Attractions list for Hong Kong Disneyland.

[WDWHound]

The following is from Screamscape.com:

We’ve been sent an official list of park lands and attractions that should be up and running by opening day.
Adventureland - Jungle River Cruise, Raft’s to Tarzan’s Treehouse, Tarzan’s Treehouse and Festival of the Lion King.
Fantasyland - The Many Adventures of Winnie The Pooh, Mickey’s Philharmagic, Dumbo, Mad Hatter Tea Cups, Sleeping Beauty’s Castle, Cinderella’s Carousel and the Disneyland Railroad (with stops only in Fantasyland & Main Street).
Tomorrowland - Space Mountain, Buzz Lightyear’s Astro Blasters and Orbitron.

Wow. I knew the list was going to be small, but this is ridiculas. No Pirates, no Haunted Mansion, no Splash Mountain. This makes DCA look positively exciting by comparson.

 

[Sarangel]

The rationalizations that I've heard were that the Chinese are "more interested" in the gardens, etc & that's what they are focusing on...

Personally, I think they're fooling themselves, but I suppose it's safer to build 1/2 a park than do what they did in Disneyland Paris and built a wonderful park that takes a while to sink in.

Sarangel

 

[wtg2000]

The rationalizations that I've heard were that the Chinese are "more interested" in the gardens, etc & that's what they are focusing on...

I read that too, but look at WDW. AK gets lots of traffic and a lot of the attraction there is looking at gardens and walking along paths to look at animals. Last week, World Showcase was extremely busy at all times of the day with guests just wandering around looking at the countries and the flowers. The attractions were fairly empty. It's not just the Chinese that like to look at gardens. Everyone does, but they also like to ride rides as well. I think the garden excuse is just a fall back position. The real reason is economics. I hope their business plan works out.

It is hard to believe though that one entire side of the park is Adventureland with three attractions. That takes the place of WDW's Frontierland, Liberty Square and Adventureland. Of these three attractions, one is a walkthrough and the other a show. There's only one ride. So when people are waiting between shows or after people exit a show and are looking for a ride - Jungle Cruise is it on that side of the park. The real "jungle" will probably be the queue! (And since shows don't often run at night, it could get really thin over there after dark).

 

[mark&sue]

Apparently Disneyland Paris is the most visited attraction in europe. It is nothing compared to WDW but anything Disney is better than nothing. DLP has grown and in another 50 years will I am sure be fairly good. I am sure Hong Kong Disney will get there in the end. For those who cannot get to the US I am sure they will love it as people did when Disneyland first opened 50 years ago.

Good luck to Hong Kong Disney.




Susan

 

[WDSearcher]

The rationalizations that I've heard were that the Chinese are "more interested" in the gardens, etc & that's what they are focusing on...

Personally, I think they're fooling themselves, but I suppose it's safer to build 1/2 a park than do what they did in Disneyland Paris and built a wonderful park that takes a while to sink in.

You're looking at it as an American tourist, not a Chinese tourist. Just because Americans prefer "more, more, more!" doesn't mean that works everywhere. Everyone always gets on Disney for not doing their homework, and then when they do, they still get criticized. Is it so hard to believe that in a place like Hong Kong, where the population density is higher than almost anywhere, tourists would enjoy a destination that had, as one of it's features, a big open quiet park to relax in? Have you done any research on Asians and their travel preferences? If so, then you know that the most popular attractions for families and older adults (who are very important in Asian culture) are gardens.

WDI did learn from Disneyland Paris. They learned to not assume that what is popular to Americans would be popular to tourists of other countries. Part of what did them in at the Paris site was trying to be "too American" and not taking into account the cultural differences. They figured, "Hey ... it worked in Tokyo", but what they forgot was that in Japan, people WANT American culture. In Europe, generally, they don't. In Hong Kong, you've got a mixed bag. American culture is welcomed, but within the context of Asian tradition. So, WDI designed a park that they believe fits -- both space-wise and culture-wise -- in Hong Kong.

 

[raidermatt]

Sorry, that's just not quite true.

The park in Paris always did fine. It was the hotels that were overbuilt that weighed on the resort fiancially. The resort had finally reached a point of stability when the Studios opened as a "1/2 park" and plunged the resort back to the brink of bankruptcy.

The park in HK was designed using the same general model as the Studios in Paris and DCA. Open small and add what you have to. The reason it may work in HK is the public has lower expectations.

So perhaps we have a hint as to Disney's strategy going forward. The public in the U.S. and Europe has rejected the 1/2 park for the same price value proposition, so take the proposition where it won't be rejected.

 

[wtg2000]

Is it so hard to believe that in a place like Hong Kong, where the population density is higher than almost anywhere, tourists would enjoy a destination that had, as one of it's features, a big open quiet park to relax in? Have you done any research on Asians and their travel preferences? If so, then you know that the most popular attractions for families and older adults (who are very important in Asian culture) are gardens.

I've been to mainland China and Hong Kong. In both of these places, and Macau, I saw myriad parks and gardens. Why would the Chinese pay $40 to go to HKDL when they see gardens for free all over the place? Do you know that 70ish per cent of Hong Kong is rural, that are 254 islands - many of which you can travel to, and that you can hike across Hong Kong Island in rural seclusion (not to mention Lantau Island on which HKDL is situated)? Is HKDL going to be a "big open quiet park?" And the guests are not just from Hong Kong. China is a pretty big country with lots of wide open spaces. Been to Tian'men Square?

Everyone always gets on Disney for not doing their homework, and then when they do, they still get criticized.

You're assuming they've done their homework properly. The proof will be when the park opens. I believe the decision is based more on economics than Chinese culture. They've done the same thing in all of Eisner's parks since DLP - start small.

 

[WDSearcher]

I've been to mainland China and Hong Kong. In both of these places, and Macau, I saw myriad parks and gardens. Why would the Chinese pay $40 to go to HKDL when they see gardens for free all over the place?

Because they're getting more than just gardens. I've been to mainland China and Hong Kong too, and I can totally understand why putting the theme park elements together with a large garden area would be attractive to families in the region. The older adults have a place to sit and relax while the younger members of the family can go off and play in a place that has lots of diversions but is safe and secure. Seems very logical to me.

Do you know that 70ish per cent of Hong Kong is rural, that are 254 islands - many of which you can travel to, and that you can hike across Hong Kong Island in rural seclusion (not to mention Lantau Island on which HKDL is situated)? Is HKDL going to be a "big open quiet park?" And the guests are not just from Hong Kong. China is a pretty big country with lots of wide open spaces. Been to Tian'men Square?

Yes, I've been to Tian'men Square, but I don't think most Chinese look at that as "wide open spaces" where one can bring the family to hang out and relax. And, while you can certainly hike across Hong Kong, were you so inclined, Disney obviously didn't build HKDL for the people who like to hike. They built a theme park that had elements of gardens and quiet places so that both sides of the culture could be reached. Obviously, if all they were concerned about was giving Chinese tourists places to wander, they'd have filled in the bay and planted a bunch of trees.

My point was that just because the park is small and contains garden areas instead of another batch of e-ticket rides doesn't mean that Disney is building "half a park" or taking the cheap way out. There's nothing wrong with starting small. If they'd have built something the size of WDW (or even MK) there, people would be grousing that it was too big and encroaching on the culture. Can't win for losing.

 

[wtg2000]

They built a theme park that had elements of gardens and quiet places so that both sides of the culture could be reached. Obviously, if all they were concerned about was giving Chinese tourists places to wander, they'd have filled in the bay and planted a bunch of trees.

Other Disney theme parks, including the MKs, have gardens, flower beds, and places to wander around and relax as well. So it's not just for the Chinese culture. You're making it sound as though HKDL is one giant flower festival. As it is, they have the garden in Fantasyland with the five gazebos plus the usual leafy sections of Adventureland. It's not going to take all day to wander around there.

My point was that just because the park is small and contains garden areas instead of another batch of e-ticket rides doesn't mean that Disney is building "half a park" or taking the cheap way out.

I think the are building "half a park" and "taking the cheap way" and it's done for economical reasons. They expect about 5 million visitors. It wouldn't make fiscal sense to build a park to fit 15 million guests if you only expect 5. The question is, is there enough to satisfy those 5 million? WDSP was built to house only a few million guests per year, but the problem is that one of those guests - namely me! - was outta there after a few hours with plans never to return. I just don't see enough attractions at HKDL to keep people happy for an entire day. Are old adults going to want to sit there all day long? Will the couple shows keep them happy? Is there enough for kids to do to keep them happy for a full day? Is there enough for thrillseekers? What about guest staying overnight? Is there enough for two days? Even if you take your time and stop to smell the roses I just don't see it - and I've experienced it at WDSP and AK,and to an extent at MGM. At least we had other parks to go to.

 

[wtg2000]

Sorry, that's just not quite true.

The park in Paris always did fine. It was the hotels that were overbuilt that weighed on the resort fiancially. The resort had finally reached a point of stability when the Studios opened as a "1/2 park" and plunged the resort back to the brink of bankruptcy.

My understanding, and please correct me if I'm wrong, is that part of the problem in Paris was per capita spending. People were not eating in the restaurants or spending as much on stuff. The last time I went, April 2002, it was a busy day but most of the restaurants were closed. Colonel Hahti's was about the only one open and the line was long so I ended up eating back in Paris. WDSP has hardly any restaurants.

This is why Tokyo is so successful, not just because of attendance but because of per capita spending. This is why TDS is so good because it gives the guests more things to buy. And TDS is chock full of restaurants.

This is one of the financial benefits or more parks and hotels. Let's say someone went to TDL twice per year. The first time they buy lots of stuff, but the second time they don't because they have everything. But if on the second visit they go to TDS, then they can buy a whole new raft of stuff. It's the same with more hotels. You stay at the Poly and buy a Poly shirt; next year you stay at the Beach Club and buy a shirt there. So one important aspect in HK will be - will the guests shop and will they stay and eat or head back to HK?

 

[SoCalKDG]

The SAR government will be hoping his estimates are on target, for it has already sunk more than HK$20 billion of public funds in the venture - HK$13.6 billion for land formation and reclamation, infrastructure and transportation, HK$6.1 billion in loans and an investment of HK$3.25 billion in the joint venture set up to run the park. Disney, on the other hand, will own 43 per cent of the project after having committed just HK$2.45 billion in equity.

Just wondering how Disney can be considered cheap on this venture since they only have 12% invested into the park(but own 43% of the park). The real investment was done by the SAR govt. to the tune of approx. 3 billion $ U.S. total. Looks to me like money for Disney isn't really playing any type of factor into this. Its their name and expertise that is really being supplied in this deal.

Two questions:

1) How much was Disney Sea? Any type of breakdown for land, infrastructure, hotels, etc.? Just wanted to know for comparison purposes.

2) What version of Pooh, Buzz, Space Mtn., FOTLK, Jungle Cruise, are they getting? This can make a big difference. FOTLK at AK is the best show Disney offers and worth 20% of a visit to AK.

3) Planned list for expansion....when and what? For ex. Tarzan rocks is closing in Sept. at AK and being shipped to HK.


Now looking at that list, what would I do in a day at the park with my wife and DD(3) joining me:

Adventureland - Jungle River Cruise, Raft’s to Tarzan’s Treehouse, Tarzan’s Treehouse and Festival of the Lion King.

Yes to Jungle Cruise and to FOTLK. Maybe to the rest.

Fantasyland - The Many Adventures of Winnie The Pooh, Mickey’s Philharmagic, Dumbo, Mad Hatter Tea Cups, Sleeping Beauty’s Castle, Cinderella’s Carousel and the Disneyland Railroad (with stops only in Fantasyland & Main Street).

No to Tea Cups, Castle doesn't mean much in my visit, yes to everything else.

Tomorrowland - Space Mountain, Buzz Lightyear’s Astro Blasters and Orbitron.

Yes to all.

So 10 attractions I'd visit on a 1 day visit. Now do they have a daytime or nighttime parade? Fireworks? If yes I'd spend a weekend there if taking a hypothetical trip. For comparisons I'd take a hypothetical trip to Tokyo and spend 4-5 days at the two parks. I'll usually spend 9 days for a trip to WDW.

I don't see how anyone could call this a 1/2 day park(5 hours approx.)

 

[Plus4206]

So perhaps we have a hint as to Disney's strategy going forward. The public in the U.S. and Europe has rejected the 1/2 park for the same price value proposition, so take the proposition where it won't be rejected.

But HKDL was funded by the Hong Kong government - to the tune of some 3.5 billion dollars. One, 3.5 bil is not half park money and two, it's not like Disney was being cheap. It wasn't their money they were spending.

 

[wtg2000]

For ex. Tarzan rocks is closing in Sept. at AK and being shipped to HK.

Thanks. First I've heard of that. Have they built a theatre in HKDL to house it? What is replacing it at AK?

I don't see how anyone could call this a 1/2 day park(5 hours approx.)

You think it's going to take a full day or weekend to see these attractions? I suppose if it's super busy it might. Most of these attractions are 2 minute jobbies, except for Mickey's Phil, Lion King show and Jungle Cruise. There are no pre-shows that I can see. If the lines aren't too long you can breeze through it pretty quickly I would imagine. Tomorrowland will take one hour tops, Fantasy and Adventure not much more. Of course you want to spend time to look around and eat and shop, but I'm wondering if by dinner time guests will be ready to go. That's where per capita spending comes into play.

Look at Islands of Adventure. I went there on a slow day. By 2:30ish I'd ridden everything in the park (except the kiddie rides) including Spiderman 7 times, Dueling Dragons 7 times, and Hulk 4 times. I left because I was getting dizzy. I didn't stick around and spend money on dinner. HKDL has even fewer attractions.

Just wondering how Disney can be considered cheap on this venture since they only have 12% invested into the park

I guess in my thinking that was the proof - that they are putting up little of their own money but taking a bigger share of the profits. Isn't that being cheap?

 

[Plus4206]

I guess in my thinking that was the proof - that they are putting up little of their own money but taking a bigger share of the profits. Isn't that being cheap?

I'd call it a shrewd business deal.

 

[SoCalKDG]

I guess in my thinking that was the proof - that they are putting up little of their own money but taking a bigger share of the profits. Isn't that being cheap?

You didn't really type that with a straight face, did you? Lets see, I can put up little of my own money but get a bigger share of profits, hmm, what to do, what to do.

Thanks. First I've heard of that. Have they built a theatre in HKDL to house it? What is replacing it at AK?

Initial rumors is enclosing it completely like FOTLK, then converting to a Jungle Book show with Asian theme(since its so close to Expedition Everest). Not sure where at HK it is going. I also believe that an autopia will be added pretty quickly as well. I didn't really like the Tarzan show. I liked the live band, but wish it would have been a reproduction of some of the Tarzan scenes.

You think it's going to take a full day or weekend to see these attractions? I suppose if it's super busy it might. Most of these attractions are 2 minute jobbies, except for Mickey's Phil, Lion King show and Jungle Cruise. There are no pre-shows that I can see. If the lines aren't too long you can breeze through it pretty quickly I would imagine. Tomorrowland will take one hour tops, Fantasy and Adventure not much more. Of course you want to spend time to look around and eat and shop, but I'm wondering if by dinner time guests will be ready to go. That's where per capita spending comes into play.

Look at Islands of Adventure. I went there on a slow day. By 2:30ish I'd ridden everything in the park (except the kiddie rides) including Spiderman 7 times, Dueling Dragons 7 times, and Hulk 4 times. I left because I was getting dizzy. I didn't stick around and spend money on dinner. HKDL has even fewer attractions.

OK, lets play estimate game. Lets assume you are Joe Tourist, and you want to do everything. Plus you haven't checked out the Disboards and guide books, so maybe you don't ride everything in the correct order. Much of the info is based off my experiences from both WDW and many trips to DLR.

