Orlando Sentinel Story: Disney turns on '100 years' blitz

[DVC-Landbaron]

Here’s a little tidbit Re: Hundred years of magic/9-11/Tourism in general/ and other such meaty topics for discussion.

Orlando Sentinel Story

Enjoy!

 

[Testtrack321]

I still can't beleave that the Millennium Celebration wasn't as sucessful as this puny 100 Years...
It boggles the imagination and all physics of distorting numbers to make stock holders rejoice.

 

[Bob O]

I like it that the "regulars" arent impressed with another promotion and also the comments about the lack of major new rides and Warrens telling comment" I dont know where we would be if we didnt have 100 years". Apparently they want to run promotions on made up campaigns than new attractions, but its cheaper that way apparently.

 

[All Aboard]

321, it depends on how you measure "success". More total visitors may have come during the Millennium Celebration, but WDW is judging the responses to surveys that say "if not for 100 years, we would not have made this trip." There's a spin to everything. By saying that this is our "most successful celebration ever" folks who read that will say "we have to check this out, honey let's go to WDW."

 

[Testtrack321]

Good point gcurling....
My idea of "sucess" is when your guests leave happy, and wanting to come back to see it again before it dissappears, and the ploy to suck as much money out of them as possible while their happy (ToN pins, for example, or the Leave a Leg(acy))

 

[larworth]

It will be interesting to see what they do in 2003/2004.

You would think they might want to give these celebrations a little rest so people don't become immune to them. They will actually have a portfolio of new things to trumpet in 2003 for someone that hasn't been in a couple years: Space, Philarmagic, JIYI rehab, Dino-rama(cough), maybe a HM make-over for the Holidays.

Should they go ahead and extend 100 years through early 2003 and than give it a rest for awhile. Or will they be tempted to go to the well again, especially with Mickey's 75th hanging there?

 

[raidermatt]

Since they are pushing 100 years into March 2003, it doesn't sound like there will be any big celebration at WDW in 2003. If there were, 100 years would be eating into it. As long as the celebrations are working, i.e. bringing guests in, we'll still see them, probably with a year in between. The Millineum Celebration ended 1/1/01, with 100 years scheduled for October.

This is just a guess, but I think Disney will probably try to alternate celebrations/events between WDW and DLResort.
2000 - Millineum Celebration at WDW
2001 - Opening of DCA/DD at DLResort.
2002 - 100 years at WDW.
2003 - Mickey's 75th at DLResort (Just a guess on my part, but I can't believe Disney would ignore this event, and frankly I would be disappointed if they did)
2004 - Something at WDW?
2005 - DL's 50th anniversary at DLResort.

Again, I have no inside info on this, its just my thoughts on what I think would work best.

 

[Bob O]

I think they WILL ALWAYS have some type of promo either going on or just about to start. Its a good way for them to get PR without having to always spend their own money.

 

[raidermatt]

Another interesting piece was the targeting of "tweeners", kids 9-14 (or something like that). We all know that's an issue, but I don't think changing the toys in Happy Meals is really going to make a difference.

I'm not saying Disney SHOULD do this, but if they want to target this group, they will need more "thrill" oriented rides. Things that are "cool", inside the parks. I think there are drawbacks to this strategy, namely that it works against keeping the rest of the families together.

I guess changing the toys is an inexpensive thing to do, so if it gets a few more tweeners in the parks, great. If it doesn't, nothing was lost (as long as the wee ones still like the toys).

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Let me direct your attention to the following passage:

Although Disney World's economizing has been credited with boosting the bottom line of its parent, it has contributed to a temporary dearth of major new rides.

Disney World's most recent new ones, Magic Carpets of Aladdin and TriceraTop Spin, are of the off-the-shelf variety that can be found at carnivals or amusement parks rather than unique trendsetters such as the $92 million Splash Mountain that has become a Magic Kingdom landmark.

"I don't know where we would be if we didn't have 100 Years," Warren said.

Does that mean that the parks, in their current condition just won't pack 'em in anymore? You know, now that I think about it, I kind of agree with her!! How sad!

And wouldn’t it be nice if they aspired to that “Magic Kingdom landmark” status once again!

 

[antnee]

but doesnt Mickey Mouse have a birthday coming up next year (75th) whic wuld be cause for another celebration????

 

[raidermatt]

Baron- I don't think the passage, in and of itself, is indicitive of future developments. It merely points out the obvious current situation. Space must certainly be considered a major attraction. Whether it will please everyone can't be determined yet, but it certainly has the potential to be in the same league as Splash.

Disney has been using the economy as a reason/excuse for a lot of things recently, and I think MOST of it is justified. Their actions as we come out of the recession will have a lot to do with my overall opinion of their direction.

 

[Bob O]

I think the passage quoted by dvc is telling. Disney is trying to get by on smoke/mirros/reputation/past good will without investing their own money into the park for any major type attraction!! They are content to put in cheap carny rides with a little theme or have other companies pay for attractions(space) and then siphon off money from the parks to pay for other misguided ventures. The 9-14yr olds crowd wont be thrilled by just putting in a few parades and cheap rides IMHO. And i would also bet a large portion of them are watching nick/cartoon channel more than the disney channel and to get their business as they grow older they will need to be wowed and disney isnt willing to do that now.

 

[raidermatt]

I'm not all that concerned with who pays for the attraction. If Disney can find a sponser, great. Wouldn't they be foolish to foot the bill for something they didn't have to? I don't want sponsers' signs popping up on the face of the castles at DL or MK, but if a sponser is willing to pay for a new attraction like Space at Epcot, I say go for it.

By most accounts, Test Track is a hit. Does it really matter who paid for it?

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

raidermatt I agree. I don't care who pays for it. But…

I'm not all that concerned with who pays for the attraction. If Disney can find a sponsor, great.

And therein lies the problem. It doesn't seem as though the sponsors are breaking down the door. So if a concept or an existing pavilion goes begging, what should Disney do? Let it go to seed? Never add anything?

 

[Another Voice]

Since when did yet another movie suddenly become an “E-Ticket” attraction?

Are we so desperate for something new that our standards have sunk this low?

 

[Bob O]

I would agree with AV some apparently are letting their standards slip. I would never consider Its tought to be a bug/honey i shrunk the audience to be e tickets. Isnt that title held for only your best attractions like TOT or POC etc. Or are we going to water down what a e-ticket attraction is??? Ive seen both numerous times and have had more than enough of honey i shrunk the audience but i cant say the same about TOT/POC. As for 3d shows both IMHO pale in comparsion to T23D!!!!!

 

[Peter Pirate]

ITTBAB certainly IS one of the BEST attractions at WDW. Just because it doesn't spin, loop or make you puke doesn't eliminate the amazing aspects of the SHOW.
(mia)

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

But is it an "E" ticket? A true "E" ticket attraction?

 

[Peter Pirate]

Refresh my memory, before they did away with the tickets, which rides at WDW were E-tickets?
(mia)