Volcano Bay

flynnibus

flynnibus

Premium Member
Tom Morrow said:
But if the numbers being quoted here are true, that at 6,000 people Volcano Bay is at capacity yet that is how many people are typically at the Disney water parks, then Volcano Bay has a serious capacity issue and this isn't just because it's new.
Click to expand...

??
Volcano Bay was never built to be as big as the Disney parks.

Does everyone forget already the early discussions how people thought the park may even be ONLY for hotel guests? Volcano Bay is not huge... this is not news. Volcano Bay does not need to 'beat' or be bigger than Disney's parks.
 
mergatroid

mergatroid

Well-Known Member
Tom Morrow said:
But if the numbers being quoted here are true, that at 6,000 people Volcano Bay is at capacity yet that is how many people are typically at the Disney water parks, then Volcano Bay has a serious capacity issue and this isn't just because it's new.
Click to expand...

flynnibus said:
??
Volcano Bay was never built to be as big as the Disney parks.

Does everyone forget already the early discussions how people thought the park may even be ONLY for hotel guests? Volcano Bay is not huge... this is not news. Volcano Bay does not need to 'beat' or be bigger than Disney's parks.
Click to expand...

I believe the person you're quoting never made any of those claims my friend? He seems to be just pointing out that if they're letting in so many people that the park is 'overwhelmed' that maybe the capacity needs reducing, at least that's how it reads to me? The mentioning of the Disney water parks is probably being used as they don't seem to have nearly as many issues with 6,000 people getting on 'attractions' there (including slides, bars and wave pools etc). He's even probably agreeing with your statement that they're bigger parks, hence why he's querying VB being smaller yet trying to operate with the same number of visitors in it rather than capping it's capacity at a lower number?

As an aside and in the interest of fairness, I believe several people on here have reported that VB has reduced it's capacity since opening to try to improve the experience for guests. If so then that's a good thing as all most people want (myself included) is a better experience for all. I'll also concede that some people don't want to just use slides at a water park and instead prefer to just drink, lounge, read, tan, burn, perve, chat, play on phones, shop, eat, argue with family members, pick their nose, bite their nails, people watch, brush their hair, play scrabble or any other multitude of activities available rather than go on slides. For the purpose of this debate though they're not as relevant as those who aren't happy at not riding enough slides as they're the people who are making the majority of the complaints in my humble opinion.
 
Last edited:
Evolution

Evolution

Active Member
Tom Morrow said:
But if the numbers being quoted here are true, that at 6,000 people Volcano Bay is at capacity yet that is how many people are typically at the Disney water parks, then Volcano Bay has a serious capacity issue and this isn't just because it's new.
Click to expand...

What's the capacity of their water parks? I've seen a few say 6,000 just like VB. If that's indeed true: unless TL and BB are closing everyday, they aren't hitting capacity.
 
mergatroid

mergatroid

Well-Known Member
Evolution said:
What's the capacity of their water parks? I've seen a few say 6,000 just like VB. If that's indeed true: unless TL and BB are closing everyday, they aren't hitting capacity.
Click to expand...

I don't think TL or BB hit capacity every day, in fact they probably don't most of the time apart from summer time.
 
flynnibus

flynnibus

Premium Member
mergatroid said:
I believe the person you're quoting never made any of those claims my friend? He seems to be just pointing out that if they're letting in so many people that the park is 'overwhelmed' that maybe the capacity needs reducing, at least that's how it reads to me?
Click to expand...

Then there would be no need to compare to Disney's numbers. The comparison to what Disney manages is irrelevant because the two are not equals in size.

mergatroid said:
The mentioning of the Disney water parks is probably being used as they don't seem to have nearly as many issues with 6,000 people getting on 'attractions' there (including slides, bars and wave pools etc). He's even probably agreeing with your statement that they're bigger parks, hence why he's querying VB being smaller yet trying to operate with the same number of visitors in it rather than capping it's capacity at a lower number?
Click to expand...

Then you are back to comparing what the two parks can do... which you can't do without inferring they should be comparable. So we are back to the original statement... They aren't equal, weren't built to be equal... so comparing how they absorb the same number of people is kind of pointless.
 
mergatroid

mergatroid

Well-Known Member
flynnibus said:
Then there would be no need to compare to Disney's numbers. The comparison to what Disney manages is irrelevant because the two are not equals in size.



Then you are back to comparing what the two parks can do... which you can't do without inferring they should be comparable. So we are back to the original statement... They aren't equal, weren't built to be equal... so comparing how they absorb the same number of people is kind of pointless.
Click to expand...

Well you'll probably have to get an answer from him, I was pointing out how it reads to me.

A similar example could be that you have 2 eateries built. One is bigger than the other and can sit 200 people and feed them all without much of a wait, we'll call it 'Jim's mega restaurant'.

The other one can sit 40 people without a wait, we'll call it 'Bob's Family Cafe'

Now Bob decides he'll let 200 people in at once like Jim does even though Bob can only accommodate 40 people and people are upset that they're let in but can't sit or eat without a wait. If somebody compared the two and pointed out that one deals with the capacity far better than the other, they wouldn't be wrong. They're not saying that both should manage the same number of guests, rather pointing out than one knows it's capacity better than the other. That's completely different to arguing that they should both let in the same number of guests and deal with them, in fact that's not implied at all.
 
JoeCamel

JoeCamel

Well-Known Member
DisneyJayL said:
Just asking the question. I heard guests aren't really liking the place. Of course with something new, it's going to have lots of curious people.
Click to expand...
Capacity every day? I don't think that is all lookie lous. I know people that have been multiple times in the last week or two, I don't think they would be going back if they didn't like it. There are lots of other things to do if it were bad. Like most things social media blows it up but the GP like it. Just look at Fallon GSATs
 
D

DisneyJayL

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No
JoeCamel said:
Capacity every day? I don't think that is all lookie lous. I know people that have been multiple times in the last week or two, I don't think they would be going back if they didn't like it. There are lots of other things to do if it were bad. Like most things social media blows it up but the GP like it. Just look at Fallon GSATs
Click to expand...
Just wanted to be sure before I dive in. I hear that it is getting better though, whatever it was.
 
cheezbat

cheezbat

Well-Known Member
DisneyJayL said:
Just asking the question. I heard guests aren't really liking the place. Of course with something new, it's going to have lots of curious people.
Click to expand...
The majority of the people I saw in the park seemed to be enjoying it. Even with long waits I really enjoyed it. The park has some of the best waterslides in central Florida...and two nice rivers. It's a nice park, and the more stuff Universal adds to it will only make it better.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom