-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Haunted Mansion Refurb to be dissapointing
- Thread starter MuRkErY
- Start date
I would love to see the Nightmare before Christmas Haunted Holidays makeovers at WDW
Wouldnt you much rather see an entire permanent attraction dedicated to Nightmare Before Christmas?
I am still quietly confident...
Look at the amazing job that was performed during the Small World rehab, I hope HM's rehab is like this -not like the recent Splash Mountain refurb..
manutdfan1
Active Member
Yes, man that would be awesome. I would ride it over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. I love that movie!
jmvd20
Well-Known Member
Are you serious?
Do you mean that people should actually wait to experience something for themselves prior to saying it is disapointing?
Are you suggesting that we let WDW perform the work prior to saying the work was horrible and management messed it up?
That doesn't make any sense to me.
disnyfan89
Well-Known Member
Enigma said:
But why settle for one when we could have them both! :lol:
I believe the most any "Hourly" person makes is about $270 per day and that would be a "Equity" performer in a show... such as "Tinker bell"
Currently BVCC (the guys who work on things such as the POTC rehab) make about $18 per hour. Once the project is done, they have no work. So some of those guys work other places as well, others just go onto the next project or rehab that comes along. As a side note BVCC must "Bid" for these projects and therefore, it's possible an outside contractor can come in do to the work for less money (and less quality.) Since the work is bid for, costs are known upfront and they do NOT take kindly to overuns.
Management knows that people are coming here and will come here, no matter what state the haunted mansion is in. Most guests who visit are happy to be here and see there little kids smile and laugh at Mickey. So therefore, why spend any extra to plus up the mansion when we could spend a little extra and build a new Bibbity Bobbity whatever in the castle that would bring in a cool extra 400K per year. So what will the rehab bring, I'm sure a few nice little things but above that not much else.
(Note, I do not AGREE with this at all.. it's just what is going on these days)
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
The argument is that WDW has reached the mature stage of the business cycle with little potential for future growth. That doesn't mean that there isn't physical room for further growth, just that the market won't support much further growth at this point in time thus the focus will be on maintaining market share rather than growing the resort with new parks, for example. This is why Disney officials keep saying that the focus will be more on smaller additions to the parks and rehabs in the near future (like Pirates and Living Seas) and less on larger new attractions like Everest which add significant capacity.
DL, on the other hand, is still a relatively small resort with only 3 Disney-owned hotels and two theme parks, one of which has a lot of potential for growth! Particularly with the incredibly high attendence for the 50th and beyond, Downtown Disney's success, DCA's consistantly improving numbers and high hotel occupancy, the logic is that there's a far greater untapped market out there for the DLR which could be served by more parks, hotels, retail offerings, etc. This is why the Disney Cruise Line is now expanding its business to the west coast, the head of the DL resort is in the press talking about long-terms plans for a third park and they're going to court to stop affordable housing being built across the road from land they own but have yet to develop. It's precisely as a function of the resort's small size compared to WDW that it has greater potential for growth, even if they'll have a harder time finding the land to support it.
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
To be honest, I don't know that MK particularly needs a new E-ticket. The number of attractions in the park isn't really the problem. As long as they kept everything that was there fresh and up to date, also replacing existing attractions now and then, I think it would be fine. For example, Philharmagic and Buzz were good additions to the park which replaced old attractions and weren't great new e-tickets but which also added a lot to the park. Timekeeper had also probably run its course. The problem is that they let the park's most popular attractions fall into disrepair because their existing popularity/good premise or design, etc ensures that people will keep riding. Whether the guests will see a classic ride falling to pieces or not doesn't seem to bother them.
sknydave
Active Member
CJR
Well-Known Member
I'm starting to lose faith in WDW Management. I know this is just a possibility, but I am starting to get the idea that they're just trying to be cheap. Them not wanting to celebrate Epcot's 25th birthday is a sign of that. Where's the magic? I want to trust them, but with each thing they do wrong, I want to trust them less. It seems like California is going to be the place to go again. This will hurt WDW eventually Quality > Quantity. Hopefully management realizes this and does this refurb right.
hokielutz
Well-Known Member
Splash mountain's shutdown, if I recall, was only a couple weeks of down-time. Enough only to paint faded scenery, fix some of the belt assemblies, and scrub down & disenfect the whole water way system.
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
KevinPage
Well-Known Member
Well WDW did get more of the "loving" as Pressler & Harris ran the place into the ground. Quimet started the redo of DL and it looks like DL will be getting the lion's share of the quality stuff for the immediate future.
Unfortunately, when WDW was in better shape than DL, it wasn't getting nearly as many of the positive upgrades that DL is currently getting.
Unfortunately, when WDW was in better shape than DL, it wasn't getting nearly as many of the positive upgrades that DL is currently getting.
TP2000
Well-Known Member
May I say that you just summed it up beautifully regarding the Magic Kingdom's predicament! :sohappy:
It fascinates me that two theme park properties run by the same company could be operated so very differently. When visting Tokyo Disneyland I noticed just as many differences, but could chalk them up to national culture and an inherently different business situation with the Oriental Land Company owning and financing the place. But I can't quite figure out how two parks in the same country set up through the same corporate office can be so very different.
And the difference between Anaheim and Orlando seem to grow wider and wider as each year passes.
disneycouple
New Member
i hope not i really love this ride. and it needs some tlc.
DisneyMusician2
Well-Known Member
May I say that you just summed it up beautifully regarding the Magic Kingdom's predicament! :sohappy:
It fascinates me that two theme park properties run by the same company could be operated so very differently. When visting Tokyo Disneyland I noticed just as many differences, but could chalk them up to national culture and an inherently different business situation with the Oriental Land Company owning and financing the place. But I can't quite figure out how two parks in the same country set up through the same corporate office can be so very different.
And the difference between Anaheim and Orlando seem to grow wider and wider as each year passes.
It is very difficult to compare the Anaheim and Orlando mindset. The finances necessary to keep an entire resort and four theme parks fresh in no way compares to the much smaller California resort. The idea of keeping everything fresh in California is more important as the majority of their guests are repeat locals. The WDW resort is a worldwide vacation destination and, in all honesty, can get away with less frequent updates.
Not that I agree with WDW management, but the comparisons simply aren't fair and attractions cannot be compared at face value.
