• The new WDWMAGIC iOS app is here!
    Stay up to date with the latest Disney news, photos, and discussions right from your iPhone. The app is free to download and gives you quick access to news articles, forums, photo galleries, park hours, weather and Lightning Lane pricing. Learn More
  • Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.

News Coco Boat Ride Coming to Disney California Adventure

mickEblu

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Mr. Sullivan said:
Excuse me if this is a stupid question, but I maybe don’t know exactly how they count these type of entries, but if they only count attendance by people who use that as their starting park, would we be able to tell if it’s just the same people now using DCA to start if Disneyland park itself has an attendance dip?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure to be honest. Im also confused on how they count attendance at DLR. Im guessing it's as simple as the starting park getting the credit. Thats why Im wondering if and when DCA gets an attendance boost how much of that will be the same MK's/ guests just choosing DCA as their starting park instead.
 
Mr. Sullivan

Mr. Sullivan

Well-Known Member
mickEblu said:
I'm not sure to be honest. Im also confused on how they count attendance at DLR. Im guessing it's as simple as the starting park getting the credit. Thats why Im wondering if and when DCA gets an attendance boost how much of that will be the same MK's/ guests just choosing DCA as their starting park instead.
Click to expand...
If it is indeed the first park gets the credit, then I guess we'd expect to see either DL's numbers stay similar while DCA's creep up if it's a case of actual new guests, or see DL's go down slightly while DCA's comes up slightly if they're just moving folks around.
 
Disney Irish

Disney Irish

Premium Member
Mr. Sullivan said:
Excuse me if this is a stupid question, but I maybe don’t know exactly how they count these type of entries, but if they only count attendance by people who use that as their starting park, would we be able to tell if it’s just the same people now using DCA to start if Disneyland park itself has an attendance dip?
Click to expand...

mickEblu said:
I'm not sure to be honest. Im also confused on how they count attendance at DLR. Im guessing it's as simple as the starting park getting the credit. Thats why Im wondering if and when DCA gets an attendance boost how much of that will be the same MK's/ guests just choosing DCA as their starting park instead.
Click to expand...
Can't say if its right or not (its been debated here a lot), but I've always understood it as individual gate clicks not unique guests. So really it wouldn't matter if DCA becomes the starting Park or not, as even a Park hop from DCA to DL will be counted as two clicks, one for each Park.

My guess has always been that once DCA becomes more a full day Park (it already is for many) that Park Hopping will be less a factor anyways, so you'll start to see an equalization of attendance between the two Parks even if it was first Park credited.
 
D

DrStarlander

Well-Known Member
Disney Irish said:
Serious question, does each new attraction need new F&B capacity associated with it? I don't think there is a direct correlation between the number of new attractions coming online and F&B locations being added. As of the 4 new attractions only 1 (assuming its only 1 and not a 2nd yet to be announced) is part of a new land. So really in my mind its new lands where F&B capacity additions are discussed, not attractions.
Click to expand...
I definitely don't think it's a one-to-one ratio. I'd say it's bigger picture in terms of the park's daily average and peak guest population. But if more attractions are intended to drive more attendance, and the F&B capacity is already maxed, so to speak (which was my question earlier), then more capacity is needed to keep things in balance, and everyone happy (including the guests and accountants).

It doesn't need to be adjacent to the new attractions, but there would be benefits (enhanced revenue opportunities) to having on-theme dining nearby, whether it's new or re-themed facilities. And it's a consideration that guests will often want F&B immediately before or after an hour-plus wait-and-ride on a new attraction. For example, if you're walking along Paradise Gardens on your way to Coco (potentially an hour-plus commitment, and you're hungry), and Paradise Gardens is maxed out (which will be more likely if Coco is drawing thousands of more people an hour to the area), it doesn't help a lot that there's excess capacity over at San Fransokyo. As they build new attractions they are drawing more guests to new places in the park (the heat-map changes) and old F&B locations may be less helpful to guests and less lucrative to Disney. Location, Location, location is true even inside a theme park, right?
 
