dshimel
10-04-2001, 11:22 AM
Much is being made of comparing DCA to DAK or what MGM was when it opened. MGM is now great, and DAK is said to be getting better. The obvious implication is that all parks stink at first, but get better.
I’d also seen many reports that when new parks open, they usually just cannibalize most of their attendance by drawing guests from other parks in the resort. MGM did this, DAK did this, and DCA has done this. Eventually, the attendance at the older parks returns to normal, and the new park’s attendance is above and beyond what they resort’s attendance was.
Is there a parallel? It seems that Disney hasn’t tried to build a new park, that by itself, can bring people in from all over the country to see it. They build parks that attract only people that would be there anyway. It is only after the new parks have been open for many years, and added many top class attractions, that they have enough stuff in them to actually attract people to the resort.
Anyone else see this parallel?
I’d also seen many reports that when new parks open, they usually just cannibalize most of their attendance by drawing guests from other parks in the resort. MGM did this, DAK did this, and DCA has done this. Eventually, the attendance at the older parks returns to normal, and the new park’s attendance is above and beyond what they resort’s attendance was.
Is there a parallel? It seems that Disney hasn’t tried to build a new park, that by itself, can bring people in from all over the country to see it. They build parks that attract only people that would be there anyway. It is only after the new parks have been open for many years, and added many top class attractions, that they have enough stuff in them to actually attract people to the resort.
Anyone else see this parallel?