Nothing more. It hasn't been cut... so far.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Announced: Mary Poppins Attraction in UK Pavilion
- Thread starter TabulaRasa
- Start date
Nothing more. It hasn't been cut... so far.
mikejs78
Well-Known Member
I agree with both of those points, but see them as areas of improvement, not major flaws. It's a great park already, it could just be better if they addressed a few things - the points you mentioned as well as replacing C&H.
matt9112
Well-Known Member
most guests go once in a lifetime and want rides....most guests IMHO want 4 magic kingdoms.
HauntedMansionFLA
Well-Known Member
So it’s a Poppins carousel ???
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
I actually think in the internet age, the wdw customer has become less sophisticated. I don't know how - its paradoxical - but seems to be more and more true as time has gone on.
Part of it is the marketing...all their promotional materials are heavily MK "centric", where as in the past it wasn't always so. Anyone remember mickey on the top of SSE?
...that used to be like the coolest thing ever.
Tony the Tigger
Well-Known Member
Right, because a generic lion is intellectually far superior to that lowly, tainted, recognizable, Disney-rebuilding Simba, and we can’t see generic lions anywhere else.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
While statistically I don't agree that "most" go only once...I do sense that many want all MK/princesses/IP only nonsense...
The whole "i think DAK is the best!!" Has long been a blog battle cry to cover for its comparative lack of performance/draw.
Many people are turned off by animals and the theme...just as zoos have long had little appeal widespread.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
Great point...it's not at all what I'm getting at...but great point.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
Both of those are design flaws that were identified in 1998/99 and remain to this day due to the high operational costs/unwillingness to go deeper financially.
Elephants and joe rohde nonsense ain't cheap
mikejs78
Well-Known Member
This is completely opposite of my experience with people I know who go do WDW. Many are going every 3 years on average, and they love MK because of the rides/princesses/pirates/parade), and love AK because of the rides and the animals. In fact most people I've talked to rave about KS as their favorite attraction at AK (unless they've been in the last year, and the favorite becomes FoP).
In contrast, the people I know love the idea of DHS but think it has deteriorated and there isn't much to do (truth), and that Epcot is boring from a ride perspective, but fun for the festivals/dining and a couple of rides.
Kman101
Well-Known Member
For some people they may say "it's not my favorite". Many say it's only because of how hot the park is and nothing to do with it "being a zoo" or a lack of rides. Though, it should go without saying we need a few more indoor dark rides to fill out the park and give people some things to do inside.
Yeah, animals aren't for everyone. But I don't have a zoo that looks like Animal Kingdom (though Brevard Zoo is pretty nice). Can ya'll ride Everest at your local zoo? It's kind of interesting those who credit Disney for being original and for being good at what they do dismiss Animal Kingdom as a zoo (yes the park was bare bones when it opened and back then, sure I can get the whole "Disney's building a zoo?"). The theming in most places is top notch so it always hurts to hear the park be dismissed. YMMV otherwise on the rides, trails, etc. but I don't understand the current dislike for the park, its both similar yet very different from it's opening few years. Rides aren't everything. But it needs more, absolutely. Doesn't that speak to the bigger problem with people simply caring more about rides and wanting IP. So when we knock "the zoo" ...
Also kind of interesting we're all "rah rah rah" trees but some knock the heavily forested park. "But it's hooooootttttt". First world problems
lol
It's too bad it can't shake it's stigma. Too many people formed a closed off opinion when the park opened (for good reason, of course). I wish the park had opened better so it wouldn't always be called "just a zoo".
And no, not every blogger was on the Animal Kingdom bandwagon. @WDWFigment (Tom Bricker/Disney Tourist Blog) springs to mind as a more recent "convert".
Plus the quick service food selection is probably tops of the four WDW parks. I think they have a great variety.
But I do agree the perception is there and a majority of guests only care about jumping from ride to ride.
Yeah, animals aren't for everyone. But I don't have a zoo that looks like Animal Kingdom (though Brevard Zoo is pretty nice). Can ya'll ride Everest at your local zoo? It's kind of interesting those who credit Disney for being original and for being good at what they do dismiss Animal Kingdom as a zoo (yes the park was bare bones when it opened and back then, sure I can get the whole "Disney's building a zoo?"). The theming in most places is top notch so it always hurts to hear the park be dismissed. YMMV otherwise on the rides, trails, etc. but I don't understand the current dislike for the park, its both similar yet very different from it's opening few years. Rides aren't everything. But it needs more, absolutely. Doesn't that speak to the bigger problem with people simply caring more about rides and wanting IP. So when we knock "the zoo" ...
Also kind of interesting we're all "rah rah rah" trees but some knock the heavily forested park. "But it's hooooootttttt". First world problems
lolIt's too bad it can't shake it's stigma. Too many people formed a closed off opinion when the park opened (for good reason, of course). I wish the park had opened better so it wouldn't always be called "just a zoo".
And no, not every blogger was on the Animal Kingdom bandwagon. @WDWFigment (Tom Bricker/Disney Tourist Blog) springs to mind as a more recent "convert".
Plus the quick service food selection is probably tops of the four WDW parks. I think they have a great variety.
But I do agree the perception is there and a majority of guests only care about jumping from ride to ride.
Last edited:
mikejs78
Well-Known Member
AK is still the fourth most attended domestic park, behind MK, Disneyland, and Epcot, ahead of DHS and anything Universal. And that was before Pandora opened. It must be doing something right.For some people they may say "it's not my favorite". Many say it's only because of how hot the park is and nothing to do with it "being a zoo" or a lack of rides. Though, it should go without saying we need a few more indoor dark rides to fill out the park and give people some things to do inside.
Yeah, animals aren't for everyone. But I don't have a zoo that looks like Animal Kingdom (though Brevard Zoo is pretty nice). Can ya'll ride Everest at your local zoo? It's kind of interesting those who credit Disney for being original and for being good at what they do dismiss Animal Kingdom as a zoo (yes the park was bare bones when it opened and back then, sure I can get the whole "Disney's building a zoo?"). The theming in most places is top notch so it always hurts to hear the park be dismissed. YMMV otherwise on the rides, trails, etc. but I don't understand the current dislike for the park, its both similar yet very different from it's opening few years. Rides aren't everything. But it needs more, absolutely. Doesn't that speak to the bigger problem with people simply caring more about rides and wanting IP. So when we knock "the zoo" ...
Also kind of interesting we're all "rah rah rah" trees but some knock the heavily forested park. "But it's hooooootttttt". First world problems
It's too bad it can't shake it's stigma. Too many people formed a closed off opinion when the park opened (for good reason, of course). I wish the park had opened better so it wouldn't always be called "just a zoo".
And no, not every blogger was on the Animal Kingdom bandwagon. @WDWFigment (Tom Bricker/Disney Tourist Blog) springs to mind as a more recent "convert".
Plus the quick service food selection is probably tops of the four WDW parks. I think they have a great variety.
But I do agree the perception is there and a majority of guests only care about jumping from ride to ride.
Kman101
Well-Known Member
I think it is!
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
I don't doubt your personal experience...but you have to realize that "people I know" can't be expanded to cover the clientele. There are lots of things that the "people I know" do that don't play out...for instance being completely turned off by the bad food/price of character buffets. I know few who will go to them...but obviously that's not representative.
The reality is that AK dropped in attendance after 1999 and hovered...well below their expectations. Now it's crowded now, and I'll be interested to see what they numbers are estimated at for last and this year...but they need more.
I can only say what I "think"...attendance should be a ratio similar to this:
MK - 20 mil
DAK, EPCOT - 15 mil
Studios - 10-12 mil at most
That's how they are designed/staffed. Anything short of that represents operational failure and/of lack of appeal.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
It's not the raw attendance...it's how much it costs compared to the gate/revenue.
Disney parks are not "competing" against great adventure or cedar point...and only moderately against universal.
