DAK 'Encanto' and 'Indiana Jones'-themed experiences at Animal Kingdom

[lazyboy97o]

I’m not suggesting expansion is not also necessary. But, Dinoland is definitely and issue for the park and it needs to be fixed. They also should add attractions elsewhere.

I thought it was obvious they wanted guests in the park all day. They did make the night safaris and RoL. Both just failed. That doesn’t mean the idea is abandoned forever.

Who said anything about not wanting guests in the park all day? “Fixing” Dinoland by spending huge sums expected to make a return and induce demand doesn’t fix anything. It just makes crowding and waits worse.

 

[ToTBellHop]

Who said anything about not wanting guests in the park all day? “Fixing” Dinoland by spending huge sums expected to make a return and induce demand doesn’t fix anything. It just makes crowding and waits worse.

They need people to want to spend time in the spaces they have. Especially when the Safari, Kali, the train, and the animal trails close early.

We can similarly debate the merits, but Toy Story Land and SWGE do more for DHS than BLT and LMA did.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

Who said anything about not wanting guests in the park all day? “Fixing” Dinoland by spending huge sums expected to make a return and induce demand doesn’t fix anything. It just makes crowding and waits worse.

It should help spread crowds and take demand off the Pandora rides but having in demand attractions in that side of the park. Plus it is stuff that can stay open later/isn't dependant on the animals

It's definitely not the complete solution but it can be part of it

 

[peter11435]

It should help spread crowds and take demand off the Pandora rides but having in demand attractions in that side of the park. Plus it is stuff that can stay open later/isn't dependant on the animals

It's definitely not the complete solution but it can be part of it

It’s not actually a solution though because dinosaur already has demand pretty much the whole day. They aren’t cycling empty vehicles. Yes Indy would be more popular than dinosaur but it’s not going to be able to accommodate more guests.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

It’s not actually a solution though because dinosaur already has demand pretty much the whole day. They aren’t cycling empty vehicles. Yes Indy would be more popular than dinosaur but it’s not going to be able to accommodate more guests.

I was talking the whole Dinoland redo including Encanto.

 

[lazyboy97o]

They need people to want to spend time in the spaces they have. Especially when the Safari, Kali, the train, and the animal trails close early.

We can similarly debate the merits, but Toy Story Land and SWGE do more for DHS than BLT and LMA did.

If there are waits then people are spending time in the space.

It should help spread crowds and take demand off the Pandora rides but having in demand attractions in that side of the park. Plus it is stuff that can stay open later/isn't dependant on the animals

It's definitely not the complete solution but it can be part of it

You’re not going to spread out crowds because the capacity is already being utilized. There’s no place for the crowds to go. Spreading out crowds means you need to add capacity and not induce additional demand. Even if you do create more demand in the Dinoland area you’re not getting people out of Pandora because you’re bringing in more people than you’ll be squeezing into the Dinosaur queue and whatever additional attraction is added. Disney’s Animal Kingdom (and really all of Walt Disney World) needs more things like Dinosaur that aren’t in huge demand but being utilized so that capacity can be increased. Creating more demand to visit Disney’s Animal Kingdom before increasing capacity isn’t part of the solution, it’s the opposite and will just make things worse for the park experience.

 

[Twirlnhurl]

If there are waits then people are spending time in the space.


You’re not going to spread out crowds because the capacity is already being utilized. There’s no place for the crowds to go. Spreading out crowds means you need to add capacity and not induce additional demand. Even if you do create more demand in the Dinoland area you’re not getting people out of Pandora because you’re bringing in more people than you’ll be squeezing into the Dinosaur queue and whatever additional attraction is added. Disney’s Animal Kingdom (and really all of Walt Disney World) needs more things like Dinosaur that aren’t in huge demand but being utilized so that capacity can be increased. Creating more demand to visit Disney’s Animal Kingdom before increasing capacity isn’t part of the solution, it’s the opposite and will just make things worse for the park experience.

The induced demand is likely to be lower than the additional capacity, though. There is a ton of overlap between people who want to see Flight of Passage and Encanto. Especially in a park where people are looking for things to fill out their day with.

 

[lazyboy97o]

The induced demand is likely to be lower than the additional capacity, though. There is a ton of overlap between people who want to see Flight of Passage and Encanto. Especially in a park where people are looking for things to fill out their day with.

The park already has insufficient capacity as it stands. And there’s no way Disney is going to position a big, expensive, multi-hundreds of millions of dollars project to only induce a little demand. The financials wont work.

