Disney Closing Animal Kingdom?

[kathylovesdisneyworl]

Quote
IT'S NAHTAZU!

I haven't been to every zoo there is, but I have never seen a zoo like DAK. To compare just doesn't cut it in my book. Just because someone doesn't enjoy a day with nature doesn't make DAK bad.
Just not for all people.

 

[Laurajean1014]

AK is better than any time I've visited Busch Gardens! BG was good, but it never had AKL, the walking path with the gorillas (up close and personal), the authentic foods, a Bug's Life, Lion King Show (which I believe to be worth the admission in itself), Dinosaur, Kali Rapids and my kids would say "Dinoland."

It is forming into being a great park. My husband and I like the laid back feel of AK. It's very un-Disney like, but still being part of Disney. I am very happy that they are expanding and not closing this park!

Does anyone remember Epcot when it opened? Only a few exhibits and countries were ready in time!

Also, Universal for the first few years, was such a disappointment that people demanded their money back!

AK is only going to get better and better as it matures into a main attraction!

 

[HB2K]

Quote
IT'S NAHTAZU!

I haven't been to every zoo there is, but I have never seen a zoo like DAK. To compare just doesn't cut it in my book. Just because someone doesn't enjoy a day with nature doesn't make DAK bad.

Hey it's Disney's words....not mine. Disney is trying to convince the public that DAK is not a zoo (which most people seem to think it is) but a theme park.

Also if the general public doesn't enjoy a day with nature, it does make DAK's theme a bad business decision.

Does anyone remember Epcot when it opened? Only a few exhibits and countries were ready in time!

I can see DVC clenching his teeth after statements like this...

EPCOT was built as a FULL park. Did they expand and add things over time? Yes. But when it opened, the public embraced it (Unlike DAK) and I've never seen ANYONE comment that EPCOT was not complete upon opening.

AS I said previously, the concept of a half built but open to the public theme park started with MGM.

AK is only going to get better and better as it matures into a main attraction!

But how long is the general public, who currently doesn't think much of the park, going to wait?

Based on the average expansion timelines, once E:E is open, is it going to be another 5 years before we see a meaningful expansion at the park? Is a single E-Ticket (if it ends up that high) going to be enough to drive attendance for 5 more years all by itself?

 

[Laurajean1014]

AK - is not a disappointment. We have recommended it to many friends and I have not heard negatives on the park. The park is different, but not insignificant.

It's worth the admission. My son has gotten up close and personal with a giraffe on safari - first time ever at a park or a zoo!

I do not believe AK is complete, HB2k - nor are other parks. They are always updating, closing and adding attractions. That's what makes Disney survive.

HB2k - Your previous message was incorrect. Epcot did not open as a full and complete park. Ask any WDW employee and they will tell you that they received negative feedback because it was not complete. By the way, Walt is not DVC he's WD!

 

[space42]

HB2k - Your previous message was incorrect. Epcot did not open as a full and complete park. Ask any WDW employee and they will tell you that they received negative feedback because it was not complete.

Huh? Epcot was at least a two day park for my family when we first went in '82.

I made a post last year compairing EPCOT Center of '83 to AK of '99 (One year after opening). You can read it here.
http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=220393

In summary, (not counting shows) the attraction count was 19 to 10 in EPCOT's favor. Heck, Future World alone had more attractions than all of AK. That is why many people consider AK a 1/2 park.

 

[Peter Pirate]

Nahtazu WAS Disney's PR move and is very apt, IMO. It is not looked at as a zoo by those who know but rather by those who merely read brochures or complaints on the Rumors Boards! I'd say few would call it a zoo after they've visited (not none, but few).

I can see DVC clenching his teeth after statements like this...

Yeah, so can I. But his take is always so one demensional that it would be predictable would it not?

EPCOT was built as a full day Park (in relative terms - Laurajean's stament is actually correct) but hey, there was little in competetion or comparison at that time. Do you think that maybe they've learned a little about building a theme park along they way? ... Well, that's a dumb question, because obviously you do not...

But I get tired of hearing about this "general public" that doesn't like AK...The numbers don't really tell that story unless you surround them with caveots, 'buts' or 'what ifs'...The Park OUTDREW IOA last year...Nuff said!

