TP2000
Well-Known Member
GASP! So sinful! :fork:
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Why are they closing Snow White?
- Thread starter captainkidd
- Start date
GASP! So sinful! :fork:
aladdin2007
Well-Known Member
Would love to see one of each of those, tarzan would be better for animal kingdom. For current times though Tangled would be the most popular and snow white is the perfect location for it. Someone is not thinking and missing the boat. They need to get their heads out of this meetngreet thinking mode they are stuck in. Or at least not use perfectly good ride real estate for such things.
"Management" is not in any such mode. They hate meet n greets. Their labor cost is obscene and the guest counts are horrible. If it was up to management they would do away with every meet n greet outside of character meals. Guests demand meet n greets and management is simply giving them what they want.
pmaljr
Well-Known Member
Here's a couple of better ideas for that space than another meet and greet:
1. Install the same version of the ride that is Disneyland. I like that one much better. This would assume that everyone thinks the new coaster isn't worth a @#$@. Time will tell but please don't demolish the existing as of yet.
2. Install a Pinnochio ride similar to the one at Disneyland. We rode this for the first time in May on our first trip to DLP and we loved it.
I think both of these ideas are better than just a M&G.
1. Install the same version of the ride that is Disneyland. I like that one much better. This would assume that everyone thinks the new coaster isn't worth a @#$@. Time will tell but please don't demolish the existing as of yet.
2. Install a Pinnochio ride similar to the one at Disneyland. We rode this for the first time in May on our first trip to DLP and we loved it.
I think both of these ideas are better than just a M&G.
COProgressFan
Well-Known Member
I think you have this backwards. While management does not like the cost of operating meet and greets (in terms of the higher levels of staffing compared to, say, a standard FL dark ride), the cost of a meet and greet is significantly less expensive over the long run than a ride. Even a basic Fantasyland dark ride would cost tens of millions of dollars, significantly more than the cost of building a simple meet and greet area and staffing it.
While you mentioned the shortcomings of meet and greets, they are still much less expensive to create and maintain over the long run than a ride, while still being able to promote it as an attraction.
Since1976
Well-Known Member
It's my understanding that the transformation of Snow White into a Meet n Greet is a temporary solution. Yes, "temporary" in WDW park terms could mean 5 or 10 years, but it's still very likely they will leave the track in and cover it up with floorboards until a good idea for a replacement comes around. I'd much rather have a Meet n Greet in that spot than a rushed, expensive and half-thought-out ride that falls out of favor after a couple of weeks.
To maintain, maybe. To run overall, no. Maintenance is only one part of a large equation and meet n greets do take a surprising beating in the maintenance department. Paint that is only being looked at wears far better than paint that is constantly being touched by the sticky hands of 5 year olds. The construction cost of an attraction is a one time expense that is quickly eclipsed by the never ending, labor dollar black hole known as a meet n greet. You are also forgetting that Disney looks at cost of an attraction as a cost per guest number. Even unthemed meet n greets come up horribly bad by this metric. From ever bit if information I have been given, a well themed Meet n Greet, which is what this is supposed to be, will cost considerably more per guest than the B ticket dark ride it is replacing.
Pixiedustmaker
Well-Known Member
Hi all, I've been lurking on this board for a while and decided to chime in on this thread as the thinking behind installing a new M&G area seems to be misunderstood by fans. (I have some input/contact with Imagineering). Here's the reasoning behind the decision:
1. The Snow White dark ride had to go because the opening of the new Seven Dwarfs Mine Coaster would have meant that there would be two Snow White rides, one of them would be an aging dark ride. This would confuse guests (let's meet at the Snow White ride!) and would detract from whatever value the remaining Snow White dark ride would have had. It is easy to see why the decision was made to remove the older dark ride.
Plus, from a merchandizing stand-point, more Grumpy and Doopey t-shirts are sold that purely Snow White stuff, so it was easy to see how a dark ride with more of an emphasis on the funny Seven was greenlit.
2. The decision to install a M&G in Snow White's old location was based purely on guest expectations. Remember, originally there was going to be a lavish princess meet n' greet built where the Seven Dwarfs coaster will go. Management realizes that little girls will want to meet the Disney Princesses for decades to come, so the princess M&G has been scaled back some and plopped down where Snow White was.
3. Why wasn't a new dark ride put in in place of the Old Snow White dark ride? A lot of people have been surmising that putting in a new dark ride at Snow White would have been cheaper. Well, given that Potterland has raised the bar in terms of new attractions added in the parks, reconfiguring Snow White into another ride would have been expensive. There were originally plans to turn Snow White into a Beauty and the Beast dark ride, but obviously with the construction of the B&B restaurant, this plan was scuttled. Mind you, a B&B ride could eventually be added to Belle's village (with some creative queue design and utilizing the large amount of space behind the Fantasyland land expansion).
The costs of putting in a new dark ride, such as Mermaid, are more than simply building new ride vehicles and adding new scenes. You have to pay for the conceptualization and development of the ride, which can be costly, and you want to have time to learn what works with today's audience. Given that two major dark rides are in construction, Mermaid and Seven Dwarfs, management wants to see how successful the rides are before green lighting anything else in Fantasyland. Actually, there is a lot of nail biting going on right now. The Little Mermaid ride in DCA hasn't been as successful as planned (tongue in cheek), and there's talk about plussing the attraction that goes into fantasyland, such that it really outshines its somewhat lackluster clone in Anaheim. Fantasyland is the heart and soul of the Magic Kingdom for a lot of guests, and tinkering with this land is a slow and careful process.
4. Eventually the old section of Fantasyland will get an upgrade, maybe seven or so years down the line. This will be easily accomplished as the Fantasyland Expansion will remain open will ride like Peter Pan and Small World get new queues and upgrades to the rides. If at this time management decides to add another dark ride, then the Princess M&G could easily be moved again, and a dark ride added to the location of the old Snow White. There are three new Disney Princesses who don't have an attraction: Princess Tiana, Rapunzel, and Princess Merida from Pixar's upcoming Brave. Actually building a quality dark ride for one of these princesses, plus upgrading the old section of Fantasyland will be in the hundreds of millions, so you can see why management hasn't given the green lights just yet, though obviously this area of the park needs attention in the coming decade.
1. The Snow White dark ride had to go because the opening of the new Seven Dwarfs Mine Coaster would have meant that there would be two Snow White rides, one of them would be an aging dark ride. This would confuse guests (let's meet at the Snow White ride!) and would detract from whatever value the remaining Snow White dark ride would have had. It is easy to see why the decision was made to remove the older dark ride.
Plus, from a merchandizing stand-point, more Grumpy and Doopey t-shirts are sold that purely Snow White stuff, so it was easy to see how a dark ride with more of an emphasis on the funny Seven was greenlit.
2. The decision to install a M&G in Snow White's old location was based purely on guest expectations. Remember, originally there was going to be a lavish princess meet n' greet built where the Seven Dwarfs coaster will go. Management realizes that little girls will want to meet the Disney Princesses for decades to come, so the princess M&G has been scaled back some and plopped down where Snow White was.
3. Why wasn't a new dark ride put in in place of the Old Snow White dark ride? A lot of people have been surmising that putting in a new dark ride at Snow White would have been cheaper. Well, given that Potterland has raised the bar in terms of new attractions added in the parks, reconfiguring Snow White into another ride would have been expensive. There were originally plans to turn Snow White into a Beauty and the Beast dark ride, but obviously with the construction of the B&B restaurant, this plan was scuttled. Mind you, a B&B ride could eventually be added to Belle's village (with some creative queue design and utilizing the large amount of space behind the Fantasyland land expansion).
The costs of putting in a new dark ride, such as Mermaid, are more than simply building new ride vehicles and adding new scenes. You have to pay for the conceptualization and development of the ride, which can be costly, and you want to have time to learn what works with today's audience. Given that two major dark rides are in construction, Mermaid and Seven Dwarfs, management wants to see how successful the rides are before green lighting anything else in Fantasyland. Actually, there is a lot of nail biting going on right now. The Little Mermaid ride in DCA hasn't been as successful as planned (tongue in cheek), and there's talk about plussing the attraction that goes into fantasyland, such that it really outshines its somewhat lackluster clone in Anaheim. Fantasyland is the heart and soul of the Magic Kingdom for a lot of guests, and tinkering with this land is a slow and careful process.
4. Eventually the old section of Fantasyland will get an upgrade, maybe seven or so years down the line. This will be easily accomplished as the Fantasyland Expansion will remain open will ride like Peter Pan and Small World get new queues and upgrades to the rides. If at this time management decides to add another dark ride, then the Princess M&G could easily be moved again, and a dark ride added to the location of the old Snow White. There are three new Disney Princesses who don't have an attraction: Princess Tiana, Rapunzel, and Princess Merida from Pixar's upcoming Brave. Actually building a quality dark ride for one of these princesses, plus upgrading the old section of Fantasyland will be in the hundreds of millions, so you can see why management hasn't given the green lights just yet, though obviously this area of the park needs attention in the coming decade.
Alektronic
Well-Known Member
I think you are forgetting about maintenance of the ride itself. During non-operating hours, that is when all the upkeep of the ride occurs and involves a lot of CM's which you don't normally think about like Artist Prep, hairdressers, cosmetology, costuming, and then there is electrical and mechanical maintenance. They have to cycle and inspect every ride vehicle and replace the parts that have worn. They have maintain large inventory of different parts and there is preventive maintenance also. Then there is the cost of operating the ride, ride control computers, show control computers, and then audio controls and amplifiers for all the speakers and the PA system that goes throughout the ride.
Nope. Not forgetting that. Many of the same people are doing the same things at the meet n greets.
Since1976
Well-Known Member
That sort of free-roaming vehicle ride system has long been rumored to replace Journey into Imagination with Figment. I'm surprised that nothing like it has come to WDW yet.
You're right in that it would need the floor space of two such attractions to work. But considering Pooh is already popular as it is, I doubt it's going anywhere for a long time.
aladdin2007
Well-Known Member
Its overdue here for sure, but TDO doesnt want to pay for it, and no sponsor has come in.
Actually, word has it there are technical issues with the Imagination pavilion that prevent the trackless technology from being used there.
whylightbulb
Well-Known Member
Sigh...this really shouldn't need a comment but I just have to: how many long years will it take management to get their heads out of their MBA butts and simply open their eyes!!!?? Let's see...DCA mermaid and Nemo dark ride are both poorly designed and boring. Today's audience ride them because that is what Disney is offering. They neither hate them or love them for the most part. They are at best average, and in most cases lacklaster or barely passable but that is what Disney has conditioned the audience to accept. They already see how audiences are responding to Mermaid at DCA so why do they need more time before "plussing" Florida's version? I can save them a whole lot of time and money - the rides will be mildly successfull and barely passable. We already know how Mermaid is and I've seen the plans for the coaster and it is pretty bare in terms of show.
Right because a whole lot of useless management types need to justify their jobs.
By the way this is nothing against you I'm just reacting to information I know to be true but have very few opportunities to truly vent about it :brick:
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
I know it would be considered wasteful of the space in the Imagination building, but could they theoretically build a new building behind it that would work? I assume due to the inevitably popularity of such an attraction that a longer queue would be necessary.
From what I remember, the big issue was the lack of a completely level concrete floor in the Imagination building. Unfortunately, it could simply not be made level without knocking the building to the ground and starting from scratch. Of course there is precedence that with the right sponsor, Disney would be willing to do exactly that.
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
Why couldn't you have a partial demolition of the building for the necessary work, and have the part that needs to be leveled addressed? Would the total demolition just be the easier/less costly route?
It would seem wasteful to tear down the building and replace it with an identical one on the outside, so I anticipate any tear down would involve a new building design as well.
Speaking solely about how the building looks, I am a much bigger fan of the look of Mission: SPACE than I am Horizons, so this may not be a bad thing. However, I think the Imagination Pavilion is a much nicer looking building than Horizons was.
I am not really sure. I am going off of information provided to me vs. having a set of plans in front of me. From my experience a complete demo is often the best solution. When you start from a clean canvas you are not hemmed in by existing field conditions or trying to shoe horn something into an existing space. I have seen numerous occasions where one existing condition that has to be worked around ends up driving an entire design to the detriment of the finished project. I often tell clients "Don't spend a dollar to save a dime".
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
Looking at from above, it appears that the bulk of the building could be demolished while still leaving the pyramid facades:
http://www.wikimapia.org/#lat=28.3724842&lon=-81.5510336&z=19&l=0&m=b