AVATAR land construction progress

[DinoInstitute]

I like both, but IMO Uni relies WAAYYY too much on Harry Potter. Why can't it just be a nice, extra, side land that is awesome? Because people only seem to want to go there for Potter. At least my family and friends did. We didn't do/love too much else, because what was there just didn't offer the same experience that Disney did. Also, they advertise it as if it is a separate park then IA, and in other circumstances, such as the "who says lightning.....never strikes twice?" it isn't advertised as an awesome experience, but more as a "we are owning disney, b****!!".

Uni arguably had the most powerful card in the game, but isn't wise enough to play it the right way.
And once the Potter momentum is lost, Disney will be back on track.

Sorry for all of my opinion.

 

[DinoInstitute]

Disney has been and will continue to be my favorite theme park. It still does things no one else does. But, I do understand the frustration that we feel at times. For me personally, I think UNI and IoA have been getting the headline attention stuff with the exciting attractions. HP, Transformers, Simpsons and maybe JP tend to be more "trendy" more "now". The general populace tends to pay more attention. Also I believe part of the issue is when people use cutting edge, state of the art, setting the bar to describe HP, I get a tad bit territorial. I want Disney to have those accolades, especially since they are more than capable of accomplishing this. I don't think there is anything wrong with the 7DMC or FLE (except maybe the mermaid), it's just having it compared to what are arguably more "advanced" attractions, smarts. At least that's how I feel about it. I want my team to be the best, all the time.

This^

And to one of your points, thats the problem. Disney unfortunately will never be recognized again, at least for a long time, as the "go to" and "this is it" park. It will be recognized as little kid, slow ride, meet and greet park that uninformed pop culture accuses it of. Sure it doesn't have the most thrilling thrills, but it does have awesome experiences and its own game changers. These include but are not limited to- Star Tours (at the time), Test Track 2.0, Dinosaur (well, indy...) , Toy Story Midway Mania, and more. Uni does have new, innovative rides, but they also rely to heavily on screens and motion simulators, at least as of late.
True, true, Disney may have been slowing down a bit in the past, but that is because when they want to bring you something new, they will bring you something great that will not be forgotten.

Again, I apologies for my opinion. Sorry for any harsh words...

 

[wdisney9000]

I like both, but IMO Uni relies WAAYYY too much on Harry Potter. Why can't it just be a nice, extra, side land that is awesome? Because people only seem to want to go there for Potter. At least my family and friends did. We didn't do/love too much else, because what was there just didn't offer the same experience that Disney did. Also, they advertise it as if it is a separate park then IA, and in other circumstances, such as the "who says lightning.....never strikes twice?" it isn't advertised as an awesome experience, but more as a "we are owning disney fools!!".

Uni arguably had the most powerful card in the game, but isn't wise enough to play it the right way.
And once the Potter momentum is lost, Disney will be back on track.

Sorry for all of my opinion.

If Uni continues to spend and build as they have been doing, all they need are a few creative minds to keep things on track. I'm sure they have sharked a few good imagineers over the years to make it happen.

The blessing Disney has is that they already have everything they need to make "lightning strike" as many times as they want. If they go all out for Avatar land it won't matter if people do or don't like the movies. It will be am awesome land to visit. Same way people enjoy Splash Mountain without being fans of Song of the South.

 

[DinoInstitute]

If Uni continues to spend and build as they have been doing, all they need are a few creative minds to keep things on track. I'm sure they have sharked a few good imagineers over the years to make it happen.

The blessing Disney has is that they already have everything they need to make "lightning strike" as many times as they want. If they go all out for Avatar land it won't matter if people do or don't like the movies. It will be am awesome land to visit. Same way people enjoy Splash Mountain without being fans of Song of the South.

Exactly. In fact, that is the point I have been making all along about Avatar Land. The main complaint is that the movie is forgettable and a bad choice, but what if the idea was their own? It would be something like no other. I didn't even know Splash was based on a movie until relatively recently ago, and I watch song of the south....and hated it. Yet, Splash continues to be in my top 3 Disney rides.