 

[Twirlnhurl]

The park already has insufficient capacity as it stands. And there’s no way Disney is going to position a big, expensive, multi-hundreds of millions of dollars project to only induce a little demand. The financials wont work.

Induced demand (more guests in the park and selling more tickets) is only one way to earn more money. You can also earn more money by making guests spend more time in the park (by selling more meals, merch, or ILLs. It could also increase revenue by making guests less likely to combine the DAK day with the Epcot day).

Demand will be induced if this is built and if it is good. But it doesn't need to induce demand to be profitable on other metrics.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Induced demand (more guests in the park and selling more tickets) is only one way to earn more money. You can also earn more money by making guests spend more time in the park (by selling more meals, merch, or ILLs. It could also increase revenue by making guests less likely to combine the DAK day with the Epcot day).

Demand will be induced if this is built and if it is good. But it doesn't need to induce demand to be profitable on other metrics.

Adding one attraction, which will not have enough capacity to serve every single guest, is not going to move the needle that much in terms of length of stay. If it’s slammed, but somehow not inducing more demand, you’re looking at maybe an extra hour in the park but only for a fraction of guests. That’s not really enough given Disney’s costs.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

It’s not actually a solution though because dinosaur already has demand pretty much the whole day. They aren’t cycling empty vehicles. Yes Indy would be more popular than dinosaur but it’s not going to be able to accommodate more guests.

This whole thing is so misguided.

They don't have a DinoLand problem, they have a Dino-Rama problem.

Fix that and leave Dinosaur alone. Save for sprucing it up to the show quality it deserves.

 

[JD80]

If there are waits then people are spending time in the space.


You’re not going to spread out crowds because the capacity is already being utilized. There’s no place for the crowds to go. Spreading out crowds means you need to add capacity and not induce additional demand. Even if you do create more demand in the Dinoland area you’re not getting people out of Pandora because you’re bringing in more people than you’ll be squeezing into the Dinosaur queue and whatever additional attraction is added. Disney’s Animal Kingdom (and really all of Walt Disney World) needs more things like Dinosaur that aren’t in huge demand but being utilized so that capacity can be increased. Creating more demand to visit Disney’s Animal Kingdom before increasing capacity isn’t part of the solution, it’s the opposite and will just make things worse for the park experience.

People aren't going to AK for Dinosaur. People will go to AK for Encanto and Indy.

Re-doing that part of the park helps draw people away from other parks and keeps people in the park longer. Obviously you need more capacity in the park too.

 

[JD80]

Just looking at wait times today in Animal Kingdom via Thrill-Data. All the good attractions in the park are 40+ minutes.

Dinosaur is 15m. If Dinosaur was a good attraction it would pull people away from the other attractions evening out the wait times, but it's not.

#1 issue is overall capacity in the park for sure, but Dinosaur is nearly wasted space. I think you might see a reason why It's Tough to be a Bug and Dinoland are being updated.

 

[lazyboy97o]

People aren't going to AK for Dinosaur. People will go to AK for Encanto and Indy.

Re-doing that part of the park helps draw people away from other parks and keeps people in the park longer. Obviously you need more capacity in the park too.

Where did I say anything that suggests that I don’t understand this? My whole point is that drawing more people to Disney's Animal Kingdom would not be a good thing because there is no place to them. Adding one attraction while bringing in more people would largely keep people in the park longer by driving down attractions per guest per hour (higher wait times) which just sours people on their experience making them less likely to make purchases and return.

Just looking at wait times today in Animal Kingdom via Thrill-Data. All the good attractions in the park are 40+ minutes.

Dinosaur is 15m. If Dinosaur was a good attraction it would pull people away from the other attractions evening out the wait times, but it's not.

#1 issue is overall capacity in the park for sure, but Dinosaur is nearly wasted space. I think you might see a reason why It's Tough to be a Bug and Dinoland are being updated.

You are contradicting yourself. You can't claim that more capacity is needed but also that they need to strain the capacity even more. An attraction with a wait is not wasted space. The capacity is being utilized. Bringing more people to the park makes no sense because there's no place to put those new people. Parks need attractions that utilize their capacity but offer lower waits. It is the only way you can ever have sufficient capacity.

 

[rle4lunch]

This whole thing is so misguided.

They don't have a DinoLand problem, they have a Dino-Rama problem.

Fix that and leave Dinosaur alone. Save for sprucing it up to the show quality it deserves.

They obviously don't care to spruce it up though. You can barely see the preshow video, and the AA is a joke. I think the last time I rode it in March 2023, the sound was so loud that I left it with my ears ringing. Shining a light on the dinos as you pass them is just dumb. The whole ride is garbage. Laughable garbage, just like maelstrom was.

