A Spirited Perfect Ten

[hpyhnt 1000]

Although I appreciate your attempting to not direct this at me, it still is, isn't it? You know what though, there is a better then even chance that it is Spirit that "doesn't get it".

No, it really isn't. Your viewpoint is shared by others, hence my using the generic you as opposed to calling you out specifically. As for using @WDW1974's quote, I did so because it was, I thought, an accurate way of describing the two opposing ways of looking at the Hub, not because I see him as some infalliable leader of the crusades fighting to bring truth into a world awash with pixie dust and magic (though perhaps he fancies himself as that).

 

[twebber55]

That's my key problem I started as a WDW fan as a teen in the 80''s back then the place was amazing and Disney was always adding something be it as simple as a menu item, people who have just started visiting the park have no idea what it was like then, fast forward to today it's now about what has Disney taken AWAY this visit.

A key example is Ohana they raised the price and subtracted one of the courses and they rush you, when I'm presented with the bill before the dessert course it's clearly about how many seatings can Ohana achieve vs giving the guests a good experience.

It's clear Disney no longer wants the repeat customer because they see the differences between visits and that trend is not a good one from a guest centric point of view.

What the MK needs is significant new capacity without increasing the admission count this means expansion beyond the berm. It will never happen though because all TWDC cares about is cramming more people into too small a space

I find this interesting because I always think im at Ohanas forever when we eat there

 

[Lee]

Got any idea who gets to chose who gets excluded and who gets to enjoy the offerings?

Easy. When the park hits capacity, nobody else in. Same as on the busy holidays, but a considerably lower number.

 

[hpyhnt 1000]

Disney has never succeeded in taking crowds away from the Magic Kingdom, but they also have been neglecting the other parks. A serious commitment to the other parks is necessary and is the only hope in addressing the greater issue.

If I were ever to become president of WDW, I think my first directive would be a blanket statement: within 5 years, I want to see yearly attendance at MK drop by 10%, to be offset by a 15% increase at each Epcot, DHS and AK. Essentially, all resources would go into making the other 3 parks legitimate contenders for "top park" at the resort.

Think about how radical that would be and how it would shake up the status quo of WDW=MK. But it's ideas like this that ensure I would never become president of WDW...

 

[asianway]

If I were ever to become president of WDW, I think my first directive would be a blanket statement: within 5 years, I want to see yearly attendance at MK drop by 10%, to be offset by a 15% increase at each Epcot, DHS and AK. Essentially, all resources would go into making the other 3 parks legitimate contenders for "top park" at the resort.

Think about how radical that would be and how it would shake up the status quo of WDW=MK. But it's ideas like this that ensure I would never become president of WDW...

How would you start? Because Burbank controls the capex. You'd have to be chairman level to effect that level of change. George K is just a manager

 

[PhotoDave219]

Ticketing and attendance is what I do for a living. They no doubt have internal reporting that will give them a breakdown of any statistic they need, multiple visits, times, ticket type gorced entry invalid tickets, all the way down to the specific turnstile.

That information will never be publicized.

Well based on just observational data, there are a few things we can assume.

Biggest assumption that I can put forth is that everybody park Hops to Magic Kingdom in the evening.

 

[spacemt354]

So the thoughts on the AstroTurf.....

I've been burned by AstroTurf in August/September before. I forget which sporting event it was, but I kneeled down on it in the middle of the afternoon and stood right up in a hurry.

It retains heat badly. It's like ice when it's wet. Plus there are the cancer links.

That's where I'm at on the grass. I'll check it out myself but I'm apprehensive

Astroturf is really bad in the heat. But I haven't seen any conclusive scientific evidence linking it to cancer. It doesn't appear to be a cause-effect relationship based on the research today.

It will be interesting to see how many people mid-day August are going to sit on the turf to watch a show, forget a towel, and get quite a warm welcoming by the ground.

 

[PhotoDave219]

How would you start? Because Burbank controls the capex. You'd have to be chairman level to effect that level of change. George K is just a manager

Eventually they'll figure it out....

 

[andysol]

Astroturf is really bad in the heat. But I haven't seen any conclusive scientific evidence linking it to cancer. It doesn't appear to be a cause-effect relationship based on the research today.

Not true- it creates terrible football and baseball teams.

Cause, meet effect

 

[Phil12]

Astroturf is really bad in the heat. But I haven't seen any conclusive scientific evidence linking it to cancer. It doesn't appear to be a cause-effect relationship based on the research today.

It will be interesting to see how many people mid-day August are going to sit on the turf to watch a show, forget a towel, and get quite a warm welcoming by the ground.

Perhaps that's exactly what they had in mind. They eliminated benches as well. It's always amazed me to see people just sit down anywhere they please.

 

[Phil12]

Yogi Berra was right. The MK is too crowded, nobody goes there anymore.

 

[PhotoDave219]

Yogi Berra was right. The MK is too crowded, nobody goes there anymore.

 

[DisneyOutsider]

It's no more visible then it ever was. I don't know where you folks come up with this stuff. You could always see the other lands from the hub. They weren't trying to hide anything.

