NEW WDW 2006 Attendance Figures!

[Slowjack]

Wow, Slowjack! I'd be very curious to hear what criteria you are using to judge IOA and DCA for their "quality."
(snip) But I just can't see either way how DCA bodes poorly for the future of theme parks. I've missed all the debates, though, so I understand I may be in the minority.

Well, I wasn't really trying to get into a quality debate. I really meant this in more of an investment perspective. I mean, regardless of how anyone feels about IoA (and again, it's not for me because it focuses too much on coasters and such), it's clear that Universal was really trying to hit a home run, a park that would rival Disney quality. Whether they achieved that is personal opinion, but I really think that was the intention from everything I read at the time, and I think they were very disappointed that the new park didn't siphoned off many people from WDW.

DCA, again, seems clearly to have been designed from the start to be inexpensive. I don't think that's a matter of huge debate, although I suppose on these boards anything can be a source of debate . Given that previous thoughts for the second park were Westcot or DisneySea, I don't think that the DCA concept won out because they thought future guests would consider this to be the most exciting park option. Instead I think it was a way of putting in a second park at reduced cost. I even saw an interview with Eisner at the time where he more or less admitted this, and said that they really needed the concept to work because he didn't want to keep making such huge capital investments in parks.

I'm here in Alabama and I've never seen DCA, so I'm not making a statement on which park is better, really, although I will say that I have no interest in visiting DCA. If I want to ride standard amusement park rides in a state-themed environment, I can do so here, at the similarly named Alabama Adventure. Obviously if you really like it, then you've got no worries.

To see my concern, though, I would offer the example of Dino-Rama in AK. It was a cheap way to add some addition ride capacity to a park, but it's not remotely Disney quality in my mind, and I think most people miss the theming concept entirely (it's suppose to be a roadside carnival but I know several people who thought Disney had just thrown it up on a real former parking lot). I don't think Dino-Rama did a lot for AK's attendance, certainly not like Everest did. But suppose Dino-Rama had been really successful...would we have ever gotten Everest? That's the thing I worry about.

 

[DisneyYorkian74]

And what's the dral with the Six Flags "fast lane" fast pass rip off that you have to pay for? In my opinion, that's f'ed up that you pay a higher price and you can cut the line. At least the real fastpass is available to anybody and you are limited to how often you can get them.

Universal Orlando also makes you pay extra for their version of the "Fast Pass."

Some people say that that's just another thing to add to Universal's decline in quality.

 

[DizFanatic]

Universal Orlando also makes you pay extra for their version of the "Fast Pass."

Some people say that that's just another thing to add to Universal's decline in quality.

OK, now I remember why I'm such a Disney Fanatic!
Oh, thanks for the information! It will make some great reading on the train home tonight.

 

[Deadmanwalking]

Now if someone could just post the average park attendane figures by day on an hour by hour basis I think I could really plan the next trip perfectly.

 

[PintoColvig]

Now if someone could just post the average park attendane figures by day on an hour by hour basis I think I could really plan the next trip perfectly.

Here's the next best thing...
http://www.touringplans.com/tp2/UG2_index.php?PageID=14

 

[dreamscometrue]

Thanks for posting the link.

It's great to see more people entering Animal Kingdom. The past 2 years have seen quite an increase at this park. I've always been a huge fan of AK since first setting foot in the place a few years back. Everytime I visit, I notice more of the theming and enjoy the park more than during the previous visit. Time just has to be spent exploring the place. It's a great park to slow down and check out. As EE and the Nemo musical get more people through the gates, perhaps while there they will explore the Maharajh Trek and Pangani Trail, etc. and develop a better sense of the overall amazing theming and atmosphere of the park.

 

[sponono88]

Well, I wasn't really trying to get into a quality debate. I really meant this in more of an investment perspective. I mean, regardless of how anyone feels about IoA (and again, it's not for me because it focuses too much on coasters and such), it's clear that Universal was really trying to hit a home run, a park that would rival Disney quality. Whether they achieved that is personal opinion, but I really think that was the intention from everything I read at the time, and I think they were very disappointed that the new park didn't siphoned off many people from WDW.

