WS New Country Rumor

[Uncleromulus]

There have been what--1,487 previous rumors that a new country is coming to Epcot.
None of the others were true.
I suspect that this one isn't either.
If they EVER do get another country, trust they will have a ride, a good restaurant, and if they have a movie--seats!!!

 

[Horace Horsecollar]

I only read the first and last pages of this thread, so maybe this was already discussed....but what are they doing next to France? Something is going on there at the moment....

The Epcot International Flower & Garden Festival ran from March 3, 2010 to May 16, 2010.

If there are construction walls between France and Morocco, they're probably removing the "Art of Green Living" temporary exhibit and restoring the usual landscaping there.

 

[Belle5]

I have not read all the replies, so this may have been covered already. My DS23 recently returned from Turkey and while we were at EPCOT last week he was pointing out to us just how similar the Moroccan pavilion was to all that he saw in Turkey. I do think Turkey would be too much of a repeat!

I have always thought that Russia would be a good fit--except who wants borscht?

 

[LuluLovesDisney]

If Disney added Greece, they would not only have all of the things pp's have mentioned such as great food, history, artifacts, architecture, et al., but a ready-made, new meet and greet character-opportunity: Hercules. My kids would love to meet Hercules, Meg, Hades etc. Think of the marketing opportunities and potential profits Disney would reap by re-establishing this movie.

Agreed!!

 

[BecBennett]

While I'd love too see Australia added I can't see it happening. We'd probably have great QS options - IMO (I'm thinking anything by arnotts, vegemite, prawn skewers) but don't think we'd be able to pull off a proper table service restaurant... We've got some great Aboriginal heritage, but I'd pass on that cuisine... Haha!!

Personally I could see something like Spain or Greece - a Pompeii dig site would be fun.

If they add an attraction before a country, my vote is for an indoor roller coaster, themed to the emperor's new groove trip to the secret lair, placed near the Mayan temple... Or something like that!

 

[chrisw127]

I have not read all the replies, so this may have been covered already. My DS23 recently returned from Turkey and while we were at EPCOT last week he was pointing out to us just how similar the Moroccan pavilion was to all that he saw in Turkey. I do think Turkey would be too much of a repeat!

I have always thought that Russia would be a good fit--except who wants borscht?

I lived in Russia for a while and the food isn't bad. Like the US, Russia has a lot of influence from other places, so there isn't just one simple cuisine. Lots of beefy/mushroom dishes that are somewhat familiar to Americans, shish-kabob is very popular, as are simple salads and soups and really good bread. They could serve different flavored vodkas. I can see a restaurant with traditional dancers and music being lots of fun.

 

[movie77]

Brazil should be a no brainer. Huge growing country and there is no South American country today. Brazilian steak house for the food and they can serve Caprinas out front. Think mojito but better!

 

[Cobra B.]

The only problem with this map with such small available country locations is that Turkey would always be stuffed and you would be roasting and dripping from the heat. You couldn't fly through it. And you would just want to gobble down your meal because it's so tiring. The only thing you would want to do after going there is unbutton your pants and take a nap in front of a football game.

Would it be wrong to have one of those carts out front selling legs? Do they sell fries in front of France?

 

[DisCopper]

I'm always amazed at people who say there's no space for more countries in WS. Take a close look at GoogleEarth, and use some imagination.

Going clockwise:
1. You could rip out the old Odyssey restaurant and put somethere there (Yes, I realize they do use the space for some special events).
2. There is a lot of space between Mexico and Norway. There are some backstage buildings in there, but they could obviously be relocated (look at what they're doing with the new Fantasyland).
3. If you rip out the Outpost, there is space for probably two countries. They wouldn't necessarily have a lot of "waterfront property," but there is a ton of space in the back.
4. One new country between Germany and Italy.
5. Possibly a small (narrow) country between Japan and Morocco.
6. Definitely a large country between Morocco and France.
7. If they were frantic for space, they could even totally redesign the International Gateway, and put a country there. Maybe reroute the entrance so that it comes up through the WS Events Pavillion between the UK and Canada.

So, if they're pushing it, that's 8 additional countries.

Now, really think out of the box. Go behind the countries, get rid of Ave. of the Stars, and/or Buena Vista Dr., and you can put a whole other ring of countries behind the ones that are already there. Granted, it would require a huge traffic redesign (and I don't see them ever doing it), but it's all Disney's land and they can do what they want.

 

[airhead]

If Disney added Greece, they would not only have all of the things pp's have mentioned such as great food, history, artifacts, architecture, et al., but a ready-made, new meet and greet character-opportunity: Hercules. My kids would love to meet Hercules, Meg, Hades etc. Think of the marketing opportunities and potential profits Disney would reap by re-establishing this movie.

Greece would be a great choice!!! The food,history and music!

 

[skiingfast]

Now, really think out of the box. Go behind the countries, get rid of Ave. of the Stars, and/or Buena Vista Dr., and you can put a whole other ring of countries behind the ones that are already there. Granted, it would require a huge traffic redesign (and I don't see them ever doing it), but it's all Disney's land and they can do what they want.

Better yet, Get more boats to cut down on the walking, double the diameter of the lagoon. Then you can fit 25 or 35 countries around the lagoon.

 

[Horace Horsecollar]

I'm always amazed at people who say there's no space for more countries in WS.

Yesterland recently had an article showing how many spots are still available around the lagoon:

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

1. You could rip out the old Odyssey restaurant and put somethere there

Odyssey takes up a rather small space, and it's in Future World more than on the lagoon. The large pond that separates Odyssey from the walkways in unbuildable. That's why Odyssey had to be set back so far and connected to the walkways with foot bridges.

It's intentional that World Showcase begins with America's neighbors Canada and Mexico on either side as you enter from Future World.

Even without using the Odyssey site, there are 6 to 10 spots for additional countries.

 

[Mag7515]

I would like to see Poland, Ireland, Russia and Brazil.

 

[bod diddy]

North Korea for me, please.

 

[Horace Horsecollar]

North Korea for me, please.

Korea would be a good addition to World Showcase. The "land" wouldn't be North Korea or South Korea, but just Korea.

When World Showcase opened in 1982, it included Germany. Just plain Germany. However, Germany was a divided country at the time, with two distinct governments: West Germany and East Germany.

It makes sense that a World Showcase "land" should honor that culture, traditions, people, and foods of a nationality, rather than dealing with whatever governments happen to be in place at the time.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

The problem with any additons are two-fold:

1. Disney insists on the country paying for large amounts of the construction/ operation cost. Which was fine in 1982 when there was no world internet and digital media. But the times have changed and the need for bucks in an increasingly debt-laden world to be spent on a mockup in florida is probably not as attractive. we see the same thing happening to corporate sponsorship at disney parks...the yield is not commensurate with the investment.

2. About 10 years ago...we could probably all agree on who the first two countries to be added would be: Israel and Russia
How's that working for you today? The "friendly" russians have turned out to be not that friendly...and the israelis have abandoned the public perception of peaceful coexistence (right or wrong) that the US government cannot discard in future relations.
So who's on top now? Austrailia? Turkey? Brazil? Greece?

Economics and politics are broadcast real-time and the general world public can by and large now see how volatile and fickle they are - unlike in 1982.

Expansion would have been easier if we still had the soviet to point to - when everybody "knew" who was not to be liked and everybody else was acceptible. Now, we are "friendly" with the real bad guys - the Chinese - because we get all our Wal-crap from there and don't have the guts to change the deal...

So what fiberglass landmark would you throw up?

Spain would probably be the safest bet...perhaps austrailia/ new zealand. But who knows?

as prezzie Wubya used to say: "what about Poland, people!"?

 

[Horace Horsecollar]

1. Disney insists on the country paying for large amounts of the construction/ operation cost.

Not true.

Go to the link in post #92.

