NoChesterHester
Well-Known Member
I wasn't being sarcastic, but you clarification made a lot of sense.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Why Hollywood Studios is being rebuilt
- Thread starter pheneix
- Start date
I wasn't being sarcastic, but you clarification made a lot of sense.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
That seems like a pretty good list and its a good point that attractions can be other things besides rides. I think it will probably be either #5 or #8 but not both. Another spinner or low cost/low maintenance attraction could replace it to keep the total count up. I also assume they will add at least 1 new parade and maybe another show too. The Star Wars parades for SWW are pretty cool. A daily daytime Star Wars parade would be a good add.
PeterAlt
Well-Known Member
Sounds realistic to me.... Are we forgetting...
"Here in Florida ... we have something special we never enjoyed at Disneyland — the blessing of size. There's enough land here to hold all the ideas and plans we can possibly imagine." - Walt Disney
So, I don't want to hear any more discussion of mass removal of attractions - or Walt will turn in his grave!
doctornick
Well-Known Member
Understood. Yeah, it's unreasonable to expect TDO to build 8 more rides at DHS in one expansion (though the park would benefit from it.....). But when you are taking a bunch of attractions off-line -- especially ones like the stunt shows that can occupy a lot of guests at one time -- you need to make up for that capacity. I have some serious concerns about the results of this expansion in that it might be far too much like the FLE, with a lot of very pretty and well done placemaking and not enough "sizzle" in terms of rides/attractions.
If we lose 3 current attractions (Indy, Backlot, LMA) and replace VOTLM with the Muppets (some have hinted that might happen so the current Muppets space will be used for Star Wars), then I think it would be disappointing if all we get is one Star Wars ride and 2 Cars rides plus maybe an indoor Jedi Academy show. That would be weak and not really address the "half day park" complaints very much. TDO (or Burbank, whoever makes the call) needs to replace what is taken away with something better and provide additional things to do.
I also really hope that they do add family friendly rides as part of this. The park needs it, not only for young kids, but to have enough stuff for the non-thrill ride people to enjoy.
englanddg
One Little Spark...
Or they could...I dunno...build it in phases?
doctornick
Well-Known Member
I'm sure they'll build it in phases. They have to be able to have enough stuff open in the park to justify it being open. I'm not sure what that has to do with what I've said.
My point is that DHS, as it currently exists, needs more total attractions. There isn't enough to do and that is why it suffers with a "half day park" label. If they remove 3-5 current attractions, then they would need to build, say, 6-8 total new attractions to not only replace the current capacity but to add more to the park that is desperately needed. That's the problem with tearing down existing attractions and replacing them. Even if the new attractions are superior, you end up "running in place" in terms of capacity.
I don't think my above list is an unrealistic expectation of what to hope for with the Star Wars/Pixar expansion.
ttalovebug
Active Member
In all seriousness, does anyone else think that the removal of the Osborne Lights is a big problem? It's no secret the the Christmas offerings at the resort have been diminishing badly, with the Lights of Winter and decline in overall decor at EPCOT. Completely eliminating Osborne would be horrible. It's always packed at Christmas; wouldn't getting rid of them give guests no incentive to visit that particular park during the holidays? At least when EPCOT's holiday themeing was diminished, people still want to come for the Candlelight Processional.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
JWG
Well-Known Member
I feel as though this would be resolved. Either a) not all of Streets of America will disappear or b) they'll find a way to implement them elsewhere. Either "lights around the world" in Epcot or "Lights of Carsland", etc.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
It would be terrible, but only for 45 days out of 365. I saw it for the first time last December of 2011. I thought they were great, but I also can see that Disney cannot necessarily maintain that whole area for 45 days worth of increased attendance. Factually, the area of SoA is way to small to house that display. It is cozy and visable but it is also a sea of humanity and many go there just to see that. Park Hop over see the start and then leave again.
If they figure out that they can do something with that area that would boost attendance year round then I certainly understand why they would do it. I don't know how they would do it, but, if they keep it, I would agree that DTD (Disney Springs) would be the logical place. If they don't intend to tear down the buildings in Pleasure Island, it seems to me that this would be perfect for that show.They might even be able to get some of the retailers to basically pay for it as a retail draw.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
I agree with this in theory. However, the half day park status is partially because the "regulars" who are local and/or visit multiple times a year skip half of the current attractions. If you show up at rope drop and ride GMR, TSMM, Star Tours, RNRC and ToT and maybe catch 1 or 2 shows you can be done by 1PM. If you do all of the current rides and attractions/shows its hard to fit it all in 1 day. A lot of the stuff there is either stale or has been neutered (shout out to Bob Barker
). If you replace 3 or 4 attractions that maybe half the guests visit with 3 new rides and a few smaller show/attractions that are must do it becomes more of a full day park without actually increasing total capacity. I get the feeling this is what they are leaning towards as opposed to dramatically increasing total attraction count.
ttalovebug
Active Member
I agree this would be ideal, but I truly can't see them putting it anywhere without admission.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
Well, they don't really get much extra now to have it in DHS and when you are dealing with retail, as I said, they might be able to get the retailers to kick in the cost. I mean, really, the Christmas music, snow and light show gets everyone in the mood and what better place is there to have people get in that mood then right in the middle of a giant retail mall.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
A $10 parking fee on nights with the lights on should cover that. If I were local I'd be glad to pay $10 to see that display around the holidays.
Another option is to convince the vendors to shell out the cash for it. The additional draw of waves of customers might be enough incentive to get it done.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
It's not even so much as additional retail draw, it also takes care of the people that make the trip to Disney to see the show. If they travel from anywhere seeing the show is only one part of the trip...they also go to the parks during the day. It's a win-win for everybody. I don't see them charging anyone to see it, the retail draw incentive should be more then enough reason to have it there.
doctornick
Well-Known Member
I agree with this in theory. However, the half day park status is partially because the "regulars" who are local and/or visit multiple times a year skip half of the current attractions. If you show up at rope drop and ride GMR, TSMM, Star Tours, RNRC and ToT and maybe catch 1 or 2 shows you can be done by 1PM. If you do all of the current rides and attractions/shows its hard to fit it all in 1 day. A lot of the stuff there is either stale or has been neutered (shout out to Bob Barker
That's fair. And, honestly, I fit that bill as well -- I haven't gone to LMA or Backlot in any of my recent visits. I like the IJ stunt show, but it's not a "can't miss" for me. So, even if they just replaced them with an equal number of attractions -- especially ones with more repeatability than the ones being cut -- that would be a net positive.
I guess my point is that I hope they don't just built 3 rides and call it a day. There should be something more than that, even smaller things (shows/walk through attractions) and there should be stuff that is accessible to everyone, not just thrill seekers, because DHS already has skews towards thrilling rides and they'd be removing many of the all ages/low thrill tolerance attractions.
I guess we'll see what gets announced. I'm really looking forward to details from D23 and hope we aren't disappointed....
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
That is the problem, repeatability is always a situation where the more you see it the less that you would want to see it again. There is nothing really that doesn't have a time stamp on it. The thing is though that it only has a time stamp for those of us that are repeat, repeat and repeat some more, visitors to the parks. There are still millions of people out there that have never seen it even once. To them it doesn't need repeatability, to us we are bored with the old stuff, but that's just to us for the most part. An unfortunate fact, I think, is that we are not even close to being the majority of WDW Guests. That is part of the reason that Disney has had little incentive to do much of anything. However, even a minority manages to spend a lot of money there and as they see more pealing off to places up the road and spending that money there instead, they don't really want to lose that either. So if they finally realize that doing something, anything, that renews everyone's interest again, it might be a good idea.
SoonerDave
New Member
This is a *fabulous* thread, and props to Phenix for posting a frank, business-themed assessment of DHS and its future. It puts into much more basic terms the problems DHS is facing, how Universal is an increasingly "annoying" competitor for Disney, and how Disney doesn't quite yet seem to know exactly how to deal with them. Its sobering to read that Disney may try to reinvent DHS on the cheap, especially considering their recent effort in DLE is being met with a general yawn. I know it did for my family, and my daughter in particular. It's pretty, but there's nothing to do.
Pointing out that days lost in the parks as the focal for DHS analysis is spot-on especially considering Iger's recent comments about how the ultimate goal of MyMagic+ is to keep people in the parks, and more specifically, keep them spending money while they're there. People not in parks aren't spending money, and that's why a park like DHS that's losing if not hemorrhaging attendance can't endure in its current state. Having just come from a trip down to WDW, and realizing we struggled to spend more than a half-day at DHS only because we had an ADR at 50's that afternoon, it becomes apparent something has to be done. Leaving Toy Story Mania from the morning to a virtually unoccupied Backlot Tour queue, and empty Streets of America brings all the realities of DHS current problems into sharp focus.
Great analysis and discussion, Phenix. Thanks.
Pointing out that days lost in the parks as the focal for DHS analysis is spot-on especially considering Iger's recent comments about how the ultimate goal of MyMagic+ is to keep people in the parks, and more specifically, keep them spending money while they're there. People not in parks aren't spending money, and that's why a park like DHS that's losing if not hemorrhaging attendance can't endure in its current state. Having just come from a trip down to WDW, and realizing we struggled to spend more than a half-day at DHS only because we had an ADR at 50's that afternoon, it becomes apparent something has to be done. Leaving Toy Story Mania from the morning to a virtually unoccupied Backlot Tour queue, and empty Streets of America brings all the realities of DHS current problems into sharp focus.
Great analysis and discussion, Phenix. Thanks.
WDWFREAK53
Well-Known Member
I acknowledged that it boosted attendance but not as much as HP. This debate is about non-IP vs IP.
An entire section of Asia was added with an E-ticket, shops, and a sit down restaurant with an original ride as its anchor. UO did the same with a major franchise...and you can see the difference.
That's all I was trying to get at.
WDWFREAK53
Well-Known Member
So you're saying that it would be ok for a Star Wars Land as long as it didn't have the Star Wars name?
I don't follow you.
I just don't see the logic being against something that has been tested to be a complete success and have a strong fan base in lieu of something that nobody knows about and is a gamble whether people will be interested when it's completed.
Say you are the one putting the money down for the project...and your return on investment solely relied on whether an attraction was popular enough to bring people through the gates. Would you feel more comfortable putting it down on a major E-ticket with the Star Wars name attached to it...or the same ride with all Star Wars content replaced with generic ships/robots/etc.?