Early Entry

[Another Voice]

Most zoos built DO now create natural looking environments. Mostly because the role of zoos has changed from exhibiting animals to preserving species. And I can’t recall seeing anything that looks remotely like a cage since I was a child (back when wholly mammoths still roamed L.A.).

And most places have far BETTER environments than the ones created at Animal Kingdom. MANY TIMES better. Look at the exhibit spaces at the San Diego Zoo or their Wild Animal Park among them. Even the Bronx Zoo – the stereotypical example of horrible places – has been completely rebuilt with environments for the animals that far exceed Disney’s attempts. This is a particular sore point because Disney could have done so much better – but they choose not to.

By the way, did you know that the lion exhibit space at Animal Kingdom is supposed to be the smallest of any major animal there? Disney is trying to force the animals into visible positions for the lumbering trucks. And guess where those very same animals spend ever moment they are not on display – in twenty foot cages. NONE of the animals have miles to roam around in. They’re all nicely locked into their own little pens. All that lovely rock work isn’t intended to make the animals feel at home, it’s to hide the bars.

People were expecting an animal park that was generations beyond their local zoo. They were expecting a place that transformed zoos and aquariums the same way that Disneyland transformed amusement parks. Instead they got a rehash of trends from Lion Country Safari thirty years ago and a few value-designed theme rides.

No wonder Discovery Cove is such a strong success while Animal Kingdom is giving away soft drinks just to get loyal customers back through the turnstiles.

 

[raidermatt]

Cobbling together two genres doesn’t automatically create “a new category”. It creates a hybrid that lacks the coherence and cohesiveness that a well planned and well thought out place has.

The key here is automatically. Epcot certainly was and is a cobbling together of genres/elements. The need for updating aside, its been very successful. I see the same effort in AK, but as you point out, if the masses don't buy it, it didn't work.

Of course, if the masses love PW, does that make it "good"?

The public is speaking! Why can’t you hear them?

I repeat, if the masses love PW, does that make it "good". If the masses don't care that Mickey butter is gone, does that make it ok?


AK's decline in 2001 attendance was in line with the decline at most other "destination" parks, so it certainly appears that the trend has leveled off.

The "poaching" portion of KS takes up very little time (I road it twice on our last trip), so I find it strange that there are a few here who think it is overbearing. Its also easy to follow what's going on, and generally has a long queue, despite its out of the way location. So it appears the public is ok with this attraction.

And, deserted in the afternoon. Actually, the crowds got bigger the later it got towards the parade. Jewell, did you notice this?

I'm not Jeff, but I can say that on 5/31 and 6/3, the crowds did not start shrinking significantly until after the 4:00 Jungle Parade.

 

[All Aboard]

230 species at Metrozoo, 200 at AK. Hmmm.... seems like a much bigger variance than that. But, I guess the numbers don't lie. Sure seems like I see many more species at Metrozoo. And, I can spend as much time with each as I want. That's true of very few species at AK. Many are fly-bys on the safari. Other than parrots, an anteater, various other birds, tigers, gorillas, goats and bats I can't think of too many where that is the case at AK.

FWIW, there's only a couple of cages at Metrozoo. One for the Koala and one for the Austrailian Tree Monkey. Everybody else spends the day out in the open. And, you can pretty much traverse that entire 300 acres on foot. They even got a monorail (albeit a little crappy.) By the way, did I mention that it costs $8 to get in? $20 gets you an annual pass.

Scoop, I really think Baron's "breakdown" analysis is on point. You used a movie example. But in it you said that the dialog is great, the lighting is great and the story is wonderful - the only thing lacking is the cinematography. For that to be a good comparison you'd have to say that at AK, the zoo elements are great, the rides are great and the shows are wonderful the only thing lacking is x. I just don't agree with that.

To me, the zoo elements are ok, just in seemingly short supply. The ride element is severly lacking. There are a couple of good shows.

So, who gets pleased by AK. Does the animal enthusiast looking for numerous interactive displays where they can spend lots of timing "taking in" the animals? I doubt it. That describes my wife. She really, really looked forward to her first trip to AK. She came away utterly disappointed.

