Disney HONG KONG

[MiniMissMinnie]

The word is out:

Disney will open park in Hong Kong in 2005.....

Gotta make an Asian tour, then!!

Marie

 

[space42]

Warning, Contents of this post were copied from a "insider" post on Laughingplace. Do not read unless you have your rose colored glasses firmly in place!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
When Hong Kong Disneyland opens in late '05 or early '06 (some infrastructure delays have put the opening in a bit of flux from it's original "October, 2005" date), Hong Kong will NOT have a Pirates of the Caribbean. It will not have a Haunted Mansion. It will not have a Small World, an Indy, a Splash Mountain, or a Big Thunder Mountain. It will be a very different type of "Disneyland" than what you would probably assume.

The opening day roster of attractions for Hong Kong Disneyland is as follows:

Main Street USA
-Disneyland Railroad
-Main Street vehicles

Tomorrowland
-Space Mountain (Paris version)
-Buzz Lightyer Space Ranger Spin
-Rocket Jes

Fantasyland
-Carousel
-The Many Adventures of Winnie The Pooh (WDW/Disneyland version)
-Mad Hatter's Tea Party (teacups)
-Dumbo The Flying Elephant
-Mickey's Philharmagic (3D Movie coming to WDW next year)

Adventureland
-Raft's to Tarzan's Island
-Tarzan's Treehouse (on the island)
-Pocahontas Canoes
-River Boats (A cross between Jungle Cruise and Keelboats that travel around the Rivers of Adventure alongwith the Canoes. AA's and Show scope from standard Jungle Cruise will not be used however. Limited show scenes.)
-Lion King Theater (Fantasyland Theater type venue)

That is the opening day roster of attractions for Hong Kong Disneyland in it's entirety. It will be a very limited interpretation of a "Disneyland" or "Magic Kingdom" type Park upon opening.


Also, this quote from a recent WDI Design Guideline document may help you understand the scale, scope and environment that Hong Kong Disneyland will present to it's Guests throughout the Park.

"Fantasyland recreates the 'Medieval Faire' atmosphere of the original Disneyland (i.e., the Anaheim version) with banners, flags and tent-like structures."

Basically, it's a recreation of the 1955 Fantasyland, with flat painted walls and simple facility structures decorated with flags and banners. The lushly designed "village" Fantasyland of 1983, or the similar Disneyland Paris version of 1992, will not be built in Hong Kong.

Hong Kong Disneyland will be very different from what most Americans currently expect from modern Disney Parks, especially one branded as a "Disneyland".
------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Only one E-Ticket (Space Mountain)?????????????

At least it will be the Paris version.

 

[mrtoadslastride]

Apparently they have learned nothing from California Adventure. Maybe after this park bombs with Tokyo Disneyland doing so well they will finally get a clue...

 

[DisDuck]

With 3 to 4 years to go before opening I would take anything said with 'a grain of salt'. DL Hong Kong could be better than this or worse. Too much time left to get anything accurate. My opinion.

 

[larry_poppins]

All I can say is God bless the Oriental Land Company and Tokyo Disneyland!

Larry

 

[space42]

Not too long ago, I would not have believed that this could possibly be true. However based on Disney's last few park efforts that they have paid for (DAK, DCA, Disney Studios Paris), this seems to be right in line.

If true, this is very sad.

 

[KidDurango]

For those who are so excited to bash Hong Kong before it opens, I just want to remind them that Magic Kingdom at WDW, a park who's construction was overseen by Roy, opened without Pirates, Space Mountain, Thunder Mountain, Splash Mountain, and still does not have an Indiana Jones. For many years Country Bear Jamboree was the E-ticket on the west side of the park! I realize that many of these attractions had not been invented yet, but my point is that just because a Magic Kingdom does not have these things, does not mean that it is not a Magic Kingdom. Roy and the team in charge at the time cut Pirates from opening day to save money. The walkway between Small World and Peter Pan was narrowed considerably to save in concrete costs, and that area remains a bottleneck during busier periods to this day. Cutting scope in order to get a park out of the ground is nothing new, I believe that if you even go back and look at the historys, Walt even cut scope on Disneyland. Many of the "Walt=magnanimous genius, Eisner=evil miserly jerk" people will now argue that Walt cut scope because he just didn't have the money, but who can say that if Walt had had more money, and spent it on the park, that it wouldn't have been operating in the red longer, and been a financial drain on the company. The point is, as Roy E. recently stated , these parks never have, and never will be designed to open as "completed parks".

