News 'Beyond Big Thunder Mountain' Blue Sky concept revealed for Magic Kingdom

[orky8]

How does it logically not make sense?

This is like the discussion on the impact of Mario in the new park.

Surprise, surprise, Disney super-fans who don’t care about Mario assume not many else in the world do, either, despite all evidence to the contrary.

Just go to Target and look on the Lego isle, is there more space for Mario sets or Star Wars?

In mine, Star Wars has a display but Mario has more shelf space for actual sets to buy.

Look at the fruit snacks in your grocery store. Do you see Mickey and friends branded ones? How about Mario?

Who has their own Spaghetti O's?

Nah - Mario must not be popular with kids these days at all.

That's a few small examples but look at the retail space devoted to Nintendo stuff between Target and Walmart; not just in the electronics section but in toys, household goods, clothing (shirts and little boy's underoos), even the checkout line space.

WDW has a land and ultra expensive resort devoted to the least popular parts of their Star Wars IP and weirdly enough, nothing for their most popular which also happens to have more hours of content (Mando).

They have a new attraction based on Pixars 10th most popular movie while half that rank as more popular aren't served in the parks because that one was cheaper to clone.

They just opened the Guardian's ride for a fairly popular segment of their marvel franchise that's about to see only it's third (and last) movie devoted to these characters.

Meanwhile, IOA has Velosicoaster based on the Jurassic World IP which as a franchise has trounced GOTG (the first Jurasic Word did 1.67 billion in box office compared to the original Guardians which did 773 million) despite being Transformers-level dumb.

They have Hagrids which is an insanely popular attraction (with reliable up-time) in an insanely popular land based on an insanely popular IP.

In terms of appeal to the masses, they've been getting a lot right lately while Disney's been saving money by cloning attractions for IP the public hasn't been clamoring for and spending half a decade to build more affordable affordable quasi-attractions like the Moana water walk-through and the center garden for Epcot.

Anyway, as for those attendance numbers, they’re compiled by the TEA and nobody in the industry ever disputes them, including Disney.


*I think the Transformers movies are junk just like I think the new Jurassic World movies are junk, just like I think the FATF movies are junk but I have to accept by their box office numbers that I'm not the target audience. Disney announces Toy Story 5 and the world cries "WHY?!". Meanwhile, Universal is probably cooking up something like FATF 100 featuring Vin Diesel and his turbo-charged walker with nitro-filled tennis balls on the feet where he races someone to save humanity on Pluto and people will be like "BRING IT!)

First, let me say, I fully agree with almost everything you have said. Now, let me also say, IP wouldn't matter as much if the attractions are well built. But, Disney is failing pretty hard there, too, recently. Disney is often using IP as a crutch to try to draw people to mediocre attractions and, worse as you pointed out, using the wrong IP because they can clone it so it's theoretically cheaper. Flight of Passage - great attraction, so doesn't matter if the IP had fallen off everyone's radar. In fact, I'd argue that attraction would be just as popular even if the Avatar movies never existed. Splash Mountain was an obscure IP, but a great ride. Haunted Mansion, Jungle Cruise, Thunder Mountain, Everest - great rides, no IP.

 

[Tha Realest]

First, let me say, I fully agree with almost everything you have said. Now, let me also say, IP wouldn't matter as much if the attractions are well built. But, Disney is failing pretty hard there, too, recently. Disney is often using IP as a crutch to try to draw people to mediocre attractions and, worse as you pointed out, using the wrong IP because they can clone it so it's theoretically cheaper. Flight of Passage - great attraction, so doesn't matter if the IP had fallen off everyone's radar. In fact, I'd argue that attraction would be just as popular even if the Avatar movies never existed. Splash Mountain was an obscure IP, but a great ride. Haunted Mansion, Jungle Cruise, Thunder Mountain, Everest - great rides, no IP.

FOP offers a unique spectacle. As do some of the classics you mention. How many other attractions can say the same?