DCA, again, seems clearly to have been designed from the start to be inexpensive. I don't think that's a matter of huge debate, although I suppose on these boards anything can be a source of debate . Given that previous thoughts for the second park were Westcot or DisneySea, I don't think that the DCA concept won out because they thought future guests would consider this to be the most exciting park option. Instead I think it was a way of putting in a second park at reduced cost. I even saw an interview with Eisner at the time where he more or less admitted this, and said that they really needed the concept to work because he didn't want to keep making such huge capital investments in parks.

I'm here in Alabama and I've never seen DCA, so I'm not making a statement on which park is better, really, although I will say that I have no interest in visiting DCA. If I want to ride standard amusement park rides in a state-themed environment, I can do so here, at the similarly named Alabama Adventure. Obviously if you really like it, then you've got no worries.

To see my concern, though, I would offer the example of Dino-Rama in AK. It was a cheap way to add some addition ride capacity to a park, but it's not remotely Disney quality in my mind, and I think most people miss the theming concept entirely (it's suppose to be a roadside carnival but I know several people who thought Disney had just thrown it up on a real former parking lot). I don't think Dino-Rama did a lot for AK's attendance, certainly not like Everest did. But suppose Dino-Rama had been really successful...would we have ever gotten Everest? That's the thing I worry about.

If you haven't been to DCA then you probably shouldn't be talking about it so negatively. It's funny how so many people have such a strong hate for California Adventure, yet they've never even stepped one foot inside the park. :brick:

Btw, you mention standard amusement park rides... What rides are you talking about exactly, besides Paradise Pier? Because most rides at DCA were cloned from WDW. Perhaps you're talking about Grizzly River Run? That ride sure seems like a standard amusement park ride to me

 

[Christi22222]

Hi Slowjack!

I think I see the point better now. You aren't necessarily comparing the end result of the parks, but more the effort made and willingness to invest cash. I hear you and agree. I guess I'm hopeful that it is just a matter of "new" parks take a while to mature and work out the kinks and get more rides in them. I was never a fan of the DinoRama either, and Paradise Pier is definitely my least favorite part of DCA. Agreed that it is just adding attractions on the cheap. I would suggest, though, that it is coloring your opinion of DCA. I hope you will consider visiting DCA - not because I'm right and you're wrong and I want to have a debate! But because I feel that park is very Disney quality and am guessing as a Disney fan you would be pleasantly surprised. But then, you are awfully close to WDW where you are, so I'm not sure I would ever choose going to Anaheim over that. I just have family in SoCal and use Disney as a break!

 

[jmvd20]

I have never been to DCA but did not hear good things about it. Over the weekend they had a Disney special on with a segment about DCA and I was trying to figure out where the negativity is coming from. Based upon what I saw it looked really neat, and with a lot of good attractions. It's just my thoughts from the TV show but I was impressed with how DCA looked. :shrug:

 

[perculata]

The Disney name does indeed draw people into their parks. Look at the worst performing Disney parks worldwide which are the ones you mentioned and they are still on the worldwide top 25 list. If it was Paramounts California Adventure, or Sea World's Hong Kong SeaLand do you think they still be that high?

I'm not saying that just the name can make the park a great success on it's own - but it sure as heck can't hurt. Some Disney parks may not have met expectations but to have a brand new park break into the top 10 in it's first years - that is the result of name recognition.

Ok, that makes sense. I was thinkin about the parks in the long run. I realize that when parks are first opened, people will give them a chance just because the Disney name is on them. But what I was trying to get at is the fact that people won't continue to go to the parks year after year just because they're Disney. The initial rush is there, but once the public has time to assess the quality of the park, the repeat visitors may not turn out.

 

[perculata]

I'd say that's certainly true when it comes to the Disney water parks.

I was pleasantly shocked when I saw that Typhoon Lagoon and Blizzard Beach held the top spots in water park attendance and were well ahead of all the other water parks.

