Screamscape reports...Forbidden Mountain!?!?!

[norestneeded]

Screamscape has just reported the following Animal Kingdom rumor. I keep myself pretty abreast of the rumor wires but this one is news to me. Any of our moles know anything more?

"2004 / 2005 - Forbidden Mountain - (6/26/02) While this may be another big nail in Beastly Kingdom’s coffin, Screamscape has just heard a major rumor that may form into a press release in the near future. We don’t know much at this point, but it seems that this will be the first “Mountain” attraction outside of a Magic Kingdom park. To be more specific, it sounds like this ride will be plopped down somewhere in the Asia area of the park and sounds as if it will be a heavily themed Mine Train coaster ride in and out of a giant mountain. We were also told that it sounds as if this ride may even have two individual but unique track layouts interwoven with each other, much like the famous Matterhorn at Disneyland. If anyone knows more, please let us know!"

[April76]

I've never seen the Indiana Jones attraction, but it's the first thing I thought of from this description... wasn't "Temple of Doom" in an Asia type setting? I would love to see that type of attraction in any of the WDW parks!

[Lesley]

Taking this slightly OT....but does anyone else feel that Beastly Kingdom is essential to the AK having a cohesive and appealing theme? If this really is the nail in the coffin.....I think they've shot themselves in the foot. AK doesn't get great attendance because its too much like a zoo...yet they are refusing to add the elements that will further define it as something else. The original idea was a park dedicated to "the animals that are, were and will never be" (bad paraphrase,sorry)

As far as the whole Nahtazu campaign....I find it incredibly half assed (sorry to be crude). In defining the park by what its not (though, it is, isn't it?) they've made the whole premise that much weaker.

AK could be awesome...and in some ways it already is.....but they seem to keep throwing good money after bad. Is this only obvious to me?

BTW...AK is my favorite park in many respects....so I'm particularly ticked off at the mismanagement of it!

Oh, and the rumor does sound pretty cool....though as I said...I think its the totally wrong direction!

[Another Voice]

Hmmmm……

This sounds very, very, very much like the original coaster planned for the Dinosaur section of Animal Kingdom. It was supposed to be an opening day attraction, then was pushed back in the initial wave of the park’s budget cuts, and then finally replaced by the spreadsheet-friendly Dino-Rama. Just replace the original dinosaur digging site with the mine and you have the “new” rumor.

Of course at WDI projects never die (the graveyard sits at the corporate offices), so someone my be trying to a quick rethemeing and rebudgeting of the attraction for another go at getting approval to build something, anything at all.

Then there all the other rumors about a certain other theme park that actually invests money in attractions and themeing – some say they spend money like sea water. They are supposed to be looking for a second Indiana Jones themed attraction to compliment the one they already have. Hmmm – a roller coaster through a mine with Indiana Jones….why does that sound so familiar?

[Horace Horsecollar]

Originally posted by Another Voice
Then there all the other rumors about a certain other theme park that actually invests money in attractions and themeing – some say they spend money like sea water. They are supposed to be looking for a second Indiana Jones themed attraction to compliment the one they already have. Hmmm – a roller coaster through a mine with Indiana Jones….why does that sound so familiar?
So Screamscape says it's going to be plopped down somewhere in Asia. Could this ride actually be going to the real Asia, not the Asia at AK?

[d-r]

AV - you are about to go to 1,000.

And, yeah, I agree with you - when I read this, it sounded like a re-themed excavater, which always sounded to me like a re-themed indiana jones coaster from Paris. I was still sort of hoping that maybe, somehow, someday a roller coaster would show up at dinoland, because I always thought the idea was for a "grown up" and "kiddie" version, so I sort of secretly hoped that primevil whirl was the kiddie one with a big one to follow.

I wonder if this is a back-up or alternative plan to Beastly Kingdom - maybe if reign of fire isn't a big box office, why should they build an e-ticket for it? So how to re-theme this coaster, without the dragon? Well, without the dragon, you wouldn't need beastly kingdom anymore....why not just put it one of the other lands.

If this uses the same RIDE that was supposed to be in fire mountain without the dragon (and not an older coaster like paris indiana jones, even if it is backwards) I still think it would be pretty cool, and instead of beastly kingdom they could build another continent - that wouldn't bother me too much. I think that AK's success hinges on more and better attractions, and not neccessarily only on beastly kingdom - if they do some well-themed really good attractions I wouldn't miss it. I mean really, everything besides fire mt. sounds pretty lame anyway (a unicorn maze?) and I've said for a while that Beastly Kingdom has already been build, it is just at ioa. So why bother? If you must have a mythical creature, put back in the allusion to a dragon or a unicorn on the boat ride over from AKL -

- you know, honestly, I'd rather have the same quality of a coaster as fire MT. in Asia, a new S. America or Australia with new animals and an e-ticket (even a soarin clone, or put forbidden MT. here instead of Asia for that matter), and a boat from AKL with a view of a dragon or unicorn than Beastly Kingdom with fire Mt. and the unicorn maze.

DR

[All Aboard]

A mine train ride in and out of a mountain. All seems somewhat familiar.Click Here (http://disneyworld.disney.go.com/waltdisneyworld/parksandmore/attractions/attractionindex?id=MKBigThunderMountainRailroadAtt )

[raidermatt]

gcurling- That was my first thought as well. But if its a Temple of Doom kind of thing, it could be very different. But if AV's right, we might have to dust off the old passport to actually ride it (if it even ends up being built at all).

Not to change the subject, (never happens around here), but doesn't the Cave of Wonders seem like a natural for a coaster/thrill ride of some type? (Maybe not for AK...).

It could even be a Soarin' type of ride, where the magic carpet has picked us up from above...

[rocketman23]

I think this would not be a good move for Disney. Animal Kingdom needs a thrilling new land, Beastly Kingdom, then a rehash of Thunder Mountain. You see dragons and unicorns all over the park for petessake! It's about time they built Beastly Kingdom, ended the bad reputation of AK, and not be afraid to take on IOA's Lost Continent! Go for it Disney...

[tuck]

I think this may be the next thing after BK. ASia was rumored to get a new attaction after BK a while back.

Even if this Mt. is built... Screamscape had one thing wrong..IT won't be the first Mt. attaction outside a magic Kingdom/disneyland

1. Grizzly River - Cali Adv.
2. Journey to the center of the Earth - Disney sea

[Bob O]

A mine train ride doesnt sound like a e-ticket attraction IMHO.
They do need to build BK!!!! The park was advertised from the beginning concepts of having as part of the park a land for mythical animals, it would be sad if the only myth was the building of BK in the first place. And who will build the ride mechanism for this new attraction??

[Peter Pirate]

I no longer think BK is needed at AK (apparantely a good thing if Scoop's scoop is correct - and I know that it is).

I think AK needs another 'E' ticket to be sure, but I personally would rather see them develop and cultivate the current demographic that seems to really like the AK philosophy as given us (no it wasn't a large as they'd hoped, but then they cut back on the initial development also). I think the AK fan base is growing and more of the same type of entertainment would be preferable to a 'weenie' for the excitement crowd (a 'weenie' that would only serve to draw the excitement seekers to that one attraction anyway - see TT at Epcot).

I would love to see Austrailia become a reality. The Soarin' clone would be great and I'd like to see one more top-notch Australian animal enconter ride/attraction...Maybe they can get that croc hunter guy to risk his life six times a day or smething!;)

:cool: :cool: :bounce: :cool: :cool:

[Bstanley]

Well Scoop,

From a picture that I snatched from the web, it would appear that the distance from the present bus 'depot' at the AKL to a small lake that borders AK is only 300 yards or so. But that lake doesn't approach the front entrance.

The lake wraps around an area in the picture that has been cleared and if I remember my bus ride from AKL to AK it is a 'backstage area'. I suppose they could relocate whatever is there today, or even dig a canal nearer to the front entrance...

Personally I still wish that the Steam Train that goes to Rafiki's Plant Watch (nee' Conservation Station) went to AKL also.

[daannzzz]

A mine train through a mountain could easily be an E-ticket ride depending on what's in the mountain!!! This sure wouldn't be my first choice to add to AK. Wouldn't be my second, third or fourth choice either, though I am sure it would be fun. I really would like to se BK built as long as it wasn't just a dragon coaster. if they decide not to do BK I will still be happy if the continue to creat exaotic locals AND put in some real E-ticket attractions not just rides.

[Another Voice]

“…really like the AK philosophy as given us…”

“As given us”?

Hmmm…… I just had a flash about some a scene from an old C.B. DeMile Biblical Epic where this giant tree appears in the wilderness and a booming voice from the clouds tells a group of shepards to “rejoice for a Great Gift has been given unto thee”.

Disney built AK as a business, not a private hang-out for the people who “get the concept”. And while it’s good that some people can still lower, er, I mean change their expectations, I’d really like to hear how ‘Primeval Whirl’ is not just a spreadsheet friendly weenie for the excitement crowd.

[DisneyKidds]

Hmmmmm AV..... a little literal this am aren't we?;)

As for AK and expectations, all I have to say is.....

.......'you spin me right round, baby right round, like a record, baby right round round round'

Do we really want to go round in circles on this one again so soon :crazy: ?

[Lesley]

If AK isn't getting Beastly Kingdom....then what is the theme of the park? It seems to be turning into World Showcase plus animals.....oh, but then again we have this Dinoland (with a tacky carnival?) and Camp Minnie-Mickey....which don't fit. The element AK needs to keep its original theme cohesive is BK. That does't necessarily mean a dragon coaster and unicorn maze...it could be a Pegasus coaster/dark ride through Mt. Olympus...or whatever. I'm not the imagineer.

There is so much that could be done with the orginal concept for the park....but they seem to just want to water it down and weaken it. Big rides (or not so big rides) with no cohesive story do not make a Disney park......that makes a Six Flags...or maybe Busch Gardens?

Camp Minnie Mickey could be better fleshed out as a tribute to animated animals.....how about a Bambi dark ride along the lines of Pooh or Peter Pan? Dinoland seems pretty much finished (unless they come to their senses and bulldoze that awful carnival) and the continent areas give us animals as they are now as well as some nice attractions....the missing link to pull it all together is BK.

AK could be as good as TDS, if they were willing to put a real effort into developing what they started with. But it seems they've written that idea off as a failure before ever finishing it. Kind of like building half a grocery store....no bakery, dairy or meat departments...with the promise of bringing those in later...and then declaring the whole concept of a grocery store a failure because people stop visiting it. The failure isn't in the concept, but in the fact that it wasn't completed. But no, lets just bring in more frozen foods....yeah, that'll do it.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Another Voice]

The big question to be resolved is a fundamental issue with the place’s theme: is Animal Kingdom supposed to be ABOUT animals, or is Animal Kingdom an amusement park THEMED around animals.

I have a feeling most people go there expecting to see and learn about animals, something like a zoo or an aquarium. Animal Kingdom should be educational and get its “magic” from real animal in real settings.

Other people go there wanting a theme park; the animals are there just like dressing up a roller coaster like an old western mine train “themes” it Frontierland. The place should be fun just like any other theme park and the rides are the draw.

As it stands now, the place tries to do both and fails. One concept or the other has to be dominate (the other can still exist) to give the place a clear direction and give the guests a clear message. At the moment, you have the safari ride which seems to be educational, but says really nothing new (poaching is bad – not exactly a news flash) and wastes time with a phony storyline about a lost elephant. Surely there are still people at Disney that know how to make a real elephant just as exciting as a fiberglass replica (one hopes).

Answering that question would make the choice between Beastly Kingdom type attractions and Australia type attractions more than just a budget call.

P.S. – Mr. Pirate, please be sure to stop by the Monterey Bay Aquarium on your swing out west. You’ll see the potential that Animal Kingdom had.

P.S.S. – It’s been my observation that the Car 1 crowd views Disney products very much as a gift, something that we must both accept unconditionally and that one must show proper gratitude for. The Car 3 crowd seems to view Disney products as a business transaction, they judge them by value received for the price and how the product matches one’s own taste and desires. I think the vast public tends to see things like the fans in Car 3 does. If Disney wants to continue as a business, they need to give to public want its willing to pay for.

[Peter Pirate]

My words do seem to do strange things to your imagination, don't they Voice?:p

I have been to AK a lot this year and I can tell you it has always been VERY busy, so when the next numbers are 'leaked' I don't believe we will see AK as the dog it has been made out to be. ...not a private hangout for those "who get the concept".
Jeez Louise AV, it's been a number of threads since I flamed most of the (un)civilized world...Can't we let bygones be...Well, you know...:rolleyes:

I really do take exception to your continual portrayal of my taste as basically "anything Disney gives us." While it's true that I like PW you must remember that in my 46 year existence on this orbiting hunk or rock, I have never experieiced anything remotely like PW. So should my personal experience be influenced by those many of you who obviuosly have? I can accept that it isn't a great ride and nee definately isn't anywhere near classic Disney standards, but the "weenie" was given to smaller kids (IMO) as an adddition in an area that really needed it. But as to my standards, why is it ok for you to suggest that I had to have "lowered my standards" to like AK but if I suggest that people who don't like AK simply don't get it, I become some evil elitist? Aren't we playing the same game?;)

Now you've just posted that AK fails on both of is missions, au contraire monfraire! Educationally AK gives us plenty, or does talking to the CM's from the host countries or from animal services not count? We have learned so much more here & at AKL than we ever learned at SeaWorld or Metro Zoo (Miami) or even the SD Zoo....And enough about "Big Red" OK? The story is cute and it's a fun way to get us back to camp, otherwise we'd be out there for two weeks!

As for the Aquarium, well it's not currently in my plans but I'm looking at my itinery for time slots...

:cool: :cool: :bounce: :cool: :cool:

[Bstanley]

Disney built AK as a business, not a private hang-out for the people who “get the concept”. And while it’s good that some people can still lower, er, I mean change their expectations, I’d really like to hear how ‘Primeval Whirl’ is not just a spreadsheet friendly weenie for the excitement crowd.

Meowr...my, my... we DID have our saucer of milk today, didn't we?

Well now I know what AV wanted AK to be. I've never visited the Monterey Bay Aquarium, but I'll substitute the San Diego Zoo (SDZ) instead in my mind and comment on it.

When my family visits Southern CA I 'take' my family to see the SDZ (in fact the last trip the older one asked to skip it), when we go to WDW they continue to ask to go to AK (next Feb will be the next data point).

When we visit the SDZ I think to myself, wow this is really a great zoo and the shows are pretty kewl, but by 3pm everybody has seen just about all the small furry creatures they want to see and they want to move on. When we vist AK we alternate between attractions - creatures - shows and my band doesn't want to leave until it's time for supper. Especially this last trip with the Jammin' Jungle Parade added in we didn't get out of the place until the CMs ran us off.

The people who work with the animals at SDK are wonderful to talk to, the CMs at AK who work with the animals are wonderful to talk to. The SDK is fairly 'attractive', AK is visually stunning (right down to every last detail). Blah, blah...

To summarize, it may be true that AK is not a SDK class 'zoo', but frankly I and my band of merry travelers have found it to be a much more entertaining and involving mix of entertainment than the SDK, period. So apparently do 5 Million people (the difference between visitors to SDK and visitors to AK).

I think AK would benefit from new things - what Theme park doesn't need new things every so often? I haven't seen PW yet, but Fantasyland has Dumbos going around and around and I've never found that to be particularly Magical, but I think the MK is Magical.


P.S. You're wrong AV - of course AK is a "private hang-out for the people who 'get the concept' ", AK is no different than the MK or Epcot, etc. in that regard. There are MILLIONS of people who don't get the concept of WDW - I've got neighbors across the street in their sixties that have NEVER visited WDW. For crying out loud - I've got a former employee that lives in Orlando who hasn't taken his children to WDW in the 5 years since he moved there! Sheer insanity in my mind...

[raidermatt]

The Monterey Aquarium really is beautiful, and its in a wonderful setting. We go about once a year, and if you get the chance Mr. Pirate, I recommend it as well.

The big question to be resolved is a fundamental issue with the place’s theme: is Animal Kingdom supposed to be ABOUT animals, or is Animal Kingdom an amusement park THEMED around animals.

My initial reaction was to agree with this statement. After all, its logical, and "clean", which I like.

However, I realize I do not have all the answers, and when it comes to entertainment, logical and clean just doesn't always cut it. To paint things broadly, I see three possible directions:

1- AK is ABOUT animals. In this case, adding an aquatic area makes the most sense. You just can't pretend to be about animals and leave out those that occupy 2/3 of the Earth. Most of the current rides/shows would have to go, or at least undergo extreme modifications. More things like the Mahrajah (sp) Trek and Pangini (sp) Walk would need to be added, possibly with Australian and South American mini-lands. Other types of educational and interactive "slow" attractions would be added. No BK.

2- AK is an amusement park themed toward animals. This lets most of the current rides/shows stay, but would probably require replacing the Trek/Walks, and "jazzing-up" the Safari. Allows for BK, an aquatic area, or Australia/South America.

3- AK continues to try to be both. I know some disagree, but I honestly think this can work. I think it DOES work now, its just that Disney has not really built on the foundation it had since 1999. Under this scenario, it would make sense to eventually add one or two lands/mini-lands. BK does make sense, but isn't necessary. An aquatica area, and another land themed area can work just as well. Add an E-ticket and a couple of minor attractions to Asia/Africa, mixing education and amusement.


But it seems they've written that idea off as a failure before ever finishing it. Kind of like building half a grocery store....and then declaring the whole concept of a grocery store a failure because people stop visiting it.

Lesley, while I disagree with the idea that BK is a necessity, I completely agree with your above statement. Whether its BK, Australia, or Aquatic, follow-through on the idea. Continue to develop the current areas, and finish* the park (but not with DR quality).

*(Stealing AV's use of footnotes) finish means complete it in scope, with the understanding that, per Walt, no park is ever finished.

[OnWithTheShow]

At least AK got the Tree of Life instead of the originally designed icon a three tier carousel. Thats right a CAROUSEL as the icon! The original concept is NOT always the best...

[Bob O]

Actually i think AV has made his points very well with people complaining about his tone but not responding well at all to the points he has made!!
And i would agree with lesley that BK is a must. Before the park was built they made a big thing of BK in all there PR and even had icons from that park built into the front entrance.
As for being educational i find little in the park that educates people as much as the average zoo and alot less than the major zoo's. As much as i love KS the big red part is just part of their pc movement as most of conservation station is.
They need to BK and even though dscoop says it is dead im not aware that he is in the boardromm where these decisions are meade. But he may end of being right because of disney's inability to be creative anymore and they would perfer to give us PW which can be found at most any amusement park.(though some may think this is as breathtaking as spiderman at IOA)

[raidermatt]

Forget what was planned. If for whatever reason they decided that BK is wrong, so be it. Focusing on BK is too narrow a focus.

There are two problems surrounding what has or has not been built at AK:

1- The park was designed to have a certain "amount" of things to do/see/experience. With BK and others cut, the park has less "value" than was intended. Therefore, if follows that attendance will be lower as well. I have no problem with opening an incomplete park to get the revenue stream started. However, when attendance for your incomplete park does not match what you expect at a complete park, you have to consider the fact that its NOT COMPLETE!

If initial guest reaction tells you that you are not on the right track, fine, adjust. After all, that's one of the reasons you opened the thing incomplete, so you can make those adjustments without ripping things out. However, you can't do virtually nothing for 3 years and expect things to get better.

No BK? Ok, what's replacing it that is on the same scope and is a better fit? A different land, or enhancements to the existing lands? Its clear you need to do something, so figure out what it is and DO IT. (DR is not even close to the scope of what was axed, but unless we have any leaked figures, we really don't know if it and the parade have impacted attendance).

2- The specific expectation of BK and other things based on the pre-promotion that included these things. (Including the current logos). Its always a mistake to set such specific expectations, then change course. Even if your changes are an improvement, some will be angry. When your changes are clearly cuts, its even worse.

[Peter Pirate]

I basically agree Matt, except consideration has to be given to the economic climate & the comanies economic situation since AK first opened. I know things cannot stop because of 'unspeakable events' but I think it realistic to believe that the focus, timetable or scope could be changed by the combination (or cumulative) affects of a myriad of odd circumstances that have been facing business and particularily the tourism industry over the past 2-3 years...
:cool: :cool: :bounce: :cool: :cool:

[raidermatt]

Those are good points, Peter. But it seems pretty clear that Disney was in no hurry to make any major additions to AK, even before the economy started to turn in late 2000. I can understand the delay given the way things have gone the last year and a half or so, but its not like they halted construction. They hadn't even started.

