doctornick
Well-Known Member
If they are doing Cars themed versions of Disney characters, it would be a good opportunity to bring in a car version of Humphrey the Bear.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
MK Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
doctornick
Well-Known Member
I don’t think what they’ve detailed is specific enough to know, might be more like a D ticket.
Regardless, I know there was some question as to where exactly Coco will go. Does anyone have a good map showing the specific plot planned? I thought I read that it might replace Goofys Sky School
Disney Analyst
Well-Known Member
Just to be clear, I did not say it has to be liked.
You might have missed the very off topic conversation, it’s enough to drive anyone crazy when it’s the same thing that’s been discussed the last 5 years.
How did we get to California?
This thread: Orlando...
This thread: Orlando...
Dreamer19
Well-Known Member
My neighbor across the street is a Universal Parks engineer who worked heavily on EU and is currently working on the new UK park.
I spoke to him yesterday and asked what he thought about tearing out ROA and his response was exactly that. “What does Disney have all of that space for?!” and “They don’t know what they’re doing.”
DisneyHead123
Well-Known Member
I wonder how much of it has to do with park real estate. Would a Cars ride out on an expansion pad at the periphery or in HS sell as much merch or as many LLs as a Cars ride in the heart of the park?
My stance is still that if Disney absolutely feels they need to better utilize that space, ok - but I’m not sure about Cars as a choice. I feel somewhat better with the newly released concept art but I just don’t know that Cars has the universal appeal of something like the riverboat. I remember taking my son’s grandparents to Disney for the first time and how charmed they were by the riverboat. If it has been Cars? I think they would have thought “Well that’s nice for our grandson I guess”, but I don’t think they would have been wowed by Disney in the same way. When I think Cars, “classic ambiance” is just not what comes to mind.
TheMaxRebo
Well-Known Member
The latest update talked a lot about the focus on sightlines and sound leed, etc. And especially the view when coming in via Liberty Square area
My hope based on this is the are will still feel like the Frontier - more broadly speaking not just "old West" with the national Park take and rivers and waterfalls and greenery, etc. And then the actual Cars part will be self contained
If this winds up being seeing and hearing Cars zipping around in front of you when in the current Frontier area then I totally agree it won't feel as timeless, but if all that is absent from the main existing drag, I think the end result can work out quite well - but margin for error is pretty high
dmc493
Well-Known Member
Said my goodbyes to Muppet Vision yesterday, and now ROA / riverboat / TSI / round-trip railroad today. Didn’t realize this trip would be such a doozy with goodbyes. Even tho I wasn’t attached to TSI or the riverboat I’m just not prepared for this change
yes I know the railroad thing is temporary but it’s still years away
yes I know the railroad thing is temporary but it’s still years away
flynnibus
Premium Member
How does space miles away help the MK footprint?
Every sq ft of park you add runs up your daily opex… you don’t do that without serious consideration and usually new monetization
DisneyHead123
Well-Known Member
In my dream world it would be something like a New Orleans Square, Coco Village, or even just a catch all (walkable) forest themed area.
If it’s a great backdrop with minimal Cars in view I think that would be… ok. But still not quite the same vibe. Like Big Thunder looks cool in the distance, but if you bring a relative to the parks for the first time, they’re probably not going to stop and admire the Big Thunder mountain for awhile. Kids will no doubt like it more but to me it’s still a downgrade on charm factor, albeit a more minor one.
doctornick
Well-Known Member
I mean there’s an argument that what they are doing makes it much better for guest flow and walking around while doing new stuff on the far side of the current RoA would push stuff fairly far. But even with that, they could achieve a relatively similar effect but cutting the RoA down to just the lower TSI and incorporating the upper island/fort area into a new Cars/Villains area. Might have to put some stuff outside the berm to make it work but it would have possible to keep a truncated RoA with riverboat and rafts/TSI while also accessing that northern area more effectively
doctornick
Well-Known Member
How does Disneyland run more attractions (including an intact RoA) than MK then? With fewer annual visitors? And, heck, a greater percentage of their guests are the “less favorable” Annual Passholders.
Disney can make it work and make plenty of money doing it if they wanted. It’s not like RoA/TSI is that expensive to run in the grand scheme of things and there’s plenty of available land if they wanted. They just constantly choose to shutter and replace rather than expand.
doctornick
Well-Known Member
The irony to me is if they were just doing a “National parks” area in Frontierland with the waterfalls and geysers but without the anthropomorphic Cars then it would actually IMHO be a decent idea. I don’t even mind pivoting Frontierland to be a more broad “exploring American wilderness” kind of concept. It’s just that Cars is incongruous to this all.
With some waterfront thankfully remaining, I’m mostly just bothered with using Cars at this point. If they were using Humphrey the Bear or Chip & Dale (maybe Rescue Rangers?) or Pocahontas in that area instead, I’d actually be pretty down with it. I don’t think that the riverboat and TSI are so sacrosanct that they need to stay forever, but I just don’t think this plan is an improvement
DL saves on fireworks.
Also, WDW upcharges guests thru their many 'luxe' hotels wherein most of the upcharge is due to proximity to MK (even tho the rooms ain't that luxe.)
MK is just a piece of the larger WDW pie. The other three theme parks and all the other entertainment synergizes with MK.
Who'd go to DAK if DAK was just a single theme park out in the world by itself with no other 'linked' theme parks nearby to hit up in one trip? (Yes, some would, but, it would definitely not be as popular).
DAK is profitable because it's part of the WDW network. And MK, with less rides than DL profits from anchoring that network.
When you look at just *rides*, the four WDW parks have as many as DL/DCA. So, to hit all the rides, you are enticed to stay longer and spend more. Especially in a Disney hotel. While WDW tickets are cheaper the more days you by, the hotels are the same rate each day (mostly). Then on top of having the same number of rides (albeit spread out more), WDW has a lot more non-ride attractions.
Comparing DL to just MK is a false comparison. Each has their own network of supporting cast. And WDW has a lot more supporting cast, which make MK as profitable over all as part of that network.
People forget that when they focus on MK 'expanding.' Every time a new ride/attraction is added or refreshed at DAK, EPCOT, or DHS... that's an expansion to MK, too.
DisneyHead123
Well-Known Member
Yes this is my feeling too. Littles would be just as happy with a Tomorrowland Speedway Cars overlay with a big ol’ gift shop next to it, if Disney really wants the merch aspect. To me this is just not the kind of iconic aesthetic that should make up the heart of MK.
Indeed.
Refreshing/retheming a ride instead of expanding is a huge savings not only on the build, but by not inflating operational costs that come with more and more rides.
And if any ride has stale IP. Or IP no longer that popular. Or IP that is 'problematic.' Or no IP at all. Then that ride no longer synergizes with Disney branding and merch and bringing in new guests. And so, it's a retheme into a more popular IP for that ride instead of adding an expansion for that IP.
And despite "the blessing of size," a lot of that true expansion sometimes comes from having to raze BoH infrastructure. Which means often having the cost to relocate that BoH operation.
Or spending millions on stabilizing swamp land (which may also come with extra cost to buy out other wetlands and preserving them).
As an observation on my part, WDW and DLR seem to always have nearly the same number of rides. If one resort gets two more new rides... so does the other.
Almost as if it were intentional that neither resort can claim to have (significantly) more rides than the other.
Incomudro
Well-Known Member
It doesn't appear that we will be able to see the cars from outside the land.
That helps a lot for me.
flynnibus
Premium Member
When do you see them expanding instead of replacing deadwood? They have very little unused capacity because they have had very little alternatives. Expanding like they are now requires major reworking of the larger resort.
The point is not density - but just the basic common sense that just because you have land doesn’t make expanding your operations somehow the obvious choice.
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
What are the numbers?