Quote Originally Posted by Ian View Post
Huh. I typically can find some common ground with you on most of what you say and I think that, by and large, we agree on more than we disagree on.

But I think you're completely wrong with this one. I, in fact, think it's the exact opposite. I bet if you had access to the numbers you would see an almost immediate spike in theme park attendance as soon as a new, big budget, highly publicized attraction is open.

I'm not talking about the Laugh Floor or minor additions like that. But your Everests, your Soarins, your Toy Story Manias ... I think they add immediately and impactfully to the bottom line from day one.

Do I have stats to back that up? No. Disney doesn't release numbers with enough granularity to prove that out. But to me it's common sense. Why? Why else would they spend hundreds of millions of dollars opening new blockbuster attractions?

I've seen Mufasa lurking around the boards lately ... I would love to hear him chime in on this topic ...

I would think that there would be a spike.....

But i strongly believe it isn't sustained due to any ride or attraction.

Of course you get a bump...remember that at least 50% of WDW's travelers at anytime are repeat guests (fact)....so they would naturally gravitate to what's on the commercials and brochures.....
but a few months (say....six) down the line....the attendance is back to be a mechanism of the demand for each park as a whole.....kinda why they always rank the same way in numbers....don't you think.

The overall yearly volume has NOTHING to do with a ride. It makes no sense that a significant statistical sample of 50 million visitors are going there for one thing....
the numbers are too great.....and disney world still costs too much for this kinda casual consumption (I REALLY don't think some of you are giving this point enough thought.....)

I would be interested in Mufasa's take as well....

And the last thing: ask yourself what a new attraction is to the management?

in 1958......it clearly was mostly to generate fun and draw....not for sheer bottomline.

I would strongly suggest that those who really hold the strings to the puppet now view new "mountains" as nothing but necessary evil.

They don't directly yield much to revenue...which is the primary goal.....but they are still an entertainment enterprise...and know that they still have to put out the perception.

Do i think they would ride what they have into the ground if it wouldn't eventually lead to decline?
Absolutely.....nobody named "Disney" in charge anymore....and the money is the CEO now....has been for years