MK Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

[flynnibus]

I do think there is still decent demand for many rides considered “B-C list” like the Speedway, Railroad, etc. Not overwhelming but I think it’s there.

There certainly is a need for things 'not E tickets' - but I think it's mention in this conversation kind of muddies things up. Yes people want the various 'scale' attractions.. and the park NEEDS them.. the problem more central to this conversation is.. doesn't matter what Scale the thing is, if it's not attractive to or able to lure the customer in, they are going to pass it by more often than not.

Customer interests have shifted like you mention... My earlier comment is Disney is a big influencer in how customers have evolved in how they consume theme parks because Disney is the biggest and loudest coach in the room.

 

[Raineman]

So, all those stories of people wondering why certain rides got updates shortly before their closure never happened?

I don't believe I said "all attractions", right? But if someone can provide me with info on attractions that had more than just token amounts of money/updates/repairs after their replacement had been announced and a date set for closure, or a source for that info, I would appreciate it. I would bet that Dinosaur isn't looking that great at the moment, and it will most likely get worse.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

I think that for many the “slow down” areas are air conditioned stores and maybe dining or indulging in cocktails at Epcot. I’ll avoid any commentary on what that says about the state of consumption and consumerism in society, but especially with social media where new rounds of merch are highlighted online, I think that’s been a shift. People will stop to look around if they’re looking at festival merch. I also think AC is now seen as a prerequisite for any “relaxing” areas by guests.

I do think there is still decent demand for many rides considered “B-C list” like the Speedway, Railroad, etc. Not overwhelming but I think it’s there.

I think there is still a demand for smaller or "filler" attractions but many guests operate those - which they still have some draw to and would view it as something they want to accomplish/add it to the list of things they did - vs "skippable" attractions - ones that even if no line they still don't want to allocate time of their vacation to

So it honk things like People Mover, Living with the Land, Journey of Water, etc qualify for the first, but things like TSI, Circle of Life, etc are more the later

 

[Raineman]

This would be called "crying over spilled milk". AKA that time has already passed... those attractions are not having any influence because the consumers have already been conditioned away from them. Their presence is in effect, already being ignored. So taking them away isn't going to re-enforce the commando mentalty - it's already passed them over.

And why focusing on 'adding more slow downs and escapes' won't resonate.. it's not acknowledging how the consumer has been evolved. They are conditioning people with their product strategy and marketing to act like X... adding attractions to be like Y, without addressing the rest of things.. will just miss.

I wouldn't call it re-enforcement, but more like support it and almost reward it. "We know our guests want more attractions and fun things to do, so we will be replacing X with Y, a new, exciting area with things to do for the whole family!" And I fully agree that there will never be new areas like ROA/TSI, which have always been a staple of Disney theme parks since day 1. And the fact that a core element of Disney parks for decades is disappearing, never to return, is a big reason why some people are opposed to this kind of change.

 

[networkpro]

Imagine if NYC decided to just fill it all in with apartments because the space would be better used that way.

Not a great comparison. "Greensward" was aimed to create a contrast between a crowded and monotonous street life and the park. I don't see any 'democratized civilizing influence ' or 'urban cleansing' provided by RoA.

 

[etc98]

While I don't necessarily agree with the planned changes to MK (for me, my main complaint is based more on the IP used rather than the execution; I think something more harmonious with Frontierland like Chip & Dale or Humphrey the Bear would be appropriate over Cars), I think there is some clear objective upside for all guests. Having a better guest flow with the new walking paths being the biggest improvement especially with a greater presence of parades. I also think that, for better or worse, more overall guests will get more overall enjoyment from the Cars attractions than they do from the Liberty Belle/TSI.

Your sentence about parades makes me wonder if Disney will change the parade route. They have a big new path between Cars and Villains that meets up with Liberty Square.

Since it’s on the border of two lands, it might make more thematic sense to have a parade there than to bring it down the center of Frontierland. It could also add more viewing capacity, and help crowd flow


Edit: looking at a map it doesn’t seem like this would actually be possible

 

[Dreamer19]

Genuinely curious, are there any changes that Disney could make that would illicit a negative response from those who staunchly defend the removal of something like ROA?

What would be beyond the pale for you? Why?

 

[Raineman]

Genuinely curious, are there any changes that Disney could make that would illicit a negative response from those who staunchly defend the removal of something like ROA?

What would be beyond the pale for you? Why?

I think there are some people who would not have a limit-anything would be open season in their opinion, even attractions that they have always loved. "I love it and I'm gonna miss it, but I'm soooooo excited to see the new attraction!"

 

[ctrlaltdel]

I think there is still a demand for smaller or "filler" attractions but many guests operate those - which they still have some draw to and would view it as something they want to accomplish/add it to the list of things they did - vs "skippable" attractions - ones that even if no line they still don't want to allocate time of their vacation to

So it honk things like People Mover, Living with the Land, Journey of Water, etc qualify for the first, but things like TSI, Circle of Life, etc are more the later

I think the biggest issue that Disney has with "filler" attractions is that there isn't nearly enough of them, so the smaller attractions they do have get outsized wait times. A bit of a Catch-22 as this is because there is less to do in the parks, and those smaller attractions also have much lower capacity than E/D tickets. Unless Disney is gonna start opening expansions with the major ride (or two) being supplemented by another 2-3 spinner type attractions, instead of one E ticket and one D/C/B-ticket, it's always gonna be an uphill battle to actually make an impact on wait times. I feel like TSL is the prime example of that. They should have had 2-3 more Alien Spinning Saucer type attractions.

Still ,l I think since this is taking over a not enormous plot of land, adding a C/B ticket kid-friendly ride is about as good as you can expect. Villains is a bit greater sin if they stick to only 2 headliner attractions and nothing else smaller.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

Genuinely curious, are there any changes that Disney could make that would illicit a negative response from those who staunchly defend the removal of something like ROA?

What would be beyond the pale for you? Why?

I don't think anything should be off limits/treated as "sacred" - depends more what the replacement would be and what the overall planning is

Some things have a higher bar to clear for their removal (and thing RoA/TSI is one of those things) but everything should be open to being updated if it makes sense (and still not convinced Piston Peak is enough - though latest plans look rather good)

The thing I can think of that would have the highest bar to justify would be demolishing Space Ship Earth (not just changing the ride but the actual geodesic dome) as to me that is the symbol of EPCOT and EPCOT (the original plan) was the entire point of the Florida Project, so is really the Icon of all of Walt Disney World

That said, if there was something great to replace it, bring it on - but it really better be outstanding

 

[TheMaxRebo]

I think the biggest issue that Disney has with "filler" attractions is that there isn't nearly enough of them, so the smaller attractions they do have get outsized wait times. A bit of a Catch-22 as this is because there is less to do in the parks, and those smaller attractions also have much lower capacity than E/D tickets. Unless Disney is gonna start opening expansions with the major ride (or two) being supplemented by another 2-3 spinner type attractions, instead of one E ticket and one D/C/B-ticket, it's always gonna be an uphill battle to actually make an impact on wait times. I feel like TSL is the prime example of that. They should have had 2-3 more Alien Spinning Saucer type attractions.

Still ,l I think since this is taking over a not enormous plot of land, adding a C/B ticket kid-friendly ride is about as good as you can expect. Villains is a bit greater sin if they stick to only 2 headliner attractions and nothing else smaller.

but even with that - and like you said, some of them do get outsized wait times - some things still have no wait/are half empty. Even Muppets, before they announced it was closing, I never saw more that what felt like half full, never heard the CMs say "move all the way down to make room for others" (rather heard them say "just take whatever seat you want) ... but then other things, like SSE, or even LwtL at time did get sizeable waits

 

[𝐌𝖆𝖓 𝖎𝖓 𝐖𝖊𝖇]

Genuinely curious, are there any changes that Disney could make that would illicit a negative response from those who staunchly defend the removal of something like ROA?

What would be beyond the pale for you? Why?

Nothing of note, no. Mainly because there's no equal comparisons. Nothing like ROA. The removal of say Haunted Mansion (blasphemous to the nth degree) isn't the same.. Some may feel that way of course but there's no 1:1 comparison that matches the intent behind your question. Obviously, any removal, of anything in the parks will be meet with some negative response.

 

[Dreamer19]

I think there are some people who would not have a limit-anything would be open season in their opinion, even attractions that they have always loved. "I love it and I'm gonna miss it, but I'm soooooo excited to see the new attraction!"

And you know what? Good for them. I mean that.

Unfortunately for me I think the Disney train has left the station. I just don’t have the desire to go anymore.

With these changes some may feel more inclined to go to Disney, but it’s given someone like me the opposite feeling.

I know I’m not alone and I wonder if another company or maybe even the next Walt Disney will come through to fill the vacuum of people seeking what Disney was when I was growing up. That place would be hugely successful.

 

[Chi84]

I think there are some people who would not have a limit-anything would be open season in their opinion, even attractions that they have always loved. "I love it and I'm gonna miss it, but I'm soooooo excited to see the new attraction!"