They compete against themselves...dak costs a lot more to run than MGM
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
For some people they may say "it's not my favorite". Many say it's only because of how hot the park is and nothing to do with it "being a zoo" or a lack of rides. Though, it should go without saying we need a few more indoor dark rides to fill out the park and give people some things to do inside.
Yeah, animals aren't for everyone. But I don't have a zoo that looks like Animal Kingdom (though Brevard Zoo is pretty nice). Can ya'll ride Everest at your local zoo? It's kind of interesting those who credit Disney for being original and for being good at what they do dismiss Animal Kingdom as a zoo (yes the park was bare bones when it opened and back then, sure I can get the whole "Disney's building a zoo?"). The theming in most places is top notch so it always hurts to hear the park be dismissed. YMMV otherwise on the rides, trails, etc. but I don't understand the current dislike for the park, its both similar yet very different from it's opening few years. Rides aren't everything. But it needs more, absolutely. Doesn't that speak to the bigger problem with people simply caring more about rides and wanting IP. So when we knock "the zoo" ...
Also kind of interesting we're all "rah rah rah" trees but some knock the heavily forested park. "But it's hooooootttttt". First world problems
It's too bad it can't shake it's stigma. Too many people formed a closed off opinion when the park opened (for good reason, of course). I wish the park had opened better so it wouldn't always be called "just a zoo".
And no, not every blogger was on the Animal Kingdom bandwagon. @WDWFigment (Tom Bricker/Disney Tourist Blog) springs to mind as a more recent "convert".
Plus the quick service food selection is probably tops of the four WDW parks. I think they have a great variety.
But I do agree the perception is there and a majority of guests only care about jumping from ride to ride.
Don't get me wrong...I like animal kingdom - a lot. I think futureworld and MGM are pretty awful in comparison since it opened...
But it does have that stigma...and it's a valid problem.
Remember that Eisner fought almost on his own to proceed with DAK...wells and the board were not convinced. And they never fully committed to a build out due to cost and two different ceos with agendas that didn't serve it. It's still the same in most aspects
Or a hedge maze.
Don't forget the advantage of proximity. It's the poor stepsister, but it's close by and admission's included on a multi-day ticket.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
Exactly...neither MGM nor dak would earn nearly that gate without MK dragging it along...
That doesn't mean "it's fine"...it's always meant "better do something..." and management has failed there - buy and large.
matt9112
Well-Known Member
For some people they may say "it's not my favorite". Many say it's only because of how hot the park is and nothing to do with it "being a zoo" or a lack of rides. Though, it should go without saying we need a few more indoor dark rides to fill out the park and give people some things to do inside.
Yeah, animals aren't for everyone. But I don't have a zoo that looks like Animal Kingdom (though Brevard Zoo is pretty nice). Can ya'll ride Everest at your local zoo? It's kind of interesting those who credit Disney for being original and for being good at what they do dismiss Animal Kingdom as a zoo (yes the park was bare bones when it opened and back then, sure I can get the whole "Disney's building a zoo?"). The theming in most places is top notch so it always hurts to hear the park be dismissed. YMMV otherwise on the rides, trails, etc. but I don't understand the current dislike for the park, its both similar yet very different from it's opening few years. Rides aren't everything. But it needs more, absolutely. Doesn't that speak to the bigger problem with people simply caring more about rides and wanting IP. So when we knock "the zoo" ...
Also kind of interesting we're all "rah rah rah" trees but some knock the heavily forested park. "But it's hooooootttttt". First world problems
It's too bad it can't shake it's stigma. Too many people formed a closed off opinion when the park opened (for good reason, of course). I wish the park had opened better so it wouldn't always be called "just a zoo".
And no, not every blogger was on the Animal Kingdom bandwagon. @WDWFigment (Tom Bricker/Disney Tourist Blog) springs to mind as a more recent "convert".
Plus the quick service food selection is probably tops of the four WDW parks. I think they have a great variety.
But I do agree the perception is there and a majority of guests only care about jumping from ride to ride.
fans with mist work....too bad there are barely any.