Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom <improved the bathrooms so that there was just one stall in the mensroom,> That was suppose to read, improve the bathrooms so that there was more than just one stall in the mensroom.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<TSI would be more popular if they had a functioning sitdown restaurant, improved the bathrooms so that there was just one stall in the mensroom>> Aut Polly's needs to reopen. it wasn't sit down, but it was great! As for the men's room, I don't think changing it is going to add much popularity to the area. With that being said...it doesn't need to be popular. Not every ride/attraction needs a 2 hour wait. It's nice to have an area to get away from the crowds.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<Did someone suggest eliminating the Jungle Cruise? I'm hurt.>> I think it was a "Why not do ______ while they're at it?" type of thing. not that the person wants it gone.
Originally Posted By HMButler79 Didn't Iger already say the Parks and resorts checkbook/wallet was going under lock and key after CarsLand and Fantasyland?? And I SURE don't see Meg or Phil asking Burbank for even more money for MK.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper ^^From what I understand, he meant expenditures wouldn't be increasing anymore, not that they would be stopping altogether.
Originally Posted By tonyanton Don't forget that the park maps (formerly "guidebooks") have been further widdled-down over the years. We may all know about TSI but the average tourist may have no clue and the last time I checked the descriptions in the maps were minimal and laughable. I just want to add my voice to those noting all of the closed facilities in the MK...not to mention redundant merchandise in the shops that do exist. Does anyone think that "Bon Jour Gifts" or the merchandise tent in the new circus area will offer anything different? With regards to restaurants, the dining plan seems to increase the need for more places to eat...no reason why the shuttered or barely open facilities (Adventureland Veranda, Tortuga Tavern, TL Terrace, Diamond Horseshoe) couldn't be open in addition to the new Fantasyland food spots. It's unfortunately just a matter of not just revenue but gross profit...10 extra ODVs cost less than having the four spaces above open permanently, however the clutter and intangible loss of full operating facilities cannot be measured (which is all an MBA consultant cares about).
Originally Posted By tonyanton I realize I sound cynical, and I still enjoy the MK as I have grown up going there from the 1970s, but I have to concur that management is either clueless or just does not care, neither of which is acceptable for the supposed #1 Disney park in the world!
Originally Posted By wahooskipper It is number one in attendance. I think we sometimes confuse that with quality.
Originally Posted By Mickeymouseclub This is "Dis"tressing. I realize it is not the WDW Company responsibility to offer but I am thankful these choices still exist. Where in the world is a child going to have the opportunity to experience a steam train or a riverboat cruise or the chance to explore an island or row a canoe or even walk down Main Street to admire a window themed piece of Art or even see a Clydesdale horse? If the true measure of keeping an attraction is equated to the "marketing sales profits" I fear most of this will be in danger of "Dis"appearing. Maybe if we promise to call it Igerland or Lassiterland they will keep the DISNEY aspect alive.
Originally Posted By Mickeymouseclub I think I will start that book now DISNEY: Discuss, Discover but Disappear? NEVER!
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom <<With regards to restaurants, the dining plan seems to increase the need for more places to eat.>> As a WDW fan it would be seem logical and correct to believe that with the inception of the Disney Dining Plan there would be an obvious need for more sitdown restaurants. <<...no reason why the shuttered or barely open facilities (Adventureland Veranda, Tortuga Tavern, TL Terrace, Diamond Horseshoe) couldn't be open in addition to the new Fantasyland food spots.>> Agreed <<It's unfortunately just a matter of not just revenue but gross profit...10 extra ODVs cost less than having the four spaces above open permanently, however the clutter and intangible loss of full operating facilities cannot be measured (which is all an MBA consultant cares about).>> There is where I have to disagree. Althought rides and attractions are the draw, WDW makes a substantial amount of money off of food and fluff. So restaurants and shops are where the profit is. As a Disney fan one would think that having additional restaurants open would bring in additional revenue. As least logic would dictate that. As things are right now in the MK, it is virtually impossible to get a sit down table at any restaurant without having to make resevations six months in advance. The sit down restaurants in the MK turn away guests in droves on a daily basis. This ultimately amounts a daily loss of potential revenue to the Disney Company. It is blantly obvious there is a demand for more sitdown restaurants in the MK. A concept WDW management is incapable of grasping. The last time I visited the MK, a castmember had placed a hand written sign on an 8 X 11 sheet of white paper, on the front of Liberty Tree Tavern informing everyone that the Liberty Tree Tavern was fully booked and was not accepting walk-ins. Talk about bad show! So what is happening with all this hungry MK visitors? You got to eat. If those people are either not eating, or eating somewhere else then that is money in someone else's pocket and not the Disney Companys. Seems to me to be a no brainer that WDW would have more available sitdown restaurants. Another example of when WDW crackerjack management team takes a completely different course of action. Apparently is the WDW altered universe, less sitdown restaurants mean more gross profits, and hungry guests are happy guests, and everyone sings the praises of Disney to the castmembers turning everyone away at the sitdown restaurant doors. NOT! <<10 extra ODVs cost less than having the four spaces above open permanently, however the clutter and intangible loss of full operating facilities cannot be measured (which is all an MBA consultant cares about).>> Whatever, see above.
Originally Posted By Fort I wish Tom Sawyer Island was where River Country used to be. The Fort would fit right in.
Originally Posted By Scutr Hmmm.....well there's an idea. They could turn the old "Discovery Island" into an expanded TSI thereby freeing up that space in FrL for something else.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 "I find it oddly ironic that for a company who's founder ultimately purchased a property the size of manhattan so they would never run out of land. The prevailing theme of expansion in any of it's parks is to remove a ride or feature in order to add something new." I also find it ironic. The "blessing of size" apparently doesn't matter. How Disneyland can add attractions the way it does, and the MK removes and replaces them, it's just weird. WHY rip out RoA? I mean, there's plenty of room outside the berm, or unused buildings. Besides, if all of this is for a family raft ride, that's just such a waste. Kali River Rapids isn't enough at AK? Disney is going to have multiple versions of the same attractions between the 4 parks? I would rather something completely new and different...
Originally Posted By CDF2 Surprising that some legal eagle at WDW or DLR hasn't been able to convince management that there is some kind of risk involved in letting kids run around a playground area built on an island in the park that should be closed lest somebody get hurt and have some ambulance-chasing lawyer try to get a big settlement. Walt's original idea was a themed place in the park for little kids (ideally with parents in tow) to have someplace to exert themselves - but as we have seen time and time again there is now always the spectre of legal action against any deep pockets organization should such action be warranted or not. So ultimately, one expects that Tom Sawyer Island will fall victim to this situation in favor of either nothing at all or some other attraction where freedom of choice is not permitted for guests seated with a restraint or lap bar.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<Surprising that some legal eagle at WDW or DLR hasn't been able to convince management that there is some kind of risk involved...>> See post #6. FWIW, that's the main justification I've heard regarding this rumor. You're correct about this becoming inevitable. Disney Legal will at some point no longer tolerate the liability factor of areas like TSI, and demand something less litigious in their place. Plus, it is a significant chunk of land that could be repurposed into another 'people eater' which MK desperately needs. The FL Expansion is a good start, but it's not nearly enough.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom <<repurposed into another 'people eater' which MK desperately needs.>> Surely you jet! As apposed to the other less championed WDW parks that don't desperately need a people eaters? <<The FL Expansion is a good start, but it's not nearly enough.>> And it pales in comparison to what is needed elsewhere in the other less championed WDW parks. It's always Marcia, Marcia, Marcia!
