Logic fails? I'm literally just explaining to you what Disney has already done. What is the more logical answer here: that Disney is completely inept at running a theme park, or you have an incomplete understanding of the decisions they are making.
Disney theme park success is intertwined with the Disney universe and the generations of past good will it has built. You don't get to hang their current customer demand on a single item and say "see, its working" - that's asinine. We can also point to the fact Disney keeps trying over and over since 2013 to get a FP system that works in their current environment. If things were so great - they wouldn't be spending all this time and money iterating and trying to relaunch a system... again.
Nor would they be introducing park reservations to manage crowds
Nor would they be telling customers they are raising prices to combat crowding
If Disney wasn't facing a crowding and guest sat problem in the parks - they could have skipped all the above.. but they didn't.
You want to believe that Disney is inept, because you're already decided you are right, but honestly, Disney has access to more information, more understanding and more knowledge on the situation than you do.
Disney leadership isn't necessarily motivated nor incentivized to address the same concerns as others. They were doing great at what they were incentivized to do... Drive demand and drive guest spending. The fact they can run the bus into the wall or run it well past it's scheduled service isn't really their primary concern. Priority #1 is meeting growth goals.
So as justification for how they haven't added enough, you list out literally billions of dollars of expansion they have completed. But it's never enough right? They added Pandora, and it had 4 hour long lines. They added Star Wars and it had four hour long lines. They will add Tron and it will have four hour long lines. And the only answer you can conjure is ... let's just keep adding more. It's not the adding more that's the problem, it's the FOUR HOUR long line.
At AK people waiting in 4hr lines is good for the discussion on hand because that's thousands of people soaked up. People capacity that the park never had. At DHS, no one waited in those lines so Rise didn't act like the sponge, and on top of it the park had lost its two biggest people eater attractions leading up to it. And we know TRON won't have 4hr lines either because it will be basically ILL and virtual.. so it won't be soaking up people beyond the 20mins it will take them to cycle through it. That's a huge problem with these new attractions. Note in my post I said people sponges... not just 'new rides'.
You keep beating this 'brings more demand' mantra because you have a RIDE on the mind and then make generalizations about all attractions because of it.
The problem is like I said in the past post. "The point is it's not enough when you spent 15years choking off what you already had and your additions are largely constrained themselves in their ability to soak up people."
So yes, 'its not enough' when the things you are doing don't address your problem. People have been talking about adding more capacity - attractions that spit people out in 15-20 mins are limited in their ability to soak up people.
People always complain about losing attractions and shows, but Disney isn't cutting things that are drawing a crowd. They are cutting things that are not meeting their numbers/expectations. Yes things are a little cloudy here because of COVID, but let's be honest: they closed Stitch instead of Pirates because they actually know which rides are working.
The important part here is not just cutting them BUT NOT REPLACING THEM. So they literally are compounding their own problem of reducing activities, reducing their people soak capacity, and funneling people together.
The complaint is the reduction in activities people are interested in. Just cutting dead wood doesn't speak to that.
Yeah we both agree here on the importance of C-Ticket attractions, but the biggest problem here is that, to reduce demand on the E-Ticket attractions, you have to supplant them with those C-Ticket experiences. That's where the disappointment comes in.
People can't run at full sensory overload at all times. People can't run at full physical exertion at all times. People don't focus on just one person in their party at all times. The point of attraction variety isn't just to 'not spend as much money' but to round out your offerings. People didn't goto Coral Reef purely because they needed substance... they went as part of their vacation experience. Disney built places like Sci-Fi diner instead of a burger stand for a reason. No one goes 'Damn.. I wish Sci-Fi was Superman the ride instead!'. The experience roster has a purpose in the park and isn't a letdown or only done because of spending less.
Think of it this way: if you went back to a ticket book approach, where people are doled out a certain number of E Tickets and C -Tickets, you could fix the demand profiles in the park overnight. People would generally hate it though, if they were told they could only do X number of E-Tickets in a day.
You do realize people bought individual tickets right? The ticket books were just the discount purchase model.
Second, your hypothetical doesn't work anyway because Disney is building parks without enough e-ticket capacity to even do what you said. Back to our problem... more attendance than they have capacity to soak and maintain a good experience.
Conventional Wisdom in this case is that a high capacity attraction/venue (like a theater show, or a tour ride), do not generate the same level of demand as something like a roller coaster or whatever-new-technology system Disney has this week.
non sequitur - Those attractions do not NEED to 'generate the same level of demand as something like a roller coaster or whatever-new-technology system' -- They need to generate enough demand to keep them busy and effective in their role in the park. Obviously the higher capacity they can soak up the better - but to damn them because they do not equal the headliners is non-sense. Not everything is a headliner!
Yeah but taking the example of Disneyland. Disneyland has more attractions than the MK, but is the crowding issue any less at Disneyland?
Yes
Disneyland has more physical space crowd issues than it does 'so busy I didn't get to ride anything DHS' issues. Disneyland's crowd problems were more operational/infrastructure ... issues like surges in parking, uneven demand, etc.. shaped more by the visiting patterns of large amounts of APs - not just crushing crowds.
Is a 60 minute wait at Space Mountain somehow different than the 60 minute wait at MK?
Yes, because you'll find the wait at Space Mountain at DL will be lower than at MK on average and most of the time. Your comparison is not accurate.
Isn't Genie+ going to cost MORE money at Disneyland, even if they generally have more supply? How does that work?
Because Genie+ pricing at Disneyland is being set to cope with the legacy Maxpass situation and differences in photopass infrastructure.
Again which is it... is Disney adding capacity and we have a crowding problem, or is Disney NOT adding capacity and we still have a crowding problem. How can you see it as both at the same time?
Because 'adding capacity' is a generic statement that is not self supportive. If you are starving and I give you $5... I can't shout down complains you are going hungry because I gave you $5 when you are actually trying to feed yourself more than once.
