Andrew C
You know what's funny?
That isn't what is happening with RoA removal...that abhors change simply because it is change.
That isn't what is happening with RoA removal...that abhors change simply because it is change.
First, how would any of us have those specific metrics? You are asking an unanswerable question. Even for those that drill down to these types of details as part of their job with Disney, the nuance would be significant.Real in what measurable way? Do fewer people come? Do they spend less money? Can you cite an example where thematic inconsistency actually resulted in a measurable and recorded decline for any metric at the parks?
Second, oh my goodness, for you it is like if you can't attach a specific number to it, it doesn't matter...
This is….. this is an interesting take.And If you can believe that Mr Lincoln is thematically appropriate on Main Street, why can't you believe that Cars fit in the Frontier?
it's an interesting take but now that I think about it, they definitely have a point. It's by all means a time jump that doesn't really make sense.This is….. this is an interesting take.
You wanna add up all the Orlando parks vs So Cal? That was my point. It’s not even close
That wouldn't make any sense. Most people that visit the other parks also visit the Magic Kingdom (and most people that visit DCA also visit Disneyland), so adding them all up and pointing at that number would be statistical malpractice.
It's not like the MK had 17 million visitors, and then EPCOT had 11 million (hypothetical number) completely separate, unique visitors. Most of those 11 million would already be counted in the MK figure.
You are attempting to make a point to fit a certain narrative, without actually reading what he wrote.If someone says something is real, what's wrong in asking for proof?
I mean I have definitely seen a lot of jokes and memes throughout the internet of people hating ROA/Tom Sawyer. Have you not seen any of the memes of people saying "Disney is closing TSI & ROA, call me up and I'll fill them in myself" So it's not a positive impact for everyone. There are people who dislike it and want Cars much better, whether or not people want to accept that opinion. The question is indeed pretty much moot because its impossible to prove or disprove. ROA being filled in is not going to affect guest members, no matter how many people say that this is their "last straw" and "never going to Disney again". There will be just as many people who've never went who want to see the new Cars land, almost certainly more. And the merch sales will more than make up for the few people who don't want to come back.You are attempting to make a point to fit a certain narrative, without actually reading what he wrote.
How could he possibly have a metric in his hand to measure the impact of RoA or comparable park area? And also, are you going to pretend that RoA doesn't have an impact on guest experience just because the individual doesn't have a metric to provide? I think we should all be able to agree it does have a positive impact on guests, while at the same time debating whether or not that impact warrants keeping it.
Which attraction?When does it take place then?
I mean, my last straw is what recently reopened at Epcot, this just reaffirms my position. Yes, others will probably take my place, but there may be an overall tipping point eventually...ROA being filled in is not going to affect guest members, no matter how many people say that this is their "last straw" and "never going to Disney again".
Unless it is fully enclosed, it will be impossible *not* to hear it.I'm with you on that I don't believe we will be able to view and hear "cartoon cars" whizzing around from Frontierland or the Haunted Mansion.
My concern is the loss of the waterway, and what Disney is actually going to give us in its place.
How could he possibly have a metric in his hand to measure the impact of RoA or comparable park area? And also, are you going to pretend that RoA doesn't have an impact on guest experience just because the individual doesn't have a metric to provide or we can't put a specific number to it? I think we should all be able to agree it does have a positive impact on guests, while at the same time debating whether or not that impact warrants keeping it.
Real in what measurable way? Do fewer people come? Do they spend less money? Can you cite an example where thematic inconsistency actually resulted in a measurable and recorded decline for any metric at the parks?
Oh I read it. The statement that bad ride placement can erode the thematic coherence of the parks is nothing but spin. It's not real at all. That's why there are no real examples of it ever happening.
This is an amazing statement.Oh I read it. The statement that bad ride placement can erode the thematic coherence of the parks is nothing but spin. It's not real at all. That's why there are no real examples of it ever happening.
Real in what measurable way? Do fewer people come? Do they spend less money? Can you cite an example where thematic inconsistency actually resulted in a measurable and recorded decline for any metric at the parks?
This is an amazing statement.
That is just...not happening here...If you want to believe that there are some "rules" to theme park design as a way of validating a fear of change...
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.