-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
D23 Dissapointment
- Thread starter RememberTheMagic
- Start date
NoChesterHester
Well-Known Member
And that is exactly what they have been doing for years. It didn't help that when IOA originally opened it didn't dent their attendance. It made them feel invincible... arrogant.
doctornick
Well-Known Member
However, didn't they have contingency plans if IOA did impact their attendance/revenues? Surely even then, they had some level of arrogance about their status and they prepared for a worse case scenario. I've got to think that the powers that be are not so naive as to not even have some idea of what to do if they start to lose a significant amount of market share.
Anyway, we the consumers stand to win from Comcast's actions with Universal. At worse, there's some cool new options to experience in their parks. At best, it lights a fuse under WDW leadership and puts them on expansion mode -- potentially at a faster pace then they have tended to use. There's no reason that TDO couldn't enact a building plan at the same pace that Universal is doing if they wanted to devote the resources to do so.
Captain Chaos
Well-Known Member
Part of the Disney online fan psychosis??? LOL...
Pixiedustmaker
Well-Known Member
Here's what I see as pretty much undisputed facts regarding theme park construction and Disney.
1. There is growth opportunity in Asia, and other developing countries with an emerging middle class. Hence Disney built Hong Kong Disneyland, and is building Shanghai Disneyland. This is based on research, projections, etc. . . We all know that Robert Foster ('Bob Price') got a window on Main Street in Disneyland for, in part, predicting that Anaheim would be smack dab in the middle of population growth in Southern California.
2. The theme park industry really took a hit after 9/11. It has since recovered, but the economy also has been dragging. If Disney could get more growth out of a park/resort in the middle of Texas than Shanghai, don't you'd think they'd look at that first? It's a complex decision, but Disney has x amount of dollars they are willing to invest in a park/land . . . they need to put that money where they will get the most return.
3. Magic Kingdom has capacity issues, New Fantasyland was in good part a response to said capacity issues in the most visited theme park in the U.S.. Adding Avatarland at Animal Kingdom makes great sense, it has room for growth like that, and it is a needed capacity boost.
4. When attendance was flagging at WDW parks, in the past the solution was to build a big fancy new attraction. Such as Expedition Everest. I don't know how much EE increases the guest capacity of AK, but I would assume it is less than the completed version of NFL. If there is one thing that Disney loves, seriously, is having guests enter a theme park, having paid for an expensive ticket, and they spend a good chunk of their time enjoying the landscaping around the hub, shopping a little bit, strolling down Main Street. At this point, they haven't yet got on an attraction (which would increase wait times), or necessarily clogged up the major pathways yet. This is why these interactive games in the park are so popular with management, they give guests a reason to soak up the atmosphere without increasing wait time for rides.
Its kinda the arcade-effect in Disneyland. Plop a regular arcade down in Tomorrowland and some kids will spend a significant amount of time with the games, instead of riding Space Mountain an extra time or waiting in line for Star Tours. Of course, at some point you have so many guests that these little distractions along the way to big rides can't keep wait times from climbing above a comfortable/doable amount of time.
My Outloook on New Construction and Goals
Having said all this, you can see why I support (or rather more clearly understand) the construction of new lands/attractions on de novo (undeveloped) space. The situation in WDW isn't even funny anymore given how crowded the parks can get, and given that Disney has avoided adding new guest capacity: attractions, themed areas which act like a buffer/sponge, and restaurants with encourage guests to spend time enjoying the scenery.
You can see why Shanghai incorporates the mega-hub, the Fantasia Gardens. More space for firework/parade viewing, but it is also a cleverly designed people sponge. You get some isolated attractions in the middle of beautiful landscaping, guests aren't spending time running from attraction to attraction, but rather they "waste" time soaking up the sights. They have a more relaxed experience, and wait times drop for attractions as time is spent enjoying the scenery.
You’ve already seen this strategy expanded upon at the Magic Kingdom. Dumbo’s Circusland is a good balance of low-cost activities, landscaping/water play areas, shopping . . . make sense from a financial perspective as it reduces strain on the attractions. Double Dumbos also makes sense as one can go down for refurb while the other is running, plus you get double capacity and are just paying for upkeep on a relatively cheap ride.
WDW's Biggest Issue: I would say insufficient guest capacity. We can argue about detailed rate-of-change models with regards to growth at WDW vs. Uni, but they're both growing. MK's solution, (outside of NFL), is to do the interactive games (gives guests a reason to spend time in a line to stare at foliage in Adventureland), set it up so bigger spenders aren't *that* aggravated with the lines. NFL was in large part a guest capacity sponge, though they also marketed it, somewhat clumsily, as the next great thing. Avatarland will drive attendance and be a capacity sponge. The question is when should the next capacity sponge, i.e. land, be added to WDW? A lot of that will depend on growth projections, attendance, and the optics angle with regards to quality.
Pixiedustmaker
Well-Known Member
There's a big difference between market share and absolute number of guests. I guess if you invented the first pizza delivery service decades ago, you'd be behind in terms of market share today, but if you were also a big player like Domino's . . . life has gotten markedly better for you.
WDW attendance: 48 million a year, approximately, attendance up in 2012
USF/IOA attendance: 14 million
USF/IOA got a roughly 2.7 million guest boost from 2008, which is due in large part to Potterland.
WDW's attendance has gone up roughly 1.2 million from 2008. Improving economy helped.
I think a worse case scenario would be that USF/IOA's attendance goes up another 2.7 million in the next five years, and WDW's attendance would go from 48 million to around 45.5 million. Well, you also have yearly increased attendance due to a growing US population with a recovering economy. Heck, you have to also look at retirement of the baby boomers and other stuff to come up with a guess. I doubt that WDW's attendance would slip that much.
I think a middle of the road estimate would be that WDW's attendance goes up only to 49-50 million. This is with Avatarland/NFL, and improving economy, less than 1% forecasted growth, but a steady and sure stream of customers. (Looking at 1% growth we'd get closer to 50.5 million)
Even if WDW's attendance flatlined at 48 million, it would still, in five years, be much more than Uni's expected increase in attendance to 16.7 million. Given that the parks at WDW are bursting at the seams (record attendance last Easter I believe), Uni could from one point of view be seen as "helping" WDW deal with long lines. If every one of WDW's park hit capacity for most days of the year, you can bet they would be building more capacity fairly quickly.
bubbles1812
Well-Known Member
I skimmed that... And you still didnt address anything in my post. But it's pretty obvious you like hearing the sound of your own "voice." Must be hard for you to know that no one else cares. I get it though. You really like Asia.
Pixiedustmaker
Well-Known Member
Not sure where the question is. WDW gets 48 million guests a year, in total, Walt Disney Parks and resorts gets 126.5 million guests a year, and with time WDW's percentage of total guest attendance at Disney parks, worldwide, will decrease.
I've never been to "Asia", or any foreign Disney park besides DLP. Don't kill the messenger, any serious and comprehensive discussion of massive construction projects at WDW needs to look at the big picture.
Gabe1
Ivory Tower Squabble EST 2011. WINDMILL SURVIVOR
bubbles1812
Well-Known Member
Yay! Wonderful! More word vomit in the form of facts that you think support your point but don't... Yes, obviously if Disney builds other parks their % of guests goes down. Doesn't take a genius to figure that one out. Doesn't change what their flagship park and/or resort is, where the biggest amount of money is made. And doesn't give them a "pass" to let that resort go to crap and not address problems, or the fact that their competition is ramping out their game. That's just bad business.
Disney Springs is relatively inexpensive compared to what's going into DAK and what's being discussed for DHS. It also fills distinct needs for locals and international visitors. Domestic guests probably view the expansion less favorably than those two groups.And the boat load of bucks on the latest DTD Springs.
Gabe1
Ivory Tower Squabble EST 2011. WINDMILL SURVIVOR
Disney Springs inexpensive? The resort alone is going to cost a pretty penny. As for what they are putting in DAK, remember the Wharf? I'll believe DAK when it is built and we see what that expansion really gets whittled down to. Meanwhile DAK is just delays and speculation with a completion time frame that keeps drifting farther and farther away. DHS, we're discussing it plenty, Disney not so much, last I heard there are not any D23 Expo announcements this year...speaks volumes.
Um. What?
You obviously don't know what you're talking about. Sorry to be so blunt but it's well established that DAK has been firmly greenlit with a substantial budget. Do some reading before you pick up the snark.
Gabe1
Ivory Tower Squabble EST 2011. WINDMILL SURVIVOR
OK, I've missed a Disney Announcement, what projects exactly have been announced, time frame, etc, are going to break ground at DHS and what is the actual budget? When did Disney announce these projects?
Studios Fan
Active Member
I hope Disney announces the projects and fast-tracks them sooner rather than later. They need to take a lesson from their competition down the road.
Zweiland
Well-Known Member
He was talking about DAK, not DHS.
I said DAK, not DHS. Avatar was announced almost two years ago. The timeline has always been 2017 and still is 2017. The budget is somewhere in between Fantasyland and DCA expansion.
All I said was that Disney Springs is relatively inexpensive and then you started going after me with attitude about a phantom resort (?). Did I offend you in some way when I said:
bubbles1812
Well-Known Member
It has been greenlit... Though we aren't sure to what extent yet. The night show still doesn't have a green light at last check for instance. And he has a point. So long as construction hasn't started, there is always time for changes and whittling down. 2017... Yes that has been the date for awhile, but I don't think it has always been as you surmise. I've seen many dates since it was announced.
Gabe1
Ivory Tower Squabble EST 2011. WINDMILL SURVIVOR
It is highly questionable to be blunt who doesn't know what they are talking about.
DAK's "dollar" budget is pretty set. Now it's about the creatives getting in what they can within that budget. If the night show doesn't come to fruition, it's more likely because the E-ticket went over budget than the overall allocation getting slashed.