MK Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Once again creating a position no one here is advocating for.

You’re killing a lot of sea turtles with all the straw you seem to throw out there

…only because it’s a day ending in “Y”

 

[DisneyHead123]

Two things:

I agree with the politics aspect of it. That’s the 24/7 cycle combined with the infestation that is social media…things don’t get put to bed. Not gonna be better as the robots take over either…

So agree

Second: “Josh” is a disposable tool as all parks “heads” are. That’s what that job js for. Pay him no mind…will be gone in a few years. Maybe less?

Really? I still think Josh is next in line for Iger’s position, provided he can handle all the internal politics that are going to be intense in any high profile job like that. My theory is still that Chapek was supposed to be a protege but ended up wanting to do his own thing, so Josh is being trained prior to being moved into a CEO role, not after.

 

[rd805]

Really? I still think Josh is next in line for Iger’s position, provided he can handle all the internal politics that are going to be intense in any high profile job like that. My theory is still that Chapek was supposed to be a protege but ended up wanting to do his own thing, so Josh is being trained prior to being moved into a CEO role, not after.

Josh gets a lot of hate from the mega-fans, but seemingly is the best case scenario for the position IMO.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Really? I still think Josh is next in line for Iger’s position, provided he can handle all the internal politics that are going to be intense in any high profile job like that. My theory is still that Chapek was supposed to be a protege but ended up wanting to do his own thing, so Josh is being trained prior to being moved into a CEO role, not after.

The parks guy has zero power, zero real experience in entertainment…and serves as a public shield for the operation to the highest spending, most dedicated, easy to set off segment of fandom they depend on (except maybe Star Wars fans…but I’m not opening that can)…

They also conveniently are never “ready”……which would serve a dictator with no intention of leaving.

Let’s just watch it play?

 

[flynnibus]

It likely wouldn’t have the impact on revenue to justify the investment, if I had to guess.

So what is different between an attraction with LL that you assume will have an impact on revenue.. and one that won't?

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Josh gets a lot of hate from the mega-fans, but seemingly is the best case scenario for the position IMO.

I just googled/groked “best case scenario”…and no…he didn’t come up

It served two semi transparent agendas

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

So what is different between an attraction with LL that you assume will have an impact on revenue.. and one that won't?

At the current prices…probably one where they enslave your children to make the stuff for the giftshops?

…I better apply for a patent before somebody catches that idea.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

I’m very interested to see and hear about the actual impact of removing this river by people other than highly influential bloggers and locals, in other words the common guests.

I’m neither. The loss of the riverboat is the part that is unforgivable- just like the fountain of nations at Epcot.

But I’m guessing you have a reason my opinion doesn’t count.

 

[DisneyHead123]

Let’s just watch it play?

Sounds good. My money is still on Josh, if not for CEO then in something like a co-leadership role.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Sounds good. My money is still on Josh, if not for CEO then in something like a co-leadership role.

You might be right and it certainly serves the power “agenda”

But it’s a disastrous move. We’ve seen this play before

 

[monothingie]

So what is different between an attraction with LL that you assume will have an impact on revenue.. and one that won't?

It's a question with an open ended answer because circumstances are different. Disney eliminated LL on character M&G, a popular but low throughput attraction, but kept it for Philharmagic a not popular but high throughput attraction.

LL Revenue is in the hundreds of millions of dollars. LL Revenue is a key component of future attraction development. TSI and LB had high operating cost and never going to contribute to LL revenue. It was only after the success of LL for OI that nothing that could be repurposed for more profitable attractions, regardless of it could remain, became safe in the parks.

 

[Purduevian]

It's a question with an open ended answer because circumstances are different. Disney eliminated LL on character M&G, a popular but low throughput attraction, but kept it for Philharmagic a not popular but high throughput attraction.

LL Revenue is in the hundreds of millions of dollars. LL Revenue is a key component of future attraction development. TSI and LB had high operating cost and never going to contribute to LL revenue. It was only after the success of LL for OI that nothing that could be repurposed for more profitable attractions, regardless of it could remain, became safe in the parks.

I always assumed they eliminated Character LLs in an attempt to get more people into character meals.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I always assumed they eliminated Character LLs in an attempt to get more people into character meals.