Maybe the expansion plans are sitting in the driver's seat, waiting for the green light. Until we see something actually happen, we can only wait.

But perhaps a bigger factor is the company's economic situation that you alluded to. One of the drawbacks, it seems, of being part of a media empire is that when that empire is not going well, you are going to see your profits sucked away to prop up those other areas. I'm hoping Eisner can turn ABC around, but since he's ultimately responsible for it going in the tank to begin with, I won't exactly be putting him in the Hall of Fame if he succeeds. Any TV industry savvy person should have seen the precarious position ABC was in over a year ago. Whether the Fox Family acquisition ends up being a good move remains to be seen, but clearly with the "mother ship" so short of quality shows, the timing certainly seems questionable.

I only digress because it is frustrating to have such failures used as a reason for hurting the parts of your business that are producing. It maybe an economic reality, but whose responsible for Disney getting hit so hard by that reality?

Another thing I should point out is that we are going on the assumption that Disney is disappointed with the performance of AK. We all know the attendance figures, so there's no point re-hashing those. What we don't know for sure is what management's current opinion is of those figures, and what positive affect AK had on the average length of stay. I know, we have some who have told us the news is all bad, but we have to at least entertain the possibility that mgmt considers the news at least adequate. Hence, nothing bigger or better than DR. No way to prove or disprove this, its just something that has to be considered.

[Bob O]

Some may have no problem with disney intentionally opening a park incomplete while charging full price, but i certainly do!!!
How can anybody agree that a park should be built incomplete yet still charge a full admission price???? Why should full admission be charged for a incomplete park??
Disney did this becasue they knew there faithful(car 1 people???) would stand beside them. But if lets say Universal did this w/IOA they would be outraged at how a company could act in such a manner for the sole purpose to make some money.

[Peter Pirate]

I don't know any car 1'ers on this board that wish ill will to US/IOA...Some of us don't necessarily like the place, some of us haven't embraced their movies but for me it's just taste. I wish US/IOA would do well because it would be incentive for Disney to do better (yes Landbaron it's too bad that Disney just doesn't do it on their own). US/IOA's failures IN NO WAY make Disney better IMO.

Again, AK doesn't seem like a half day park to me and no amount of name calling (Disney apologist, Disney lover, faithfull, whatever) is going to change that. You like IOA, others don't. Does it mean you are right? Or wrong? No, neither...It's just taste, so please don't tell me I don't have any by telling me I'm wrong...Or worse yet, senseless!:p

Lastly, I'll admit AK wasn't complete when it opened, but it is nearing "Disney" completion now, IMO (whether everyone likes it or not). Remember DL & MK didn't open complete and neither did MGM. The difference between MK & AK is tha MK was given many years to find its way and had no internet critics...Ak has only been with us three years!

:cool: :cool: :bounce: :cool: :cool:

[Lesley]

I really wanted to respond here...but after writing a huge post most of it disappeared.....this text window is weird for me...stuff keeps vanishing. Gonna have to bow out of this discussion...

I don't have time for this! :mad: And things were just getting good!

And Peter Pirate...its been over 4 years..AK opened on April 23rd (my birthday) 1998.

[space42]

The difference between MK & AK is tha MK was given many years to find its way and had no internet critics...Ak has only been with us three years!

5 years this April.

MK at 5 years was 1976. It already had 2 E-Ticket expansions Pirates and Space Mountain. Add that to the other E-Tickets Haunted Manison, 20k Leagues, Jungle Cruise, Small World. Plus MANY other A-B-C Tickets. I dont think it is even a close compairison. Just my $.02

[tfc3rid]

When DAK opened in 1998 I figured to give it 5 years. MGM opened in 1989 and in its 5th year, we see the Tower of Terror.

However, as we all know, the climate has changed. I had fully expected to see some major expansion at AK (not including Asia). I figured that the park experience would be enhanced with additional attractions, both animal related and pure fantasy, using new technologies, etc. However, based upon the recent track record and what we have seen put into AK, the optimism has obviously faded. This park, at least in the forseeable future will not be even close to what it could be. My glass half-full mindset tells me that someday (don't know when) AK will be a real experience...a true must see. While many of us (myself included) like it right now, I know it could be so much more.

[Peter Pirate]

I didn't mean for a direct comparison, only to illustrate the fact that MK was not complete either. AK is not supposed to be 'MK', even under the most grandiose interpretation.

3 years, 4 years, 6 years who cares? It's the big picture that matters. What will it look like in 10 or 20 years? Another post pointed out that we really don't know the current company desire for AK. Yes they want bottom line growth but maybe their projctions for the future vesus what they're willing to spend are in line. Maybe they have since come to the conclusion that additional parks like AK just WILL NOT add days to a guests vacation. Maybe the general thinking is that Orlando is saturated...Remember that glorious completely finished park IOA is still not drawing like was envisioned...Perhaps the plug has been pulled on the original AK and future big time expansion because it is not in Disney's best interest (in their opinion). We don't know these things for sure but the handwriting does seem to be there. We will get expansion, but it doesn't seem to be in the terms we Disney nuts generally want (me included).

I know we all hate to hear that projects get axed by the bean counters but it's always been that way. While Walt generally got what he wanted there were a lot of struggles and compromises with Roy along the way and this Company is not in the same situation in any way, shape or form as it was then. From being a privately held public to completely public, from going boldly where no one had dared go before, to a business landscape littered with competetion. From a world accepting of more simplistic offerings to a guest base needing faster, hipper & technologically advanced (all at the same time). From a time of unprecedented national growth to a time of unprecedented national stagnation (despite the tremendous growth of the top 5 percent). This business environment can only be compared in principle to that of the past. If Walt were here today (aside from being really old) he wouldn't have approched things exactly as he did then...Oh, I still think his mark would have been made (greatness does shine though) but it would have been dfferent, just as AK is diffeent.

I'm not trying to convince anybody that AK is good, we all have our own tastes and only time will tell, but AK is a park on the rise IMO, whether it keeps pace in the "E" ticket war or not, who knows...
:cool: :cool: :bounce: :cool: :cool:

[DisneyKidds]

Ah, the AK debate goes round and round again, same teams and all ;).

I thought I'd try and appease Mr.O and do more than poke at AV's apparent crankiness. However, I find it hard to expand on what the good Pirate has said.

I will say this, the tunnel vision focus on BK prevents some from seeing all the other wonderful things that AK offers, and other possibilities that might make just as good additions. Furthermore, AK is not a loser of a park that just appeals to a set of Disney apologists who 'get it'. Oh, wait, maybe it is - there are just 8 million of them.

