• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

Disney buys 1000 acres of land

SteveAZee

Well-Known Member
That can never be done at mgm...it is a tough sell at dak...and they’ve rotted the piling out from underneath Epcot and making that hard.

After all this stuff opens...not a lot will have changed. And probably the best pure attraction from a crowd use level will end up being tron...which conveniently is in mk.
It seems like the push for IP everywhere is to draw people to the other parks... adding Frozen to Epcot to draw families with kids there and away from MK, to add Star Wars to HS to draw people away... force people to visit all four parks somewhat evenly so they can hit all the 'highlights', which in some (many?) people's view are rides with name recognition, i.e. IP.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Well-Known Member
Advertisement
It seems like the push for IP everywhere is to draw people to the other parks... adding Frozen to Epcot to draw families with kids there and away from MK, to add Star Wars to HS to draw people away... force people to visit all four parks somewhat evenly so they can hit all the 'highlights', which in some (many?) people's view are rides with name recognition, i.e. IP.
Oh I don’t dispute your interpretation...and thank you for intelligence instead of responding like a nuisance...

I mean from a logistics standpoint it is basically impossible for any park to have the capabilities of magic kingdom except EPCOT.

Those two stuck to the master plan of the concept...the other two deviated which makes it impossible.

I was there last week...and as I’ve said till I’m blue in the face - studios is not Big enough. Size wise and support layout. They “ripped it apart” without addressing the fundamental reality that it is not big enough to handle a crowd of the older sisters. And by building boutique hotels and gondolas and new roadways...they have ensured it never will be. It’s abour time and space...they don’t have it there. 15 mil a year would be a gridlock nightmare...20 like mk is impossible.

Dak has the physical space...but they shorted the build. Blame goofy joe for that...but it doesn’t matter. The reality - as Eisner was strongly discouraged from crossing in 1994 - is that zoos are always a tough sell. That’s why they are non-profit things run of tax money in most places. That’s the history of it. Dak has that problem...theme appeal. I like the park...but the die is cast. To make it a draw anywhere close to mk (it’s not...but better) would require a several billion dollar investment and complete buildout loaded with stuff. It never makes any financial sense and never will. Hopefully they get “a land”...and more good attractions. But to do what is suggested - really dent mk - it would take dropping like islands of adventure into it...that kinda bulk. Doesn’t make sense.

Epcot has the bones/infrastructure...but they’ve let the skin and muscles get picked off.

They got to a point - around 99 - where they should have said “Alright...the park is good enough for its concept...now we have to reinvent it and fill it out”

They didn’t...it’s a labor of love the stock wonks wouldn’t tolerate. I think limited IP Infusion is what we will say and therefore only moderate relative attendance gains.

I’d love New countries and a complete redesign of futureworld - often fabricated into “plans” on sites such as this - but that one you have to believe with your EYES...not your heart. It shouldn’t be a controversial stance but often is.
 

SteveAZee

Well-Known Member
Oh I don’t dispute your interpretation...and thank you for intelligence instead of responding like a nuisance...

I mean from a logistics standpoint it is basically impossible for any park to have the capabilities of magic kingdom except EPCOT.

Those two stuck to the master plan of the concept...the other two deviated which makes it impossible.

I was there last week...and as I’ve said till I’m blue in the face - studios is not Big enough. Size wise and support layout. They “ripped it apart” without addressing the fundamental reality that it is not big enough to handle a crowd of the older sisters. And by building boutique hotels and gondolas and new roadways...they have ensured it never will be. It’s abour time and space...they don’t have it there. 15 mil a year would be a gridlock nightmare...20 like mk is impossible.

Dak has the physical space...but they shorted the build. Blame goofy joe for that...but it doesn’t matter. The reality - as Eisner was strongly discouraged from crossing in 1994 - is that zoos are always a tough sell. That’s why they are non-profit things run of tax money in most places. That’s the history of it. Dak has that problem...theme appeal. I like the park...but the die is cast. To make it a draw anywhere close to mk (it’s not...but better) would require a several billion dollar investment and complete buildout loaded with stuff. It never makes any financial sense and never will. Hopefully they get “a land”...and more good attractions. But to do what is suggested - really dent mk - it would take dropping like islands of adventure into it...that kinda bulk. Doesn’t make sense.

Epcot has the bones/infrastructure...but they’ve let the skin and muscles get picked off.

They got to a point - around 99 - where they should have said “Alright...the park is good enough for its concept...now we have to reinvent it and fill it out”

They didn’t...it’s a labor of love the stock wonks wouldn’t tolerate. I think limited IP Infusion is what we will say and therefore only moderate relative attendance gains.

