I'm sure this is going to sound pretty naive, but it seems like it takes an inordinate amount of time for them to get these types of things done. I am not talking about repainting the mountains. I know that is time consuming, especially since it is done at night. I am talking about something like the AE/Stich makeover. Why does that take a year+? Obviously everything is designed and everything that can be prefabricated is made well before they closed AE. So what takes so long? How can they build an entire park in a couple of years and then need that long for one attraction?? I assume that Disney doesn't want a down attraction any longer than it needs to. What am I missing?
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Is it me, or does it take way too long to refurbish/replace attractions????
- Thread starter johnvree
- Start date
ISTCrew20
Well-Known Member
For AE Stitch makeover, I can see why it's taking a year. They got the money to do things right, so they're gonna be doing it right. They got to take out all references to AE and everything about the old attraction. Then, they got to bring in the new stuff, make sure it works, make sure everything flows together. Then they have to retheme everything. In this case, they might have to do it twice, if they decide to use both chambers. Then comes the task of merchandising, advertising, and all that good stuff, to tie in with everything. It takes this long to do a single attraction over a park because the team working on 1 (one) attraction is alot smaller then the thousands working on a park...
Although, Im clueless as to why AK was done is 5 years, and MS took 3...:hammer:
Although, Im clueless as to why AK was done is 5 years, and MS took 3...:hammer:
NemoRocks78
Seized
No, you're not the only one who feels that Disney takes too long to build new attractions. I feel the same. Expedition Everest in 2006? C'mon, they can do better than that. It can't take them that long to do something like EE if they worked faster. Look at Universal for example. Revenge of the Mummy is opening in 2 months, and it was only September 2002 when Kongfrontation closed. Then there was the fact they had to remove EVERYTHING out of Kong's building, and that sure took a long time. So basically, it hasn't even been 2 years since Kong's closure, yet Revenge of the Mummy is about to open. ROTM is also not a simple thing to build either. It's going to be very, very complex. I also know that the building structure was already in place, but still, it shouldn't take another 2 1/2 years to get EE up and running. Universal also had The Funtastic World of Hanna-Barbera close in October 2002 and had Jimmy Neutron's Nicktoon Blast open by April 2003, and Alfred Hitchcock: The Art of Making Movies closed in January 2003 and Shrek 4D was showing in June.
If only Disney had some fast construction workers.........
If only Disney had some fast construction workers.........
t3techcom18
Well-Known Member
Well, that's sort of the answer to that. The thing is, with AE/Stitch makeover is:
1) You don't have tear down the facility
2) The audio and restrant system stays
3) Put a Stitch AA instead of an alien
4) Just Stitch theme the whole place!
Thing with AK, it was because it was a park, and could never be built within a year. If you would only have a year to build a theme park, you would need TONS of people, and TONS of money. With MS, they needed 6 years to design the whole thing, because:
1) They need budget cuts(Ugh)
2) It was an entirely new building
3) New ride system that has never been created in a Disney park
That's why it takes long sometimes...but sometimes, the wait is worth it....
imagineer boy
Well-Known Member
Originally posted by NemoRocks78
No, you're not the only one who feels that Disney takes too long to build new attractions. I feel the same. Expedition Everest in 2006? C'mon, they can do better than that. It can't take them that long to do something like EE if they worked faster. Look at Universal for example. Revenge of the Mummy is opening in 2 months, and it was only September 2002 when Kongfrontation closed. Then there was the fact they had to remove EVERYTHING out of Kong's building, and that sure took a long time. So basically, it hasn't even been 2 years since Kong's closure, yet Revenge of the Mummy is about to open. ROTM is also not a simple thing to build either. It's going to be very, very complex. I also know that the building structure was already in place, but still, it shouldn't take another 2 1/2 years to get EE up and running. Universal also had The Funtastic World of Hanna-Barbera close in October 2002 and had Jimmy Neutron's Nicktoon Blast open by April 2003, and Alfred Hitchcock: The Art of Making Movies closed in January 2003 and Shrek 4D was showing in June.
If only Disney had some fast construction workers.........
