Originally Posted By WorldDisney <Welcome to human nature Dabob lol. Yeah everyone predicted that dude.> <<Actually, no. There were plenty of people who were predicting that their opposite numbers would be eating crow and admitting their error and bowing down gratefully to the others' "I told you so." Interesting fantasy some people had to have, but I knew that was never gonna happen.>> Again dude, many of those people still believe that lol. Spend about 10 minutes at Mice Chat ;D. But it DOSENT MATTER!! End of the day, YOU want a Disney theme park you like, *I* want a Disney theme park I like. Everyone seems to be happy to an extent are getting that. I'm not here to throw it in peoples faces I thought DCA was a dud that needed changing. Because yeah for *me* it WAS a dud and I'm glad they are changing it. Most importantly, I'm glad they listened to the criticisms and making the changes we wanted. You can argue that was always the plan anyway. I dont know obviously, but DCA was a HORRIBLE Disney theme park for me. Simply one of the worst. All the people that built it have now been fired or quit and now we are getting something better, if not completely new with the new regieme. I simply wasnt happy with the original designers work and its apparent the new ones werent either. Thats progress! I dont care how it came about, I just care its happening at the end of the day and we get a park ALL of us can enjoy here. DCA 1.0 wasnt it, but hopefully DCA 2.0 will be.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "Sure, I agree with that too Hans but I have to pull a DW here and say if the original TPTB were still in charge, we would probably still have the same crappy execution and creative direction of DCA 1.0, just simply expanded on." After all the debating and surveying they've done since 2001? I don't think so.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "Many people simply disagree that the change is all that radical." I'm one of those people.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "Past Hollywood Boulevard you had Echo Park Lake, with a charming assemblage of buildings and a couple of great "California Crazies." That spot is literally right next to HW Blvd. So, yes it is off that particular street, but it is tied to it. "The Studio Courtyard was also well detailed, in a streamlined deco that evoked the Disney Studio." Yes, it was nice, but tiny in comparison to the areas I mentioned at DCA. Grizzly Peak Recreation Area compared to the Animation courtyard? Well, there's no comparison. Disney/MGM Studio was not a "lavishly detailed" park in comparison to DCA. It may have given that impression because of its entrance and elaborate Chinese Theater icon, but overall, no.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney <What people keep forgetting here is that DCA is being changed on every level possible: physically, thematically and tone. > <<Many people simply disagree that the change is all that radical. Yes, there are plenty of improvements, but the theme remains the same (and is in fact being underscored - remember the many who confidently predicted that by 2010 the CA theme would be a thing of the past?)>> Well lets be honest, even with a billion dollars, there is ONLY so much you can do lol. Unless they were going to tear down the park and start from scratch, of course most of it was going to remaing the same. But I'm happy they are GREATLY improving what they are doing and what can be changed. Look at SSS for example. THIS is what we are talking about. Its the same ride as before, but they took down that ugly tacky orange peel and built a wonderful structure that ties in to a time period that DIDNT exist at the park before and made it blend into PP. Sure they couldnt knock the entire pier down, but AT LEAST they had the foresight to make this area of the park something truly Disney, which the original TPTB didnt go beyound. This is all most of us wanted in the first place. Some actual creativity and real thought the original DCA didnt have, nor care to have. And I *highly* doubt we would get this with the original TPTB, but I dont care. I'm just glad we got it now! <<and large parts of the park are not being touched, at least for now (GRR/RCCT area, Condor Flats, HPB except for the red cars, PW, the winery area, Bugs Land/ITTBAB, and even the major structures of PP except for Maliboomer are staying (though getting nice cosmetic makeovers).>> Again, its a billion is not THAT much money lol. But for what they have, they are doing it beautifully. And no one said we wanted the ENTIRE park redone. No one ever said the entire park was a complete failure or even needed changing, so why change those?? Its just the real sucky areas, i.e. PP, the entrance, route 66 and improve on HPB. Again, they are DOING that, all of it! PP for example has now not only gotten REAL attractions, TLM, TSMM, eliminating the stucco, is WIPING out Route 66 altogeter, one of the tackiest parts in a Disney theme park EVER for an elegant area and garden, they are even throwing a specific time period on it. Again, ALL the things we were complainging about the area from day one. Sure some people dont like PP in general, but compared to what it was before, its almost night and day. Its BECAUSE of the moaning and complaining this is even happening so I'm happy. As for GRR, the winery, Condor Flats, people LIKE these areas. There has been no to zero complaints about them. So no one is saying fix the stuff that isnt broken, simply fix the stuff that IS and with that we are happy they listened . And even GRR has gotten some small thematic changes in the queue. Its quietly changing to fit in with the rest of the new park. Thats cool! <<It's a mostly wonderful expansion/adaptation, but it's more a re-imagining and building on existing "bones" than "being changed on every level possible," which sounds pretty hyperbolic to me, dude.