Blizzard Beach and Typhoon Lagoon don't offer that many attractions compared to the others and they're not that big; so it would appear that it's the fact that the "Disney" name is attached to it that make them so successful.

It's probably less about the disney name and more about the location. The ticket tie ins with the other 4 parks and the fact that those 4 parks drew 50 million people last year is probably the main reason those numbers are so high. If Schlitterbain (sp?) or some of the other waterparks up on that list were associated with large parks that got 50 million visitors per year, i gurantee their numbers would be higher.

 

[Pete C]

I can't believe anyone wouldn't give IOA it's due. Let's get one thing straight...when it comes to quality and detail, that park is flat-out amazing. The entrance bazaar is awesome, overloaded with details. Dr. Suess world is INSANE. The area is completely wild and imaginative. The Lost Continent area with the trident coming out of the ground is massive and overwhelming. Hit up the Tree restaurant and you might as well be in a Lord of the Rings movie. The queue for Dueling Dragons is unmatched by any queue in any park, anywhere. Please, argue with me on that. The toon area and rides: Ripsaw and Popeye's, are incredible. Popeye is easily the best rapids ride ever made. Ripsaw is a close second to Splash Mountain...better final drop, but not as good theming. Spidey? Only the best dark ride ever made in my, and may others, opinion.

So, this park definitely has some incredible details and quality. That doesn't make it better, it just makes it impressive. IOA is as good if not better than the Disney parks if you just compare WOW factor. Animal Kingdom and the World Showcase are really the only ones that compare when it comes to that. However, I think the key distinction is that IOA doesn't make you yearn to go back because the charisma isn't there...something about it is lacking. The charm and characters...the stories...the magic if you will, make the Disney parks.

 

[dandaman]

Universal Orlando also makes you pay extra for their version of the "Fast Pass."

Some people say that that's just another thing to add to Universal's decline in quality.

Universal Express is free with a stay at either of the three on-site resorts, and is redeemable for as many times as you want (whereas the purchased one is good for one ride per participating attraction). Saved me a good solid 4 hours each day last month.

FYI, Royal Pacific seemed better than Polynesian, with less price. :wave:

^And, regarding the above post: I found out that WOW factor's power first-hand a few weeks ago. Like I said in my trip report, anyone who says IoA is far less impressive in awe has never gone.

As for "that Tree restaurant":

 

[perculata]

I can't believe anyone wouldn't give IOA it's due. Let's get one thing straight...when it comes to quality and detail, that park is flat-out amazing. The entrance bazaar is awesome, overloaded with details. Dr. Suess world is INSANE. The area is completely wild and imaginative. The Lost Continent area with the trident coming out of the ground is massive and overwhelming. Hit up the Tree restaurant and you might as well be in a Lord of the Rings movie. The queue for Dueling Dragons is unmatched by any queue in any park, anywhere. Please, argue with me on that. The toon area and rides: Ripsaw and Popeye's, are incredible. Popeye is easily the best rapids ride ever made. Ripsaw is a close second to Splash Mountain...better final drop, but not as good theming. Spidey? Only the best dark ride ever made in my, and may others, opinion.

So, this park definitely has some incredible details and quality. That doesn't make it better, it just makes it impressive. IOA is as good if not better than the Disney parks if you just compare WOW factor. Animal Kingdom and the World Showcase are really the only ones that compare when it comes to that. However, I think the key distinction is that IOA doesn't make you yearn to go back because the charisma isn't there...something about it is lacking. The charm and characters...the stories...the magic if you will, make the Disney parks.

Yea, I don't see how people can short change IOA. Honestly, I'm kind of sad that it sucks attendance wise. It deserves a lot more visitors than it gets. The fact that DCA out draws it is a joke. I mean DCA may have a few fun rides,but quality wise, it doesn't compare to IOA. My only problems with IOA are the two coasters and doctor doom. Otherwise the themeing there is, for the most part, on par with Disney. It's really a great place to go to get the thrills of a six flags park mixed with the theming of a disney park.

