MK Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

[MisterPenguin]

Hence why Disney needs to use its blessing of size and EXPAND not REPLACE

With Villains and Cars, both are happening at the same time. More acreage that's currently not part of the park is being used within the park.

Same with TRON.

Same with Monsters Coaster.

Same with Guardians and Ratatouille.

Same with SWL and TSL.

Same with Encanto.

But there's also a limit to expanding: A giant swamp. Some of which is designated as preserved wetlands, which, if Disney wanted to build on would require purchasing acreage many times bigger elsewhere to designate as preserved wetlands (which is what Disney did for the DHS expansion).

And even where they can readily build, it's still a swamp that needs drainage and designation of nearby retention/detention ponds.

The blessing of size is being used up. This is why all new hotels/DVC are towers and not sprawling compounds like the Value or Moderate resorts.

They do have some buildable land, but not readily connected to existing parks. This is why the Cars/Villain lands require water management permits just for a laydown yard.

 

[MrPromey]

Literally an opinion to claim whole cloth that people didn’t have any interest in them. And not a very accurate one. Walk on doesn’t mean less popular in most cases, it means high capacity and sometimes less popular mixed in

Yes, Spaceship Earth, as it exists today was at one time a walk-on for the majority of hours Epcot was open and by that I mean you literally walked up the ramp and straight onto the turntable. They changed nothing in the attraction itself to get us to the common standby lines we now have.

If we're to go by it's previous status as a walk-on, what changed that has made it now in demand?

Even talking about "interest", it's important to remember that it isn't some sort of "it factor" an attraction does or doesn't have or something that exists in guests heads' completely out of DIsney's control.

 

[Disstevefan1]

So your argument is that a business should strive to build/keep attractions that are so unpopular that no one wants to experience them in order to what....service the 1-2 people that do?

I mean we are not talking about having attractions where the capacity per hour is so high that a line never builds up. Sure that would be great. But are you seriously trying to say its better to have rides with no one using them, then get rid of them and building something that hopefully the majority of guests will want to experience? I mean seriously explain that business pitch to me.

"We need to keep Liberty Bell up and running, and Tom Sawyers Island in fact we need to spend money to improve/repair them"

"Is spending money on it going to bring in new revenue/customers?"

"Nope, no one is spending more money for this"

"Is it going to increase current guest fan base satisfaction?"

"Nope no one is really using it right now."

"Is it going to help with congestion in the parks?"

"Nope, I mean no one is using it right now anyway, even when there are long lines for other attractions"

"So you want us to take the money we were going to use to create new rides that people want, and instead use it on rides/areas that no one is using?"

"Oh no, we think we should do both, and spend the money in both areas"

I already conceded you, Bob, Josh and Hugh was correct. Business is business.

I am really going to miss CoP, HoP...... Do you think the Peoplemover will be going away? I will really miss Peoplemover.

Could you please talk to the folks in charge of Disney's movie business.

They need your pure business logic.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Based on the new information coming out, I think it was about an embankmant dam holding in water in the lower loop as a new pond, as well as filling in the canal north of the lock, albeit in a rather confusing manner.
From the SFWMD permit:
Exhibit No.2.0E SWM Plans

But things are fluid right now, and I could be wrong.

I get it!!

 

[mattpeto]

Not sure the reason for the hyperbole and sarcasm?

It’s not a stretch to say that if Disney is willing to remove an integral, themed area of the park that makes it cohesive, at the altar of LL revenue, then the moment any other classic attraction doesn’t bring enough ancillary revenue, it’s in danger.

Personally I think CoP will be next. Despite the fact Stitch is STILL sitting empty across the avenue.

It's the Doom and Gloom around here. They aren't taking down the castle or Pirates or etc.

Yeah, it is not going to work out like that. If anything, it will drive more people to MK. Lines overall with be just as long (if not more) and there will be one or two less places to escape the crowds/lines and just enjoy MK.

Why do you think Disney is doubling down on putting more in MK, when AK, DHS and Epcot could use more rides?

No matter what Disney does (Pandora, Galaxy's Edge, Toy Story Land) - people still end up using their 5th park at Magic Kingdom.

Adding more attractions have always been the answer. Net new is more ideal (like Villains Land), but in this case the Cars attraction, if close to RSR in terms of quality has an opportunity to be a huge capacity eater.

 

[Jrb1979]

It's the Doom and Gloom around here. They aren't taking down the castle or Pirates or etc.


Why do you think Disney is doubling down on putting more in MK, when AK, DHS and Epcot could use more rides?

No matter what Disney does (Pandora, Galaxy's Edge, Toy Story Land) - people still end up using their 5th park at Magic Kingdom.

Adding more attractions have always been the answer. Net new is more ideal (like Villains Land), but in this case the Cars attraction, if close to RSR in terms of quality has an opportunity to be a huge capacity eater.

