DEBATE Is DCA Worth $14/Day?
- Thread starter raidermatt
- Start date
Putting an "incomplete" park in Disneyland's parking lot is a completely different proposition than making Animal Kingdom as an incomplete park.
First of all, DCA is only the second park on the site. The main reason for building the second park was to put Disneyland on the map as a destination Resort, with extended stays on site. This was an attempt to emulate the success of WDW.
It was the opening of EPCOT that really catapulted WDW into the "destination" category, with week and longer stays. This was made possible by creating EPCOT as a 1.5 to 2 day park, and even at opening it mostly lived up to this billing. I know many people are somewhat down on EPCOT, but without it the huge build-out of all the resort hotels never would have happened (at least not at nearly the pace we witnessed over the last 15+ years). Compare this to poor DCA, where you can do most everything in 6-7 hours (half a day, regardless of the number of hours the park is actually open), and which requires much less time than that on repeat visits to do the very few things that aren't in the been-there-done-that category. Not what it takes to make DL a destination resort. If AK (or MGM) is incomplete, well that's okay, because WDW was already a destination resort.
DCA also has the additional disadvantages of being in Disneyland's parking lot. It is so close to DL that it invites direct comparisons in ways totally unlike the widely scattered parks at WDW. When at DCA, DL is right there in-your-face. You can't escape the feeling that you should be across the way at DL instead of here at DCA.
And for the most part (until this recent announcement), you can't park hop because this was only available to APers and those with many-day tickets which expire (and as already pointed out, you don't need tickets for that many days at the DL resort). I don't mind if AK is not a full day park, as I am there on a park hopper and just hop to another park when I am done. I would never pay a full admission to AK, but that's okay because I don't have to. I had to pay a full admission to see DCA, but I would never do so again.
And DCA is not adjacent to just any park, it is adjacent to Disneyland, the flagship park which has the most attractions of any Disney park. Being sooo close to DL which has soooo much to do, makes DCA look even more sparse by comparison.
Finally, while it is a smaller matter, DL has a level of tradition that surpasses WDW. It has served an additional generation of guests as compared to WDW, most of whom are locals which make up the bulk of visitors and have a special fondness for the place. It is a slap in the face to these people to put in an inferior, incomplete product and charge full price for it.
First of all, DCA is only the second park on the site. The main reason for building the second park was to put Disneyland on the map as a destination Resort, with extended stays on site. This was an attempt to emulate the success of WDW.
It was the opening of EPCOT that really catapulted WDW into the "destination" category, with week and longer stays. This was made possible by creating EPCOT as a 1.5 to 2 day park, and even at opening it mostly lived up to this billing. I know many people are somewhat down on EPCOT, but without it the huge build-out of all the resort hotels never would have happened (at least not at nearly the pace we witnessed over the last 15+ years). Compare this to poor DCA, where you can do most everything in 6-7 hours (half a day, regardless of the number of hours the park is actually open), and which requires much less time than that on repeat visits to do the very few things that aren't in the been-there-done-that category. Not what it takes to make DL a destination resort. If AK (or MGM) is incomplete, well that's okay, because WDW was already a destination resort.
DCA also has the additional disadvantages of being in Disneyland's parking lot. It is so close to DL that it invites direct comparisons in ways totally unlike the widely scattered parks at WDW. When at DCA, DL is right there in-your-face. You can't escape the feeling that you should be across the way at DL instead of here at DCA.
And for the most part (until this recent announcement), you can't park hop because this was only available to APers and those with many-day tickets which expire (and as already pointed out, you don't need tickets for that many days at the DL resort). I don't mind if AK is not a full day park, as I am there on a park hopper and just hop to another park when I am done. I would never pay a full admission to AK, but that's okay because I don't have to. I had to pay a full admission to see DCA, but I would never do so again.
And DCA is not adjacent to just any park, it is adjacent to Disneyland, the flagship park which has the most attractions of any Disney park. Being sooo close to DL which has soooo much to do, makes DCA look even more sparse by comparison.
