Let me sum up the whole "Disney needs thrill rides to appeal to teens" thing so I can move on.
1. Not all teens like thrill rides.
Definitely true, but that's not what is meant by a target market. The market as a whole is more apt to seek out thrill rides vs. a Fantasyland style dark ride.
2. WDW and MK offer lots of rides that appeal to all age groups.
3. Even if teenagers only liked thrill rides, it would not be wise for Disney to base their designs around appealing to one demographic.
Yes, this is definitely true - although I would argue that it's easier to sell Rock 'n' Roller Coaster or Tower of Terror to a teen as opposed to Toy Story Mania. That's not to say that once the "thrill ride minded teen" rides Toy Story Mania they won't come off smiling, but it's a harder sell the other two.
4. The demo in question (teenage thrill seekers - presumably male) have thrill parks to visit all over the country.
True, I've had debates with friends that love roller coasters but have little to no interest in Disney because from a coaster standpoint, the Disney coasters are tame. They'd rather experience the bare bones coasters at a six flags because they create a greater thrill.
5. This same demo has a stigma about Disney. If Disney built the greatest coaster park in the world, but called it Disney's Thrill Park, a lot of teens wouldn't give it a second look because of the Disney name.
Absolutely. This is why the name Disney XD was a bad choice.
Disney is what it is. They specialize in entertainment for the whole family. That includes thrill rides, but thrill rides have always been a relatively small piece of the formula. Never the focus. If thrill rides are the only thing that interest you, you would be better served by another company.
Seriously, Islands of Adventure is a marvelously themed park. It is up to Disney standards in every way. But it is focused on thrill rides. The teen thrill-seeker demo is always going to choose IoA over Disney. Disney shouldn't waste their time and resources making a play for this crowd.
They thought about it, but realized very quickly that the didn't have to. Seriously, I see very little reason to go to Islands of Adventure with a child that won't go on thrill rides.
Instead, Disney's going to continue focus on the "all ages" approach. Rides that grandparents can ride with their grandkids. They are going to throw in some thrill rides to fill out the roster. But Disney parks will never be designed for people who just want to ride thrill rides all day. That's not Disney.
It's how the maintain the status as a resort destination. If there isn't enough that appeals to the entire family, they're not going to get the entire family.
Finally, I don't think anyone is against another thrill ride in MK. As fans, I think we would all be for it. But you have to look at it from a business perspective. Putting a big thrill ride in MK (the most attended park which sometimes closes due to capacity issues) while you have parks with much lower attendance like DHS and DAK makes no sense at all.
If you're Disney and you've got the budget to put in a new e-ticket, you want to get the most bang for your buck. Putting that e-ticket in MK will not generate as much ticket sales as putting it in a park people might otherwise skip. A single e-ticket might turn DHS or DAK from a half-day park (for some) into a full day park. It might cause a family to extend their vacation.
And let's be real, a thrill park at MK will always be relatively tame anyway. How many thrill junkies really think Splash Mountain is a thrill? If you are bored by Pirates and Haunted Mansion, the Mountains really aren't going to be that big of a draw anyway. And one more excellent themed but relatively tame thrill ride isn't going to change your mind about the park.
I do think that the Magic Kingdom could use another thrill ride, but I agree - it's not the park to put in an ultra intense attraction. You mentioned capacity, and a new thrill ride would help that because it is actually an issue that needs to be addressed. However your point is well taken. A thrill ride of the scope of Everest would not have the same effect on the Magic Kingdom as it did to the Animal Kingdom.
Extending the vacations is the aim of Disney for adding new attractions. They were successful in doing this when MGM opened because they also opened Mickey's Birthdayland, Norway and Wonders of Life at around the same time. The plan was to do something similar when the Animal Kingdom opened but Test Track was delayed and the funding ran out for David Copperfield's Magic Underground.
Grizzly Hall 71, I understand that obviously these rides appeal to you. And I guess none of the other rides at MK do. But I think you are mistaken in generalizing your feelings to your entire generation. Most teens fall into two camps:
1. Those who like Disney (and while they might enoy another mountain-style thrill ride at MK they don't need it to continue enjoying the parks).
I would say that this group of Teens probably grew up going to the parks and are exempt from the "Disney is for kids" or "Disney is for girls" mentality
2. Those who think Disney is lame (and one more family-style thrill ride won't matter to them one bit).
I understand that you are in a third category. But I think the vast majority of teens fit into one of the first two.
That's the general perception of those people that have not been to Disney World in the last 10 years.
