The Spirited Seventh Heaven ...

[seascape]

Do you have any idea at all what Wet N Wild actually is? And how it compares to Uni's competition?



Whatever it is.. don't quit your day job to be a lawyer

I know what Wet N Wild is. It's the number 4 water park in Orlando. That has nothing to do with what I said. I said they could renovate it. Isn't that where they would put the water park? The infrastructure is there and all they have to do is spend the money.

 

[LithiumBill]

That, I believe, is a relatively new development ... I also tend to believe it is because the races have begun attracting a much more novice (ie. have no business running) crowd. And people dropping dead or stroking out on the course or just causing a bunch of serious runners to go down in a pile isn't going to be good for RunDisney's PR and bottom line.

But instead of weeding these folks out, Disney is coddling them ... sorta like mentally feeble Lifestylers.

MY wife has recently started running these type of races weekends around our area. When she began she was slow, and needed to walk a bit. But the organizers took this into account with the races and put the faster people in the front, and timed the releases of runners so that there would be no issues or slow downs.

A year later my wife has lost 145 pounds and has increased her time on 5ks by nearly 20 minutes. And she has moved to 10ks, and is training for a half marathon.

Now with that said, she has no interest in RunDisney. Her feeling is the same as everyone seems to be - this is not really a RUN s much as it is an excuse to give Disney more money so you can be in the parks with no one else there... She does not want to run a marathon through the parking lots and main street and "SIGHTSEE" with cast members cheering on.

RunDisney is a money grab, a lot like a bunch of these run clubs and organizations across the country. Anyone can get a permit and set up a run, and then charge $30-$50 to get people to run a course that later in the day they can run for free. All to get a fake plastic medal or a $5 T-shirt. But RunDisney gets away with the exclusive, RUN IN OUR PARSK AND ON OUR PROPERTY WHERE NO ONE ESLE CAN... and get to charge more for it. It's BS....

 

[71jason]

I said they could renovate it. Isn't that where they would put the water park? The infrastructure is there and all they have to do is spend the money.

The WnW brand is so damaged right now I can see wanting to get away from it with a new name and a new location.

I also agree with Flynnibus that there's a natural cap on water park attendance. Both weather-wise--only Brits go in December, nobody goes in January--and a percentage of the population who just have zero interest. That said it's probably the cheapest way to turn UOR into a 3 (or at least 2.5) day resort.

 

[bhg469]

I always felt like the water parks were more for the locals but I guess they are in higher demand..

 

[twebber55]

Notice you skipped Aquatica there... which is the real thing they'd need to improve over. WnW is just biding time... and exists as the lower end alternative

Agree
But dont u think sea world would be extremely worried about aquatica if universal opened an onsite highly themed water park?

 

[danlb_2000]

I don't understand why Universal would build a new water park. They own Wet New Wild. I could see them renovate it but that's all. I don't think that would violate the Marvel contract because Wet New Wild already existed and it would not be a new addition to the development. The only reason I think they haven't changed the name to Universal Wet N Wild is that the lawyers are still looking into it.

Wet and Wild wasn't owned by Universal at the time the contract was made.

 

[twebber55]

The WnW brand is so damaged right now I can see wanting to get away from it with a new name and a new location.

I also agree with Flynnibus that there's a natural cap on water park attendance. Both weather-wise--only Brits go in December, nobody goes in January--and a percentage of the population who just have zero interest. That said it's probably the cheapest way to turn UOR into a 3 (or at least 2.5) day resort.

Agreee on all points
I will say an onsite water park doesnt need the space a themepark needs so uni sees this as their best option

 

[seascape]

Wet and Wild wasn't owned by Universal at the time the contract was made.

That is what I said. But they own it now and why not just renovate it or at least just add Universal's name so that everyone knows it is their water park.

 

[Ariel484]

I'll be the first to admit, you could write everything I know about running on the back of a postage stamp, with room left over, but it sounds like the solution is better policing of the corrals and, perhaps, a wider race corridor for at least the first few miles. How about a separate marked 'lane' for walkers only, and immediately sweep anyone (regardless of pace) caught walking in the running lane?

They are trying to get stricter with the corrals...
- They used to accept corral changes at the expos (where you pick up your race packet...so if I ran a faster 10K time I could take it with me and show it to them and they move me up). Now they don't do that - the cut-off is a couple of months before race day so that they (I assume) can check more thoroughly to make sure people are submitting real times.
- They also now require proof of time (as they call it) if you claim you'll run a 3:15 half marathon or faster...used to be 2:45 or faster which means more and more people need to submit times.
- Lastly, they now require runners to submit at least a 10-mile race time for the marathon, where they used to require only a 10K.

