Originally Posted By Dabob2 < a less limited theme (as they are also now changing)> Actually, if anything the coming changes reinforce the theme: The very L.A./Mission Architecture-looking Buena Vista Street, the redcars, the Cathay Circle Theatre, and a whole land devoted to (quintessentially California) car culture with a landscape that looks very much like the old Route 66 through the CA desert. The problem was never the theme, but the execution.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt All Disney parks are not created equal. They never have been, and they never will be. Disney made some significant missteps with the design and marketing of DCA, HOWEVER, what was there at the start was a decent foundation to build upon. The Internet fans have greatly exaggerated how "bad" DCA was with dramatic proclamations that it was a "carnival in the parking lot", a "tacky nightmare", and that "Walt would be rolling in his grave". Their criticisms were fanned by the mediocre attendance and inept DLR management. The fact that the major physical transformation of key areas of the park has barely started and people are saying the park is better just because of WOC and Glow Fest illustrates that much of the early reaction to the park was just silly.
Originally Posted By tashajilek The thing is if nobody complained about what DCA was nothing would have been done. We would have no mermaid, carsland and maybe even WOC. If Disney would have gotten away with 2001 DCA we would only continue to get crap.
Originally Posted By CuriouserConstance I think DL is just too darn popular. DCA didn't have a chance no matter what it was.
Originally Posted By CuriouserConstance BTW Tasha, I have your package near completion and will be mailing it out soon!
Originally Posted By CuriouserConstance I hope you like it! I hand wrote you a letter back and everything! lol
Originally Posted By leemac <<BVS will never be something people plan their vacations around. But it will absolutely be a more pleasant place to linger longer, and that equals more retail/restaurant sales.>> Not necessarily - there still needs to be merchandise that people want and F&B options that they want. Changing the facades to those buildings won't increase sales on their own.
Originally Posted By leemac <But what is sad is Disney didn't learn the lesson ... they did the same thing in Paris and Hong Kong ... and one wonders what they'll pull in Shanghai (although I seriously doubt they'll be able to pull the same bait and switch deal).>> It all comes down to one thing - planning. I'd have had no issue if the decision was taken that they would open up DCA as it was in '01 but you need to have a coherent five or ten year plan about adding capacity and experiences - this is of critical importance in a market (like SoCal) that is dependent on repeat visitation (particularly AP-ers). The key problem was that no-one had a plan. Everyone in management believed that DCA was "enough" on Day One when the rest of us were all shaking our heads. Then you end up making knee-jerk reactions - some work (like A Bug's Land) and some don't (arguably Tower of Terror but most definitely nonsense like Rockin' the Bay and X-Games). Pure short-sightedness. There was no excuse as DCA is 100% owned by TWDC - they should have had a coherent Five-Year Plan to add experiences - everything from A- to E-Tickets. You would have thought that all those MBAs would know how to develop a business plan. Paris and Hong Kong are trickier cases to argue. When you are a minority partner (like TWDC is in both cases) then it is difficult to get exactly what you want. Paris was already up to its eyeballs in debt (most of it owned back to TWDC) and had little ability to raise any new capital. Hong Kong is the best disappointment - they pitched low and get exactly what they wanted. That resort should have been capable of bringing millions of tourists to Hong Kong.
Originally Posted By leemac <<I think DL is just too darn popular. >> It is definitely a poisoned chalice being a second gate to any Magic Kingdom. Especially when decades of development have passed before it comes along.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "The thing is if nobody complained about what DCA was nothing would have been done." Of course something would have been done. Generally speaking Disney parks aren't stagnant; they grow and change. There was an initial investment made to change the paradigm at DLR in Anaheim. On that Disney succeeded. It only stands to reason that the park would grow and expand over time just like DL Park did.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt The key problem was that no-one had a plan. Everyone in management believed that DCA was "enough" on Day One when the rest of us were all shaking our heads." That was painfully evident in the way the place was marketed before it opened and the embarrassing way that management handled the negative PR that the it received from the online fan community.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "How did they handle the negative PR?" Very, very poorly. They basically ignored it. DLR management pretended like there wasn't a problem with the perception of the park when it was obvious that the place fell short of expectations on so many levels. Even worse there were some within the company that predicted the place would be sold out on many days when their own attendance annual estimates (7 million) contradicted such claims. Had they done a better marketing job before and after it opened, carefully explained what DCA really was (a diversion from DL not a fully developed park like DL), and had a long term development plan (much like the one in place now), it probably would have taken off a lot better.