 

[Brer Panther]

Well, does Frozen Ever After offer a "unique spectacle"? You can sit in a boat and float by animatronics on several other rides at Disney World.

 

[ToTBellHop]

What would they do about the Hall of Presidents and the Riverboat?

Do you think they want to keep HoP forever? Riverboat could stay as several Disney films have one.

 

[Rich Brownn]

Yes, the numbers are correct; however, I would argue that they don't tell the entire story, since they are pulled from the 2021 calendar year, during part of which Disney was still heavily limiting attendance due to COVID and Universal was not.

It will be very interesting to see the 2022 numbers.

Supposedly limiting attendance and yet lines were just as long as always...

 

[lazyboy97o]

I’ve played at least some of every mainline Mario game starting from the first Mario Bros all the way through Odyssey and while he is iconic, he has always felt empty. There is no character there, no developed personality. Saying “Waahoo” or muttering an occasional phrase in a stereotypical Italian accent doesn’t form a “person”. It is all the other characters that do the story telling which is on purpose as Mario Is meant to be a vessel for the player. He might be wildly recognizable but I’m not so sure he is the draw some believe.

But the big lesson that Universal learned with Hogsmead is that people want to be a character in a universe. They don’t want to just watch, people actually do want to participate.

 

[999th Happy Haunt]

Do you think they want to keep HoP forever? Riverboat could stay as several Disney films have one.

Ugh. Hall of Presidents is such an iconic and truly impressive attraction. Would hate to see a Magic Kingdom without it.

 

[MrPromey]

First, let me say, I fully agree with almost everything you have said. Now, let me also say, IP wouldn't matter as much if the attractions are well built. But, Disney is failing pretty hard there, too, recently. Disney is often using IP as a crutch to try to draw people to mediocre attractions and, worse as you pointed out, using the wrong IP because they can clone it so it's theoretically cheaper. Flight of Passage - great attraction, so doesn't matter if the IP had fallen off everyone's radar. In fact, I'd argue that attraction would be just as popular even if the Avatar movies never existed. Splash Mountain was an obscure IP, but a great ride. Haunted Mansion, Jungle Cruise, Thunder Mountain, Everest - great rides, no IP.

Whole heatedly agree with you here, too.

IP in the movie parks makes sense because they're supposed to be based on movie things which lend themselves to being IP heavy but i miss the days of entirely original quailty attractions, too and I agree, the IP, especially for Disney, is often the crutch more often than not, now. :/

 

[MrPromey]

FOP offers a unique spectacle. As do some of the classics you mention. How many other attractions can say the same?

It's funny when you think about it.

FOP as the ride which was co-developed by James Cameron, works the exact same way the movies do - as an experience.

That's why #2 is steadily moving up the charts even though a lot of people forgot about #1 after it left theaters - it's something to experience in theaters.

They made the ride like he makes the movies and it could have been about just about anything but with that level of detail, immersiveness, intensity, and scale, the IP was frankly, irrelevant.

If only modern Disney took that approach with every new major attraction they worked on.

Maybe James Cameron needs to become an Imagineer.*

*not to dismiss Joe Rohde's hand in this. He was of course, instrumental which seems obvious when you consider the end results of everything he was and wasn't involved with over the last 15 or so years. He managed to make a highly controversial change to an iconic ride in California Adventure that many now admit they prefer to what was originally there. Meanwhile we get an entirely original massive build with the same IP over here managed by others and people describe it as a better Space Mountain which isn't an intentional dig but suggests they totally missed the mark on what they were going for.

 

[MrPromey]

But the big lesson that Universal learned with Hogsmead is that people want to be a character in a universe. They don’t want to just watch, people actually do want to participate.

And this is where something based on a video game comes into play (pun intended).

How will the movie do?

We'll see but I doubt it'll struggle.

As far as the land, it's perfect because in the games, you're not passive at all which, for the purposes of interaction, translates better to a theme park experience than a movie because you can expect your experience in the land to be determined by your own actions, much like your experience in a game.