I think it’s a factor

Also…long lines for characters keep people away from cash registers elsewhere

They try to fence post sit on somethings…still

Truth is they never want people in a 90 minute line…they want them to think about the line and book the skip…and the posted wait reinforces that behavior that gets them free money.

Nothing has changed since fast pass…lines are a loss. They lose money on so many fronts it’s hard to quantify fully.

But now the geniuses are trying to take double the problems and make four Times the money

 

[BrianLo]

Okay, for this argument to work, you would have to agree that the Cars franchise will pull in 600 more people per hour that weren't already going to be there. That's a very interesting claim, isn't it? Just to be clear, this expansion would have to increase the parks attendance by 8,400 PER DAY just for the cars land to not just break even which wouldn't be a "very, very bad idea" that would not be taken up by this ride. Which is an interesting argument but one I don't think is rooted in fact.

That’s not how that math works out. Every new guest needs to be able to get on at least 8 attractions, which was the historical barometer Eisner had utilized as what constituted a good day. I’d argue that’s soft and 10 would be better, but we’ll go with 8.

In your proposal, Cars can allow 1050 extra guests a day (8400/8). Or a little under 400k a year. Given Pandora increased DAK attendance by 3 million, it’s probable Cars on its own will induce way more demand than it adds capacity.

Villains will likely be better and accommodate another 1.5M-2M guests annually (in a truly perfect evenly distributed visiting pattern). But I think it’s questionable if even that is enough to keep up with the sheer demand boost it will cause.

This is not to say they should not build new things at MK. They absolutely should. But they need to stop taking one step backwards first every time they do.

 

[FigmentFan82]

Question I’m not sure I’ve seen been brought up, I think others have speculated that Villains Land may have some food options, but has there been any rumor or information on if there may be some type of food options for the Cars area?

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

That’s not how that math works out. Every new guest needs to be able to get on at least 8 attractions, which was the historical barometer Eisner had utilized as what constituted a good day. I’d argue that’s soft and 10 would be better, but we’ll go with 8.

In your proposal, Cars can allow 1050 extra guests a day (8400/8). Or a little under 400k a year. Given Pandora increased DAK attendance by 3 million, it’s probable Cars on its own will induce way more demand than it adds capacity.

Villains will likely be better and accommodate another 1.5M-2M guests annually (in a truly perfect evenly distributed visiting pattern). But I think it’s questionable if even that is enough to keep up with the sheer demand boost it will cause.

This is not to say they should not build new things at MK. They absolutely should. But they need to stop taking one step backwards first every time they do.

Replacements are a pricing tactic…it really shouldn’t be doubted after 15 years of it…

But up is down in the magic kingdom

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

This is not to say they should not build new things at MK. They absolutely should. But they need to stop taking one step backwards first every time they do.

Not saying this is the perfect idea….

But if they had done a true beyond without removing the River and island… they could have plussed both the island and the boat so they were more popular. maybe even add a second boat that was Villians themed? Who knows.

But yes…. Use the existing space better PLUS expand.

 

[monothingie]

I always assumed they eliminated Character LLs in an attempt to get more people into character meals.

Have they hit the baseline $70 per person character meals yet?

 

[Purduevian]

Have they hit the baseline $70 per person character meals yet?

for dinner
CRT is $88++ per adult...

 

[flynnibus]

It's a question with an open ended answer because circumstances are different. Disney eliminated LL on character M&G, a popular but low throughput attraction, but kept it for Philharmagic a not popular but high throughput attraction.

I'm not asking why Disney choses to have LL or not - you made the conclusion these attractions "were not able to be monetized with LL" to which you further said because doing so wouldn't make an impact on revenue. Ok, so come clean, why wouldn't these attractions be able to contribute with LL?

It's because what you know but won't say... Because they don't have enough demand and guest load to justify anyone paying for the privilege to use LL with them.

They couldn't be monetized because there was no excess guest demand for them. Disney could have added LL - but as you mention, it wouldn't drive any new revenue, because LL on a ride with virtually no wait is pointless, and guests know that.

The attractions were not creating guest demand at sufficient levels - hence they were eye'd for redevelopment.