Does the person who has come to know Disney theme parks as showcases of fantastic "ride" attractions come away happy? Kali is over before it starts. Dinosaur is the biggest waste of great technology - see Indy. Triceratip spin and PW... see other threads. Four rides (a couple of weak E's, a D and a C ticket) that's it.

BStanley, if 28,000 is the AK max that's a little disturbing. At a development cost of a rumored billion, isn't that a recipe for failure? If you know that there's no way you can ever get more than 10 million through the gates...

If true that AK's attendance is more or less maxed out, we can all just forget about any expansion plans. For Heaven's sake, if AK is performing at peak levels why in the world would they have to change anything?

Raidermatt, I've ridden KS about a dozen times. I can't take the whole "little red" thing anymore. I've ridden Pirates at least 200 times, and if I can I'll ride it another 200 times.

 

[raidermatt]

Raidermatt, I've ridden KS about a dozen times. I can't take the whole "little red" thing anymore. I've ridden Pirates at least 200 times, and if I can I'll ride it another 200 times.

...and there are plenty of Disney fans who can't take Small World either but love Pirates...

 

[Bstanley]

gcurling,

Well $800M is the published number but let's say AK did cost $1B to develop. If it has 8M guests a year and they average spending $100 a day (pass $40, food $30, 'stuff' $30) AK brings in $800,000,000 a year in Gross.

I don't have any inside information on the bottom line at a Disney park (Voice?) but I imagine it's better than 15%. At 15% NET that works out to a $120M a year in profit and a (greatly simplified) IRR of about 3.5% which isn't great. If the bottom line is actually 20% the IRR is about 9.5% ($160M) and now we're in the ballpark.

This is one area where the Japanese economic system actually gives their companies a big advantage - a Japanese company is very pleased to have a 1% IRR on a 5% NET profit product. An American company would be crucified on Wall Street if those were their numbers.

PS.

IRR = Internal Rate of Return

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

I repeat, if the masses love PW, does that make it "good". If the masses don't care that Mickey butter is gone, does that make it ok?

Ahhh!!! You just don’t get it!!! Of course not. Just because some rotten TV show is a hit doesn’t necessarily mean it’s good. I made the serious mistake of giving Gilligan’s Island as an example once on these boards in a similar argument. AHHHHH! They nearly strung me up. Which further proved my point I thought, but I didn’t say that at the time!

You see, citing that something is a hit, just because it is popular could mean many things. It could mean that it is a work of art sent from the heavens. It could mean that it was the right idea for the right time. It could mean that the people behind it worked their butts off to get it right and the public appreciated their efforts. Or it could be that they did as little as possible, stuck it in an ailing park, slapped a Disney® on it and called it a day!

But when it’s something you plan, either halfassed or wholeheartedly, and the public doesn’t show up, then it is a failure!! And it doesn’t matter if it is a work of art sent from heaven above that the stupid public doesn’t understand. It is still a failure!!!

Now do see the difference?

I repeat, if the masses love PW, does that make it "good". If the masses don't care that Mickey butter is gone, does that make it ok?

See above for PW non-argument-argument! As for the butter… No. It doesn’t make it OK. It makes it, doing business the Disney® way. As little as possible according to the survey!!

...and there are plenty of Disney fans who can't take Small World either but love Pirates...

Apples and oranges!!! Fruit salad here we come!! The point was a lame show (heck, even a great show) has a huge potential to spoil repeat visits. Whereas rides like Splash, ToT, Haunted Mansion and Pirates don’t seem to lose their appeal. Unless, of course, it is accompanied by an obnoxious song that won’t leave your brain even after days, and days, and Days, and DAYS, and DAYS… AHHHHHHHHHHH!!

I understand what you are saying, but it’s not to the point. The Great Movie Ride is the only other one I can think of that they did this. And it’s bothered me for years!!!!

 

[Another Voice]

AK Economics 101

The last time I ran the numbers from the annual report I came up with somewhat over 25% for all of Disney parks. This is a very rough number, and since it includes California Adventure and the cruise line, it’s probably less than what WDW parks generate on their own. In any case – it ain’t a bad business.

