Frozen Ever After opening day

[Haymarket2008]

This topic is debated ad nauseum, but having ridden it, I cannot see ONE reason why they couldn't have fit all of those show scenes into the Princess Fairytale Hall / Snow White's Scary Adventures space.

 

[Phil12]

Well, of course there are capacity issues when people decide to ride it 3 times !

I like the ride. But I think this is more of a question of what the capacity for this IP should have been.
It deserved a a large-scale attraction in Fantasyland. But as @RSoxNo1 has said, the Imagineers did their best considering the constraints.

I'd think even you would agree that a completely new attraction in the fantasyland setting would have been better than gutting a small ride like Maelstrom.

No, I don't agree with that idea. The park has to deal with the long term and not just currently popular IP. Sure, they could have built a massive new attraction in Fantasyland but what happens to that attraction when the popularity of Frozen begins to wane? It would turn into another Horizons which had massive capacity and very few guests after its popularity diminished.

In a few short years Frozen Ever After will be about as popular as CoP and their decision to use the old Maelstrom ride will continue to make perfect sense. On the other hand, if the popularity of Olaf increases, they still have to option of creating a new "Olaf Summer Fun" water ride in Fantasyland, AK or DHS.

The idea is that they can always build more if guest demand justifies it. Soarin' is a good example. But to build these goose eggs such as Horizons is a costly mistake. Of course, GE paid for that mistake so Disney didn't have to absorb the loss. But as we all know, the days of the big time sponsors have all but disappeared.

 

[aladdin2007]

No, I don't agree with that idea. The park has to deal with the long term and not just currently popular IP. Sure, they could have built a massive new attraction in Fantasyland but what happens to that attraction when the popularity of Frozen begins to wane? It would turn into another Horizons which had massive capacity and very few guests after its popularity diminished.

In a few short years Frozen Ever After will be about as popular as CoP and their decision to use the old Maelstrom ride will continue to make perfect sense. On the other hand, if the popularity of Olaf increases, they still have to option of creating a new "Olaf Summer Fun" water ride in Fantasyland, AK or DHS.

The idea is that they can always build more if guest demand justifies it. Soarin' is a good example. But to build these goose eggs such as Horizons is a costly mistake. Of course, GE paid for that mistake so Disney didn't have to absorb the loss. But as we all know, the days of the big time sponsors have all but disappeared.

I dont know what to say to this except, wow, and horizons was not a mistake.

 

[aladdin2007]

This topic is debated ad nauseum, but having ridden it, I cannot see ONE reason why they couldn't have fit all of those show scenes into the Princess Fairytale Hall / Snow White's Scary Adventures space.

this.

 

[disney4life2008]

Silly question, what does IP stand for?

 

[Matt_Black]

Silly question, what does IP stand for?

Intellectual Property. In the context of the parks, it usually refers to something that was created for a movie or TV series rather than an attraction first. For instance, The Seas With Nemo is an "IP ride", whereas Big Thunder Mountain is not.

 

[Biff215]

This topic is debated ad nauseum, but having ridden it, I cannot see ONE reason why they couldn't have fit all of those show scenes into the Princess Fairytale Hall / Snow White's Scary Adventures space.

So I agree the placement would be better, but would capacity improve any over Maelstrom? I don't know the exact numbers, but to start, SW had a minimal queue that would have needed significant modifications.

 

[VJ]

For instance, The Seas With Nemo is an "IP ride", whereas Big Thunder Mountain is not.

And Pirates of the Caribbean, well... depends on who ya ask.

 

[RSoxNo1]

So I agree the placement would be better, but would capacity improve any over Maelstrom? I don't know the exact numbers, but to start, SW had a minimal queue that would have needed significant modifications.

I'm pretty sure Snow White's Scary Adventures had worse capacity than Maelstrom. I've said it before and I'll say it again. The best possible move would have been moving it's a small world to Epcot and opening up that large area for Frozen and other entities (Tangled, Pixie Hollow).

