Article: Can 'Avatar' Save Disney's Animal Kingdom?

[beer dave]

It doesn't matter what I write. You're just going to disagree with it. So, what's the point?

strange game, isn't it... the only winning move is not to play. (anyone?)

 

[ChipnDale79]

Problem is you're making generalizations about your own habits--and those of personal acquaintances--without really having any knowledge of how many people follow those same patterns.

Disney loses and gains business all the time. I've been to Universal a couple times. Once was about 6 years ago and the other time about 4 years ago. So on those occasions you could argue that Disney "lost" a few days of my business. More recently, they haven't.

How is it a problem that I'm making generalizations about my own habits and those of my personal acquaintances, and you doing the same thing isn't a problem? Aren't you making generalizations about your own habits as well? Nothing different than I did. It's ok to have different opinions.

Unless you're some high executive inside the Disney company, you don't know the numbers or the strategy inside of Disney any better than any one else on this forum. I don't claim I do either, but I do have opinions and I think its fair to state them, this is a discussion board and this part of what we do here is give our opinions.


For what it's worth, I agree that Harry Potter will do nothing but help central florida, including WDW. People will come to central fl because of Harry Potter and spend time at WDW as well, just like they come down for WDW and spend time at Universal.

Competition is nothing but good for Disney, it does force their hand to be more creative and not rest on their laurels.

Consider something as basic as food sales. Right now, the only viable meal at DAK is lunch. The park closes at 5pm most days. The number of guests eating dinner at DAK is miniscule. Just getting dinner crowds into the park could double food & beverage revenues. Not to mention all of the other retail sales that accompany longer operating hours.

Avatar itself is a calculated move. Disney is gambling that more film sequels will reignite worldwide interest in the franchise. If so, then you will have people saying "hey, lets go to Walt Disney World to see that Pandora area." Best case scenario, the park will eventually host fan events and move a lot of Avatar merchandise.

A generic expansion like "Australia" or "Beastly Kingdom" would never have as great of an upside.

I agree with all of that, I've seen the movie, I thought it was "ok", but have been one of the few supporters of bringing Avatar to DAK. I think it's a great move because of all the same things you stated.

Are there diehard fans out there? Sure, they may not be Disney fans, but that's only a good thing for Disney right? That means it's a potential to bring in guests that would not have come before, it's a smart move.

On top of that, even if you aren't a fan of the movie, Disney still has the potential to blow you away with what they can do with the special effects.

Count me as a fan of all 4 parks being open later and offering more dinning options.

I don't think DAK needs to be "saved", but how many people have you heard say it's a "half day" park, or how many people have you heard say they only go there for 1 day of their vacation? We all know that it's not really about how many park tickets are sold, after all after 4 days, WDW tickets are insanely cheap, it's about the food and merchandise, and by getting people to stay longer in the park should be very profitable for Disney.

 

[tjkraz]

How is it a problem that I'm making generalizations about my own habits and those of my personal acquaintances, and you doing the same thing isn't a problem? Aren't you making generalizations about your own habits as well? Nothing different than I did. It's ok to have different opinions.

Unless you're some high executive inside the Disney company, you don't know the numbers or the strategy inside of Disney any better than any one else on this forum. I don't claim I do either, but I do have opinions and I think its fair to state them, this is a discussion board and this part of what we do here is give our opinions.

I referenced my own habits only for the sake of contrast.

The attendance numbers speak for themselves. From '08 to '12...with a terrible economy and IOA making huge gains in attendance...DHS and DAK not only held steady but increased their own attendance.

Sure USF/IOA is impacting Disney attendance. But that's been the case since the day it opened in 1990. Disney could spend billions of dollars to expand its own parks, and people would still venture over to Universal.

 

[twebber55]

the word "save" was used just for a head line and its the wrong word to learn...however withe expansion of pandora, the new nighttime show, and nighttime safari will go a long way in changing the rep as a half day park....

im really curious to see what happens when all this opens.... will we see a huge movement of people to DAk around 6:00? if so DAk has to open more CS and TS areas

 

[ChipnDale79]

I referenced my own habits only for the sake of contrast.

The attendance numbers speak for themselves. From '08 to '12...with a terrible economy and IOA making huge gains in attendance...DHS and DAK not only held steady but increased their own attendance.

Sure USF/IOA is impacting Disney attendance. But that's been the case since the day it opened in 1990. Disney could spend billions of dollars to expand its own parks, and people would still venture over to Universal.

Then it sounds like we are on the same page.

All I ask is that when one person gives their opinion, please do not pass it off as wrong or pointless.

 

[nkosiek]

strange game, isn't it... the only winning move is not to play. (anyone?)

Sorry, Joshua. I was looking for thermonuclear war in the games menu.

 

[DPCummerbund]

The arguments in this thread are going in circles, and for no good reason.

Building more attractions (at WDW or Universal) makes attendance go up. That's a fact. Whether it's financially worthwhile is an entirely different story. I think we all know and agree that Disney (and Universal) will make moves when the people in charge think it's financially worthwhile to do so, and not before.

None of us are these "people in charge". We're just on a forum expressing our OPINIONS about whether we think it would be worthwhile for Disney to do these things. Some people are of the opinion that Disney is basically doing fine, and that Disney shouldn't be spending it's money on more attractions. You are entitled to that opinion. Others (like myself) wish that Disney would spend more, and it's our FEELING that Disney is going to start falling behind if it doesn't "catch up" to Universal.

If you want to look at FACTS, that's an entirely different story. For that, you need MORE FACTS, and not insults or snide remarks (on BOTH sides).

For example, here's the TEA publishes theme park attendance numbers every year.
*********************************/2013/2012-theme-park-attendance-figures-released-universal-orlando-up/

The top 25% of theme parks in the world was up 5.2% in 2012. Orlando visitor attendance was up 3.3%.

So, any park that was up more than 3.3% is gaining in its share in Orlando. Any park that gained less than 3.3% lost a share of the Orlando visitors.

As you can see, all for Disney parks in Orlando were up, but less than the average. US was slightly below average, but IOA was up higher than average.

We know that the 4 Disney parks are the top 4 in Florida. DHS is the lowest of the 4 at 9.9 million per year. IOA is the highest non-Disney park at 7.9 million. However, since IOA was up, and we can certainly expect another bump with the expansion to WWOHP, might it catch DHS some day?

Look at California Adventure - it had the highest growth of any park, up 22%, or 1.4 million visitors. CA added Cars Land last year, which was undoubtedly a big part of that bump. But is it a "permanent" bump, or only a temporary one as the many California residents check out a new park? Was it "worth" the money that was put into it? CA, especially before the renovations and Cars Land, was largely considered to be an unsuccessful park. Disney publicly admitted that. So, how much of the renovations at CA were designed to actually increase revenue, and how much were to change the public perception of the park? If it didn't break even but increased the public's general perception of Disney, was it "worth it"?

Similarly, IOA is only 2 million visitors per year behind DHS. If Cars Land brought 1.4 million people to CA, what can the WWHOP expansion bring to IOA? If IOA eventually passes DHS, will it hurt Disney overall? US and IOA were in decline just a few years ago - are these numbers going to keep going up, or are they just temporary jumps as people make "one time" visits to IOA just to see WWHOP?

NONE OF US know the answers to these questions. But they sure are fun to talk about, and they're the reason I like the Rumors and News forum. I think we ought to be able to discuss them without anyone needing to be "right" about things that NOBODY really knows.

 

[wdwgreg]

Maybe a slightly different perspective as coming from the UK, and tend to holiday for longer ( to make the flight worthwhile, at least that is the reasoning)

In 2011 we came for 20 nights, and we visited seaworld for 2 days, universal for 3 Busch gardens for 1, aquatica 1 day and st augustine for 1, however on each of those days, because we were staying on disney property, im sure we spent something at disney, either breakfast, or late journey into the parks for fireworks and a drink/snack, (i think the UK tickets are designed for this kind of thing) if there was just WDW in the Orlando area, would we be coming for 20 nights, no probably not, we would probably do a split stay maybe 10 nights at WDW and then either Miami, Florida beaches or somewhere else in US/Caribbean.

In November this year we are coming for 10 nights and that is going to be just a WDW visit, partly because shorter trip due to work constraints, but if the WWOHP expansion was completed then sure we would have made a trip out to International drive and if we were going to Universal then to please everyone we would have had to do SW as well.


At the end of the day barring anything completely disastourous then we will always base our Florida vacations at Disney, we like the convince and also the atmosphere you get there, but we will usually visit elsewhere as well, and the more that the others are offering thats new, the more days Disney will lose, and a couple of new rides wouldnt make a difference, as they couild just be done in normal days, the only thing that will add more disney days, is a massive increase in attractions at DHS making that a multiple day park,. as Epcot and MK are, or a fifth gate (not going to happen soon)

 

[Planogirl]

At the rate things are going, this could lure us to spend more time at the Disney parks. WDW will likely never be our primary goal but the place could be way more important if they open something amazing.

I have a question. Why are most of the top movies so unpopular? It really boggles the mind.

 

[twebber55]

At the rate things are going, this could lure us to spend more time at the Disney parks. WDW will likely never be our primary goal but the place could be way more important if they open something amazing. I have a question. Why are most of the top movies so unpopular? It really boggles the mind.

Well said plano

 

[DPCummerbund]

I have a question. Why are most of the top movies so unpopular? It really boggles the mind.

Because they appeal to the widest audience. Very few people actually LOVE them, but when a group has to go to the theater, the "popular" movies are ones that everybody can agree on. This is a broad overgeneralization, but if women want to see a romantic movie, men want to see an action movie, and kids want to see a cartoon, they can't all get their own first choice. But if you choose Avatar, you get all three. Nobody loves it, but everyone can tolerate it together. It's why "tentpole" movies are so unpopular with everyone except studio executives.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

I have a question. Why are most of the top movies so unpopular? It really boggles the mind.

Because popcorn blockbusters aren't exceptionally good stories or well acted...generally.

The original Star Wars movies were regarded as terribly acted 25 years ago... But compared to the bad acting in the movies now...mark Hamill looks like Sir Laurence Olivier

 

[OnSpaceshipEarth]

At the rate things are going, this could lure us to spend more time at the Disney parks. WDW will likely never be our primary goal but the place could be way more important if they open something amazing.

I have a question. Why are most of the top movies so unpopular? It really boggles the mind.

"WDW will likely never be our primary goal"?!?!?!

You're on Disboards...what is your "primary goal"? Universal? Cocoa Beach?

 

[Robbi]

"WDW will likely never be our primary goal"?!?!?!

You're on Disboards...what is your "primary goal"? Universal? Cocoa Beach?

Our primary goal is Universal. It used to be WDW but even with a new grandbaby, Disney is the "Since we're going to Universal, we might as well spend some time at Disney World." We became DVC members 6 years ago but if Universal ever built timeshares, we'd buy there and decide afterward whether to keep or sell DVC.
Animal Kingdom needs something though I'm not sure Avatar is the answer. We'll see. Something is better than nothing.

 

[dansamy]

Our primary goal is Universal. It used to be WDW but even with a new grandbaby, Disney is the "Since we're going to Universal, we might as well spend some time at Disney World." We became DVC members 6 years ago but if Universal ever built timeshares, we'd buy there and decide afterward whether to keep or sell DVC.

We still enjoy wdw over uso. We'll do uso to see the Potter adds. And over time owning dvc, we're doing less park stuff & more other activities in the area.

 

[Planogirl]

"WDW will likely never be our primary goal"?!?!?!

You're on Disboards...what is your "primary goal"? Universal? Cocoa Beach?

Universal (and hopefully St Augustine again. We just loved it there!). That isn't to say that WDW isn't a goal because we do enjoy it and have been many, many times; it's just no longer the primary goal for us. I would prefer to always visit both but if I give WDW a rest it likely won't stop me from going to Florida. There is a lot to love there.

There are other forums besides Disney forums on this website...

 

[Planogirl]

Because they appeal to the widest audience. Very few people actually LOVE them, but when a group has to go to the theater, the "popular" movies are ones that everybody can agree on. This is a broad overgeneralization, but if women want to see a romantic movie, men want to see an action movie, and kids want to see a cartoon, they can't all get their own first choice. But if you choose Avatar, you get all three. Nobody loves it, but everyone can tolerate it together. It's why "tentpole" movies are so unpopular with everyone except studio executives.

Thanks for the explanation. That sounds very reasonable. I would argue that Titanic might be different though because I had friends (all female) that went to see it over and over and over. It was a strange phenomenon.

 

[PuppyJonathan]

Truth be told the only two parks that ever needed saved were California Adventure and Disneyland Paris. MGM is in good standing in visiting numbers just not by feedback from a lot of fans (even though I'll admit I'm not one whose complaining)

 

[Reddog1134]

That is not true at all (you must be rohde's mother)

It wasn't necessarily "we'll conceived"... But what it definitely wasn't done was constructed with any sense of economic sense. What was built was completely blown overbudget...and that diminished what would be "tolerated" to be built.

The result was a half finished park which EISNER pulled the funding plug on and threw open the gates. Disney's claims of cost are artificially reduced...I believe Guinness that asserts that the park cost close to 2 billion ( more like 3 now) to build. It was DOA and so was its expansion "budget"

That dippy joe... Who apparently doesn't understand he doesn't have every penny in Disney's liquid value to spend. It's called stock price, genius... You have to fight the war...not try to thrown every dime into one "artistic" battle

That guy should be fired ten times over. I'm tired of paying to offset his "musings"

But if it wasn't Joe wouldn't it have been the next Imagineer on the next big project?

If Joe went over budget, isn't that the executive teams fault for allowing it?

 

[josiegracesmom]

I couldn't care less about Avatar land. I had no desire to see the movie, and no desire for the attractions. Wish they were doing something different. I LOVE Animal Kingdom. As the others say, I think HS needs a boost worse...we do 3 things at HS and leave...