It lends itself completely to guest participation because ultimately, the stories are week as a result of being player driven and for most who don't end up completing/beating the games, open-ended. That gives them a lot more room to do stuff than something where the audience knows the traditional story, knows all the beats and knows how things should play out.

 

[MrPromey]

Logical meaning applying that list to the parks right now (for 2022 and 2023). That's why I said it doesn't make logical sense and it rings true. I didn't realize it was pulling from TEA and that it was an outdated list from 2021 which is an anomaly. The way the list was used seemed to imply Universal is almost overtaking Disney right now, that's not what's happening at all. While they've made gains (and I love it), it's grossly misleading because Disney has pretty much returned to 2019 numbers. However, we don't have an accurate picture until 2022's comes out, and to use either 2019 or 2021's report is inaccurate to make broad statements.

Ah, then that makes sense given that context since COVID caps at Disney were limiting people. I know firsthand since I went to UOR and WDW during the summer of 2021 and how busy the parks were (except for HWS, WDW was dead and UOR was swamped).

That list is highly misleading of how popular the parks are. I assumed it was for 2022, which I guarantee you, Universal would be significantly lower on that list if it was. Universal is probably around as popular now, but again, logically, they're going to be lower on that list because Disney has had way more attendance since 2021 due to caps going away. Just look at the numbers from 2019.

DLP, Disneyland, Tokyo, Universal Japan, etc. are all way higher than what they seem to be on that list today. It's a wildly outdated picture into the parks over the last year because it's 2 years old.

Until we know the attendance numbers from 2022, we don't really have an accurate picture of which parks are more popular right now.

I wasn't talking about Mario vs. Mickey. Mario is one the the undisputed largest IPs in the world and the Nintendo brand as a whole is even more so, so don't really get your rant. Was just commenting that the COVID years are outliers and are awful gauges for the year since.

Again, we'll see. It's still strange how MK maintained it's top spot despite allegedly being capped while the other three slid so much.

I'm not sure where the logic is in that.

Anyway, my point with the Mario "rant" (which has been discussed ad-nauseam over the last several pages of this thread about the blue sky announcement for MK) is Disney super-fans seem to have a huge blind spot for anything that isn't Disney.

They say weird things like that it isn't logical Disney isn't #1 across the board because - I don't know, I guess it isn't possible in their minds that parks that are left torn up for years on end and which have gotten weird updates based more on money than on fan attention could slip in popularity to competitors that are focused more on their guests and that don't have a pattern of over-promising and under-delivering like Disney has in recent years.

Anyway, the most recent numbers are the most recent numbers. Disney was already losing ground four years ago.

We'll see what the next set of numbers show.

Logically, they could change or they could stay the same.

Epcot did get Guardians, after all, which will give them some boost.

 

[SplashJacket]

Again, we'll see. It's still strange how MK maintained it's top spot despite allegedly being capped while the other three slid so much.

I'm not sure where the logic is in that.

Anyway, my point with the Mario "rant" (which has been discussed ad-nauseam over the last several pages of this thread about the blue sky announcement for MK) is Disney super-fans seem to have a huge blind spot for anything that isn't Disney.

They say weird things like that it isn't logical Disney isn't #1 across the board because - I don't know, I guess it isn't possible in their minds that parks that are left torn up for years on end and which have gotten weird updates based more on money than on fan attention could slip in popularity to competitors that are focused more on their guests and that don't have a pattern of over-promising and under-delivering like Disney has in recent years.

Anyway, the most recent numbers are the most recent numbers. Disney was already losing ground four years ago.

We'll see what the next set of numbers show.

You can make that argument without displaying skewed data.

The extremely poor performance of Universal Studios Japan (due to covid restrictions that we’re ignoring) could point to a downfall of Universal.

It doesn’t, but that data can be interpreted many different ways, especially because it really doesn’t tell much at all.