 

[JD80]

Where did I say anything that suggests that I don’t understand this? My whole point is that drawing more people to Disney's Animal Kingdom would not be a good thing because there is no place to them. Adding one attraction while bringing in more people would largely keep people in the park longer by driving down attractions per guest per hour (higher wait times) which just sours people on their experience making them less likely to make purchases and return.


You are contradicting yourself. You can't claim that more capacity is needed but also that they need to strain the capacity even more. An attraction with a wait is not wasted space. The capacity is being utilized. Bringing more people to the park makes no sense because there's no place to put those new people. Parks need attractions that utilize their capacity but offer lower waits. It is the only way you can ever have sufficient capacity.

Maybe we're talking past each other, so I'm sorry for misunderstanding. I agree AK needs more capacity as a whole. That's priority #1.

Going past that, if you look at the wait times I posted - the whole park is unbalanced which is why you see plans for Dinoland and the Tree of Life upgrades. You need to pull people out of Pandora and spread them around the park. Hopefully the new stuff does that. That's why Dinosaur is being underutilized.

As to bring more people to the park, the park empties out the later in the day you go. If you can either A) keep people in the park longer and not hop to Magic Kingdom or potentially give me people a hopping target helps other parks.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Maybe we're talking past each other, so I'm sorry for misunderstanding. I agree AK needs more capacity as a whole. That's priority #1.

Going past that, if you look at the wait times I posted - the whole park is unbalanced which is why you see plans for Dinoland and the Tree of Life upgrades. You need to pull people out of Pandora and spread them around the park. Hopefully the new stuff does that. That's why Dinosaur is being underutilized.

As to bring more people to the park, the park empties out the later in the day you go. If you can either A) keep people in the park longer and not hop to Magic Kingdom or potentially give me people a hopping target helps other parks.

A park should be unbalanced. That's perfectly okay. That's how you average out the day to reach a good attractions per guest per hour and a good overall number of attractions per day. People better accept the long wait at the headliner because other attractions had a minimal wait. You spend one hour only experiencing one attraction and you spend another experiencing two and viola, you have the perfect 1.5 attractions per hour. An attraction with a wait is being utilized. You can't shove more people onto the ride.

The park empties out later in the day because it does not have enough things to do. It was built on the post-Euro Disney formula of offering just enough to provide the 7.3 attractions per day that made people satisfied enough with their day. The key to getting people to happily stay longer is not to make them wait in longer lines (which is the current plan with redoing Dinoland), but to simply have more things available to fill our their day and provide options because very people want to do everything (and that's ok!). Part of doing that is having things that are more readily available so that people are willing to try them on more of a whim.

 

[JD80]

A park should be unbalanced. That's perfectly okay. That's how you average out the day to reach a good attractions per guest per hour and a good overall number of attractions per day. People better accept the long wait at the headliner because other attractions had a minimal wait. You spend one hour only experiencing one attraction and you spend another experiencing two and viola, you have the perfect 1.5 attractions per hour. An attraction with a wait is being utilized. You can't shove more people onto the ride.

The park empties out later in the day because it does not have enough things to do. It was built on the post-Euro Disney formula of offering just enough to provide the 7.3 attractions per day that made people satisfied enough with their day. The key to getting people to happily stay longer is not to make them wait in longer lines (which is the current plan with redoing Dinoland), but to simply have more things available to fill our their day and provide options because very people want to do everything (and that's ok!). Part of doing that is having things that are more readily available so that people are willing to try them on more of a whim.

I think you're conflating my point with another argument that I don't think I'm making. I don't disagree with you in a vacuum.

You're viewing AK as a singular system. I'm thinking at a more resort level.

 

[Jrb1979]

I think you're conflating my point with another argument that I don't think I'm making. I don't disagree with you in a vacuum.

You're viewing AK as a singular system. I'm thinking at a more resort level.

IMO Disney relies on data way too much.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I think you're conflating my point with another argument that I don't think I'm making. I don't disagree with you in a vacuum.

You're viewing AK as a singular system. I'm thinking at a more resort level.

Even as part of a resort, inducing more demand onto Disney's Animal Kingdom doesn't serve any positive guest experience purpose. It's the same problem. The park lacks capacity, so pulling people away from the other parks just makes the Disney's Animal Kingdom experience worse. And since the park cannot handle a whole lot more people you're not going to be pulling enough people out of the other parks to noticeably improve their experience. Nor is one ride (because Dinosaur is already full) going to keep people in the park too much longer to stop them from hopping.