Well, that's because the Mummy is replacing an attraction. On E:E's case, its an entire roller coaster inside a GIGANTIC mountain with unique mechanics ( switching to going backwards ) and with big AA Yeties. I can see why its taking until 2006.
Afterall, the Imagineers want everything to be perfect, and perfection takes time.
HumanOddity
New Member
Yes, Universal may get their new attractions up and running faster than Disney, but I'd prefer Disney take their time and give their guests the best possible attraction than rush to get it out there. Let's face it, Universal ain't Disney. Don't get me wrong, I *gulp* love the Universal parks *gasp!*, but the quality level between the two parks is glaringly higher at Disney.
AndyP
Active Member
Disney don't want to rush because they don't want everything to be completed at the same time. They want people to come back year after year afterall.
Look at the trend :
New 2003 - M:S, Philharmagic, WIshes
New 2004 - Stitch
New 2005 - Stunt Show, Soarin'
New 2006 - Everest
New 2007 - ???
Disney are slowly rolling out these top new attractions, and when people visit each year they will be showing everyone what will be there next year! Plus, if they don't rush the attractions they do a great job, almost perfection and its saves money, then work force doesn't have to be as large.
Thats my view on it anyways.
Look at the trend :
New 2003 - M:S, Philharmagic, WIshes
New 2004 - Stitch
New 2005 - Stunt Show, Soarin'
New 2006 - Everest
New 2007 - ???
Disney are slowly rolling out these top new attractions, and when people visit each year they will be showing everyone what will be there next year! Plus, if they don't rush the attractions they do a great job, almost perfection and its saves money, then work force doesn't have to be as large.
Thats my view on it anyways.
GaryT977
New Member
Good point. There's also the issue of durability. Take Spiderman at Universal. When that ride opened, it broke down every day at noon. Take Test Track, after it opened they discovered they were going through tires like mad. And I've ridden it six times and it worked properly once.
It's one thing to design a ride on computers and models, it's another to build it and test it properly. I prefer Disney take their time and get it right.
MagicalMonorail
New Member
I agree with Andy. They have to keep people coming back year after year. It's good that they spread the openings of attractions over a few years. If they opened them all at once, people would come to WDW once and wouldn't come again for years. And another reason it takes so long: It's all about the detail. Yes rollercoasters can be put up in a year. But not a Disney rollercoaster. They're going to put special effects, the pre-show, the post show, and all those details and scenes you see on a ride. I wish they would all open up at the same time too, but we can't get too spoiled. :animwink:
By the way, coming in 2007: A New CEO! :sohappy:
By the way, coming in 2007: A New CEO! :sohappy:
Tom
Beta Return
First, buy the book "Roller Coasters, Flumes and Flying Saucers." It explains in detail how Disneyland was built. It was completely half-assed! Things were thrown together, and then broke down continually. They invented the rides and systems as they were building them! Disney doesn't want to half-______ things anymore - so they take their time, and make sure it is completely right thr first time, or at least try to.
I am a Construction Project Manager by profession. I can also tell you that there are thousands of outside forces that slow down production:
1. The owner, architect or engineer changing the plans - which means you have to go back and change things already in place, or sit down to re-plan how you're going to do things
2. Rain delays - on outdoor projects. Every time it rains, you have to wait 2-3 days for the ground to dry enough to work on it or pour concrete
3. Funding
4. Inspections - could slow down production if something is found wrong
5. Shipments or parts delayed due to manufacturing
6. Disney attractions are 100 times more elaborate than ANY normal commercial construction project - with pipes, electrical and control wiring running EVERYWHERE!
7. Etcetera
So, without knowing any of the above variables, its not fair to say that Disney renovations take "too long". We have no idea what setbacks they could be having, or what the actual renovation entails. Let's just be the patient folks that we are and enjoy them when they do open - knowing that they'll be fun and safe when we do!
cherrynegra
Well-Known Member
I agree with those who say that you should take your time, do it right, the first time. But 2006 for Mt. Everest? And then with the long lines and wait time, I won't be able to ride till 2010 more like it.
kanepresten
New Member
i tend to agree. the numbers dont exactly match up. my beef is that they broke ground on everest roughly the same time they broke ground on hong kong disneyland. strangely, the attraction and the park are expected to open at the same time. It just makes no sense to me that they can build an entire park, with many eticket attractons and a hotel, in the same amount of time that it takes to build just ONE eticket attraction. It doesnt quite add up.