 

[Uncleromulus]

I would much prefer to see the Company refurbish and upgrade things at WDW and staff the place back to normal levels. Opening this thing in Hong Kong is diverting funds needed at WDW.
Saw a Travel Channel special on Disneyland Paris the other day. Quite nice!!
WDW in Florida is fast becoming a poor cousin to Disney's other efforts.

 

[space42]

I just want to remind them that Magic Kingdom at WDW, a park who's construction was overseen by Roy, opened without Pirates, Space Mountain, Thunder Mountain, Splash Mountain, and still does not have an Indiana Jones.

True.. and as you stated many of these had not yet been invented. See EuroDisney and Tokyo Disneyland for recent Magic Kingdom parks that have opened more "complete" or at least more in line with what the public would expect from a Magic Kingdom park. This will be 2005 not 1971.

Roy and the team in charge at the time cut Pirates from opening day to save money

Not ture. Pirates was not supposed to be on the attraction roster at all because of the newly being designed Western River Expedition that was supposed to "top" Pirates. After public outcry because of the lack of a Pirates ride at WDW, WDI quickly responded to the publics demands. Pirates at WDW opened two years later in 1973.


This is not Eisner bashing from me. I could care less who is to blame. But it does not sit right with me either that a MK being built in 2005 will have an attraction roster less than one built in 1971.

 

[Another Voice]

When the Magic Kingdom opened in 1971 it did have fewer attractions than Disneyland had – but WDW also opened with several significant new attractions: ‘Country Bear Jamboree’, ‘The Hall of Presidents’, ‘The Mickey Mouse Review’ among them. And the “cloned” attractions were also generally larger and/or more elaborate than their Disneyland counterparts: ‘Jungle Cruise’, ‘Haunted Mansion’, everything in Fantasyland (and especially the castle). And all of the restaurants and merchandise locations were also significantly larger than Disneyland.

‘Pirates of the Caribbean’ was not an opening day attraction because it was felt the entire New Orleans Square concept wouldn’t be of interest for a park so close to the real city of New Orleans. So instead, the new park got Liberty Square. And I don’t think that missing out on ‘Alice in Wonderland’ or the ‘Storybook Canal Boats’ constituted a major cheapening of the project.

This corporate spin that “Disney has always built small and then filled out” is (let me be precise here) – a complete, bald-faced, unmitigated, flat-out, can’t-say-it-in-court - lie. Disney has always wanted to add to their parks, but the current line about building them half-sized and filling-in as attendance grows is a complete untruth.

EPCOT Center was built and opened as a complete park, although ‘Living Seas’ and ‘Life and Health’ were pushed back because of sponsor problems. But no one can claim that these two pavilions represented the other half of the park. The Disney/MGM Studios was built as a “complete” park. In fact the biggest trouble was finding the space to expand as much as they have (it’s failure as a production facility has helped). The park opened at its original size simply because The Company did not want to spend anymore money. There were never ANY plans to fill it out as a “full-day” park.

The trend is not to build economical and grow with attendance, the trend now is to build cheap and market well. At Animal Kingdom, Asia was pushed back to save money and Beastly Kingdom was flat out cancelled (again to save money). California Adventure was built as a “complete park” with no plans for ANY additions during its first five years. There are no plans to expand these to ‘Magic Kingdom’ size parks. The only plan was to invest as little as possible and draft off the good will of the larger, fuller parks nearby.

In absolutely none of those cases was there any thought what so ever of “building small” and building the rest later as part of some masterful business strategy. Instead, the company has been caught by surprise by the public’s negative reception to their minimal efforts. Panicked contruction of new attractions is an after-thought covered over in hopes that Wall Street won't notice major business failures.

This current company line is nothing but an eight-year old kid crying “I meant to do that” when he falls down on the playground. In the current company culture, it’s considered much better to lie outright and trash the past than it is to admit that someone made a mistake.

And yes, Walt poured every cent he had into Disneyland and continued to pour more money in. The public responded to the effort and Disneyland has been profitable since it opened. In fact, Disney made so much money off Disneyland he was able to buy back all the stakes he had sold in the project (including the third sold to ABC and the entire food service concession) within a few years of opening.

So it seems that opposite business case has been proven – building complete up front produces profits, but building small like at California Adventure turns out to be nothing but a financial drain on the company.