MK Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

[flynnibus]

I'm not talking about the subject matter.
I am talking about Disney's choice to create an aesthetic of calm, and openness.

So you want to keep the RoA just as a backdrop?

Should closed shops not be replaced for the same reason?

Let’s keep the fry cart wagon… it’s about the asthetics…

 

[LSLS]

Is that a bad thing? Really?

This group went from "Disney doesn't build enough attractions" to "Actually... new attractions are the worst thing they could ever do" so quickly.

To me as a guest, yes. That incentivizes making sure lines stay long enough to force people to purchase them. Which again, is why despite much fewer guests, you are seeing longer lines. BUT, that also was never my point. My point was that I don't believe capacity was close to the top of the list of reasons for change, whether it's good or bad.

But, I'll say for me personally as someone who has screamed about capacity on projects, MK was NOT the place I ever focused on. MK always had plenty of things to do without needing to wait in hour long lines. My complaints were always about the other 3 parks.

 

[monothingie]

How could they not be monetized if they were not under utilized?

The only reason something can’t have LL is people aren’t willing to pay for it.

Interesting thing on that was that at DLR LL was removed from their version of Pirates, which I don’t think is underutilized.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

They’re building the cars ride to put behind $40 daily firewalls…or $30 one shot firewalls

Those are your two possibilities and the only ones

So the idea that any of these “grand” construction projects is not to handle people more comfortably and haven’t been for years. And won’t be.

It’s about shifting from old to new while maintaining the wait times…

And lookie here…now we gots the prebooks! Yay! A bad idea returns monetized.

So FOMO gets Mom to buy the fastpass before you leave ohio… and when you get there and notice nobody is around…you try to flip the narrative on yourself.

It sounds like I have no respect for this conundrum. It’s exactly the opposite. It’s a textbook “modern free market” seminar.

 

[flynnibus]

Interesting thing on that was that at DLR LL was removed from their version of Pirates, which I don’t think is underutilized.

nice deflection… but doesn’t address the point.

You say they could not LL monetize these attractions… why do you that is?

 

[Disstevefan1]

So you want to keep the RoA just as a backdrop?

Should closed shops not be replaced for the same reason?

Let’s keep the fry cart wagon… it’s about the asthetics…

Backdrops are for losers!

Keep the costly theming to a minimum!

Destroy and replace with attractions the SELL LLs

The only thing that matters is the ability to MAKE MONEY!

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Interesting thing on that was that at DLR LL was removed from their version of Pirates, which I don’t think is underutilized.

Different ballgame out there…some minor semblance of backbone still exists in the faithful there

 

[LSLS]

So you want to keep the RoA just as a backdrop?

Should closed shops not be replaced for the same reason?

Let’s keep the fry cart wagon… it’s about the asthetics…

Personally, yes, it is about aesthetics for me. Well, in the sense of the continuity and feel of all the lands in and around. I'm not a doomer on this in the sense that I think it ruins everything with the elmination, but I'm a heavy skeptic in the idea that the replacement will accomplish what RoA did in terms of the feel of the land (and the surrounding lands). If it does, I'll honestly say I don't care about the change.

 

[Andrew C]

So if disney just closed TSI and the riverboat… but kept the river would that have kept people happy?

That is the compromise/middle-ground that would have made many okay with this overall change. Maintain the most important thematic part of Frontierland.

 

[flynnibus]

Personally, yes, it is about aesthetics for me. Well, in the sense of the continuity and feel of all the lands in and around. I'm not a doomer on this in the sense that I think it ruins everything with the elmination, but I'm a heavy skeptic in the idea that the replacement will accomplish what RoA did in terms of the feel of the land (and the surrounding lands). If it does, I'll honestly say I don't care about the change.

It’s a fine pov. And basically be bothered by the change of setting/atmosphere of the area.

I just think people conflute the staging with the attractions themselves. I don’t think people like seeing dead attractions lying about… even if pretty or integrated. And people need to acknowledge it’s not good for Disney to run attractions that no longer serve their purpose.

