matt9112
Well-Known Member
Most popular rides in the entire resort.....lets put them all in the smallest park we have.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Lightning Lane at Walt Disney World
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
Most popular rides in the entire resort.....lets put them all in the smallest park we have.
matt9112
Well-Known Member
Because thats the only fix....increasing capacity is the ONLY solution. I have never seen all the disney fan sites turn on disney until this year. Disney is burning through there goodwill like oil. Eventually it WILL affect the parks.
el_super
Well-Known Member
The solution to what problem exactly? You have rides with high demand, commanding long lines and wait times and the demand needs to be managed. If you build a new ride, you just shift all that demand to the new thing and solve nothing.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Except for all of the times that does not happen, but you keep spinning.
el_super
Well-Known Member
Sorry I keep forgetting, what year exactly was it that capacity was sufficient for there not to be any lines?
Chip Chipperson
Well-Known Member
They don't have to build E-ticket after E-ticket. I realize that they may feel it's easier to see a tangible ROI immediately for an E-ticket, but they need rides that appeal to various demographics rather than just, "Here's the latest E-ticket that will bring in more new guests than it can handle." For example, Galaxy's Edge, Toy Story Land, and Pandora could all use another ride. They need something to replace closed attractions like Primeval Whirl and Stitch's Great Escape. None of those need to be rides that bring in more guests per day than they can handle. I'm not saying they shouldn't make them as great as they can, but something that has a high hourly capacity is more important than, "Look at this cool technology we built!" after this latest slate of new rides is done. They're obviously capable of doing that. Just look at Alien Swirling Saucers. It's a fun ride and kids will really enjoy it, but it's not the hook that gets people to visit Toy Story Land. That's Slinky and, to some extent even after being open for a while now, TSMM. Adding an omnimover to each park (maybe even 2 in some cases) would add capacity without the hype of something like Cosmic Rewind or Rise of the Resistance that brings more people to the park than the added capacity can handle.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
There it is again, intentionally conflating different issues.
Jrb1979
Well-Known Member
It looks good on them for burning through their goodwill.
I agree the only fix is increasing capacity but at the same time we also know that isn't happening any time soon. Since that's not happening my solution is to limit the sales of Genie+. No where does it say that it everyone has to have access to it.
As far as adding capacity, I really don't understand why the don't go the route that regional parks do in adding something every year. Most parks will add some smaller ride most years.
matt9112
Well-Known Member
Well theres two answers. One is they need to stop building only head liners. And or advertising them as such. They need to build ALOT more little mermaids than trons. New rides inherently create more demand than they have capacity. This is true for even a six flags. BUT that demand should subside after a year or two IF you continue to build things.
The second portion is the resort as a whole (it should be considered its own thing for context) not oh the mk is ok but hs isn't. Is they went a very large period of time with no large capacity increases. They closed old capacity and replaced it with new capacity. (Granted utilization of said capacity is now higher due to popularity/demand) its still not moving the needle of resort wide capacity. The resort sees x amount more people. In a perfect world you match that with x new capacity. Now to be fair its probably not just to ask for a theme park to match it perfectly but it should scale similarly. That has not occured. Capacity has not scaled with demand. The entire resort needs such a massive injection of capacity its not something the board is ever going to do. To be fair i consider GE a net gain as well as rat but almost everything else is not. Things like the starliner or a giant billboard on i drive should never get approved until the fundamentals of the parks are fixed.
Now everything i said is based off of the EXPECTATION of resonsble and or acceptable crowd levels. Disney is clearly perfectly fine bottoming out the parks capacity. Thus they might not even see the problem because to them it dosen't exsist the level of crowding and line waiting to them MAY BE perfectly acceptable. If thats the case everything i said above is moot.
Chip Chipperson
Well-Known Member
There's a very real and obvious difference between people wanting lines to be tolerable and wanting "no lines." Literally nobody has argued that there could or should be no lines. But when they know that a new ride such as Rise of the Resistance will have extremely high demand then they should build it to account for that demand as much as possible (add another theater or add another ride in the land to divert some of that demand to another attraction). Building new lands with only 2 rides has become a trend for them (2 rides for Pandora, 2 rides for Galaxy's Edge, 2 new rides for Toy Story Land) and then they have to come up with ways to handle the lines that extend well past the ride entrance (or, in some cases, past the entrance to the land itself). How about an omnimover in Toy Story Land that tells some sort of story about Forky? Or maybe something in Galaxy's Edge that tells the history of the Resistance or Jedis (think a fictional version of an old-school educational Epcot attraction)?
matt9112
Well-Known Member
Bloat....anything disney touches costs SO MUCH. Look at how much SDD costs and thats as bare as it gets for disney.
They should be able to buy 2 or 3 rides for every one they pay for. Now with that said another Avenue is shows....they are massive people eaters and generally run longer than rides and thus keep guests tied down for longer periods of time. Sure FOTLK is probably a little pricey but even newer versions of non actor based shows such as philmore and muppets would go a long way.
