News New Theater to be built at the Magic Kingdom - now cancelled?

[TheMaxRebo]

This makes 0 sense. More attractions = more capacity, which in turn does make it so there are more places to put people.

I do think they need more "other stuff" too ... So if a new ride let's them have another 2,000 people of ride capacity, then need 2,000 more dining capacity, retail, entertainment, etc

 

[lazyboy97o]

Brick and Mortar retail has been dying across the country for the last 5 years+, and covid really helped push that along. Why in the world would Disney want to lean into a dying market space and build MORE retail space. Its not like there is NO retail spaces in MK (just taking this park as the example.) And other than special dates, like the opening of the 50th Anniversary, or a new item launch, I have never seen the retail spaces currently available at MK being so crowded such that they are turning people away, or that shopping in them was a hardship. You don't need a Genie+ spot for the shops on Main St.

And its not like Disney is afraid to sell things to people to try and make money. Does anyone really think that if they thought that additional retail space was in demand, and would result in more sales, that they wouldn't explore it?

In addition to 1) there being no real demand for more retail space, and 2) no monetary incentive or ROI to spend on more retail space, there is 3) is more retail space, or a new sit down restaurant really going to solve the problem of long lines at the high demand attractions. Take 7D, lets say out of 40,000 guests per day, 30,000 want to ride 7D. Those 30,000 riders are in line for 7D throughout the day, and lets be honest, for the high end attractions, absent the very last moments of the park, the lines themselves stay rather long and static the entire day. Are we really thinking a significant number or people are going to NOT wait in line for 7D, and go to a third or fourth merchandise shop? Your much more likely to have people choosing between riding Tron and 7D.

And finally, the major problem with this thinking is you are not truly asking Disney to spend money to increase capacity, as it is generally used. WDW has a capacity of 40,000 guests per day, if your investing capex to increase capacity, you are spending money in order to increase that 40,000 guest number to 45 or 50,000 per day, with all the corresponding revenue that entails. What many people on this board want, is for WDW to spend capex to NOT increase capacity, but rather distribute the same 40,000 guests across more areas/activities. So you are asking for a large capex spend, and increase in overhead, with no increased consumer base and direct ROI.

You thought they were going to build a movie theater and now you are making up new definitions of capacity.

 

[JMcMahonEsq]

What I will say is that no one is asking WDW to spend capex to not increase capacity. I have no idea where you are coming up with that idea. That's actually one of the major complaints people have about so many of their recent moves, where they've just replaced existing capacity instead of actually adding it.

Almost everyone here who is talking about spending capex for more rides, more things to do, has stated they DON'T want the purpose of the new rides to be to increase overall attendance, the capacity of the park to allow MORE guests. The stated purpose/goal most people in this thread have articulated is to have more things in the park, for the people who are already in the park to be spread out amongst, to arguably reduce lines across the existing rides. That is not increasing capacity of WDW. You are not trying to go from saying WDW can hold 40K people, but with new rides, attractions, we can bring in 5K more people and hold 45K. In fact tons of people have said they don't want to build new high-profile rides that will draw in new crowds, but rather build line eating sub headliner type rides that eat up the people already in the park. That's not adding overall capacity, that's attempting to spread out your current capacity across other area of the park.

 

[JMcMahonEsq]

You thought they were going to build a movie theater and now you are making up new definitions of capacity.

Capacity: Noun "the maximum amount that something can contain"

If by making up, you mean using the actual webster definition for the word sure.

 

[JMcMahonEsq]

I doubt the death of traditional brick-and-mortar retail has any impact on retail within a theme park. Walt Disney World is already a physical space you have to inhabit to enjoy, so retail integrated into the built environment makes sense. You can't hop on Amazon to get your WDW fix delivered to your door, and much of the exclusive merchandise that you can purchase online came from a reseller visiting a brick-and-mortar location within the parks.

People have become almost ingrained in the idea that they can buy things online. You don't think there are numerous families looking for things at shops at WDW that say something along the lines of "We can get that cheaper online" or "I don't feel like carrying that around the park/hotel/plane" we can get it online and have it sent to the house?"

Are there some things that are park exclusives? Sure, but the majority of any movie/ip based toys, stuffed animals, ect can all be purchased online, in one form or the other.

Plus, again have you ever been to the park and seen any sign of the demand for retail shopping being so high, that you said to yourself, these stores are packed, what they really need is another store or two? Do you honestly think WDW is turning away the pent-up demand of more consumers/shoppers rather than having more retail?

 

[lazyboy97o]

Capacity: Noun "the maximum amount that something can contain"

If by making up, you mean using the actual webster definition for the word sure.

Industries have their own technical terminology. That you’re looking to Webster’s is proof positive that you don’t actually know what you are talking about. Capacity in an amusement park is not measured by the day or maximum park occupancy, which is a somewhat arbitrary derivative of attraction capacity.

 

[doctornick]

Until every country in world showcase has a real attraction, no need for a fifth gate

Yep. There are so many WS countries still lacking in a proper full attraction. Add something to UK, Morocco, Japan, Italy, and Germany (and have them as part of any new pavilions if ever built... Brazil). If there were rides or shows in all of those locations, it would really enhance WS and all of Epcot as a destination.

 

[TrojanUSC]

People have become almost ingrained in the idea that they can buy things online. You don't think there are numerous families looking for things at shops at WDW that say something along the lines of "We can get that cheaper online" or "I don't feel like carrying that around the park/hotel/plane" we can get it online and have it sent to the house?"

Are there some things that are park exclusives? Sure, but the majority of any movie/ip based toys, stuffed animals, ect can all be purchased online, in one form or the other.

Plus, again have you ever been to the park and seen any sign of the demand for retail shopping being so high, that you said to yourself, these stores are packed, what they really need is another store or two? Do you honestly think WDW is turning away the pent-up demand of more consumers/shoppers rather than having more retail?

They did themselves a big disservice by homogenizing all of the merchandise across property. No reason you should be able to buy the same Star Wars crap in Frontierland as you can buy in Harambe.

 

[crazy4disney]

Yep. There are so many WS countries still lacking in a proper full attraction. Add something to UK, Morocco, Japan, Italy, and Germany (and have them as part of any new pavilions if ever built... Brazil). If there were rides or shows in all of those locations, it would really enhance WS and all of Epcot as a destination.

The amount of money and construction that has gone into Epcot and when its all said and done when you sit back and look at what we ended up getting its going to be laughable. I dont care how good GotG ride is…

 

[the_rich]

I agree with you. Disney will always have its guests who will never visit Universal. A lot of that is due to no interest in their IP. Another part is those with littles, they will always choose Disney as they have more things for them to do. IMO a big one that few bring up is that a lot of Disney guests aren't ride people. I can't count how many times I have seen people here post about motion sickness.

Yea I can't go anything more intense than everest. Even that gets me queasy. So universal for me is a no go.

 

[Dear Prudence]

Yea I can't go anything more intense than everest. Even that gets me queasy. So universal for me is a no go.

Universal is also majority screens, which are a no from me. Also, if I wanted to watch television, I could do that at home. Why am I paying to sit in front of a screen?! I don't want extreme attractions, I want good storytelling. Universal is hard no from me.

 

[the_rich]

Universal is also majority screens, which are a no from me. Also, if I wanted to watch television, I could do that at home. Why am I paying to sit in front of a screen?! I don't want extreme attractions, I want good storytelling. Universal is hard no from me.

It just doesn't offer me or my family enough. I have people who love world showcase and don't care about rides. I get motion sickness and am afraid of heights. So for me even if someone said I could go to universal for free, I would still pay to go to Disney instead.

 

[ToTBellHop]

A Connections in every park!!

Imperfections CONFIRMED for Magic Kingdom!
Overcorrections CONFIRMED for Disney’s Hollywood Studios!
Erections CONFIRMED for Disney’s Animal Kingdom!

Imagine the floor tiles!!!

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Universal is also majority screens, which are a no from me. Also, if I wanted to watch television, I could do that at home. Why am I paying to sit in front of a screen?! I don't want extreme attractions, I want good storytelling. Universal is hard no from me.

Islands of Adventure isn't majority screen rides, and dismissing Spider-Man and Forbidden Journey as just that is a bit over the top.

When people say they don't like Universal I think they really mean the Studios because so much of the criticism doesn't make sense for IoA or Volcano Bay.

 

[UNCgolf]

Universal is also majority screens, which are a no from me. Also, if I wanted to watch television, I could do that at home. Why am I paying to sit in front of a screen?! I don't want extreme attractions, I want good storytelling. Universal is hard no from me.

There are some good non-screen attractions at Universal (Jurassic Park River Adventure is great, as is E.T.), and some are combination screen and physical sets/AAs.

With that said, as much as people love Forbidden Journey, I found it far too screen heavy, and in a relatively boring way. The non-screen parts were pretty good but most of the broom flight was a snore, and it's the majority of the ride. The ride system is also miserable (as in it throws you all over the place), which doesn't help. Flight of Passage is entirely screen based, which I generally don't like, and yet I enjoy it far more than Forbidden Journey.

The attraction lineup at USF (not IoA) was much better in the 1990s than it is today, at least for me.

 

[Dear Prudence]

Islands of Adventure isn't majority screen rides, and dismissing Spider-Man and Forbidden Journey as just that is a bit over the top.

When people say they don't like Universal I think they really mean the Studios because so much of the criticism doesn't make sense for IoA or Volcano Bay.

I haven't been to the latter two, so that makes sense!

 

[Animaniac93-98]

I haven't been to the latter two, so that makes sense!

IoA and Volcano Bay are the main reasons I'm a Passholder. I really love those parks.

Universal Studios Florida is actually my least favorite of the Universal Studios parks I've visited. Both Japan and Singapore are better IMO.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Also, if I wanted to watch television, I could do that at home. Why am I paying to sit in front of a screen?!

If you’re there on the right day, Universal will pay you to watch television. They do audience testing at the NBC Preview Center.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

If you’re there on the right day, Universal will pay you to watch television. They do audience testing at the NBC Preview Center.

I almost did that for a $50 gift card, but I wasn't selected because I didn't pass the initial screening questions.

They kept asking about streaming services (like Peacock) that are not available in Canada, lol.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I almost did that for a $50 gift card, but I wasn't selected because I didn't pass the initial screening questions.

They kept asking about streaming services (like Peacock) that are not available in Canada, lol.

Most I’ve been offered is a $25 gift card. Back when it was over in New York it was a crisp $20 bill. Either way, I’ll take a meal in exchange for watching TV in a well conditioned space.