Universal has made made market share gains, but Disney doesn’t really seem to care. Any growth since 2020 is hard to quantify without updated figures.

It’s good for Universal to make gains on Disney and create experiences that attract new guests, and we can see evidence of that without skewing misrepresentative data.

 

[MrPromey]

You can make that argument without displaying skewed data.

The extremely poor performance of Universal Studios Japan (due to covid restrictions that we’re ignoring) could point to a downfall of Universal.

It doesn’t, but that data can be interpreted many different ways, especially because it really doesn’t tell much at all.

Universal has made made market share gains, but Disney doesn’t really seem to care. Any growth since 2020 is hard to quantify without updated figures.

It’s good for Universal to make gains on Disney and create experiences that attract new guests, and we can see evidence of that without skewing misrepresentative data.

I'm displaying the only data we have.

As I said before - lies, damn lies, and statistics.

Again, Disney was already losing ground to Universal at least as far back as 2019.

We'll see what future numbers hold and go from there - I'll be happy to admit I was wrong if I'm wrong. That said, caps seem like they would have affected the MK the most if they were going to have a major impact on any of Disney's park numbers, wouldn't they?

Why didn't they?

And even still, caps were a Disney decision based as much or more on their inability to staff (which they still have) as anything related to social distancing.

We'll never know what these caps actually were and now Disney says they are keeping the reservation system for the "guest experience" so... caps are forever and I guess if they still don't look great with the newest numbers, people will argue attendance numbers don't matter anymore at all?

Again, MK managed to handily hold it's spot - nothing else even remotely close - despite "skewed" "misrepresentation" of data and the fact that more often than not, park reservations left it as the one people usually couldn't get into.

That said, I believe my argument still stands - Disney needs to invest in the other three parks far more than they do the MK, at this point.

Despite it's alleged cap, just like the other three, it's attendance didn't slide the way theirs did in comparison to the competition.

The MK is not going to lose attendance as a result of anything the competition does in the foreseeable future but the other three are likely to lose attendance as a result.

The fact that this third park opening makes Universal appear like a viable destination alternative for a lot of people should be worrying Disney because what Disney doesn't need is the MK becoming the add-on day or two for a Universal trip which I'm in no way claiming will become the majority of guests to Orlando but will definitely become a new vacation pattern for some that had previously done it the other way around.

We're past the half-decade point since Pandora opened at AK. They have since closed an attraction without a replacement, losing capacity in the process with conservation station on life support as filler.

They need to be breaking ground there, first, most likely and then going back to revist the other two - again, not at MK.

 

[MrPromey]

... I hope Epic Universe makes Disney feel the heat and that it's a phenomenal theme park. Better for the consumer overall.

Couldn't agree more.

The best thing for Disney fans was Universal coming to Florida and spooking Disney, even if they did show up intially with kind of a thud.

That said, they've (Disney) been locked in this blue ocean strategy for a couple of decades now where they seem to think they're essentially, impenetrable which is horrible for fans/customers.

It's hard to tell what reality is anymore with youtubers and mommy-bloggers losing their s_!t over a new cupcake or pair of Mickey ears like it's the second coming but their forced enthusiasm does seem to have an impact on the perception many fans have on the state of things.

Again though, to bring it back to the point of the thread, I don't think the MK needs additional investment at this time (Beyond Big Thunder Mountain) while the other three need way more than they're getting.

The Universal stuff, if they are not careful, is just going to widen the divide that already exists between MK and the other three.

 

[James Alucobond]

It's hard to tell what reality is anymore with youtubers and mommy-bloggers losing their over a new cupcake or pair of Mickey ears like it's the second coming but their forced enthusiasm does seem to have an impact on the perception many fans have on the state of things.

Probably just me being an old man, but vlogging is generally insufferable no matter the subject matter.

 

[gorillaball]

Again, we'll see. It's still strange how MK maintained it's top spot despite allegedly being capped while the other three slid so much.

