails and shows are closed, then their kids are going to be bored to tears at night. Live music probably isn't going to help, and Avatar probably won't do a lot either. Then again, this same issue is present at EPCOT and DHS.
 

Angel Ariel

Well-Known Member
I tend to agree with you most of the time, but Animal Kingdom is the doldrums for those under 6 at night. Especially at a park where you can comfortably do all of the rides/shows during the day. Most of the shows are done well before sundown, and unless someone specifically stops the kiddies from riding stuff during the day in order to "save it" for evening when the Animal trails and shows are closed, then their kids are going to be bored to tears at night. Live music probably isn't going to help, and Avatar probably won't do a lot either. Then again, this same issue is present at EPCOT and DHS.

At night, I would agree. The comment that Captain America and I were both originally responding to was not limiting the comments about nothing for preK age to do to nighttime, though. It's only recently that AK's consistently been open late enough for the shows ending/animal exhibits closing to significantly affect the experience for the rest of the time the park is open.
 

CaptainAmerica

Premium Member
I tend to agree with you most of the time, but Animal Kingdom is the doldrums for those under 6 at night. Especially at a park where you can comfortably do all of the rides/shows during the day. Most of the shows are done well before sundown, and unless someone specifically stops the kiddies from riding stuff during the day in order to "save it" for evening when the Animal trails and shows are closed, then their kids are going to be bored to tears at night. Live music probably isn't going to help, and Avatar probably won't do a lot either. Then again, this same issue is present at EPCOT and DHS.
"Under 6 at night" is a VERY specific complaint when you consider that the park has only been open at night for a few months in the first place. I'm not sure why you don't think Avatar and live music would help. They'll help in two ways. First, it'll give people something to do at nighttime. Second, it'll give people more to do in the day time so they're waiting until nighttime to do other things.
 

kpilcher

Well-Known Member

HauntedPirate

Park nostalgist
Premium Member
The "Disney Princess" branding may be considered a mistake by some, but it's made ridiculous amounts of money.

I cannot equate Eisner to Iger at all. Eisner, for all his post-Wells and post-heart attack flaws, still had a passion for the parks and could be found in the parks even when there wasn't a press conference or event to attend. I was firmly in the #SaveDisney corner, as Eisner was his own worst enemy by that point, but Iger became the "be careful what you wish for" worst nightmare scenario. All nice and smiles to start, coupled with the acquisition of Pixar, only to show his true colors a couple of years later. You'd have to drag his cold, dead corpse into a park to find him in a park if there isn't a press junket, let alone have him be in a park without a horde of handlers. He embodies "living in an ivory tower".

The costs involved seem prohibitive. No way I would want to own there

I agree. There are many other places that would be more conducive to DVC development. Besides, building there would ruin all the lore and legend of the abandoned Discovery Island. ;)
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
Here's one example, IMHO, according to recently filed DVC documents 86% of the Polynesian is now controlled/owned by DVC!

No, that's not what your article says. The 85.8% number is a percentage WITHIN the DVC inventory.. not the whole Poly Resort.
http://dvcnews.com/index.php/resort...olynesian-villas-bungalows?utm_source=dlvr.it

"
Including this latest declaration, 16 bungalows and 312 studios have now been added to the DVC inventory. This accounts for 3,460,724 points, or 85.8% of the Polynesian’s 4,032,720 total points. There are four bungalows and 48 studios that have not yet been declared for the DVC inventory.

This declaration gives DVC members access to more rooms at the Polynesian. For every Use Day, 85.8% of the resort can be booked using DVC points; the remaining 14.2% is still owned and controlled by Disney, which can use it for cash reservations or other ways it desires."

This is talking about how much of the total DVC inventory has been released to sales/use. It's not talking about DVC vs remainder of Poly property.
 

PorterRedkey

Well-Known Member
Yeah, it's really not that hard.
tumblr_n3bsc3ktO01qh5vtfo1_500.jpg


Not many rides are imo.
I loved this touch when we stayed at Cabana Bay. The resort was the second-best thing at USF for me and my wife (behind Potter).
 

kpilcher

Well-Known Member
No, that's not what your article says. The 85.8% number is a percentage WITHIN the DVC inventory.. not the whole Poly Resort.
http://dvcnews.com/index.php/resort...olynesian-villas-bungalows?utm_source=dlvr.it

"
Including this latest declaration, 16 bungalows and 312 studios have now been added to the DVC inventory. This accounts for 3,460,724 points, or 85.8% of the Polynesian’s 4,032,720 total points. There are four bungalows and 48 studios that have not yet been declared for the DVC inventory.

