Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< As far as tickets go, just make them all parkhoppers, then it won't matter which one they use. >>> That's never going to happen (unless they just got rid of the single-park ticket and made all 1-day tickets park hoppers at $79). There's no way they could support DCA even in its current form let alone fund all of the planned changes if it produced no incremental gate revenue.
Originally Posted By schoolsinger >>>What if Disneyland and DCA was one BIG THEME PARK? Re-theme DCA with lands and attactions that are complimentary to Disneyland.<<< I back this up 100%. The best way to make DCA more appealing is to attach Disneyland to it.
Originally Posted By LuvDatDisney ^^That's ridiculous. And it will never happen. DCA was built as a second gate and even if is third rate and not the draw expected, Disney would never simply remove the gate. And how exactly would you combine them? Sorry, but that's just nonsense.
Originally Posted By woody When I wrote that, I was saying DCA's theming should be based on Disneyland. It's like Disneyland 2 with the second gate.
Originally Posted By dr jones Thats not a bad idea woody, the fact is, DCA only has trace amounts of real "Disney Magic". and there are lots of great themes and characters in Disneyland that could be expanded on. Not to mention the entire Disney lexicon. Sure keep it as a second gate, but make it true Disney.
Originally Posted By schoolsinger The Disneyland resort does not have the large distances between the parks like Disney World does. There is just a tiny piece of land between Disneyland and DCA. It is not hard to connect the parks. While many hard core Disney fans like the ones on this board think the parks should stay separate, every average Joe person I talk to about this subject thinks the parks should be combined. Many people I have talked too even found it stupid that Disney charges a separate admission to DCA when it is almost touching Disneyland. Bigger parks are more appealing to the average Joe than smaller parks. If Disney were to combine the two parks, it would be a good completive strategy. The bigger Disneyland is, the smaller competitor parks like Universal Studios appear to be. While having multiple gates may help some in extending the stay of out of state tourists, combining the parks into one super park will get more people come in the first place. Keep in mind that Disneyland does not have as many tourists as Disney World. Most Disneyland guests are day tripping locals.
Originally Posted By Brick-N-Mortar I think the idea of combining the parks literally or thematicly would be a step in the wrong direction. I believe that part of the reason to have a second gate is to offer the public two seperate experiances at the Disneyland Resort motivating guests to stay longer when on a multi-day vacation or returning more often if the guests are local. The problem with DCA is it doesn't have the wow factor Disneyland does. I think it could and I believe it eventually will.
Originally Posted By dr jones Brick-N-Mortar, that's exactly what I'm saying. I don't want it to be one huge park with one gate, but it should still feel like your in another world like Disneyland does. We (my wife and I)always leave DCA after coming from DL, with a sort of "Was that cool or...? I don't know, just kind of a "theme park limbo" feeling. But when we cross the Esplanade back into DL, we feel transported to another world. I'm sure you know that feeling. DCA lacks THAT transformative power.
Originally Posted By schoolsinger If you were take a survey of guests at the Disneyland Resort and asked them if they think Disneyland and DCA should be combined into one super park, I bet you would receive an overwhelming “yes†response. I would also think that most of the minority that says “no†are probably answering the question from a business standpoint instead of what they personally want as a guest. Whether or not combining the parks makes Disney more money, you have to admit that it is what the average Joe guests want.
Originally Posted By Brick-N-Mortar dr jones, yeah, we're on the same vibe here. I like the term "transformative power", it'll be fun to see how DCA finds that power in the comming months and years. schoolsinger, I agree that having one mega Disney park would be very cool, but I think DCA, as it is now, would decrease the effectiveness of Disneyland rather than Disneyland boosting the effectiveness of DCA.
Originally Posted By Sweeper If the idea is too make DCA Disneyland 2, then the parks should be merged. If real money is going to be invested to make DCA unique and great, then they should remain two different gates.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<I would also think that most of the minority that says “no†are probably answering the question from a business standpoint instead of what they personally want as a guest. Whether or not combining the parks makes Disney more money, you have to admit that it is what the average Joe guests want.>> I can't separate the business standpoint and the guests standpoint, because there must be a mutual agreement between the two. Average Joe Guest wants 50¢ churros too, along with two parks for the same price, but it's not going to happen (barring the discounts that Disney occasionally runs.)
