The Spirited Seventh Heaven ...

[Goofyernmost]

I like the idea of a Kong ride better than Kongfrontation. Dial it up on YouTube, it wasn't the greatest

No need to dial it up, I saw it in person at least a dozen times. It was amazing.

 

[Cesar R M]

I finally saw Maleficent on a recent flight... what a bore. I can't believe people gave it as much praise as they did.

I totally didn't get the rape/induendo/whatever about Steffan people were talking about. I know that they've gone on record that was the part of the thinking.. the 'violation' or 'abuse' but...mehhhh.

What a waste of a film. The kind that you watch and wonder 'why'. Meanwhile I watched Inglorious Bastards.. and while I didn't love the film per say, it felt so much more of a return for my time. I watched American Hustle on the same flight, and that was 100x better. Kept you interested, had interesting characters, and had a great twist and climax. It had its story flaws, but it felt like a movie I would have enjoyed in the theater to pay for. Maleficent?? The kind of film that would keep me from seeing the next film...

because you're male and you are used to "male" type movies?
I mean.. the Inglorious Bastards remark was easy to notice.

 

[ford91exploder]

No need to dial it up, I saw it in person at least a dozen times. It was amazing.

What features made it special for you, Please understand I have not been to a UNI park since a corporate event in 2003 where the company rented out Citywalk and IOA.

 

[ford91exploder]

It would be easier to invent a time machine to go back to 1994, and bring one of these:

But wouldn't that violate the Prime Directive

 

[flynnibus]

because you're male and you are used to "male" type movies?
I mean.. the Inglorious Bastards remark was easy to notice.

What was easy? It was an interesting movie in the way it was presented and the movie climax was suspenseful with a surprise epilogue. Have you seen the movie?

Contrast that with the bland... she hates her, but learns to love her cliche plot of Maleficent that rewrites a classic and doesn't really improve upon it at all. The comedic interlude of the fairies is anything but funny.. the minion is entirely forgettable. It's just a bland bland movie that if it didn't have Jolie or a monster special effects budget would have been lucky to be a direct to video flick.

 

[ford91exploder]

Slightly off topic but doesn't the concept sketches for the castle look very similar to this 1976 Herbert ryman sketch for Tokyo? (Image from Walt Disney imagineering, volume one....that I picked up today!)

You noticed that as well, I think this Castle is going to be amazing I hope I will have a chance to visit on a China trip - but I'm usually stuck in Shenzen or Beijing and the company does not pay for me to play tourist.

 

[ford91exploder]

What was easy? It was an interesting movie in the way it was presented and the movie climax was suspenseful with a surprise epilogue. Have you seen the movie?

Contrast that with the bland... she hates her, but learns to love her cliche plot of Maleficent that rewrites a classic and doesn't really improve upon it at all. The comedic interlude of the fairies is anything but funny.. the minion is entirely forgettable. It's just a bland bland movie that if it didn't have Jolie or a monster special effects budget would have been lucky to be a direct to video flick.

I thought it WAS a direct to video flick which accidentally got released to theaters , Saw it same place you did on a plane.

 

[wdwfan4ver]

Actually, they closed the Pocahontas show in 2008, so they removed an attraction from a park that desperately needed more.

I was talking about stuff opening, not closing. You have the right to accuse me of not being specific enough though.

 

[BrerJon]

What features made it special for you, Please understand I have not been to a UNI park since a corporate event in 2003 where the company rented out Citywalk and IOA.

This is what made it special for me: It had a proper, highly themed queue line with lots of memorabilia to look at, video screens to set up the story and transport you into the world of New York being attacked by Kong. Then you have the ride itself which takes you through a city, normal at first, then more and more damaged. Eventually you get the confrontation with the big guy himself, an enormous animatronic with banana breath, before finally making it to safety.

Looking back, it's pretty much the same ride concept and plotline as Spider-Man and Transformers, only done with animatronics and live sets instead of video screens and 3D, but it was a fantastic ride.

I didn't mind it being replaced, as what replaced it (Mummy) was just as good, but it would be great if the new Kong ride lived up to the excitement of the original.

 

[Goofyernmost]

What features made it special for you, Please understand I have not been to a UNI park since a corporate event in 2003 where the company rented out Citywalk and IOA.

Well, you talk about theme, that attraction was themed to the extreme. The overhead trams may or may not have ever existed, but, they had you believing that they were real and when Kong came up next to you looking in, giant in size and you could almost feel his breath it was or seemed very real. It was unique, at least to me. I had never seen anything like it before nor felt the intensity of the ride quite as much.

Funny story... well not funny really, but, an example of just how real it seemed. I once owned a residential care home. We took care of the mentally ill, mentally challenged, physically challenged and the elderly. Many of the residents worked in sheltered workshops and earned money that they spent on whatever the wanted. They wanted to go to WDW and Universal.

I took two brothers that were mentally challenged. Both were close to 50 years old, but, were living with the same mental status as a 12 year old. I, fortunate as I was, knew the Kongfrontation was just a show. Design, background and animatronics all in place to represent reality. I knew that, but it never crossed my mind that they might have been completely unaware of that type of possibility, so I said nothing when we stood in line/queue waiting to board the ride. I should have because one of the boys kept saying, and I quote... "the King Kong is big and mean, boy".

We got to the part of the ride where you come face to face with Kong and I was getting a kick out of the ride but then happened to glance over at the brothers who, I swear to goodness, looked as if they had a shotgun to their heads. The color had drained from their faces and they looked like they were about to pass out. They were convinced that it was real and they were about to die at the giant hands of King Kong. I quickly leaned over and literally yelled at them. "It not real, guys it's just make believe. It's all for fun, you won't get hurt. They immediately started to relax and the color came back. Now I knew how real the ride seemed but I could grasp the difference between reality and make believe, but, even I got immersed in it, but never to the degree that they saw it. It was done so well, that it just plain seemed real. I have never really done anything at Disney with that degree of realism.

The post show also had a huge head and hand of Kong where you could stand and have a picture opportunity. Very impressive. The drawback was that the queue could be incredibly long. You would think that you were just about into the show building and all of a sudden it would take a sharp left and you would find yourself in this gigantic room complete filled with people all in line ahead of you.

 

[ford91exploder]

Well, you talk about theme, that attraction was themed to the extreme. The overhead trams may or may not have ever existed, but, they had you believing that they were real and when Kong came up next to you looking in, giant in size and you could almost feel his breath it was or seemed very real. It was unique, at least to me. I had never seen anything like it before nor felt the intensity of the ride quite as much.

Funny story... well not funny really, but, an example of just how real it seemed. I once owned a residential care home. We took care of the mentally ill, mentally challenged, physically challenged and the elderly. Many of the residents worked in sheltered workshops and earned money that they spent on whatever the wanted. They wanted to go to WDW and Universal.

I took two brothers that were mentally challenged. Both were close to 50 years old, but, were living with the same mental status as a 12 year old. I, fortunate as I was, knew the Kongfrontation was just a show. Design, background and animatronics all in place to represent reality. I knew that, but it never crossed my mind that they might have been completely unaware of that type of possibility, so I said nothing when we stood in line/queue waiting to board the ride. I should have because one of the boys kept saying, and I quote... "the King Kong is big and mean, boy".

We got to the part of the ride where you come face to face with Kong and I was getting a kick out of the ride but then happened to glance over at the brothers who, I swear to goodness, looked as if they had a shotgun to their heads. The color had drained from their faces and they looked like they were about to pass out. They were convinced that it was real and they were about to die at the giant hands of King Kong. I quickly leaned over and literally yelled at them. "It not real, guys it's just make believe. It's all for fun, you won't get hurt. They immediately started to relax and the color came back. Now I knew how real the ride seemed but I could grasp the difference between reality and make believe, but, even I got immersed in it, but never to the degree that they saw it. It was done so well, that it just plain seemed real. I have never really done anything at Disney with that degree of realism.

The post show also had a huge head and hand of Kong where you could stand and have a picture opportunity. Very impressive. The drawback was that the queue could be incredibly long. You would think that you were just about into the show building and all of a sudden it would take a sharp left and you would find yourself in this gigantic room complete filled with people all in line ahead of you.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH @Goofyernmost , Now I understand why that attraction is so well loved.

 

[MonkeyHead]

The Roosevelt Island aerial tram most certainly did and does exist.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roosevelt_Island_Tramway

 

[ParentsOf4]

No worries. I'm not trying to give you a hard time. The only reasons I ask is because I haven't seen the exec team speaking in any specifics on MyMagic. It's almost laughable to watch them dance around the questions at this point.
My theory is that there is absolutely no way to quantify any gains achieved by MyMagic+ And they knew this all along. Last quarter Iger stated that MyMagic would contribute to earnings growth starting with Q4 this year. I predict that this contribution will not come in the form of a solid number or percentage. They will just list MyMagic as a contributing factor to P&R earnings growth. As @ParentsOf4 stated in another thread the expense of MyMagic+ will decrease resulting in a year over year increase without even increasing revenue. If they publicly disclosed an expected return of 11% then I would expect to see analysts nail them to the wall on this when they have their earnings release.
The main reason I don't think MyMagic will have any impact on the DHS project is that the majority of the spending on it is done. It may have delayed some projects while they finished it up, but now that it's complete and rolled out there is no reason to hold back on capital projects. Shanghai is another story. Those delays are far more likely to impact DHS projects than MyMagic. Not that they should, there is enough money to go around.

Understand perfectly,
I agree with your theory - But you recall on the last 3 earnings calls Iger has been pressed multiple times to quantify the financial effect on a couple of calls he was asked the same question twice and that NEVER happens on earnings calls.

I'm responding to your MyMagic+ discussion here because the thread where you posted is specific to DHS.

I count roughly $1.6B in unidentified domestic theme park expenses through 2013, but there are ways to hide a few hundred million more.

Wall Street repeatedly has asked Iger and Rasulo for signs that MyMagic+ is working financially. The responses always dodge the question, either referring to increased usage (which we know is because there are more attractions with FP+ than FP) or simply suggesting Iger and Rasulo are pleased with what they see in their internal, undisclosed, and unspecified metrics.

It's actually fairly easy to see if MyMagic+ is 'working'. Just watch theme park attendance, hotel occupancy, domestic revenue, ticket sales, and merchandise, food, & beverage spending. Disney publishes all of these numbers. Then compare them to the baseline established over the prior 3 years.

For the first 3 quarters of the current fiscal year, the numbers published so far show that MyMagic+ has had no effect, except for one quarter when MyMagic+ was an onsite-only perk resulting in a pop in hotel occupancy.

Since there's (so far) nothing to support MyMagic's 'success' in other financial numbers, I expect Disney to hide behind P & R operating income this quarter. As I've described before, this is going to pop upward because of a decline in MyMagic+ R&D expenses.

The increase in operating income is a red herring.

It’s somewhat akin to a gambler saying, “I lost $10,000 two years ago. I lost $10,000 last year. This year I didn’t gamble, so I made $10,000.”

Again, watch this upcoming quarter's theme park attendance, hotel occupancy, domestic revenue, and merchandise, food, & beverage numbers. That's where the truth is.

 

[danv3]

I'm responding to your MyMagic+ discussion here because the thread where you posted is specific to DHS.

I count roughly $1.6B in unidentified domestic theme park expenses through 2013, but there are ways to hide a few hundred million more.

Wall Street repeatedly has asked Iger and Rasulo for signs that MyMagic+ is working financially. The responses always dodge the question, either referring to increased usage (which we know is because there are more attractions with FP+ than FP) or simply suggesting Iger and Rasulo are pleased with what they see in their internal, undisclosed, and unspecified metrics.

It's actually fairly easy to see if MyMagic+ is 'working'. Just watch theme park attendance, hotel occupancy, domestic revenue, ticket sales, and merchandise, food, & beverage spending. Disney publishes all of these numbers. Then compare them to the baseline established over the prior 3 years.

For the first 3 quarters of the current fiscal year, the numbers published so far show that MyMagic+ has had no effect, except for one quarter when MyMagic+ was an onsite-only perk resulting in a pop in hotel occupancy.

Since there's (so far) nothing to support MyMagic's 'success' in other financial numbers, I expect Disney to hide behind P & R operating income this quarter. As I've described before, this is going to pop upward because of a decline in MyMagic+ R&D expenses.

The increase in operating income is baloney.

It’s somewhat akin to a gambler saying, “I lost $10,000 two years ago. I lost $10,000 last year. This year I didn’t gamble, so I made $10,000.”

Again, watch this upcoming quarter's theme park attendance, hotel occupancy, domestic revenue, and merchandise, food, & beverage numbers. That's where the truth is.

All of Pof4's posts are great, but this point outlining how Disney is going to misleadingly start to provide evidence that MM+ is a financial positive for the company is outstanding. I only hope this somehow makes its way to one of the analysts who will be on the call.

 

[GoofGoof]

I'm responding to your MyMagic+ discussion here because the thread where you posted is specific to DHS.

I count roughly $1.6B in unidentified domestic theme park expenses through 2013, but there are ways to hide a few hundred million more.

Wall Street repeatedly has asked Iger and Rasulo for signs that MyMagic+ is working financially. The responses always dodge the question, either referring to increased usage (which we know is because there are more attractions with FP+ than FP) or simply suggesting Iger and Rasulo are pleased with what they see in their internal, undisclosed, and unspecified metrics.

It's actually fairly easy to see if MyMagic+ is 'working'. Just watch theme park attendance, hotel occupancy, domestic revenue, ticket sales, and merchandise, food, & beverage spending. Disney publishes all of these numbers. Then compare them to the baseline established over the prior 3 years.

For the first 3 quarters of the current fiscal year, the numbers published so far show that MyMagic+ has had no effect, except for one quarter when MyMagic+ was an onsite-only perk resulting in a pop in hotel occupancy.

Since there's (so far) nothing to support MyMagic's 'success' in other financial numbers, I expect Disney to hide behind P & R operating income this quarter. As I've described before, this is going to pop upward because of a decline in MyMagic+ R&D expenses.

The increase in operating income is baloney.

It’s somewhat akin to a gambler saying, “I lost $10,000 two years ago. I lost $10,000 last year. This year I didn’t gamble, so I made $10,000.”

Again, watch the last quarter's theme park attendance, hotel occupancy, domestic revenue, and merchandise, food, & beverage numbers. That's where the truth is.

Agreed.

I think we may see an uptick in per guest spending along with hotel and attendance numbers anyway. I can't say it is because of MyMagic+. Increased per guest spending could be the result of a lot of things like increased upsell events (a lot of those Lion King shows sold out this summer). I agree they will not quantify MyMagic results directly, but credit it with part of the overall gains. I also think that we may never hear from Iger about MyMagic + directly again after this earnings call. If some analyst asks he will say it's working well and they are happy with it, but they won't include it as part of their prepared remarks.

 

[WildcatDen]

Meanwhile MK and Epcot need 3-4 thrill rides/E-ticket

If I want thrill, I will go to Cedar Fair properties. Kicks the Krap out of all the Universal and Disney offerings. I don't go
to Disney for thrills. You honestly say the best attended park in the world needs 3 to 4 thrill rides? Is that a want or a need? All we need is another reason for even more people to go to MK. The crowds are too light . . .

 

[ford91exploder]

I'm responding to your MyMagic+ discussion here because the thread where you posted is specific to DHS.

I count roughly $1.6B in unidentified domestic theme park expenses through 2013, but there are ways to hide a few hundred million more.

Wall Street repeatedly has asked Iger and Rasulo for signs that MyMagic+ is working financially. The responses always dodge the question, either referring to increased usage (which we know is because there are more attractions with FP+ than FP) or simply suggesting Iger and Rasulo are pleased with what they see in their internal, undisclosed, and unspecified metrics.

It's actually fairly easy to see if MyMagic+ is 'working'. Just watch theme park attendance, hotel occupancy, domestic revenue, ticket sales, and merchandise, food, & beverage spending. Disney publishes all of these numbers. Then compare them to the baseline established over the prior 3 years.

For the first 3 quarters of the current fiscal year, the numbers published so far show that MyMagic+ has had no effect, except for one quarter when MyMagic+ was an onsite-only perk resulting in a pop in hotel occupancy.

Since there's (so far) nothing to support MyMagic's 'success' in other financial numbers, I expect Disney to hide behind P & R operating income this quarter. As I've described before, this is going to pop upward because of a decline in MyMagic+ R&D expenses.

The increase in operating income is a red herring.

It’s somewhat akin to a gambler saying, “I lost $10,000 two years ago. I lost $10,000 last year. This year I didn’t gamble, so I made $10,000.”

Again, watch this upcoming quarter's theme park attendance, hotel occupancy, domestic revenue, and merchandise, food, & beverage numbers. That's where the truth is.

Thanks @ParentsOf4 amazing as usual

 

[mahnamahna101]

If I want thrill, I will go to Cedar Fair properties. Kicks the Krap out of all the Universal and Disney offerings. I don't go
to Disney for thrills. You honestly say the best attended park in the world needs 3 to 4 thrill rides? Is that a want or a need? All we need is another reason for even more people to go to MK. The crowds are too light . . .

MK has 42 attractions.
35 of them have no height requirement.
7 do.

5 out of every 6 attractions is all-ages.

Speedway has a 32" height requirement so it might as well be all-ages. Only infants and a few toddlers can't do it.

Barnstormer is 35" - basically anyone other than infants, toddlers and tall adults

SDMT is 38" - ages 4 and up. Quite a few 3 year olds as well.

Stitch, Big Thunder and Splash are 40" - ages 5 and up. They're a little more intense than those first three, but most kindergartners can handle it.

Space Mountain is 44" - only true thrill ride at MK. ages 8 and up. Before then, I'd be too afraid of making a child scared of riding any indoor ride or coaster ever again

Is it wrong for me to want Fire Mountain, an IJA clone, Bald Mountain and a Tomorrowland E-ticket? MK should eventually equal DL in attraction count. The last thing I want to see is more Omnimovers and spinners. Only Frontierland truly needs an all-ages attraction. Every other area wouldn't be hurt by something more thrilling.

 

[MerlinTheGoat]

If I want thrill, I will go to Cedar Fair properties. Kicks the Krap out of all the Universal and Disney offerings. I don't go
to Disney for thrills. You honestly say the best attended park in the world needs 3 to 4 thrill rides? Is that a want or a need? All we need is another reason for even more people to go to MK. The crowds are too light . . .

MK definitely could use some more E tickets, but that doesn't mean they have to include thrills at all (Haunted Mansion is an E after all). But it also depends on the definition of "thrill ride" used here because we're not really talking about Cedar Point sparsely themed mega coasters (which I don't care for anyways). But Disney gets by very successfully with less thrilling (but still partially intense) rides when they're incredibly well themed. One or two extra E tickets more or less around Splash Mountain's thrill level wouldn't be unwelcome if designed with that high level of Disney show quality. There's plenty of room to accommodate a lot of calm rides AND a couple of more thrilling ones as well.

So while I don't agree that the park should get nothing but thrill rides (especially since you can build great E tickets without a height limit), neither do I agree that all we need is more kiddie rides. We need a balance, and this to me means a very large injection of BOTH.

I don't want more sparsely themed coasters like Rock n Roller Coaster or even Screamin'. Though an Adventureland ride/area like either Fire Mountain or the concept of Indiana Jones and the Lost Expedition (the original concept for Disneyland in the early-mid 90's) might be interesting. Besides the existing Indy EMV (and Jungle Cruise traveling through part of the building), it also included a mine coaster with inversions. Looked like it took after the famous Temple of Doom mine chase scene, and included some very impressive show elements beyond what I generally see out of inverted coasters (even from Disney). This idea was cut down considerably to just the EMV, but it was an impressive concept that could always be revived or another project use elements from it. Or again Fire Mountain if built with similar ambition.

I don't want to get too armchair imagineer and wishful thinking or anything, so I won't be too specific here. Fantasyland needs at least 2-3 more dark rides just to start with (along with something like Bald Mountain to give it a good E ticket "thrill"). For the dark rides there's the old Snow White building, behind Small World's building and all the circus tents. That's without even compromising important attractions (the tent area alone is more than enough room to accommodate another Mermaid sized ride, or several smaller classic dark rides).

Tomorrowland has tons of space in the cast member parking area that has been discussed before.

Frontierland could a similar boost in ride quantity, wouldn't hurt to add some less thrilling rides here since Splash and BTM are here (looks like there's expansion space that could be used both above Big Thunder AND behind Haunted Mansion's show building with some creative tinkering). Adventureland has been discussed, and if they could find a way to build outside the berm then it could have even more space to use (don't know if this is possible to do but it would provide space for several new rides instead of just one, enough for probably 2 thrill rides and maybe even a few slower rides).

I didn't even mention the Speedway if people didn't mind sacrificing that for multiple new rides (I won't cry bloody murder if it's replaced with some new quality rides, though others may not agree). This land could be split between Fantasyland and Tomorrowland attractions if they wanted (could fit 2 big rides in this entire plot or quite a few smaller ones). And to the east of the speedway beyond the train's berm (above space mountain), there's a large plot of land that looks like it could be used for expansion purposes.

 

[Mike S]

MK definitely could use some more E tickets, but that doesn't mean they have to include thrills at all (Haunted Mansion is an E after all). But it also depends on the definition of "thrill ride" used here because we're not really talking about Cedar Point sparsely themed mega coasters (which I don't care for anyways). But Disney gets by very successfully with less thrilling (but still partially intense) rides when they're incredibly well themed. One or two extra E tickets more or less around Splash Mountain's thrill level wouldn't be unwelcome if designed with that high level of Disney show quality. There's plenty of room to accommodate a lot of calm rides AND a couple of more thrilling ones as well.

So while I don't agree that the park should get nothing but thrill rides (especially since you can build great E tickets without a height limit), neither do I agree that all we need is more kiddie rides. We need a balance, and this to me means a very large injection of BOTH.

I don't want more sparsely themed coasters like Rock n Roller Coaster or even Screamin'. Though an Adventureland ride/area like either Fire Mountain or the concept of Indiana Jones and the Lost Expedition (the original concept for Disneyland in the early-mid 90's) might be interesting. Besides the existing Indy EMV (and Jungle Cruise traveling through part of the building), it also included a mine coaster with inversions. Looked like it took after the famous Temple of Doom mine chase scene, and included some very impressive show elements beyond what I generally see out of inverted coasters (even from Disney). This idea was cut down considerably to just the EMV, but it was an impressive concept that could always be revived or another project use elements from it. Or again Fire Mountain if built with similar ambition.

I don't want to get too armchair imagineer and wishful thinking or anything, but I definitely agree that MK needs a considerably larger amount of rides, quite a lot really. One or two extra thrill rides wouldn't hurt as long as they weren't all that was built. Fantasyland needs at least 2-3 more dark rides just to start with (Bald Mountain would also be a welcome addition to give it a good E ticket "thrill"). For the dark rides there's the old Snow White building, behind Small World's building and all the circus tents. That's without even compromising important attractions (the tent area alone is more than enough room to accommodate another Mermaid sized ride, or several smaller classic dark rides). Tomorrowland has tons of space in the cast member parking area. Frontierland could a similar boost in ride quantity, something less thrilling as well (it looks like there's expansion space that could be used above Big Thunder AND behind Haunted Mansion's show building). Adventureland has been discussed, if they could find a way to build outside the berm then it could have even more space (don't know if this is possible).

I didn't even mention the Speedway if people didn't mind sacrificing that for multiple new rides (I won't cry bloody murder if it's replaced with some new quality rides, though others may not agree). This land could be split between Fantasyland and Tomorrowland attractions if they wanted (could fit 2 big rides in this entire plot or quite a few smaller ones). And to the east of the speedway beyond the train's berm (above space mountain), there's a large plot of land that looks like it could be used for expansion purposes.

There's also space next to Space Mountain for expansion besides the CM parking area. Thanks @marni1971 for the pic.