Which doesn't increase capacity as it will take up an existing area already in use for patrons. SWL is taking over backstage area and the bbq.
Frozen Ever After
- Thread starter Brian G.
- Start date
-
Signing up for a Premium Membership is a donation to help Inside Universal maintain costs and offers an ad-free experience on the forum. Learn more about it here.
Which doesn't increase capacity as it will take up an existing area already in use for patrons. SWL is taking over backstage area and the bbq.
It likely will theoretically increase capacity as a main ride will likely have greater capacity than Car Toon Spin and if there is any more than one major ride, capacity is DEFINITELY increasing.
I honesty don't understand the arguments going on around here. First the argument is there should be new rides every year because it's lazy if you don't. Then it's rides are needed to increase capacity. Then we have those saying eventually business will go down because they aren't doing enough. Now we're talking about two new major land additions to Disneyland on top of the 1.5 billion expansion in the other park.
What's going on around here?
I can't speak for others, i'm speaking for myself and only myself.
I was never involved in that other part of the conversation so I don't really care about that. My point was, Frozen is coming and it likely WILL add capacity. It may not expand the park, but ride capacity? Definitely.
I have no problem with Frozen going there as it actually fits, my big problem is with Star Wars taking up a huge chunk of the park and backstage areas as it's a theme breaker and will likely ruin a lot of the DL charm simply by existing.
I just feel like they felt they needed to fit SWL in somewhere in Cali so they put it wherever they could squeeze it. The problem is, there will come a day when DLR has three parks most likely (which could've been sooner than later) and this land will be an all encompassing (meaning it will cover parts of the entire SW Universe). In an entire new park, there could've been room to spread things out more and maybe create separate SW Areas themed to different Planets.
My point is capacity. You need to keep increasing DCA's capacity to maintain an already healthy park added on with a huge monster land that will attract more tourists than DLR's usual heavy local market. They can do this by adding more rides or screwing over loyal APs like USH is doing with Potter right now.
Disney has more than enough money to pour into DCA's expansion pads especially considering CL had a restaurant cut on that very pad and they also have the theme park rights to MARVEL over there. DCA is just now barely a full-day park. It's miles better, but it could stand to be built out more to accompany the SWL insanity.
(That said, I am pro-SWL in DL, just FYI)
Disney has more than enough money to pour into DCA's expansion pads especially considering CL had a restaurant cut on that very pad and they also have the theme park rights to MARVEL over there. DCA is just now barely a full-day park. It's miles better, but it could stand to be built out more to accompany the SWL insanity.
(That said, I am pro-SWL in DL, just FYI)
I agree, there's no reason for such a stall in new attractions at DCA. Sure DCA underwent a huge re-do, but it still has work to be done and capacity to be added.
Then again, it will be 23 or so years since IJA opened at DL by the time SWL opens and that was the last "new" ride that actually expanded the park if i'm remembering correctly.
And my point is this: you try justifying to your board that on top of a 1.5 billion dollar expansion and a promise to pour in another 1-2 billion in expansion (in order to maintain tax breaks) that they should pour in ANOTHER expansion to increase "capacity." They'd laugh you off the face of the earth. Look at the problems Shanghai is having right now and tell me a board is just going to start signing even more checks on top of what they have scheduled.
We're not talking about overall guest experience with these people. It's dollars and cents. Which is why we have Escape to Effin' Arendelle in the first place.
We're not talking about overall guest experience with these people. It's dollars and cents. Which is why we have Escape to Effin' Arendelle in the first place.
$1.5B is a drop in the bucket to TWDC and since that was spread out over 5 years, it cost them far less than it even looks on the surface. We're talking a singular ride or a miniland here, something like Marvel. That should - AT MOST - cost $500M and it would be a merchandising gold mine with the right products and themed areas.
I know how this company works and they throw cash around like nobody's business. MM+ and Disney Springs ALONE cost around $3B or more combined and people piss all over those. Avatar is costing $500M minimum and DHS is getting Billions thrown it's way.
DCA isn't getting anything because they simply don't see the need - people keep coming. Looks/sounds good in the short term, but it can cause lots of long term damage.
But this is exactly what I said a page ago. They aren't going to pump in a ton of money into a park that has seen a 30% jump in attendance since 2012 and 3% growth yearly.
Although I disagree about the "long term damage." Disneyland is the #3 park in the world and hasn't added an E ticket in over 20 years. How long does long-term damage take to set in?
This is true, BUT - and this is very important - Disneyland was already very built up and packed in heavy by that time. DCA isn't built up nearly to the level in which DL was in '95. DCA will do fine if they get an expansion in there shortly after Star Wars, but if they wait too long, I don't think it is a park that is built to weather a long storm yet.
I think something as simple as adding a day or nighttime parade to DCA could help though. DCA is an oddly shaped park, almost similar to USF in some ways (much larger of course). But a nighttime parade to compliment WoC would do wonders and would take the heat off of Paint The Night.
Disneyland is over 60 freaking years old! And trust me, it has problems (take a look at that Tomorrowland), but easily among the healthiest Disney parks in the franchise in terms of capacity. DCA still isn't.
Star Wars Land is something MAJOR. The fact that they aren't investing to at least throw DCA something in terms of additional capacity is weird. In fact, they were supposed to have a small Marvel land with an E-ticket opened by 2020 solely due to SWL, but it's been delayed becuase Shanghai and stuff. Yet I don't think Parks and Resorts should see funding cut (especially when they're doing so boffo business) because Iger made a couple bad decisions. You still build up the others to make sure you don't run into more problems down the road, period.