The issue with AK is that it was designed to bring in new guests to the property. It failed miserably to do that. Instead it siphoned attendance from the other three parks the first year, and in the second year all those guests went back and haven’t returned. Disney does track these things. Worse still is that the time in park is very low. That means most of the people going to AK are on park hoppers (no $40 for the admission) and they aren’t sticking around to drop the $30 on food and the $30 on stuff. And what money is spent at AK is money that was going to be spent at another park anyway. So the net increase to the company is zero. And just for the salt in the wounds, AK has had no impact on attendance at Universal or Sea World; Disney’s new park isn’t even keeping people on property to spend money.


Gluing Epcot Together.

Yes, EPCOT definitely has a feeling that it’s two different parks nailed together. It was a big criticism during the park’s design, a bigger criticism at its opening, and continues to be a criticism today. But with some cleaver design work and a bit of luck, the problem was turned into an advantage.

If you look at the layout of Epcot you will see that everything about the place is designed as two parks. Future World and World Showcase are separated by a huge gap and there is a strong feeling you are leaving FW and heading into WS. It gives the audience a chance to adjust and to reset their mental state. Someone once called the walk way as “an intermission between the double feature”. People see the places as having separate identities.

Now imagine what the place would look like if it was mixed up. Imagine the Norway pavilion sitting in between The Land and The Living Seas, and The American Adventure taking up half of Communicore. That mixes up the identities of the two places and produces nothing but a jumble.

That’s the problem I have with the ‘Big Red/Little Red/Kill the Bad Guys’ bit on the safari. It’s inserting a phony theme park element into something that’s trying to be “natural” in a very clumsy way. An ‘Indiana Jones’ jeep chase through the bush chasing poachers would have been an excellent thrill ride. And a truck journey through an animal enclosure for close look at real animals also makes for a good attraction. But mixing things up just doesn’t work very well. It’s possible, but it wasn’t done here. All that time taken up by the canned radio chatter could have been used to explain more about the animals staring back at us.


Last Words

There's a big difference between "popular" and "good". But if you're a business, it's much easier to get people to by tickets by being "good".

 

[Bstanley]

Theme Parks/Resorts numbers

year : $$$ - MK - EPC - MGM - AK - "TOTAL" (Million)
1999 : 6.1B - 15.2 - 10.1 - 8.7 - 8.6 - 42.6
1998 : 5.5B - 15.6 - 10.6 - 9.4 - 6.0 - 41.6
1997 : 5.0B - 17.0 - 11.8 - 10.4 - 0.0 - 39.2
1996 : 4.0B - 13.8 - 11.2 - 10.0 - 0.0 - 35.0

Well AV I don't know...I'm still not convinced that AK is such a drain. It looks like it's keeping the people on site that the 25th anniversary brought in and the bottom line $$ certainly show growth consistent with the attendance numbers. Example - 1997 to 1999 shows 8.6 million of growth at AK and the growth of $$ aren't that far off of my $100 estimate (maybe they're spending it at the MK, but they're spending it onsite) - figuring that the $$ include DL and the Cruise line, but I'm guessing that DL was basically constant during this time and there would only have been one ship operating that last year (that's why I discounted the 1.1B growth down to 800M).

What did I miss?

 

[Another Voice]

Well Mr. Bstanley, take a look at the numbers again.

You spend $800 million to open a brand new theme park, market it to the hilt – and the bump you get is half that of the bump you got for putting on a parade and covering the castle with vinyl. Not exactly the greatest return for the investment is it? And if retaining gains is simply the goal, opening up single E-ticket attractions works just as well for a fraction of the cost of a park. Look at what ‘Tower of Terror’ did for Disney/MGM Studios.

Now take a deeper look at the figures. Notice that the attendance for ALL of the other parks has fallen. Where did all those people go? Yes, Animal Kingdom. So what’s the point of spending $800 million dollars just to reshuffle where people are going to be spending the money? If Disney had spent nothing, all those people would still be flocking to the other three parks, spending just as much money.

And actually the results from Disneyland soared in this period with the farewell season of the ‘Main Street Electrical Parade’ (the highest attended year in Disneyland’s history) and the opening of the New Tomorrowland (yes, we where young and naïve back then…).

The results from the Animal Kingdom shocked Disney. Most troubling was the cannibalization impact on the other parks. Plans were quickly drawn up for major attractions to combat the drain, but only ‘Mission: Space’ seems to have made it (‘cause someone else is picking up the check). It also cased a huge slow down in spending at AK itself and is the reason why something cheesy like Dino-Rama took so long to build (and why it’s so cheesy). Only now you have falling attendance at four parks instead of three.

Doing things on the cheap up front may seem economical, but you end up paying much more to fix the problems that happen later. Good creative decisions can result in great economic outcomes.

 

[Bstanley]

Well, I seem to recall that the 25th anniversary involved a bit more than a castlecake and had some marketing of it's own...

I still see a substantial overall growth in dollars and people, EPCOT and The Studios took a minor hit, but the MK was up substantially and stayed up in addition to AK. If Disney could bring in 20% more people anytime they wanted (35 - 42 M) they should do it more often...

According to the same site that I got the WDW figures from the results for DL show a steady decline from '96 (the last year of the Main Street Electrical Parade) on - so any $ growth had to come from WDW, right?

DL attendance
1999 : 13.5M
1998 : 13.7M
1997 : 14.2M
1996 : 15.0M

If the word out inside Disney is that AK is/has been losing money I guess it must be...unless the stories are coming from somebody that just doesn't want to follow through and finish what IMHO is as good an example of real Disney Magic as has been done.

 

[DisneyKidds]

From EE, to half day parks, to 'was AK a failure'. Who needs the twists and turns of E ticket coasters at WDW, we can just come to these boards to have things turned upside down.

Where to begin......

AK may (or may not) be a failure in relation to Disney's expectations. A number of you are way too versed on Disney from the 'inside', others impress me with your knowledge of numbers - so I won't opine on the success or failure of AK as a business model or revenue center, et.al. I do think it is somewhat of an assumption (and you know what they say about those) to say that AK is 'cannibalizing' attendance from the other WDW parks. Perhaps without the AK the other WDW parks would have had the same decline, and the beer company would have had the guests the AK was keeping on property. That is just as likely as the 'cannibalization theory'.

Was AK a failure in it's design? Not an adequate zoo, not an adequate amusement park, not an adequate...... I forgot what else YOU GUYS want to define it as. I agree with scoop, you have to accept AK for what it is, not what you want it to be. I think Disney achieved what they set out to design, so no, it wasn't a failure in that respect.

Has AK met the public's (that public being the discontented third, and the indifferent middle third) expectations. Perhaps not.

Did that public have the proper expectations? Definitely not. Like some here, they expected it to be something it wasn't designed to be. The only failure I see in the AK would be Disney's ability to properly set people's expectation regarding the AK. That is unfortunate, because if people weren't looking for something they were never going to find (and getting PO'd because of it), they might have found the real AK and really enjoyed it.

We spend a lot of time in the AK. It is crowded. It stays crowded until after the parade, at the least. Sure, someone might go in March and find the AK empty at 3 pm. You know what, so is the MK. AK is not a half day park, and I'm sorry AV, you only scratch the surface of what the AK has to offer in what you actually toured in 3 hours. But that is ok for you, just down try and force it on anyone else.

Here is what we do in about 6 or 7 hours - KS (and I'm sorry, it seems a bit silly to condemn the ride for a 30 second corny bit that is at the end, after the animals anyway, and where else are you going to be 5 feet from a white rhino who stops your open air, unprotected vehicle in the middle of the road), Planet Watch, Lion King show, Pocahontas show, Kali Rapids, Asia and Africa walking trails, Triceratops Spin, Tarzan Rocks, the parade, a bite or a snack along with that wonderfully relaxing respite behind Flame Tree. Quite a lot of good entertainment, and that doesn't include taking the time to enjoy the plethora of little gems and hidden pleasures I discussed earlier. All the things we don't get to in that time. Dinosaur, Primevil Whirl, Boneyard, ITTBAB, adequate exploration of the Tree of Life and environs. AK a half day park - PISH.

