Long term effects of WDC decision making, failure to innovate, and price gouging has caught up with WDW

[Ztonyg]

I'd argue WDW in the late 2000s was in worse shape than it is in now.

MK hadn't been touched other than a play area was put over what was once the Sub lagoon (which was closed and filled in due to cost).

EPCOT was full of either closed pavilions and/or attractions that were all 10+ years out of date.

DHS (or MGM) was a park that lacked an identity and didn't have nearly as much to do. It was the quintessential 1/2 day park.

DAK was basically a glorified zoo with a handful of rides.

Disney did invest money in the parks in the early 2010s. At least now the parks are getting a more consistent flow of investment than they were during most of the 2000s into 2011 or so.

 

[CoastalElite64]

Floridians say business is down and the tourism numbers don't add up. Will be interesting to see if that affects WDW.

 

[Club Cooloholic]

Just got back from a trip to Japan, and we included two days at the Tokyo Disney Resort, one at Disney Sea one at Tokyo Disney. There was a festival going on so the days we were at the parks were some of the busiest of the year. Great time, they have a nice mix of nostalgia in the original park with Sea bringing a ton of innovation. This is why I hate them ripping up Frontierland. Keep MK classic. Sure update some things but keep the classics. There are plenty of other parks at the Orlando resort with room to put in a cars land. Oh and a one day ticket in Tokyo is about $65. Maybe Orlando can try that.

 

[wdwfan4ver]

I'd argue WDW in the late 2000s was in worse shape than it is in now.

EPCOT was full of either closed pavilions and/or attractions that were all 10+ years out of date.

DHS (or MGM) was a park that lacked an identity and didn't have nearly as much to do. It was the quintessential 1/2 day park.

Disney did invest money in the parks in the early 2010s. At least now the parks are getting a more consistent flow of investment than they were during most of the 2000s into 2011 or so.

DHS still really doesn't have an identity. While DHS is going to have 10 rides, theming is a weak point.

The problem is DHS does not have cohesive theme. It seems to be an IP dumping ground and also parts of the Park is out of place. The Indiana Jones stunt spectacular came from the era DHS theme was how the movies were made.

Also Monsters Inc. Land also does not help DHS being cohesive either because of how faraway it is from Toy Story land.

Epcot isn't exactly great right now. Also the China film wasn't updated unlike what they announced at the 2019 D23.
I'm not a fan of Epcot's spine and the concept art of how Epcot was supposed and what it became is different. Epcot was supposed get a fountain matter of fact, but got planters instead. Also parts of Epcot actually felt worse after the work was done.

Also Epcot still has an empty pavilion in the building formerly called Wonders of Life. Also the money Disney had put into isn't as much into Epcot as you think. Disney cut parts of Epcot plans due to Covid. I know Test Track is updated, but there is still to be desired in that park besides Wonders of Life build such imagination pavilion still needs help for decades.

 

[James Alucobond]

Also Monsters Inc. Land also does not help DHS being cohesive either because of how faraway it is from Toy Story land.

Monsters, Inc. has as little to do with Toy Story as it does anything else in the park. Why should they need to be near to one another?

 

[networkpro]

Monsters, Inc. has as little to do with Toy Story as it does anything else in the park. Why should they need to be near to one another?

I believe they were not too subtly advocating for a Pixars-Place where the IP from that acquisition could be grouped together. Pixar as a separate entity, just like Lucas Films (the white slavers George handed his children off into bondage). Whatever past trajectory they might have been following has been redirected into the direction the skewed focus groups and producers have determined they should follow. Showered with money, but they are showing as much institutional graft as Mob directed union contract.

 

[James Alucobond]

I believe they were not too subtly advocating for a Pixars-Place where the IP from that acquisition could be grouped together. Pixar as a separate entity, just like Lucas Films (the white slavers George handed his children off into bondage). Whatever past trajectory they might have been following has been redirected into the direction the skewed focus groups and producers have determined they should follow. Showered with money, but they are showing as much institutional graft as Mob directed union contract.

They explicitly suggested that the cohesiveness of Hollywood Studios would be enhanced by moving Monsters closer to Toy Story. They weren't proposing a fourth rethinking of the park that returns to a more studio-based layout; they were just suggesting that the current transportive single-IP lands that happen to have been released by the same studios should sit next to each other for ... reasons. It might make some sense if there were any conceptual connective tissue at all between TSL and Monstropolis, but one is "shrunken down to the size of toys in a suburban backyard" and the other is "cityscape with industrial warehouse". There is no thematic reason that they should occupy adjacent plots.

 

[wdwfan4ver]

Monsters, Inc. has as little to do with Toy Story as it does anything else in the park. Why should they need to be near to one another?

There are two reasons with the first being both being made from Pixar.

The 2nd being Having a Monsters Inc. Land between Star Tours and Galaxy's Edge is not really cohesive from a DHS standpoint. The fact is Star Tours: the Adventure Continues and Galaxy's Edge is part of the Star Wars IP unless Disney has future plans of scrapping Star Tours: the adventure continues.

Disney imagineers originally planned on having Star Tours part of Galaxy's Edge at DHS before higher ups scrapped that. Disney higher ups thought the next 2 sequel movies was going to be just as big at Box Office and The Force Awakens was.

 

[CoastalElite64]

Just got back from a trip to Japan, and we included two days at the Tokyo Disney Resort, one at Disney Sea one at Tokyo Disney. There was a festival going on so the days we were at the parks were some of the busiest of the year. Great time, they have a nice mix of nostalgia in the original park with Sea bringing a ton of innovation. This is why I hate them ripping up Frontierland. Keep MK classic. Sure update some things but keep the classics. There are plenty of other parks at the Orlando resort with room to put in a cars land. Oh and a one day ticket in Tokyo is about $65. Maybe Orlando can try that.

