News Tron coaster coming to the Magic Kingdom

[Basil of Baker Street]

With capacity issues, every attraction is an E ticket outside of a handfull of rides/shows. SDD is a prime example.

 

[Marc Davis Fan]

I think this is the best path to a “solution” for those that think capacity is a major problem. It’s not building a movie theater at MK to soak up people, or another restaurant. People can eat and watch movies anywhere. I also don’t think it’s building “lesser” rides for the sake of more rides. I love dark water rides and don’t like roller coasters of any form, but I don’t think people will look better on a 1.5hour wait for 7D as opposed to a 2hour wait because they got to ride little mermaid or a new similar ride.

I think best way forward is building E ticket feature rides that draw people but that also have high capacity. Something like Pandora where they made sure to have multiple loading areas so that you increase the groups of 16 that are riding every time. Maybe it means building huge show buildings so that a feature ride runs multiple tracks, but I think the key is getting people on rides that are popular faster, not hopeinf people will spread out to less attractive rides to offset lines on popular ones.

THIS x 1,000!

Look at Shanghai's PotC. It's the park's biggest E-ticket, yet the wait times are usually quite short. Because the capacity is insane. That's good for attendance and good for guest satisfaction.

However, there's another necessary piece of the formula: Higher attendance means crowded walkways. But this has a solution, too. More walking space. The reason EPCOT doesn't feel as crowded as the other parks when at the same attendance level is simply that there's more space and good crowd-flow design. If MK opened two new lands on opposite sides of the park (e.g., past Fantasyland or Tomorrowland on one side, and west of Adventureland/Frontierland on the other side), and used the "blessing of size" to actually make them physically expansive while properly connected with the entrances/exits of other lands, things would be really good.

A related issue: I know we always say that parks 2-4 are still "under-built" from an attraction capacity standpoint. However...

1. No matter how built-up the other parks become, MK is still going to be viewed as "Disney" by a huge percentage of guests, especially first-timers and "casual visitors."
2. ...and this means that, if Disney wants to retain the cultural status as "the best," and thereby create new fans / repeat visitors, MK must showcase the best that Disney is capable of.
3. ...and yet, right now, MK's top offerings are thoroughly outdated/surpassed compared to those of the other three parks and Disney's competition. There is no MK equivalent of SWGE, Pandora, Word Showcase, or WWoHP. The contrast will be even more stark when Epic Universe opens.

Considering the above, I believe the addition of immersive, capacity-increasing new lands with top-tier high-capacity E-tickets at MK should be one of WDW's top priorities.

 

[doctornick]

THIS x 1,000!

Look at Shanghai's PotC. It's the park's biggest E-ticket, yet the wait times are usually quite short. Because the capacity is insane. That's good for attendance and good for guest satisfaction.

However, there's another necessary piece of the formula: Higher attendance means crowded walkways. But this has a solution, too. More walking space. The reason EPCOT doesn't feel as crowded as the other parks when at the same attendance level is simply that there's more space and good crowd-flow design. If MK opened two new lands on opposite sides of the park (e.g., past Fantasyland or Tomorrowland on one side, and west of Adventureland/Frontierland on the other side), and used the "blessing of size" to actually make them physically expansive while properly connected with the entrances/exits of other lands, things would be really good.

* * *

A related issue: I know we always say that parks 2-4 are still "under-built" from an attraction capacity standpoint. However...

1. No matter how built-up the other parks become, MK is still going to be viewed as "Disney" by a huge percentage of guests, especially first-timers and "casual visitors."
2. ...and this means that, if Disney wants to retain the cultural status as "the best," and thereby create new fans / repeat visitors, MK must showcase the best that Disney is capable of.
3. ...and yet, right now, MK's top offerings are thoroughly outdated/surpassed compared to those of the other three parks and Disney's competition. There is no MK equivalent of SWGE, Pandora, Word Showcase, or WWoHP. The contrast will be even more stark when Epic Universe opens.

Considering the above, I believe the addition of immersive, capacity-increasing new lands with top-tier high-capacity E-tickets at MK should be one of WDW's top priorities.

IMHO they would really benefit to building on the north side of the RoA and connecting Frontierland to Liberty Square that way. Like do a proper New Orleans Square and put Tiana's ride there or maybe something themed to the California or Alaska gold rush (to keep the further west/later time period flow). Adding stuff there would be tremendous for guest flow especially during parades.

 

[jpinkc]

Hell I was excited to think we were finally getting a Mary Poppins ride for the UK Pavillion, that was more exciting to me than Tron. I like coasters but will Take Mary Poppins over Tron any day. Bring Back MR TOAD TO MK!!!!!!

 

[jpinkc]

THIS x 1,000!

Look at Shanghai's PotC. It's the park's biggest E-ticket, yet the wait times are usually quite short. Because the capacity is insane. That's good for attendance and good for guest satisfaction.

However, there's another necessary piece of the formula: Higher attendance means crowded walkways. But this has a solution, too. More walking space. The reason EPCOT doesn't feel as crowded as the other parks when at the same attendance level is simply that there's more space and good crowd-flow design. If MK opened two new lands on opposite sides of the park (e.g., past Fantasyland or Tomorrowland on one side, and west of Adventureland/Frontierland on the other side), and used the "blessing of size" to actually make them physically expansive while properly connected with the entrances/exits of other lands, things would be really good.

A related issue: I know we always say that parks 2-4 are still "under-built" from an attraction capacity standpoint. However...

1. No matter how built-up the other parks become, MK is still going to be viewed as "Disney" by a huge percentage of guests, especially first-timers and "casual visitors."
2. ...and this means that, if Disney wants to retain the cultural status as "the best," and thereby create new fans / repeat visitors, MK must showcase the best that Disney is capable of.
3. ...and yet, right now, MK's top offerings are thoroughly outdated/surpassed compared to those of the other three parks and Disney's competition. There is no MK equivalent of SWGE, Pandora, Word Showcase, or WWoHP. The contrast will be even more stark when Epic Universe opens.

Considering the above, I believe the addition of immersive, capacity-increasing new lands with top-tier high-capacity E-tickets at MK should be one of WDW's top priorities.

I agree with what your saying, I just dont see Disney doing anything about it. They dont see a problem when the park is packed 90% of the year. They see money pouring in and are doing what lots of companies do before they fall flat on there . The other side of the coin is if they did announce something truely New or Exciting to the fanbase, what we end up with is never as it was presented. Then the other shoe is it seems to take disney 5 years or more to build 1 attraction that there competition builds in 2 years or less.

 

[JoeCamel]

I agree with what your saying, I just dont see Disney doing anything about it. They dont see a problem when the park is packed 90% of the year. They see money pouring in and are doing what lots of companies do before they fall flat on there *****. The other side of the coin is if they did announce something truely New or Exciting to the fanbase, what we end up with is never as it was presented. Then the other shoe is it seems to take disney 5 years or more to build 1 attraction that there competition builds in 2 years or less.

The difference is the pool of customers are there for the taking if you build attractions, Universal wants more - Disney is not sure what to do with how many they have.
Universal is in the position to gain share and profits so they build and build and build some more. Disney thinks there is little return on expanding they just want to maximize what they have.
Shanghai was a vanity project not a serious attempt to expand the company as a whole, that is D+ in a crowded market with limited content. The parks do not produce much content so not the focus of the coming growth and growth is all that matters when all the money demands 10% yoy returns yoy.....

 

[Casper Gutman]

The difference is the pool of customers are there for the taking if you build attractions, Universal wants more - Disney is not sure what to do with how many they have.
Universal is in the position to gain share and profits so they build and build and build some more. Disney thinks there is little return on expanding they just want to maximize what they have.
Shanghai was a vanity project not a serious attempt to expand the company as a whole, that is D+ in a crowded market with limited content. The parks do not produce much content so not the focus of the coming growth and growth is all that matters when all the money demands 10% yoy returns yoy.....

So why is Universal the one not overhyping attractions like Bourne while Disney takes out Super Bowl ads for a kiddie coaster?

 

[JoeCamel]

So why is Universal the one not overhyping attractions like Bourne while Disney takes out Super Bowl ads for a kiddie coaster?

Universal has a long history of under promising and over delivering. The result is increased GS scores.
Remember Disney no longer cares about GS

 

[networkpro]

Universal has a long history of under promising and over delivering. The result is increased GS scores.
Remember Disney no longer cares about GS

Fast and Furious Party Bus

 

[JoeCamel]

Fast and Furious Party Bus

I give them a pass on that and certainly if they close it this year but after closing Shrek and putting Mummy into refurb they need the capacity. Did I mention they are dismantling Fear Factor? Not the park where I would want to go for a few years but when they get done I wish for F&F to exit the building. It was a forced ride from the top much like Fallon but with spectacular results (not in good way).
But I could do MiB and Finn's and be happy.

 

[Poseidon Quest]

So why is Universal the one not overhyping attractions like Bourne while Disney takes out Super Bowl ads for a kiddie coaster?

At least one major factor was the pandemic. I've heard that the show was essentially ready to open until COVID shut the parks down. They did quietly open it when the parks reopened, but they understandably didn't choose to pursue any sort of extensive marketing campaign due to being forced to limit park capacity. It seems smart to have just saved the show until later when things improved, but there's likely a number of factors that forced them to take the loss. The training phase for the live actors and stunt-people must be extremely time consuming and expensive, and so it would make less sense to shelve the show until capacity could pick back up, needing to go through the whole process again.

In another other scenario, there would probably have been a lot of positive buzz around it.

 

[lazyboy97o]

At least one major factor was the pandemic. I've heard that the show was essentially ready to open until COVID shut the parks down. They did quietly open it when the parks reopened, but they understandably didn't choose to pursue any sort of extensive marketing campaign due to being forced to limit park capacity. It seems smart to have just saved the show until later when things improved, but there's likely a number of factors that forced them to take the loss. The training phase for the live actors and stunt-people must be extremely time consuming and expensive, and so it would make less sense to shelve the show until capacity could pick back up, needing to go through the whole process again.

In another other scenario, there would probably have been a lot of positive buzz around it.

Nothing stops them from marketing it now. It was always a bit of filler between the coasters.

 

[Casper Gutman]

I give them a pass on that and certainly if they close it this year but after closing Shrek and putting Mummy into refurb they need the capacity. Did I mention they are dismantling Fear Factor? Not the park where I would want to go for a few years but when they get done I wish for F&F to exit the building. It was a forced ride from the top much like Fallon but with spectacular results (not in good way).
But I could do MiB and Finn's and be happy.

Fast and Furious is stupid in a way very much in line with the franchise it represents. And it’s stupid in a fun way - I’d happily ride it several times before riding Smugglers once. It certainly shouldn’t be around in 10 years, but for now it’s not high on my list of things I’d like to see replaced at Uni.

 

[JoeCamel]

Fast and Furious is stupid in a way very much in line with the franchise it represents. And it’s stupid in a fun way - I’d happily ride it several times before riding Smugglers once. It certainly shouldn’t be around in 10 years, but for now it’s not high on my list of things I’d like to see replaced at Uni.

If they had actually bothered to produce CGI on par with the franchise movies it would have been amazing, not going to do that now or ever.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

Just because something isn’t an E-Ticket doesn’t mean it is above criticism. This becomes more so when the size, scope and cost are all more than enough to deliver an E-Ticket experience.

Indeed. Disney spent $20 million more on The Little Mermaid dark ride than Universal did on Harry Potter and the Forbidden Journey. Seven Dwarfs was nearly twice the cost of Forbidden Journey.

Isn't it true that Alien Swirling Saucers cost almost twice as much as Winnie the Pooh? Considering that Swirling Saucers is such a "lite" experience that's really wild.

Disney has been practically its own worst enemy when it comes to things like this. When budgets blow up this way they feel they HAVE to seek immediate return on that investment, and marketing runs into overdrive to ensure that. Which really is a mistake given that we live now more than ever in a time where word of mouth moves fast.

New Fantasyland could have sold itself without a single marketing dollar if they'd just opened and let people start posting about it. Some of the most popular Disney properties ever, in the most popular land of the most popular park on Earth? Combined with the fact that most of it was about giving people more space to be and less about drawing more people in, it's silly that they were playing ads for it alongside trailers in Movie Theaters across the country. I get the need for SOME promo, but they pushed it like the second coming when it was purposefully designed not to be.

I'd love to see Disney pull a Beyonce and drop a "secret album", where they just quietly build a mid-size C or D ticket, say nothing, and one day just open it. Could you imagine? They'd never do it, but what a contrast that would be to the current cycle of "announce early, keep people on the hook, scale back the budget, finally open after years, and then promote promote promote". Something mid-range might have more of a chance than it would if you'd been told for years how great it was going to be. Save that for the grand-slams that are meant to massively alter guest spending patterns.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

I enjoyed Spidey for what it was. It has an E-ticket next door (GotG) and will eventually have a 2nd E-ticket in the land.

It's worth noting that Disney has gotten into a bad habit of bunting on their biggest money-making franchises - Frozen, Marvel, Star Wars, Toy Story, and The Disney Princesses have all fallen victim to lackluster attractions in the last decade despite raking in some of Disney's biggest-ever box office returns. Star Wars of course has Rise of the Resistance providing some balance, but the problem still exists (and looks like it may well continue with the Star Cruiser).

Building a Marvel-themed C Ticket isn't inherently a bad idea, but when it's the only attraction opening with your brand new land themed to your many-billion-dollar franchise, and then is itself themed to the character who is historically most popular from that catalogue, it makes sense that there'd be some inflated expectation and Disney didn't do much to temper that.

Had the Quinjet ride opened alongside it wouldn't be as big a deal - people complain about Na'vi, for sure, but imagine how much worse reception would be if Flight of Passage were delayed and Na'vi had to anchor the new expansion on opening day. Yes, the Guardians Tower retheme that *is* part of the land with Spidey, but not only was it just a retheme, it had also been open for a while by the time Avenger's Campus opened. Disney deflated the impact of the biggest attraction in the land by letting it precede the land itself. I understand why, but . . . that's part of why Avenger's Campus underwhelms.

Presumably that perception will shift somewhat if the new E Ticket does come along, like Rise changed the temperature of Galaxy's Edge. But then again, it's not like people suddenly loved Smuggler's Run because Rise was open.

Not every ride has to be an E Ticket, but each ride has to deliver on its own promise. To many, neither Spidey nor Smuggler's run quite do that. That they both weirdly got burdended with the responsibility of carrying the opening of a new land with a marquee property didn't help. But whose fault is that but Disney's? They know these rides aren't headliners, and yet they made them headline the expansions to Star Wars and Marvel because the bigger attractions weren't ready. Different circumstances that resulted in the same guest-facing result - well-hyped, shiny new lands with only one new attraction to speak of, and they disappointed.

I know these are massively complex operations, and there are a million reasons Rise and the Quinjet didn't make opening day of their lands, but you can't blame the guests for expecting more than they got when they were genuinely meant to get more.

 

[Disstevefan1]

This most likely was not in the plan originally, but given where we are now -

Does anyone think WDW is purposely holding off the opening of Tron and the re opening of the WDW RR in order to make the open and re open of these to be the same time as the opening of Epic Universe?

It does serve two purposes; they have something to compete with Epic Universe when it opens and delaying work on the WDW projects also delays any money that needs to be put out for these. Disney loves to delay payments to contractors when they can.

 

[doctornick]

This most likely was not in the plan originally, but given where we are now -

Does anyone think WDW is purposely holding off the opening of Tron and the re opening of the WDW RR in order to make the open and re open of these to be the same time as the opening of Epic Universe?

It does serve two purposes; they have something to compete with Epic Universe when it opens and delaying work on the WDW projects also delays any money that needs to be put out for these. Disney loves to delay payments to contractors when they can.

Tron will be open long before Epic Universe. It's probably looking at 2025, maybe late 2024 at the earliest. Even the most cynical don't expect Tron to still not be open by then.

 

[gorillaball]

Tell me about how Toy Story Land was marketed. Do you feel it was warranted by the content of the land?

I quite honestly don't know how it was marketed. Did it cross my path other than being announced at D23, nope. Maybe I'm not exposed to the same marketing paraphernalia that you are. Since you are claiming "how" it was marketed - enlighten me with details.

 

[Touchdown]

I enjoyed Spidey for what it was. It has an E-ticket next door (GotG) and will eventually have a 2nd E-ticket in the land.

One of my issues with Spider-Man is unique to that IP, mainly it has a ride at a rival park that to this day is one of my favorite dark rides. It is a masterpiece. Web slingers fails to live up to that ride. However I get it, most people in CA haven’t ridden that ride so that’s a fan boy issue.

What isn’t a fan boy issue, is that there is another screen based shooter dark ride, in the same park, that I believe is a much better ride. This is the same complaint universal faced when building transformers out East, is why that ride is not nearly as popular, and at least they put it in another park.