I'm sorry. I don't buy the AK is more restrictive and less natural than other zoos. I love the Bronx Zoo. I can spend as much time there as I do in the AK. But you trudge from animal area to animal area, as you would expect in a zoo, and that's ok - it is what I expect. AK provides an environment with much more entertainment value, and overall is better done than the Bronx Zoo. I do cringe to say that because it only adds to the fruit salad.

Much of life and happiness comes down to expectations. Without the proper expectations, you set yourself up for diappointment. One example might be if I go to WDW in the summer and expect it to be crowded. I know, I deal, I have a great time. Someone else goes the same time and expects to walk on everything - they end up miserable. I think the folks who dislike the AK, and the people who ride in Cars #2 and 3, set themselves up for disappointment. You expect WDW to be what it was, what you want it to be - and when it is not you crucify Mr E, bemoan the decay of Walts values, and create negativity, which begets more negativity, and so on. Accept things for what they are, soak up the abundant Magic - the World can be a much happier place. You already know this BECAUSE YOU KEEP COMING BACK. Some people are like my sister in law, they just aren't happy unless they are complaining.

Have I rambled enough yet?

 

[Another Voice]

I’m sorry, I missed the part where going from 17 million to 15.6 million and then to 15.2 million is “up substantially”. Or where the Disney/MGM Studios dropping 10% one year and then dropping another 7% the following year is “a minor hit”.

Team Disney is only interested in looking at the impact the opening of Animal Kingdom. What can before is just the base. Welcome to the “what have you done for me lately” style of management. Yes, the air on the upper reaches of Team Disney is a little thin and occasional leads to some strange thinking. But it’s that thinking that drives the decisions around the property.

Again – the idea of Animal Kingdom was to INCREASE the number of guest/days overall on property. Not redistribute them. Not to keep them steady. But to increase them. There are far cheaper ways to acheive those goals.

Perhaps the goals were high, perhaps the demands that the parks to put out were too great, but the simple fact is that AK did not return the desired results. Notice all the cut backs, the delayed hotels, the cancelled expansion plans, the general belt tightening long before 9/11? Are those the signs of success?

Or perhaps, IMHO, some people just don’t want to follow through and finish what IMHO is a good example of what real Disney Management as has done.

P.S. - "Accept things for what they are, soak up the abundant Magic..."

A nice thought, but doesn't work for the business. Seen all those soaking crowds at California Adventure?

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

From EE, to half day parks, to 'was AK a failure'. Who needs the twists and turns of E ticket coasters at WDW, we can just come to these boards to have things turned upside down.

Yeah!! Don’t you just love it!!!

Let’s dive in!

Was AK a failure in it's design? Not an adequate zoo, not an adequate amusement park, not an adequate...... I forgot what else YOU GUYS want to define it as.

No, no, no!! You did it just right. Not adequate is the perfect way to describe it!

I agree with scoop, you have to accept AK for what it is, not what you want it to be.

OK! Hang on to your hats ladies and gentlemen, but I agree!! But it’s not up to me. And it’s not up to you. And believe it or not, it’s not up to Mr. Scoop either (no matter how important he thinks his opinion is )! It is up to the public, who votes with their pocketbook and attendance. And they are voting – NO!

I think Disney achieved what they set out to design, so no, it wasn't a failure in that respect.

Really? I don’t think so. I think it was compromised along the way (no BK) and value engineered wherever possible (Dino-rama). There are many, many aspects of AK that simply reek Disney magic. And those bright spots Disney should be very proud of. But there simply isn’t enough of them.

The only failure I see in the AK would be Disney's ability to properly set people's expectation regarding the AK. That is unfortunate, because if people weren't looking for something they were never going to find (and getting PO'd because of it), they might have found the real AK and really enjoyed it.

Well isn’t that a "six of one – half dozen of another"? It doesn’t matter whether Disney didn’t sell it right, or they didn’t build it right. The point is, they didn’t do something right!! And that is their fault. Not the public’s. SO Disney has a PR problem or a concept problem, right? But either way you slice it – They’ve got a problem!!

I think the folks who dislike the AK, and the people who ride in Cars #2 and 3, set themselves up for disappointment. You expect WDW to be what it was, what you want it to be - and when it is not you crucify Mr E, bemoan the decay of Walts values, and create negativity, which begets more negativity, and so on.