Have we not learned this from the 90s post-DLP? Seriously?
Edit: also a nighttime parade can't work at DCA due to WoC without significant changes. That's why they've leaned so heavily on the dance parties (also: booze sales)
2nd edit: also can we stop acting like the DCA expansion just happened? It's currently been three-and-a-half years since it opened and nearly a decade since the money was put forward to implement it. (2007) Seriously.
Star Wars Land is something MAJOR. The fact that they aren't investing to at least throw DCA something in terms of additional capacity is weird. In fact, they were supposed to have a small Marvel land with an E-ticket opened by 2020 solely due to SWL, but it's been delayed becuase Shanghai and stuff. Yet I don't think Parks and Resorts should see funding cut (especially when they're doing so boffo business) because Iger made a couple bad decisions. You still build up the others to make sure you don't run into more problems down the road, period.
Have we not learned this from the 90s post-DLP? Seriously?
Edit: also a nighttime parade can't work at DCA due to WoC without significant changes. That's why they've leaned so heavily on the dance parties (also: booze sales)
2nd edit: also can we stop acting like the DCA expansion just happened? It's currently been three-and-a-half years since it opened and nearly a decade since the money was put forward to implement it. (2007) Seriously.
I really don't get the argument. "We have to add capacity for the land that we're adding to increase capacity (and sales)." Did Universal open a major attraction in IoA to help with Diagon? Nope.
Of course DCA isn't as "healthy" Disneyland. It's Disneyland. But a 30% jump in attendance and sitting ahead of both IoA and USF in terms of visitors (post-Potter) means that the sky is falling? This is what Disney does. They languish and they take forever and they bore us. Because they can. Look at the top ten parks of the world. When's the last time #1 and #3 opened a new attraction? Sure it's the suckers making that happen. I'm a sucker because I pay every year for an AP. There's just more to do there then there is at USH. Even after Potter opens.
One of the main reasons Universal opened Transformers the previous year and redid Springfield was to increase capacity for the anticipated Diagon Alley crowds. That was straight from a Universal exec.
But they did nothing for IOA. In fact they have not done anything since Potter opened in IOA. The first addition will be Kong next year. So there will be 6 years between Potter opening and any other attraction opening in IOA. Just like Disney being a business so is Uni. They didn't NEED to add anything else because they were riding the high of Potter opening. Attendance was up and they could concentrate on their other park where attendance was not going up as fast as it was at IOA. Not to mention Potter was the first addition since the park opened in 99. So from 99 to 2009 there was nothing. Then in 2010 Potter, then again nothing until Kong in 2016.
I do not count Hogwarts express because that is in both parks and more a means of transportation between the two HP parks. I feel for an attraction to be counted towards that park total it has to be available to you if you get a 1 park 1 day pass. Since HE is not available to those people it should not count as a new addition for IOA. You have to have an IOA and Studios pass to ride HE.
When parks invest large amounts of money like with DCA redo they do this to not have to spend money again for a period of time. They want to ride out the high of that large expense before spending more money again.
Last edited:
This. Disneyland-ers like to talk about how they have the superior product (and for the most part, as of now, that's true in the states), but look at where the spending is going. DLR is getting very minimal amounts because they feel people will come no matter what. WDW, which btw is the biggest tourist area in the WORLD, is seeing massive spending. Between Frozen, DAK improvements, ROL, Avatar, Disney Springs and DHS overhaul, there's multiple billions being spent. And these are all ONGOING projects.
Meanwhile, the next project up after Star Wars is likely Arrendale... in Disneyland Park once again. Everything for DCA seems to keep being pushed back.
#1 opened a new ride in 2014. That's pretty recent compared to 1995.
SDMT is a major E ticket? Come on we're just looking for excuses.
Izzy is right. They ride the wave of spend for awhile and reap the rewards.
And the arguments grow ever weirder. DLR is seeing no spend... save for the DCA redo. And SWL. And Arendelle. Except for all that.
I'm not a "Disneyland-er." I love Disneyland, yes. But I'll be dropping $4500 this year on two vacations to UOR. I'd love to see new rides in DLR. But I know how businesses work. You don't drastically try to beef it up all at once when you're already #3 in the world. They overhauled DCA in a huge way. I understand why they want to leave it be, business wise, for awhile.
Everybody's talkin' bout' capacity and DCA, but to be brutally honest something that should be the biggest concern with SWL looming ahead is traffic flow. To be blunt, traffic flow in DL is god friggin' awful. An' unless something is done with that, when SWL opens we're gonna' have a new standard for absolute clusterf**k. Traffic flow has to be improved by any means nessicary in DL, but it feels like a higher up or two just wants the park stuck in the past...a dated past that just wasn't made to handle today's crowds.
Not to mention there are 4 parks in Orlando and 2 in California. So it only makes sense that Orlando see twice as much spending. They would need to to upkeep all their parks. So I am not sure how the excuse of no money being spent in or less money being spent on CA parks holds up at all as an argument.
I have never been to the CA parks, but reading about HP opening up over there it sounds like all the CA parks have traffic flow issues too. I imagine all those parks have less land to work with?
Last edited:
