Originally Posted By plpeters70 >>Disney could easily develop a short film titled 'Norway, the land behind the story'.<< I like this idea. And heck, if they really wanted to get people to stay, they could let Olaf host it - that would help draw in the kiddies, and would be a good learning opportunity.
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn Doesn't Lasseter have compensation terms in his contract for revenue percentages drawn from box office, rentals, merchandising, live shows, and theme park attractions?
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "Considering that the conversion of an existing attraction won't add anything to the park's capacity, it really makes me wonder if this money is being wisely spent" It's one of the biggest animated hits of all time. Yes, the money is being well spent.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>It's one of the biggest animated hits of all time. Yes, the money is being well spent.<< I don't deny that it will be popular and successful. It will draw crowds in whatever park they decide to stick it in. However, once those people have finished doing the single 4-minute ride, what are they supposed to do for the rest of their day? Epcot's capacity is pretty terrible, and overall the park really seems to be having trouble. I suspect that the popularity of F&W and F&G are boosting sales and artificially inflating the park's bottom line. The last true addition to Epcot was Soarin' in 2005 (which in turn replaced the higher capacity but less popular Food Rocks), and lots of smaller things have seen cutbacks in recent years; as much as I love it, the whole park feels very tired. I'm sure that the revised ride will be popular, but considering how sorely lacking WDW is on attraction capacity (which has only been exacerbated by FP+) you'd think that this would have been a good opportunity to make a real addition rather than a simple substitution
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<I'm sure that the revised ride will be popular, but considering how sorely lacking WDW is on attraction capacity (which has only been exacerbated by FP+) you'd think that this would have been a good opportunity to make a real addition rather than a simple substitution>> They don't need another pavilion at Epcot... not with a closed Wonders of Life pavilion and the vastly under-utilized Odyssey Center. Put something in those spaces before worrying about building something new.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 And don't forget about the Imagination pavilion. That whole place could use a gut-job and complete re-think. And Energy is so out-dated at this point, and Innoventions is a complete waste of space. Frankly, they really need to look into re-doing most of Future World. And while they're at it, can we finally lose the depressing graveyard entrance plaza, and get some color and life back in there??
Originally Posted By leemac <<Epcot's capacity is pretty terrible, and overall the park really seems to be having trouble.>> Epcot has the highest capacity for any theme park anywhere. Sure attraction capacity is lower than it has ever been but the park itself is a people eater.
Originally Posted By leemac <<I'm sure that the revised ride will be popular, but considering how sorely lacking WDW is on attraction capacity (which has only been exacerbated by FP+) you'd think that this would have been a good opportunity to make a real addition rather than a simple substitution.>> Attendance is still growing at Epcot - albeit marginally slower than D/MGM and DAK. Attraction capacity isn't an issue when you are still struggling to get beyond 11m guests annually.
Originally Posted By leemac <<"Considering that the conversion of an existing attraction won't add anything to the park's capacity, it really makes me wonder if this money is being wisely spent" It's one of the biggest animated hits of all time. Yes, the money is being well spent.>> It still comes down to execution. The attraction still needs to be well done. The Lion King was the biggest movie of '94 and the puppet show is MK just didn't seem to resonate which is why it was tugged - although it did last 8 years. There isn't necessarily a correlation between box office success and theme park success. Lilo & Stitch wasn't a top ten movie in 2002 but guests couldn't get enough of the movie. We all know how that led to Stitch being shoehorned into a terrible attraction.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt Well of course, but let's be honest... a puppet show and a ride are really two different things.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>Epcot has the highest capacity for any theme park anywhere. Sure attraction capacity is lower than it has ever been but the park itself is a people eater.<< Which makes it all the stranger that they would replace an existing attraction rather than add a new one. The park's infrastructure is designed for massive crowds; why not build the park out to bring those crowds in? >>Attendance is still growing at Epcot - albeit marginally slower than D/MGM and DAK<< Isn't attendance at the Studios dropping? I'm not sure how the Frozen Summer stuff will have impacted it, but I've heard that they were really struggling before that was implemented And FWIW, I thought the Legend of the Lion King show was pretty cool. I remember seeing a special about it on Disney Channel, which showed how the puppeteers all had to move around each other during the show; knowing what they were doing made it even more impressive to watch! I thought that it was retired because of the huge popularity of Festival of the Lion King at DAK, which seemed to be intended as a semi-temporary production. I've never understood the huge appeal of PhilharMagic, but from the worldwide crowds I seem to be in the minority
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<I've never understood the huge appeal of PhilharMagic, but from the worldwide crowds I seem to be in the minority>> Donald Duck. Nuff said.
Originally Posted By dagobert >>>Donald Duck. Nuff said.<<< I also like the show back in 2008 and I think you are right about Donald Duck. I can only talk for Europe, but over here he is the most popular Disney character. In nearly every country you will find Donald Duck Comics. I'm still surprised that DLP doesn't feature that attraction. I'm sure it would be a hit.
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn Question: Will this attraction change increase ticket and merchandising sales?
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>Question: Will this attraction change increase ticket and merchandising sales?<< It's hard to say. In part, it largely depends on how long the Frozen mania sticks around. We're definitely seeing it start to slow down, but it's still going strong; who knows what it will be like in early 2016 when the ride reopens For merchandise, there's no doubt that they will be able to sell a lot of Frozen-related stuff. However, I have a strong hunch that sort of merchandise would do well regardless of whether there's a ride or not. In all likelihood, it seems like a huge chunk of Norway's merchandise area will be converted to Frozen merchandise and the meet & greet. This means that the high-end top-dollar Norwegian merchandise (sweaters, ski jackets, troll figurines, etc) will probably be displaced and in very limited supply around WDW (if any is left at all). Considering that the Frozen stuff is being sold everywhere and the change will result in a loss of unique merchandise, it's tough to say if it will cause a real increase in sales (though I suppose swapping out merchandise is easy enough to fix later on) Similarly, I wonder how many extra bodies it will pull into the park. I would guess that most Frozen-obsessed people would travel to WDW regardless of an attraction's presence; we've seen that by the huge crowds for the M&Gs in Epcot and MK. There will probably be some extra people who will visit because of it, but there's also the risk of Epcot getting off balance and losing its appeal among groups without interest in the movie (typically families without children, who stereotypically have more disposable income and more flexible vacation options). Since that group is less likely to visit WDW in the first place, it's an odd strategy to appeal to the folks who are already coming to the parks while appearing to alienate the more profitable segment of their audience
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn We just need to remember this is a business, not a public park. EPCOT and WDW are not something that necessarily exist indefinitely. At an absolute minimum, they must be kept continuously profitable, not non-profitable. Or they must allow other areas of the business to be profitable enough to sustain any losses. If there are any better ideas, it might be worth sending them a resume.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <We just need to remember this is a business, not a public park> I think we all understand that.
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn Good. As much as I (and others) desire some bit of permanence to some features of the park, sustaining them must be invested - invested by a company. Imagine an alternative universe where EPCOT might be a public park.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>We just need to remember this is a business, not a public park.<< I completely understand this. I just think there's a strong argument to be made that Epcot is capable of making more money as a unique place that diversifies WDW than it is as yet another kiddie park full of cartoon characters at every turn. The people who want cartoon characters are already coming to WDW in droves; why not try and get the money from the other folks (who probably have more disposable income) too?
Originally Posted By CuriousConstance Well for one, it's a risk that you would attract many people that have no care to see character based attractions. Second, it doesn't have the added benefit of cross promoting movies, shows, merchandise, etc. It's the safer choice by a mile, and in today's world, you're not going to have many people willing to let you take big risks with their invested money.
