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

#	Author	Message
11	fkurucz Tue 10/19/2004 10:24a	As others have said, it costs the same as DL, but does not offer the same (or better) value. This does not mean that it isn't fun, it just means that when day trippers have to choose between DL and DCA, they are more likely to chose DL. As DLR management continues to add quality attractions to DCA it will eventually achieve value parity with DL (granted, this will be challenging as DCA is smaller).
12	oc_dean Tue 10/19/2004 12:27p	>>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.<< Don't beleive me, just ask some other long time posters about stories that broke out .. and ended up here .. about accounts of Mr. Eisner setting the stage for the most meager park possible.
13	disneywatcher Tue 10/19/2004 1:33p	I recall an article that came out right before DCA opened in which Eisner said something about some people claiming the DisCo wasn't spending enough on the new park and his scoffing at such an opinion. While he has promoted a cheap, bottom-line philosophy in running Disney over the past several years, I don't think that alone ruined the quality of DCA. The lame ideas and concepts that he and others embraced at the Aspen conference strike me as being due not so much to their devotion to modest-budget options but to their inability to recognize poor taste and lousy creativity when it was staring them in the face. Simply put, even if DCA had been budgeted for $3 billion, I bet Eisner still would have demanded that mediocre or questionable features like Paradise Pier or Soap Opera Bistro be inserted into the park's design.
14	arstogas Tue 10/19/2004 3:20p	I think most of you are missing Darkbeer's POINT. He wasn't asking a question. He was making a statement, in ANSWER to an oft-posited question... something so hotly debated here, in order to SETTLE the issue of whether DCA is quantifiable as a failure in ANY sense of the word. And he showed, clearly, that in the most important way to Disneyland Resort management, the park absolutely IS a failure. He wasn't really seeking perspective as to "is it a failure", which is why the question of "haven't we debated this to death already" not really relevant, except to underscore the purpose of Darkbeer's quite astute and enlightening post. Other folks certainly may not see the park as a failure from their particular vantage point, but they are also NOT making the park the success that the true estimators of the park's success WANT it to be... so it's kind of a moot observation without consequence of significance (sorry). Thanks DB. Well done. And if I've totally misread you, then my apologies.
15	planodisney Tue 10/19/2004 7:14p	There is a difference between something being a failure, and something that is in trouble and hasnt met expectations. Generally, labeling something as a failure refers to an end evaluation. A pitcher had a terrible game, so he failed at his attempt. He doesnt get another inning to try and turn things around. Its over, and he failed. With DCA, the park hasnt met expectations of anyone. The park isnt where anyone wants it to be. But I dont think you can label DCA a failure because they will keep trying to expand and make it better. If you want to say that the first three years have been a failure, that fine. Because those years are gone and there is nothing that can be done to change the outcome of those years. But, the history of DCA cant be written yet, therefore, you cant declare DCA a failure. I realize we are just talking terminology, but I think its important, particularly when people use terms that arent correct just to be dramatic.
16	ModHatter Tue 10/19/2004 8:50p	Okay, let's just fix the semantics and say DCA is failING, then move on to the meat of the situation.
17	oc_dean Tue 10/19/2004 9:05p	Well .. I see a piece of lettuce and some mustard .. along with some onions going bad ... but .... WHERE'S THE BEEF?
18	Blacksheep Uncle Tue 10/19/2004 9:07p	well since you guys have it all worked out, I guess you won't have to bring it up anymore then huh... ;)
19	WorldDisney Wed 10/20/2004 1:39a	Blacksheep, Not sure what's worse, bringing up the same topic over and over again OR having someone who has a choice NOT to read the same topic over and over does just to keep complaining about it being written over and over again. Think about it........over and over again ;).
20	Darkbeer Wed 10/20/2004 10:20a	For all the newer folks, here is an old "blast from the past" post of mine... >>Somebody was kind enough to send me an internal PointPoint presentation file from over 5 years ago. I totally trust this person in the fact that this is the real Mc Coy, and not a fake. If I could share my source, I am sure you would agree that it is a true document. Sorry, guys I will not post the file, nor will I share it. I am sorry, but you are going to have to trust me on this one. I will clearly identify my comments with brackets [like this]. I am also only going to post selected information, mainly related to the infamous comment, and other points discussed over the last few years. I received a 10 slide presentation, based on the wording, is an internal WDI presentation. The first slide is the title slide... Quote: THE "OFF THE SHELF" DECISION Slide 2 is titled "1995 Company Mentality", which had 7 points. Point 2 is "Can we do a "E" attraction for $70M?" Point 6 is "With Paul Pressler's arrival our client became the "parks", not MDE." Slide 3 is Quote: 1996 KEY TO A CHEAPER PARK Facility, Show or Ride - Pick any 2. Capitalize on an improving ride industry. Take known technology & theme it with paint color, lighting & graphics. Take advantage of engineering already spent by others. "Direct Lifts" If it's good enough for Six Flags .... The "Guiding Principles" As to the second point of Capitalizing, [To me, this is looking at outside companies, such as S&S Power, since the outside