Most aren't against adding new attractions to MK or any park for that matter. It's always been about the theme of the park and keeping it intact. They have been slowly moving away from that. WDW is basically becoming a mish Mash of IP with most not fitting the theme of the park.

 

[Andrew C]

No, i think people are generally arguing that something isn't important to the overall experience, if the majority of people don't want/ever make the minimal effort to experience them.

Hey, if people are interested in waiting in lines all day, if they think that is a good theme park experience, and if Disney wants to give them that...who am I to tell them otherwise? But that type of experience just isn't for me.

 

[Jrb1979]

Hey, if people are interested in waiting in lines all day, if they think that is a good theme park experience, and if Disney wants to give them that...who am I to tell them otherwise. But that type of experience just isn't for me.

I can see where that thought process comes from. It goes back to FP+. Most guests would book their 3 top attractions for each day and maybe do another couple of attractions with small waits. That was their day.

 

[DisneyRoy]

Most aren't against adding new attractions to MK or any park for that matter. It's always been about the theme of the park and keeping it intact. They have been slowly moving away from that. WDW is basically becoming a mish Mash of IP with most not fitting the theme of the park.

And obviously us "olds" have an issue with that. But kids nowadays identify to that better and prefer it. My 16 yo daughter screams bring on the IP every time we go.

 

[Andrew C]

Adding more attractions have always been the answer

Although my personal opinion is that there should be a 5th gate, I am not against new attractions in MK. If the plan makes sense. I don't think this one does, because I don't like the loss of what I think is a very important feature of MK and Frontierland. As I said in another post, Disney is moving away from what I consider a good overall experience. Some will agree..others won't

 

[Jrb1979]

And obviously us "olds" have an issue with that. But kids nowadays identify to that better and prefer it. My 16 yo daughter screams bring on the IP every time we go.

You can add IP and make it work for the park it's in.

 

[Andrew C]

And obviously us "olds" have an issue with that. But kids nowadays identify to that better and prefer it. My 16 yo daughter screams bring on the IP every time we go.

I feel like Disney was once good at giving us things we never realized we even wanted...and they have moved away from that. It doesn't have to be an either/or situation.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Tom Sawyer coulda been an Avanger!!

 

[lazyboy97o]

They do have some buildable land, but not readily connected to existing parks. This is why the Cars/Villain lands require water management permits just for a laydown yard.

The lay down yards, like everything else, needs water management permits because they’re increasing the area of impermeable surfaces. It has nothing to do with the bearing capacity of the soil.

 

[lazyboy97o]

It's the Doom and Gloom around here. They aren't taking down the castle or Pirates or etc.

Why shouldn’t they? Neither is very relevant to today’s youths.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

So your argument is that a business should strive to build/keep attractions that are so unpopular that no one wants to experience them in order to what....service the 1-2 people that do?

Why do you keep saying this? Both the riverboat and the island get decent daily numbers. I’m not sure what you’re fighting for and why.

 

[Raineman]

Why shouldn’t they? Neither is very relevant to today’s youths.

It's kind of funny how the classic Disney theme park attractions/elements were relevant and enjoyable to kids from the 50s into the 90s/2000s-5 decades-and then, all of a sudden, according to some people, they are irrelevant to today's youth, and MUST BE REPLACED! Looks like Disney and their bootlickers on here are really leaning into the Vegas style of additions-it will last about 25 years, and then need to be replaced. Rinse and repeat.

 

[mickEblu]

It's so interesting that so many people care so much about the riverboat and Tom sawyer island, yet they both are walk ons every time I go.

I love the ROA at Disneyland. Love all the trees in the park too. Doesn’t mean I swim in it or climb up the trees. The ROA is ambiance and place making. The steamboat and the island are a bonus.

 

[JMcMahonEsq]

Parks need both, ones that popular with long waits and ones that are fillers.

Something isn't a filler if it isn't being used. No business, parks or otherwise, need of should be devoted square footage to something that is not being used. People are simply not using TSI, or LB. There is no reason to keep things around for them to sit fallow for small percentages of guests every day.

 

[FettFan]

It's the Doom and Gloom around here. They aren't taking down the castle or Pirates or etc.

The castle is essentially safe, as it's the second-best known company mascot right behind Mickey himself.

But....let's not pretend that Pirates is an attraction that will exist as long as the Magic Kingdom does. Pirates are symbolic of an action-adventure genre that waxes and wanes in popularity as time goes on, and it wouldn't surprise me if in 20-30 years, pirates become the new cowboys and PotC winds up on the chopping block for something flashier and newer.

Maybe it will spring from the Moana boat ride that was initially drawn up in the Animal Kingdom concept art.

I mean....if the cavernous grotto fits...