DEBATE: Debunking the AK "half day" myth.

[BRERALEX]

i just got back returned sunday the day of the marathon.

Spent the majority at epcot and Mk spent three and a half hours at Animal kingdom.

They should really rename it to lots of birds a couple of animals kingdom.

i never even look to see when Ak closes because i know i wont be there that late or even remotely close to that late.

forget the half day park stuff though I'm going to start calling it a prepark. the place i go before the real parks.

AK might be the park of choice for thrill seekers and zoo-lovers alike...

Kali river rapids is a joke. one BIG drop and thats it short @$$ ride short as can be. Dino i like its ok but not everwhelming. And then what else is there kilo safaris IS cool i like it but no matter how early you go you get crappy quick views of the animals cept for maybe the tommy's and theres a ton of birds big deal.

its not a fair opinion cause i have great adventures safari right here at home and you see a ton of animals and at your own pace and with great visibility. the fact that the guide on the safaris at AK say "you might see over on your right......." stinks.

Lion king show rocks but im not always down to sit and watch a show. the tree of life is magnificent. But i would never waste preciuos vaca time on more then a couple of hours in that place. I just always feel im missing out on the real fun.

 

[BRERALEX]

this analogy is goin to make no sense but heck why not go for it

remember the movie twins where they explain Arnold was the all the good stuff and Danny devito was the left over crap that came out thats how i feel about Ak.

to me MK and Epcot are 1 and 2. MGM used to be my fav but i dont find enough to do. Theres not enough of those little hidden places like Epcot and MK for me.

Epcot is so grand and has so many wonderful nooks and cranies that it's nearly always the first park we explore each trip.

grand is like the perfect word for epcot. I think im awed by epcot every trip.

Mk is just in my heart. there is no disney for me without MK. I have too many memories afetr so manytrips as a kid at the place.

at mgm RnR was cool at the beginning but after i really broke it down the whole Aerosmith thing doesnt work for me...its like they tried to go for something they thought was great pop culture and didnt look far enough into the future. aerosmith is a great band no doubt but.........20 years from now..........it cant be the same. they are great but they are no Beatles. Im too young to even appreciate the beatles but still know they aint no beatles. so to me they missed the mark. TOT make sup for that miss with it being such a great detailed fun ride. It captures it all for me. TOT rocks and the new changes to the sequences makes it rock even more since they are not just sitting there on their success but keep trying to make it better and feel that responsibility to the public. i like that. INdy is great but dont you feel it needs an update its the same thing over and over but IS A GREAT SHOW dont get me wrong. Little mermaid rocks, the studio tours felt rushed and short this last visit. Using Pearl harbor brings too many memories of a sucky love triangle in a mediocre movie. Action was great but the theming was bad i mean the story was bad.

 

[d-r]

OK Matt, here is what I would do. No interest here in what disney would do or what it would cost.

1. I think that there is room in Harambe behind Tusker house to put a theatre for the Lion King. I would move it there - I wouldn't do this, though, if it would bother the animals on the Safari. With that show, the Safari, and the path, I'd be done with Africa.

2. I'd think seriously about the fire mt idea for Asia. I like the idea of it starting out as sitting down then the floor dropping out and it is a stander. Since I'm only working on AK, I'd put it there if it wouldn't bother the animals. I'd be done with Asia. Oh one other thing I'd do in Asia. If I'm the Disney Co. I am just building a theme park in Hong Kong, and thinking about what in mainland China. My partners in the Chinese government ought to throw me a bone. I want a breeding pair of pandas. I'd make sure that this was done very right and correctly and with the best of care. Do you think there would be anyway to add an extra loop into Kali to make it longer?

3. On the side of the river between Asia and Dinorama, I'd put in Australia. I'd theme a sourin over Austrailia ride to an outback bush pilot place, and tie in the rescuers down under in a tiny way in some of the decor (about the level of mr. toad handing owl the dead in pooh). I'd have a walk through with some wooden boardwalks that go through Austrailian wildlife, like kangaroos, wallabees, kualas, platypi.