On the bright side, I am happy to hear of AV taking over the ABC ship :). It can only get better under his tenure. However, the real value will come when he has Disney divest itself of ABC. Then more of the Disney focus can be placed on the parks where it belongs :bounce:.

[raidermatt]

Some may have no problem with disney intentionally opening a park incomplete while charging full price, but i certainly do!!!

Exactly. Many do. And that's the point that has to be understood and expected going in. The fact that many didn't/don't consider AK complete should not be a surprise, but it still makes sense to open it and let those who are satisfied contribute to the revenue stream, allowing you to show some return and make stockholders happy.

You take the feedback from both those that are happy and those that aren't and base further expansion plans on that.

The problems come when you axe the expansion plans, or scale them down severely.

Perhaps that was the plan all along, or perhaps the change occured somewhere in the process. Regardless, focusing on the fact that is was opened incomplete is barking up the wrong tree. The fact that many STILL view it as incomplete is the problem. (pending 2002 attendance figures...)

[Another Voice]

Yes, the Cranky One has returned.

The reason we care about the size and scope of Animal Kingdom is because we happen to be paying for the tickets now. What the place looks like in 10 or 20 years really doesn’t help the average family squeeze fifty bucks out enjoyment out of the place today. The other point is that Disney has shown little enthusiasm for any expansion to AK that is the same size as the additions that were added to MK, Epcot and the Studios.

When you look at Disney as a business you have to use a different perspective than looking at it as a fan. Yes, you may love everything that Animal Kingdom offers, but recognize that is a personal opinion only. The business side requires that you look at what the majority of people like and don’t like – a theme park is mass entertainment after all. The hardest part about entertainment is understanding that your tastes may not always match the public’s, and that you have to give the public what it wants. And if you give them something they don’t like, for whatever reason, you have to change that or accept their rejection.

Attendance at Animal Kingdom is lower than had been hoped and the distribution patterns throughout the property are much different than expected. It was publicly stated that the goal for Dino-Rama was to increase the guest’s length of stay. There have been discounts and special promotions. None of this points to a park either on the rise or a park that needs to expand because it’s popular.

Disneyland and the Magic Kingdom were both opened as “complete parks”. They were designed and built to provide a guest a full day’s experience. Yes, expansion did happen as it should at all parks. But ‘Space Mountain’ was never planned as a Day One attraction and there was never any intention of building ‘Pirates’ at all. Even Disney/MGM Studios was opened as a complete park, albeit a small one. There were no expansion plans when the place opened. The justification of Animal Kingdom’s current size by saying that the Magic Kingdom did the same thing is, well, a misstatement (I’ll try to be less cranky).

Animal Kingdom started off as a modest sized park with more initial attractions than Disney/MGM. Even the current Disney can learn from their mistakes. But other areas of the corporation required money and the park suffered through a series of cutbacks. Out of the five areas that were to have originally opened, one was postponed a year, one was cut in half and one was canned entirely. By Disney’s own relaxed standards of what constituted a “full day” - the place was short.

The public feels that and they act appropriately. The real question is will Disney respond to the public’s perceived shortcomings or will they continue to let Animal Kingdom drift along. As long as there’s park hopping, they will always get a crowd – well, a crowd for half a day anyway.

[YoHo]

I would Just like to Point out, that During the Last Recession, Disney Built
Mickey's Birthday land
Disney MGM Studios and many of its expansions
Splash Mountain
A whole lot of Hotels
A few Water Parks
Redid Pleasure Island.
Not to mention the Successful movies and the rest of the company.

Don't give me this Disney can't spend the money, because of the economy. They did in the past and it worked like Gangbusters.
The Company then decided to NOT spend the money on a complete AK during some of the best Economic times in the recent past.

So don't give me this economy BS!!!
It's a load of Horse doots and you know it. They are Scared.
Eisner is Scared.
They could and should spend that money and it would lead to results. The American People would spend their money even during rough times if they preceived that it was worth it. That's What Americans do.

Make it worh their time and money.

[DisneyKidds]

OK, lets just say for arguments sake that AK opened 'incomplete' and should have had BK from the start. That would have added an E ticket, maybe a show, a couple of smaller rides and atractions, etc. Do you honestly believe that AK would draw 10 million visitors because it had one additional land? The only place you get AK half day discussions is on boards like this. 99.9% of the average public has no preconceived notion that AK is a half day park that is keeping them from coming. They don't say 'hey, the attendance figures are not what was projected so the park must be a failure and we aren't going'. Furthermore, while BK may have added another hour and a half to some people's visit, it would not have appealed to everyone. If you only spend 4 hours there now, five and a half with BK doesn't make it a full day. For some who consider the park a half day now, they may have considered it the same with BK. Some who consider AK a full day now, they may not have spent any more time. For some, AK might have been a two dayer. There seems to be so much desire to label the AK. Failure. Incomplete. Half Day. It is none of these, and so long as you keep looking for a label you may never see what is actually inside the package.

[Peter Pirate]

Look closer Yoho I didn't say these were the specific reasons for the current Disney mindset, I was trying to point out that the economic status of both the country the company combined with many other factors could have been the culprit.

At one time a Disney/Yahoo merger was discussed here and elsewhere. This was in the midst of great economic times and Yahoo appeared to be a company of the future a company to be reccond with...Boy aren't we glad that merger didn't take place...

I'm not saying the economy (good or bad) are specfcally directing Disney's movement, but in this economy, in which we have no current clue where it is going, with a Company in trouble, is it surprising that they are playing it close to the vest with the Parks? That in no way explains the huge waste of time & money that apparently went into PH, but we'retalking about Parks and AK here...

I agree that Eisner appears to be runnng scared, but that and in and of itself is still relevent.

As for AK we just have a huge chasam of difference and neither side is budging. I recognize that my love of AK is personal and not necessarily reflective of the whole, but I reiterate that I believe AK's stock is on the rise (based on the huge crowds I always encounter there). But more to the point what of these discussions is not predicated on our own personal tastes?

:cool: :cool: :bounce: :cool: :cool:

[Another Voice]

Well Mr. Pirate, you do have to ask yourself about the following trend:

The Magic Kingdom was designed and built at the height of the Vietnam era of social unrests when Disney could not have been more “square”.

EPCOT Center was designed and built in the middle of stagflation, gas rationing and economic turmoil that really shut down most vacation travel.

Yet Animal Kingdom was designed and built at the very height of the Lying ‘90s when money flowed freely, people wallowed in disposable income and everything from water to toilet paper was “designer branded”.

I will agree with you that the long term success of the Company has little to do with general economic conditions. But success has a lot to do with quality leadership. Economics may simply be a convenient excuse for people to use to cover up other shortcomings.

[DisneyKidds]

Here's another take AV.

You imply that AK shows failure in the fact that it has not performed as well as MK or Epcot (mind you, I am not agreeing or disagreeing with this) while it has enjoyed a much more favorable economic and social environment.

