Just back - some observations

[YoHo]

Bob O, I would be fine with your coaster idea as long as the themeing was on par with BTMRR. I would rather the entire complex be destroyed then have it fouled with an Eyesore which is what I consider most typical World Class coasters.
(fun for some? Yes! nice to look at? not hardly!)

 

[Peter Pirate]

Don't just lurk, Dave O. You have a lot to offer. The Rumors Board does do a lot of debating & just plain "baiting" but don't let it get to you. It's all for fun & games & all that really matters it that you enjoy yourself! So grin at the comments made by those of opposing viewpoints...and hit 'em when they aint lookin'...metaphorically speaking, of course!

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

I will admit that the possibility exists that Disney could someday enter this arena, but general consensus is that this will only be when the profitability can be both quantified and qualified

Ya see, my good Pirate, this is where we disagree!! I think we (and by ‘we’ I mean the Disney corporation) needs to define the philosophy first!! Then, AND ONLY THEN, can they look to see how to maximize profits, WITHIN that philosophy! And although I’ve been agreeing an awful lot lately with the esteemed Bob O, I think we part ways when it comes to coasters (or thrill rides in general) in Disney.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I LOVE roller coasters. But I have a real problem incorporating the “thrill” philosophy into my (admitted subjectivity) Disney. I would much rather have them take those precious resources and develop something wonderful, perhaps dark, surely creative and most importantly, family oriented!! And that means something for my little 7 year old who has an AVM and cannot ride fast rides, as well as my grandmother who isn’t as adventurous as JeffJewell’s!!

So grin at the comments made by those of opposing viewpoints...and hit 'em when they ain’t lookin'

Ahhh! I will remember that at our next meet, Mr. Pirate!!!

 

[raidermatt]

AV- I agree with your general point, which I believed you summed up very well in your last paragraph, as follows.

Defending Disney by saying it’s no worse than of the other companies out there simply means Disney is no better than any of the other companies out there.

And if the discussion is just around what can/should Disney do better, I agree, there is no need to bring up Universal. But I think DaveO's frustration, as well as my own, is when the "Anti-Disney forks" say they are going to Universal because of Disney's deterioration. When truly equal standards are applied in an unbiased manner, Disney still comes out on top (coaster enthusiasts aside). The gap may not be what some think it should be, and that's fine, but to settle for an inferior product, just because the superior one is not as superior as it one would like it to be does not make sense, and that was DaveO's point.

 

[Planogirl]

Maybe you weren't disappointed with WDW because you weren't expecting as much.

We all tend to have VERY high expectations of WDW because Disney taught us to have those. If we quit expecting as much as before, I agree that we won't tend to be disappointed. I personally don't expect too much from Universal but that doesn't make me wonder if next year wouldn't be a good time to finally see Universal and once again Sea World and Busch Gardens. Not to mention the beaches. I hear that Florida has some nice beaches.

I also approve of Aerosmith as the choice for Rock n Roller Coaster. They have not only cleaned up their act but they tend to appeal to MOST age groups which I believe is real important. I personally can't imagine a better choice.

 

[Peter Pirate]

Landbaron, I'm not so certain that I don't disagree with the Corporation, as well. Surprised? I personally like the philosopy you've espoused, but I was just clearing the air with regard to why Disny is not realistically likely to build a 'world class' coaster - or at least what it would take for that to happen.

As to the coaster itself, I find mysel in mild disagreement with my brother at arms scoop as I don't really care about the "cut-outs" one way or another. Cheap[? Sure, but for RnR, an indoor ride basically in the dark, where you're screaming by them (at what seems like break neck speeds) a cool animatronic would be wasted money - heck I can't even find the hidden Mickey!

AV, as an aside to raidermatt's piece, personally I don't need to compare Disney to other parks, it's irrelevent to me, but many seem to want to prove the Disney slippage by comparing to others, seemingly showing a closeness in quality that I don't see (so it's no more than preaching to the chior). Further, I see no harm in befitting Disney with the benefit of the doubt for all they have accomplished and given us, be it tangble or PR. The fact is Disney has earned our respect in some measure or we wouldn't be here discussing the merits of a multinational conglomerate. The fact that some feel it disappearing more than others or due to different circumstances is really where the discussion lies, right?

Planogirl, we agree again (finally) on Aerosmith! But I think Dave stated quite clearly that he WAS looking for problems on his trip & simply didn't find them. This seems to be a constant theme (not that problems are never found) but very often now, it seems we're getting more 'busineess as usual' type reports than not, & the complaints are coming from the folks who haven't been recently & have more to do with the cutbacks (both perceived & real).

 

[Peter Pirate]

...because he speaks so much more eloquently, sarcastically an direct than I...

My sarcasam has been mentioned two days in a row...I guess you guys do read my posts, sniff, sniff...
To the matter at hand, for which I've been given scoops "bandwith", sorry...I've got to go to work, but alas, if the subject is still hangng when I return...

 

[JeffJewell]

All my post tried to do is pursuade all lurkers that US/IOA are making the SAME IF NOT MORE cutbacks as Disney - There are just not as many people whining about it. Now back to lurking - let the flaming begin ......

...if you get any flames, I'd wager it would only be for categorizing what many folks consider to be legitimate complaints as "whining." I'd expect to recieve flames if I was to categorize your obviously valid views as "kissing Disney's behind," for instance. We're not all going to agree on one answer to this, and if you're going to get people to agree to disagree with you in this medium, you're going to have to choose your words pretty carefully.

That said, I simply don't see the other theme parks as offering any meaningful evidence upon which to judge "Disney Magic," in either direction. It has been mentioned that no other theme parks have even attempted to supply that historical brand of Disney Magic, and that's true. For that very reason, I view any attempt to either justify or discredit the label "Disney Magic" by using examples of businesses who never pretended to be offering that product as inconsequential to the argument (Indeed, it is Disney's lack of superior performance, not the other parks sudden adoption of superior performance, that prompted these comparisons in the first place).

I recently posted a list of some of the highlights of my recent trip. I don't think anyone can reasonably argue that Disney is suddenly bereft of any Magic at all. Something I didn't say in that thread is that, unless at least some of the hours are restored such that we can get started in a park by 7:30 or so, we will not maintain the habit we've developed of visiting WDW about every three or four months. Without going into too much "whining," the change in hours ended up for us meaning that, instead of going to a park early, having a late breakfast or early lunch, taking a break and then hitting a second park, we ate breakfast, went to one park for the day, then ate dinner. Instead of two three- to four-hour park sessions with a nice break between them, we got one four- to five-hour park session with no break (and while I certainly don't mean to imply that the specific wants and needs of my family are universal [no pun intended], I will demand that this reality be recognized as true for at least some subset of the vacationing population).

For my family, any comparison of Universal to Disney is a joke; like comparing apples and orangutans. We are comparing Disney's current offering to the offering that Disney, for better or worse, has us expecting based on previous visits; and we find Disney's current product lacking on that basis, alone.

DaveO, I hope this came across as discussing an issue upon which we disagree, and not as a flame of your opinion. I believe your non-lurking status to be a positive thing, in the big picture of the boards, even though I'm likely to want to argue an opposing viewpoint, on occasion.

Jeff

 

[Horizons16]

Ha yeah go disney no problems.
~Steve

 

[Bob O]

DVC im a coaster nut so i personally(and selfishly) would love a world class thrill ride. But besides that i think disney could use a great coaster(also excellantly themed) that would appeal to the teenage set. I also agree that i would love a dark ride on par with POTC but they dont seem to build those anymore. I do think disney could use some ride/show/attraction for a more adult audience like Universal has the horror makeup show.

Peter Pirate i think a world class coaster could be easily marketed for both a local and world pr campaign and disney could make money off of it. It may even enocurage people who love coasters but may not go to a disney park because of a perception its not a thrill park but once they go will find what a great place it is. Myself i love coasters and go to other parks to get that experience but nothing compares to disney in the overall package.

yoho i dont know if you've been to busch gardems williamsburg but they have a great coaster called Alpengist that is outside but also excellantly themed as a runaway ski tram with all the bells and whistles you would expect from disney. So i think it can be done right it they wanted to rather than hiding the coasters inside. i havent been to DCA to see califoria screamin so i dont know if they did any themeing with that coaster.

DaveO you may seem some flaming on other boards on this site but i enjoy this site the best because i think that even if we disagree we do get along and agree to disagree but still have great and lengthy discussions!

 

[raidermatt]

BobO- I agree that a world class coaster or two, that are excellently themed, could be a good thing. In fact, I think a 5th gate that is slanted in this direction could be an excellent addition to WDW, if done right. I realize that there is a need to beef up AK, but that can continue to occur, since a 5th gate would still be several years away.

Disney had not really worried about the true coaster enthusiasts in the past, but in today's environment of needing to find new ways to grow business, it maybe time for a change... Its true that big coasters and thrill rides tend to split-up some families, but right now, they are splintering off to Universal. Why not keep them on site?

I also agree that elaborate, well done, non-stomach churning rides, like Pirates, are also important, and should not be abandoned.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

I agree that a world class coaster or two, that are excellently themed, could be a good thing.
<<< SNIP >>>
I also agree that elaborate, well done, non-stomach churning rides, like Pirates, are also important, and should not be abandoned.

So, where does this leave us?