>> Again, when you go from a park that started off with an adult contempory direction, with its 'hip and edgy' tone, devoid of any character based rides or shows, where 90% of the rides were clones, with ONE ride that had a queue that bothered to tell a story to what we are getting now. Today its becoming a family orientated fantasy park no different than DL across the way that is now ALL about Disney characters, pushing very specific historical time periods with EVERY single attraction from 2006 on ALL new original attractions, all basically the complete opposite of what the park was about in 2001. The entrance alone gives you a COMPLETELY different feel of a brand new tone and creation of DCA. DCA 1.0 will basically be dead within the next 5 years at this rate. DCA is basically just turning into DL 2.0 in California now. I dont know how people CANT see this? Its completely transformed what the ENTIRE direction of what DCA was in just 9 short years. How many other Disney theme parks have gone such a complete physical and thematic turn around in a couple of years time??? Everything about what they are doing to this park is simply forgetting what the park was suppose to be about in 2001. Again, what am I missing? Listen we ALL know they cant turn the park into TDS. I think most of us are happy with what they can do on the budget and time now. To ask for more would just be unrealistic at this point, and more WILL come in time, so I think what they are doing is fine and they are changing the stuff that really bothered us, but still doing it in a way the park will feel veeery differnt from original opening day. For the money and time, they are trying hard this time....something they werent doing with DCA 1.0. ;D
Originally Posted By LOVE-DCA omg it's like you guys have nothing better to do then talk about DCA allday! ☺ ..hee hee j/k lol
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Again dude, many of those people still believe that lol> "Again?" Come on. I said that I predicted everyone would see in the changes a justification for their previous positions, and you said "yeah, everybody said that." I pointed out that that was not the case - some people said something very different. <of course most of it was going to remaing the same. But I'm happy they are GREATLY improving what they are doing and what can be changed.> We all are. But that doesn't translate to "being changed on every possible level" as you said. <I dont know how people CANT see this?> Which, respectfully, is kind of the problem. It's not that we "can't see" it, it's that we disagree. There's a difference. You're very fond of phrases like "We ALL..." and you need to realize that not everyone is going to feel about things the way you do.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney <<After all the debating and surveying they've done since 2001? I don't think so.>> Sure Hans, I would LOVE to believe that, I would. But I only look to what happened with other theme parks like WDSP and HKDL later on. Both parks built by the same TPTB and KNEW the issues had with DCA, and yet still used the same paint brush and model with those parks. Sure WDSP was only a year away basically after DCA, but STILL even after that park opened, nothing was changed for years and that was the worst park they opened, EVER!! It was actually UGLIER than DCA, which at the time I didnt think was possible (and yes, DCA had its pretty areas of course, but the ugly areas outweighed them in my mind). And HKDL was 4 years after DCA and even KNOWING the issues people complained about DCA, park too small, too many clones, etc, etc, and thats a park with a major first gate next to it. They STILL opened HKDL as a half day, barely imaginative park, in a brand new market as the sole park. I mean it still boggles the mind. Yes, its prettier, but its an MK park, how hard is that? The content somewhat better, but still lacked any real imagination or innovation. Whats scary is this is a park they done 4 times already and STILL couldnt get it right. You would think they wouldve took ALL the mistakes with DCA and WDSP and did something better. They made it a little prettier and gave us bland rides that didnt want to make us hurl at least, but that's it? So yeah, I dont know, I just lost faith in those guys, but yes I'm assuming DCA wouldve gotten somewhat better. But what we are seeing now? I just dont know.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "...devoid of any character based rides or shows..." WD, are you feeling ok? How could you forget that Muppets and Bugs were both there on opening day, not to mention the Fab 5 strolling around for meet & greets? "How many other Disney theme parks have gone such a complete physical and thematic turn around in a couple of years time???" Look only across the way at DL. The alterations and additions there from 1955 to 1967 were even more dramatic than DCA's