I'm not sure where the logic is in that.

Anyway, my point with the Mario "rant" (which has been discussed ad-nauseam over the last several pages of this thread about the blue sky announcement for MK) is Disney super-fans seem to have a huge blind spot for anything that isn't Disney.

They say weird things like that it isn't logical Disney isn't #1 across the board because - I don't know, I guess it isn't possible in their minds that parks that are left torn up for years on end and which have gotten weird updates based more on money than on fan attention could slip in popularity to competitors that are focused more on their guests and that don't have a pattern of over-promising and under-delivering like Disney has in recent years.

Anyway, the most recent numbers are the most recent numbers. Disney was already losing ground four years ago.

We'll see what the next set of numbers show.

Logically, they could change or they could stay the same.

Epcot did get Guardians, after all, which will give them some boost.

I agree with some of your points, others I'm highly skeptical of - call me delusional, maybe that's accruate.

I do agree that some Disney super fans discount the popularity of Mario.

However, as has been said 100 times and needs said 1000 more times, a great IP or great move does not equate to a great land any more than a mediocre IP equates to a bad land. EXECUTION matters above all else.

Now your attendance numbers I'm just not seeing. I wouldn't doubt UO and IOA jumping Epcot/HS/AK... but when I see your list has Disneyland at #5 it makes me question the validity of the entire thing. Below #'s from the 2019 TEA reports, not some partial period that may or may not be in the middle of a pandemic.

 

[Rush]

EU is going to add another half day park ride wise.

This is absolutely wild giving what we know is coming to EU. Wild. And doesn't make your point across either since 3/4 of Disney's parks are the same or lower than EU's ride count.

 

[MrPromey]

I agree with some of your points, others I'm highly skeptical of - call me delusional, maybe that's accruate.

I do agree that some Disney super fans discount the popularity of Mario.

However, as has been said 100 times and needs said 1000 more times, a great IP or great move does not equate to a great land any more than a mediocre IP equates to a bad land. EXECUTION matters above all else.

Now your attendance numbers I'm just not seeing. I wouldn't doubt UO and IOA jumping Epcot/HS/AK... but when I see your list has Disneyland at #5 it makes me question the validity of the entire thing. Below #'s from the 2019 PUBLISHED TEA reports, not some partial period that may or may not be in the middle of a pandemic.

View attachment 700223

I agree completely about how a great IP does not carry a land or attraction. Both Toy Story Land and the majority of Galaxy's Edge show current Disney management's belief that the IP can make up for execution with their own projects, though.

Universal on the other hand, has a pretty good recent record with their handling of IP based attractions so I do have a little more faith in them right now.

I'm the first to admit I've soured on Disney but that doesn't mean I want to see them fail or that I'm rooting for the competition. What I want is for them to go back to doing great things rather than trying to extract pennies out of guest while working on new systems to shuffle people around like mindless cattle.

My semi-recent showing of appreciation for Universal stems from having APs with them for the fist time in about a decade and being utterly shocked at the improvements to conditions in those parks and how much less stressful a visit there is compared to what I've come to expect a park experience to be from going to Disney.

I feel like I was a frog in a pot of water that was slowly set to boil and didn't appreciate how hot it was getting until I got thrown into another one that wasn't being heated.

For what it's worth, those aren't my numbers, they're the most current numbers from TEA as found in the link I referenced in my initial post.

 

[orky8]

Couldn't agree more.

The best thing for Disney fans was Universal coming to Florida and spooking Disney, even if they did show up intially with kind of a thud.

That said, they've been locked in this blue ocean strategy for a couple of decades now where they seem to think they're essentially, impenetrable which is horrible for fans/customers.

It's hard to tell what reality is anymore with youtubers and mommy-bloggers losing their over a new cupcake or pair of Mickey ears like it's the second coming but their forced enthusiasm does seem to have an impact on the perception many fans have on the state of things.