Originally Posted By schoolsinger What do you think makes more sense from a business standpoint: combining the parks, or offering 2fers?
Originally Posted By SuperDry Between the 2, 2fers make more sense, in that they can be gradually reduced and eventually discontinued as DCA's issues are addressed and the park becomes something that more people are willing to pay a separate admission for. Plus, 2fers can be restricted to certain groups, such as local residents.
Originally Posted By markedward First, let me admit I haven't read ALL 54 posts, so if I inadvertently plagiarize someone else's idea, sorry. I like the idea of an "8 foot ceiling" project. Get it? The opposite of a "blue sky" project. What would be done for maximum impact with minimum expense at DCA? Retheme the park to Anaheim Disneysea. Add more water. Squeeze a small waterway from the entrance (renamed Port Disney) to the lagoon. Probably move or wipe out It's Tough to be a Bug if it blocks things as much as every map suggests. This would clear out the sight line to King Triton's Castle, the new icon for the park - to be built about where the Tortilla Factory is. Trust me, it will not be greatly missed. The San Francisco and Grizzly Peak areas become Eureka Bay (Frontierland on the water). The Monterey area, as it faces Eureka Bay would keep it's theming from that side, though the back side would look like Copenhagen to fit with the Little Mermaid theme. The area around Triton's castle becomes the Fantasyland area, named Mermaid Lagoon, with a Little Mermaid dark ride - a pet obsession of mine for it's undersea feel. And some of the rides from Tokyo DisneySea's Mermaid Lagoon. The right side of Paradise Pier is dramatically rethemed as the Adventureland area, named Adventure Cove, but with a younger, more Disney theme that Disneyland's Adventureland. It would steal Paris's Peter Pan themed play area. With minimal retheming, the Orange Stinger becomes the peach from James and the Giant Peach. I think that last one really captures how to retheme with minimal rebuilding. Mulholland Madness would also be rethemed, though I haven't settled on a theme. The back part of Paradise Pier is pretty hard to actually change. How do you hide a giant rollercoaster and ferris wheel? So they become the core of Waterfront USA. Waterfront USA would capture the theme of Main Street USA while Port Disney would perform it's function. A Bug's Land COULD be left as is and renamed A Bug's Island. But that is weak. Probably it would get a complete make over. To what I don't know. What to do with the Studio, which doesn't remotely fit the DisneySea concept? Close it off from the rest of the park. Make it an add on mini-park, either free to guests of either park, or a ten dollar add on that's free during slow seasons or when there isn't a new draw. Or add a tunnel or bridge from Disneyland and make it a new land.
Originally Posted By markedward I don't want to make enemies of fan's of the Tortilla Factory. It could certainly be moved to the new Eureka Bay. Who am I to complain about a free tortilla?
Originally Posted By WorldDisney LOL, schoolsinger, about once or twice a year you come out and once again throw out the 2 park combined theory and as ALWAYS, its shot down over and over again on these boards. Face it, it isn't a very good idea and will just decrease the feel of DL by all of a sudden adding a big "Californialand" on it . Anyway, it will NEVER happen. Disney still can't bring themselves to making the admission price $15-20 lower than it should be. I don't see themselves just saying 'screw it' and adding the whole thing to DL. Again, they are SEPERATE parks with very seperate philosophies and ideas. It would completely kill what each is trying to do not to mention the bad business decision to all of a sudden jack up the price AGAIN and basically force people to pay for an additional park automatically they really had no interest in paying the first time around. It will never happen.
Originally Posted By schoolsinger Combining the parks does not mean Disney needs to raise the prices, because time only allows guest to ride the same amount of rides. What combining the parks will do is give people more choice as to what those rides are. This new freedom makes the park more appealing, which in turn makes more people want to visit. The more people that visit, the more $ the mouse gets.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 There's no way Disney could charge the same amount they do currently for one park, and combine the two. That would add a huge burden to Disneyland, because bsically DCA would be free. If you think DCA leeches off Disneyland now, it would be worse if it was combined and didn't add to the price of a ticket. I agree with those who say Disney will never combine the parks into a mega-park. It doesn't make sense financially. Guest surveys don't mean anything if they are not going to be cost effective.