I'm a huge fan of these changes. It IS better than it was a couple of years ago.

Other races I've been in have walkers indicate that they will be walking the race and they are automatically placed in the last corral (as another poster mentioned). The walking lane idea is interesting but I can't see people actually following the rules for that.

Such events are always going to be crowded, which begs the question, how much worse are the Disney races for walkers/slower runners and the like than other events around the country with a similar number of participants? Are there similar problems everywhere, or is this unique to Disney?

Did you saw the picture @flynnibus posted earlier? Crowded, yes? What makes Disney races challenging is what makes them so appealing - that they go through the parks and resorts areas. These paths are not built for road racing - they are NARROW. Imagine all of those people running on a road half as wide...then throw in runners that don't know proper race etiquette stopping in the middle of the course to take pictures, walking in the middle of the course, run/walking 3-4 people across...it's frustrating.

Just my opinion, but while I'd give everyone a 'certificate of participation' and whatever swag goes with the event, reserve medals for those who actually finish.

The finisher medal debate can get really intense...and I can't adequately explain why but Disney's policy of giving them to everyone makes me pretty angry. Admittedly somewhat irrationally so. Maybe it's because I don't consider myself a natural runner and have to work my butt off all year to get in marathon shape (20-mile run in NE Ohio winter, yeehaw!), so earning that medal really means something to me. Maybe it's because runDisney specifically calls them FINISHER medals and not PARTICIPATION medals. To me that means crossing the finish line is the way to get the medal. If not, why not just give them out at the expo? In my opinion, if you finish you earn the medal - for participating you get the shirt.

Hence why I was asking. I'm still curious what the race looks like at the front of the pack though, the middle will always be a human swarm.

I'll never be able to tell you since I'll never be at the front of the pack!

I think the real takeaway is don't run a Disney race with serious intent of "racing", because you can't. With those expectations in check I'm sure an enjoyable time could be made of it.

Could not agree more. If I want to run a fast time I do it at home (for much cheaper).

Well that's not really the debate (I think?). The debate is whether or not people who don't finish are deserving of a medal (At least that was the one I was involved in).

I say it's to each his own. If they paid money for the race, didn't train, and need a medal to show they participated, that's their own problem. If I was a runner who finished and got my award, I wouldn't dwell on others too much. Of course, I don't think they deserve one, but I don't think it's something too severe.

Again, I don't know why giving the medals to non-finishers bugs me so much, but it does.

None taken. And for me it's not really winning the Internet for the day. I'm actually curious as to the significance of the medal and at what level of trouble the non-finishers are to the safety of the race. Because, to be honest, we tend to deal in hyperbole a lot on this site (good and bad) and I asked my questions not as a "gotcha" but to actually see if it's a genuine problem or if it's just one or two outlying opinions.

Clearly it's more or less unanimous.

For me it's not that the non-finishers are "dangerous" to the rest of us (except for the etiquette/crowd issues I described above). It's that I'm bothered that they get what is described as a "finisher medal" for not finishing. I don't think it cheapens my accomplishment that I'm wearing a medal for a race I finished when someone else is wearing a medal just for starting the race, but I still think it's crappy.

I DO think that a brand-new runner signing up to run, say, the Dopey Challenge (5K/10K/half marathon/marathon on consecutive days) is a danger to themselves, in a way. That's just asking for an injury and a miserable weekend at WDW.

And don't forget that a lot of these races either start in the dark or are run completely in the dark. It's difficult to have to watch your footing while running in and out of walkers. During the first Tower of Terror 10 miler I had to run in the grass coming out of the studios just to avoid all of the walkers who had lined up in Corral B.

Yep!

On the racing issue, one thing that keeps me wondering is how much of a problem is it that people are more or less told by The RunDisney running guru (forgot the name) to not run the whole race, but to do a run/walk interval thing? This is something that I never saw people do at my races here in Germany and I think it makes it problematic as you might have the same people passing you over and over again when they are in their running interval and the fall behind you when they walk.

Personally I don't think it's an issue if the run/walkers use good race etiquette...but runDisney loves Galloway because he makes doing these races more approachable for people that never thought they would be able to do it. I guess that's good and bad. At any rate I think his training plans are INSANE.

Galloway does encourage the run/walk method. They generally tend to stay to the right side of the road and not get in anyone's way. But like Ariel said there are a lot of bottlenecks in the parks that can be tricky, especially for the shorter runs and half marathons. The whole idea behind it is to keep your legs fresher. I'm not going to argue with Galloway because he knows what he's talking about much more than I do, but it's not for me. I prefer to suffer my way through the whole course if possible.

The other place where it gets bad is the path from Hollywood Studios to the Epcot resorts. Just a freaking wall of people.

I'm not sure if it's been said, but the walkers try to push up into the first few corrals because it gives them extra time to complete the course. The time for sweeping doesn't start until the last person crosses the start line. If you can work your way up, you may only need to run a 17 or 18 minute mile to avoid the sweepers.

Great point. There's a lot of talk of getting a cushion from the sweepers. I'm sorry, but if you think you'll possibly be swept I sort of feel like you should wait a year, train more and then sign up to try again next year.

Shoot, a 16 minute mile is a brisk walk.

Maybe...unless you have short legs like yours truly...

That's what they try to do. But people cheat on what they tell Disney about what their experience is. And as @Runnin'Gator said there is a huge incentive especially for the really slow people to cheat. Also, I think that while for many other races your 10k time is a good indicator as to what your half marathon time will be, that's not the case when so many of your participants only started running any distance half a year ago. I can see many people keeping up quite well for the first 12km and then being totally exhausted and only able to walk and hence making it problematic for runners that are slower but keep their speed constant throughout the race.

Yep. Their new policy of asking for a 10-mile time for a marathon is a good step. I wonder if they'll someday increase it to asking for a half marathon time in order to corral the marathon? If you're training for a marathon you'll need to run that distance regularly anyway...

Some of the other runners might be able to speak to this better than I can, but I think at some point the time you submit has nothing to do with which corral you're placed in. The Elite runners will be placed at the very front, and you're not running with them unless you're verified. I want to say A through D or E (for the halfs) is based on your submitted time, but I'm not sure about anything after that. I ran the Wine and Dine with three friends and they were scattered all over the place -- and it didn't seem to be based on their times.

I've submitted a 10-miler time for each Disney race I've run and have felt I was corralled properly.

The corrals go up to P now for the WDW/Princess Half Marathons so there should be more based on the submitted times, I think.

Again, sorry for the novel!

 

[seascape]

The WnW brand is so damaged right now I can see wanting to get away from it with a new name and a new location.

I also agree with Flynnibus that there's a natural cap on water park attendance. Both weather-wise--only Brits go in December, nobody goes in January--and a percentage of the population who just have zero interest. That said it's probably the cheapest way to turn UOR into a 3 (or at least 2.5) day resort.

Why did they buy it then? From a financial view it makes no sense to buy a water park, tear it down and build a new water park somewhere else. If they have the land near the resorts, to build on it makes more sense to build something else there like more hotels since Universal wants to get to 10,000 rooms and rebuild the water park where it is. That is much cheaper and easier to do.

 

[crispy]

Galloway does encourage the run/walk method. They generally tend to stay to the right side of the road and not get in anyone's way. But like Ariel said there are a lot of bottlenecks in the parks that can be tricky, especially for the shorter runs and half marathons. The whole idea behind it is to keep your legs fresher. I'm not going to argue with Galloway because he knows what he's talking about much more than I do, but it's not for me. I prefer to suffer my way through the whole course if possible.

I'm not sure if it's been said, but the walkers try to push up into the first few corrals because it gives them extra time to complete the course. The time for sweeping doesn't start until the last person crosses the start line. If you can work your way up, you may only need to run a 17 or 18 minute mile to avoid the sweepers. Shoot, a 16 minute mile is a brisk walk.

And not all walkers are super slow. My best friend walks exclusively and has finished her half marathons with an average 12 minute mile. I do intervals and am closer to a 14 minute mile. I said I was slow! I do, however, make sure I am placed in a proper corral, and I find myself passing tons of people who shouldn't have put themselves in higher corrals.

 

[GLaDOS]

Why did they buy it then? From a financial view it makes no sense to buy a water park, tear it down and build a new water park somewhere else.

Universal has owned Wet and Wild since 1998, they just did not own the land it was built on until recently.

 

[flynnibus]

Agree
But dont u think sea world would be extremely worried about aquatica if universal opened an onsite highly themed water park?

Again, sea world and UNI are already partners in this space. All the more reason for them to not too.

The question is.. is the return there? If your neighbor lends you the specialized tool you need.. and you use it with almost no consequences.. is it really worth spending a ton of money to buy your own? Or do you both keep contributing to the shared tool.

I'm not saying there is no reason at all for Uni to do it - It's a question of is it WORTH the investment of money and ongoing costs considering what they would gain above and beyond what they have now... which is Aquatica which is a top notch park in itself... for an offering that is not really going to be an attendance driver in itself? I'm leaning towards 'no'. Spend that capex and opex in things that are going to be draws, not just baby step improvements.

 

[GLaDOS]

Again, sea world and UNI are already partners in this space. All the more reason for them to not too.

The question is.. is the return there? If your neighbor lends you the specialized tool you need.. and you use it with almost no consequences.. is it really worth spending a ton of money to buy your own? Or do you both keep contributing to the shared tool.

I'm not saying there is no reason at all for Uni to do it - It's a question of is it WORTH the investment of money and ongoing costs considering what they would gain above and beyond what they have now... which is Aquatica which is a top notch park in itself... for an offering that is not really going to be an attendance driver in itself? I'm leaning towards 'no'. Spend that capex and opex in things that are going to be draws, not just baby step improvements.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by they "have" Aquatica. Yes, they provide transport to Aquatica, but they don't get any of the profits from people going to Aquatica.

 

[flynnibus]

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by they "have" Aquatica. Yes, they provide transport to Aquatica, but they don't get any of the profits from people going to Aquatica.

The prime motivation for adding a water park is to extend people's stays. They aren't staying at Aquatica They already have the model where you stay at a UNI hotel, you eat at UNI resturants, and you are wisked to Aquatica and back again when you're done. Yes, they don't get the money from Aquatica itself - but they also aren't paying all the costs to run it. That means they get the most important benefit, with little of the risk.

 

[GLaDOS]

The prime motivation for adding a water park is to extend people's stays. They aren't staying at Aquatica They already have the model where you stay at a UNI hotel, you eat at UNI resturants, and you are wisked to Aquatica and back again when you're done. Yes, they don't get the money from Aquatica itself - but they also aren't paying all the costs to run it. That means they get the most important benefit, with little of the risk.

Eh. I'd say the amount of people that stay at UOR resorts to take advantage of Aquatica transportation is minimal at best, considering most of the cheaper hotels in the area do the same.

 

[wogwog]

When @PhotoDave219 is CEO of disney can I be in charge of landscaping?

You want trees, you'll get trees. Lots of them. And plenty of flowers and ornamental shrubs and green everywhere.

And benches!

Speaking of benches. Evidently it was not enough to rip 68 or more benches out of the MK and some from the other parks, now some of them are for sale at the WDW surplus store behind WDW where they sell off surplus furniture, equipment, merchandise, vehicles and other obsolete (by WDW standards) items. This from a cast member that works there. Said to be getting a dozen or so every few months to dump. Nothing wrong with the benches. You can't buy them, in case you are local and wanted to rescue one, unless your are a Disney employee or are a licensed reseller I understand.

Don't let those guests sit around. Keep moving.

 

[flynnibus]

Eh. I'd say the amount of people that stay at UOR resorts to take advantage of Aquatica transportation is minimal at best, considering most of the cheaper hotels in the area do the same.

So there you have it... if bundling tickets and transportation to a top notch water park like aquatica won't add hotel stays to your property... why spend money to build a water park?

 

[71jason]

Eh. I'd say the amount of people that stay at UOR resorts to take advantage of Aquatica transportation is minimal at best, considering most of the cheaper hotels in the area do the same.

Agreed, I think the average Cabana Bay guest sees a world of difference between Wondersea Island, which you can see on the drive in and walk to, and Aquatica. To say nothing of synergy from ticket sales and the like.

Not backtracking, but just because I said water parks have a cap, I think they still make decent money, given they can't cost that much to build/run relative to a theme park. I can see wanting a bigger slice of the water park market from strictly a financial viewpoint, in addition to "coming of age" as a destination resort.

 

[GLaDOS]

So there you have it... if bundling tickets and transportation to a top notch water park like aquatica won't add hotel stays to your property... why spend money to build a water park?

But the tickets aren't bundled. Yes, that "Florida Pass" or whatever it's called is out there, but it's not advertised by Universal in anyway.

EDIT: Nope, I'm wrong. It is at the very bottom of the UOR ticket page. My mistake.