Although I appreciate your attempting to not direct this at me, it still is, isn't it? You know what though, there is a better then even chance that it is Spirit that "doesn't get it". For all his knowledge stuff like this ends up being one persons perspective as opposed to someone else's. It is also his opinion about what it was supposed to be for, it is not necessarily the actuality.

I'm young (born in the 80's) and don't remember the hub the way that people here describe it, as a tree-filled buffer/area of transition between all of the lands. I don't have memories of this hub, but I take everybody's word for the original intent of the hub architects because it sounds VERY nice and I am rather ignorant on the subject. If the hub truly was as they say it was (and I have no real reason to believe it wasn't), then I would very much like to have that hub back. Now I would never go as far as to call the current hub a "concrete wasteland", but that's another discussion altogether.

Are you saying that there is no information out there to back up these claims of the concept of the original hub? Can anyone shed light on this?

 

[cheezbat]

Well based on just observational data, there are a few things we can assume.

Biggest assumption that I can put forth is that everybody park Hops to Magic Kingdom in the evening.

This is a real problem. I hate to say it, but I think the time is coming where park hopping to Magic Kingdom cannot happen. Make park hopper tickets for the other three parks ONLY.

I think that, coupled with raising admission prices to MK would reduce the crowds.

 

[Goofyernmost]

So the thoughts on the AstroTurf.....

I've been burned by AstroTurf in August/September before. I forget which sporting event it was, but I kneeled down on it in the middle of the afternoon and stood right up in a hurry.

It retains heat badly. It's like ice when it's wet. Plus there are the cancer links.

That's where I'm at on the grass. I'll check it out myself but I'm apprehensive

Just one balancing comment from me on that and that concerns the "Cancer" risk. The hysterics that people in this country jump into over that concern tend to outweigh every other logical statement made. If anyone can site even one report that says that someone having an extremely limited exposure to artificial turf, as would be in a visit to WDW, ever got cancer due to that exposure ONLY, then I'd surely like to see it. Hot or Cold I cannot comment on, as I don't have any knowledge of either, but the cancer risk, even if true, blown way out of reasonable proportion.

 

[cheezbat]

I'm young (born in the 80's) and don't remember the hub the way that people here describe it, as a tree-filled buffer/area of transition between all of the lands. I don't have memories of this hub, but I take everybody's word for the original intent of the hub architects because it sounds VERY nice and I am rather ignorant on the subject. If the hub truly was as they say it was (and I have no real reason to believe it wasn't), then I would very much like to have that hub back. Now I would never go as far as to call the current hub a "concrete wasteland", but that's another discussion altogether.

Are you saying that there is no information out there to back up these claims of the concept of the original hub? Can anyone shed light on this?

My first visit to WDW was in 1986(that's as early as I can remember at least.). Main Street USA and the hub were both so much nicer and green. Once crowds got too big and so much focus was placed on the shows near the hub, the redesign became inevitable. Having just visited the park again last week, I can honestly say that while traffic flow is better and it was designed nicely, it pales in comparison to what was once there. The entire park needs more trees and more shade, yet every year they seem to rip out more and more trees.

 

[Goofyernmost]

I'm young (born in the 80's) and don't remember the hub the way that people here describe it, as a tree-filled buffer/area of transition between all of the lands. I don't have memories of this hub, but I take everybody's word for the original intent of the hub architects because it sounds VERY nice and I am rather ignorant on the subject. If the hub truly was as they say it was (and I have no real reason to believe it wasn't), then I would very much like to have that hub back. Now I would never go as far as to call the current hub a "concrete wasteland", but that's another discussion altogether.

Are you saying that there is no information out there to back up these claims of the concept of the original hub? Can anyone shed light on this?

I was there consistently since 1983 and frankly, I have no memory of the detail of the Hub from any of my trips. That is how impressive it is. The HUB is a utility creation designed to make exploring the park easier. It was, like a traffic circle, a central way to go to whatever land you wanted too without having to cross over other lands to do so. That was it's primary function. Other then leading up to the castle and allowing the branching out in every direction, it had no other use. As usual, now that it has been changed it has been romanticized to the point of ridiculousness.

 

[Goofyernmost]

Easy. When the park hits capacity, nobody else in. Same as on the busy holidays, but a considerably lower number.

You do indeed need to think about what you just said. The park hasn't reached capacity, but those that paid admission and still had space available should not be allowed to enter so you can sit under a tree?

 

[Lee]

You do indeed need to think about what you just said. The park hasn't reached capacity, but those that paid admission and still had space available should not be allowed to enter so you can sit under a tree?

I'm saying reduce daily park capacity to a level that would ensure no overcrowding and compromising of guest experience.

 

[PhotoDave219]

Just one balancing comment from me on that and that concerns the "Cancer" risk. The hysterics that people in this country jump into over that concern tend to outweigh every other logical statement made. If anyone can site even one report that says that someone having an extremely limited exposure to artificial turf, as would be in a visit to WDW, ever got cancer due to that exposure ONLY, then I'd surely like to see it. Hot or Cold I cannot comment on, as I don't have any knowledge of either, but the cancer risk, even if true, blown way out of reasonable proportion.

OK the verdict is still out on that BUT the slippery surface and the heat retention still stand as valid concerns.