Maybe, just maybe, the trials and tribulations you think might have hindered the MK and Epcot successes were actually part of the reason they were as successful as they were. The height of the Vietnam era, things were a mess, social unrest, unreal reality all around, etc., etc. Disney may have been 'square', but where better to get away from the realities of the time. Likewise, with Epcot, WDW was a somewhat proven commodity at the time. People had limited resources for vacations. If you are going to go - go with the sure thing, the best value.

Now enter AK in its era of free flowing money and relative harmony throughout much of the world. Perhaps this was a detriment to the AK (as well as a hindrance to other Disney and Orlando parks) as people were more free to travel the world and had the resources to do it. In hard times, if people can do anything at all, they are likely to go for the safe bet. In the best of times they take more risks and explore other options.

There are many factors that afect business decisions and performance. The economy is only one. Social environment is one. How people react to the economy and social environment is another. How businesses plan for future economic events is yet another. Plus, many factors that have nothing to do with the economy or social environment.

BTW, there is no motive to look for excuses and hide shortcomings, just a desire to see the big picture.

[Bstanley]

Kewl, a discussion.

I don't plan to change cars or anything, but I'm certainly willing to accept that adding a couple more E-ticket attractions to AK would benefit the park.

I personally can't imagine how you could really 'theme' a giant (think Hulk or Dueling Dragons) roller coaster without mightily detracting from those aspects of AK that I really enjoy now, but I've been surprised by the Imagineers before. I especially cannot picture myself enoying the Lion King show with the 'WHHOoosshh' of a 'Hulk style' 'coaster going on next door.

You know one thing that hasn't been mentioned is the competition - AK opened just one year before IoA opened - I wonder how much attendance at WDW would have declined if AK hadn't been opened when it was?

[Another Voice]

Actually what I’m trying to implying is that Animal Kingdom has not lived up to Disney management’s expectations in terms of overall numbers, length of stay in the park and in-park spending (related numbers of course). For that reason the park’s operations have been reduced and expansion plans have been long in coming and smaller in scope than expected. Whether Disney's original expectations were realistic, pre- or post-IOA, is another matter entirely.

No one expects AK to draw the same numbers at the Magic Kingdom, but the belief inside the company is that AK receives its guest by drawing them away from the other parks rather bringing additional guests to the property overall. This has had ramifications through the resort. I think it is important to understand the background of the situation when talking about rumors and future plans. One can put faith in Beastly Kingdom, Australia or whatever – but one has to understand the likelihood about those things coming into existence.

On the economy comments, what I was trying to point out is that “early years” required more courage and more conviction to proceed with Walt Disney World projects than today does. I think the success of WDW came in spite of the economy due to the quality and scope of the project. And the good times in ‘90s did not see people feeling WDW for more exotic destinations; it allowed more people to travel to WDW more often than in the past.

My personal opinion is that Animal Kingdom is symptomatic of just how unsure The Company is about itself these days. There were some absolutely staggering ideas that would have made a park so exciting and innovative that – had they worked – would have had the public clamoring for the experience. But instead of taking a risk on the new, they choose instead to create another theme park using very traditional ideas (I went on the drive through animal enclosures at Lion Country Safari thirty years ago). And even then, they did not have the courage to build their full idea. They hedged, they worried, and they fretted – and let a spreadsheet do their thinking. Yes, it was economocially sound, but entertainment is by nature a risky business and the public responds more to excitment than it does to sound business management.

Disneyland, the Magic Kingdom, and especially EPCOT Center were huge leaps of confidence. The Company knew it had a good product and that they would be rewarded by the public. The current management lacks that confidence. They are offering a timid product yet are surprised when the public does not embrace it like they did the bolder parks.

[space42]

Originally posted by Bstanley
Kewl, a discussion.

I don't plan to change cars or anything, but I'm certainly willing to accept that adding a couple more E-ticket attractions to AK would benefit the park.

I personally can't imagine how you could really 'theme' a giant (think Hulk or Dueling Dragons) roller coaster without mightily detracting from those aspects of AK that I really enjoy now, but I've been surprised by the Imagineers before. I especially cannot picture myself enoying the Lion King show with the 'WHHOoosshh' of a 'Hulk style' 'coaster going on next door.

You know one thing that hasn't been mentioned is the competition - AK opened just one year before IoA opened - I wonder how much attendance at WDW would have declined if AK hadn't been opened when it was?

Good point Bstanley. I'll try to find a link to that BK concept art. The "coaster" would have been all wrapped up inside a crumbleing castle / dragons lair. Most, if not all, of the attraction would have been indoors so noise would not have been a problem. It would not be like those ugly eyesores over at IOA (sorry BobO).

One must also remember that it was not JUST BK that was axed from the budget. If you had BK, that would have probably added 1 1/2 hours or so to your day. One or two smaller attractions in each "land" would have added perhaps another 2 hours. That would at least put it in the same league as the other parks.

[Bstanley]

Wow, what a great word picture, thanks AV.

Lost Opportunities - certainly the most frustating aspect of business when you're on the creative side - in your mind you can see the people walking in the gate, hear the excitement in their voices...

It's as clear as the nose on my face you think, as you hear the MBA at the head of the table say NO - why can't he see the people too you marvel!

You know though nothing happens in a vacumn, Epcot is a World Class Wonder there's no doubt about that, but half of the money spent on it might have been just the money the company needed to stay out of the hands of the greenmailers and breakup artists.

[DisneyKidds]

Voice - I have a few questions for you my learned friend. I'm curious to learn how things are viewed from the inside.

What were the expectations for AK attendance numbers? Spending? How have the results measured up?

How can Disney conclude with any certainty that AK visitors are drawn from the other WDW parks, as opposed to new visitors? I'm sure there are lots of people who made post AK return visits to WDW sooner than they would have had a new park not opened. These people may spend more time and money at MK or Epcot, but they may be there in part because of the AK. How would these people be counted in the great attendance tabulator? Does AK get any credit for boosting overall WDW attendance in such a way?

It seems that it can become a difficult game as you open more parks and then start to try and determine who visited where, and whether they were drawn away from another park. I view WDW as a package deal and find it hard to look at any of the individual parks on their own when it comes to what draws me to WDW. I can also say that our length of visit is greater now than in the past, and would be shorter if there were fewer parks. I also doubt we are that many standard deviations from the norm when it comes to the WDW public.

[YoHo]

I think the Main Problem is that Disney World started to rely on "Yearly" Repeat visits as a given and designed accordingly.

Clearly, Small improvments like Dinorama are tailored to the type of Visitor who needs incremental upgrades, not major ones.

A shift back in focus to the Vacation Destination is in order, the problem is that the economics is different. oh they can make the same amount of money, but they have to think differently.
Combined with the Disney Stores which undermine sales within the park. They've restructured the economy of the parks such that in the current economic climate it simply does not work as efficently as a money Generator. Combined with the gunshy attitude of managment. You're left with parks treading water.