Originally Posted By tashajilek "Of course something would have been done. Generally speaking Disney parks aren't stagnant; they grow and change. There was an initial investment made to change the paradigm at DLR in Anaheim. On that Disney succeeded. It only stands to reason that the park would grow and expand over time just like DL Park did." Yea but if people were happy with the maliboomer and the other carnival rides they would just replace them with other cheap rides in the future. I agree with WD they should have spent the $$ to have the DL or TDS standards instead of spending more money to fix DCA.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "Yea but if people were happy with the maliboomer and the other carnival rides they would just replace them with other cheap rides in the future." Maybe, but that has never been true with Disney parks in the past. With the exception of EPCOT Disney parks have mostly been about a mixture of experiences - some lavish and others not so much. I certainly couldn't have anticipated that growth at DCA would shape up to be what it will be come 2012, but given what was there at the start some kind of elaborate expansion seemed inevitable to me.
Originally Posted By tashajilek Hey im not a DCA hater, in fact if there was no DCA my trips would probably be much shorter. Hopefully the expansion will be amazing and then no one can complain about DCA anymore.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt Yes, hopefully Tasha. It's been such a long, tacky, nightmare.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney <<It all comes down to one thing - planning. I'd have had no issue if the decision was taken that they would open up DCA as it was in '01 but you need to have a coherent five or ten year plan about adding capacity and experiences - this is of critical importance in a market (like SoCal) that is dependent on repeat visitation (particularly AP-ers). The key problem was that no-one had a plan. Everyone in management believed that DCA was "enough" on Day One when the rest of us were all shaking our heads. Then you end up making knee-jerk reactions - some work (like A Bug's Land) and some don't (arguably Tower of Terror but most definitely nonsense like Rockin' the Bay and X-Games). Pure short-sightedness. There was no excuse as DCA is 100% owned by TWDC - they should have had a coherent Five-Year Plan to add experiences - everything from A- to E-Tickets. You would have thought that all those MBAs would know how to develop a business plan.>> You know what, I decided I'm going to buy you a beer next time I see you ;D. And this, this right here, proves the people running ship was doing it without a rudder as we all knew. It was obvious. But it just boggles the mind that they opened this park with tacky carnival rides, a ton of movies (thankfully there are only two now) and very limited appeal, slap Disney on the marquee and actually thought their work was done for the next decade. Its unreal to me. And it proves time and time again that this is nothing BUT A FIX!!! In every sense of the word, thats all it was all along. How could it not be anything else at this point if they never had an INKLING to change anything? Its not like Walt Disney built DL and when it opened in 1955 said, 'good enough boys, lets go get drunk now'. No, the dude realized ON day one that DL was going to change and expand every freakin year after it and he did just that...every year. But now we have DCA where, at the time, the only plan was to add TOT somewhere 5 years LATER and nothing else. WOW!! I mean they probably thought from 2001-2011, they would spend the minimum on this park with a few rides here and there (i.e. LOTS of C tickets) a couple of shows and maybe a new parade somewhere in that decade and call it a day. But then the park was labled a dud from the first year out and it never got that much better. Little better attendence wise (thats not hard though when you start from rock bottom ), but only because of all the discounting and APs mainly, but the PERCPTION of the park has never changed much. It was always thought of as a 'filler' park for most out there with something you need a few hours for. I think even now, that perception hasnt changed much although WOC has kept people around longer at least. We ALL know, if DCA had 7+ million people entering the park the first year like plan, noooooo way in hell they would be spending $1.5 billion lol. Not even close. Lets not forget the hundreds of millions they already HAVE spent with the quick fixes and shows they never had planned either. We wouldnt have a $125 million revamped entrance if these people got there way and DCA was a sucessful theme park, thats for sure. That original entrance was meant to sit there just as long as DCA itself was. Again, they built it right the first time, they probably wouldnt be in this spot, but they built a crappy, unambitious park with no plans to update it from the get go and they are paying for it now...litterally. And I do find it funny they are spending $1.5 billion on a park to achieve basically the same attendance levels they expected to get 9 years ago already. AND they expected to get that level of attendance on basically FULL DAY admissions. Thats the crazier part since there were no APs at the time and multi day tickets were strictly for hotel guests and no one else and they were only 3 and 4 day tickets. There wasnt even a 2 day pass. So, its nice to see these people eating a lot of humble pie now after they thought DCA would be so sucessful, it was going to coast through when most of us was saying it was a disaster in the making. Even then, I THOUGHT it would have sky rocket attendance the first year, but quickly die out in the second year. That didnt even happen. I do have a question Leemac, but do you have any idea what do they expect/hope the attendance patterns will be when this is all done? I'm guessing the park is probably somewhere between 6-7 million now actually, so I'm guessing they want it at 7+ million, but do you have a more accurate idea? I mean with the new rides and Carsland added, thats a lot of extra capacity the park can handle now.
