Sped2424
Well-Known Member
Horizons was literally demolished to the ground. Do you mean Wonders of Life?
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Ellen's voice is back in the ride... but her animatronic is probably gone for good.
- Thread starter The Visionary Soul
- Start date
Jon81uk
Well-Known Member
I think the main reason they won't spend the money on the energy or imagination pavilions is that they aren't easily marketable. A TV advert for Soarin', Test Track, Frozen Ever After will bring people to the park. But a ride about energy wouldn't work as a TV commercial without an IP to hook it on. It wouldn't even work well as part of a montage.
Nor is half a park that has many run down, neglected, dated or closed rides and areas.
When it opened EPCOT Center had the equivalent of the best bits of IOA, DisneySea and Disneyland all in one park. It was beyond state of the art. And totally unique. Now it's a paradoy and a shadow of its former self.
The current dated and neglected state of Energy is symbolic of this. Small pockets of brilliance exist amongst a mire of mediocre.
When it opened EPCOT Center had the equivalent of the best bits of IOA, DisneySea and Disneyland all in one park. It was beyond state of the art. And totally unique. Now it's a paradoy and a shadow of its former self.
The current dated and neglected state of Energy is symbolic of this. Small pockets of brilliance exist amongst a mire of mediocre.
Last edited:
Yes, it needs work. Lots of Epcot does. If it's true that $300M has been approved for Epcot as part of the big $3.5M budget, then I would expect it to get some love soon.
I know that a lot of stuff has been neglected in recent years, but what's a little bit lost in this is that WDW has really only recently recovered (maybe the past 4-5 years or so) from the economic impact of 9/11 and the later slide into a recession that continued through the late 2000s. While Universal started spending money a bit sooner (partly because of new ownership that had a lot of cash thanks to a cable monopoly), Disney had done so much in the 90s that they were suddenly gun shy with large expansions and expenditures after 2001 (AK had only been open 3 years when 9/11 happened). And it's not that revenues weren't decent, it's just that reinvesting big sums of money for even more expansions during uncertain economic times is something that's naturally difficult to receive approval for.
The recent turn around has been slow, but it has been happening (Soarin/ToyStoryMania expansions, New Fantasyland, Frozenstrom (I know, relax), Avatar, Rivers of Light, Disney Springs (I know, keep your pants in tact), Star Tours 2, etc). Epcot will get some love soon. They know it needs love, especially Future World. I do think Ellen is first, but I don't know what they do with it. It's clearly dated now (the film portions), so a complete retheme to something other than Energy could be possible while still retaining the Dinos in some new/different context. Maybe a time travel pavilion? Timekeeper 2.0? I don't know, I'd be for it. But even if it's just a conservative refurb to fix it up without changes, I think it'll come. When I rode it 2013 it seemed in decent shape to me, so it's probably only since then that it's gotten that much worse.
But armchair imagineering aside, I do believe Epcot will get some love. Resort-wide attendance is up, and if rumors are true, budgets were approved ($2.8 for DHS, $300+ for MK, Frontierland "project", and $300+ for Epcot) that should help with some of the more glaring issues.
I know that a lot of stuff has been neglected in recent years, but what's a little bit lost in this is that WDW has really only recently recovered (maybe the past 4-5 years or so) from the economic impact of 9/11 and the later slide into a recession that continued through the late 2000s. While Universal started spending money a bit sooner (partly because of new ownership that had a lot of cash thanks to a cable monopoly), Disney had done so much in the 90s that they were suddenly gun shy with large expansions and expenditures after 2001 (AK had only been open 3 years when 9/11 happened). And it's not that revenues weren't decent, it's just that reinvesting big sums of money for even more expansions during uncertain economic times is something that's naturally difficult to receive approval for.
The recent turn around has been slow, but it has been happening (Soarin/ToyStoryMania expansions, New Fantasyland, Frozenstrom (I know, relax), Avatar, Rivers of Light, Disney Springs (I know, keep your pants in tact), Star Tours 2, etc). Epcot will get some love soon. They know it needs love, especially Future World. I do think Ellen is first, but I don't know what they do with it. It's clearly dated now (the film portions), so a complete retheme to something other than Energy could be possible while still retaining the Dinos in some new/different context. Maybe a time travel pavilion? Timekeeper 2.0? I don't know, I'd be for it. But even if it's just a conservative refurb to fix it up without changes, I think it'll come. When I rode it 2013 it seemed in decent shape to me, so it's probably only since then that it's gotten that much worse.
But armchair imagineering aside, I do believe Epcot will get some love. Resort-wide attendance is up, and if rumors are true, budgets were approved ($2.8 for DHS, $300+ for MK, Frontierland "project", and $300+ for Epcot) that should help with some of the more glaring issues.
They aren't expansions though. They used to be called regular upkeep, maintainence and updating.
Whilst the ticket cost continued to rise.
Yeah but in 1995 Epcot was still almost a baby at only 13 years old. 13 year old parks don't require much refurbishing and maintenance. It's now 33 years old, almost 3 times what it was in the early 90s, and the money required to maintain a 30+ year old park is a lot more than required of a 13 year old park. Much more. And in the 2000s, with the problems of economic recession and struggling travel industry, it stands to reason that there would be issues. Universal struggled with maintenance issues in the 2000s as well. I remember smashed speakers near Jurassic Park during my visit in (I think) 2006, Poseidon's Fury had no fire effects. One of the sharks on Jaws wasn't moving, and BTTF the ride was broken down, and I never got to ride it again before it closed. Maybe it was bad luck, or maybe things weren't so good there, either.
