Search results

They tried to bring Duffy to the US but it didn't catch on.

I think a big change worth understanding, that a lot of fans don't want to accept any longer, is the ease and availability of non-IP experiences. In the 1950s, or the 1970s, when the predominant method of travel for families were road trips, going to a place that was equal parts wilderness and...

What is the effective range of the "see water" hack? Are we willing to write off Fantasyland and Tomorrowland because they don't have any water features we can see? What about Main Street? What about Hollywood Studios? Is there a requirement to how big the water has to be in order for the...

Again: ... go for it.

It's a factual statement: you cannot see the water from most of Liberty Square. Sorry that seems to break your argument apart.

I assume this was really meant to be two distinct thoughts, because it is definitely not Disney's fault that kids don't read books or play outside anymore. It seems silly to think Disney would maintain a property that was locked into appealing to kids in the 1950s and never change from that.

It's not obvious at all. Go for it.

Do you think that the audience is willing to pay the increased admission prices to pay for attractions they don't intend to use? If the parks keep expanding, and maintenance keeps increasing, so too must the admission price. This is the whole point of it not being a museum: they are not...

Now: https://www.google.com/maps/@28.4193204,-81.5823173,3a,60y,302h,95.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYUmQjMGVMM9Q8lrzjCWTbw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?coh=205409&entry=ttu Can you point to water here?

You can't even see the water from most of Liberty Square.

So if we get to keep the Rivers of America because we have the better version... does that mean our Monorail is toast? 🤔

I feel pretty meh about it. Admittedly as a Disneyland I don't feel too much of the attachment to the ROA over there in general, but the one thing Disney does that I cannot stand in any way shape or form, is removing trees and greenery. It's a weird pet peeve of mine. The other weird pet peeve...

No. Not at all. ROA isn't being removed because of a land use/planning decision. It's being removed because of 30+ years of erroding support for the story and theme. It's being removed because of dwindling attendance numbers. It's being removed because of high ratio between maintenance/turnstile...

People are only going to visit 10 or 15 attractions in a day at a park, tops. If you keep adding attractions at the top of the list, some attractions are just going to fall to the bottom of the demand list. Eventually they will pass the point of it being worth the dollars spent to keep them...

So wait, are we back to hoping they DON'T spend money on the parks? I'm sure that's what Wall Street wants.

That said, I am honestly surprised that this stayed a secret (relatively) right up until the day it was announced.

And? Why does it have to be water?

The island at Disneyland got a complete re-theme 15 years ago. Certainly there were problems there. It's been 8 years since they shortened the river too. Let's not pretend it's safe either.

The crux of the issue: people weren't utilizing this desperately needed space. Either it's not as needed as people want to think, or the burdens to utilizing it were too high. Either way the result is the same. Splash wasn't popular because of the IP.

You do if you have to get on a boat to enjoy it.