DCA, Future Expansion
Topic: Tom Staggs basically confirms the massive upgrade

#	Author	Message
81	jonvn Mon 9/24/2007 3:11p	"The 7 million figure was used to reverse engineer the design of DCA. There's no guess work involved." Yes, we know that. But you are using that figure in a specific manner without knowing how it operates in that specific manner. You still don't know what the figure actually represented and how it was derived. So, you can stop using it as a benchmark because you don't know what it was beyond what it was used for. As to the quick online links: 1) This does not point out how Disneyland is meeting or exceeding its goals. It is about the 450 millionth visitor. It does not apply to what you said. 2) Same thing. 3) Same thing. None of these articles claim anything like what you say they claim. This really is sad. "I suppose we could now go 'round and 'round over what constitutes "failure." But why bother?" No, we won't go round and round, because it has a very specific meaning. And the reason why you don't want to bother, I suppose, is because you are using it incorrectly. And that is the precise reason we should bother, is because what you are saying is flatly wrong. "No, Jack Kyser, Chief Economist of the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp. suggested it was a contributing factor" It's absurd on its face. That someone would decide to not visit LA because an ADDITION to the area isn't as good as they think it should be? Let's put this in perspective. Say someone built a theme park in London. You were going to go visit London, but you heard this particular theme park wasn't as good as it could be. You would cancel your visit? Absurd doesn't begin to describe this. Either it's a misquote, or he was making an absolutely outrageous claim. "The deterioration at Disneyland was the result of cutbacks to maintenence budgets. There was no effort made to eliminate food, retail or entertainment venues. " This is not true. They cut back hours on both rides and restaurant hours. Since the premise is false immediately, your conclusion is already going to be incorrect as well.
82	Hans Reinhardt Mon 9/24/2007 3:12p	I think we can all agree that perhaps DCA's attendance may have missed the mark during its first year. How the place has performed since 2001 is a different story and much harder to determine. It's simply impossible to prove that the place is tanking. To interpret the park's performance since it opened as a failure without any reliable supporting data (figures, graphs, charts, profitability sheets, etc.) from Disney, other than the much ballyhooed 7 million, is a just a broad stretch by any measure.
83	jonvn Mon 9/24/2007 3:19p	That's right, and you know what? We don't even know if it's not doing 7 million now. We have no idea. But somehow because one guy gives out this one number, from which we have no idea of its origins and exact meaning, the whole place is a failure. And why? Because we're looking at guesswork numbers from an outside agency over the years. Numbers that are said to be incorrect by people who do know actual numbers. So, really. It's a failure. Of course.
84	TDR_Fan Mon 9/24/2007 4:21p	<<The story I've heard is: 1) No parks met their attendance goals in 2001.>> True, with the exception of Tokyo DisneySea.
85	jonvn Mon 9/24/2007 4:37p	OK, so no parks in the US met their goals that year. So gee, it doesn't sound quite so bad in that perspective, does it.
86	Hans Reinhardt Mon 9/24/2007 9:49p	TDS did well at the expense of TDL, which had a significant attendance drop within TDS' first full year of operation.
87	Darkbeer Mon 9/24/2007 10:23p	OK, let's check the Tokyo Disney attendance, which is OFFICIAL as OLC does announce the numbers... 2000... TDL 16.5 million (TDS not yet open) 2001... TDL 17.7 million, TDS 4 million (TDS was a partial year) Still an increase of over a million for Tokyo Disneyland itself, and then an extra 4 million for the new park (TDS) 2002... TDL gets 13 million (a decrease) but TDS gets 12 million (IMHO, due to the POSITIVE reviews), but that is still 25 million between the 2 parks, or a 17% increase over 2001. Now compare that to Anaheim... (AB/ERA numbers, not official) 2000... Disneyland 13.9 million 2001... DL 12.3, DCA 5 million 2002... DL 12.7 million, DCA 4.7 million, less than a 1% increase from 2001.
88	Skellington88 Mon 9/24/2007 10:48p	jonvn I dont know why you continue to defend DCA. It is nothing more than a slaped together marketing idea to expand disneyland resort without spending too much money. It was a poor attempt to trick consumers into paying $50+ for a subpar theme park experince. Remember, DCA opened the same year as Disenysea (a park with MINIMAL tie-ins mind you). We, as customers, got screwed and insulted by Disney, who thought we were dumb and would just mindlessly go to anything that has "Disney" in the name regardless of quality. They were wrong.
89	2001DLFan Mon 9/24/2007 10:51p	<<jonvn: "The reason the 7 million number is used is because it is a firm number that was clearly stated." Yes, I know. But that is one tiny shard of information that we know little about. You can't reasonably extrapolate that to everything you are trying to say. "Ergo, we understand that the Comapny predicted that 7 million would visit DCA in a given year." Actually, we don't really know that. We know that was one prediction, but we don't know what sort. Like I said, high, medium, low? You see, they don't usually have trip wires set up on things like that. They'll have a series of things. A high projection, we expect to max out at this level. A low one, we expect at least this many people. A middle one, we expect to maybe get this many people. Was 7 million the high water mark? Or was it the low water mark? Which was it? "Generally, when estimating projected attendance, they want to provide high enough numbers to show confidence, low enough to exceed any lowball estimates, and yet conservative enough that they can hype when those numbers are exceeded. Unfortunately, DCA failed to achieve any of those situations."
90	pwrof3 Mon 9/24/2007 10:58p	Here's an interesting side topic in this discussion: What would DCAs attendance have been like if 9/11 had not happened? After 9/11 a lot of people around the world did not fly for quite some time or visit theme parks.

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	181-181

< Previous 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

Antenna Toppers and Accessories
Antenna Toppers of all styles including sports, holiday, animals, occupations and more. Hundreds to choose f rom.

What's on
The Latest
Miley Cyrus tour bus in fatal crash, Miley not aboard
Captain EO on the way back?
Mobile Magic Application Transforms Verizon Wireless Phones Into Electronic Tour Guides to Navigate Disney Parks
Disney Executives Swap Jobs
2009 Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade Sailor Mickey Mouse Plush Available Online
Disney Digital Books Expands Its Vast Library with Princess and the Frog Books
Disney Interactive Studios Starts a New Holiday Tradition with Disney's A Chrsitmas Carol Video Game
Jonas and Sonny With a Chance Video Games Invite Fans Onstage, Backstage and Beyond
Disney Cruise Line in Macy's Parade for the first time
Space Mountain preview

Click here for The Latest