[raidermatt]

AV- Has any info leaked about AK's numbers this year, relative to the other parks? Have JJP and DR had the positive impact mgmt hoped for? Any impact to length of stay, rather than just sucking from the other parks? Too early to say? (probably too early on at least some counts, since DR has only been open a couple of months, and length of stay is probably a "lag" indicator)

What about occupancy percentage in the resorts? Yes, there are many other factors, but if the goal is an increase in length of stay and new attendees, that should show up (or not show up) in the resort occupancies, or in increased room rates...

So many questions...

Not that positive numbers would completely justify mgmt actions, but since part of the criticism of AK is that the people aren't responding, any change in numbers is relevant to the discussion.

Pirate, it seems from your comments that you believe we will see some more investment in the parks when the economy improves, and/or the company's other businesses improve. True?

AV, what about you? It seems you are more skeptical that even an improved economy and ABC would loosen things up for the parks. In other words, mgmt has been and will continue to be timid until they are gone. True?

[All Aboard]

How can Disney conclude with any certainty that AK visitors are drawn from the other WDW parks, as opposed to new visitors? The annual visitors numbers were hashed out in an earlier thread. Using the numbers provided:

Growth in attendance for MK+Ep+MGM

1995: 14.5%
1996: 5.7%
1997: 11.7%

1998 (AK Opened): 8.8% decline [4 million total decline [MK+Ep+MGM] AK had 6 million guests]

1999: 4.7% decline [2 million decline, 8.6 million AK visitors.]

2000: Attendance stabilized in total, AK declined slightly.

From those numbers it's fairly easy to conclude that while WDW has some total growth in attendance, some of AK's attendance came at the expense of the first three parks.

Even though the 25th anniv was going on in 1997, and 9/11 occured last year - the fact that 1997 and 2001 total WDW attendance are almost identical (despite 33.3% more Disney Theme Parks to choose from) is troubling.

[Peter Pirate]

Matt, sadly I believe we won't see new investment in the parks without a direct positive cost/benefit ratio (no matter what the economy). I think under the current philosophy, in the current environment (both business & economic) that WDW's new 'excitement' will come from necessary replacement & sponsored attractions. I don't see this company going 'hog wild' in Orlando in the near future.

I have always contended that the only way we will see a TDS type Park in the US is if Disney decides to build another Resort (i.e Texas)...
:cool: :cool: :bounce: :cool: :cool:

[Bob O]

To me it gets down to producing a quality product with enough things to do for a entire day at the park. Even some Car1 people have stated when AK was initially opened it wasnt a full day park. To charge a full days admission for a park that doesnt have a full days worth of attractions is intentionally riping off the public, and thats what disney did from day 1. now if they would have charged a small admission that would have been fine, but no they wanted to bleed the public till the park is fully completed. And like AV said, the additions coming now are no benefit to the people who have already paid full pirce to be at the park.
And i hope SW/USF keeps pushing wdw to increase the quality of their product. But i still believe that alot of wdw fans wuld have been complaining big time if they went to IOA and their was no marvel comic area or JP area and they were touted prior to park opening that they would be a mainstay area of the park which is what took place at BK.

[Another Voice]

Okay, another conference call just started – I can get some posting done now.

The Amusement Business Journal numbers are not wholly accurate, but they are accurate enough for discussion here and to look at the major trends. I think using the way those numbers were taken, first year attendance for Animal Kingdom was probably pegged at between 9.5 – 10 million clicks. AK was supposed to draw near Epcot numbers (which Burbank still considers low) and the Disney/MGM Studios was always going to be the small park.

Understanding the mechanics behind those numbers is more like quantum physics than mathematics – nothing’s really certain one way or the other. Disney can collect a whole lot of data (the magnetic stripes on the back of your tickets do more than just keep track of the number of times the ticket has been used). Simply looking at the times and places a single ticket is swiped on the same day gives you a rough idea about what the guest is up to. And there are lots of young bright faces locked in gray cubicles in Mouseacatraz who spend their working hours puzzling over the numbers. And in Animal Kingdom’s case you had a whole bunch of managers at the other three parks wondering why all their guests were showing up late.

Also the attendance numbers track the number of admission-day – one guest entering one theme park for a day – not the true number of guests on the property. Part of the goal of Animal Kingdom was to keep people on property, have them go to a Disney theme park instead of Universal, Sea World or other area attractions. That would have happened without the guests extending their hotel stay a single day; Disney really wanted both meal & merchandise spending and to sell longer length passports. That effect alone should have caused an immediate 15% or so increase in admission-day numbers.

As Mr. DisneyKidds said, it is a very difficult game. That’s why I think Disney management’s perception of what’s going on is so important. What you or I see on the ground is not as important to the future of this park as the PowerPoint presentation given to the guys in Burbank that tries to explain this mess. All they want to see are numbers move in specific ways. The hows and whys of the numbers are always going to be fuzzy, that’s why a good businessperson can look beyond the spreadsheet and make an occasional judgment call. But if you have an executive that just looks at numbers....

On the economy, I think entertainment works very differently. Big consumer products like cars and refrigerators follow big economic trends; people have to buy them and it’s a matter of when and how much they can afford. But entertainment needs to draw people to it. There is no “must have” about a trip to WDW. People can all too easily postpone a trip. The postponement can quickly turn into disinterest – especially if there is no strong compelling reason to go back. People don’t go to a theme park simply because it’s there (witness California Adventure).

On the effects of Dino-Rama, I did read a quote from Al Weiss where he said they noticed a slight increase in the length of stay. If that’s the best spin he can put on it I’m not surprised to see all the sudden talk about more attractions at Animal Kingdom. The effects should have been immediate too since the guests are already in the park. And I have not seen any numbers for this year, but it’s going to be a strange one anyway.


P.S. – A lot of people consider EPCOT Center to be the single asset that saved Disney from the greenmailers. The raiders were looking for cash and lots of easily disposable assets that they could take in profit and/or pay off the junk bonds used to takeover the company. A $1.2 billion chunk of concrete sunk in the central Florida swamp lands isn’t as easy to sell as the cable rights to ‘Snow White’. Both of the major attempts stumbled over trying to line up the buyers for the after-takeover sales of assets. No one was convinced that anyone other than Disney could run the parks better, so there were few potential customers. Without customers, the take-over attempts lack financing.

And the greenmails themselves weren’t because Disney was doing poorly financially. It was simply a case that the sum of the company was valued less (by the stock price) than what people thought they could get for the individual parts. Has anyone looked at the break-up value of Disney compared to its current market capitalization recently? Seems like déjà vu all over again.

P.S.S. – As for the crankiness, you sit through a screening of ‘Mr. Deeds’ and see how your brain comes out of that experience.

[Tik Tok]

Originally posted by Another Voice
On the effects of Dino-Rama, I did read a quote from Al Weiss where he said they noticed a slight increase in the length of stay. If that’s the best spin he can put on it I’m not surprised to see all the sudden talk about more attractions at Animal Kingdom. The effects should have been immediate too since the guests are already in the park. And I have not seen any numbers for this year, but it’s going to be a strange one anyway.


This is not surprising at all. That coaster has such a low capacity that it always seems to have a huge wait time, and I can just imagine people walking up to it, seeing what the ride is, seeing the long wait time, and just walking away. Don't get me wrong, the ride is fun and all, but certainly not worth a 45 minute wait -- and unfortunately for Disney, people can SEE that as soon as they walk up to the ride.

And that's the real problem with this ride -- guests can SEE the whole ride, and realize that it's really nothing special. I gurantee that if this coaster had been hidden within a show building with a few effects, then it would have easily turned into a "must-see" attraction -- but as is, it's really not much better than what's available at your local fair, fun - but not really worth waiting around for...

[PKS44]

Please go to this thread and vote on my poll about AK opinions as they relate to which admission media used--we need more votes-

http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=223602

I remember my first AK visit- I left saying that they will be discounting admission in the near future--I was off-slightly- they did change rules for Florida Resident Seasonal Passes- so that was a kind of discounting to increase traffic in the park...I find it amusing how it is rumored that Burbank was snickering at that stupid Oriental Land Company for spending so much to build TDS while they (American Disney) created their cheaper parks (DCA and AK)...What OLC seemed to understand and our Disney does not is that it is never about the money...put on as good a show as you can, if it succeeds, you rake in the dough...Even if it fails, there is a satisfaction that you did your best that feeds and sustains a company in a way that getting by with half efforts no matter how profitable can never provide...mediocrity breeds employee discontent and destabilizes a company, no matter how profitable it seems at the time...if Disney wants to attract and retain the best employees it will take a change in philosophy, or better yet a complete takeover, perhaps by OLC?

[JeffH]

and especially EPCOT Center were huge leaps of confidence
Far from it, EPCOT was almost totally financed by sponsors who continue to make most of the profits and when it opened it was easily a "1-day park" as far as attractions go. Sure it was big, but most of it was empty space making walking one of the primary activities. Giant sponsorships signs where a part of each pavilion, whereas at AK McDonalds in Dinoland is the only sponsorship I can think of at the newer AK.
Most of the attractions in Future world (Spaceship Earth, Imagination and Motion) were quick 10 minute ride throughs, with only Energy, Symbiosis and what is now Food Rocks, and the 3D movie the only attractions that took any significant time. Then World Showcase only had 3 movies, 1 ride and 1 show to fill the rest of the day with. This was then a 'shopping and fancy dining park' after that.
Although the attraction count was greater than AK when it opened, the AK offers adventure and discovery after you are done with the rides.
Then there is also a lot to be said about the quality of attractions that AK had verses EPCOT.
CTX (and KSafari) easily beat the pants off any of the slow cartoon-like rides EPCOT had to offer. And the live shows (FotLK and Journey into Jungle Book) are much more entertaining. And Tough to Be a Bug is easily a better 3D experience than Imagination offered (which was considered, along with the American Adventure the 2 best attractions at EPCOT at the time).

[space42]

I dont normaly nit pick.. but.. sorry Jeff H.

Sure it was big, but most of it was empty space making walking one of the primary activities

Your talking about AK right???? where you only have one attraction in each "land"

Most of the attractions in Future world (Spaceship Earth, Imagination and Motion) were quick 10 minute ride throughs

Again, ar we talking about the same EPCOT?? Most of the FW attractions were closer to 15 minutes. And since when is a 10-15 minute long attraction concidered short??? The big rides in FW were Spaceship Earth, World of Motion, Horizons, Imagination, Energy. That is almost 2 hours of ride time alone (energy was a 45 minute presntation). Shoot.. almost forgot the Land.. add on antother 20 minutes of "ride time"
Are Pirates, Mansion, Splash Mountain quick 15 minute ride throughs also?? I dont get it.

Now, you can call Test Track a quick 5 minute ride and I would agree with you.

Again, sorry Jeff H. This was not intended to be a flame

[Another Voice]

“Most of the attractions in Future world …were quick 10 minute ride throughs…”

Yea, and Kali River Rapids is so long they should stop for a lunch break.

[JeffH]

The 'walking area' of AK would pretty much fit into Future World at Epcot. Epcot is filled with much more empty space than one might realize due to the 'magical' way that Disney has of disguising it.

The area between areas and attractions at AK is filled with lush vegetation, and theming, which, to me, made for a very relaxing walk between area as opposed to the 'long' walk between them at Epcot.

The length of the rides at the MK is not an issue considering how many rides/attractions there are in this park per square foot.
I was referring to the quality/length of attractions at AK compared to those at Epcot.

No matter what I say, AK DOES need more...I just feel that it wasn't as bad when it opened when compared to MGM (especially) and Epcot.

And there were at least 2 attractions in each land at AK, and each land is quite small. You could also say that EPCOT only had about 1 ride per pavilion, too.

[PKS44]

I was there in the early days of Epcot and MGM and AK-here is how I recall the early years-

Epcot was a one day park-that is, you could do most of it, but not all in one day...and feel you got your money's worth--but you had to do it commando and you had to skip a few things..as I recall we did The Land (but not Kitchen Kabaret or Symbiosis) Imagination and Magic Journeys, but not the Imagination pavillion play area, SE, Energy, Horizons and World of Motion, very little at Communicore, did Mexico and China, peeked in at Germany, Italy, Japan, did America Adventure had a beer in England. Ate in France, Did not see Impressions de France, nor O Canada...and it was closing time. The addition of Living Seas, Wonders of Life, Norway, Morroco certainly have not rendered the park any less than a one day park, even with the subtractions...I think the lack of appeal of repeating many of these attractions is what has led to Epcot's attendance declines...

MGM-was TOO CROWDED, fewer things to do and just as many people equaled an unsatisfying experience...GMR, Indy, backstage tour, I don't even remember if we did ST, Muppets then or later...it is better now but still pretty thin for a family with kids of various ages....

AK-disappointing- got there around 4:30 first afternoon-did the Safari with no wait and it was not very good--Maharajah was closed for the night, looked around the place, the Oasis, the Tree, etc...Next morning, saw the Gorilla Trail, the Maharajah Trek, FOTLK, kids enjoyed the Boneyard and nobody wanted to stay (young kids-no interest in TTBAB, CTX, Kali)Felt the animal exhibits were as nice as many zoos we have visited, the show was good, the rides were too few for families with little kids, and the whole feeling was "eh." I can't imagine what people thought the first year before Asia even opened, what a complete rip-off! Eisner has admitted to the strategy-build only a little to make the dough, then add later...I think the public is waiting till they add now and the dough is not coming until they do...

Paul

[Bob O]

Epcot from day one was at least one full day to see everything while AK still hasnt reached that level and is near empty near closing due to a proper number of attractions.