Next Big Thing
Well-Known Member
^^^It's definitely a good way to show how it takes money to make money.
Im pretty sure the funds for this and Star Wars were approved by the board 6 months ago when Tom Staggs and Iger took them on a tour of Cars Land at DCA:
On a related note: I can't wait until @marni1971 gets back and we hopefully can get some solid info on this.
So I am unfamiliar with the DL DCA redo after the first failed attempt at that park. When Anaheim decided to open the checkbook for that park, how was it handled from an advertising standpoint? Was there a big official announcement for DCA 2.0?
Was it like, "hey we got it wrong first time around so please give us a second chance!" Just curious as to how they handled that and if people expect this to be done in a similar manner or if it will be different
And why dwell in the past when you have fantastic, new attractions?No - it was leaked by Micechat and while things were announced, it was more about Disney PR. The DCA redo was in part local politics about the resort district and development Disney didn't want to happen. It was laid out as a long term plan to be done in chunks. D23 and the Bluesky Cellar were big avenues for fans to see what was coming, details, etc.
Just like everything else... 'we have a brand new re-imagined experience for you!' - the company didn't need to say 'its under performing, so here's a reboot' - everyone already knew it. It was a old song by that point and the company just promoted what new and great things were coming. It's PR man.. its all about the positive.
At the 2011 expo Lasseter did say that the park wasn't up to Disney standards.No - it was leaked by Micechat and while things were announced, it was more about Disney PR. The DCA redo was in part local politics about the resort district and development Disney didn't want to happen. It was laid out as a long term plan to be done in chunks. D23 and the Bluesky Cellar were big avenues for fans to see what was coming, details, etc.
Just like everything else... 'we have a brand new re-imagined experience for you!' - the company didn't need to say 'its under performing, so here's a reboot' - everyone already knew it. It was a old song by that point and the company just promoted what new and great things were coming. It's PR man.. its all about the positive.
At the 2011 expo Lasseter did say that the park wasn't up to Disney standards.
hang on, which new ones? (apart from 7dmt)And why dwell in the past when you have fantastic, new attractions?
So I am unfamiliar with the DL DCA redo after the first failed attempt at that park. When Anaheim decided to open the checkbook for that park, how was it handled from an advertising standpoint? Was there a big official announcement for DCA 2.0? Was it like, "hey we got it wrong first time around so please give us a second chance!" Just curious as to how they handled that and if people expect this to be done in a similar manner or if it will be different. Also, will that responsibility of selling this to the public be handled by Burbank or TDO?
The post I was responding to was talking about DCA. I was saying, why complain about DCA circa 2001 when the current DCA has fantastic, new attractions. I hope we feel the same way about DHS in 5 years.hang on, which new ones? (apart from 7dmt)
aaah gotcha!The post I was responding to was talking about DCA. I was saying, why complain about DCA circa 2001 when the current DCA has fantastic, new attractions. I hope we feel the same way about DHS in 5 years.
Hang about people have been saying that the B tickets that come with a Toy Story Playland will give more stuff for kids to do ... news flash two of the flat rides have height restrictions.
Agreed, it's definitely different. It is why I found it someone entertaining when Meg Crofton's letter regarding the GAC explicitly mentioned guest abuse. I would have expected, "we constantly re-evaluate, blah blah blah"Nothing shocking there when it's a safe thing to say since the company had already committed to redoing it. By that point it was ok to call the baby ugly. Not like Gurr and others who openly panned it when it was new.
Like when they straight-up fired the guy who screwed up the Aulani sales instead of him "resigning to spend more time with his family"... when Disney is frank, you know it's REALLY bad.Agreed, it's definitely different. It is why I found it someone entertaining when Meg Crofton's letter regarding the GAC explicitly mentioned guest abuse. I would have expected, "we constantly re-evaluate, blah blah blah"
Hang about people have been saying that the B tickets that come with a Toy Story Playland will give more stuff for kids to do ... news flash two of the flat rides have height restrictions.
Normally, I would agree, but I think we're at the point where adding anything to the area that includes some family rides would be good.I'm really surprised at the number of people here who seems to think a Toy Story Playland would be an acceptable development.
This is Disney, surely some basic and lightly themed, low capacity carnival rides should not be acceptable?
For info, the Playland people are calling for from the Paris Studio features just 3 rides, 2 of which have height restrictions (81 and 120cm).
If this is what is added to DHS, I for one will be extremely disappointed.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.