OK, you're head mouse. Your bean counters tell you that their research shows that a new ride, a true "E" ticket ride, will increase revenue by X%. They tell you that the numbers show that sponsorship and corporate funding, augmented by Disney Dollars is $XXX.XX. That's all you've got to spend!!! A finite amount of money!! NO MORE!!!

As any self respecting top mouse you immediately place a call to your head Imagineer. Eager to finally get a green light on ANY project he rushes to your office and lays several stupendous concepts on you. After an hour's worth of enthusiasm he pauses, eye wide, waiting….

So. What do you tell him?

Flesh out that dark ride. Very cool!! Very family!! We need more of those!! It's what put us on the map!!

Or

100 miles an hour is too slow!!! Bump up that speed!! And theme it to the MAX!!!!

The point is you can't always have both. There's only so much money to go around (and lately that isn't even enough for a decent "C" ride!!) So which direction would you like to see Disney go. Thrill? Or dark?

I LOVE thrill, but for Disney, gimme dark, any day of the week!!!

 

[Horizons16]

That is a tpugh dission. dark or thrills i would not want to be top mouse
~Steve

 

[Testtrack321]

The only decent ride I went on was SpiderMan at IOA. The CM's were awfull, they had no parade, and almost everything else cost money to play! I will still go back, but I wouldn't stay at one of their resorts or go to City Walk. Universal can afford to cut corners, just like Six Flags (my other one that I hate), and the Paramount parks (though the 007 ride they got rid of was the best motion simulator I have ever ridden..). If Disney did something like IOA, certain Disney forums would be up their @$$ before they even built it.... But no specific forms (*DIS*Cough*DIS)

 

[raidermatt]

So which direction would you like to see Disney go. Thrill? Or dark?

Your point is well-taken. And that is exactly why I think the "100 mph is to slow" rides would be very appropriate in a 5th gate. Certainly opening a 5th gate risks cannibilization, as has been pointed out by several here. However, a 5th gate that can still be family oriented, and targets families that are spending time at Universal is less likely to steal customers from the other 4 parks. With the clear revenue stream ahead, the bean counters will have some beans to put on the other side of the ledger. The opening would again be an "unfinished" park, so that revenue can start coming in sooner, and so that guest reaction can dictate how/when the park expands.

Meanwhile, tweaking continues at the big three, as it always will. The AK expansion continues, but at the same controlled deliberate pace it is moving now. Part of this tweaking/expansion is an occasional E-ticket dark ride. I'm not picky about which park gets the first one, though AK needs it the most.

Without the opportunity to count the beans myself, I really don't believe this to be an unreasonable financial scenario. For instance, I don't believe all other development stopped while DCA and AK were built. Granted, $$$ are tighter now, but I don't believe they are THAT tight. If the plan was to build one or two "100 MPH" rides in the existing parks, then I think it would suck up most of the develpment money, because the potential revenue increase becomes murkier.

All that said, if the choice came down to one dark ride and one big thrill ride in the exisitng parks, I would go with the dark, because I believe it would be unwise to try to draw the big coaster crowd into the existing parks. One coaster would not be enough to bring them in on a consistent basis. A dark ride appeals to the core crowd that must be kept.

 

[Bob O]

If i had to choose i would go for a world clas coaster (with great theming)as its something they dont have right now. It would help get a younger crowd and go after a different segment then they do now. Unless they did a spiderman type dark ride, but that would cost alot more than a roller coaster does. Spiderman from reports ive read cost over 100 million if true. Cedar Point built a record breaking coaster Millineum Force which reportedly cost 25 million.
Testtrack my expeirnces at the Universal parks have always been very good with no CM problems. I thought Hulk and DD were great thrill rides and the kids enjoyed the kid rides/play areas. I stayed at the Portifino and i perferred it over the Beach club at wdw. And staying on site at universal offers a perk that disney cant beat-front of the line access!!!!!! You cant beat riding a ride like Hulk/Spiderman/MIB 6-8 times in a row with only having to walk several feet thru a baby swap area and go right back on the ride, that was truely magical!!

 

[Horizons16]

I do like roller coasters the RnR is cool.
~Steve

 

[DaveH]

OK folks how many people remember the speed of Space Mountain when it opend? It was around 60 or 65MPH!!! The have slowed it over the years to the 35MPH today. A couple of years ago I went on Space Mountain and the lightest person(not me LOL) was around 150 pounds. At the end of every drop the breaks were slowing us down so when you were at the bottom you were leaning forward. BTW when Space Mountain opened it was dark not dusk light like now.

 

[Horizons16]

I think i reaad some place that it was slowed becuase a lady cracked her neck or snapped it or whatever. Dont hold me to that it may just be a rumor.
~Steve

 

[DaveH]

My understanding is over the years they had several different kinds of problems of folks getting hurt, such as heart attacks and other injuries. The earlier ride was not one person per seat. you could have 3 in front of each other.