*Also, a point that you brought up in an earlier post that I forgot-People complain that Disney is moving very slow, but its not like the parks are their only project. They have hotel work, Disney Springs work, MM+, so since they are bigger, they have a lot of other stuff to worry about too aside from their parks.

 

[juan]

*Also, a point that you brought up in an earlier post that I forgot-People complain that Disney is moving very slow, but its not like the parks are their only project. They have hotel work, Disney Springs work, MM+, so since they are bigger, they have a lot of other stuff to worry about too aside from their parks.

^This.

In the real world, projects are rarely completed at fastest possible speeds. Projects are typically completed on a particular schedule that dictates the speed of the construction. Budgets (and year over year budgets), development (ride had to be fully designed for Shanghai first), and outside vendors (ie coaster track manufacturer, etc) all play into the perceived "speed" of construction.

Blue Sky Cellar at DCA had a good video on this a few years back. They had all of the projects in computer models and could literally move the progress bar day by day to see the plan for what would be completed at what time.

 

[wdisney9000]

^This.

In the real world, projects are rarely completed at fastest possible speeds. Projects are typically completed on a particular schedule that dictates the speed of the construction. Budgets (and year over year budgets), development (ride had to be fully designed for Shanghai first), and outside vendors (ie coaster track manufacturer, etc) all play into the perceived "speed" of construction.

Blue Sky Cellar at DCA had a good video on this a few years back. They had all of the projects in computer models and could literally move the progress bar day by day to see the plan for what would be completed at what time.

All that crap didnt seem to slow them down when they built the ENTIRE Magic Kingdom, EPCOT, HS, DL (which were all larger and built more quickly) and they didnt have jazzy computers with simulated models and progress bars. Admiral Joe just got sh** done! Plain and simple. I love Disney, but Im not gonna make excuses for them when it takes 4 years to build a small addition.

 

[juan]

All that crap didnt seem to slow them down when they built the ENTIRE Magic Kingdom, EPCOT, HS, DL (which were all larger and built more quickly) and they didnt have jazzy computers with simulated models and progress bars. Admiral Joe just got sh** done! Plain and simple. I love Disney, but Im not gonna make excuses for them when it takes 4 years to build a small addition.

I think you missed the point I was trying to make with the computer models. It's has nothing to do with newer technology today versus what was available in the 50s, 70s, and 80s; it was just a point made on scheduling and only completing work to that schedule. For instance, if today was 6/1/11 and you typed in 10/1/11, you could see exactly how many foundations were poured, how many beams were installed, etc and everything that was built followed these schedules. It wasn't "get this finished ASAP" (which was more the philosophy when they built some of the parks).

For other projects that were completed faster, they built them faster because that is what the budget and schedule dictated.

If Disney said "we're going to build FLE and it will open in 1 year" and then it took 4 years, then yes, the pace does need to be questioned and people should be held accountable. But in this case, they said it would all be complete in 2014 and it is. Just because it took longer than people wanted or hoped, doesn't mean that Disney is in some bad state and needs to make excuses.

I'm not making excuses or defending Disney, but I'm just presenting a side to the discussion based on business practices of most industries today. My company does the exact same thing. We will produce product A in X time and it is produced in X time. Could we have produced it faster than X? Yes, but that's not how it was scheduled or budgeted.

I do share many of your feelings about the lack of progress and pace. I personally would like to see a lot more done across the property. I'm still quite upset with the current state of Epcot.
Especially JII:
<----------

 

[DinoInstitute]

All that crap didnt seem to slow them down when they built the ENTIRE Magic Kingdom, EPCOT, HS, DL (which were all larger and built more quickly) and they didnt have jazzy computers with simulated models and progress bars. Admiral Joe just got sh** done! Plain and simple. I love Disney, but Im not gonna make excuses for them when it takes 4 years to build a small addition.

But the thing is though, when they are using new technology (AA's, swinging) it could take a while to get it right. If the same tech was to be used in another new ride of the same scale, it should take about a year and a half to two years.

 

[DinoInstitute]

Especially JII:
<----------

Haha love that

 

[wdisney9000]

But the thing is though, when they are using new technology (AA's, swinging) it could take a while to get it right. If the same tech was to be used in another new ride of the same scale, it should take about a year and a half to two years.