So disney should look at rework those in some way.

 

[flynnibus]

That is the compromise/middle-ground that would have made many okay with this overall change. Maintain the most important thematic element of Frontierland.

I think that is a false prediction and people would constantly drag disney for not running it… its right there !!

See jolly trolly… or any number of past examples. Fans don’t like to accept operational choices that result in reductions period

 

[Andrew C]

I think that is a false prediction and people would constantly drag disney for not running it… its right there !!

See jolly trolly… or any number of past examples. Fans don’t like to accept operational choices that result in reductions period

As I said, it is a compromise that is able to maintain the integrity of Frontierland. Is it perfect and will everyone be happy? As you said, of course not.

 

[monothingie]

nice deflection… but doesn’t address the point.

You say they could not LL monetize these attractions… why do you that is?

It likely wouldn’t have the impact on revenue to justify the investment, if I had to guess.

 

[Purduevian]

I remember when they first opened it was such a fantastic place and value to get lunch. Could get a sandwich and a drink for under $20 in a very cool setting. What is it now? $65 bucks per person?

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

View attachment 872170
View attachment 872171

They were referring to Beasts castle which is now about $90 with tax and tip.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

People are looking at Cars completely on it's own, when the reality is that it's a package deal with Villains. These two additions are clearly meant to work together to take strain off of the rest of the park.

It’s not a package deal - Villians could have happened without cars. The original beyond big thunder project did not include cars.

You say they have decided suddenly that this problem exists, but I don't think that's the case. The problem has always been there. They're only just now responding to it.

What is the problem? The river and riverboat? If it was a problem why did they build it in 1971 when it had been “a problem” since 1955? And then build it again in Tokyo and Paris in the 80’s and 90’s…. and then keep the visual elements of the island and River for both Hong Kong and Shanghai.

 

[Purduevian]

They were referring to Beasts castle which is now about $90 with tax and tip.

That would make sense! BOG lunch was great... only did it once but it was a highlight. Haven't been back for pre fixe

 

[Horizons '83]

View attachment 872170
View attachment 872171

What @TrainsOfDisney said.

 

[phillip9698]

I’m very interested to see and hear about the actual impact of removing this river by people other than highly influential bloggers and locals, in other words the common guests.

From my observations the river in the MK wasn’t really appreciated as much as it is at other parks. Pretty much any open space bordering that river would be used as stroller parking, so you couldn’t really sit near it and enjoy the view.

When walking in the areas the river physically impacts the most, you would hear guests groaning that they have to walk “all the way around this water” when leaving BTMR, Splash, and HM.

I don’t have the exact numbers in front of me but I have heard it said that the MK is a more destination park than it is local. Meaning these people are there to crank out rides more-so than guests at Disneyland. And people looking to maximize rides aren’t taking the time to soak in the atmosphere and spend time taking it slow. Many of the atmospheric and smaller story telling aspects of the park are more appreciated on a 5th, 6th, 7th visit or someone local who is there quite frequently. Is Orlando management catering to those very frequent visitors or are they trying to maximize revenue from the once every 5-10 year crowd. I think it’s the latter.

For example, I have been to Epcot 8 times in the last 12 years. Me and my wife never went deep into the pavilions until our 5th visit when we had already rode most of everything numerous times in the past and we came without our kids. We have a trip planned now but with our kids again, and we are not planning on going back deep into those pavilions if there isn’t a ride. And trust me we aren’t alone, you go back into the Moroccan and Chinese pavilions and nobody is back there, definetly no children. They even put those kids passport things back there, and still little traffic.

Now im not saying get rid of the Moroccan pavilion, what I’m saying is in the MK, where developed space is a premium, they probably don’t want a footprint as big as that river being so underutilized especially when guests there don’t value it.

 

[SamusAranX]

Is that a bad thing? Really?

This group went from "Disney doesn't build enough attractions" to "Actually... new attractions are the worst thing they could ever do" so quickly.

Once again creating a position no one here is advocating for.

You’re killing a lot of sea turtles with all the straw you seem to throw out there