Finally, while it is a smaller matter, DL has a level of tradition that surpasses WDW. It has served an additional generation of guests as compared to WDW, most of whom are locals which make up the bulk of visitors and have a special fondness for the place. It is a slap in the face to these people to put in an inferior, incomplete product and charge full price for it.
TheLionKing
<font color=#6600CC>Will Conga for Fun<br><font co
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2000
Remind me, how much is a one day park hopper ticket at WDW?
Is it less than this DLR one day park hopper?
IMHO, a true capitulation would have been to make the park hopper the same price as a Disneyland one day admission.
We don't seem to be there.......... YET!
Is it less than this DLR one day park hopper?
IMHO, a true capitulation would have been to make the park hopper the same price as a Disneyland one day admission.
We don't seem to be there.......... YET!
raidermatt
Be water, my friend.
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2000
Of course, but nonetheless, the problem with DCA is not that it is incomplete. Complaints from guests are not that Paradise Pier is a wonderful, magical place. Its that it's not what was expected from Disney. Same with most of the rest of the park.
In contrast, AK complaints for the most part revolve more around adding more to what is already there. Nobody was clamoring for an entire land to be ripped out because its cheap. DR is an exception, but it is a change from the original park plans and is more equivalent to the attractions that have made-up DCA from day one.
Absolutely true. And its true that a "complete" park built up to guest expectations would be the best case scenario. However, its also understandable that mgmt would want to mitigate risk by not building the entire park only to find out they were off-base. Excellent but incomplete would have done the job, as long as consistent steps were taken to make it complete. Maybe it only would have added 3/4 of a day to the average guests stay initially, but that is far better than its doing now, and within a year or two, it might just acheive the extra 1 or 2 days Disney is seeking.
Problem is, what is there is not considered excellent by guests. So even if the park were bigger, ie complete, it would still have major problems attracting guests.
raidermatt
Be water, my friend.
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2000
I don't think WDW even sells a one-day hopper. I THINK the minimum is 4 days.
DL didn't want to sell a one-day hopper either...
Yes, that would essentially make them one park, and maybe that will happen one day, but its not what Disney wanted. If they did that without raising the DL price, they would essentially be getting no return on their investment. (unless they significantly increased the number of tickets sold, but we already know that DCA does not sell tickets...)
d-r
<font color=red>l|ll|||ll||ll||<font color=purple>
- Joined
- May 31, 2000
I agree with you 100% the epcot moved wdw forward as being a 'destination,' but i just wanted to add a friendly reminder that even before then wdw promoted itself as a multi-day destination, with discovery island, activities at ft. wilderness (and i think river country, but my memory may be clowdy about the timing there), dinner shows at all the resorts (poly luau, top of the world at contemporary and the good ole hoop de do), ski shows on the lake, water sports, etc. they offered lots of three and four night packages when it was just magic kingdom, partnered with other attractions in fl like cypress gardens (the way disneyland still does with some so.cal. attractions), and even partnered with norwegian cruise lines to have a combined wdw stay and cruise (way before the big red boat). Honestly, I believe that the amount of space at wdw helped it to become a distination.
dr
How can anybody justify building a incomplete park intentionally and charge full admission to that park????? For the people who often go to the parks it may not matter, but for people who go every couple of years why should they pay full price today for some type of vague promise the park will be completed in the future. They get ripped off so disney can start immediately to fleece their guests.
raidermatt
Be water, my friend.
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2000
They can build whatever they want and charge whatever they want. In a free society, that's the justification.
Now, as to whether its BEST for Disney to do that, that's another question. Again, I said that if they do it, they have to ensure that what they do open is Disney quality, and they should offer plenty of discount opportunities.
The simple fact is that while its logical that you should charge less for a smaller park, the public will view price increases later much more negatively than they will a reduction in discount opportunities. Again, may not be logical, but its reality.
Just because you can do something doesnt mean it is the right thing to do or a moral thing to do!!!! Just becuase something can be done that is legal doesnt mean it is the right thing to do or a smart business decision.
Douglas Dubh
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 13, 1999
"How can anybody justify building a incomplete park intentionally and charge full admission to that park?????"
How do you define incomplete? For me, DCA is complete, because I can go there one day a year and spend a whole day there and not be bored. Doesn't mean I wouldn't mind seeing them add more stuff, because it's always nicer to have more to choose from, and there's no question that they won't expand it. None of the Disney parks had as much stuff when they opened as they do today, it's the nature of parks to open and grow. I wouldn't want a park to have the same number of attractions 10 years from now as it did today.
I do think Disney should have introduced a two day hopper pass soon after the park opened; they were definitely overconfident.
How do you define incomplete? For me, DCA is complete, because I can go there one day a year and spend a whole day there and not be bored. Doesn't mean I wouldn't mind seeing them add more stuff, because it's always nicer to have more to choose from, and there's no question that they won't expand it. None of the Disney parks had as much stuff when they opened as they do today, it's the nature of parks to open and grow. I wouldn't want a park to have the same number of attractions 10 years from now as it did today.
I do think Disney should have introduced a two day hopper pass soon after the park opened; they were definitely overconfident.
Douglas Dubh
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 13, 1999
"Just reading the above quote, one might think you're talking about Texas!"
Texas certainly has a lot of people, a diverse population, and diverse geography, but it's still not in California's league
"I wouldn't want to see "Texas Adventure" any more than I want to see California Adventure."
Isn't at least one of the Six Flags parks located in Texas themed to Texas?
Texas certainly has a lot of people, a diverse population, and diverse geography, but it's still not in California's league
"I wouldn't want to see "Texas Adventure" any more than I want to see California Adventure."
Isn't at least one of the Six Flags parks located in Texas themed to Texas?
airlarry!
Did you know some ferns date back to Prehistoric t
- Joined
- May 30, 2000
As Lord Baron's proxy, I feel I must respond in quotes: 
I am sure he will enjoy sparring with you when he returns...
You have just disagreed with the Braverman/Eisner philosophy. They would be disappointed in you, Monsieur Douglas. They *know* DCA was built as an incomplete park, they have said so themselves. It is the *new* style of park, let's call it the Eisner Plan, to build parks with as few attractions as can support the ticket. Of course, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but to argue that DCA is complete is to argue with Ei$ner himself. You aren't supposed to spend a whole day there...you were supposed to enjoy a few hours worth of attractions, then eat an expensive dinner at one of the leased restaurants, and then spend more time over at nightclubs in between Disneyland. You are ruining their strategy....
True? Perhaps. Please see the earlier debate ably led by Lord Baron where the differences in the Ei$ner Plan and the Walt Philosophy are explained. I'll use shorthand here...Epcot and Disneyseas are complete, stand-alone parks worth the price of admission at opening day. MGM was arguably not, and AK was unquestionably not, but both were on a resort property that encouraged the purchasing of discount, park-hopping tickets.
DCA was never intended to be a park hopper type of park. It was to be the reason to extend a vacation, a reason to purchase *additional* days or tickets, but somehow the Budgeteers prevailed.
Why can't we celebrate the achievements that Imagineering made with DCA, albeit few, or compliment the hard-working CMs at DCA who are dealing with a frustrated paying audience, without apologizing for the management that designed this place? DCA is a park stamped with the Disney brand. DisneySeas is a Disney park stamped with Disney imagination and magic. And never the twain shall meet....
I am sure he will enjoy sparring with you when he returns...You have just disagreed with the Braverman/Eisner philosophy. They would be disappointed in you, Monsieur Douglas. They *know* DCA was built as an incomplete park, they have said so themselves. It is the *new* style of park, let's call it the Eisner Plan, to build parks with as few attractions as can support the ticket. Of course, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but to argue that DCA is complete is to argue with Ei$ner himself. You aren't supposed to spend a whole day there...you were supposed to enjoy a few hours worth of attractions, then eat an expensive dinner at one of the leased restaurants, and then spend more time over at nightclubs in between Disneyland. You are ruining their strategy....
