IWant2GoNow
Well-Known Member
Not to mention it's probably been inactive since late 07 or early 08. :lol:
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Sentinel writes article on broken yeti!
- Thread starter Buried20KLeague
- Start date
Not to mention it's probably been inactive since late 07 or early 08. :lol:
Atomicmickey
Well-Known Member
The UPI article is a GOOD THING.
It means that this info will be published in lots of places and be seen
by more people than the original.
They do attribute the source to the Orlando Sentinel, so I think it's
OK.
In any event, why complain? More eyes on the problem!
It means that this info will be published in lots of places and be seen
by more people than the original.
They do attribute the source to the Orlando Sentinel, so I think it's
OK.
In any event, why complain? More eyes on the problem!
I couldn't agree more. I just thought it was weird how they just took snippets.
And... The person in the first quote certainly wasn't talking to the Sentinel during a recent visit to AK... :lookaroun
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
It's not so much the cost of fixing the Yeti. It's the downtime for the attraction, and what that means. It means a decline in attendance for the park that can't afford that because they haven't added enough substantial since it opened.
GrumpyFan
Well-Known Member
So, does this mean you know the extent of the problems, how long and how much it's going to take to fix it?
SOLISIMO
Member
I just think he is referring to the fact that AK will loose attendance #'s if the ride is shut down and since it might take awhile that is not a good thing.
jakeman
Well-Known Member
Do you?
Really folks, I think we all agree that it is fairly unacceptable to have the marquee animatronic in the marquee ride at a theme park not working for three years.
I also realize it's pretty easy to sit back in our office chairs and stroke our chins and say, "They just don't want to because they are cheap."
In reality, there are many, many factors involved, the very least of which is money needed to repair the yeti. Once you close E:E for any long amount of time, you are reverting the park back 10 years. It will have pretty much the same capacity as it did in 1999 when Asia opened. You know what comes with 1999 capacity? 1999 attendance.
They need to compensate for a closed E:E. They haven't done that and that is bad, but the problem is a little more complicated than them not wanting to decrease the depth of their Scrooge McDuck money bin everyone seems to think they swim in.
Lee
Adventurer
True, but...
This has been an ongoing issue for three years (give or take), which means that they have known about the extent if the problem for that long.
In that length if time, knowing the capacity corner they had painted themselves into, they could have greenlit any number of new attractions that could have filled the void left by Everest going down. Good chance those attractions would be ready, or nearly so, by now.
But no...although there were a couple projects ready to move forward....they cancelled them and just did nothing.
Why...
This has been an ongoing issue for three years (give or take), which means that they have known about the extent if the problem for that long.
In that length if time, knowing the capacity corner they had painted themselves into, they could have greenlit any number of new attractions that could have filled the void left by Everest going down. Good chance those attractions would be ready, or nearly so, by now.
But no...although there were a couple projects ready to move forward....they cancelled them and just did nothing.
Why...
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
With regards to the Yeti, I don't know any more than what's being said on these boards. The understanding (although it has never been verified) is that the problem with the Yeti is structural, and that could merit 6 months of downtime.
My statement was operating under the assumption that it would take 6 months to fix. I doubt the cost to fix the Yeti is the prohibitive part. Even if it's $15 million to build a new Yeti (which doesn't seem to be the case), I don't think that's the hold up.
Take a look at Animal Kingdom's Attendance figures:
2005: 8.2 million
2006: 8.91 million (Everest opens officially in April)
2007: 9.49
2008: 9.54
2009: 9.59
It is more than likely that taking Everest offline could result in a drop in attendance to the tune of 600K. It could be exaggerated even more with the Wizarding World of Harry Potter (I'm hoping that it has this drop off without the Everest refurbishment). Frankly, the park is underdeveloped.
The decision should never come down to the fact that "we don't have enough to do if we fix this attraction, so we can't fix it." That's inexcuseable.
I know for me, this is the biggest issue I have with Disney World at the moment. Moreso than poor attractions, a neglected headliner is inexcuseable.
BrerFrog
Active Member
It didn't have to be that way, but they decided not to build anything else in the park
DisneyParksFan1
Active Member
It didn't have to be that way, but they decided not to build anything else in the park
Precisely. I mean it's stupid decision after stupid decision with TDO but hey it's them that will lose when they finally have to close Everest and lose all that money!
Clever Name
Well-Known Member
Disney made the same mistakes with the Yeti that Universal made with Kong. Bad design and poor show.
But the whole Kong attraction was 3rd party.
jakeman
Well-Known Member
I agree. I'm not defending the decision at all. I'm just pointing out the corner they have painted themselves into now.It didn't have to be that way, but they decided not to build anything else in the park
It shouldn't developed into such a complicated problem. Now it has and because of cancelled projects and the such we are in this mess.
If folks had manned up and expanded the park in a reasonable manner, even if the expansion would just now be opening, the prospect of taking down E:E wouldn't be as terrifying as it is.
There is no excuse for this mess. However, right now, it's not the simple fix of "just throw money at it".
sunsetgrill
New Member
No matter how big a fan, one can only defend Disney so much. I think the Yeti is the straw that broke this camel's back. Poor maintenance(I see peeling paint in way too many places throughout), lack of park upgrade priorities, and now increasing prices while providing so little really disappoints. The real insult is when they refuse to fix well known problems, skirting the issue with poor excuses and larger bonuses.
Regarding any advertising featuring the Yeti (which is everything Disney uses), it is false advertising. While it is not deceptive, as I'm sure they have every intention of getting it fixed someday(after flying cars and world peace are achieved), it is still advertising that is false, since it shows a Yeti that is obviously not there.
I hope there is enough uproar to make them either bite the bullet and fix this, or expand the park so it has more E-ticket attractions to justify(in their eyes) fixing the Yeti. I find it hard to enjoy Animal Kingdom like MK or Epcot, when there seems to be so much more it could be. I still don't understand the thought process behind Dino-Rama. Walt specifically stated numerous times he did not want a carnival-like atmosphere when creating Disneyland. I doubt he meant it would be OK for WDW.
Regarding any advertising featuring the Yeti (which is everything Disney uses), it is false advertising. While it is not deceptive, as I'm sure they have every intention of getting it fixed someday(after flying cars and world peace are achieved), it is still advertising that is false, since it shows a Yeti that is obviously not there.
I hope there is enough uproar to make them either bite the bullet and fix this, or expand the park so it has more E-ticket attractions to justify(in their eyes) fixing the Yeti. I find it hard to enjoy Animal Kingdom like MK or Epcot, when there seems to be so much more it could be. I still don't understand the thought process behind Dino-Rama. Walt specifically stated numerous times he did not want a carnival-like atmosphere when creating Disneyland. I doubt he meant it would be OK for WDW.
Clever Name
Well-Known Member
You're right and I admit that Universal was smarter in that regard.
I like the "contacts" question personally, although you know he'll never get specific....
Otherwise, how about seeing if he has any confirmation on the FLE rumors floating around. It would be nice to get another source/point of view....:wave: