DCA, Future Expansion
Topic: Why is Disney's California Adventure a failure?

#	Author	Message
1	Darkbeer Mon 10/18/2004 4:01p	Why is Disney's California Adventure a failure? We can talk about the original attractions, the attractions that were added or removed..... But really, if you talk to Disney Managment, why do they feel that it is a failure, and not just for DCA, but also for Disneyland Park..... And the answer is tickets sold, but not the number of tickets sold...... Let's go back to December 2000, when DCA was still under construction, and Disneyland tickets cost $43 (adults)... they were $41 in early 2000, but were raised in November... Also in November 2000, they started to sell the new 2-park Annual Passes, mainly to those who already had a Disneyland Annual Pass, allowing the upgrading.... a Premium 2 park AP was $100 more than a Disneyland Park only AP... But in January 2001 they stopped selling Annual Passes to anyone, due to the expected crowds that would should up at DCA's door. The ONLY people who could parkhop were guests staying at one of the 3 owned Disney hotels. Almost everybody was expected to buy a Full Price ticket, or a slightly discounted multi-day ticket, but you would have to decide prior to use which park you would visit that day... The Execs talking about how they would have to send the DCA overflow over to Disneyland. Go back and find the January 14th, 2001 Los Angeles Times article titled "The Most Jam-Packed Theme Park on Earth?; Attracting visitors won't be a problem for Disney's soon-to-open California Adventure. But coping with the expected hordes may be another matter" written by E. Scott Reckard. The article states that senior Disney officials that there will be days that DCA will have to turn patrons away. George Kalogridis, then senior vice president of Disney operations in Anaheim is quoted in the article as saying ""Come early in the day or come later, after the park clears out again, hopefully, with Disneyland right across the esplanade and Downtown Disney right there, we won't have to turn people away from the resort." This is also the news article that talked about company projections showing that DCA would get about 7 million visitors a year. Barry Braverman stated that "Disney Imagineers worked backward from the projected attendance level of 7 million a year" DCA was supposed to draw full price admission, and get up to 30,000, if not a bit more than that daily in the summer and weekends.... While not the capacity of Disneyland, it was still supposed to bring in a lot of admission dollars.... What happened, first they started to sell ParkHoppers to the Good Neighbor Hotels, then to anyone, brought back the AP's.... offered a MAJOR discount just 4 months after opening (One Adult and One Kid for just $33, instead of the $76 they wanted when the park opened, that was less than 1/2 the price...) Then in the fall, they dropped the price of the 2 park AP's to the DL only price, and eliminated the DL only AP, basically giving DCA for free to AP holders..... Yesterday, a 2-park Premium was still cheaper than what it cost when they went on sell in November of 2000 ($279 vs $299), now with the price increase the Premium AP is $329, or just a $30 increase in about 4 years. Then we had all the 2 for one promotions, heck for a 16 month period from January 2003 thru April of 2004, 13 months offered the "Pay for Disneyland, get DCA for free" to Southern California and Baja California residents... Now we have the 5 days for the price of 3 (plus 6 for 4, etc.) ParkHoppers on sale for the last 2 years straight (plus previous times).... While a few more folks have come to the DLR, and some have bought an additional day or two in a hotel (one of 3 Disney owned, or at a Good Neighbor location...) BUT... If you look at the statistic of... "Amount paid per person, per day to enter the park", that dollar amount has gone DOWN, which has hurt BOTH parks..... And that is probably the biggest failure of DCA in the eyes of TDA....
2	knoxvelour Mon 10/18/2004 4:25p	Hasn't this been over analyzed to death already? I think we all came up with one conclusion that could be agreed on. Neither side of the argument has access to Disney records, nor the information necessary to make a valid assessment. Maybe part of the reason DCA is failing is from people not letting the subject die already. How many movies have you passed up just because a someone said it wasn't any good? It gets tiring seeing the same topic over and over again
3	melekalikimaka Mon 10/18/2004 4:28p	<<The ONLY people who could parkhop were guests staying at one of the 3 owned Disney hotels.>> I was so ticked off about that. It was stupid and I'm glad it didn't last.
4	debtee Mon 10/18/2004 5:08p	Interesting read Darkbeer thanks! Knoxvelour: <Maybe part of the reason DCA is failing is from people not letting the subject die already.> I Have to agree here! We went to DCA and loved it...I know we are from Australia so the California theme did appeal to us....however it wasn't until I got home and kept on reading on LP about how bad it is that I realised the perception is there's a problem with it!
5	Jim in Pasadena CA Mon 10/18/2004 5:32p	Interesting read, Darkbeer. But it's all from the perspective of the 'sharp pencil boys.' You didn't really get into the content of the park, and the overall thrown together quality of most of it. For whatever reason, DCA felt a bit like it was tossed at me, the theme park going guy, with an attitude of 'hey, you like Disney amusement parks, you'll enjoy this!' I didn't get the impression that those in charge were very excited about me being there. Unlike Disneyland or EPCOT Center, parks that can be experienced like some sparkling jewel, that they want me to examine and enjoy, Disney's California Adventure was like a 'Disney Theme Park Lite' -- and if you stayed too long to look at anything, you could see the painted flats, hear the hollow pop music, and taste the knock-off sandwiches from the 'Wine Country.' There seemed to exist an almost palpable disdain for its audience. Like the designers, for whatever reason, didn't really give a crap. Maybe success means that after 15 years, the park actually helps the overall resort to grow, but they have a long way to go as far as being a Great Disney Theme Park. Oh yeah, I renew my Annual Passes next March.
6	ModHatter Mon 10/18/2004 10:06p	Bottom line, as discussed elsewhere, they were charging Epcot prices for a DMGM park. You can't charge full-day prices for a half-day park, plain and simple. Luckily, they have gotten away from the Bug's Land model of quick fixes and are investing in better attractions to build DCA into what could very well be a full-day park in about the same timeframe it took the original Disneyland to build a real Tomorrowland, and add the pivotal New Orleans Square. Based on that, DCA developers should be looking at the kind of rides added during that time and pattern their expansion after it. DCA needs an innovative thrill ride, not another RnRc. They need to clean up some theming and unify a couple of lands. They need some transportation. And they need some family dark rides. And, for that matter, they shouldn't necessarily unload one new ride every so often. They might just need to workwall a large chunk of Route 66, open another corridor to ToT and take on the north side of HPB, tear up Timon and Pumbaa and tear out everything south of the Plaza and putting a more California-themed land than Bugs. People might not make the trip for a new ride in DCA, especially one that was done at another park. But a whole new land that aims higher should be just too good to pass up, and DCA needn't be the ugly stepsister anymore.
7	RoadTrip Mon 10/18/2004 10:27p	I don't think DCA is a failure... I enjoyed the park very much. If there is a failure anywhere, it was in the expectation that it could be a 'stand alone' park without park-hopper discounts. The only non-Magic Kingdom Park with the scope to possibly stand alone is Epcot. And I even doubt Epcot could draw the visitors it needs if the MK weren't just down the road. If you look at DCA as an 'extra' park like MGM or AK, I think it stacks up just fine. P.S. I personally think that the AK is one of Disney's finest parks. I also realize that I am part of a small minority that thinks that.
8	ModHatter Tue 10/19/2004 1:49a	I agree about AK, in a way. I didn't feel the burning need to go back when I visited again last year, but when I went, I liked it, because it delivered more than I was expecting. Which is contrary to DCA. I also only went because I had my AP. I would have never visited either park for a full day admission price. I think DCA failed to get people in the gates not because it's a California theme, but because they didn't deliver the kind of California that Disney could deliver. California is a frontier land, a land of fantasy, a land of adventure, and a symbol of Tomorrow to many people. But DCA failed to capture any of that in its pedestrian offerings and its shallow theming.
9	oc_dean Tue 10/19/2004 1:56a	>>Why is Disney's California Adventure a failure?<< That's an easy and simple answer: Michael Eisner went for an all-out assault to make this the cheapest park possible - at the cost of quality. We all speculated that here on LP a year before the park opened .. and a year after it did. Then the stories through the grapevine began to surface going into 2002. Disney execs (some of them former) beginning to leak out to the public .. that Michael indeed put "the bottom line" before "quality will out".
10	meowthew Tue 10/19/2004 9:01a	DCA's problem has little to do with it being built on the cheap. I just can't buy the argument that more money = better park. That's an inherently flawed and dangerous way of thinking. You can build the most expensive and elaborate park anybody's ever seen, but without vision, it's doomed. DCA's only problem is that there's never seemed to be any genuine creative vision or purpose behind it. Sure, Disney executives envisioned it as a way for guests to stay an extra day and spend more money, but that's not vision, that's just a business plan. Unlike Disneyland, DCA has never been a park with a vision, just a business plan with a theme. That said, it's a great park. It has a number of good, solid elements in place and enormous potential to succeed. It doesn't need vast amounts of cash pumped into it to flourish -- just some clear creative vision breathed into it.