True? Perhaps. Please see the earlier debate ably led by Lord Baron where the differences in the Ei$ner Plan and the Walt Philosophy are explained. I'll use shorthand here...Epcot and Disneyseas are complete, stand-alone parks worth the price of admission at opening day. MGM was arguably not, and AK was unquestionably not, but both were on a resort property that encouraged the purchasing of discount, park-hopping tickets.
DCA was never intended to be a park hopper type of park. It was to be the reason to extend a vacation, a reason to purchase *additional* days or tickets, but somehow the Budgeteers prevailed.
Why can't we celebrate the achievements that Imagineering made with DCA, albeit few, or compliment the hard-working CMs at DCA who are dealing with a frustrated paying audience, without apologizing for the management that designed this place? DCA is a park stamped with the Disney brand. DisneySeas is a Disney park stamped with Disney imagination and magic. And never the twain shall meet....
raidermatt
Be water, my friend.
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2000
Ah, but its NOT supporting the ticket.... It seems they HOPED they had built enough to do what you describe, but they haven't even accomplished that. They did expect us to spend a full day there, they were just wrong.
Yes, their strategy is different than prior years, but what makes it worse is that they didn't even succeed in meeting their own goals.
Moral? C'mon now. Businesses miss their target markets all the time. Its not good, but its not immoral. They truly thought they had built a park that would meet the expectations of their customers. They were wrong, and that's a problem. And yes, its bad business, which I've already said. But its not immoral. They do not have a moral obligation to build every park with as many attractions as DL anymore than any other company does.
That's fine. I'm sure there are more like you. Personally, I don't hate DCA, and we did have fun there when we went. I'm sure I'm in the upper half of opinions given by guests. However, the need to discount and lackluster attendance means that regardless of what you or I think personally, Disney blew it with this park. They are not even coming close to meeting the expectations of most of their customers, and that is a problem.
HauntedMansionFan
Yes, I am crazy.
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2002
A Six Flags park "themed"? Surely, you jest. But back on topic. I personally can't pass judgement on DCA because I haven't been there yet. But I have heard both sides from friends and family members that have been. So I'm just leaving my decision up in the air until I go through the DCA gates.
Figmentrocks
Earning My Ears
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2002
I wanted to make a few points, but first of all mention that this is one of the best threads going in some time. You all make some absolutely excellent points.
With Animal Kingdom, the attention to detail in the buildings, signs, etc. is absolutely superb, of the quality that we've always expected from Disney. What was striking the first time my wife and I visited AK was the fact that there was simply not too much to do. I think that Dinosaur is a big-time disappointment. It's cool that it's the killer technology from Indy at Disneyland, but it lacks a lot.... mostly anything to look at, except for the creepy, loud carnatorus.
Disney built AK without enough to honestly do for a full day, although one could spend a full day walking and seeing the stage shows, but that's not what one pays about fifty bucks to see for the most part. They used the same angle as with DCA, "it's a different type of park". Well, that all reminds me of slim like lawyer talk. The fact of the matter is that they didn't build these parks with satisfying expectations.
AK suffers from a lack of attractions and a wealth of stage shows. AK has a beautiful look and nice atmosphere.
DCA suffers from a lack of quality, quality attractions, lack of lack of lacking.
Someone made the greatest point earlier, 45 Years after what would be considered the world's most wonderful theme park with all the ideas in the world (also in the midst of a massive economic boom), Disney builds DCA next door. How do you fix a park that is mainly constructed of sound stages and metal looking off the shelf rides... Close it and start again? Well, from an economic standpoint, that's not feasible. Maybe they can work on changing the theme. Work on section by section of the park slowly transforming it... Maybe one day it will simply be known as Disney's Adventure Theme Park... Hmm..