Disney also has much slower turn around than an average park. They leave land empty for years at a time on a regular basis. Rides close years before anything takes its place.
Furthermore theres this systemic hesitation to expand the parks....Rat was the first time in what feels like forever. To actually increase the park foot print.
el_super
Well-Known Member
Ok then any proof at all really. Name a time that they added a ride/attraction/capacity and wait times went down? You're so sure that it's true that there has to be some evidence of it somewhere, some documented example of it happening in all the years the parks have been open...
In principal I would agree, but Slinky is a good case for why this isn't working. They built Toy Story Land quick and cheap to give people waiting for Star Wars something to do, but then Slinky became a headliner attraction (why... I'm not even sure on that) and now it's the bottleneck attraction in Genie+ that is forcing everyone to wake up early because they must do it.
matt9112
Well-Known Member
They advertised the **** out of TSL they legitimately wanted people coming on vacation for that land alone. It was plastered at airports...on buses....big fancy tv commercials.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
You have repeatedly been given examples and detailed explanations that you just dismiss because you don’t like them. Even now you demand an example of your distortions.
el_super
Well-Known Member
I don't think they have a choice anymore. I think one of the key issues here, part of the reason the models are failing, is that the disparity between headliners and non-headliners is widening. Rather than there really being a range of experiences (A, B, C, D and E), everything is getting boiled down into "must-do" or "skip." That's putting way more pressure on the headliners to perform in a way that traditionally they were never meant to.
Case in point: Muppet's still being empty when all those attractions went down yesterday. People are so driven to get the headliners done, that waiting in a 100+ minute wait for Tower of Terror seems like a better option then wasting any time visiting Muppets or seeing a show.
Well I think another angle on this is that, ultimately, people would rather wait in long lines than be excluded from visiting. My solution would be a simple price increase across the board to curb demand and reduce the overall wait time everywhere. For Disney though that's a terrible solution because pricing people out would have a greater negative impact on the brand image than long wait times.
Secondarily, if attendance was brought back down, you would see a lot of attraction demand dry up, to the point that Disney would be forced to close a lot of their older, more historical attractions. That's not really something I think anyone wants, and especially not Disney. In a weird way, having a 90+ minute wait for Mine Train, justifies keeping Tiki Room and Country Bears around for another year.
el_super
Well-Known Member
If all you're going to do is keep telling me I'm wrong, you can just give up now.
Saying they need to add capacity to resolve crowding issues is a easy/lazy answer that has all the same veracity as a child with a closet full of toys saying he's bored.
You can just skip the end of the argument: Disney is never going to add "enough" capacity by your definition and they will get by just fine.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
You accuse others of being lazy? You’re the one who has to keep defaulting to “Disney did it so it must be right.”
It’s not my definition, it is an industry standard that was used to define the program of the biggest parks being built right now.
el_super
Well-Known Member
Then why is it so bad at explaining what's happening at Disney right now?
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
People have explained it to you ad nauseum. The only issue is that you refuse to accept it.
I'll put it very simply one more time for you, just so you can't continue to pretend that no one has ever told you why your argument makes absolutely no rational or logical sense (at least in this thread). A new ride creates demand for that new ride. It does not create enough new demand to outweigh the capacity addition (especially if they are also adding shop, entertainment, and dining capacity, all of which are needed) -- even Galaxy's Edge did not do this.
Your argument would only make sense if new rides increased attendance by thousands and thousands of people every single day forever, which we know isn't true, or if new rides eliminated all demand for other attractions, which we also know isn't true. The new attraction will have long lines, but the other attractions will have correspondingly shorter lines. People didn't just stop wanting to ride Expedition Everest because Flight of Passage opened. You're essentially saying that if an attraction had 2.5 hour lines, and two new attractions open that get a 3 hour line and a 1.5 hour line, and that decreases the wait time at the previously existing attraction to 1 hour, that does nothing to help the park. Of course it does -- people can now ride that previously existing attraction while waiting an hour and a half less, and that would cascade throughout the whole park. If someone isn't interested in the new ride and only wanted to ride the original attraction, they now have 1.5 more hours to spend doing something other than waiting in line. People would have more options, and not everyone is interested in every attraction.
It's not a magical panacea that would suddenly make WDW perfect, but if every park had just 3 or 4 additional attractions (and even moreso if they had a couple of extra restaurants etc.) it would help tremendously.
JMcMahonEsq
Well-Known Member
In the span of 3 years, HS opened both Toy Story Land and Galaxy's edge, and then MMRT. The addition of 6 major rides should have been enough to alleviate and capacity issue in HS. Has it worked? HS seemed pretty crowed the last 3 times i was there.
If you are looking for a built out of "capacity" larger than 6 new rides over the course of 3 years for a single park, (meaning an average of 2 new rides coming on line per year, for the past 3 years) then you just being unrealistic from any reasonable business perspective.