The same things are true for MK, which was "only" 25 years old in the mid 90s. It's now 43 years old. AK was brand new in '98, it's now 17. DHS was 6 years old in the mid 90s. It's now 25. All of the parks need a higher proportion of money to be maintained properly. A new car is good for maybe 5-7 years, and then eventually you're replacing something more and more often until you decide to junk it and buy a new one.
Point is that in the 90s, Disney had a better economic environment and younger, healthier parks to maintain. They then felt the pinch of a tougher economy in the 2000s, along with again parks that required a lot more money to maintain to the same standards.
Last edited:
So you believe that an older park costs the same to maintain as a new one?
No, I believe the amount charged today for admission compared to even ten years ago means they can afford far more to reinvest in maintainence and upkeep compared to when the parks were younger.
jt04
Well-Known Member
Just to stir things up (not trolling) but there was once a rumor of removing the turnstyles at WS. And I am wondering if Disney Springs proves wildly successful if WS could go private and FW become a corporate campus as Eddie Sotto has at times recommended.
It seems to me Disney may have big plans for Epcot. Not that this justifies neglect but this is often the pattern when an attraction is headed to yesterland.
No, I believe the amount charged today for admission compared to even ten years ago means they can afford far more to reinvest in maintainence and upkeep compared to when the parks were younger.
A lot of the reason they continue to raise 1 day tickets to such high levels is to discourage 1 day visits. The current cost of a 10 day ticket, for example, is just $36.50 per day. You can't just put up that chart and ignore inflation, rising minimum wage, and a different overall economy vs. the 90s. 10 years ago (2005) was also the midst of a significant travel recession due to 9/11. Ticket prices couldn't be raised commensurate to rising costs and inflation because the market can only bear what the market can bear. Demand is demand is demand, and ticket prices across the board reflect this.
I still say that park maintenance costs in the 90s wern't nearly what they've been over the last 10 years, thanks to two very young parks (AK/DHS) and the spending splurge in the 90s.
I also think that documenting maintenance issues in the parks has become some people's full time job. Digital cameras / cameraphones are so prevalent today, the internet has proliferated, and there's a significantly larger magnifying glass on those issues. These days, people can much more readily "compare notes" on the maintenance issues (which by the way are bound to be even more prevalent in aging parks). A lot of issues from the past simply weren't documented as well, even though issues were there in 90s.
I'm not trying to claim that you're 100% off base. I do understand that there's at least a case that Disney didn't spend enough on maintenance/refurbishment in the 2000s (same goes for Disneyland and Universal). I'm not giving Disney a "free pass" on what might have been an overly conservative spending plan during a changing of the guard and uncertain economies.
But again, I think you're too quick to gloss over the fact that costs are much higher on maintaining aging parks, along with that hurting economy of the mid 2000s, all of which are bound to manifest in some way. I suppose you could argue that Disney should have thrown caution to the wind and thrown money at the problem(s) anyway, but we weren't the ones whose jobs might have been on the line for those hard decisions during a weaker economic time, but back then, Disney didn't have the benefit of foresight to know if/when the travel industry would rebound. A business can't be both a business and a charity organization. We could go on at length about the awful "business system" in America, but Disney is hardly the only corporation where perhaps too much profits are pocketed by the rich bigwigs, and too few dollars get reinvested. But let's compare to the rest of the country (including the travel and theme park industries, especially in Orlando), to see what the other similar organizations did during the lull of the 2000s.
Last edited:
Let's not. This is about WDW. And already veering off topic. Take it the Disney vs Universal thread if you like, though it's been discussed to death on these forums already as you know over the last 5-10 years.
To end I will add, especially in Epcot, the attractions of today cost less to maintain park wide than they did 20 years ago. Today half of Futureworld is fast becoming a shuttered ghetto.
You say a one day pass is an unfair comparison do to a desire to price it out of the market. If you like, take a 5 day all parks pass and compare the price over the last 25 years. Even factor in DAK. The results speak for themselves.
I disagree with so much you wrote but again it's been discussed ad nauseum.
Last edited:
Cmdr_Crimson
Well-Known Member
The cynic in me sees their turning one theater into convention space, the other into retail, and the dinosaur area into a restaurant.
Do we need another T-Rex...Nahhh
jt04
Well-Known Member
DAK does.
Figments Friend
Well-Known Member
Part of the reason for that may well be because most of the folks who were around at WED -WDI back in the day who created EPCOT Center are no longer around.
Either by their own hand, the Grim Reapers hand, forced *retirement*, or outright purging....most of the Imagineers who had a major hand in the project are gone.
A few remain, but they are too few and far between now.
The younger generation that is currently employed may be aware of and respect EPCOT*s past, but they are likely focused on other projects.
We have to always keep in mind that WDI only works on things that are perceived by the Company as *needed*.
WDI may well wish to *fix* some issues ( such as the Imagination Pavilion) but unless they are allowed by the Corporate purse holders nothing will happen.
I am aware of a few areas they are dying to *fix*....but to date they have been held back.
So it has more to do with the current Company*s focus (or lack of...) that drives what gets done and what does not.
EPCOT has not really been a important focus area for the Company for some time now, as we all can plainly see.
The forward thinking, thought provoking concepts that used to be proudly showcased there have now been replaced with primarily generic or insipid fodder for the masses.
The entire focus was lost years ago, but once in a while there is a slight glimmer of hope when a throwback to EPCOT*s previous spirit is seen through the thickening veil of mediocrity.
-
Last edited:
Cmdr_Crimson
Well-Known Member
I hardly see rainforest cafe get extremly busy at AK...
Figments Friend
Well-Known Member
WondersOfLife
Blink, blink. Breathe, breathe. Day in, day out.
This happened to me too last year!! That was REALLY bad!