With Animal Kingdom, the attention to detail in the buildings, signs, etc. is absolutely superb, of the quality that we've always expected from Disney. What was striking the first time my wife and I visited AK was the fact that there was simply not too much to do. I think that Dinosaur is a big-time disappointment. It's cool that it's the killer technology from Indy at Disneyland, but it lacks a lot.... mostly anything to look at, except for the creepy, loud carnatorus.
Disney built AK without enough to honestly do for a full day, although one could spend a full day walking and seeing the stage shows, but that's not what one pays about fifty bucks to see for the most part. They used the same angle as with DCA, "it's a different type of park". Well, that all reminds me of slim like lawyer talk. The fact of the matter is that they didn't build these parks with satisfying expectations.
AK suffers from a lack of attractions and a wealth of stage shows. AK has a beautiful look and nice atmosphere.
DCA suffers from a lack of quality, quality attractions, lack of lack of lacking.
Someone made the greatest point earlier, 45 Years after what would be considered the world's most wonderful theme park with all the ideas in the world (also in the midst of a massive economic boom), Disney builds DCA next door. How do you fix a park that is mainly constructed of sound stages and metal looking off the shelf rides... Close it and start again?
Well, from an economic standpoint, that's not feasible. Maybe they can work on changing the theme. Work on section by section of the park slowly transforming it... Maybe one day it will simply be known as Disney's Adventure Theme Park... Hmm..
Mouse Ears
Always a Mouseketeer
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2000
This has been an interesting thread.
Concerning Six Flags parks in Texas: Six Flags over Texas began as a park themed to the six different flags that flew over Texas (USA, Republic of Texas, Spain, Mexico, France, and the Confederacy - I think that's right). The theme has long since been abandoned. Six Flags Fiesta Texas in San Antonio was opened by Operyland and had great theming and shows in the beginning. Now that Six Flags has taken over, I'm sure the theming will be neglected.
I have heard many times about the limited scope of things at Animal Kingdom and there is some truth there, but it is large scale park with some of the best theming and atmosphere that Disney has ever done, IMHO. If they continue to fill in with some attractions, the potential for greatness is definitely there.
I have not been to DCA yet, and don't have any intention of planning a trip there. It just doesn't look that interesting and the reviews are consistently mediocre.
With that said, I think that the logic evaluating DCA's value at $14 could just as easily be used to say that Disneyland is worth $14. After all, that is the difference between an admission to DCA and an admission to DCA plus DL. Anyway, I think that $14 sounds like a pretty pricey upgrade to a single day ticket. After all, buying a hopper doesn't give you any more hours in the day. The bigger issue with this decision is that it seems to work against the goal of creating a longer stay at the resort and build hotel/food revenues.
Concerning Six Flags parks in Texas: Six Flags over Texas began as a park themed to the six different flags that flew over Texas (USA, Republic of Texas, Spain, Mexico, France, and the Confederacy - I think that's right). The theme has long since been abandoned. Six Flags Fiesta Texas in San Antonio was opened by Operyland and had great theming and shows in the beginning. Now that Six Flags has taken over, I'm sure the theming will be neglected.
I have heard many times about the limited scope of things at Animal Kingdom and there is some truth there, but it is large scale park with some of the best theming and atmosphere that Disney has ever done, IMHO. If they continue to fill in with some attractions, the potential for greatness is definitely there.
I have not been to DCA yet, and don't have any intention of planning a trip there. It just doesn't look that interesting and the reviews are consistently mediocre.
With that said, I think that the logic evaluating DCA's value at $14 could just as easily be used to say that Disneyland is worth $14. After all, that is the difference between an admission to DCA and an admission to DCA plus DL. Anyway, I think that $14 sounds like a pretty pricey upgrade to a single day ticket. After all, buying a hopper doesn't give you any more hours in the day. The bigger issue with this decision is that it seems to work against the goal of creating a longer stay at the resort and build hotel/food revenues.