Many of the rides and buildings they built back then we're also "new" tech and designs and they did a completely a better job of building and paying attention to detail.

 

[DinoInstitute]

Many of the rides and buildings they built back then we're also "new" tech and designs and they did a completely a better job of building and paying attention to detail.

True, true.

 

[wdisney9000]

For other projects that were completed faster, they built them faster because that is what the budget and schedule dictated.

I'm just presenting a side to the discussion based on business practices of most industries today. My company does the exact same thing. We will produce product A in X time and it is produced in X time. Could we have produced it faster than X? Yes, but that's not how it was scheduled or budgeted.

I totally get what ur saying but Disney made their name being different/better than the industry standard. Then they slowly lowered their own standards over time and it shows in many areas.

It reminds of when a great sports team has a long winning record and everybody knows they can't beat them. Then they loose a key player or two and a coach, all of the sudden that once great team is horrible. They may be using that same old winning playbook, but without the heart and drive, they won't be the same

 

[DinoInstitute]

I totally get what ur saying but Disney made their name being different/better than the industry standard. Then they slowly lowered their own standards over time and it shows in many areas.

It reminds of when a great sports team has a long winning record and everybody knows they can't beat them. Then they loose a key player or two and a coach, all of the sudden that once great team is horrible. They may be using that same old winning playbook, but without the heart and drive, they won't be the same

But I have a good feeling about the upcoming Disney generation. There are so many people on here that are going to try and become imagineers, and you know dang well that just about every single person on this forum wants to explode life into the new disney

 

[wdisney9000]

True, true.

True dat

 

[wdisney9000]

But I have a good feeling about the upcoming Disney generation. There are so many people on here that are going to try and become imagineers, and you know dang well that just about every single person on this forum wants to explode life into the new disney

All the creative minds in the world make little difference if theyre not given a proper budget

 

[DinoInstitute]

All the creative minds in the world make little difference if theyre not given a proper budget

And yet I love how they probably have millions of dollars just sitting on Igers desk.

 

[wdisney9000]

And yet I love how they probably have millions of dollars just sitting on Igers desk.

You know, I think it's awesome that Iger made $30 million last year (or whatever he made). I honestly love that about our country and he deserves it. What es me off is that he could still make that much money AND show WDW the love it deserves.

 

[kap91]

All that crap didnt seem to slow them down when they built the ENTIRE Magic Kingdom, EPCOT, HS, DL (which were all larger and built more quickly) and they didnt have jazzy computers with simulated models and progress bars. Admiral Joe just got sh** done! Plain and simple. I love Disney, but Im not gonna make excuses for them when it takes 4 years to build a small addition.

This argument comes up time and time again so I'll make my standard reply brief: just because you can build 36 attractions in 36 months does not mean you can build 1 attraction in 1 month.


Yes Disney of today builds stuff slower than in the past - but the difference is much less than people make it out to be. And how fast you CHOOSE to build something says nothing about your competency in the business. In fact, the Disney of old could be argued to be much less competent in construction, as many things missed Disney's self imposed deadlines. Just look at the state of Tomorrowland on opening day, or that Horizons missed opening by a year, etc.

 

[roj2323]

Can we get back to the topic of Avatar land construction progress please?

 

[DinoInstitute]

This argument comes up time and time again so I'll make my standard reply brief: just because you can build 36 attractions in 36 months does not mean you can build 1 attraction in 1 month.


Yes Disney of today builds stuff slower than in the past - but the difference is much less than people make it out to be. And how fast you CHOOSE to build something says nothing about your competency in the business. In fact, the Disney of old could be argued to be much less competent in construction, as many things missed Disney's self imposed deadlines. Just look at the state of Tomorrowland on opening day, or that Horizons missed opening by a year, etc.

I agree. And perhaps it could just be Uni working extra fast to show Disney up, creating the effect. And the quality is no doubt much greater now than it was before. Granted, we have newer tech now but still some of the long built stuff today could have been made then too. Just look at the themeing.

Compare the themeing of old fantasyland and new fantasyland