Search results

Fair enough. I'm referring to the WDW version. Didn't even like it as a kid.

Don't throw tomatoes at me but I've always thought this ride was silly and takes up too much space. Oh and doesn't fit Tomorrowland's theme. I'd be happy to see it go.

Respectfully that couldn't be further from the truth. People would go nuts. Aerosmith and the cultural impact they had not only historically but at the time the ride was made doesn't even light a candle to Taylor Swifts impact.

In all seriousness if they did do that, the demand would be huge. Taylor Swift's own ride? With exclusive merch at the end of it? It'd be pandemonium.

To me it speaks to the grand canyon sized gulf between the teams who worry about revenue vs. the teams worried about customer experience. It's as if the two groups never come together and even discuss whether these bean counting moves are going to help or hurt from a customer engagement...

Given how much your average attraction costs, and the fact that they have parks all over the world, I assume this investment will just cover some of the blue sky concepts announced recently for WDW. Good I guess?

I wish I could take a trip just to Epcot for this! My families' favorite ride back in the day.

Same with me. I'd run to Tokyo before even considering dropping serious money on a WDW vacation. and my husband loved Universal when we went last year so we are eagerly awaiting the new park.

Too expensive for guests? I guess we'll never know but that's my two cents. I'm surprised they didn't try to lower the cost first.

I also agree with this. I think I've summarized my opinion enough but basically my reaction to this is "Shrug. Makes sense from a business perspective. Now show me what you've got". Many things people are wringing their hands over in this thread are long gone anyway. So make your future IP rides...

It's a business decision though. I honestly can't understand opinions like yours, even if I loved the non-IP attractions Disney has had and still has. They have the IP, so it's going in their parks.

It's inevitable given the amount of IP Disney now owns, especially after the introduction of Disney+. Now I've never been a CEO, but it makes little business sense to me to *not* use your own IP within your parks. It's also a business driving move in their eyes - you like a particular IP? Oh...

Agreed. Really enjoyed doing that tour years ago. Didn't it used to be free? I was quite disappointed to see the Living with the Land ride wasn't open when were there in November.

My point is Disney is way too complicated for them, not that they are completely advserse to planning a vacation. The input isn't worth the output (cost is also a factor).

I've gotten about one sentence into talking about planning a Disney vacation and all my friends' eyes glaze over. None of them are interested enough to do that much work as you have outlined here.

That's the rub for me, I feel like Universal's gives me value for that price (or higher). And the funny thing is when were there last we didn't even need it. at all. (We didn't buy it) as opposed to our one day at Disney where we also didn't buy Genie + but I could see how people would feel...

Agreed I told my husband the next Orlando trip in 3-4 years we will definitely be staying here.

I'm as skeptical as they come in terms of Disney. But this is a move in the right direction, undoubtedly caused by negative guest feedback, social media, and press. Just like many of us said would/should happen. Where's all the "too many people are going to Disney, they don't care about...

Not by a long shot 😂

A giant corporation could start punching it's customers in the face as a required part of doing business, and you'd come up with some nonsensical arguement why that's a good thing for everyone involved.