'E:E' will be a big boost to AK, also don't forget AK & IOA (and other parks) have diferent capacities...So what kind of increase in number is Disney really looking for? I'm sure it's mostly relative to number of multiple a hoppers that can be sold and not the one day admission to AK...

 

[d-r]

"AS I said previously, the concept of a half built but open to the public theme park started with MGM."

Actually I'm really not at all sure who started this concept, but as for the Disney company it started with Disneyland.

On opening day there was:

MAIN STREET
Santa Fe & Diseyland Railroad
Disneyland Street Railway (the horse-drawn trolleys on Main Street)
Disneyland Fire Department (that fire wagon in the fire house was a ride up and down Main Street)
Disneyland Penny Arcade and Shooting Gallery
Main Street Cinema

ADVENTURELAND
Explorer's Boat Ride (now the Jungle Cruise)

FRONTIERLAND
Log Fort and Block Houses (actually, the entry fascade to Frontierland)
Mark Twain River Boat
Painted Desert (Mule Pack, Stage Coach Ride - Conestoga Wagons not open yet)
Davy Crockett Museum / Arcade (then the Mercantile)

FANTASYLAND
Sleeping Beauty Castle (the walk-through wasn't open for two more years)
Peter Pan
Mr. Toad's Wild Ride
Snow White Ride-Thru
King Arthur Carousel
Mad Tea Party
Canal Boats of the World (now Storybook Land Canal Boats)

Tomorrowland
Autopia
Clock of the World (This was a large clock that marked the entrance to Tommorowland, counting down until 1986 Haley's Comit)
Circarama, U.S.A. (playing "A Tour of the West" - filmed from the top of a car (get it?) in full circle vision; I'm not sure if this was open at first or not, one source says yes, another says it was added later)
Monsanto Hall of Chemistry
Space Station X-1 (I never saw this, but it is described as a "satellite view of America as it would appear from space, that is if America was painted by some former animators and set designers.)

In fact, they didn't even start work on tomorrowland until 6 months before opening, and added some prefab buildings at opening time so it wouldn't look empty.

This is why people say that there were either 17 or 18 attractions when it opened - I mean, do you count the castle as an attraction when there wasn't a walk through? Or the frontierland gate? But I listed everything that I could find ever referred to as an attraction (no, I didn't list restaurants or stands) to be as inclusive as possible. Over the next year, Dumbo, a 20K leagues walk through (movie props promoting the filim out that year, the boats in tomorrrowland, keelboats, and casey jr. circus train opened, along with some minor attractions/additional sponserships (aluminium hall of fame, case del fritos, chicken of the sea pirate ship, maxwell house house of coffee, etc.).

Anyway, I think the point is pretty clear.

 

[Werner Weiss]

Here another list about Disneyland in 1955 (which includes attractions that weren't open on opening day, but which opened any time before the end of the year):

http://www.yesterland.com/dl1955.html

 

[DC7800]

Originally posted by Laurajean1014
Epcot did not open as a full and complete park. Ask any WDW employee and they will tell you that they received negative feedback because it was not complete.

If Epcot, in its first year, was not a complete park then Animal Kingdom is truly a lost cause. As space42 noted, there was no way to completely cover Epcot in one day back in the early 1980's. Most of the attractions we've enjoyed at Epcot for the past two decades were there from the beginning, or opened soon thereafter (Horizons, October 1983), followed by further additions in the next 4-5 years. I simply cannot imagine anyone complaining of a lack to do in Epcot Center. Lack of updating has somewhat "stagnated" the park in recent years, but the quantity of attractions is still there.

Animal Kingdom did open Asia, but has since remained relatively static (except for wonders such as Dinorama, hardly a positive step). Granted, a few more E-tickets (and the C-D's attractions to accompany them), perhaps a Beastly Kingdom, could have made a difference, but that didn't happen, nor do we have any reason to believe it ever will. Hence, many people can finish the place in a half-day. With but a single major attraction in the works for the next few years, it's hard to imagine attendance not continuing to deteriorate.

 

[blackshirt]

Originally posted by Laurajean1014
AK is better than any time I've visited Busch Gardens! BG was good, but it never had AKL, the walking path with the gorillas (up close and personal), the authentic foods, a Bug's Life, Lion King Show (which I believe to be worth the admission in itself), Dinosaur, Kali Rapids and my kids would say "Dinoland."