Disney Irish

Disney Irish

Premium Member
DrStarlander said:
I definitely don't think it's a one-to-one ratio. I'd say it's bigger picture in terms of the park's daily average and peak guest population. But if more attractions are intended to drive more attendance, and the F&B capacity is already maxed, so to speak (which was my question earlier), then more capacity is needed to keep things in balance, and everyone happy (including the guests and accountants).

It doesn't need to be adjacent to the new attractions, but there would be benefits (enhanced revenue opportunities) to having on-theme dining nearby, whether it's new or re-themed facilities. And it's a consideration that guests will often want F&B immediately before or after an hour-plus wait-and-ride on a new attraction. For example, if you're walking along Paradise Gardens on your way to Coco (potentially an hour-plus commitment, and you're hungry), and Paradise Gardens is maxed out (which will be more likely if Coco is drawing thousands of more people an hour to the area), it doesn't help a lot that there's excess capacity over at San Fransokyo. As they build new attractions they are drawing more guests to new places in the park (the heat-map changes) and old F&B locations may be less helpful to guests and less lucrative to Disney. Location, Location, location is true even inside a theme park, right?
Click to expand...
This is why in my opinion you can't treat Coco as a one-off attraction that is just being thrown into a corner of the Park. Its really a stepping stone project that launches the eventual expansion into Simba. So while there might not be a direct F&B addition here with this project, or at best maybe a retheme of BP&P, I think additions are coming online over the next 5-10 years.

So short term pain, if you want to call it that, in that are of the Park for longer term gains.
 
mickEblu

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Disney Irish said:
Unless they turn it into a TSR, wouldn't be hard to do.... Just won't be with the on-ride experience like @DrStarlander and I'd assume @Adventureland Veranda want.
Click to expand...

Im just saying retheme would imply not turning into a TSR but yeah if they want too it wouldn't be that hard.

Who wouldn't want that? I mean whether it's feasible or not is another story but who wouldn't want a Coco version of San Angel Inn at DCA? The Cars Drive Thru Dine in Theatre could have scratched that itch for the park. Still cant believe they didnt make that happen.
 
Disney Irish

Disney Irish

Premium Member
mickEblu said:
Im just saying retheme would imply not turning into a TSR but yeah if they want too it wouldn't be that hard.

Who wouldn't want that? I mean whether it's feasible or not is another story but who wouldn't want a Coco version of San Angel Inn at DCA? The Cars Drive Thru Dine in Theatre could have scratched that itch for the park. Still cant believe they didnt make that happen.
Click to expand...
Well as we know Disney doesn't do things that we think should be obvious, the Cars drive-in is a perfect example. So just because we think it would be a slam dunk doesn't mean its feasible nor something that Disney wants with this or any other project.

But if the idea is just to quickly bring on a Coco TSR similar to San Angel, well a rethemed BP&P is the quickest and easiest way to do it.
 
wityblack

wityblack

Well-Known Member
DrStarlander said:
If the parade float building stays, the Coco show building could be about 75,000 sq. ft. in footprint and a 350-foot walk/queue from the current gate (very similar to Indy) would be expected.

If all three backstage buildings go away, the show building could be 110,000 sq. ft. in footprint and the walk/queue could be 275 feet.
Click to expand...
75k sqft seems a bit big, especially considering you need space for parade access and other backstage facilities. Also, 110k sqft would make it as big as Pirates of the Caribbean. Which is the largest show building on property. I don't see that happening.
 
Last edited:
BrianLo

BrianLo

Well-Known Member
PiratesMansion said:
30-40% attendance gain would be huge. I imagine that if all of the upcoming additions are big successes that it might get there, but I don't see that gain coming from Avengers by itself.
Click to expand...
mickEblu said:
30-40% is a huge number. Could the park even handle those numbers in the walkways etc?
Click to expand...

My comment was based on the 3M attendance bump Pandora gave DAK. It was a bit of a bold moon-shot call - and yes it will feel a bit like a nightmare, like DAK did for a while there. The steady rollout of Avengers and Coco will stabilize DCA demand, not get that percentage; but then Pandora will break it.

The only defensible thing is that all three attractions seem to be high capacity installs.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom