eddie104
Well-Known Member
I agree with you for most part but sometimes these turn into di** measuring contests between the two companies which gets kind of annoying because I’m a fan of both.
-
The new WDWMAGIC iOS app is here!
Stay up to date with the latest Disney news, photos, and discussions right from your iPhone. The app is free to download and gives you quick access to news articles, forums, photo galleries, park hours, weather and Lightning Lane pricing. Learn More -
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Tron coaster coming to the Magic Kingdom
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
The measuring is usually in private. Unless you're a fanboi.
Horizons '83
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
@MisterPenguin would know the specifics on length of construction times, but really I don’t know. I wasn’t comparing Uni to Disney because it’s not what the conversation was about. I was referring to the 3 plus years comment above.
In general, Disney does take longer than Uni to build things. Insiders have pointed to bloat. Others to purposely slow-building to spread costs. Recently, it seems projects that could be done sooner are taking especially long in order that something new debuts at that later time (the 50th). But also, several projects that were going to take a while are suddenly fast-tracked to prop up flagging attendance (O, hai, Ratatouille!). Some projects got delayed because of ambitious utilization of relatively new tech (RotR) which in turned delayed other projects (MMRR).
So, it's hard to generalize here since there are so many varied projects being built for various reason with their own timeline. One also has to watch out for company bias. E.g., for the longest time I've heard people say it only took Uni 2 years to build a Wizarding World, but took WDW 4 years to build Pandora (even using groundbreaking as the start and not announcement time). The reality is that there was only a one year difference in build time, not two. That's because those certain people rounded down the 2.5 years to build Potter to 2, and then rounded *up* the 3.5 years to build Pandora to 4 years. That's a huge perception bias right there.
Anyway, here are the stats which usually ends this kind of arguments based on feel and bias when presented with actual facts...
bclane
Well-Known Member
TRON will have A/C...CONFIRMED!!! Everyone can relax now.
Buried20KLeague
Well-Known Member
Please don’t start the unnecessary comparisons.
Unnecessary??? Uni is the only corollary one can compare against Disney. It’s hardly unnecessary when discussing attraction build times. It’s completely valid.
Uni would NEVER take 3 years to build a cloned attraction. Tron’s build time is a joke.
bclane
Well-Known Member
Much smarter people than myself have suggested in here that Disney doesn't build things as fast as they can, but instead sets an opening date based on whatever goals they have (anniversary celebrations, fiscal budgets, timing of other openings, or whatever) and then runs the project so that it will open around their desired time. Of course things don't always go according to plan but that's a different issue. Considering that I have been jonesing for TRON to open, I hate that they don't just rush it, but it is what it is.
It takes time to build rides and it takes more time while the park is open. Disney's park hours are longer than Universal's. That fact helps explain at least part of the reason it takes Disney longer. However, Universal has been moving dirt around on their new property and their new park will not open until Disney's 100th anniversary, 4 years from now. I don't think that is fast but it does take time to build nice things.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Simply looking at when someone started pushing some dirt around means measuring projects without any real, meaningful context such as scale, complexity and project delivery method. The more typical and common design-bid-build project delivery method where something is designed and that design is then handed off to a contractor to build, is not really utilized in large theme parks like Disney and Universal. Fast-track, which does not define a length of time but overlaps design and construction is widely utilized.
That Disney has long project timelines and high costs is not a secret. It is the reason for Guardians of the Galaxy — Mission: Breakout! and Pixar Pier. They were all about trying to do something faster and cheaper. There are also some recent projects that can be easily compared to other projects such as Disney Springs, Slinky Dog Dash, the Skyliner, Jessie’s Critter Carousel and Inside Out Emotional Whirlwind. Universal has historically been faster and leaner, but even that is ending. It seems doubtful that Universal could pull off something like Men in Black: Alien Attack today. The ridiculous timeline of Transformers: The Ride — 3D where the project was open 13 months after the decision to build had been made was extremely extraordinary circumstances that cut out a lot of stakeholders, and is very unlikely to ever be repeated.
There is plenty to criticize about TRON Lightcycle Power Run but it’s timeline really is not one. A project of its size easily has hundreds of pages of drawings and an even larger project manual, all of which have to be reviewed, redrawn and have any changes properly coordinated. All that work though isn’t necessary to start pushing around dirt because that sort of site work doesn’t need all of the specifics and that is exactly what happened. In other projects like Toy Story Land or Epic Universe, including early site work is even less applicable as dirt was being moved around well before any decisions were actually made on what to actually do but dirt was/is moved to prepare the site for something.
That Disney has long project timelines and high costs is not a secret. It is the reason for Guardians of the Galaxy — Mission: Breakout! and Pixar Pier. They were all about trying to do something faster and cheaper. There are also some recent projects that can be easily compared to other projects such as Disney Springs, Slinky Dog Dash, the Skyliner, Jessie’s Critter Carousel and Inside Out Emotional Whirlwind. Universal has historically been faster and leaner, but even that is ending. It seems doubtful that Universal could pull off something like Men in Black: Alien Attack today. The ridiculous timeline of Transformers: The Ride — 3D where the project was open 13 months after the decision to build had been made was extremely extraordinary circumstances that cut out a lot of stakeholders, and is very unlikely to ever be repeated.
There is plenty to criticize about TRON Lightcycle Power Run but it’s timeline really is not one. A project of its size easily has hundreds of pages of drawings and an even larger project manual, all of which have to be reviewed, redrawn and have any changes properly coordinated. All that work though isn’t necessary to start pushing around dirt because that sort of site work doesn’t need all of the specifics and that is exactly what happened. In other projects like Toy Story Land or Epic Universe, including early site work is even less applicable as dirt was being moved around well before any decisions were actually made on what to actually do but dirt was/is moved to prepare the site for something.
No Name
Well-Known Member
The only situation where the timeline really matters is if they’re trying to capitalize on something currently popular that won’t maintain its same popularity for long.
Otherwise it doesn’t really matter how long something takes, so long as Disney invests in, and coordinates, their future well enough that they have marketable offerings opening at a consistent rate. 2017 to 2021 (and hopefully beyond) is a good example of that. The company doesn’t need to build anything they announce at D23 this year for WDW particularly quickly because they have six major attractions planned to open over the next three years. 2009 to 2015, on the other hand, saw the opening of only two new rides at WDW (and not much else), and as a result, the resort experienced stagnant attendance and a huge loss of market share. Today’s investment is still helping the resort recover from Bob Iger’s poor initial analysis of the Orlando market.
Otherwise it doesn’t really matter how long something takes, so long as Disney invests in, and coordinates, their future well enough that they have marketable offerings opening at a consistent rate. 2017 to 2021 (and hopefully beyond) is a good example of that. The company doesn’t need to build anything they announce at D23 this year for WDW particularly quickly because they have six major attractions planned to open over the next three years. 2009 to 2015, on the other hand, saw the opening of only two new rides at WDW (and not much else), and as a result, the resort experienced stagnant attendance and a huge loss of market share. Today’s investment is still helping the resort recover from Bob Iger’s poor initial analysis of the Orlando market.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
To the guest the timeline is not really important. As part of a bigger picture, the timeline is important because it strongly relates to cost and that ability to properly and consistently build out capacity. Even with all of the building that is happening, Walt Disney World‘s parks will remain underbuilt but after a time period and level of expense that could have helped much more.
Are you really saying WDWs attendance is stagnant and they are losing market share. Please review the numbers and open your eyes. If Universal does not get their third park open much sooner than 2023 they will fall to under 20% of the market and Disney will be back over 75%. Yes after Universal opens their new park, they will gain a few points in market share but they will never get close to WDW. Just in case you didn't know in 2018 WDW drew 58,311,000 vs Universal's 20,496,000. In water parks WDW out drew Universal 4,284,000 to 1,750,000. Please explain where WDWs huge market share loss is?
No Name
Well-Known Member
Before launching into a long rebuttal, try making sure you read my post correctly. WDW’s attendance was rather stagnant and they lost market share from 2009-2015.
tparris
Well-Known Member
Did you even read the whole thing?
Yes they lost martket share as Universal built HP. However they gained marketshare last year and will gain most the marketshare back before Universal opens their real third gate. But if you asked most people would you rather have more marketshare in Orlando or own Marvel and Lucasfilm, I am sure most would agree that Iger made wonderful decisions. So the parks may have had a few stagnant years which by the way incude 9/11 but you can blame it on Iger investing in more profitable areas which also gave the parks more wonderful IP for the future of the parks, which also means lots more Marvel Attractions at WDW than just GotG.
Last edited:
No Name
Well-Known Member
And you say this as though the company didn’t have the money or personnel to do both. It’s not an either-or situation. Any established and responsible business invests in all of their divisions regularly, because they have the resources and understand the profitability of doing so.
Would I have you believe that they recently bought Fox for far more than the cost of Marvel and Lucasfilm combined AND are investing in WDW as well? How could this possibly be?! Maybe because they’re different divisions run by different individuals and the expenses fall on different spreadsheets.
Buried20KLeague
Well-Known Member
I’m aware of all that. It doesn’t change the point. I don’t care if they take 3 years for fiscal reasons, or to spend two years helping little old ladies cross the road... 3 plus years for a cloned attraction is an embarrassment and IMO shows little concern for guests and what they think. Though we already knew that.
eddie104
Well-Known Member
Did you forget Shanghai has exclusivity agreement for this attraction ?