Why doesn't WDW add more rides when they do major expansions?

[DW Aficionado]

Does anyone else have an issue with WDW, that with each major expansion, very few rides are actually added to the park?

For example, with the MK Fantasy Land expansion, we lost the Snow White ride, added the mine train ride, added the Little Mermaid ride. All that work.... Net 1 extra ride (plus another expensive restaurant). I think I'm starting to see the purpose of the expansion.

Hollywood Studios, Toy Story Land, Alien Swirl and Slinky Dog coaster (3D ride was already there). Net 2 extra rides (plus another restaurant).

Hollywood Studios, Star Wars Land....lost stunt car show, backlot tour, Osbourne Christmas lights... added 2 rides (plus restaurants)

Animal Kingdom, Pandora... all that work and just 2 rides.

Don't you think the Imagineers should be adding more rides per major expansion?

 

[JIMINYCR]

I think we all would agree that more attractions in any build would be welcomed. More value for our money, more excitement for our day, more things to draw crowds away.
But Dis cares first about the cost. Money isn’t doled out freely. Every build costs for plans, designs, site work, the actual build, dressing up the build and site. Then the cost and availability of staffing the attractions. Justifying one or two attractions and seeing it through is a major deal. Going further with multiple builds extends the money laid out and operating the projects.
Then with more builds you need places for handling guests who will come which means restaurants, counter service dining, rest rooms. You also need space for traffic and areas for guest flow through.. Now you need the space to add all this in. Dis has property to expand but with every expansion you take away area that’s being used for parking, and operations. Not all land is buildable.
I’d love it if we saw major build ups but Dis doesn’t see it as easily as we do who only want to be further entertained. It takes time for attractions to bring in the money after the build and turn a profit. It’s business first and foremost and what brings in more money than is taken out.

 

[monorail81]

Because rides don’t make the company money.

 

[drizgirl]

Because rides don’t make the company money.

Right? Nobody buys a ticket because of the rides.

 

[WondersOfLife]

Right? Nobody buys a ticket because of the rides.

They buy tickets for Instagram cupcakes!

 

[Chef Mickey]

Because they are cheap and have terrible management.

 

[DW Aficionado]

I think we all would agree that more attractions in any build would be welcomed. More value for our money, more excitement for our day, more things to draw crowds away.
But Dis cares first about the cost. Money isn’t doled out freely. Every build costs for plans, designs, site work, the actual build, dressing up the build and site. Then the cost and availability of staffing the attractions. Justifying one or two attractions and seeing it through is a major deal. Going further with multiple builds extends the money laid out and operating the projects.
Then with more builds you need places for handling guests who will come which means restaurants, counter service dining, rest rooms. You also need space for traffic and areas for guest flow through.. Now you need the space to add all this in. Dis has property to expand but with every expansion you take away area that’s being used for parking, and operations. Not all land is buildable.
I’d love it if we saw major build ups but Dis doesn’t see it as easily as we do who only want to be further entertained. It takes time for attractions to bring in the money after the build and turn a profit. It’s business first and foremost and what brings in more money than is taken out.

I understand all of that, but it seems to me that they are updating their other parks with more elaborate upgrades. I believe Hong Kong Disney is getting an entire Frozen Land.

Also, for all the updates in Epcot, basically they are giving us a flower garden to walk through. Tho I'm sure it will be very nice, what is it really adding for the price of admission?

 

[Lilofan]

Because rides don’t make the company money.

Its the merchandise locations at all exit areas of the rides where your money is extracted to feed the Mouse.

 

[DW Aficionado]

Well that's always been the case. But it is nice to get some cool AC before going back out into the heat

 

[JIMINYCR]

I understand all of that, but it seems to me that they are updating their other parks with more elaborate upgrades. I believe Hong Kong Disney is getting an entire Frozen Land.

Also, for all the updates in Epcot, basically they are giving us a flower garden to walk through. Tho I'm sure it will be very nice, what is it really adding for the price of admission?

WDW has always gotten the shaft when it comes to expenditures. The out of country sites get the better builds and most exciting attractions. Maybe they pull in more money?

 

[marni1971]

Poor things can’t afford it.

 

[John park hopper]

Domestic parks have to prop up all the looser companies Disney buys.

 

[DW Aficionado]

WDW has always gotten the shaft when it comes to expenditures. The out of country sites get the better builds and most exciting attractions. Maybe they pull in more money?

I've read that the WDW resort pulls in the most money out of all the resorts and is helping keeping their streaming service afloat.

 

[SpectreJordan]

I understand all of that, but it seems to me that they are updating their other parks with more elaborate upgrades. I believe Hong Kong Disney is getting an entire Frozen Land.

Also, for all the updates in Epcot, basically they are giving us a flower garden to walk through. Tho I'm sure it will be very nice, what is it really adding for the price of admission?

I don't think the Moana walkthrough is a bad addition. It's going to draw people away from ride lines for however long it takes to walk it, I think that's a good thing lol

 

[wdwfan4ver]

Its a price thing.

I am saying that because Galaxy's Edge was supposed to have a Bantha ride and Pandora was supposed to get a 3rd ride. Information is out that James Cameron wanted 3rd Pandora ride, but Disney didn't want that because Disney didn't want to spend the money.

Keep in mind Disney was so cheap that Slinky Dog queue didn't have shade originally when the ride opened in Toy Story Land.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

Its a price thing.

I am saying that because Galaxy's Edge was supposed to have a Bantha ride and Pandora was supposed to get a 3rd ride. Information is out that James Cameron wanted 3rd Pandora ride, but Disney didn't want that because Disney didn't want to spend the money.

Keep in mind Disney was so cheap that Slinky Dog queue didn't have shade originally when the ride opened in Toy Story Land.

There's an odd Venn Diagram that Disney falls into where they somehow manage to be both too cheap and also manage to blow loads of money on their projects.

They're not really all that afraid to spend money, sometimes even startling amounts of it. But the way they spend it is SUCH an issue now. They're no longer able to get any bang for their buck and the guests are paying for it. Literally and figuratively.

 

[J4546]

I understand all of that, but it seems to me that they are updating their other parks with more elaborate upgrades. I believe Hong Kong Disney is getting an entire Frozen Land.

Also, for all the updates in Epcot, basically they are giving us a flower garden to walk through. Tho I'm sure it will be very nice, what is it really adding for the price of admission?

The "flower garden walkthrough" is part of a major overhaul that added Rat and the rest of the France pavilion expansion, GotG, New Communicores, New nighttime show (though it was not good imo and has already been replaced) new entrance, new central core, Space 220, etc.....

And also the Bantha ride that was conceptualized for GE never happened not just because budget but because it would have been a slow moving maintanence nightmare with low capacity.

 

[celluloid]

The "flower garden walkthrough" is part of a major overhaul that added Rat and the rest of the France pavilion expansion, GotG, New Communicores, New nighttime show (though it was not good imo and has already been replaced) new entrance, new central core, Space 220, etc.....

Those things you mentioned replaced the net gain of things that have closed or changed since 1989.

Guardians replaced a family dark ride(subjectivity aside it replaced a ride)
and Rat makes up for a loss of a ride that shuttered in closing of Body Wars in terms of numbers.

Those other things only make a dentin the coutnless dining options and venues lost or replaced. Not gained. More to the poster's point., no new rides have been added.

 

[flynnibus]

TLDR - Because expansion and rides -> Expanding your baseline operations cost. AKA money you spend all the time - Verse things you can flex in and out as needed, or things that don't require as much upkeep.

So it's something you do very limited. It's better to replace or refurnish things to keep things 'new' than it is to expand all the time.

One in... One out.. keeps your operating budget similar.

 

[Doberge]

Depends what is being replaced and the ability of the new attraction to draw more people. A poorly reviewed ride that rarely has a line more than 5 minutes that is removed in favor an effective E ticket sucking guests in line is not a 1-to-1 swap to Disney. To us it seems that way but Disney sees a replacement with long lines as new capacity to hold folks in lines instead of walkways and other attraction queues. Guardians is an example of where it's worked well. Under the Sea is an example that did not work well. Journey into Imagination is an examplenof something that needs serious changes or replacement.