lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Because it wouldn’t look a lot different to someone unfamiliar with the park.So, why not remove the attraction/area that has always been less of a factor in the overall theming and environment at WDW, and build there?
Because it wouldn’t look a lot different to someone unfamiliar with the park.So, why not remove the attraction/area that has always been less of a factor in the overall theming and environment at WDW, and build there?
Unfortunately, I don't think there's an accurate resource for ridership numbers as compared to actual capacity, unless someone else can point me to it. But, my point is that replacing the Speedway with one E-ticket ride, or a couple of smaller attractions, would create more capacity for that piece of property. I fully realize that that is a very similar argument to the one that people make about TSI/ROA replacement, but ROA/TSI has been more integral to the theming and atmosphere of WDW than the Speedway has. If you look at the size of the area that Cars will be taking, and compare that to the size of the area that the Speedway takes up, it's almost the same (according to Google Earth measurements). Will the Speedway have the same capacity as the Cars attractions will provide? Doubtful. So, why not remove the attraction/area that has always been less of a factor in the overall theming and environment at WDW, and build there? They could even use Cars IP for the Speedway replacement if they wanted to.
The plan until late in the game was to build Villains, Coco, AND keep RoA. The idea that the Rivers had to go for Villains is not true.I don't disagree something should be done with the speedway - either a full replacement or at least a modernization of it. Though don't think it is really fair to compare the size of that plot to the size of Piston Peak as a bug reason for doing Piston Peak is to enable access to the area where Villains Land is going - so decision around rivers vs speedway is comparing that entire 14 acre plot
And shouldn't be either or anyway
The original blue sky showed Encanto, Coco and Villains beyond BTM, but honestly that could have been in the same space where Cars/Villains is going right now.The plan until late in the game was to build Villains, Coco, AND keep RoA. The idea that the Rivers had to go for Villains is not true.
I find it more condescension than anything else…let’s face it, it’s VERY easy to sit behind a keyboard and spout whatever you want…we ALL make six figure salaries, we ALL own 10,000 shares of Disney stock…it’s a bit of narcissism too…I just take it with a shaker of salt from Tiana’s mine…You noticed that, too?
Every time we’ve been at MK, there’s always been a 20-30 minute wait at the LEAST, except for the night MK was open til 3am, and my DD rode EVERY ride that night…at midnight, it was a walkonDo you have any data to back that up? I've rarely ever seen a long line for the Speedway.
I’d add to the above that the Coco/Moana/Villains plan we heard about before D23 made more financial sense and would have been genuinely exciting.
It was. Beyond BTM never meant going beyond the berm, it was always going into TSI. They just never said that and people assumed it wasn't going.The original blue sky showed Encanto, Coco and Villains beyond BTM, but honestly that could have been in the same space where Cars/Villains is going right now.
My gut feeling is TSI was on the extinction plan for a long time. I don't have information to back it, just a gut.
I don’t think that’s completely accurate. My understanding is that coco was definitely going “beyond” - but I don’t know if with that plan TSI (all or part) stayed.Beyond BTM never meant going beyond the berm, it was always going into TSI.
I'm just curious if we compared concept art if the distances/perspectives between the attractions would reveal the intent or not. I'm of the mind that the plan was always to kill TSI. But it would be interesting to see if the concept art of old and the concept art of new positions the IPs in roughly the same place, showing one way or another if the goal was to scrap TSI. (which I think it was) Not definitive, but another clue maybe. Then again, it doesn't really matter cause it's a done deal now anyway.I don’t think that’s completely accurate. My understanding is that coco was definitely going “beyond” - but I don’t know if with that plan TSI (all or part) stayed.
I assume green means keep and red means scrap, but what about yellow?
Red - DestroyThe tag colors were talked about with both BTMRR and Muppets, but I don't remember what they mean.![]()
Our trusted insider has indicated RoA was on and off the table many atimes for many years.My gut feeling is TSI was on the extinction plan for a long time. I don't have information to back it, just a gut.
Yes and…. Disney very recently got a brand new boiler for the Liberty Belle - one would assume they ran numbers and decided to keep it operating before that kind of decision was made.Our trusted insider has indicated RoA was on and off the table many atimes for many years.
That was from January 2024."But hold your horses, we’re not done yet. We have a lot of growth and investment planned for our theme parks in the coming years and look forward to sharing more announcements about Frontierland … so y’all come back now, ya hear?"
Red - Destroy
Green/Yellow - Save.
BlueSo what is the difference between Green and Yellow?
I don't have any capacity numbers...
The LLMP for speedway on average sells out before: Buzz Lightyear, Carpets, Pirates, Barnstormer, Mermaid, Dumbo, mad tea party, and small world.
Wait times in MK is currently pretty dead... but it does have a 10 min wait which is more than peoplemover, carpets, small world, dumbo and barnstormer (tied with Pirates and Mermaid)
It's not my cup of tea either... I never really ride it, but its far from a dead attraction.
Do you have anything to show that it is unpopular?
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.