All times are Pacific Time (US)

Note: Information on the discussion boards is sometimes based on rumors or incorrect information and should not be assumed true. Messages do not necessarily reflect the opinion of LaughingPlace.com or its editors.

More messages:	1-10	11-20	21-30	31-40	41-50
	51-60	61-70	71-80	81-90	91-100
	101-110	111-120	121-130	131-140	141-150
	151-160	161-170	171-180	181-190	191-200
	201-210	211-220	221-230	231-240	241-250
	251-260	261-270	271-280	281-290	291-300
	301-310	311-320	321-330	331-340	341-350
	351-360	361-370	371-380	381-390	391-400
	401-410	411-420	421-425

< Previous Topic

Next Topic >

You must be a registered user to post messages.
Click here to register.
After registration you will automatically be brought back to this topic

Disneyland Attraction Posters at
The LaughingPlace Store
The LaughingPlace Store now carries a Disneyland Attraction Posters from Sanders CC Gallery

What's on
The Latest
Group RCI and Disney Vacation Club Members to Receive Benefit of New Multi-Year Relationship
NetDragon and Disney to Launch First MMORPG 'Disney Fantasy Online'
Disneyland Thanksgiving Day Parade pictures
New Disneyland Resort Video and Audio podcasts available
Video of dogs visiting Santa Paws at WDW's Downtown Disney
Tokyo Disneyland and Tokyo DisneySea Schedule for Fiscal Year 2009
TCM Presents: The Family Classics With All-New Original Special and Nostalgic Holiday Festival
Kids go free to Disney on Broadway
Innoventions Dream Home featured on MSN.com
Disney Store Responds to Inaccurate Information in Widely Circulating Email

Click here for The Latest