WOAH!!! Time out!! Let me see if I’ve got this straight. Are you seriously saying that we are setting our sites too high? That we expect too much from Disney? That no matter what they did they could never exceed our expectations!!?? Have I got that right!

Well!! What are you doing the last three weeks of July? I’d love to spend some time with you, personally showing you some of the hundreds, maybe thousands of things around Disney that have far exceeded my expectations. It’s just that for the life of me, I can’t think of a single on that they’ve done in the past ten years or so.

I don’t think we set any higher standard than they set for themselves many years ago. They were always raising the bar. Out doing their previous efforts. In other words, “Exceeding expectations”. Today they are lowing the bar. But my expectations are still where they should be setting the bar. Is that wrong? It’s my fault? I don’t think so!!

Have I rambled enough yet?

Not nearly enough!! If it were not for people like you, I would be sitting and staring at a blank screen!! Keep it coming!!



Ps: One more thought, not really on topic(s):

One example might be if I go to WDW in the summer and expect it to be crowded. I know, I deal, I have a great time. Someone else goes the same time and expects to walk on everything - they end up miserable.

Ahhh! Someone who knows the HELL of a summer Disney visit and the JOY of it at the same time. Yes!! You deal with it. But that was when Disney gave you adequate time to deal with it. I wonder how we’ll deal with it when the MK closes on an event every night at ten in the middle of July!!! And with no EE! I don’t know about you, but I’m expecting to be miserable. I guess anything short of that you would consider ‘MAGICAL”!

 

[aalan]

the past 2 years, my wife and i went to AK and spent 1/2 day there both times. its neither a great zoo or a great thrill park. despite being the largest of the 4 parks, there just doesnt appear to be that much to do there. the mix of live animals and rides is not done well. it COULD be great, and hopefully they will add to it. i agree that the grounds are nice, but AK is unfullfilled potential. we only go because we usually get park hoppers. its not terrible or anything, just the weakest park of the four.

 

[kenjean]

I agree with previous posts that AK has great theming. The attention to detail on the enviroment is as strong, or stronger than any other park. I also enjoy taking time out to sit and soak up the atmosphere.

It also has good e-ticket attractions. Safari, Lion King Show, Dinosaur (which I personally think was under done but will leave for sake of argument), the rapids ride. It has some nice walk through exhibits.

But....
Where are the middle tier attractions? You know, the ones that some people love, others hate. Small World, COP, TTA, Food Rocks, Cranium Command, Backstage Tour, Studio Tour, Time Keeper, The Making of Me, JIYI, Country Bears, etc.

These entertain me, I don't have to stop and try to find the entertainment in them. People don't want to pay $50 a day and have to create their own entertainment.
That's what Disney is supposed to be doing.

These types of attractions are often controversial, some think they are a waste of time, others, like me, love them.

The Magic Kingdom has the most of them, it is also the most frequented park on earth. Hmmm...........

People like to discover things and have their expectations exceeded, and yes they often like having their experience fed to them.

Try getting a family of five to focus their attention all at once on a group of ducks swimming in the now unused river at AK while sitting in a beautiful spot near the Flame Tree Barbeque. If it were in their local town square, maybe. But to travel 18 hours and spend a small fortune, it doesn't fly.

The only failure I see in the AK would be Disney's ability to properly set people's expectation regarding the AK. That is unfortunate, because if people weren't looking for something they were never going to find (and getting PO'd because of it), they might have found the real AK and really enjoyed it.

What happened to exceeding expectations? Even when, in the past, those expectations were sky high? This sounds like the bad artist who screams "People don't get my work".

 

[Bstanley]

OK, one last post and then adios to this thread.

Folks, look at ALL the numbers - don't cherry-pick.

Total person-gatedays at WDW before the 25th/AK = 35M (1996)
Total person-gatedays at WDW after the 25th/AK = 42M (1998)

That is an increase of 20%/7M which is roughly equal to the people supposedly visiting AK. Yes EPCOT and the Studios are down, but the MK is up from 13.8M to 15.2 in the first full year of AK - so maybe the MK stole 1.5M of the EPCOT and Studios people - not the AK!