Alternatively, if Norway was the only option (it wasn't, but let's pretend it was) they needed to address the capacity issue. I understand the ride opened 3 months ago (and it wasn't ready then), but capacity is woefully insufficient. FP are regularly unavailable 60 days out while nearly ever other ride (save maybe Mine Train) are regularly available day of.

They needed to ensure 30 second dispatches at minimum and they weren't doing that. Even if they were hitting that they'd only be getting 1440 an hour (Assuming 12 per boat). A D-ticket ride needs to be hitting 1800+.

As we said before the ride opened, if it's good the capacity issue will be heightened that much more. If it was lousy, people would have complained about how cheap it was but the capacity would have ultimately normalized.

It's a rare situation where they made mistakes on placement and capacity but produced a quality ride. Even still it was a horrible decision by management that looks better because of creatives and creates nightmares for operations.

 

[Mike S]

I'm pretty sure Snow White's Scary Adventures had worse capacity than Maelstrom. I've said it before and I'll say it again. The best possible move would have been moving it's a small world to Epcot and opening up that large area for Frozen and other entities (Tangled, Pixie Hollow).

Alternatively, if Norway was the only option (it wasn't, but let's pretend it was) they needed to address the capacity issue. I understand the ride opened 3 months ago (and it wasn't ready then), but capacity is woefully insufficient. FP are regularly unavailable 60 days out while nearly ever other ride (save maybe Mine Train) are regularly available day of.

They needed to ensure 30 second dispatches at minimum and they weren't doing that. Even if they were hitting that they'd only be getting 1440 an hour (Assuming 12 per boat). A D-ticket ride needs to be hitting 1800+.

As we said before the ride opened, if it's good the capacity issue will be heightened that much more. If it was lousy, people would have complained about how cheap it was but the capacity would have ultimately normalized.

It's a rare situation where they made mistakes on placement and capacity but produced a quality ride. Even still it was a horrible decision by management that looks better because of creatives and creates nightmares for operations.

Or they could've gotten rid of the circus tents. That works too.

 

[Magenta Panther]

The ride shouldn't have been operating with the Elsa figure motionless except for the face projection. It was late in the day and they didn't want a line full of guests at Guest relations so they ran the attraction that wasn't show ready.

We rode three times and while we saw all effects working on individual rides, we never had a ride with all the effects working. Elsa was the big one on rides two and three. Also, the fog effect on the backwards section needed to be bigger (the same can also be said at the jewel scene of GMR).

The correct solution for what to do about capacity was "don't use a ride system that could never have supported this in the first place". However, excluding that they could potentially load two boats at once to ensure 30 second dispatch times. When you have guests needing extra time this would ensure more consistent dispatches and better capacity.

The good thing is, the exterior of the meet and greet and attraction fit the theming of World Showcase. The queue also is largely Norwegian/Scandinavian and not faux Arrendelle. There are a few exceptions, but for the most part they didn't overly toonify the queue.

Thanks for your report. The opinions of WDW Magic veterans like yourself carry real weight with me. The difficulties FEA is having makes me wonder what the GotG shoehorn in DCA's Tower is going to be like. Imagine staring at a motionless Groot for 15 minutes after the ride breaks down (although motionless kind of suits him, since he's a tree, or a giant piece of asparagus, or something). Or imagine getting stuck in the elevator. In complete darkness. Maybe TDA could claim it as a nostalgic call-back to its predatory "Late Check-Out" campaign.

 

[Magenta Panther]

This topic is debated ad nauseum, but having ridden it, I cannot see ONE reason why they couldn't have fit all of those show scenes into the Princess Fairytale Hall / Snow White's Scary Adventures space.

Man, I hadn't even THOUGHT of that. That would have been a great idea!

 

[Phil12]

I dont know what to say to this except, wow, and horizons was not a mistake.

Horizons was a wonderful money maker for Disney for ten years when GE was footing the bill. However, after GE stopped their sponsorship, the cost for Horizons had to absorbed by Disney. With the reduced guest attendance the attraction was no longer cost effective and it turned into a big goose egg for Disney.

As long as big sponsors have money to burn, Disney is willing to build most anything. But when Disney has to pay the cost, they're usually much more conservative. Walt was a master at spending other people's money and that became a Disney tradition that carried on at WDW long after Walt's death.