Originally Posted By WorldDisney <Again dude, many of those people still believe that lol> "Again?" <<Come on. I said that I predicted everyone would see in the changes a justification for their previous positions, and you said "yeah, everybody said that." I pointed out that that was not the case - some people said something very different.>> Okay, maybe not everyone, my only point was it wasnt you and YOU alone who stated this either lol. Its human nature, its just the way it is. I mean we keep saying we want to move on from the same debate and move on to the future, lets do that! But here I am pulling myself back in lol. <of course most of it was going to remaing the same. But I'm happy they are GREATLY improving what they are doing and what can be changed.> <<We all are. But that doesn't translate to "being changed on every possible level" as you said.>> I just GAVE a long paragraph of what I meant. Yes, for the money and time, sure. I'm not saying they are knocking it down and creating a new theme park obviously, but yes, physically, thematically and tone the park is changing, is it not? Thats all I meant. <I dont know how people CANT see this?> <<Which, respectfully, is kind of the problem. It's not that we "can't see" it, it's that we disagree. There's a difference. You're very fond of phrases like "We ALL..." and you need to realize that not everyone is going to feel about things the way you do.>> I didnt say we all felt the same, obviously as I'm here debating you lol. I'm only saying the people who DIDNT like the park for the most part, not as in every Disney fan. And yes even a lot of people didnt like it are STILL not satisfied and sadly most of those people probably never will be. But the key here is to realize that most of the complainers and haters DO like what's being done!! So I dont get what the problem is? Why do we keep focusing on the past? Most of us are excited now. There are is very little 'DCA sucks' threads anymore from when I show up here now. Very few are complaining about how its all being done in a half @$$ way as before. People seem generally excited about DCA 2.0 now. WOC, its FIRST big test of the future seems to be a hit with most and no references to Luminara about it when Disney was still just pulling it out of their you-know-where. Again, we WANT the park to suceed and looking forward to it in a few years time. Why can't we just focus on that??
Originally Posted By WorldDisney "...devoid of any character based rides or shows..." <<WD, are you feeling ok? How could you forget that Muppets and Bugs were both there on opening day, not to mention the Fab 5 strolling around for meet & greets?>> LOL, I'm feeling fine Hans. In terms of 'shows' I just meant LIVE shows like parades, stage shows, etc. At the time, there was NO MSEP, PBP, Alladin, WOC, none of that. All the shows then emphasis was all on 'hip and edgy' like Steps in Time *shudder*, Blast and Eureka . The park didnt have a single character based ride at the time. But yeah, I purposely left out the movies (I personnally makes the distintion between 'show' and 'movie' in my head most of the time when I talk about this stuff). So my point was accrate . And sure, they had Mickey and company running around, its still a Disney park. But it was CLEARLY a park that was had nothing to do with them. They were (originally anyway) just there to appease families and for photo ops. But the park itself was clearly suppose to be about Calif and the here and now. Fantasy took a HUGE back seat then...not anymore of course lol. "How many other Disney theme parks have gone such a complete physical and thematic turn around in a couple of years time???" <<Look only across the way at DL. The alterations and additions there from 1955 to 1967 were even more dramatic than DCA's.>> I ALWAYS hear this, but you are talking about a theme park that didnt have all the money it wanted to do at opening and the FIRST of its kind. DL was an experiment and even today the park is still the same in theme and tone over 50 years later. All the lands were there like before, simply expanded on. And even then, the park was ALWAYS sucessful. They made the changes when they knew it was going to stick around. Those changes were proactive. DCAs changes were 100% reactive only, nothing more. The fact DCA had NO phase two planned except adding TOT 5 years later, hence 2006, not 2004 tells you that . So no, its not even close to the same thing. DL changed to make it better. DCA simply changed because they knew the original execution simply failed and here we are.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Again dude, many of those people still believe that lol> "Again?" <<Come on. I said that I predicted everyone would see in the changes a justification for their previous positions, and you said "yeah, everybody said that." I pointed out that that was not the case - some people said something very different.>> <Okay, maybe not everyone, my only point was it wasnt you and YOU alone who stated this either lol. > Never said I was. <of course most of it was going to remaing the same. But I'm happy they are GREATLY improving what they are doing and what can be changed.> <<We all are. But that doesn't translate to "being changed on every possible level" as you said.>> <I just GAVE a long paragraph of what I meant.> Yes. And I don't think that paragraph justified the earlier rather hyperbolic characterization. <but yes, physically, thematically and tone the park is changing, is it not? Thats all I meant.> The overall theme (CA) is still the same, and being strengthened if anything. As for the rest, some parts are changing and others are not. <I dont know how people CANT see this?> <<Which, respectfully, is kind of the problem. It's not that we "can't see" it, it's that we disagree. There's a difference. You're very fond of phrases like "We ALL..." and you need to realize that not everyone is going to feel about things the way you do.>> <I didnt say we all felt the same, obviously as I'm here debating you lol. I'm only saying the people who DIDNT like the park for the most part, not as in every Disney fan. > Um, okay. <But the key here is to realize that most of the complainers and haters DO like what's being done!! So I dont get what the problem is? Why do we keep focusing on the past?> I don't know. Surely you have to realize you do it a lot. Even in posts that are ostensibly about moving on, there's this sort of passive-aggressive detour into "Well, of course, in 2001 it DID suck and we ALL recognize that I think and it's OBVIOUS that's why they're changing things...." Followed by "but let's move on." It's like you can't help yourself.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "I ALWAYS hear this, but you are talking about a theme park that didnt have all the money it wanted to do at opening and the FIRST of its kind." WD, even you have to acknowledge that the opening budget wasn't the only reason why DL expanded and changed during its first decade. It wasn't like Walt Disney wanted to build Great Moments With Mr Lincoln in 1955 and didn't because of money. Even so, why does DL get a pass for being short on money at opening and DCA doesn't? You asked how many other Disney theme parks have gone such a complete physical and thematic turn around in a few years time, and I gave you a reasonable answer. Apparently, in this case, what's good for goose isn't good for the gander.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney <Again dude, many of those people still believe that lol> "Again?" <<Come on. I said that I predicted everyone would see in the changes a justification for their previous positions, and you said "yeah, everybody said that." I pointed out that that was not the case - some people said something very different.>> <Okay, maybe not everyone, my only point was it wasnt you and YOU alone who stated this either lol. > <<Never said I was.>> Okay, cool! <of course most of it was going to remaing the same. But I'm happy they are GREATLY improving what they are doing and what can be changed.> <<We all are. But that doesn't translate to "being changed on every possible level" as you said.>> <I just GAVE a long paragraph of what I meant.> <<Yes. And I don't think that paragraph justified the earlier rather hyperbolic characterization.>> Well we definitely have to agree to disagree on that . When you start off with a park that had litteraly ZERO character rides and LIVE shows at opening day to a park, that will, wait for it, TWENTY character rides and shows by 2012 lol, again what am I missing? I mean, c'mon? How do you go from a park that had none of that stuff to a park that is now ALL about that? How do you go from 0-20 unless there isn't a great new paradigm shift in terms of tone and theme of the place? You can call it 'hyperbole', but if thats not a major shift in this parks mandate in 10 years time, I dont know what is. <but yes, physically, thematically and tone the park is changing, is it not? Thats all I meant.> <<The overall theme (CA) is still the same, and being strengthened if anything. As for the rest, some parts are changing and others are not.>> I guess this is where we keep falling off the curb with each other. YES, its about Calif, in theory basically, but yes. What I'm talking about his HOW the theme is now executed thats all. Before it was about California of today, serious look about the different cultures that make it up country, its industries, blah, blah, blah. NOW its basically turned into California for toons. Oh yeah and now some Walt tie in with BVS, which is to simply remind people of Main Street across the way nothing more. It has NOTHING to do with the original intent of what they were tring to do with this park, period. That said, I have NO problem with that and I like that BVS keeps it grounded, but DCA 2.0 Calif theme has little to nothing with DCA 1.0 Calif theme, hence what I was talking about. But yes, we are oddly both right lol. Its still the same theme but more in name than what they originnally started out with now. <I dont know how people CANT see this?> <<Which, respectfully, is kind of the problem. It's not that we "can't see" it, it's that we disagree. There's a difference. You're very fond of phrases like "We ALL..." and you need to realize that not everyone is going to feel about things the way you do.>> <I didnt say we all felt the same, obviously as I'm here debating you lol. I'm only saying the people who DIDNT like the park for the most part, not as in every Disney fan. > <<Um, okay.>> Okay, I guess I misunderstood what you meant originally. Sorry! <But the key here is to realize that most of the complainers and haters DO like what's being done!! So I dont get what the problem is? Why do we keep focusing on the past?> <<I don't know. Surely you have to realize you do it a lot. Even in posts that are ostensibly about moving on, there's this sort of passive-aggressive detour into "Well, of course, in 2001 it DID suck and we ALL recognize that I think and it's OBVIOUS that's why they're changing things...." Followed by "but let's move on." It's like you can't help yourself.