We can only hope that Universal is able to turn its attnedance around. It'd be really great if disney started to feel some sort of pressure from Universal again. Disney needs to start fixing some of the things in the park. Orlando management is a joke compared to their counterparts out in Anaheim... but that's a completely different story.

 

[Fried Chicken]

I believe those attendance figures as much as I believe in psychics.

*And I happen to believe that all psychics are total frauds.

 

[ToTBellHop]

I believe those attendance figures as much as I believe in psychics.

*And I happen to believe that all psychics are total frauds.

any reason in particular? They are consistent with numbers over the years and Universal's numbers are consistent w/ the numbers right from Universal. These are all estimates so they come with a margin-of-error of probably 100,000, but are pretty accurate. Estimating WDW attendance is not trivial but the algorithms AB and now these guys use have been pretty powerful--certainly the best we've got.

 

[jmvd20]

Ok, that makes sense. I was thinkin about the parks in the long run. I realize that when parks are first opened, people will give them a chance just because the Disney name is on them. But what I was trying to get at is the fact that people won't continue to go to the parks year after year just because they're Disney. The initial rush is there, but once the public has time to assess the quality of the park, the repeat visitors may not turn out.

I'd agree with that for the stand alone parks for sure. But even a place like DCA is definitely aided by having DL right next to it. People will still go to DL if DCA is good or not, and I would bet since people are already going to DL they would go to DCA as well.

To me it seems as if were both on the same page - just speaking a different language

 

[perculata]

I'd agree with that for the stand alone parks for sure. But even a place like DCA is definitely aided by having DL right next to it. People will still go to DL if DCA is good or not, and I would bet since people are already going to DL they would go to DCA as well.

To me it seems as if were both on the same page - just speaking a different language

Yea, basically. :lol:

 

[TP2000]

I have never been to DCA but did not hear good things about it. Over the weekend they had a Disney special on with a segment about DCA and I was trying to figure out where the negativity is coming from. Based upon what I saw it looked really neat, and with a lot of good attractions. It's just my thoughts from the TV show but I was impressed with how DCA looked. :shrug:

You have to realize the SoCal marketplace that DCA opened in, as it is very different from the Orlando marketplace and the demographic that visits Walt Disney World.

Southern Californians are extremely passionate about Disneyland. Disneyland was a California invention that we proudly offered to the entire country and it changed the way America entertains itself, and subsequently changed the way most of the free world now entertains itself. Disneyland is a hallowed concept for Californians, and the standards that Southern Californians have for Disneyland are extremely high.

The average relationship a WDW visitor has to the parks in Orlando is much more casual. And since most WDW guests are visitors from other states and countries, there is no home town pride associated with WDW like there is at Disneyland.

When they built a second theme park next door to Disneyland, most of us expected it to be just as good as Disneyland, if not better. Most Westerners have never been to Orlando, and use Disneyland as their point of reference for a "Disney theme park". When DCA opened and it wasn't up to the standards of Disneyland, it was a let down.

Hindsight is 20-20, and you could argue that they didn't spend as much money as they should have on DCA to prepare it to be compared and contrasted to Disneyland right on opening day in 2001. But DCA is still held to a very high standard, and it doesn't quite measure up yet. It certainly didn't measure up in 2001. They are now spending big buckets of cash to upgrade the park, and John Lasseter has taken a personal interest in the project. Things should get much better for DCA by the end of the decade.

DCA overall is held to a very high standard by locals here in SoCal. We consider Disneyland to be part of our cultural identity as Californians, right alongside surfers and movie stars and the Golden Gate Bridge and Silicon Valley and the Beach Boys blaring from a car radio stuck on a jammed LA freeway. DCA needs to be on par with those major cultural icons, and it doesn't quite live up to that standard yet.

 

[Scar Junior]

Keep in mind that Disneyland was always a primarily Californian attraction. "The company knew from market surveys that only two percent of Disneyland's visitors in California traveled from east of the Mississippi, where 3/4 of the nation's population resided." - Richard E. Foglesong's Married to the Mouse: Walt Disney World and Orlando