If you believe that the Lion King Show is worth the price of admission, more power to you. Pray tell, how much was the original Lion King movie "worth" to you? Did you refinance your house and sell all of your personal belongings to buy tickets?
If you want to observe the difference in how Universal and Disney treat their quests in terms of investment in attractions, you need only compare Kali Rapids with Popeye at IOA. I don't know the actual amount spent on each attraction or if that info is even available. But based on the resulting attractions, I would guess Popeye cost much much more. Cost is not everything, but in this case there is absolutely no comparision. Kali Rapids- board the raft, get preached to about the enviroment(What a uplifting message!), and hey, wait, that was it??? Popeye- twice as long, just when you think its over, another portion begins.

 

[DisneyKidds]

there was no way to completely cover Epcot in one day back in the early 1980's............I simply cannot imagine anyone complaining of a lack to do in Epcot Center.

Granted, Epcot had a larger attraction count than AK when it first opened. However, all this labelling as half-day, full-day, two-day............parks is extremely subjective. Replace Epcot and the early 80's with AK and the early 90's and I would make the very same statement about AK. Unfortunately, people's personal tastes apparently don't leave the majority of Disney guests feeling the way I do. However, that doesn't change the fact that, when looked at objectively, it would take more than a full day to see/do everything in the AK. The problem is that there appear to be lots of people who don't want to see/do everything. That is why, contrary to Europa, I believe there is as much problem with what is there as there is with what is not there. The place where I can see attraction count being a factor is that AK needs to rely on almost all of it's attractions to be a full day park. At MK you could do half of all available attractions and make a full day of it, at Epcot 3/4 would make a full day. That is where some new attractions would help AK I suppose. Again, I think AK and the Studios are on par as the Studios has to rely on almost all attractions to make it a full day. On the subjective judgement side, the Studios is the half-day park for the Kidds clan.

 

[Planogirl]

I can't see how to spend a full day at Animal Kingdom. We arrive at opening and hit the big rides, then we eat, walk the wonderful trails and hang around until the parade. Then we're done and we haven't particularly rushed. But it's true that this is definitely subjective and based on personal preferences. We don't bother with Kali since it's such a short ride and see nothing in Camp Minnie/Mickey except for Festival of the Lion King.

I think that it would be easier to see AK as a whole park if Disney added a few full-service restaurants. I wonder why they never have?

 

[HB2K]

AK - is not a disappointment. We have recommended it to many friends and I have not heard negatives on the park. The park is different, but not insignificant.

Laurajean-

I think this is where we end our discussion.

DAK has been an attendance disappointment since it's second year of operation. It's hardly been in dispute.

If your family, and those who you reccomend it to, find it to be worth while, that's great. The problem is you are in the minority.

Enjoy the park!

Nahtazu WAS Disney's PR move and is very apt, IMO. It is not looked at as a zoo by those who know but rather by those who merely read brochures or complaints on the Rumors Boards! I'd say few would call it a zoo after they've visited (not none, but few).

Pirate-

I think I'm teetering on the same ledge with you that I was just on with Laura.

The people Disney's PR campaign was aimed at are the important people. Not you or I....the General Public determines what is a success and a failure.

You're stance is one of personal opinion. If you don't feel DAK is a zoo, that's great.

But there are THOUSAND, if not MILLIONS which apparently think DAK is_a_zoo if Disney feels compelled to spend MILLIONS trying to tell them they are wrong (which is stupid when you think about it).

EPCOT was built as a full day Park (in relative terms - Laurajean's stament is actually correct) but hey, there was little in competetion or comparison at that time. Do you think that maybe they've learned a little about building a theme park along they way? ... Well, that's a dumb question, because obviously you do not...

Honestly?

I think Disney is trying to change what the public expects from them. I_think Ei$ner wishes EPCOT was never built, because people would be OK with the experinces DAK (and to a lesser extent MGM) offer to them.

People have been trained to expect a certain level of park from the Walt Disney company. They were used to new parks opening up which took multiple days to explore (not hunt for new, little hidden things to find mind you).

Then Ei$ner took over and determined to build smaller and expand as needed. The problem is EPCOT was built and had already trained WDW's customer base that when Disney builds a theme park, you better be ready to spend MULTIPLE days there in order to see all there is to see.