4. The concept of conservation station is sort of weird, and doesn't fit in if I add in Austrailia. I'm changing it to south america. A lot of it already fits with south america - the rain forest stuff, for example, and I'd repurpose that. I'd probably leave in the "back stage" stuff - this is the challenge, a way to include that in the story if it is south america, and the affection section. I'd have one of my story people work on that. I also need something e-ticket-ish here, but not something big or loud. Maybe this could be one of those family friendly attractions so many people want - maybe a ride through south america with jose carioca and kuzco or something. I'd be sure to use all those south american characters generously. Maybe something with the little plane that flew over the big mountain.

5. Wouldn't it be neat if there was an ice station? Maybe a simulator ride of some sort to "get there." Maybe something like the living seas. Maybe their could be a north pole with some polar bears rescued from crappy zoos living in a super nice pool. Maybe a south pole with some pinguins.

6. There is absolutely nothing wrong with dinorama that a bulldozer couldn't fix. So, hold primeval whirl and triceretop spin in your mind for minute, we are going to repurpose them below. There is a retaining pond behind dinoland. I'm going to build a heck of a roller coaster right over and through that pond. Think of the idea of the excavater, think of something between thunder mt. and indiana jones in paris, going through and down in to the ground and into what looks like it will be the water (maybe a clear tunnel through the water). This won't be a cedar point hyper coaster, but a good coaster. Not themed like Chester and Hester, necessarily, more like a runaway excavator car (I know, it sounds like thunder mt., it would have to be cooler than that, but I'll have my story guy work on it).

7. Camp Minnie Mickey. OK, we've moved the LK theatre that is currently themed like a summer camp. I never really liked that theme for this show. In it's place, I'm going to copy Flik's Fun Fair, and repurpose the two rides I took out of dinorama as buggy rides and put them in the fun fair for the kids (I know the wild mouse has a height requirement, but put something there for the bigger kids, too). It will probably bug somebody (ha a pun) that flik's fun fair is over here and tough to be a bug is in the tree of life. I don't really care. I'd have a little back story like they did in disneyland that we went to clear the land and we found all this fair back there that the bugs had put together.

I'd leave the characters there for the kids. There is a ton of empty space back here. Pocohontos forest friends confuses me. Here are some N. American Animals. They may just have to stay. I don't know if they would be able to stand it there though, because there is still a lot of land on past there that hasn't been used and in it I am going to finish the dream of so many, and put in a beastly kingdom. One really cool coaster, one something else, maybe the unicorn thing. Not a lot really, and I am more or less doing this for the point of doing it. I think there is still enough land behind there to cut a channel that connects to the water that is back past there to a point that would come out below the rain forest cafe outside the ticket windows. Then on the other side of that pond I'd cut a channel about 1/2 mile to the animal kingdom lodge, where guests could get on past the pool area.

8. I wouldn't do a lot in the oasis or discovery island. I'd bring back the boats with it clearly denoted on the guidemaps and signs that these are transportation, not attractions. I'd keep flametree bbq open all the time. I'd add in a passholder lounge.

9. I'd keep a lot of those fun little things that the AK does so well, like the school thing in Harambe, traveling performers, sunrise safari, etc.

That's what I'd do. I don't really care if it is notazu or not. There'd be stuff for little kids, big kids, those without kids, and it would stick with the theme. I added a kiddie land, three or four e-tickets, and some major draw animals.

DR

 

[Another Voice]

Mr. Scoop - 'Sounds Dangerous' is a show that appeals to adults?

There's a limit to how far one can stretch reality to a make a point. Claiming that Drew-in-the-ear Theater appeals to anyone is simply taking things to far.

Oh - and there's a big difference between the number of "adults" visiting the park and the number of "adult tickets" sold to a place. You can have all kinds of fun with numbers when you need to tell The Big Boss things he wants to here (like how Ron was stupid to build MK and Epcot, and how brilliant the Studios is).

Never mistake PowerPoint presenations for a representation of real life.

 

[raidermatt]

Seriously though, the overlap in the MK (for us) would be 7. Not that much for a park of 53+ (same % wise to AK in fact).

Hey, that's great. To each his/her own. But you don't really think that the average family that visits MK only has 7 attractions that they all like (including parades/fireworks), do you?

We love atmosphere. We love to walk around the park and take in the sights, stroll down Main Street and soak it up, etc.

Ah yes! An excellent point, and certainly this was meant to be an integral part of Disneyland, MK and Epcot. I'll agree that AK has some of this going for it as well. But it was never meant to be an either/or. MK and Epcot prove you can have a large park with lots of appealing rides/attractions, exhibits, AND atmosphere. Again, AK obviously has SOMETHING going for it. Its not like nobody goes. But atmosphere alone won't cut it.

In the end I don't know that it is a problem that warrants a complete overhaul, changing the landscape and nature of the park.

I agree. Even with unlimited funds, I don't think I'd go this far.

I've gone on record that I don't think Beastly Kingdom and a few other new attractions would solve the problem. That might entice a few people to spend another hour or two, but that isn't going to make all the things that aren't COMPELLING now all of a sudden COMPELLING.

Also very true. Honestly, I'm also not necessarily a BK fan. I think its a deviation from the overall theme/concept. But certainly a new land is in order, one that contains 3-4 attractions, along the lines that you mentioned. And, yes, there are also some things that can/should be done with some of the already existing non-COMPELLING stuff.

 

[raidermatt]

Scoop, let me first start with this:

In the end, I'll stick with my prediction (and I think maybe yours) that if Disney had added and grown AK like they did with DS (within the same time frame), few would be complaining about AK.

Yes, I pretty much agree. I don't think that is the BEST ultimate goal for a Disney park, but its a far better scenario than what has actually happened with AK.

However, from what I've been told, many at WDW consider DS to be the "healthiest" park based on several factors:

Again, though, I'm not convinced this definition of healthiest is necessarily the best for WDW, nor is it necessarily something that needs to be copied in all new Disney parks. WDW is a resort destination first and foremost, and any view of the parks has to include a "big picture" view of what it does for the entire resort.

Apparently, alot of adults who are in Orlando for whatever reason, end up at DS with one day tickets. The shows are generally considered to be the cause of this

Gee, if this is such a plus, shutting down Hunchback would seem to be a questionable move.

So, in the end, yes, MK is the mothership for WDW. But, alot of how DS was built and grown is a strong model for many reasons.

Who says the correct model for WDW is the Alien armada from Independence Day? This whole concept of trying to create small profitable parks that are weak sisters to MK and DL is a damaging concept.

1. When you lower your goals, the quality/appeal of the end result is lowered as well.

2. The public is not as dumb as some would make them out to be. When you build less and charge the same, they figure it out.

3. When the main message being sent to your creative folks is "keep it small, we don't want to create another MK!", you're not going to get the best results.

4. The ever important brand name is damaged.

I'd add Beauty, Animation, WWTBAM, Sounds Dangerous, and probably the Backlot Tour to Indy.

I share AV's skepticism about Sounds Dangerous, as well as the Backlot Tour. I also wonder about Millionaire's long term appeal, given the demise of the TV show.

It easily has the broadest based appeal and is the primary park for the much maligned but alway sought teenage market.

Maybe so, but still the 3rd most attended park at WDW, and that's with 1 and 2 getting virtually nothing new for years. (only TT stands out)

Still, saying that one of the four parks is going to slant a bit towards teens and the families that love them is one thing. Using that as a model for everything you do is another.

 

[David in Manassas]

Forgot to mention that when my wife saw Dinorama for the first time the exact words out of her mouth were :"Oh my goodness....it's just like Lincoln Park"

Lincoln Park, no defunct was an "amusement park" of our childhood back in Massachusetts. One of those parks originally built by the Union Streetcar company as a way of encouraging ridership to the end of the line. Although I have many found memories of the place, my wife does not and equates it with a old run down carnival.

Funny have we have come full circle from what Walt Disney was trying to get away from...

David

 

[Another Voice]

"Yes, yes, indeed it was the oft-hallowed (and equally oft-late) Imagineers who dreamed up and created Sounds Dangerous all on their own..."

Yes, yes, the horror of forced synergy can cause even the brightest minds to dim. It's also a shinning expample of all that's wrong with a place like Animal Kingdom.

It used to be The Disney Way to say "I have a woonderful idea for a show. Can we afford to build a quaility product?" A lot of wonderful ideas were scrapped that way, but what got built was generally pretty good.

But now the way things happen - everything from 'Sounds Dangerous' to 'Anmial Kingdom' to 'The Country Beats Movie' - is "The spreadsheet says you spend this much money. Make something for marketing to sell."