Grog
Semper Gumby
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2000
Yes it is. Six Flags Fiesta Texas in San Antonio. It was built before Six Flags aquired it, hence the fact that it actually has a theme. Also, it was themed to Texas, because San Antonio is the number one city in Texas as a tourist destination for people outside the state. I'm not sure about now, but it was built with the out of state visitor in mind.
Sorry for going OT
Another Voice
Charter Member of The Element
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2000
There seems to be a few viral strains that just dont ever seem to die no matter what. I guess there are too many corporate spinners/true believers that hold on to them no matter what
First, all Disney parks were built complete. This theyve always built them small than expanded is a rather deliberate corporate lie put out to cover the problems with Animal Kingdom and California Adventure. All of the pre-Eisner parks were built and designed to be at least full day attractions from the outset. Even the Disney/MGM Studios was built complete to what Disney expected the attendance to be (they misjudged both the popularity of a studio tour and the impact of park hopping). The plans for the park did not make any allowance for expansion at all and the parks confines remain a problem though today.
California Adventure was also built complete from Day One. There were no expansion plans for the first five years of the parks operation. None they figured the value of the Disney Brand would be some alluring to the locals that they project half a decade of profits before they had to hire the first bulldozer.
But the budget cut backs hit so hard and so early that many people at Disneyland & WDI got nervous and cooked up schemes to save the coming problems. Almost everyone in the company understood that DCA was a sub-quality park when construction began; the argument was over what to do about it. Plans included a retheming to America, a make-over into a movie studio and others. The one that was pushed as the cheapest and most management-ego friendly was to clone the Armageddon and Rock-n-Rollercoaster attractions from Disney Studios Paris (cheaper to build to at the same time) and slap them into DCA as quickly as possible.
And at the grand opening of DCA you could see all the Disney people running through the crowd telling people about the plan. It was an effort both to counteract the immense disappointment in the park and to bolster the plans through Disneys tight-fisted management.
Unfortunately the attendance at the park is dramatically below even the worst case scenarios drafted by Disneys most harsh critics. Within a month of the first guest there was no money for any kind of expansion. Things continued to get worse and worse and worse. Disney did what it does best these days and hacked the operations of the park. While that slowed the losses for a while, the situation continues to deteriorate.
By last fall they had no choice but to do something and a comprise plan was put together. The budget version Tower of Terror clone was approved for construction at the same time as the one for Paris and WDI was allowed to purchase additional carnival rides (yes, they really are purchased from a carnival supply company) and theme them for Fliks.
In the meantime, DCA continues to worsen. The one-day park hopper (according to rumor) was pushed through by Disneylands management only because Pressler is too busy packing up his office. The ticket truly is a last gasp, stop gap measure for the summer. Most rumors seem to agree that Burbank is frantically trying to distances themselves from DCA and that Disneyland is being given more leeway to run the place. That also means that WDI will have a much stronger role in the park than theyve previously had (although very few true-WDI people are left).
The future of DCA will be decided sometime in the Fall after the impact of Fliks Fun Fair can be judged (most people expect none at all).
Oh and the second strain, that those stupid, foolish, spendthrift, money throwing Japanese line just another corporate lie to cover all those egos again. Theres no basis in fact for that excuse about the success of DisneySea and the failure of California Adventure.
First, all Disney parks were built complete. This theyve always built them small than expanded is a rather deliberate corporate lie put out to cover the problems with Animal Kingdom and California Adventure. All of the pre-Eisner parks were built and designed to be at least full day attractions from the outset. Even the Disney/MGM Studios was built complete to what Disney expected the attendance to be (they misjudged both the popularity of a studio tour and the impact of park hopping). The plans for the park did not make any allowance for expansion at all and the parks confines remain a problem though today.
