Sure it can be done but it is far more expensive today than it was 50 years ago. And simply buying replacement land somewhere else isn't always an option. You have to do all sorts of environmental studies when you want to do anything in wetlands and all it takes is one endangered frog or bug and you'll quickly find that the government cares more about frogs and bugs than what people want.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
With 47 Sq. Miles, Why Do You Think Anything Needs To Be Closed.
- Thread starter Goofyernmost
- Start date
danyoung56
Well-Known Member
I guess I disagree with the premise of this thread. If someone feels strongly that an attraction (such as Stitch or Journey Into Imagination) should be closed, they should be more than welcome to express that, and then hear the opinions of those who love those attractions. I see no reason to censor anyone on a public discussion forum.
Brad Bishop
Well-Known Member
I'd argue that Stitch ought to go.
Captain EO was pretty bad, too. Thankfully it's gone but, from what I understand, it was replaced with Pixar trailers.
I think that there are two overall problems that have been going on for so long that they just seem to be accepted:
1) putting things where they don't belong (Dinorama in a Disney park - I know there's a veiled attempt to explain it with the surrounding theme, Pandora, Buzz Lightyear, Stitch, Monster's Laugh Floor, Frozen, etc.)
2) Budget cuts on long-term rides (Kali, 7DMT, etc.) / retreading rides (Buzz, Nemo)
The first one annoys people, myself included, because we'd like to see things properly placed to fit the theme of the area. If you're not trying to fit the theme of the area then the theme of the area no longer means anything and it all kind of unravels.
The second one sucks because of short-sighted budget cuts you get a cheapened or shortened ride which may have very well been an excellent ride. Bluto's Bildge Rat Barge (I think that's the name) over at UNI is what we should have at DAK. Instead, DAK has one of the shortest raft rides I know of - this is for a premium park. The same problem happened at 7DMT where they gimped the ride for budget reasons and now we're just stuck with it. The bottom line looked better for one quarter but we'll have a gimped 7DMT for many, many generations to come (we'll all be dead before it's replaced / changed out). Dinorama looks like another budget cut as does not finishing the fantasy section of DAK (became Camp Minnie Mickey and now will be Pandora).. as does not finishing Tomorrowland. It sucks. It sucks that some suit wanted a better bottom line so you get 1/2 attractions or crappy sections of parks and they don't go away.
Then you have the retreads and while some are better than others, they're still below par. Buzz is fun when it works (another problem) but it feels below par as does Nemo which just feels stuck in the Living Seas. They seemed to do well with Frozen, though, it just suffers from point #1 above.
I get the budget - you can't go bankrupt building a coaster but TWDC could have stuck with the original vision of 7DMT and not left people constantly thinking, "That was it??" when they got off. You get a similar feeling from Kali. You don't get that feeling from Space Mountain, Splash, or BTMRR. They all feel like complete rides.
Captain EO was pretty bad, too. Thankfully it's gone but, from what I understand, it was replaced with Pixar trailers.
I think that there are two overall problems that have been going on for so long that they just seem to be accepted:
1) putting things where they don't belong (Dinorama in a Disney park - I know there's a veiled attempt to explain it with the surrounding theme, Pandora, Buzz Lightyear, Stitch, Monster's Laugh Floor, Frozen, etc.)
2) Budget cuts on long-term rides (Kali, 7DMT, etc.) / retreading rides (Buzz, Nemo)
The first one annoys people, myself included, because we'd like to see things properly placed to fit the theme of the area. If you're not trying to fit the theme of the area then the theme of the area no longer means anything and it all kind of unravels.
The second one sucks because of short-sighted budget cuts you get a cheapened or shortened ride which may have very well been an excellent ride. Bluto's Bildge Rat Barge (I think that's the name) over at UNI is what we should have at DAK. Instead, DAK has one of the shortest raft rides I know of - this is for a premium park. The same problem happened at 7DMT where they gimped the ride for budget reasons and now we're just stuck with it. The bottom line looked better for one quarter but we'll have a gimped 7DMT for many, many generations to come (we'll all be dead before it's replaced / changed out). Dinorama looks like another budget cut as does not finishing the fantasy section of DAK (became Camp Minnie Mickey and now will be Pandora).. as does not finishing Tomorrowland. It sucks. It sucks that some suit wanted a better bottom line so you get 1/2 attractions or crappy sections of parks and they don't go away.
Then you have the retreads and while some are better than others, they're still below par. Buzz is fun when it works (another problem) but it feels below par as does Nemo which just feels stuck in the Living Seas. They seemed to do well with Frozen, though, it just suffers from point #1 above.
I get the budget - you can't go bankrupt building a coaster but TWDC could have stuck with the original vision of 7DMT and not left people constantly thinking, "That was it??" when they got off. You get a similar feeling from Kali. You don't get that feeling from Space Mountain, Splash, or BTMRR. They all feel like complete rides.
I'd be sympathetic if their recent profits weren't obscene. If they were losing money, OK. If they couldn't afford to staff additional attractions, OK again. However, that isn't the case, it isn't because they don't have excess profit, it is because they don't want to spend it. Someplace in their education they missed the class that told them that you make money by spending money. I'm guessing that the day of that class they stayed out with a hangover. Just because they won't doesn't mean that they shouldn't or can't if they want too. No one is more aware that Disney is a business then I am. I don't live in a world of pixie dust and mystical rainbows, however that doesn't mean that ignore basic things of profitability that dictates that you don't stay stagnant and you renew and invest in your future. Not how much money can I make today, the hell with tomorrow.
I agree, but that is not what they turn out to be. They turn out to be an accumulation of false observations, personal likes made into facts and things that people that don't have the experience of most of us, start to form opinions about something without even seeing it. If all people said is I don't like something and not get all into exaggerated drama about things that they, in many cases don't understand at all, that is nothing but negativity, half truths to fortify opinion along with misleading advice and unwarranted warnings.
IanDLBZF
Well-Known Member
Good point! Why I say don't judge a book by the cover, judge it by how its written!
Brad Bishop
Well-Known Member
I'm in agreement with you. I look at the MK and think, "you don't have homes next door - you can expand!" I see Epcot and don't think that they need to expand it as it's already pretty huge but just to fix it (add countries and whatnot). DAK has room to expand. I know they're doing Pandora right now and that is an expansion (while Camp Minnie Mickey was removed, I think you'd be hard-pressed to say it should have stayed), but they could add other continents. Put North America in there with some bears, bison, and buffalo. Add Australia or S. America. Instead we get Pandora - which is a whole other topic of discussion but it still leaves me scratching my head.
With regards to what they're thinking, which of course I don't really know, I think it's most likely a money grab to bump up the bottom line and make themselves look like geniuses, even in the wake of Shanghai Disneyland. I really think there's a thought of, "They're going to come and pay, anyway, why do anything / try?"
Second to that: I'm not sure if the current management suffers from this or not but it's something that's becoming more prevalent with the next generation of managers: being risk adverse. If they were to build new attraction and it didn't pay off then that's a "lose". If they just keep the status quo then they can just continue making profit and nothing is really risked.
You can argue against the second one by pointing out that Shanghai is a risk, as well as Pandora, SWL (I'd say less so - it's a known commodity), and Pixar (also a known commodity and it looks like it'll be kind of thin, anyway). Still the kids coming up the ranks in corporate America are the kids who were told they were special and were types to wear a helmet if they were in a pool just in case they got splashed (a bit facetious but you get the idea). The overall result is that there are a LOT of risk-adverse managers coming up through the ranks and, if Iger isn't, we're only a generation or two until we get one and then nothing's going to happen because it might fail. That's going to suck.
danyoung56
Well-Known Member
I tend to agree with this, which is why whenever someone posts about how much they hated Captain EO I'll jump in and disagree, as I really loved that show even in its later incarnation. I fully understand why some folks think it's an old, tired show that needs to go. But I just don't care - I like it, and I wanted it to stay for purely selfish reasons.
And what really gets me going is the folks who will say blanket things like "Epcot is trash and should be bulldozed over", when it's my favorite park by far. Go ahead and post those opinions, but don't begrudge me posting MY opinion.
morningstar
Well-Known Member
What's the point relative to this thread? Would you close 7DMT and leave the space empty (or, say, put in a M&G) because it's not as good as it could have been?
Brad Bishop
Well-Known Member
I was making the connection between rides like Kali, where people were thinking it should be closed, and short-sighted decisions of execs.
In other threads (the closed ones referred to by the OP) you have attractions like Kali and Frozen mentioned, among others. My main point was that the short-sighted decisions of location and budget are the real underlying issue.
People generally like a raft ride - not if it's stupid short,though. People generally like a really well themed rollercoaster, again, not if it's stupid short. Frozen looks pretty good but it's in the wrong place.
A lot of what people claim they don't like with regards to attractions (and they should be closed) is really based in:
1) location
2) budget cuts
3) retreads (which could just be under budget cuts).
Yeah, there's some "I didn't like that ride and thus it should go away" and there's an attraction or two that's really just past it's prime (you can find someone who likes it but, overall, the majority aren't interested), but still, had the execs stayed true to the location, and not done the budget cuts, a lot of the rides that make the "ought to be closed" list wouldn't be there.
I don't begrudge you for you opinion, I just don't like the subject because I find it incorrect most of the time and based on individual likes and dislikes. It's not the answers that bother me so much as it is the question even being asked. It doesn't result in anything other then disagreement and sometimes anger. All for nothing. I certainly don't want to stifle peoples opinions, heck if I did, I'd have nothing much to do, but, sometimes the unnecessary questions are tiresome and to me just baiting for a fight.
When I buy stocks I don't buy them with the expectation that the company will only make a little profit, or just enough profit.. I buy them with the expectation that the company will make as much profit as it can - and that is the way most institutional investors behave and those are the investors that push companies to do what they do. Long term died a long time ago, the way to survive now is to make as much as you can as fast as you can because investors don't want to wait they want their return and dividends today.
I agree that is how it currently is, I also think that it is a very short sighted process that eventually bites one on the butt. Instant gratification instead of steady return over long periods of time. Most successful businesses did not operate that way and still don't. However, I agree that stockholders want instant riches with no thought to the future. Doesn't matter to me, I'm getting old and by the time all that collapses onto itself, I will be happily in my dirt nap. Nothing can sustain that forever, there will be a pay day eventually.
BenJacobs
Well-Known Member
Worst rides/attractions for me, and ones which I avoid:
Jungle Cruise
Any of the spinner rides
All of the old Fantasyland rides, except for It's a Small world
The whole Storybook Circus area in MK
Tomorrowland Speedway
Stitch's Great Escape
Ellen's Energy Adventure
Journey Through Imagination
Frozen Ever After(I just think it is terrible, and Maelstrom was really good)
There isn't really anything in Hollywood Studios or Animal Kingdom which is to a bad quality, as they are more modern. I think Dinoland is well themed for the budget, but everyone hates Chester and Hesters because they think that it's just badly themed, but actually, it's themed to be badly themed - there is a back story.
Although I like Pirates of the Caribbean, if it, along with the rest of Adventureland, were to be completely removed, it could make way for a brand new Adventureland. This new Adventureland could include a copy of Adventure Isle in Shanghai, housed under that mountain could be a new Indiana Jones ride, then a second land could also be created, a similar idea to Treasure Cove in Shanghai, which could house a brand new Pirates of the Caribbean.
Last edited: A moment ago
Jungle Cruise
Any of the spinner rides
All of the old Fantasyland rides, except for It's a Small world
The whole Storybook Circus area in MK
Tomorrowland Speedway
Stitch's Great Escape
Ellen's Energy Adventure
Journey Through Imagination
Frozen Ever After(I just think it is terrible, and Maelstrom was really good)
There isn't really anything in Hollywood Studios or Animal Kingdom which is to a bad quality, as they are more modern. I think Dinoland is well themed for the budget, but everyone hates Chester and Hesters because they think that it's just badly themed, but actually, it's themed to be badly themed - there is a back story.
Although I like Pirates of the Caribbean, if it, along with the rest of Adventureland, were to be completely removed, it could make way for a brand new Adventureland. This new Adventureland could include a copy of Adventure Isle in Shanghai, housed under that mountain could be a new Indiana Jones ride, then a second land could also be created, a similar idea to Treasure Cove in Shanghai, which could house a brand new Pirates of the Caribbean.
Last edited: A moment ago