Now occansionally you can get something good out of that process, but most of the time you get low quality, assigment level product that lacks the passion and the effort that goes into a show which the creators actually care about.

Most of Animal Kingdom represents assembly line thinking. It shows and the guests respond accordingly.

 

[DisneyKidds]

But you don't really think that the average family that visits MK only has 7 attractions that they all like (including parades/fireworks), do you?

Wouldn't surprise me all that much. Take a 20-40 somethiing person (nixes Dumbo, Carousel, and maybe a few other Fantasyland rides, as well as Aladdin and most/all of ToonTown, the Speedway and Astro Orbitor) who doesn't like coasters (out goes Space and Thunder) or scary/spooky rides (by by Alien and Haunted Mansion), gets motion sick (no Teacups), isn't impressed with the dated Adventurland rides (Pirates, Jungle Cruise) and doesn't want to climb (no hoofing up the Treehouse), and just doesn't want to do the non-COMPELLING attractions (Tiki Room, Hall of Presidents, Country Bears, TTA, Tom Sawyer, Riverboat) and what are you left with - Pooh, Pan and Small World (maybe), perhaps Buzz, then Splash and the parades/fireworks. It really isn't a stretch at all to get to that point for many an individual and possibly have a small overlap. Of course, that person with their family may do just about all of the rides mentioned above and enjoy them because of the others in the family, but they might never do them on their own. I bet you could find a lot of people like that. But guess what, they still love the MK because it is about more than the sum of it's parts for the individual. There is something more there. I also believe there is something more to the AK than many people give themselves the chance to see, running out after they hit the 3 rides they are compelledto go on.

 

[raidermatt]

But you don't really think that the average family that visits MK only has 7 attractions that they all like (including parades/fireworks), do you?

Wouldn't surprise me all that much.

Can't prove if of course, but I couldn't disagree more with your statement. I would be EXTREMELY surprised (and you should be too ) if the AVERAGE family had no more overlap at MK than 7 attractions/shows/parades. Your analysis is more of a worst case scenario for a MK visitor, as opposed to the average visitor. Remember, this isn't the average person walking along 5th Avenue in New York, this is the average family already in the MK.

Of course, that person with their family may do just about all of the rides mentioned above and enjoy them because of the others in the family, but they might never do them on their own.

True, to a certain extent, but most likely less common than you would think. Still, even that person who wouldn't ride that stuff is taking his family to WDW, and more specifically, MK, because all things considered, its where he wants to be. Again, if AK and MK both have the atmosphere down, as you speculate, SOMETHING is making folks go to MK at almost twice the rate of AK.

I also believe there is something more to the AK than many people give themselves the chance to see, running out after they hit the 3 rides they are compelled to go on.

Of course there is more to see if they leave before seeing everything. But is it stuff that they would have thought worth their valuable WDW time? If yes, then why aren't they seeing it? Why do they find other things at other parks they like, but somehow miss the things at AK? What did Disney do wrong, and how do they address it? If the answer is no, even if they saw it, they wouldn't think it worth their WDW time, then Disney's choices are to start replacing things, or giving up and accept the lowered attendance and concession/merhandise sales.

 

[Mikelly1221]

As time goes by, many AK attractions have lost their "repeat value" on us.

Gcurling said that about 2 pages ago, and it really sums up the problem for me. All the other parks have rides that have repeat value-we'll go on them over and over and over and over....and never get tired of them. The only ones that do that for us at AK is Dinosaur and ITTBAB. Shows-FOTLK. Not worth going to a whole park for. We'll just skip it, or see it in the AM and go somewhere else in the PM.

Another thing...almost everyone can drive not too far from their house and be where they can see animals, a zoo, etc. AK is not unique to people. People have to come to Disney to see MK, EPCOT, MGM, but they can go anywhere and see animals, even exotic ones. The concept is not special enough.

Also, what is the deal about having Rainforest the only sit-down (not counter service) restaurant in the whole place? That is very short-sighted planning.

(Climbs down off her soapbox)

 

[space42]

Originally posted by DisneyKidds
Wouldn't surprise me all that much. Take a 20-40 somethiing person (nixes Dumbo, Carousel, and maybe a few other Fantasyland rides, as well as Aladdin and most/all of ToonTown, the Speedway and Astro Orbitor) who doesn't like coasters (out goes Space and Thunder) or scary/spooky rides (by by Alien and Haunted Mansion), gets motion sick (no Teacups), isn't impressed with the dated Adventurland rides (Pirates, Jungle Cruise) and doesn't want to climb (no hoofing up the Treehouse), and just doesn't want to do the non-COMPELLING attractions (Tiki Room, Hall of Presidents, Country Bears, TTA, Tom Sawyer, Riverboat) and what are you left with - Pooh, Pan and Small World (maybe), perhaps Buzz, then Splash and the parades/fireworks. It really isn't a stretch at all to get to that point for many an individual and possibly have a small overlap. .

No offense DisneyKidds but...

This 'imaginary' person would be the current Disney's ideal customer and would probably have a great time at the new HK Disneyland without all of those silly expensive rides...

Ugg.. Does anyone really go to the Magic Kingdom and NOT ride Pirates, Jungle Cruise, Haunted Mansion, Space Mountain, Country Bears, and Thunder Mountain??????????????????? I guess we will find out when HK Disneyland opens in 2005.

 

[DisneyKidds]

I would be EXTREMELY surprised (and you should be too ) if the AVERAGE family had no more overlap at MK than 7 attractions/shows/parades.

Fair enough. Our family, while not at all unique to those travelling to WDW, does include my DW who is bigger on atmosphere than rides, and young children who can't/don't want to do a lot of things. What do you think the overlap number might be for the average family? 10, 15, 20? Still not that high a %. Furthermore, our AK overlap is only 3 or 4, but your "average" family's overlap would likely be higher there as well.

Still, even that person who wouldn't ride that stuff is taking his family to WDW, and more specifically, MK, because all things considered, its where he wants to be.

Exactly, because they have seen it, know it, and there is something more attracting them than just the rides and attractions.

if AK and MK both have the atmosphere down, as you speculate, SOMETHING is making folks go to MK at almost twice the rate of AK.

Yeah, I know. I don't believe that it is because the AK is missing something, per se. I think it is just that what the AK has is not a theme that appeals to those people. That is why I don't know that there is a quick "fix" for the AK. People just aren't buying the atmosphere of the zoo/nathazu . Is it because AK is really so bad, or is it that it is decent (or maybe even pretty good ), but not what people want?

Of course there is more to see if they leave before seeing everything. But is it stuff that they would have thought worth their valuable WDW time?

Gets back to what people want, and think is worthy of their time. I'll bring it back to the theme and concept. People likely skip stuff (like the walking trails, planet watch, oasis, among other things) because they think it is typical zoo stuff and that is not how they want to spend their time. They only do the rides and shows (and not all of them at that) because, like Snacky, they want rides, something that was not intended to be the main focus of the park. AK is ultimately a concept that did not fly. Disney realized that - hence the nathazu tag line to try and change the perceptions that people have that are keeping them from experiencing the park. I'm not going to say it is the guests fault, that they don't get the concept, I'll just say the concept failed.

Another thing...almost everyone can drive not too far from their house and be where they can see animals, a zoo, etc. AK is not unique to people. People have to come to Disney to see MK, EPCOT, MGM, but they can go anywhere and see animals, even exotic ones. The concept is not special enough.

While AK is better than your average local zoo (the Bronx Zoo is a pretty darned good zoo, but for total entertainement value AK blows it away), people don't know that, and don't care to find that out. Again, that is why they came up with the rediculous slogan. Even adding acouple of new e-tickets and some other attractions isn't going to change all of that. This is really the root cause of the problems.

As I said earlier, the only hope to make AK into an attendance blockbuster would be to abandon the concept. Add lots of rides, extend the hours, have loud nightime entertainment spectaculars, etc. However, it might even be too late for that , if it were even the right thing to do, which I don't think it is.

 

[DisneyKidds]

This 'imaginary' person would be the current Disney's ideal customer and would probably have a great time at the new HK Disneyland without all of those silly expensive rides...

I doubt it. Main Street USA is probably one of the best non-attractions in the MK. It sets the mood and tone. It is a special entrance to a special place. Are they investing in that kind of quality in the HK park in general? I doubt it. As I have been saying, Disney doesn't have to be, and isn't always, about the rides, but you do have to have quality throughout.

Ugg.. Does anyone really go to the Magic Kingdom and NOT ride Pirates, Jungle Cruise, Haunted Mansion, Space Mountain, Country Bears, and Thunder Mountain???????????????????

Yup - that ain't no imaginary person, that is my honest to goodness wife . She has recently been on Jungle Cruise because our daughter is finally old enough to enjoy it, but my wife could take it or leave it. I'm the same way. What do I need cheesy fake animals and bad jokes for when I can see the real thing? Yeah, it's a classic, and we have seen it, but repeat value? No. Country Bears, not compelling, although cute to see now and again. Both of these she will do with our daughter, but on her own? No. Now Space and Thunder - well, if you don't like coasters (even little ones) then no. Pirates and Haunted Mansion - well, no, they don't appeal to everyone. But none of that keeps the MK from being her favorite park. She can appreciate everything that is there, even if she might not go gaga over the rides. She feels the same way about AK. So do I.

 

[d-r]

Originally posted by Mikelly1221

Also, what is the deal about having Rainforest the only sit-down (not counter service) restaurant in the whole place? That is very short-sighted planning.

I don't know how true it is, but I remember hearing a few years ago that Disney made the deal with rain forest cafe that they would be the exclusive sit-down restaurant in the park. I'm not sure why they bargained that hard, to me there are two too many rfcs at wdw. But somebody at disney must really like them, because they are also at downtown disney in anaheim, and in Tokyo Disneyland's Ikspiari, and at the disney village in Paris. They are almost as ubiquitous at disney resorts as mcdonalds and planet hollywood. Heck, they may be building one in Hong Kong for all I know.

DR

 

[Another Voice]

Very quickly - The Rainforest Cafe at the Animal Kingdom was really the first shot at the "shopping mall" concept for the theme parks. The thinking was that Disney could reap better returns by leasing out lower margin businesses to companies that specialize in those businesses. Mind you that theme park resturants don't exactly have low margins, but they don't look all that nice compared to all the other numbers on the spreadsheets.

Second, and the one that still drives the corporate types green, it's thought that other "brands" enhance the entertainment value of the park. A brand experience like a Rainforest Cafe, much like a big anchor store at your local mall, is considered to be a major draw and an inducement to visit the park in the first place; i.e. they expected people to say "let's go to the Animal Kingdom, they have a Rainforest Cafe® there!"

This idea was carried even further with California Adventure were much, much marketing was spent on the hyping restaurants owned and operated by Wolfgang Puck and Mondavi Wineries. These "destination" locations were to act for DCA much like "destination stores" do for a mall - people will go to a mall specifically because it has an Abercrombie and Fitch store and then do some addtional shopping while they are there for example. The brand experience is also behind to continuing drive to get full blown McDonalds in all of the parks.

Of course the same problem happened here as it has with all the other brilliant marketing and profit making schemes from Disney - they forgot to tell the guest that they were supposed to like this kind of stuff. Funny as it is, guests go to a Disney theme park to see a Disney theme park, not to eat at overpriced restaurants.

Fortunetly for Rainforest, they swung a better deal for Animal Kingdom than Puckie and the grape guys swung at DCA. Oh, and the flops doesn't mean Disney's given up in the idea, but they are finding it a harder time to get companies to pay Disney's asking price.

 

[Walt's Frozen Head]

I don't believe that it is because the AK is missing something, per se. I think it is just that what the AK has is not a theme that appeals to those people. That is why I don't know that there is a quick "fix" for the AK.

Animal Kingdom is missing a lot of things.

AK is missing dinner restaurants and park-closing shows. This savings was part of the decision to build a half-day park in the first place.

AK is missing a theme. Is there a person in the world who, when they first heard "Disney's Animal Kingdom," didn't think "a zoo done Disney-style?" To find out now it's NAHTAZU, well, that only leaves the question of what, precisely, is it?

AK is missing flow and balance. They may have saved money by delaying and cancelling and substituting for Asia and Australia and Beastly Kingdom and the Excavator, but they offered a crippled and bandaged half-day park, as a result.

AK is missing out on a lot of Disney Magic. The areas of AK that most resemble zoos resemble very good zoos, but not great zoos. The most obvious attempt to Disney-fy a standard concept, tacking the Little Red storyline onto a safari ride, has no replay value, and seemed forced and tedious, even the first time though. As a person who was really looking forward to a zoo done Disney-style, I was disappointed that AK's animal displays were not overwhelming (although they are very nice, and probably my own favorite parts of AK).

Ultimately, Animal Kingdom is missing heart, and soul, and spirit. Animal Kingdom was the inspiration of accountants (Disney World + something that smells like Busch Gardens without so much beer = fewer Disney resort occupants spending money in Tampa on Wednesday or Thursday); a marketing gimmick that's not going away.

Without the heart and soul and spirit, AK lacks focus, direction, and, in the end, identity.

The first step towards fixing things would be defining AK in terms of what it is to be, rather than what it is NAHT.

-WFH

 

[raidermatt]

What do you think the overlap number might be for the average family? 10, 15, 20? Still not that high a %.

But do families really care about the percentage? I don't really think so. Let's just suppose the percentage of attractions the whole family wants to do is the same at AK and MK. Let's say it's 20% (I still think the % is higher on average at MK, but the point can be made assuming an equal percentage). Using the numbers from earlier in the thread, the family wants to do about 4 or 5 at AK, and 10 or 11 at MK. So where are they going to go?

Now, lets say the family leans towards the adventurous side, and consists of older children. In addition to the all family attractions, AK gives them Dinosaur, Kali, PW, and maybe Bug. MK gives them Space Mt, Splash Mt, Big Thunder and AE. Pirates, HM and the Tea Cups come into play. Again MK wins.

Have a couple of wee ones and have to stick to the tame stuff? AK gives you KS (if they can handle the jostling), TS, Camp Minnie/Mickey, a daytime parade, three shows and maybe Bug. MK gives you all of Fantasyland (except maybe the teacups), Toontown, Tland Transit Authority, THREE spinners, some race cars, Buzz, JC, maybe Pirates, a choo-choo train, a daytime parade, and many others. Not even close.

So unless the stuff at AK is more COMPELLING (I know you are sick of seeing that word in caps, but its a perfect fit) than the stuff at AK, AK has a problem. Throw in the likely fact that the most compelling things at AK are not as appealing as the best of MK, and AK has a bigger problem.

Atmosphere? Even if AK hits the mark, very few are going to find it BETTER than MK.

MK may not be a restaurant haven like WS, but compared to AK its a culinary delight.

The only things AK has going for it OVER MK?

1- More live shows.
2- Animals.

Some folks will like the "natural" atmosphere better, but that probably hurts with at least as many people as it helps.


For whatever its worth, for the three of us (me, DW, and DS (4)), the overlap at AK is:

Kilamanjaro, Kali, Tarzan, Lion King, Pangani and maybe Maharajah.

At MK:

Railroad, Buzz, TTA, IaSW, Peter Pan, Pooh, Snow White, HM, HoP, Liberty Belle, Pirates, Jungle Cruise, Tiki Room, Country Bears, Spectro and FitS.

And yes, I'm sure about all of the MK attractions because those are the same ones my wife and I would ride at DL before my son was born. (TTA was the People Mover, no Pooh but has Toad, etc...)

So that's 5 or 6 at AK, and 14 at MK, 16 if FitS and Spectro are running.

 

[Mikelly1221]

My family enjoys Rainforest, but we would have liked to have seen one sit-down restaurant at AK that's not a chain. Yes, Disney's food is overpriced, but we enjoy the different types of restaurants Disney has to offer.

I know I'm not adding much meat to this discussion, but in effect, AK is on a slightly higher plane for us than Sea World & Busch Gardens. We like it, we don't have anything against it, it's not bad, but it doesn't have the Disney Draw like the other ones have for us. And I am a Disney nut! If it doesn't get us Disney nuts, it's got real problems.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

I gotta tell you, I haven't been real enthusiastic about posting lately. Seems we covered this same ground a couple years ago (albeit with more voices than just mine!!).

But I couldn't help but send in a line or two if just to welcome back one of the true "Disney" believers!!

So, without further fanfare:

Welcome back

Walt's Frozen Head
(the good guy)*

Now, excuse me while I go back and actually read the post. It's bound to be great!!!







*obscure record reference (circa 1967)