vendors have been making better products in the last decade or so] And the fifth point, "Direct Lifts" [and as described in a later slide, this is taking attractions from other Disney parks, such as Muppets 3-D (the example they used)] Slides 4 and 5 talks about the Guiding Principles. The 4th slide is titled "How can Disney's California be realized for less than traditional practice?" Then we have 11 points for the sub-category "Park Planning/Design/Theming" (the next slide has the other sub-category). Point 1 is "No berm around the park", other points mention outside visual intrusions are OK, themed facades are faux, show-like, not immersions or period reproductions, that only the entries and front facades are to be themed, and to keep the Monorail as is. Slide 5 contains 5 "Backstage Philosophy" points, including "First cost before life cycle savings" Slide 6 is titled "Embracing the Industry... Their way" 5 points, my favorite is "We don't have any lawyers & we don't want to get any." Slide 7 is titled "Our Experience", with the category of "good" and 11 points Slide 8 is the category "Lessons Learned" and 6 points. Slide 9 is just a title slide, "Would we do it again?" and nothing else. Slide 10 starts with "Yes" in large letters, and then the sentence "The pros far out weigh the cons. But..." Then we have 5 points, my favorite on this page is, "Have attractions partners sign(underlined) in advance of the buy." [I read this as get the prospective sponsor to pay up before spending the money, or at least be guaranteed that they will pay for it] [OK, this is the end of the PowerPoint presentation. So what have we learned, that the statement "If it's good enough for Six Flags..." was actually made at a meeting inside the Disney company, and not made up, as some folks wanted us to believe! That Disney had serious cost control issues while designing and building DCA. That Disney made the decision to use "Off the Shelf" rides instead of designing and building their own. That Disney is looking to keep the costs down on new "E" attractions (the $70 million comment, and now the LA Times report of DCA's ToT costing $75 million). That Disney purposely cut back on the theming at DCA.] Let's look at the fourth slide, and the "Park Planning/Design/Theming" points. point 1, "No berm around the Park", matches up with what was built. point 2, "Each attraction will be designed to achieve a specific emotional impact. ?Mega E?s with elaborate facilities, shows and rides will be avoided in favor of story.", and the park opened with no Mega-E's, finally we are getting a large E with ToT, but nothing of that level was included in the original park. point 3, "Some visual intrusions are okay, including structures outside park boundary", as people have mentioned (and complained about) seeing the city from GRR, the Sun Wheel, etc. detracts from the attraction. point 4, "Themed facades are faux, show-set like; not immersions into replications of period themed architecture." Once again, matches up with what is offered at DCA. point 5, "Themed facades are limited to entries and front facades and thus cover only a portion of the visible facility." Once again, a perfect match to what was delivered with DCA. point 6, "Keep the Monorail as is". And that is exactly what happened, they didn't move one inch of track, instead the attractions and other park structures were built to accommodate the Monorail. Disney did try to hide and/or use the monorail a part of the design, for example the Golden Gate Bridge at the front entrance, or the Superstar Limo sign. And they helped to limit the intrusion, but by no means did it eliminate it. They also helped keep costs down by not moving the Monorail, or adding a DCA station. Point 7, "Use ?direct lifts? (e.g. Muppets 3-D) where possible." And we got direct lifts, Muppets 3-D, WWTBAM-PI (but of course, without the pre-show offered at WDW) and ITTBAB. And Animation, which I would not call a "Direct Lift", but the majority of the attraction was. Point 8, "Surf City rides are ?off-the-shelf? except for paint, lighting, graphics and show features.", And what did Paradise Pier (the revised name for Surf City) get ? Point 9, "Where possible no new ride systems to be invented. We will use developed technology." And what did we get, the one new ride system (Soarin') was actually part of the Westcot design, so much of the design work was already completed. Point 10, "Make ?provisions only? for the future addition of a parade or water spectacular." And what did they do, build a large path through the park to accommodate a Parade, and added no infrastructure to the lagoon. They had to build the Parade building after opening, and had to add many features when they attempted LuminAria. And some of those "provisions" for the water spectacular were not that well thought out in regards as to where the guests were going to gather to watch the future show. And the last point "No upgrades or tie-in to the existing Disneyland systems.", also how DCA was delivered.

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

Now Playing
Little April Shower
Chorus / Bambi Movie Soundtrack (Bambi)

What's on
The Latest
Original Mouseketeer Cheryl Holdridge passes away
Jonas Brothers: The 3D Concert Experience pictures
Tales from the Laughing Place author featured on the Disney and More blog
Participants and Spectators to Experience More Magic At Largest Walt Disney World Marathon Weekend Ever
American Idol Experience details
Single-Game Tickets for Expanded Braves Spring Training Slate At Disney’s Wide World of Sports Complex on Sale Jan. 10
NFFC All Disneyana Show and Sale to be held on January 18, 2009
New Bedtime Stories clips
Walt Disney Studios Home Entertainment Announces Exciting New Blu-ray Options
Walt Disney World Co. and Environmental Tectonics Corporation Announce the Settlement of All Litigation Relating to Mission: Space

Click here for The Latest