KP
KP
GaryT977
New Member
Well, and this is probably a big understatement, but I don't think the same number of people are working on this one attraction as were working on the whole park at once.
Plus, and I'm no expert, but they aren't simply building a building, they're building an attraction that must withstand more that a million uses. Things have be done in a certain order and then tested, etc. Plus, I'm pretty sure stuff has to be made from scratch. I don't think Disney can go buy parts off the shelf from Attaction Depot.
At my job, we moved into a new building a couple of years ago that was built from scratch. It was a huge project for us. At two stories, it took more than a year to finish because of delays, design changes, permits, etc. The roof still leaks to this day.
I'm more than happy to see the progress being made during my twice yearly visits. For me, it builds up the anticipation.
Plus, and I'm no expert, but they aren't simply building a building, they're building an attraction that must withstand more that a million uses. Things have be done in a certain order and then tested, etc. Plus, I'm pretty sure stuff has to be made from scratch. I don't think Disney can go buy parts off the shelf from Attaction Depot.
At my job, we moved into a new building a couple of years ago that was built from scratch. It was a huge project for us. At two stories, it took more than a year to finish because of delays, design changes, permits, etc. The roof still leaks to this day.
I'm more than happy to see the progress being made during my twice yearly visits. For me, it builds up the anticipation.
AndyMagic
Well-Known Member
No matter how you look at it, Disney likes to take their time building new attractions. However, it never used to be like this! Tower and Terror was built in 2 years. Splash Mountain was also built in 2 years. I don't care what people say, Disney hires 2 little old women to build their rides lately. If you don't want to compare Revenge of the Mummy with EE. Then why don't we compare Shrek 4-D to Philharmagic? They both involved the gutting of an existing attraction and the insallation of a new one. It took 6 months for Shrek 4-D and about 2 years for Philharmagic. Philharmagic took longer to complete than Revenge of the Mummy! Also, if any of you read the New York Times article, it explained just how incredibly difficult it was to build the Mummy. It was a massive undertaking and it still only took about a year and half. If you ask me, it is strictly about money. There is a certain amount of money budgeted per year for attractions and by spreading the construction out longer, it is almost like financing a car. Oh well, I'd rather Disney take 4 years to build rides than just not build them at all like they did for the past 5 years.
Disney2002
New Member
That's not how project budgeting works. In fact, drawing a project out over time INCREASES the cost because contractors are around for longer.
Disney will most likely pay the contractors over a period of time, not in one lump sum. The accounting of the project is figured into the books over the course of a number of years. It's not like 2004 -$100m for Everest. In accounting, nothing happens in real time.
Just like the value of a building decreases on the books over an average of 40 years. It's all very complicated.
Pixie Duster
New Member
Is there a reason the thread starter has not posted again?
Would you rather have a rushed attraction or one that was carefully put together?
Would you rather have a rushed attraction or one that was carefully put together?
Tom
Beta Return
GaryT and Disney2002 said exactly what I was going to come back with.
Correct, most of a ride or attraction is a building, just like your local department store, warehouse, or office. However, the ride parts, like Animatronics, plaster trees, roller coaster track and bost lift conveyors have to be custom made.
Correct, construction companies are not paid by how long they spend on a project, so you can guarantee that the contractors, other than Disney, are working as fast as they can. Otherwise they lose money - that's a fact.
I'm sure Disney would not want a tacky construction wall up, and the distractions in the park any longer than they had too. Also, in reference to comparing the time it took to build Disneyland and how long it takes to renovate or build a new attraction - vastly different scenarios. When they were building the parks, they had hundreds of contractors working at one time, so it was like having 20 projects on one site, all being the same as one new project today. Also, they had near unlimited space to work in, whereas now they are confined to working at night (in the parks) or withing small fenced-in boundaries.
Time is money - period. No matter what, I'm sure DIsney would love to open their attractions instantly, but that just isn't possible. Too many outside influences, constraints, and other setbacks.