Again though, to bring it back to the point of the thread, I don't think the MK needs additional investment at this time (Beyond Big Thunder Mountain) while the other three need way more than they're getting.

The Universal stuff, if they are not careful, is just going to widen the divide that already exists between MK and the other three.

The bolded is where I disagree. MK needs added capacity. People are going to keep coming to MK and Disney needs to stop playing their artificial shell game to try to shuffle them around but instead add attraction capacity. BUT, it doesn't need to be expensive E-ticket draws. It needs to be more C/D tickets, like Little Mermaid (but hopefully better done). They need large capacity attractions to help suck up the people that are coming rather than continuing to degrade their product/make it more expensive to try to push people away. A theater show (with a main street bypass as a bonus). A (gasp) nighttime parade. Things that will suck up people and give them things to do. Clone the Disneyland dark rides if they want to make it look cheaper on paper.

Data I found online says MK attendance in 2009 was roughly 17M people, in 2015 and onwards (not counting 2020/21 covid years) it was 20M and almost 21M in 2019. There was a 20% rise in attendance and no real capacity increases. Going back further and I imagine the numbers are even more dramatic. Since the additional of Splash Mountain 30 years ago, Magic Kingdom has not increased its attraction capacity. Attendance, though, has increased dramatically. Magic Kingdom needs to bring attraction capacity to visitor ratio back to a reasonable level.

And, yes, the other 3 parks better get building to compete with Universal - I completely agree with you on that element from previous posts - because I do believe Universal is about to steal large amounts of attendance from those parks.

 

[MrPromey]

The bolded is where I disagree. MK needs added capacity. People are going to keep coming to MK and Disney needs to stop playing their artificial shell game to try to shuffle them around but instead add attraction capacity. BUT, it doesn't need to be expensive E-ticket draws. It needs to be more C/D tickets, like Little Mermaid (but hopefully better done). They need large capacity attractions to help suck up the people that are coming rather than continuing to degrade their product/make it more expensive to try to push people away. A theater show (with a main street bypass as a bonus). A (gasp) nighttime parade. Things that will suck up people and give them things to do. Clone the Disneyland dark rides if they want to make it look cheaper on paper.

Data I found online says MK attendance in 2009 was roughly 17M people, in 2015 and onwards (not counting 2020/21 covid years) it was 20M and almost 21M in 2019. There was a 20% rise in attendance and no real capacity increases. Going back further and I imagine the numbers are even more dramatic. Since the additional of Splash Mountain 30 years ago, Magic Kingdom has not increased its attraction capacity. Attendance, though, has increased dramatically. Magic Kingdom needs to bring attraction capacity to visitor ratio back to a reasonable level.

And, yes, the other 3 parks better get building to compete with Universal - I completely agree with you on that element from previous posts - because I do believe Universal is about to steal large amounts of attendance from those parks.

I get your point.

Me saying they don't need to be investing in the MK is an overstatement of my position.

What I should have said was, they need more investment across the whole property but the other three is where they need it most because again, those are going to be the ones Universal potentially hurts and they're reservation system trying to push people from MK to the other three isn't going to work if people aren't planning vacations that are exclusively MK.

If you only have one or two days earmarked for the mouse and you want to go to MK, is them trying to push you into Epcot going to make you pick Epcot?

Maybe, maybe not but I wouldn't want to be an executive with my bonus tied to those odds.

So yeah, I think they need to expand everywhere but the attraction list for MK already dwarfs the other three (shows included).Just looking at the park maps, there is WAY more to do in MK already so of course, nostalgia, magic™, park-eveyone-thinks-of aside, of course, guests are going to choose the park that appears to offer the most bang for their buck when they don't know where to go unless someone is a big Star Wars fan and wants to roll the dice, there.

Put another way, if you bulldozed the other three today, MK would continue to thrive. Does anyone here feel that any of the other three would continue their current numbers if that was the only Disney park left in Florida?

I don't and I think that needs to change.