California Adventure was also built complete from Day One. There were no expansion plans for the first five years of the parks operation. None they figured the value of the Disney Brand would be some alluring to the locals that they project half a decade of profits before they had to hire the first bulldozer.
But the budget cut backs hit so hard and so early that many people at Disneyland & WDI got nervous and cooked up schemes to save the coming problems. Almost everyone in the company understood that DCA was a sub-quality park when construction began; the argument was over what to do about it. Plans included a retheming to America, a make-over into a movie studio and others. The one that was pushed as the cheapest and most management-ego friendly was to clone the Armageddon and Rock-n-Rollercoaster attractions from Disney Studios Paris (cheaper to build to at the same time) and slap them into DCA as quickly as possible.
And at the grand opening of DCA you could see all the Disney people running through the crowd telling people about the plan. It was an effort both to counteract the immense disappointment in the park and to bolster the plans through Disneys tight-fisted management.
Unfortunately the attendance at the park is dramatically below even the worst case scenarios drafted by Disneys most harsh critics. Within a month of the first guest there was no money for any kind of expansion. Things continued to get worse and worse and worse. Disney did what it does best these days and hacked the operations of the park. While that slowed the losses for a while, the situation continues to deteriorate.
By last fall they had no choice but to do something and a comprise plan was put together. The budget version Tower of Terror clone was approved for construction at the same time as the one for Paris and WDI was allowed to purchase additional carnival rides (yes, they really are purchased from a carnival supply company) and theme them for Fliks.
In the meantime, DCA continues to worsen. The one-day park hopper (according to rumor) was pushed through by Disneylands management only because Pressler is too busy packing up his office. The ticket truly is a last gasp, stop gap measure for the summer. Most rumors seem to agree that Burbank is frantically trying to distances themselves from DCA and that Disneyland is being given more leeway to run the place. That also means that WDI will have a much stronger role in the park than theyve previously had (although very few true-WDI people are left).
The future of DCA will be decided sometime in the Fall after the impact of Fliks Fun Fair can be judged (most people expect none at all).
Oh and the second strain, that those stupid, foolish, spendthrift, money throwing Japanese line just another corporate lie to cover all those egos again. Theres no basis in fact for that excuse about the success of DisneySea and the failure of California Adventure.
raidermatt
Be water, my friend.
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2000
The only problem with reversing the logic is that DL will draw 40k on a given day, while DCA will draw 13k on that same day, even with discounts given to locals. Clearly the public values DL at $45. Disney has not yet figured out at what price the public values DCA. Discounted adult tickets and free kids wasn't low enough.
This is what I was clumsily trying to say previously. There's a difference between "incomplete" and just bad.
Thanks for the insight, AV.
Letting DL/WDI have more control over DCA seems to me to be a step in the right direction.
Douglas Dubh
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 13, 1999
I've read a lot about DCA, during construction and since opening, and I don't believe I've ever seen a Disney management say they built it incomplete.
I don't see the difference between "a park hopper type of park" and "a reason to purchase additional days or tickets". It has certainly led me to extend my stay on resort, staying at the Disneyland Hotel and eating at restaraunts in Downtown Disney.
A lot of people do spend a whole day there, just not enough. I've already agreed that they overestimated the draw of the park, and they were slow to admit it. I think they should have offered shorter length park hopper passes much earlier than they did, and I don't think to this day they've offered a two day hopper to the general audience. But DCA at opening day is at least as good as the Florida Studios was at opening day. The economy will improve, DCA will improve, and attendence will improve. It does not need a new theme.
Although DCA does not have as nice of theming as AK, it has a lot more attractions.
Don't go for DCA. Go for Disneyland, the original and best Disney theme park. And while you're visiting, spend a little time at DCA; you might be pleasantly surprised.
Once again, if you're going to compare DisneySea to DCA, factor in Universal Osaka. It didn't cost nearly as much as DisneySea, but it's packing them in. The Japanese market is clearly different than the American.
Share this page
GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE
Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.
Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!
Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.
Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!
