The Pho
Well-Known Member
It may not be considered as a full gate but it certainly is a snow themed area in WDW, which you said there were none of.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
How could Galaxy's Edge go wrong?
- Thread starter DeletedAccount55555
- Start date
It may not be considered as a full gate but it certainly is a snow themed area in WDW, which you said there were none of.
FettFan
Well-Known Member
tl77
Well-Known Member
The setting of Galaxy's Edge, a place called Black Spire was mentioned in the new Han Solo movie, and will probably be making appearances in future films and that TV show they are trying to produce, and it will most likely be popping up in video games and other media as well... like with Pandora they're build movie themed lands for movies that haven't been made yet
righttrack
Well-Known Member
To me, this is about appearances. It should not look nor be "cheap". It needs to live up to all of WDW and all of SW (at least the good parts). If it's evident they took the cheap way out, for anything, it's going to get roasted, by all the WDW and SW fanboys, self included.
Twirlnhurl
Well-Known Member
I think that the biggest risk of disappointment for Star Wars Galaxy's Edge are definitely capacity, the possibility of technical issues (Test Track opened something like 18 months late), and operational issues. All of these could leave a bad taste in people's mouth.
I am also worried that merchandise may be less successful than Disney is anticipating, which may make revenues less than expected. It is my understanding that the shops inside the land will only have thematically appropriate stuff. But is that going to be what people want to buy?
The good thing about the world of Harry Potter is that the stuff people buy consists of clothes, wands, and appealing food. Does the world of Star Wars have that?
I would like to push back on this comment. I definitely see where you are coming from--Star Wars has a rich backstory and the kinds of detail that can work really well in a theme park. And given an unlimited budget, a whole day's worth of attractions could be fairly easily imagined.
But I actually think that the guests will win from Star Wars being in an existing park instead of a 5th gate. The reason for this is simple: infrastructure. When Animal Kingdom was built in 1998, it cost about $600-$800 million. A fair percentage of that cost was infrastructure: massive civil engineering efforts to drain and grade the site; physical plant such as chiller plants, parkwide maintenance facilities, etc; cast member infrastructure like costuming, cast services, crew member cafeterias, management offices; and transportation infrastructure like highway connections, bridges, parking lots, buses and other transit infrastructure.
I would guess that this type of infrastructure accounted for about one third of the cost of the park. In the case of Animal Kingdom, the animal facilities may have been another third of the cost, leaving only $200-270 million for rides and attractions.
When Animal Kingdom opened, it increased the attendance of Walt Disney World, but a lot of the new park's attendance was cannibalized from Epcot and Disney-MGM Studios.
Imagine what those parks would be like today if that $600-800 million was spent on new rides at Epcot and Disney-MGM Studios instead? I mean, Animal Kingdom is a nice park that a lot of people really like, but even it's biggest fans wouldn't have called it a whole day park for its first 19 years of existence. In the meantime, Epcot and the Studios stagnated.
So I guess my point is, if Disney wants to spend $1 billion on Star Wars in Florida, it could buy two rides, a ton of rockwork, and about half of the infrastructure needed for a new park. Or Disney could build a new theme park and loose almost $300 million on infrastructure that doesn't go toward guest experience. Do you cut rockwork? A ride? Or cancel other resort expansions? Would that be better for the guest experience?
I am glad that Disney chose to put Star Wars in the Studio park where it is somewhat thematically appropriate and where new ride capacity is desperately needed. (Personally, I think that after everything currently under construction opens, The Studios will still need two or three additional rides.)
I am also worried that merchandise may be less successful than Disney is anticipating, which may make revenues less than expected. It is my understanding that the shops inside the land will only have thematically appropriate stuff. But is that going to be what people want to buy?
The good thing about the world of Harry Potter is that the stuff people buy consists of clothes, wands, and appealing food. Does the world of Star Wars have that?
@larryz
That said it's hard to imagine today's Disney building a new theme park in Florida. They seem so risk-averse, always trying to hedge their bets. I suppose from a short-term business perspective it makes sense, since they will spend millions marketing the new "land" and will essentially generate the same amount of demand a Star Wars park would generate (or at least close to it).
So in essence, with all the hype they will get a good chunk of the income of a Star Wars park without having to outlay all that enormous cost. Everyone wins except for the guests, who will be standing in line for hours just to catch a glimpse of the new land.
I would like to push back on this comment. I definitely see where you are coming from--Star Wars has a rich backstory and the kinds of detail that can work really well in a theme park. And given an unlimited budget, a whole day's worth of attractions could be fairly easily imagined.
But I actually think that the guests will win from Star Wars being in an existing park instead of a 5th gate. The reason for this is simple: infrastructure. When Animal Kingdom was built in 1998, it cost about $600-$800 million. A fair percentage of that cost was infrastructure: massive civil engineering efforts to drain and grade the site; physical plant such as chiller plants, parkwide maintenance facilities, etc; cast member infrastructure like costuming, cast services, crew member cafeterias, management offices; and transportation infrastructure like highway connections, bridges, parking lots, buses and other transit infrastructure.
I would guess that this type of infrastructure accounted for about one third of the cost of the park. In the case of Animal Kingdom, the animal facilities may have been another third of the cost, leaving only $200-270 million for rides and attractions.
When Animal Kingdom opened, it increased the attendance of Walt Disney World, but a lot of the new park's attendance was cannibalized from Epcot and Disney-MGM Studios.
Imagine what those parks would be like today if that $600-800 million was spent on new rides at Epcot and Disney-MGM Studios instead? I mean, Animal Kingdom is a nice park that a lot of people really like, but even it's biggest fans wouldn't have called it a whole day park for its first 19 years of existence. In the meantime, Epcot and the Studios stagnated.
So I guess my point is, if Disney wants to spend $1 billion on Star Wars in Florida, it could buy two rides, a ton of rockwork, and about half of the infrastructure needed for a new park. Or Disney could build a new theme park and loose almost $300 million on infrastructure that doesn't go toward guest experience. Do you cut rockwork? A ride? Or cancel other resort expansions? Would that be better for the guest experience?
I am glad that Disney chose to put Star Wars in the Studio park where it is somewhat thematically appropriate and where new ride capacity is desperately needed. (Personally, I think that after everything currently under construction opens, The Studios will still need two or three additional rides.)
Raineman
Well-Known Member
I definitely think they have that to some degree already at WDW. I guarantee anyone who visits WDW for a week, at least once will almost be hit by a kid wildly swinging a toy lightsaber. You do see people wearing SW shirts and buying other assorted SW merch; I think SW merch sales have probably been decent so far, but will it increase with SW:GE opening? That remains to be seen. If they concentrate more on the newer movies-based merch as opposed to original trilogy-based, I could see there being an issue.
Club Cooloholic
Well-Known Member
I think the park will be crowded. The only thing that can go wrong is this huge investment in the films does not pan out and the fanbase is stagnant and not growing like it is with other properties which could be happening considering Solo performed below expectations. In 10 years time it could be a little like the muppets where kids are like "what's this all about?". Now if the land is staggeringly awesome just on the face of its looks it won't matter as Pandora has proven.
Even if there were no new Disney SW movies, there is still a strong enough fan base to swamp both SWLs for years. Also, the strength of the rides alone, both E+'s, is enough to create hours long waits for years... just look at FoP. No new movies, but a fantastic, immersive land and a guest-favorite* ride.
*I'd call it an E+, but then @marni1971 would get mad at me!
Tsk tsk
erasure fan1
Well-Known Member
No, not at all. Back in the day with no new movies on the horizon, and not much going on with the franchise, kids still loved it. Even after the prequels "killed" star wars, it was as popular as ever. Why? On the strength of the original trilogy alone and those fantastic characters. And light Sabers!
Episode 9 could end up being a complete poodoo fest and bomb, but star wars will still be extremely popular. You can never take away the impact of those original movies.
HiJe
Well-Known Member
No, not at all. Back in the day with no new movies on the horizon, and not much going on with the franchise, kids still loved it. Even after the prequels "killed" star wars, it was as popular as ever. Why? On the strength of the original trilogy alone and those fantastic characters. And light Sabers!
I hate to say it, but you're right. Episode 9 could be 2 hours of Yoda sitting on a toilet, and I would still probably buy the popcorn bucket the next time I visit.
Club Cooloholic
Well-Known Member
That'what I was saying, if the land is impressive people will come no matter.
I am Timmy
Well-Known Member
If they would just re-release the original trilogy at theaters every 15 years or so = permanent success. I saw them when they first came out (no jokes about my age, I'm just a girl with a light saber). When they were re-released, my first son was little. I took him to each of them as they came out - new generation hooked. Hooked my next born son by association. They have staying power, and seeing them at the theater is just awe-inspiring. This has nothing to do with GE, btw, just Star Wars fandom in general. If the land is interesting and immersive, with at least one attraction that works, it'll be a hit. I don't think the movies will necessarily add to or take away from the enjoyment of the land.
Damon7777
Well-Known Member
Ya, I see your point:
people just aren't going to buy Yoda coffee cups, light sabers, Darth T shirts, Lego Star Wars and action figures. Lucas and Disney over the last 40 years have had to endure very disappointing merchandise sales and now they are trying to sell this stuff in a lavishly created Star Wars Land. I wish them luck
(rolls eyes)
Twirlnhurl
Well-Known Member
I think you misunderstood my post. It was my understanding that, like Harry Potter, Disney is planning on only selling thematically appropriate merchandise in Galaxy's Edge. From your list only light sabres and perhaps t-shirts would be sold in the land. The Star Wars branded content that is not thematically appropriate would be relagated to existing shops outside the land.
Something similar is done at Universal with Harry Potter, but the world of Harry Potter has more in-universe consumer goods than Star Wars.
I could be wrong, maybe robot toys, light sabres, and robes will sell enough for this to not be a problem. Or maybe they will sell Legos and Darth Vader merchandise even though no trader in a smugglers outpost would ever sell such a thing.
Club Cooloholic
Well-Known Member
I think this is kinda neat, how Harry Potter does it, except for Gilly Water....what a rip lol
joschman
New Member
Visitors might think that the popularity of it will take away visitors from other parks (which it most likely will), and the other parks overcrowding because of people planning their trips around it, going to the other parks instead, and not as many people going to SWL. I also think that long downtimes for rides will be a problem, forcing the mass to crowd to the other parts of the park.