Now when people venture into DAK, DCA, and to a lesser extent MGM they feel like they've been cheated....since they're looking for one thing and Disney is selling them another.

So in closing...I didn't set the standard for them to live up to....but I do hold them to it. Apparently I'm not alone.

D-R I'm not even going to get into the attraction counting business. I stand by my statement of the half built but open for business park started with MGM.

Did all parks leave room for expansion? Yes. But until MGM was open, there was NEVER a whisper of being able to do a Disney park within the same day. Multiple days (or single day marathons) were required to cover Magic Kingdom and/or EPCOT.

Kidds-

I think I agree with some of your points. Part of what is wrong with DAK is so much of what_is_there is uninteresting to the general public that once you start skipping things, the time needed for the park starts to whittle away....thus the half a day tag.

You would probably need ALL day to see EVERY single thing in the park....but why should I be happy if in order to get the value I demand I have to experince things I have no interest in?

 

[Peter Pirate]

You're stance is one of personal opinion....

Yes and no. I always use my personal opinion to specifically counteract the personal opinions of those on the reverse side. If people quit using personal opinion as facts against us you'll see the IMO tag less frequently in my posts...For example

But there are THOUSANDS if not MILLIONS of people which apparantely think DAK_is_a_zoo.

The proof is the NAHTAZU campaign? That seems shortsighted. DAK needed identity, to be sure and since there were many detractors squaking about "the zoo" image, it made perfect sense (IMO) to use such a campaign to dispel such thoughts. I thought the campaign was playful & entertaining. I have NEVER came across anyone who thouht DAK was a zoo. NOT ONCE. Now maybe living in Floida makes people more aware of WDW, but I don't think so (we can't even seem to get voting down)...

As for the new parks. I certainly have never felt cheated at DAK. Now I know this is personal and I love the animal theme, but to me it totally seems worth the effort. The 'Tree Of Life' is an absolute marvel all by itself. Yes, they made some BIG misakes, the shortness of Kali for one (GRR at DCA is much, much better), introducing DinoRama as an 'E' ticket area for two (it should have been one of those 'gimmees' for the kids - which it will eventully become anyway) and three the skinny walkways...But it is simply gratuitous to continue to 'call' AK on lack of things to do when in fact it (AK) is finding its fit quite nicely. It is obviously no longer planned to be an evening park, with no sit-downs (thanks PG) but still MK is hardly an evening park anymore either...This is a WDW problem, not an AK problem and should be looked at seperately. AK COULD open until 9 if Disney chose to do it but their master plan (right or wrong) obviously does not call for this. At this juncture let me say that I do have big issues with the current trend toward hours at WDW. They are making it harder for my famly to do what we do best, as well.

Lastly DCA. This Park is not a total waste to anyone who buys an AP or a hopper. We visited DL again this summer and our time breakdown was 2.5 days at DL and 1.5 at DCA and we enjoyed 90% of it. My point being that while DCA is a tremendous failure in the context of what Disney expected (making DL a real Destination Resort) and what fans may have expected (TDS). IT still has enough good offerings to make it a great add on to DL...As long as you're not paying the individal day price. This is bad for Disney but not really bad for the guest...In the long run, 'ToT' will open giving them another quality attraction to go along with 'Aladdin', 'Soarin', 'GRR', 'Screamin'', 'The Animation Building', 'Flicks Fun Fair' and 'The Main Street Electrical Parade'. That's 8 quality attractions, does that really sound like something that can't be built upon? Plus if you count 'The Muppets' and 'It's Tough To Be a Bug', and I guess you should, that makes 10 great attactions!

In the end though AK can't be dismissed in one sentence as incomplete or shortsighted while in the next sentence IOA is touted as a complete & wonderful Park as the numbers simply do not bear this out...

 

[d-r]

Werner - thanks for posting the link - and actually for all the information on your web site, I really love your site and I'm not sure if I ever told you. You may notice that in the last paragraph of my post I noted things that opened over the course of the year, and when I look at the list you have it seems like it pretty much jibes with it. Remember the original quote was "open to the public."

D-R I'm not even going to get into the attraction counting business. I stand by my statement of the half built but open for business park started with MGM.

You can believe what you want to believe, but that doesn't make it so.