I’d love New countries and a complete redesign of futureworld - often fabricated into “plans” on sites such as this - but that one you have to believe with your EYES...not your heart. It shouldn’t be a controversial stance but often is.
I think I agree with most of what you've said. For me, they're trying to make as much money as possible with the resources they have been given, so current management's approach to 'optimize profits' has done most of what we have been left with. I do think it's odd that people are surprised by the price increases on tickets... they're investing $3B+ in the parks, so in theory there's higher value for the visitor. Raising prices (in theory) may also help with some of the crowding issues. From a consumer's perspective, and one that's probably in the minority, I would like to see the parks have the character they were designed to have rather than get IP happy and try to make them all MK-like, but it's clear that's not going to happen.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Magic Kingdom was not the original Universal Studios Florida. Focusing almost exclusively on movie franchises doesn’t make any of the parks more like the Magic Kingdom.

The slanted visitation is not a perpetual constant. Instead the Magic Kingdom’s ticket book era initial build better set the park up for continued success. Theme parks do not work well as a set check list to be accomplished [and then repeated on each visit]. This is demonstrated every time someone describes a park as being a “half day” park. In all instances it is possible to fill an entire day but it requires doing the vast majority of the experiences at the park. People listing out what they did that day will lack variety, and in the case of Disney’s non-Japanese parks since 1992 this has been a deliberate design decision.

Variety is what makes the Magic Kingdom so attractive to visitors. In so many metrics it has options. Big rides and small rides. Slow rides and fast ride. Shows and walkthroughs. Two different people looking to spend the day at the park do not have to experience a near equivalent set of attractions. In the post-Six Flags world this variety has lost its financial justification. The WEDway PeopleMover or Liberty Belle are not going to top any surveys for why someone visited, even if they had a good time. To better even out attendance the other parks need many more attractions but these attractions cannot be giant marquee attractions that clearly induce demand. The cost of such experiences has grown so explosively that they cannot be built in sufficient quantity.

The current focus on movies franchises, and specifically the desire to build lands instead of single attractions, also reduces the ability to provide variety. In a lot of cases there is a limited number of experiences that really make for a solid attraction, thus hindering the land’s ability to expand. People will get bored and dissatisfied with the same story being repeated in different vehicles. Costs are also further exasperated since individual attractions cannot be added and instead all or part of a land must be replaced for a new land unless you start dropping in orphan attractions that have no host land, which is in line with a general amusement park and not the land-based story telling of a theme park.
 
Last edited:

doctornick

Well-Known Member
As you suggest, turn all the other parks into MK 2.0, 3.0, etc... which seems to be the approach they're taking.
If only.

People say they are making the other parks into "Magic Kingdom part 2" or whatever, but they aren't at all. It would be awesome if they could flesh out all the other parks to the degree that MK is. That's a big reason that MK (and DL, etc.) is so popular -- because of the wide range of quality and different experiences.

The non-castle park that is actually like MK 2.0 is DisneySea -- and nobody complains that it is too similar to its sister park across the way. Quite the opposite -- it gets endless amounts of praise.
 

CalebS

Well-Known Member
a 5th park would be awesome even if it isn’t the best business decision but... the downside is im not confident in the current management and their ability to construct a good park. It would probably start with like 5-6 rides and have the same problem the other parks have right now as well as the issue of if they could even manage to make a thematically cohesive park these days
 
Last edited:

SteveAZee

Well-Known Member
If only.

People say they are making the other parks into "Magic Kingdom part 2" or whatever, but they aren't at all. It would be awesome if they could flesh out all the other parks to the degree that MK is. That's a big reason that MK (and DL, etc.) is so popular -- because of the wide range of quality and different experiences.

The non-castle park that is actually like MK 2.0 is DisneySea -- and nobody complains that it is too similar to its sister park across the way. Quite the opposite -- it gets endless amounts of praise.
I actually agree with "If only". I believe their approach is wrong (adding IP and catering to the lower common denominator); it's lazy and uninspiring.
 

jt04

Well-Known Member
I actually agree with "If only". I believe their approach is wrong (adding IP and catering to the lower common denominator); it's lazy and uninspiring.
You have to admit watching the same people who still lament Disney losing the Potter franchise now complain about too many IPs being incorporated into the parks is entertaining.

Oh the irony.
 

seascape

Well-Known Member
a 5th park would be awesome even if it isn’t the best business decision but... the downside is im not confident in the current management and their ability to construct a good park. It would probably start with like 5-6 rides and have the same problem the other parks have right now as well as the issue of if they could even manage to make a thematically cohesive park these days
Too many people only count the number of rides and ignore the shows. A themepark is more than just rides. An amusement park is only concerned with the number of rides.
 

sfbntpc

New Member
Is there a map of all the property Disney owns in that area? I know you can easily find a map of the whole resort/Reedy Creek, but just wondering if there was something else. 1,000 acres now and 3,000 a few years ago...I’m a history/geography teacher and love looking at stuff like that
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Is there a map of all the property Disney owns in that area? I know you can easily find a map of the whole resort/Reedy Creek, but just wondering if there was something else. 1,000 acres now and 3,000 a few years ago...I’m a history/geography teacher and love looking at stuff like that
The counties have interactive maps with property records.
 

DoubleJ21

Well-Known Member
@danlb_2000 How long do you think it will be until Disney submits a mitigation request? If I recall correctly, it didn't take long at all for the Mira Lago purchase.
 

Franklin47disneyguy

Active Member
a 5th park would be awesome even if it isn’t the best business decision but... the downside is im not confident in the current management and their ability to construct a good park. It would probably start with like 5-6 rides and have the same problem the other parks have right now as well as the issue of if they could even manage to make a thematically cohesive park these days
The only park this management opened Shanghai Disneyland openend with 13 rides and added 3 2 years after opening. 13 is 4 more than the 9 DHS will have 30 years after it opened. And 4 more than animal kingdom has today and 3 more than Epcot has currently. It is 1 less than USF and 3 less than IOA, parks that are open for 20+ years. These are not the Eisner years with under built parks : DHS, DAK, DCA, WDSP & HKDL.
 

danlb_2000

Premium Member
@danlb_2000 How long do you think it will be until Disney submits a mitigation request? If I recall correctly, it didn't take long at all for the Mira Lago purchase.
Yes, the Mira Lago permit was filed very close to, if not before the land was purchased. The permit was filed in August 2014, and I don't find the first article about the purchase of the land until November 2014. Note that the permit did not get approved until October 2015.

I guess it depends on when they need the offsets. They still have the one from the Mira Lago purchase to use, so the new ones might not be urgent.
 

CalebS

Well-Known Member
The only park this management opened Shanghai Disneyland openend with 13 rides and added 3 2 years after opening. 13 is 4 more than the 9 DHS will have 30 years after it opened. And 4 more than animal kingdom has today and 3 more than Epcot has currently. It is 1 less than USF and 3 less than IOA, parks that are open for 20+ years. These are not the Eisner years with under built parks : DHS, DAK, DCA, WDSP & HKDL.
Yes, that is true, but that is a single park resort so that is not the same as building another park at an existing resort.
 

capsshield

Active Member
When I go to WDW with my family we always plan on two days for the MK and 1 for each of the other 3 parks. For longer trips we will add a 2nd day to EPCOT and a third day to the MK but no way will we spend more than a day at the studios and AK. Those two parks are underbuilt bigtime. I can see places where they could add at least 6 to 8 attractions in the studios and really round out the day, but at the rate they build that's at least a decade or more away from reality. The AK could easily contain a dozen more attractions. These two parks really need a long term plan to beef up attendance.
One thing Disney could do to spread out crowds is to offer a free park hopper pass with a dining plan purchase to Epcot only. Spend the day at one of the other parks and then get dinner at EPCOT and add a fantastic new show to close the park. With Guardians, Remmy, the Space restaurant, A possible Mary Poppins attraction, and a new country they could handle a bigger load.
No one goes to the world without a day or two at the MK however, so they really do have a problem that can only be fixed by expanding that park. They really need to expand North of Big Thunder all the way to the circus tents. Adventureland could also use some rework and expansion. 3 big theaters or dinner shows to eat crowds plus some "E" and "D" attractions. Make the MK a true 2-3 day park.
 

MisterPenguin

Rumormonger
Premium Member
No one goes to the world without a day or two at the MK however, so they really do have a problem that can only be fixed by expanding that park. They really need to expand North of Big Thunder all the way to the circus tents. Adventureland could also use some rework and expansion. 3 big theaters or dinner shows to eat crowds plus some "E" and "D" attractions. Make the MK a true 2-3 day park.
You want them to expand the park which draws all the guests because it has so many attractions with more attractions and that won't draw in even more guests subverting the plan to make it less crowded?
 
Top Bottom