Perhaps Disney could get Nestle to sponsor a huge Frozen ride at WDW and give them an exclusive licensing deal to create and sell Olaf Premium Ice Cream Bars.

 

[ShoalFox]

Perhaps Disney could get Nestle to sponsor a huge Frozen ride at WDW and give them an exclusive licensing deal to create and sell Olaf Premium Ice Cream Bars.

As you might recall, Nestle sponsored The Land pavilion for nearly 16 years before pulling out in 2009. Given that and corporations' reluctance to sponsor anything nowadays, I highly doubt that would ever happen.

 

[Goofyernmost]

Man, I hadn't even THOUGHT of that. That would have been a great idea!

The very last thing that they needed in MK was another big draw attraction. It is in Epcot mostly in the hopes of redirecting a large group of people out of MK and to another park. It doesn't matter how much better it might have fit, it wasn't wanted in MK for what are actually very good reasons.

 

[Mike S]

The very last thing that they needed in MK was another big draw attraction. It is in Epcot mostly in the hopes of redirecting a large group of people out of MK and to another park. It doesn't matter how much better it might have fit, it wasn't wanted in MK for what are actually very good reasons.

DHS is a good spot.

 

[Phil12]

As you might recall, Nestle sponsored The Land pavilion for nearly 16 years before pulling out in 2009. Given that and corporations' reluctance to sponsor anything nowadays, I highly doubt that would ever happen.

That's precisely the reason why Nestle should be their first option. You see, the Olaf Frozen Lemonade Strawberry Bar that is currently sold in the MK is made by Tropicale Foods, Inc. which is a company from Helados, Mexico. That's where the licensing deal comes in.

The Mickey Bars are currently made by Nestle. Disney might negotiate a deal to allow Nestle to sell Mickey Bars in retail outlets and give them the licensing for Olaf as well in exchange for an attraction sponsorship. There's got to be big money in selling Mickey Bars at Wal*Mart.

Or perhaps Blue Bell ice cream would be interested in a deal since they've been plagued with such bad publicity from their listeria problems. I would hope that Disney has learned their lesson from the previous Donald Duck orange juice fiasco and has top notch marketing people in place to leverage their IP in other venues.

Elsa's Frozen Ice Cream Bars might be big sellers!

 

[Goofyernmost]

DHS is a good spot.

I know it would be alright there, but, right now Epcot has the most available space for people and, personally, I'm not even a little upset about it being in Norway. Maelstrom was tediously boring and had been since the day it opened** and even if it is a stretch connection, it is close enough to work, so... I feel like moving on and going with change.

Spoiler: **

To be fair, I guess, it wasn't as boring as originally and improved as soon as they stopped the requirement that we sit through that film.

 

[Jones14]

Elsa's arms were not working tonight. It's crazy how much the arm movements make or break the Let It Go scene.

 

[NearTheEars]

No, I don't agree with that idea. The park has to deal with the long term and not just currently popular IP. Sure, they could have built a massive new attraction in Fantasyland but what happens to that attraction when the popularity of Frozen begins to wane? It would turn into another Horizons which had massive capacity and very few guests after its popularity diminished.

In a few short years Frozen Ever After will be about as popular as CoP and their decision to use the old Maelstrom ride will continue to make perfect sense. On the other hand, if the popularity of Olaf increases, they still have to option of creating a new "Olaf Summer Fun" water ride in Fantasyland, AK or DHS.

The idea is that they can always build more if guest demand justifies it. Soarin' is a good example. But to build these goose eggs such as Horizons is a costly mistake. Of course, GE paid for that mistake so Disney didn't have to absorb the loss. But as we all know, the days of the big time sponsors have all but disappeared.

Well, I guess I shouldn't be surprised by your opinion. I think about just about every other theme park fan in the world would prefer a large-scale attraction over a remodel, but I guess there is always someone.

I was mostly asking for your opinion as a theme park fan, and not in the mindset of Disney as a business decision.

I do appreciate you laying out your opinion and explaining it, though.