I listed out the attractions, rather than just citing a number, so that people could think about what a day would have been like in disneyland when it opened. I wasn't there in 1955, but I can imagine what it was like. I think DAK as it opened had more to do than disneyland as it opened.

For that matter, the wdw mk was opened aimed more at an older demopgraphic of retirees than at families on vacation; there were no mountains, no pirates, no people mover or starjets, no tom sawyer island. Of course no toon fair, etc.

DK makes a good point in that this sort of thing is subjective. Epcot opened without horizons, wonders of life, living seas, imagination, norway or morroco. To some people in the 80s that would have been more than a one day park. To me (and my friends) in the 80s, as teenagers, that was a NO day park!

We've probably been to the DAK 10 times, and for us, we rarely spend more than 3/4 of a day there, but I imagine that someone visiting for the first time would find much more that was fresh and interesting to spend some time with. It is a complex thing to talk about DAK attendance as a disappointment - the dissapointment was that it cannibalized attendance from other parks, rather than bringing in new folks or causing folks to add days. Will this change as the parks matures? Well, if you think about it systemically, that depends on the other parks as well. We rarely spend more than 1/2 day at the studios or epcot at a given time either.

DAK has been an attendance disappointment since it's second year of operation.

The matrix:frontloaded has been an attendance disappointment since its second week of showing, but apparently some people think it is a decent movie. Different strokes, right?

 

[princesstommi]

I just have a question (and it could be totally random, and not worth talking about so feel free to ignore it)...

Does the fact that DAK only has the one *restaurant* make it more of a half-day park than the Studios? (I know about the RFC thing, and that DAK can't have any other sit-down restaurants, I just don't think it's such a god idea)

When we went to the Studios, we planned out a whole day, including lunch at Prime Time and dinner at the Brown Derby, with Fantasmic of course.

Our DAK day, we went, saw the stuff we wanted to see, and left to go to DTD. I hate the Rainforest Cafe, and had no desire to even think about eating there.

Our plans for the parks usually include lunch and/or dinner plans somewhere fun in whatever park we are at. Actually, our last trip revolved really completely around food, and places we wanted to try.

I just wonder if that might have anything to do with the *half day* idea/perception/attitude about DAK.

 

[raidermatt]

While in WDW in May, I saw a "Nahtazu" commercial on one of the local TV channels (not the Resort channels), so I guess its still a concern for Disney.

One more random comment.... If a park had 500 attractions, and not enough people found more than 2 or 3 of those attractions to be "compelling", they would still call it a half-day park. AK has far less than 500 attractions, and lacks more than a few "compelling" attractions.

Arguing semantics doesn't change the problem.

That is all.

 

[Peter Pirate]

Semantics are not nearly as big of problem as misrepresentation is around here...

...Or the fact that a few people are making a mountain sized crises out of a mole hill sized problem..Please keep in mind that despite dropping attendance AK was still the number 5 drawing Park in America last year. Since everyone thinks it should be doing so much better which of the four parks ahead of it should it easily surpass?

 

[EUROPA]

Originally posted by thedscoop


I've talked to plenty of people at WDW about plenty of things. None of them are worried about long term problems for AK as opposed to the DCA fiasco. Frankly, the future of AK looks much brighter than IOA because IOA was built as a "Here's the Whole Kit and Kaboodle" type of "full" park with very little room for long term growth and change. In other words, if ya ain't drawn to IOA now, IOA doesn't have alot it can do about it later.

I never heard this before. From what I understand IOA has plenty of room to add new attractions. 2 Or more in each land.

 

[EUROPA]

Originally posted by thedscoop
Check out the sat images and you'll see that IOA is severely hindered by I-4, USF, and the hotels/citywalk. The only direction it could grow would be the area where Universal is already rumored to have plans for.

I really don't care to look at a satellite image of IOA. For one I'm not a theme park designer nor to I have the skill to asses what property belongs to who. I do remember this thread coming up before on the USF board and from several of the employees that work there all said the same thing that IOA has plenty of room for expansion. (I'm not talking about hotdog vendors either) So unless you heard that IOA is bounded to the current list of attractions by property issues from someone pretty high up at IOA, I would not put much faith in it.

I know that its the popular thing to do around here ....as soon as a question about Disney comes up they like to point to a worse problem at Universal that they heard about from one of their friends at Disney...we'll lets just consider what company that person really works for.