John Frost is reporting that Australia has been approved for DAK

That has been a hope of mine for a while. ; I don't know how much of that article I want to believe or agree with - the Australia land idea sounds very good for me, but I don't like the moving of Lion King over to Harambe - it would make that area too crowded. ; I also wouldn't want to see the Wildlife Express scrapped - I'd rather they keep it, and just add an Australia stop to it. ; Even better if they could figure out a way to modify the track to provide circular transportation to Asia as well, to cover all of the country lands of the park. ; As for other transportation ideas in AK with the expansion, given the sheer acreage there - the obvious answer is the one they had originally when it first opened - BRING BACK THE BOATS! ; There's already a canal running through Asia and off to Africa - it wouldn't be too hard to expand it to the new area as well. ; Boats are awesome...with the theming of AK, the boat ride around all that space would be one of the best rides in the park for many of us.
 
well said, justin, by as far as the expansion goes, it sounds awesome. ; but... wouldn't nemo the musical be more appropriate located in australia just as simba belongs in africa?
 
This is the type of thing that used to get me very excited. ; But, now I wait for the official word from Disney. ; Love the possibilities this may bring, but I cant get to overworked on it. ; Time will tell.
 
considering that per orlando sentinel, attendance at wdw is flat, and that disney has now merged reporting for both coasts, cannot tell if wdw losing or gaining attendance, and given the current economy, we'll see how much ends up beint built, if any, although they need something with big bang, to counter hp wizarding world, a lot of customer days being lost to universal right now. need to stop the bloodloss somehow
 
I wish the bean counters and stock holders at Disney would realize that a flat or down economy is the best time to invest in themselves. ; It's time to do those all important infrastructure updates and to infuse some new items to draw people in. ; Let's face it, when things are booming that is the time guests get upset when things are closed so new things can be built. ; If they want to compete with the Wizarding World of Harry Potter, they are going to need to find something that people are going to want to pay to see and the best time to do it is NOW
 
Oh, and I don't think adding Australia to Disney's Animal Kingdom is the thing that will bring people in. ; I'm not sure what is, but it has to be big. ; I love the idea of an Australia themed land at Animal Kingdom, but I don't think it'll be enough. ; Plus, price deals only carry you so far. ; Eventually, people want something new and exciting to see
 
Ray, I think the current management understands it, and that's also why they stopped Phase 2 and 3 of the Fantasyland redo, because they finally figured out that princesses aren't going to draw people to the parks.

But the other problem is that it takes sooo long to approve anything. ; Honestly I think the thing WDW needs, well, isn't even opening in the U.S. for another 18 months, and once it does, well, that park has exclusive on it for a few years. ; They need to break ground NOW, and theme it to the new movie coming out[nb]Cars 2[/nb] so it'll be different. ; And also get the new coaster built before THAT sequel[nb]Monsters Inc 2[/nb] comes out in 18 months as well. ; I don't know who the heck thinks that opening a new land SEVEN years after a movie comes out is a good thing. ; Or a coaster built on a movie, where you can't even get the coaster running before the sequel comes out!
 
Interesting thoughts Roger. ; I agree also. ; It seems that there might be a lot in the works, but nothing has been approved to the point that they can announce it. ; I mean there are changes to Pleasure Island, changes to Fantasyland, and now maybe changes to Animal Kingdom. ; There are also mentions of changes and additions to the Studios. ; I think that there might be some upcoming additions to the parks that have yet to be announced, and all we can do for now is speculate and wonder.
 
"Roger" said:
I don't know who the heck thinks that opening a new land SEVEN years after a movie comes out is a good thing. ; Or a coaster built on a movie, where you can't even get the coaster running before the sequel comes out!
Click to expand...

I agree that the timing isn't really good on the opening/release dates. ; However, I think the timing is a multiple part problem. ; First, nobody is willing to spend money if they aren't fairly certain that the new attraction will be a success. ; Even Disney who is arguably the best at what they do sometimes misses the target with new attractions[nb]DCA[/nb]. ; So, it would be very difficult to sell management on the idea of putting the time and effort into designing a land based on a movie that hasn't been released yet which forces them to design things based on movies after the movie has been declared a success.

Second, it takes years to design something that big from scratch. ; We tell our clients that it usually takes 3-5 years for a project to go from first idea to completed building and that's for buildings that are relatively small and simple compared to what WDI designs. ; Given that, I don't think 7 years is all that long. ;

I agree that it would be nice to open attractions at WDW based on sequels, but that would require attraction development to start at almost the same time as the movie scripting which would make the design process difficult because you would have to make potentially significant design changes to the attraction if changes occur to the movie unless you're willing to hold the movie release to accommodate the attraction opening schedule which brings me to my third point. ; Making a movie is somewhat straightforward in that all of the reviews in the process are completely internal and you generally don't have significant delays from uncontrollable factors like weather, where building a new attraction has several external reviews (permit office, Fire Marshal, etc.) and is subject to weather delays making it difficult to get both completed at the same time. ; The only way to reliably set the movie release and attraction opening for the same date would be to complete the movie and hold the release date until you know for certain when the attraction will open which means outlaying the complete cost of the movie and then waiting some period of time before seeing any returns from the box office. ;
 
Michael, the only thing I'll say is that the regime in power at the time intentionally did what they did with DCA. ; They thought people wouldn't mind that the shops got the money instead of the attractions.

Basically they didn't spend money on attractions, which is why the park has cost the company MORE since opening day than it did to build it. ; And why the giant C A L I F O R N I A letters are leaving soon.
 
never forget, disney has one huge advantage when it comes to construction, wdw is run by the reedy creek improvement district, and find me another company that's it's own defacto government. yeah sure you want to meet modern building codes, if only to avoid the bad press and liability if you ever have a bad collapse/fire. but the approval/permitting process is severely streamlined when you are only down the hall, email away from the approving office
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top