Originally Posted By fkurucz At least according to CC/Money "SMH Capital analyst David Miller Monday estimated the "Finding Nemo" ride upgrade took Disney about three years and cost $172 million." <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2007/06/11/news/funny/bc.disney.nemo.reut/index.htm?postversion=2007061115" target="_blank">http://money.cnn.com/2007/06/1 1/news/funny/bc.disney.nemo.reut/index.htm?postversion=2007061115</a> Anyone know if it really did cost that much?
Originally Posted By ni_teach It's hard to pin down a real number because...... It really depends on how you want to "count thing" For example if you count all the R&D then the price tag goes way up.... But remember the same technology was used at WDW for their Nemo make over. So do you split the R&D between the two rides. There were also lots of other repairs in the area (such as the motor boat area), which might or might not be charged back to the Nemo Subs. Only Disney bookkeepers know for sure.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney ^^I'm sorry what now? Its VERY late on my side of the world, I guess and I'm a little drowsy, but did someone just say Nemo cost $172,000,000???? Wow, if that's true, I think that will easily go in the record books! I always thought the most expensive ride was Indy, but maybe in TODAY'S dollars it might be that much anyway, but man that's alot. No WONDER there was no new queue, they only had enough money left over to change the sign ;D.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt Someone else here posted a few weeks ago that DL's Nemo is the most expensive ride ever built by Disney in the States. Given that rumor and the figure in the article I'm going to guess that this upgrade was not an inexpensive thing to do.
Originally Posted By danyoung >Wow - that article was full of errors.< Like what? Seemed pretty straitforward to me.
Originally Posted By Skippy Hey, what do you expect? It costs a lot of money to get a submarine to go through a loop!
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< Like what? Seemed pretty straitforward to me. >>> Like DCA opening in 1997. Like the old subs being based on 20,000 Leagues (although Ed Grier made the same mistake). Like the subs being switched from grey to yellow for Nemo.
Originally Posted By jonvn If they spent that much on that ride, then they really got shafted....once again. Someone really needs to examine their procedures.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo And although you are still watching movies, at least you move. Plus every age can ride. These are all great plusses.
Originally Posted By SuperDry I find the number of $172 million VERY hard to believe, both in terms of "how could it cost that much?" and in terms of a figure anywhere near that high would never get approved to bring back an old attraction at DL. EE cost right around $100 million - how could Nemo cost 75% more than that?
Originally Posted By fredddy I just don't believe it. Or Disney just got crazy, because to spend so much for a ride that has such a small capacity makes no sense.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo I'm sure this must include the R&D and some of the shared production costs for Epcot, WDS and DL.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo For example, the seagulls have been produced for all three parks. I am sure they will have treated these as an attraction programme rather than individual projects.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo That's probably more like it. Also I am sure that pipe and leak problem added to the costs to exceed budgetary tolerances.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< LA Times says it costs more than $70 million. >>> That I can believe, although it still seems expensive. Let's assume for the sake of discussion that the number is accurate - is that the most that's been spent on a DL attraction since Indy opened in 1995? I hope it's effective at keeping attendance up, so that we might see this sort of investment happen again without having to wait another 12 years.
Originally Posted By Daannzzz Wasn't it originally budgeted at 50 million? Then later I read somewhere they were heading toward 60 million. Recently a couple of LP'rs have been discussing it going way over budget so would going from 50 to 70 million be way over budget? I guess 170 would be.