That's interesting, as Tokyo doesn't offer annual passes. Would fans be willing to forgo annual passes for lower ticket prices?

 

[James Alucobond]

There are two reasons with the first being both being made from Pixar.

Cinderella and Lilo & Stitch were both made by Walt Disney Animation. That doesn't mean that lands centered around each IP would have any thematic reason to sit next to each other. "Pixar" is not a theme, especially as it pertains to the way in which Hollywood Studios has been progressively redesigned in recent years.

The 2nd being Having a Monsters Inc. Land between Star Tours and Galaxy's Edge is not really cohesive from a DHS standpoint. The fact is Star Tours: the Adventure Continues and Galaxy's Edge is part of the Star Wars IP unless Disney has future plans of scrapping Star Tours: the adventure continues.

If Monstropolis hadn't occupied that plot, Muppets would still divide Star Tours from Galaxy's Edge regardless of any unrealized plans during the land's inception to incorporate it.

As DHS exists today, there is no reason why Monstropolis "fits better" next to Toy Story Land than it does in the same position previously occupied by Muppets Courtyard. Each new land they're building is self-contained and thematically independent, and they already established with TSL sitting next to Batuu that there's no intended segregation and/or progression of IPs with different moods or audiences.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

There are two reasons with the first being both being made from Pixar.

The 2nd being Having a Monsters Inc. Land between Star Tours and Galaxy's Edge is not really cohesive from a DHS standpoint. The fact is Star Tours: the Adventure Continues and Galaxy's Edge is part of the Star Wars IP unless Disney has future plans of scrapping Star Tours: the adventure continues.

Disney imagineers originally planned on having Star Tours part of Galaxy's Edge at DHS before higher ups scrapped that. Disney higher ups thought the next 2 sequel movies was going to be just as big at Box Office and The Force Awakens was.

…they were stupid…that’s been documented

Some of that going around on this thread as well

 

[Touchdown]

That's interesting, as Tokyo doesn't offer annual passes. Would fans be willing to forgo annual passes for lower ticket prices?

It has nothing to do with what fans want, we dont decide that. The question is if management is willing to risk a significant drop in attendance in order to increase per capita numbers. Tokyo sells out most days without APs because they are located next to one of the largest cities in the world and have an amazing track record going back nearly 50 years as great place to visit. WDW and DLR tried this post Covid, it didn’t work even though DLR is located in an equally large metro area and WDW has collected a large number of captive vacationers who are locked in to going to Orlando yearly (DVC.) Instead of studying why TDL was able to pull that off and trying to replicate it here, they begrudgingly let the filthy AP people back in and instead continued to cut experiences in the park, upcharge more, and raise prices.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Instead of studying why TDL was able to pull that off and trying to replicate it here, they begrudgingly let the filthy AP people back in and instead continued to cut experiences in the park, upcharge more, and raise prices.

…you mad, bro?

 

[Touchdown]

…you mad, bro?

Nope just disappointed, but that’s the way it is. t least they are now building a bunch of new rides (a correction after they learned that yes they need to do that.) It’s going to take a while before I forget 2010-2022.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Nope just disappointed, but that’s the way it is. t least they are now building a bunch of new rides (a correction after they learned that yes they need to do that.) It’s going to take a while before I forget 2010-2022.

You’re sending me some mixed signals, baby

 

[harryk]

Looking back at the original comment on page 1. This is really what it is all about. Naturally management will tout the fantastic attendance figures for the last quarter as proof that the pricing is not having an adverse affect. What I'm interested in seeing is how the figures are next year and the reservations are - not counting DVC. How many guests actually return for another visit. Instead of adding attractions, they are replacing attractions - that is not growth.

 

[Goofyernmost]

Looking back at the original comment on page 1. This is really what it is all about. Naturally management will tout the fantastic attendance figures for the last quarter as proof that the pricing is not having an adverse affect. What I'm interested in seeing is how the figures are next year and the reservations are - not counting DVC. How many guests actually return for another visit. Instead of adding attractions, they are replacing attractions - that is not growth.

It is a bit of growth is you figure that new attractions will attract more people than the replaced attractions did. Not bigger in numbers but bigger in productivity. Don't get me wrong, I still think that doing away with the RoA and TSI just plain sucked. It altered an important part of the astentics of the park when they had the land to expend without losing a damn thing. Think Indiana Jones in Disneyland built basically under what was once the parking lot.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Growth implies more of something…
Replacements don’t meet that criteria

Just like their sales…they’re not growing…they’re shrinking…as they attempt to charge more to make up for the bleed

It works for now…but there is diminishing returns there. Been going on for years

 

[KDM31091]

It is a bit of growth is you figure that new attractions will attract more people than the replaced attractions did. Not bigger in numbers but bigger in productivity. Don't get me wrong, I still think that doing away with the RoA and TSI just plain sucked. It altered an important part of the astentics of the park when they had the land to expend without losing a damn thing. Think Indiana Jones in Disneyland built basically under what was once the parking lot.

This is my issue. There is more than enough space on property to add things without constantly taking something away, especially a large iconic part of that park. Did the Riverboat and TSI attract tons of guests? Probably not, but they were still important to the park and had their place. A Cars ride that caters to only certain people is a step backward. Riverboat/TSI could be enjoyed by almost everyone, and the number of attractions that that applies to will continue to shrink over time it seems.

After the initial novelty I don't know that WDW's Indy will attract much more than Dinosaur does now. It's realistically still the same ride, and those who don't like it for that reason (rough, etc) still won't.