SuddenStorm
Well-Known Member
Well, that 'blessing of size' has to do with having four large parks and not just two small ones. Anaheim and Orland both have nearly the same number of rides. But the 'three other' parks in WDW got nine rides each (give or take one) leaving MK to have significantly less rides than DL.
So, the blessing of size has to take into account all the parks.
But, what makes that difficult to do is that for both Anaheim and Orlando, everyone wants to go primarily to the castle park. DCA and 'the other three parks' at WDW don't have the attractive power that the castle parks do because they have fewer rides.
And so, in practice, the two castle parks get compared directly to each other without consideration of the other parks. And in that regard, DL beats MK for capacity.
And that's Disney's fault for not beefing up the non-castle parks.
I'm a bit confused by this post.
Magic Kingdom is significantly larger then Disneyland Park- how does the blessing of size not apply?
And how is comparing four theme parks (with four separate admission) to two parks at all fair? Or even the four parks to just Disneyland, in an excuse to justify Magic Kingdom's lack of attractions?
Especially when the conversation was referring specifically to the capacity level restrictions of Magic Kingdom park vs Disneyland