PDA

View Full Version : What's the deal with Splash Mountain?



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6

fairytalelover
11-03-2003, 04:15 PM
So, we go to SM over the weekend. Looking forward to having it back after being closed for refurbishment. Then we notice that there is still chipped paint on the mountain and that screen in the ride on the upper right hand side which is supposed to show the picture of your log is still not working. Didn't they close it down to fix it up? So, they couldn't be bothered with putting on new paint and fixing the screen? It just seems like they are being cheap. If they don't want to put up the money to fix the picture screen and have it running then get rid of it altogether. It looks worse when you go on a ride where there are things sitting there idle not working. It's better if it's taken out permanantly so we don't have to look at the carcass. I don't think Walt would be too happy about this kind of slacking.

sediment
11-03-2003, 04:25 PM
The AP money keeps pouring in, whether it's spruced up or not. Of course, if the AP revenue has been spent already, there will be no more fixing up of the park.

zapppop
11-03-2003, 05:03 PM
Splash Mountan's refurb was rushed to get more rides open after the Big Thunder tragedy.

MonorailMan
11-03-2003, 07:37 PM
Also, according to many CMs, the in ride picture viewing system (Prof. Barnaby's Owl's Hangout), is way to troublesome to make it work. Too often the wrong picture was showed.

fairytalelover
11-04-2003, 02:10 PM
Originally posted by MonorailMan
Also, according to many CMs, the in ride picture viewing system (Prof. Barnaby's Owl's Hangout), is way to troublesome to make it work. Too often the wrong picture was showed.

Well, if that is the case then why don't they just take it down, rather than have it sit there not functioning. It just looks bad. It just adds to yet one more thing at DL that doesn't work and is just sitting there. Most of Tomorrowland is just a cemetary filled with the memories of what used to be. It is just getting very frustrating.

GreatWhiteShark
11-04-2003, 03:28 PM
One would think that since Splash is/was down that no matter that BTM was down too do to the tragedy, they would want to fix everything and do it right so that it does not look so halfa**ed when it reopened.

Oh yeah that's me using that silly little thing called "common sense". Guess you got to have it in order to use it.:D

Don't get me wrong, I do understand that several major attractions are down, but no one could have predicted BTM tragedy. So would you rather have a ride open just for the sake of it being opened or have it go down for it's scheduled repairs and painting so that when it does reopen it looks brand new?
Personally I pick the second one. I did notice the work that was done, but it seems to me they slacked on a lot of things just to open a major attraction sooner and just in the nick of time too for the winter!:rolleyes:

Sediment ,

Sorry but that whole AP thing sounds a little hokey to me. If they just rely on one source to fund the "refurbishments" then the park is doomed. Also if your theory is correct then I guess the APer funds for Splash has run out. That does not give me a lot of hope.

fairytalelover
11-04-2003, 04:02 PM
It seems odd to me that DL would rely solely on funds from selling APs for refurbishment. I would think that they use funds from other DL sources also.

fairytalelover
11-05-2003, 10:46 AM
Well, I recently was told that the refurbishment is part of the budget that is alloted from Burbank to the Theme Park division. And that the AP money is put in the same general ledger account as everything else from Disneyland.

Apparently, Disneyland is not its own company.It is only a piece of a bigger division and that division is only a piece of larger corporation. The money that is taken in by Disneyland is dump onto the pile that goes to the Corporate level and then Corporate doles it out to each division based on a specific business plan.

Not Afraid
11-05-2003, 10:51 AM
Originally posted by fairytalelover
Well, I recently was told that the refurbishment is part of the budget that is alloted from Burbank to the Theme Park division. And that the AP money is put in the same general ledger account as everything else from Disneyland.

Apparently, Disneyland is not its own company.It is only a piece of a bigger division and that division is only a piece of larger corporation. The money that is taken in by Disneyland is dump onto the pile that goes to the Corporate level and then Corporate doles it out to each division based on a specific business plan.

I'll check this out this weekend with the Disney Finance executive I know. I would be interested in finding out this information but never thought to ask. I may have the opportunity on Sunday (if I can peel myself away from Pierce Brosnen);)

fairytalelover
11-05-2003, 10:56 AM
Originally posted by Not Afraid
I'll check this out this weekend with the Disney Finance executive I know. I would be interested in finding out this information but never thought to ask. I may have the opportunity on Sunday (if I can peel myself away from Pierce Brosnen);)

That would be great if you could check this out. I am very curious. Pierce Brosnan? You're gonna see him?

Not Afraid
11-05-2003, 11:05 AM
Originally posted by fairytalelover
Pierce Brosnan? You're gonna see him?

Yeah baby!:D

cemeinke
11-05-2003, 11:11 AM
Originally posted by Not Afraid
Yeah baby!:D

Meanwhile, I'll be home cleaning house and doing laundry :rolleyes:

Say hi to Shia for me :p

Not Afraid
11-05-2003, 11:11 AM
Originally posted by cemeinke
Meanwhile, I'll be home cleaning house and doing laundry :rolleyes:

Say hi to Shia for me :p

I thought you were coming with? Your know, to protect me?

sediment
11-05-2003, 11:49 AM
My point is that since the revenue stream is somewhat fixed despite the level of quality, you get what the average admission (not what you) pays for. AP program is one cause of this drop in quality.
I believe that Disneyland Resort revenue is being used to generate the Disneyland Resort expense budget. I.e., "This (X) is what we project the revenue from Disneyland will be in 2004. Therefore, this (Y = 85% of X) will be your expense budget for 2004."
That's basic "Return on Investment" (or ROI) analysis. It's how the company can decide what to buy or to sell or to invest in.
Take an ROI analysis on whether to add an attraction. Will adding an attraction (an investment) lead to more revenue, and if so, how much of the investment will the company recoup yearly? Since the AP program generates so much revenue, and is not likely to increase due to an added attraction, it serves to lower the ROI. This leads to lowering the investment (the denominator) to increase the ROI of a project (see Pooh ride).

fairytalelover
11-05-2003, 12:56 PM
I understand the ROI analysis but I don't understand why it would be solely based on the revenue from APs.

sediment
11-05-2003, 02:03 PM
Not solely. There is non-AP-related revenue. But if half the park's revenue comes from AP's, then ROI on any project is effectively halved right from the start. Or, the additional non-AP-related revenue would have to double. Take your pick.
With such a large amount of revenue not changing based on the decisions made to improve, not improving becomes the optimal decision (ROI-wise, but not D-Land-wise).

Regardless, I hope Splash Mountain can complete the refurb during the nights, so the additional revenues from on-ride photographs can add to the till. (Note that it highly unlikely that AP holders will buy more than one of these, so do not count AP admissions in your ROI analysis.)

sediment
11-05-2003, 02:12 PM
All this ROI talk reminds me of that one MP columnist who would analyze the Disney quarterly results. I miss that.

spectromen
11-06-2003, 07:54 AM
Speaking of a bad rehab, I noticed a few more things wrong with Splash right after rehab:

-1 of the possums hanging in the trees doesn't move
-"There's nothin in here but bees" is still 4-5 seconds behind
-The "glowing" spurts of water around the bird in the fountain aren't working
-The water wheel on the outside isn't turning (but did it ever? not sure)
-Animatronics in the rabbit family/possum family section right before the final lift are anemic, not powered as fully as they should be and the mouth movements don't quite match the lyrics

But at least the owl at the end is moving again, albeit as a mute! I agree, they should just take out the photo screen and give the poor owl a new script, perhaps along the lines of "remain seated til we get back out o' the mountain" etc etc etc...

Anybody find other deficiencies in the rehab?

fairytalelover
11-06-2003, 08:42 AM
And the water wheel outside does not work. I actually cannot remember the last time I saw that working.

GreatWhiteShark
11-06-2003, 11:26 AM
Originally posted by spectromen
-The water wheel on the outside isn't turning (but did it ever? not sure)


I actually Have old video footage from when Splash first opened and it used to have water running down the wheel, it never moved though. So where did the water go? Did it dry up with the refurb money?:confused:

fairytalelover
11-06-2003, 12:22 PM
The water wheel on Tom Sawyer island is working. I can't imagine that it would be that hard to make a water wheel work. It has been used since 400 B.C. for crying out loud. How difficult could it be?

Freerider127
11-06-2003, 02:33 PM
Originally posted by sediment
Not solely. There is non-AP-related revenue. But if half the park's revenue comes from AP's, then ROI on any project is effectively halved right from the start. Or, the additional non-AP-related revenue would have to double. Take your pick.
With such a large amount of revenue not changing based on the decisions made to improve, not improving becomes the optimal decision (ROI-wise, but not D-Land-wise).

Regardless, I hope Splash Mountain can complete the refurb during the nights, so the additional revenues from on-ride photographs can add to the till. (Note that it highly unlikely that AP holders will buy more than one of these, so do not count AP admissions in your ROI analysis.)

Stop including APs in everything seriously, its not the reason that Splash mountain hasnt been fully fixed.

fairytalelover
11-06-2003, 03:17 PM
Originally posted by Freerider127
Stop including APs in everything seriously, its not the reason that Splash mountain hasnt been fully fixed.


APs do get blamed for quite a lot of stuff actually don't they? Very odd. It's like were lepers.

Freerider127
11-06-2003, 03:26 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by fairytalelover
APs do get blamed for quite a lot of stuff actually don't they? Very odd. It's like were lepers. [/Q
Im serious anything that goes wrong its automatically the APs falt. :rolleyes:

fairytalelover
11-06-2003, 03:36 PM
Originally posted by Freerider127
[QUOTE]Originally posted by fairytalelover
APs do get blamed for quite a lot of stuff actually don't they? Very odd. It's like were lepers. [/Q
Im serious anything that goes wrong its automatically the APs falt. :rolleyes:

I was serious too. I feel like a leper having an AP. It's like there is something wrong with us and it really annoys the you know what out of me.