That’s actually a pretty good mindset to have unless you’re into cultivating disappointment.

Life is all about change; how you deal with it is a choice. “Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond to it.”

 

[Raineman]

I don't think anything should be off limits/treated as "sacred" - depends more what the replacement would be and what the overall planning is

Some things have a higher bar to clear for their removal (and thing RoA/TSI is one of those things) but everything should be open to being updated if it makes sense (and still not convinced Piston Peak is enough - though latest plans look rather good)

The thing I can think of that would have the highest bar to justify would be demolishing Space Ship Earth (not just changing the ride but the actual geodesic dome) as to me that is the symbol of EPCOT and EPCOT (the original plan) was the entire point of the Florida Project, so is really the Icon of all of Walt Disney World

That said, if there was something great to replace it, bring it on - but it really better be outstanding

Any classic attraction that still draws alot of people should always have a bar that never will be cleared. One of the metrics that some people have repeated during the course of this discussion is the perceived low ridership of ROA/TSI, which should immediately disqualify attractions like HM, Peter Pan, Space Mountain, Pirates, etc., from being replaced. But I don't think anyone should trust Disney to look at it that way.

 

[Agent H]

There are absolutely things that should never close or should never have closed. Pirates of the Caribbean. The haunted mansion. Jungle Cruise. Big thunder mountain. The tiki room. Original journey into imagination. Horizons. Muppet version 3d. The carousel of progress and yes the rivers of America. (By the way there are plenty of other attractions that I don’t think should ever close but they didn’t really fit the untouchable classic theme I wanted this list to have)

 

[Raineman]

That’s actually a pretty good mindset to have unless you’re into cultivating disappointment.

Life is all about change; how you deal with it is a choice. “Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you respond to it.”

I would say that, despite what I might sound like as far as not wanting this change we're discussing, for the majority attractions at WDW, I have this mindset. For example, if they replaced Tomorrowland Speedway, or the Teacups, I would shed absolutely no tears. But if they replaced Haunted Mansion, Disney would never get another cent from me. IMO, there is no situation possible where I would advocate Disney replacing the Mansion with something else, even if the replacement is amazing-because an attraction that has emotional value to me had to be sacrificed to do it.

 

[Dreamer19]

I would say that, despite what I might sound like as far as not wanting this change we're discussing, for the majority attractions at WDW, I have this mindset. For example, if they replaced Tomorrowland Speedway, or the Teacups, I would shed absolutely no tears. But if they replaced Haunted Mansion, Disney would never get another cent from me. IMO, there is no situation possible where I would advocate Disney replacing the Mansion with something else, even if the replacement is amazing-because an attraction that has emotional value to me had to be sacrificed to do it.

That’s how I felt about Splash. I have not given another cent since.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

Any classic attraction that still draws alot of people should always have a bar that never will be cleared. One of the metrics that some people have repeated during the course of this discussion is the perceived low ridership of ROA/TSI, which should immediately disqualify attractions like HM, Peter Pan, Space Mountain, Pirates, etc., from being replaced. But I don't think anyone should trust Disney to look at it that way.

Always will look at what is drawing people - but also what is the cost of operation/upkeep, what is the opportunity cost vs whatelse could be there, etc

So Peter Pan is probably safe for a very long time as small footprint, not a ton of upkeep, motivates people to buy LLMP, etc.

Of the classic attractions the one most at risk would probably be Jungle Cruise due to size it takes up and the capacity it has, upkeep needed, etc. ... which if that went away would hurt me as it is my favorite of the classic rides, but if they replaced it with something amazing I would welcome it (just would be a very high bar, personally, to clear)

 

[DisneyHead123]

There certainly is a need for things 'not E tickets' - but I think it's mention in this conversation kind of muddies things up. Yes people want the various 'scale' attractions.. and the park NEEDS them.. the problem more central to this conversation is.. doesn't matter what Scale the thing is, if it's not attractive to or able to lure the customer in, they are going to pass it by more often than not.

Customer interests have shifted like you mention... My earlier comment is Disney is a big influencer in how customers have evolved in how they consume theme parks because Disney is the biggest and loudest coach in the room.

I agree with a lot of what you’re saying for now, although if I could make a pitch / plea to Disney on the topic it would be this - the pendulum is starting to shift a bit on “competition culture”, and “experience culture” seems like the natural predecessor. They must know this to an extent, based on their investment in the cruise lines, which are a slower paced vacation. I’ve accepted that given the pros and cons for Disney, there’s no way TSI is staying, but I wish they would go with a walkable, experiential area over an E-ticket that means walling off a huge section of the park.