MK Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

[Chi84]

If no data exists, that's fine. But don't present something as fact when there is nothing to support it other than assumptions or anecdotal evidence. I was not commenting on the "underutilization" of this area as a reason why this change is being made; that has been beaten to death in this thread. I was simply commenting on his presentation of his claim as fact, when it is still an opinion based on circumstantial evidence.

Facts are often established by circumstantial evidence.

There is a difference between circumstantial evidence and anecdotal evidence.

 

[Disstevefan1]

It’s not misinformation. It actually is fact.

On any given day the percentage of MK guests who rode the riverboat was in the single digits.

its the "Two attractions that most guests didn’t even do once." cant be verified.

But I get it, some can call misinformation fact, and some can not.

And that's OK, it makes it fun and folks must defend what Disney does.

 

[Raineman]

its the "Two attractions that most guests didn’t even do once." cant be verified.

But I get it, some can call misinformation fact, and some can not.

And that's OK, it makes it fun and folks must defend what Disney does.

I've been trying to explain that I was just referring to what you bolded in that quote, but no one wants to listen. I'm not wasting any more time on it, though. Not worth it.

 

[JMcMahonEsq]

"Two attractions that most guests didn’t even do once." The lack of a fastpass option, the budget considerations, the per hour capacity-none of that provides conclusive, irrefutable evidence to support that specific claim that he made. Does all of that support the idea that less people are visiting TSI/ROA now, and that Disney made this decision because of that and knows that they will make alot more $$ with Cars attractions? Absolutely. And in most legal systems, circumstantial evidence on it's own cannot irrefutably prove anything-it can be a key factor, but circumstantial evidence can be influenced by biases and assumptions, and should never be used to fully prove or disprove anything; it is very effective when combined with direct evidence. There have been many cases that have been overturned where the conviction was based only on circumstantial evidence. And I unless there is direct evidence that TSI & ROA were "Two attractions that most guests didn’t even do once.", it's not a fact in my eyes. Anyone else can believe what they want.

Lets unpack alot of what is wrong with this post.

First, no case has ever been overturned based upon circumstantial evidence. Now I could go an pull out various rules of civil procedure, appellate decisions cite to the proposition that circumstantial evidence doesn't form a basis for overturning a decision, and that there is no grounds to object/exclude evidence because it is circumstantial, but i won't because 1) its a very basic tenant of jurisprudence, 2) its not worth my time, and 3) no one on this board, let alone you, are paying for the time to pull up the research.

Second, no one needs irrefutable evidence to support a fact, and certainly none is needed on a public message board forum. Hell even if he did happen to have certain utilization data, and for some reason he hated his job and didn't mind revealing it here, someone could still refute it. You could argue the time period was too short, or the data is skewed due to the time of year, ect. The hilarity is that you haven't come up with anything to contract his factual assertion.

Third facts do not care about the eyes of the beholder. Facts simply are. You have some support to contradict his statement of fact...lets here it. Do you have insider data you are not sharing with the class? Do you have anything to contradict the idea that people weren't doing the attractions?

 

[Disstevefan1]

My kids did TSI once when they were about 9 & 7 years old and that was enough for them. My daughter found it "boring" and my son, while he said it was "cool", also said it took too much time waiting for the rafts to get back and forth to the island. It was a time consuming attraction to be sure.

By my math once not zero.

My family did it several times so we made up for it

My kid even found the paint brush... If you know, you know.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

It was a time consuming attraction to be sure.

So will the cars ride. Unless you buy LL. Oh wait…. That’s the point!

*I actually don’t buy the whole LL conspiracy 100%… but it was too easy!

 

[Nickm2022]

I don;t think I have ever thought about this before some how but is there any dining/food locations in this expansion (obv for villains there is, but talking cars area)

 

[mattpeto]

I don;t think I have ever thought about this before some how but is there any dining/food locations in this expansion (obv for villains there is, but talking cars area)

I think a QS and/or snack stands are locks, but I don't think anything was confirmed.

Would be nice to add some Cozy Cones at the very least.