>> Well, thats because for me it is OBVIOUS it sucked! ;D I get what you are saying, butof course people are going to mention their feelings about it. I mean, I'm NOT saying dont mention the past at all. DCA STILL sucks for me for the most part, but its simply getting better. All I'm saying is I'm not trying to get into a debate about it anymore. I dont start threads or throw up posts about the lack of people showing up in 2002. We talked about the attendance, lack of elements, etc countless times. PART of the reason I dont come here like I use to because I got tired of talking about it as well. I'm here NOW because of WOC and all the announcements about the new stuff. Yeah, I cant hide it lol, nor am I say I or others should. I guess my point is DCA 2.0 is the REAL focus now and yes, if I was sitting here talking about how I think the new park will still suck, the same attitiudes will never change, etc, then yes, I will just be negative just for the sake of being negative. Strangely I do see many doing that and there people on these boards who said they would NEVER like the park...but their tone is changing as well. But no I cant help that DCA 1.0 will always suck. Its was a horrible theme park, it still is in a lot of ways for me. That said I think HKDL and WDSP is MUCH worse! Just in different ways. But yes, I'm happy that DCA has/is getting better. Most people seem to be...even the ones who wanted it back as a parking lot lol. I never HATED the place, it just simply sucks/sucked for a Disney park. What's crazy is I want to spend a little more time in it everytime I go....but admittedly thats partly because I just discovered the alcohol there like 6 weeks ago. ;D
Originally Posted By WorldDisney "I ALWAYS hear this, but you are talking about a theme park that didnt have all the money it wanted to do at opening and the FIRST of its kind." <<WD, even you have to acknowledge that the opening budget wasn't the only reason why DL expanded and changed during its first decade. It wasn't like Walt Disney wanted to build Great Moments With Mr Lincoln in 1955 and didn't because of money.>> Sure Hans, but that argument, not from you per se, just feels disingenious to me, thats all. It just feels more like talking points to prove DCA is really going through some normal simple transformation or something. I mean are you comparing the reasons why the company has thrown a billion dollars into DCA as the same reasons why DL expanded back in 1955? I'm sorry, it just reminds me of the same arguments people made why HKDL only had 20 attractions at opening, because the argument goes the original park only had 20 attractions at opening in 1955. They both hold about the same weight in terms of legitimate argument for me. <<Even so, why does DL get a pass for being short on money at opening and DCA doesn't? You asked how many other Disney theme parks have gone such a complete physical and thematic turn around in a few years time, and I gave you a reasonable answer. Apparently, in this case, what's good for goose isn't good for the gander.>> Disneyland gets a pass because it was a crazy experiment built by a guy who put up his own house to get the money to help build the thing. DCA was built by a multi-billion dollar international fortune 500 company who had built 7 theme parks prior on 3 sepearate continents. DL was a park where every dollar was used to make the best park possible. DCA was a park where every dollar was held back if they thought they could get away with it to make it just 'good enough' to please the shareholders. And now 9 years later, they have probably spent up to 3 times the original cost to correct that mistake. Where did that thinking get them? DL was an EXPERIMENT!! I have NO clue what was on the books in terms of expansion or ideas back then because I wasnt exactly born then and we didnt have the internet lol. But it was always CLEAR that Walt was going to expand the park WHEN the park was considered an outright sucess. Again, this is what Disney USE to do anyway. It was NEVER clear DCA was going to expand much of anything if the crowds showed up, period. There WAS no phase 2. There WAS no discussions about Sunshine Plaza being 'temporary'. I read the farm actually WAS suppose to be tempoarary until they could move something in there, but everything else there now probably meant to stay as is. Expanded on, sure, but I never heard of the wholesale changes we are seeing now. None of that existed, at least during Eisner time. He finally gets the boot, and viola, the park, the BIGGEST joke in Disney theme park history is now getting a complete billion dollar revamp by people who had nothing to do with the park originally. Weird coincidce I guess. It wasnt even a gradual change like DL and others got. Park failed to increase attendance and overnight they threw in everything under the sun: discounts, character shows, kiddie lands, night time show and on and on. Again, NONE of that planned as well. IF that was stuff that was being designed before opening, I would get your point. But it was all stuff done off the cuff when they realized they were in trouble. Hell they bought out MSEP out of mothballs becasue someone realize, waaaay too late, that they needed a night time show to keep the sheep in, but didnt have anything for them. I mean, how desperate does it get lol. DCA failed to capture a full audience. It has NEVER reached that 7 million figure waaay back in 2001 even WITH the dicounts, APs and ridiculous amount of quick fixes. Maybe now it has I dont know. And sure, I'm not even saying after that year they were even trying to get achieve that after the first year. But it still feels completely ingenious to say DCA is simply making changes the way DL did back in 1955. TDS is just as old as DCA. How many drastic changes has that made in all of that time? Its added a few attractions and of course its always changing its shows. But its a park that draws in 10+ million guest a year. I'm guessing if DCA was drawing that, its no way we would be seeing the changes like we are now. New rides, certainly, but do you honestly think they would be changing the entrance?? I just find it funny the parks TODAY that are getting these huge transformations, entire new lands changed or added, again, NONE that was ever planned with the old regieme, are the ones struggling the most: WDSP, HKDL and DCA. I dont know, just a crazy coincidence I guess.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney Okay maybe I DO miss the debats lol. Happy now Bob...you got your 18 paragraphs back lol.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "I mean are you comparing the reasons why the company has thrown a billion dollars into DCA as the same reasons why DL expanded back in 1955?" No, I was simply responding to your assertion that DCA was the first Disney theme park to have the level of growth and expansion that it is experiencing. I proved you wrong by pointing to DL, which had a rather eventful first decade. Now you are making excuses for DL. That old double standard will never die I guess. "Disneyland gets a pass because it was a crazy experiment built by a guy who put up his own house to get the money to help build the thing." So are changing the question then. What you are asking is what theme park BESIDE DISNEYLAND has had similar growth and change to DCA in the early years of its operation. If so, then I would agree that DCA stands without equal. "DCA was built by a multi-billion dollar international fortune 500 company who had built 7 theme parks prior on 3 sepearate continents." And why does any of that diminish the company's desire to reduce financial risk?
Originally Posted By WorldDisney "I mean are you comparing the reasons why the company has thrown a billion dollars into DCA as the same reasons why DL expanded back in 1955?" <<No, I was simply responding to your assertion that DCA was the first Disney theme park to have the level of growth and expansion that it is experiencing. I proved you wrong by pointing to DL, which had a rather eventful first decade. Now you are making excuses for DL. That old double standard will never die I guess.>> I'm not making excuses for anyone dude. That just SOUNDS like an excuse to me since they are completely seperate issues, thats all. How is it a double standard if you are saying one was being changed simply to expand a park they had planned to vs the other that was being FORCED to expand, that was NEVER planned on this level, because it couldnt get the audience it wanted, which DL had no problem getting? I get what you are saying dude, but it still comes off disingenious a little, thats all. My entire point was DCA is ONLY making these vast changes because someone felt it had to stay alive. DL changes seem more organic. And like I said earlier, the theme of the park never changed, simply expanded on. I'm not just talking merely physical transformation. DCA is undergoing a thematic and tone one as well because of these changes. IF you say thats what DL did, I will take your word for it, but it just feels more like additions to SUPPORT its theme, not to shift it which DCA is CLEARLY doing. DCA is renaming entire lands to fit this new theme or direction. DL never did that IIRC. But yes, I GET your point, it just honestly feels like apples and oranges to me thats all. Do you understand more of what I mean?? I'm honestly not trying to make this a double standard, but its clearly differnt for me as I stated. "Disneyland gets a pass because it was a crazy experiment built by a guy who put up his own house to get the money to help build the thing." <<So are changing the question then. What you are asking is what theme park BESIDE DISNEYLAND has had similar growth and change to DCA in the early years of its operation. If so, then I would agree that DCA stands without equal.>> You lost me dude lol. You asked why does DL gets a pass for being cheaper. I told you, because the guy gave every cent he could with DL. There simply wasnt more or at least not more to drive his family homeless. Not NEARLY the same case with DCA. Not even close to the same. But maybe I'm just missing your point. "DCA was built by a multi-billion dollar international fortune 500 company who had built 7 theme parks prior on 3 sepearate continents." <<And why does any of that diminish the company's desire to reduce financial risk?>> It doesnt. But if they obviously couldnt build a decent park with the money they had, then they shouldnt have built it. OR if they did, they shouldnt have tried to charge full price for a mediocre effort if they knew they couldnt put in the money for a park worthy of a full price ticket...and yet they tried to get away with having pay the same price as DL and got burnt for it. I mean, I cant exactly feel SORRY for their failed tactic! What do you want me to say? I mean if you can't build a decent park in 2001, fine, then just wait until later when you CAN throw billions in the park like they are apparently doing now. Right?
