Why are we even bothering talking about alternative ticket pricing options? Disneyland is packed. They don't need to change their operations. Sometimes these discussions rehash the most ridiculous ideas. If people are concerned about poor people, don't worry about them. They are still going to Disneyland.
Using imagination does not mean magic happens if you will it. There are still the laws of economics and physics. Besides, Disney has been living off its goodwill for decades. It's a magic of another sort. People will buy whatever Disney sells almost like it is unquestioned.Quote:
It gets so frustrating and so discouraging and depressing dealing with all these "realistic thinkers."
I admit I've only been going to Disneyland for 20 years, but the thing is... I always have a good time, and for the most part I think the park is always in great shape (especially since the 50th anniversary). I have a hard time buying into the doomsaying that tends to occur here because I honestly don't see any of it. Also, maybe because I only go once every year or so... they do say that familiarity breeds contempt.
For the record, the last time I went was in May 2005, during the 50th Anniversary Celebration, and I did have a good time, at both parks. I haven't been able to go back since, as I don't live in Southern California anymore, and I no longer make the kind of money I did when I was able to take vacations there.
I'm sorry, I certainly don't mean to rain on anyone's parade in my various nostalgic musings or thoughts on possible new changes that hearken back to previous Park practices; I don't want to ruin anyone's enjoyment of Disneyland at all. If folks are having a good time at the Parks, that's wonderful - that's what should be happening.
I guess I just miss a lot of the things I grew up with, the way they used to be, including Disneyland. It's not just Disneyland, it's other things too. Combine that feeling with hearing that some Park guests are either displeased with this or that aspect of Disneyland (Tomorrowland, for example), or realizing that some of the changes that have happened over the years have been less than stellar, and I naturally turn to what I remember as being good, and fun, and exciting about the Park, and I want that feeling to return, even if it is done in a different way, with newer technologies and elements.
I don't want people to not have a good time at the Park - completely the opposite, I want them to have the best times of their lives, like I did. And of course, if and when I ever get to visit again, I want to have a wonderful, beautiful time myself as well. Disneyland means so much to me; it was an oasis of absolute joy in a very tumultuous youth and young adulthood. That's why it can be so upsetting when things change but are not replaced with something better (for example, the Skyway and the PeopleMover). I think everyone can relate to this to some degree - if a beloved menu item at your favorite restaurant is discontinued, or some candy you just love is no longer manufactured, it's upsetting to learn that. Maybe it's the closure of a favorite restaurant or shop, or the demolishing of a building you consider a landmark. It might be the canceling of a TV show, or the fall from popularity or death of a beloved entertainer.
Anyway, I'm sorry if I upset anyone with this thread. That was not my intent.
When Disneyland opened, it WAS a nonpareil. Disney was doing something that up until then, nobody had the resources, talent, imagination or drive to do, apparently. What has changed is that there are others out there with incredible technology, resources and ability to create immersive or interesting environments. From what I've seen of the Universal Harry Potter world, it's right up there with Disney caliber.
So IMHO both this post and Steve's are spot on: others are rising to the bar Disney set, AND Disney has to be aware that the competition is out there and fully viable. For a lot of passholders, it's Disneyland or nothing; for a lot of others that is absolutely not the case.
This is a ginormous issue to tackle in one thread. From the deeper societal issues like the self-entitled mindsets infecting this generation to the questions regarding the impact that a change in ticketing system would have on the park's crowds, there are so many ways angles from which one can address the subjects, ideas, and thoughts presented in the original post. On the issue of the current ticket policy breeding bad behavior and the proposal that a ticket-based system could help remedy this disrespect for the park-- I can see both sides of the argument. From the POV of a critic of the current system, an endless-buffet passport (and even more so, an all-you-can-eat-everyday annual pass) gives the Guest the idea that they have ownership over the park and its attractions, and thus, they don’t have to treat it with respect or dignity-- they can treat it however the wish which results in disrespect for the park and other Guests. On the flip-side, you could say that a system with tickets doesn’t convey any sense of ownership to the Guest-- which could lead some visitors to abandon any care for the park since it’s not theirs, and thus, they don’t have to treat it with respect and dignity. It depends on the individual person and how they will interpret Disney’s policies and the messages that these policies convey. Since all human beings are unique and have brains that function differently and interpret messages in various ways, it's difficult to pinpoint what reactions will be. It's easy to throw around speculations, but we really don't know how these people would react to various changes, just like we don't fully know the implications of implementing a ticket-based system: how it would affect the park's crowd levels and attendance, the logistics of creating such a system, if people would actually utilize it, et cetera-- the line of questions goes on. Quite frankly, it’s impossible for us to predict how a change in the ticketing system will affect the park-- we simply don't have adequate information or the correct tools to analyze the statistics and data in a way that will form a foolproof model of what such a park would look like. All we can do is speculate and assume and do our best to isolate all the different variables in effect in our efforts to fully understand what's happening in the park today and how policy's role in this. But there are so many variables in play that it becomes a difficult, nearly impossible question to answer definitively.
I agree that something needs to change. Something needs to change in the park and somethings needs to change in society. To what extent could a change in Disneyland's policies help combat the disrespect and selfishness running rampant in today's world? That's a big question to which I really don't have an answer. Lots of ideas and thoughts and wishes, but none that I feel really stand solid on a factual base. This is really a ginormous issue that I don't see an easy way to adequately answer.
As for the actual costs involved, that would be carefully developed to benefit both Disney and and their guests. Personally, I would look forward to some sort of ticket (or similar smart card based) system being developed.
all I know is some of these people should be ashamed of them selves.. knocking into someone who is using a cane and is disabled without so much as a sorry is disgusting.. using the restroom out in the open instead of a bathroom....cussing left and right, not fallowing the rules. jumping out of ride vehicles. public sex. tagging. drugs,.. abusing the Disability cards and lines . or just the sheer stupidity of some people.... cm saids you cant bring pepper spay into the park then you cant bring it in. don't argue. wont do much good. i wonder what would happen is the CMs weren't sooo..calm and nice all the time and really let some of these people have it.. wonder what would happen lol
Existing rides would have to pay its own way with attendance. Instead of being thought as the overflow rides when the park gets super crowded, they will have to survive on their own popularity. Thus, many rides will be at risk.
New rides will be paid on an entirely different budget. They are based on park profits and not on attractions transferring profits to another new attraction, which doesn't make sense. All attraction profits are pooled together as park profits and then redistributed. Thus, I can see a lot of arguments when attractions deteriorate and we wonder why nothing was done when it is considered popular and can pay its own way. And why not transfer some profits to keep alive some failed attractions like Lincoln and the Tiki Room.
Be prepared for retrenchment as that is the new model. Then again, I think they will quickly reverse this plan when it proves to be unworkable and the bureaucracy is worse then the fix, which is adding more attractions to increase the park capacity, which is also more profitable and keeps the minor attractions running.