Our list, total time to wait and ride:

Jungle River Cruise - 25 min. wait, 15 min. ride
Raft’s to Tarzan’s Treehouse - going to skip
Tarzan’s Treehouse - going to skip
Festival of the Lion King - 20 min. wait in seats, 25 min. show
The Many Adventures of Winnie The Pooh - 35 min wait, 5 min. ride
Mickey’s Philharmagic - 20 min. wait, 15 min show
Dumbo - 40 min wait, 2 min. ride
Mad Hatter Tea Cups - 25 min wait, 2 min ride
Sleeping Beauty’s Castle - skip
Cinderella’s Carousel - 12 min wait, 3 min ride
Disneyland Railroad (with stops only in Fantasyland & Main Street) 15 min wait, 30 min ride around complete park
Space Mountain - 60 min wait, 5 min ride
Buzz Lightyear’s Astro Blasters - 30 min wait, 5 min ride
Orbitron - 20 min wait, 3 min ride

Walking between rides usually 3-4 miles per day(estimating low) at a park, thus 90 minutes walking. Restroom breaks and snack breaks 30 minutes. 2 meals in the day, 90 minutes. Character interaction 30 minutes. 15 minutes into park and 15 minutes leaving park.

Total time: 682 minutes or 11.5 hours. So 10:00 AM to 9:30 PM

Much of the times listed is for average days at parks. Assuming that the park is small as you say, expect the lines to be 20-30% longer. If you FP 3-4 rides, this might balance this a bit. This didn't account for parades, small shows, fireworks, gardens, etc.

All the times are just estimates, and while I've seen the times at half the above listed, I've also seen the times twice as long on crowded days. Its possible every day might be a crowded day as its the only game in town.

E tickets:
Festival of the Lion King
Mickey’s Philharmagic
Space Mountain

Having looked at everything, the lineup would be very good for a second park. Since this is the primary park, how quickly expansion happens is important. The addition of two of the following would help: POTC, HM, Splash, BTMRR.

 

[airlarry!]

"So, WDI designed a park that they believe fits -- both space-wise and culture-wise -- in Hong Kong."

On what do you base this assertion? This statement is not only false, its misleading, and I demand an attribution, a cite, a reference, a quotation, anything.

The Euro park has, for the most part, always had great attendance. What dragged it down, as someone else said, was the hotels and the dining (this straight from mini-ME's boss). When it finally rebounded, some Suitaneer in Burbank decided that it looked better with a half-sized albatross around its neck, and added the universally derided Studios Them Par (they forgot to finish the park, so I forgot to finish the name).

HK = DLPStudios = DCA = AK = MGM. It ain't a one shot deal, folks, it is a pattern, a...dare I say it?....a "philosophy." Half-size ATMs disguised as themeparks.

The Chinese people deserve Disney's best, not what they are getting. Shame, shame.

 

[wtg2000]

You didn't really type that with a straight face, did you? Lets see, I can put up little of my own money but get a bigger share of profits, hmm, what to do, what to do.

Read below.

 

[Plus4206]

SoCal's comment wasn't meant to be mean or cruel, it's just the personality of this board. The comment you posted was begging for a SoCal type reply and he didn't let you down. No harm, no foul.

 

[Plus4206]

By all accounts HKDL is costing in the neighborhood of 3.5 BILLION dollars. That's one helluva chunk of cash. How much would a 100% complete MK type park cost to build ? Who can afford to put that kind of capital on the line ?
And for that matter, when has Disney ever opened a "completed" park ?

 

[wtg2000]

Fine. Then I'll try and explain it clearer then.

Cheap: costing little effort hence of little worth.

Eisner lavished on DLP because it was going to be his stamp on theme parks. It was his baby. He picked Paris. He was going to bring Disney to the European masses. It didn't work out that well. So now he's going to build smaller resorts in HK, India, or wherever, invest little money and divest Disney of much of the risk. If they bomb, it won't impact Disney in a big way. Hence - cheap: costing little effort hence of little worth. I'm not saying it's bad business. Like I said before, it's a fiscal decision not a Chinese culture decision. I'm just saying that it's the dictionary definition of "cheap," and yes I'm saying it with a straight face!