Guardians of the Galaxy: Cosmic Rewind - General Discussion

[JungleSkip]

Gringotts isn't a coaster. It's a dark ride with a coaster portion at the front and back.

Guardians will be a COASTER. It may have a scene or two, but it just is not comparable to Gringotts.

 

[Viator]

I don't understand how anybody can't see the similarities to this and Gringotts:

It's a coaster with spinning trains that will probably encompass some kind of show scenes at some point.

Are they using a Jr Boomerang track as the test track for this?

Seems like it IMO.

 

[belloq87]

Would an improved RNRC be a better comparison?

Depends on your definition of "improved," I guess!

Full disclosure: I've never been terribly impressed with RNRC. So for me, Guardians had better damn well be a notch above it (in theme and execution, not intensity) to justify the egregiously inappropriate placement in Epcot.

 

[brianlo]

For the record the spin is controlled. But it still will have more in common with Rockin Roller Coaster than Gringotts.

 

[Joel]

Gringotts isn't a coaster. It's a dark ride with a coaster portion at the front and back.

Guardians will be a COASTER. It may have a scene or two, but it just is not comparable to Gringotts.

Would you say it's comparable to what people initially thought Gringotts was going to be? :shrug:

 

[Nick]

I know this isn't going to be something that opens until Spring 2021-ish, but unless they go the route of building the track after enclosing the building (which is within the realm of possibility), we should see coaster supports go up sometime this year I would think.

 

[belloq87]

Is this going to be the longest construction period for a single attraction in Disney's history?

 

[Parkscope Joe]

Is this going to be the longest construction period for a single attraction in Disney's history?

While it had extremely unusual circumstances around its creation, Haunted Mansion still takes the cake at 9 years.

 

[belloq87]

While it had extremely unusual circumstances around its creation, Haunted Mansion still takes the cake at 9 years.

Good point, though as you say, an unusual case. Once they picked a final direction for the ride, I believe it was about 2 years until it was open.

 

[rioriz]

Tron would probably be a better comparison for the coaster part of this attraction....screenz!

 

[OLSinFLA]

Good point, though as you say, an unusual case. Once they picked a final direction for the ride, I believe it was about 2 years until it was open.

What about DL's Pirates, which started c construction in 1963, got torn out in 1965 and finally opened in 1967. (I think thats the only time an attraction started construction twice!)

 

[belloq87]

What about DL's Pirates, which started c construction in 1963, got torn out in 1965 and finally opened in 1967. (I think thats the only time an attraction started construction twice!)

Another long construction period, but also another case where there were extenuating circumstances and indecision in terms of what the final attraction was actually going to be.

There are no (as of yet) extenuating circumstances with Guardians. Disney actually wants it to take 3.5 years to open, which is the bizarre part to me.

 

[Scott W.]

Another long construction period, but also another case where there were extenuating circumstances and indecision in terms of what the final attraction was actually going to be.

There are no (as of yet) extenuating circumstances with Guardians. Disney actually wants it to take 3.5 years to open, which is the bizarre part to me.

You'd expect it to open around the same time as Guardians 3 for that sweet synergy.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

Another long construction period, but also another case where there were extenuating circumstances and indecision in terms of what the final attraction was actually going to be.

There are no (as of yet) extenuating circumstances with Guardians. Disney actually wants it to take 3.5 years to open, which is the bizarre part to me.

I wonder how much of it was due to UoE being in such poor shape in order to let it run another year or two would require way too much money.

 

[twebber55]

probably want to take that long to open because of other things opening
TSL 2018
SWGE 2019
Ratatouille 2020?

 

[belloq87]

I wonder how much of it was due to UoE being in such poor shape in order to let it run another year or two would require way too much money.

Possibly.

probably want to take that long to open because of other things opening
TSL 2018
SWGE 2019
Ratatouille 2020?

It's fine to target a specific year/date to open for strategic reasons, but if I'm in charge, I would ask the team a very specific question: "Working efficiently, how long would it take to get this attraction open?"

If the answer is 2 years, say, and you want it open in 2021, then start the project in 2019 and leave the attraction it’s replacing open longer, so there’s a smaller window of time where the park is down an attraction. Now, maybe leaving UOE open for another 18 months wasn't feasible for practical reasons, but all other things being equal, I don't think they should stretch out construction timetables to meet an artificially-created end date; they should start construction later.

 

[UniversalRBLX]

I don’t understand Disney’s method of stretching timelines. You want things to open fast so you can start making profit faster right?

 

[Alicia]

I don’t understand Disney’s method of stretching timelines. You want things to open fast so you can start making profit faster right?

Spread the cost out, that way spending in each quarter is less.

 

[UniversalRBLX]

Spread the cost out, that way spending in each quarter is less.

Disney and Wall Street. That needs to be an attraction.

 

[Mad Dog]

Spread the cost out, that way spending in each quarter is less.

Yes, their MO is spread the costs out over X number of years to take full advantage of accounting, tax & legal rules, and make the short term bottom line look better. ....The only question I have on that though, is whether the new business tax law would still treat that as an advantageous strategy.