This declaration gives DVC members access to more rooms at the Polynesian. For every Use Day, 85.8% of the resort can be booked using DVC points; the remaining 14.2% is still owned and controlled by Disney, which can use it for cash reservations or other ways it desires."

This is talking about how much of the total DVC inventory has been released to sales/use. It's not talking about DVC vs remainder of Poly property.

I'm not at all saying you're wrong.. but why would DVC not control 100% of DVC inventory??
Also...as you quoted: "For every Use Day, 85.8% of the resort can be booked using DVC points; the remaining 14.2% is still owned and controlled by Disney" Please help unconfuse me.
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
I'm not at all saying you're wrong.. but why would DVC not control 100% of DVC inventory??
Also...as you quoted: "For every Use Day, 85.8% of the resort can be booked using DVC points; the remaining 14.2% is still owned and controlled by Disney" Please help unconfuse me.

Because the # of points defined for the property are set up front... the # of rooms actually in circulation is ramped up over time. You are reading too much into the wording 'controlled by DVC' - it's all DVC (eventually). They are referring to the points.
 

WDWTank

Well-Known Member
There are times when I really want to punch the suits at Disney in the face, and this is one of them. I'm no fan of Cars the Movies, but Carsland is amazing. Lasseter showed the true spirit of Walt when he fought to make it so. I wish he were in charge of the parks. He used to work at Disneyland, after all, and I bet a bunch of the penny-pinchers in the Disney organization have never even visited there. The Disney company may be successful, but it still makes me sad. And mad. Sometimes.
Totally :)
They need to stop shoe-horning marketing executives into careers designed for themed entertainment ;)
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
Why is Disney focused only on characters these days? I do not pay $150+ to ride grocery store aisles....

Then you can go to any old generic theme park, right?

"Hey, Billie, wanna go to Theme Park Land? You can get your picture taken with a random costumed mammal! You can go on several boat or slow track rides featuring animatronic characters you've never heard of! You can ride a coaster or two!"

"You mean, like the local Six Flags?"

"Sure, why not."
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Then you can go to any old generic theme park, right?

"Hey, Billie, wanna go to Theme Park Land? You can get your picture taken with a random costumed mammal! You can go on several boat or slow track rides featuring animatronic characters you've never heard of! You can ride a coaster or two!"

"You mean, like the local Six Flags?"

"Sure, why not."
Then why isn't Mickey Mouse in Beauty and the Beast? Isn't Belle just some random girl if she isn't 'played' by Minnie?
 

TalkingHead

Well-Known Member
My 4 year old would love Primeval Whirl, if she were allowed to ride it. With a height requirement of 48", though, that's not going to happen for a while yet (She only 41"). Everest is also not an option, for height..same with Dinosaur. My 6 y/I nephew loved Everest, and I have no doubt that the 3 y/o nephew would have loved it if he'd been allowed to ride it (he's always been a risk taker). If not at 3, definitely at 4. None of them would have had issues with Kali, and the height requirement there is only 38".

The Navi river ride is supposed to be a family friendly ride in Avatar. I doubt we'll have any issue taking DD on that either when it opens.

No one is saying that everything in AK is kid friendly. It's not. There should be a balance in all parks. But to say it doesn't appeal to the preK age at all is also wrong.

"Under 6 at night" is a VERY specific complaint when you consider that the park has only been open at night for a few months in the first place. I'm not sure why you don't think Avatar and live music would help. They'll help in two ways. First, it'll give people something to do at nighttime. Second, it'll give people more to do in the day time so they're waiting until nighttime to do other things.

Both of you are missing the bigger point: why would Disney care that Rivers of Light doesn't test well with pre-K'ers? It's not as if the park caters to their age range - nearly every ride has a height requirement or a scare factor with the exception of Safari and the shows.

Maybe the "Disney cares what pre-K kids think of Rivers of Light" rumor is groundless, or maybe Disney can't see the forest for the trees. Beats me which it is.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom