WDW neglected?

A few more thoughts on this

1) For all the hoopla surrounding Carsland, it's essentially a heavily themed area with one great ride and 2 well, old school kind of rides. The big draw of the updates to me are really in how well they implemented the Radiator Springs environment at Buena Vista Street, plus of course a great looking very impressive new E ticket ride. So when I look at the FLE project, I see a large new highly themed area, a brand new mine coaster, another major ride added with Mermaid, and a really nicely themed Storybook Circus area. There have been some operational issues and perhaps the splash zone needs tweaking but it's all part of the break-in period as far as I'm concerned. And, again IMO - I think it looks great. Plus they have been redoing all the building exteriors (see Main St, Frontierland) plus a major retro-upgrade of Sunshine Tree. They are really putting in a lot of effort to the MK and I think they are doing a great job. My guess - when FLE is done everyone is going to be impressed.

2) Whether you like Avatarland or not, they have committed to a major upgrade in AK. Although AK was nowhere in need of what DCA needed it does need a major new area. Even if the whole Avatar thing doesn't pan out, I believe there will be a major expansion there.

3) On attendance, the WDW parks are heavily attended now. How many down periods are there really these days? September, Early Nov, Early Dec, late Jan through Feb. The pool of quiet times continues to shrink. So all of this work being done is not being done to increase attendance (except maybe for AK) since those numbers are already there.

Personally, I would rather that Disney tackle Future World first, then Transportation, then DTD (at least come up with something, eh?) , then AK. Plus get another country into World Showcase. But there's not an unlimited budget for this stuff. I still find the thought that WDW is being neglected is well, pretty absurd.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mo Noyz

Of course you won't see a 29% increase in a park that is already pushing capacity most months out of the year. Yet, I'm sure that won't stop you from using that example later on when it doesn't meet the impossible HG goal of 29% increased attendance.

---

I've seen you state pushing capacity most months multiple times and I don't find that to be close to accurate. While we can mess with the statistics and find a day or two each month that hit in the 90% level, or particular holiday weeks, if we look at the majority of days in each month the MK does not even come close to hitting capacity. Putting the major holiday school break weeks aside, I grant that is busy but not pushing capacity, this week however, a high season Tuesday was 80%, Wed. was 70% and today is running 65%. Even over the December 2011 Christmas weeks only had one day that pushed capacity and it wasn't even Christmas or NYE and that was one odd day, that pushed capacity at the MK, DHS and Epcot. There are 16 to 18 weeks out of 52 weeks that attendance that see high capacity crowds of 70-90% and scattered holiday draws like the 4th of July.

June though Mid July are the busiest summer vacation weeks.

Saturdays at the MK are always by far the busiest days at the MK even during the slow seasons.

March is nutty but didn't near capacity this year. The parks are very busy around 90% some of the March weeks/days.

January runs on average between 20-40% MLK weekend up
February aside from President weekend 30-40 %
March depending on the week runs 70-90%
April, because of Easter being late this year was busy early and ran 80-90% the first week and then fell to the average of 50% for the balance.
May averages around 60%
June by the second week is running 80-90% depending on the day through Mid July
After After the 18th of July it tapers down 60-70% with select days higher.
Early August runs about the same then by the second half of August crowds are between 20-40%
September, the entire month minus Labor Day is excellent, like January, depending on the day of the week you are at 10, 20, 30%.
October is odder, weekdays run 10%-40 and long weekends are around 60% Saturdays 70%, Epcot actually fairs much higher than the norm in October, especially the weekends.
November runs between 40%-60% except the extremely crowded Thanksgiving days.
December first half runs around 20-30% and climbs to the nutty 80-90% for holidays.

60-70% of capacity is already pretty darn crowded, with good lines for popular attractions. Even with over an hour wait for Space and Splash it still isn't anywhere close to park capacity. I've been in the MK once and Epcot once when they hit capacity. It is just crazy and impossible to navigate or do anything or try to eat. Even this year when they did the 24 hour leap year MK only pulled in a fraction of what Disneyland did and the MK didn't consider capacity like Disneyland did.

But to drive home the same point I was attempting to make before, I'll revise it to make it a fair comparison in the time to come. My prediction is the same theory, but on a percentile instead of a percentage, my prediction is that FLE and Cars on a percentile will not increase attendance any where near what Harry Potter has done for IoA. Without even seeing plans for Avatar I can't even in my wildest imagination believe that it will have the same demographic draw, across generations of guests that Harry Potter does. I give kudos to IoA imagineers for a phenomenal success. It doesn't surprise me since many of these imagineers were the cast off, seasoned Disney Imagineers, discarded.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weepstah

There have been some operational issues and perhaps the splash zone needs tweaking but it's all part of the break-in period as far as I'm concerned. And, again IMO - I think it looks great. Plus they have been redoing all the building exteriors (see Main St, Frontierland) plus a major retro-upgrade of Sunshine Tree. They are really putting in a lot of effort to the MK and I think they are doing a great job. My guess - when FLE is done everyone is going to be impressed.

---

I so agree. Disney has really done a great job on giving the MK a facelift that it despartely needed. Frontieer land had many areas that had not been facelifted since the opening, including original wood fencing had seen better days a decade ago. From the tiny bit of the FLE I have seen it will be visually beautiful, the details are amazing. Dumbo and Casey both are already scheduled for rehabs, though with anything new not overly surprising, I'm just a bit more surprised with Casey than Dumbo. This isn't Disney's first stab at splash areas or kid spots in water parks. Dumbo will likely work properly when re-tooled a bit.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

2) Whether you like Avatarland or not, they have committed to a major upgrade in AK. Although AK was nowhere in need of what DCA needed it does need a major new area. Even if the whole Avatar thing doesn't pan out, I believe there will be a major expansion there.

---

---

I'm very guarded about Avatar. They can't afford another flop in that park. Actually attendance was up slightly in AK and edged out DSH slightly in attendance this year. That speaks loudly to the lack luster draw to Star Tours rehab, it just didn't bring the guests in like anticipated after the rehab beyond the initial unveiling and the popular Star Tours weekend.

Quote:

---

Personally, I would rather that Disney tackle Future World first, then Transportation, then DTD (at least come up with something, eh?) , then AK. Plus get another country into World Showcase. But there's not an unlimited budget for this stuff. I still find the thought that WDW is being neglected is well, pretty absurd.

---

---

I agree with Future World. DTD is an embarrassment to Disney, so while I don't really care that much I'd think Disney would want to undo the mess they have created with demolished areas and abandoned buildings especially since Universal put their own City Walk together very nicely. TTC, is just an ugly blob of concrete that needs a nice face lift. Their bus transfer area is just icky. For the hub of WDW it should not look that way. As much as I would like a pavilion or two in the World Showcase, that area still draws me. I love it, especially at night.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by supernova

At least in that case, the ride came before the movie. In most cases, it's the other way around.

---

I realize that. But I still wonder why it matters. And what about those who saw the movie but had never been on the ride?

Now, the one thing I will stress is that I do indeed think theming matters. I doubt many WDW addicts would disagree. If they theme Avatarland with the attention to detail that they normally show, I won't be concerned at all with whether I like the movie or not. I'd be willing to guarantee there are already tons of visitors who are huge fans Carsland that didn't like the movie. I'm not a fan of TRON, but if they built something on the theme, and did it right as they normally do, the fact that I'm not a huge fan of the movie wouldn't color my opinion one iota. Not one.

I think it's being overly sensitive to already determine you're not going to be happy with Avatarland just because you didn't like the movie. Honestly...

And really, how many of those same people were disappointed when Beastly Kingdom got the ax?

Sorry, folks. Mythical creatures are mythical creatures. Dragons are as plausible and real as the inhabitants of Pandora.

And just to reiterate my feelings on the movie, Avatar, I am not a fan. Purdy, but pointless. Great movie to show off your home theater system, but that's about it. And even as politically progressive as I am, I thought Cameron's depiction of our military as blood-thirsty savages was pathetic, at best.

HG, I'd like to see where you got those figures from. Especially since Disney does not officially release their attendance figures.

When we were there the week after Christmas Day in '06, the first day the MK was closed due to capacity. The second day MK, AK, and DHS were closed due to capacity. On our monorail ride to Epcot cars were parked on World Drive as far as the eye could see (and the lines to simply get into the park were absurd in the extreme). On the third day MK and AK hit capacity.

MK regularly hit capacity in the 70's during the Summer months. If you didn't get there early, you weren't going to get in for awhile. If at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weepstah

I still find the thought that WDW is being neglected is well, pretty absurd.

---

Sing it, brother/sister (not sure which, my apologies)!!!

Absurd IS the word.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mo Noyz

HG, I'd like to see where you got those figures from. Especially since Disney does not officially release their attendance figures.

When we were there the week after Christmas Day in '06, the first day the MK was closed due to capacity. The second day MK, AK, and DHS were closed due to capacity. On our monorail ride to Epcot cars were parked on World Drive as far as the eye could see (and the lines to simply get into the park were absurd in the extreme). On the third day MK and AK hit capacity.

MK regularly hit capacity in the 70's during the Summer months. If you didn't get there early, you weren't going to get in for awhile. If at all.

---

Ya the good old days, but now there is so much more than the MK. I too remember those days, though during spring break we avoided Florida in the Summer.

The MK did not close 2011 on Christmas, even though it could have in '06. But it did along with DHS and AK one day during the holidays. Epcot doesn't seem to draw like it use to and didn't come close to closing with the other three.

But Let me try it again. Annual average attendance of the MK is approximately 50% of capacity. Capacity of the MK is approximately 100,000. There are 365 days in a year, so if you multiply that out it is would be around 36 million if the MK hit capacity annually. The MK approximate attendance totals for 2011 was apx. was 17.1 million. That averages out to a tad less than 50% capacity average.

The apx. capacity is all over the Internet. The attendance levels would be easiest for you to locate from TEA, Themed Entertainment Association, which annually puts out the attendance figures for the top 25 themed parks. You will find information about and from TEA on most Disney related boards and also in the credits of well respected tour books. In most of these better tour books you will find the peaks and valleys of attendance in these tour books. Also if you want to look at the attendance trends for the MK go to Tour Plans, they have compiled details on attendance in many formats you might enjoy, including which days of the week and time of the year the MK is least and most crowded. There data is very interesting and have found Touring Plans to be darn on the money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HG

Ya the good old days, but now there is so much more than the MK. I too remember those days, though during spring break we avoided Florida in the Summer.

---

Smart decision. It was a nightmare. Hot, sticky, nasty, and you could barely move around the park.

Quote:

---

Epcot doesn't seem to draw like it use to and didn't come close to closing with the other three.

---

No, unfortunately the attendance has been very low there from what I've experienced. Unless it's New Year's Eve. The day we were there and the other three had closed due to capacity was the heaviest attendance day I'd ever seen in Epcot.

I know we both agree that park is in a bad way...And that's a shame.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mo Noyz

I realize that. But I still wonder why it matters. And what about those who saw the movie but had never been on the ride?

Now, the one thing I will stress is that I do indeed think theming matters. I doubt many WDW addicts would disagree. If they theme Avatarland with the attention to detail that they normally show, I won't be concerned at all with whether I like the movie or not. I'd be willing to guarantee there are already tons of visitors who are huge fans Carsland that didn't like the movie. I'm not a fan of TRON, but if they built something on the theme, and did it right as they normally do, the fact that I'm not a huge fan of the movie wouldn't color my opinion one iota. Not one.

I think it's being overly sensitive to already determine you're not going to be happy with Avatarland just because you didn't like the movie. Honestly...

And really, how many of those same people were disappointed when Beastly Kingdom got the ax?

Sorry, folks. Mythical creatures are mythical creatures. Dragons are as plausible and real as the inhabitants of Pandora.

And just to reiterate my feelings on the movie, Avatar, I am not a fan. Purdy, but pointless. Great movie to show off your home theater system, but that's about it. And even as politically progressive as I am, I thought Cameron's depiction of our military as blood-thirsty savages was pathetic, at best.

---

I think a big difference for HM, neither one is codependent on the other. Also, the film is almost unanimously disliked. Only the truly delusional Disney fans would tell someone to watch that movie to see that the attraction is all about. It has almost been completely erased from pop culture, and if Guillermor del Toro's version ever comes to fruition I'm sure Disney will be more than happy to pretend the first one never happened.

Avatar Land will be built for the purpose of bringing people into the movie. I agree with you that whatever Disney comes up with will almost certainly be breathtaking and wonderful, but in my core I have no desire to be "in" the world of Avatar.

I'm sure multitudes of people have the exact same opinion as you, and God love you for being able to just take the land and enjoy it in a vacuum, but just as many others won't be able to.

.

Quote:

---

I think a big difference for HM, neither one is codependent on the other.

---

Agreed. And that is the way it should be.

Quote:

---

Avatar Land will be built for the purpose of bringing people into the movie.

---

Will it?

And that's bad? Visually, it was impressive. No?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mo Noyz

Will it?

And that's bad? Visually, it was impressive. No?

---

Again, yes it was. But there are a million other things that could be just as visually impressive that wouldn't have to bring in a franchise whose story and characters I don't care for.

Well, let's say they bring in a new E ticket for the land. Let's also say it's an inverted coaster, something that doesin't exist anywhere else on property.

Guess what I' m least concerned with when it comes to an inverted roller coaster?

Story.

Would a new coaster be a bad thing?

I am always amazed at the wealth of Disney park knowledge in these forums.

I wonder if our proximity to everything WDW affects our perceptions (how could it not)?

I wonder if the majority of park attendees who visit less frequently (every few years or more) know the nuances of the changes/refurbs/additions to various attractions to the extent that our forum does? They are obviously pulled in by new, but are they pushed off by a park not offering enough new experiences from the last trip?

We are familiar with the Main St. Electrical vs. SpectroMagic parade discussions. We know the various iterations of Spaceship Earth and Journey into Imagination. We remember when it was called Countdown to Extinction or we recall the Tarzan musical show. Old Star Tours and Space Mountain. Pre-Soarin', you get the idea. Most of you have a much greater knowledge of these things than I.

I think being so up-close can make us view new development differently than most people wanting a Disney experience. I am not putting down any opinions of the thread, I'm just wondering (and I hope I can express it clearly).

Do you think that less-frequently-attending Disney guests (at any/all parks) consider WDW neglected? Can they walk in to Future World and notice "older" attractions and neglect we're discussing? I certainly think they could in the case of the last days of Wonders of Life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mo Noyz

Well, let's say they bring in a new E ticket for the land. Let's also say it's an inverted coaster, something that doesin't exist anywhere else on property.

Guess what I' m least concerned with when it comes to an inverted roller coaster?

Story.

Would a new coaster be a bad thing?

---

A new coaster? No, that would be awesome!
A new coaster with a subpar story? No thanks.

There is a Six Flags about an hour and a half from where I live with a great inverted coaster with no story. But I make the trip to Disney for something much more than a good roller coaster.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by historyguy64

I am always amazed at the wealth of Disney park knowledge in these forums.

I wonder if our proximity to everything WDW affects our perceptions (how could it not)?

I wonder if the majority of park attendees who visit less frequently (every few years or more) know the nuances of the changes/refurbs/additions to various attractions to the extent that our forum does? They are obviously pulled in by new, but are they pushed off by a park not offering enough new experiences from the last trip?

We are familiar with the Main St. Electrical vs. SpectroMagic parade discussions. We know the various iterations of Spaceship Earth and Journey into Imagination. We remember when it was called Countdown to Extinction or we recall the Tarzan musical show. Old Star Tours and Space Mountain. Pre-Soarin', you get the idea. Most of you have a much greater knowledge of these things than I.

I think being so up-close can make us view new development differently than most people wanting a Disney experience. I am not putting down any opinions of the thread, I'm just wondering (and I hope I can express it clearly).

Do you think that less-frequently-attending Disney guests (at any/all parks) consider WDW neglected? Can they walk in to Future World and notice "older" attractions and neglect we're discussing? I certainly think they could in the case of the last days of Wonders of Life.

---

Some of us do. I've only been to the World twice.