Total Park/Resort dollars before the 25th/AK = $4B (1996)
Total Park/Resort dollars after the 25th/AK = $5.5B (1998)

This $ increase is totally consistent with the observed increase in person-gatedays at WDW (~20% increase in people and a ~20% increase in $).

DL attendance down from 15M to 13.7M from 1996 to 1998 (almost 10%) - an indicator that any dollar increases during that time must have come from WDW (or other operations - but '99 tthere was only one 'boat' running) and the extra $ made at WDW must have been large enough to make up for the 10% LOSS of $ at DL.

Now if you want to contend that the people who showed up for the 25th Anniversary in'97 would have just kept showing up at WDW for 'lagniappe' in '98, then don't fret the above details.

For me and my house we will continue to enjoy AK, a park abundant with detail, laid out according to decades of Disney experience (weenie and all), verdant and rich with experiences, friendly and a true expression of WDI.

Ciao'

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

This one might just be my confusion. Are you saying that parts of AK (besides I agree with DinoRama) don't meet the Disney standard?

Mr. Scoop! Calm down. So I reeled you back in. It wasn’t my intention, but I’m glad you’re here. Let me explain.

As you know I'm no real fan of AK. Not only is AK a half park but…. it is probably one of the worse themed places in all the world! There’s hardly any story, for any attraction. They mix up themes and stretch a point to absurdity, and that stupid tree is lame at best.

Is that little heart of yours racing a bit? Did your breathing increase ever so much? Are you pounding your fists into the desk, or worse into your temples? Are you pulling out you hair? Sorry! I couldn’t resist. JUST KIDDING!!!

As it happens you are right. It is mainly Dino-rama with which I have an issue. On a personal note, I don’t care for Dinosaur and Kili is way too short and way too wet for my taste. But those are extremely subjective and as such have no bearing on the subject at hand.

My personal take on AK is that this grandiose, Disney style plan was presented and they were told the price tag was simple too much. And in my little Disney brain I like to think that some Imagineer somewhere made a choice between dumbing down everything within the park equally, or making the hard decision of doing what they could do Disney style and simply giving the axe to everything else. I know it’s pretty naive, but I like to think that way.

 

[raidermatt]

Ahhh!!! You just don’t get it!!! Of course not. Just because some rotten TV show is a hit doesn’t necessarily mean it’s good.

Oh, but yes, I do! Unfortunately, my misguided attempts at light sarcasm have further muddied my clouded points...

I agree that just because something is popular, it is not automatically "good". And, if something is not popular, it is a failure. However, there is a difference between failure and bad.

Baron, the Golf Inn/resort is an oft-cited example from you of something that did not hit with the people, ie was a failure, BUT is still an example of the Disney philosophy. My point is that its true that AK may not be meeting its goals for attendance and increased "stay-length" (though its possible it is at least close). Therefore, to some degree it is a failure. However, that does not make it "bad". There is true Magic in that park, it may just be that it doesn't have wide enough appeal to make the numbers that were targeted. But it was a noble effort to blend aspects from different types of parks, and if it missed the mark, its still not far off.

 

[Another Voice]

Numbers are fun, aren’t they? Unfortunately the interpretation put on them here have no bearing on what happens at WDW. Yes, comparing the attendance now to what it was two years before AK opens does so an increase. If you go back to 1971 it probably shows an even greater increase, “proving” how peachy keen the success of the AK is. But that’s not how the people that control the money see things.

Please do enjoy Animal Kingdom. Accept it for what it is. But don’t ever delude yourself about the real reasons Beastly Kingdom is a field of scrub, that boat docks have been turned into bars, that carnival rides sprout up instead of major attractions and why photographers hound you to squeeze another $10.95 for a picture in front of the Tree.

“Disney is a business” is more than just a rationalization for cutting hours.

 

[DisneyKidds]

OK folks - too much to not respond to, but too much to respond to now. You know how it is. As Arnold would say, "I'll be back" - if for no other reason to keep the Baron sane .

Where was that link to the personality test. Have you all indulged. My fear is that we are all the same type and these threads will go on FOREVER.