Economics and politics are broadcast real-time and the general world public can by and large now see how volatile and fickle they are - unlike in 1982.

Please see post #95.

World Showcase isn't meant to be a showcase of US relations with other national governments at a given point in time.

World Showcase is about giving Disney guests a glimpse at the timeless qualities of each nationality.

In other words, just because there's hostility between the governments of the US and Iran doesn't mean there couldn't be a wonderful pavilion showcasing the traditions, art, architecture, foods (and so on) of the Persian people.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Not true.

Go to the link in post #92.



Please see post #95.

World Showcase isn't meant to be a showcase of US relations with other national governments at a given point in time.

World Showcase is about giving Disney guests a glimpse at the timeless qualities of each nationality.

In other words, just because there's hostility between the governments of the US and Iran doesn't mean there couldn't be a wonderful pavilion showcasing the traditions, art, architecture, foods (and so on) of the Persian people.

As to point 1...i looked back through the post and didn't see the nuts and bolts operational costs involved. The initial countries paid a hefty portion of costs...there was a book (married to the mouse...i believe) that spoke in great length about the construction of epcot and described some of the "unclassified" details of the world showcase. perhaps that is not how future expansion would go...but disney is not going to spend 100-200 million (that's a guess...but that is probably conservative) on each new pavilion without a partner because the financial impact of an addition of that type is not going to justify it aka - that's a lot of beers to sell to get that back.
but i'm open to theories and hard facts about construction, operation, and motives - as always

you're second point is kinda blah blah

No politics...sharing of ideas...celebrations of cultures....

Uh huh...an international media conglomerate that's publically traded not taking politics into any account on EVERY decision?

That should be their next fantasy movie plot

i admire your "disney optimism"...misguided as it might be...but please consider how much information is readily available to the masses compared to the 1970's during construction and development...and how that has changed the formula...maybe even against the corporation's wishes.

And EPCOT was the final stand of the true "disney" old guard. the last thing that had Walt's guys in charge...they still retained some of the vision even as the financials of Disney at the time were spiraling downhill.
Ask any analyst or Disney veteran if EPCOT would be constructed today and their answer would be the same: No Way.
The costs were astronomical...in real and inflation-adjusted dollars. no way would it even be considered.
all disney parks since have been more corporate and restrained....Animal Kingdom would be the closest example - and they still have half a day going over there and cut down the original plans significantly to start pumping out tickets. If you think about it...both Tokyo DL and EPCOT represent the end of an era when the vision was brought fully to bear after the bulldozers moved in. They built what they had designed when construction began - it wasn't trimmed, short-tracked, and budgeted down to a place where the afficianados walk around daily saying "this was supposed to be ______ or ____" (the easy example is the now legendary "Beastly Kingdom" but there are many others)

grain of salt

 

[Horace Horsecollar]

As to point 1...i looked back through the post and didn't see the nuts and bolts operational costs involved. The initial countries paid a hefty portion of costs...there was a book (married to the mouse...i believe) that spoke in great length about the construction of epcot and described some of the "unclassified" details of the world showcase.

Please identify the page numbers in "Married to the Mouse" that describe how the "initial countries paid a hefty portion of costs." Perhaps you would care to cite the text too.

Most (but not all) initial World Showcase countries had some financial participation from companies such as breweries or restaurant companies. That's quite different than national governments footing the bills for the pavilions. Some pavilions had no financial participation at all.

you're second point is kinda blah blah

No politics...sharing of ideas...celebrations of cultures....

Uh huh...an international media conglomerate that's publically traded not taking politics into any account on EVERY decision?

That should be their next fantasy movie plot

I stand by my point that World Showcase is not a showcase of point-in-time international politics.

Of course, Disney makes decisions based on business and political considerations. I never said they didn't. There have been no additions to World Showcase since 1988. The Disney parks and Resorts business sector has invested billions in capital elsewhere since 1988, while World Showcase has remained largely unchanged. That speaks for itself.

They built what they had designed when construction began - it wasn't trimmed, short-tracked, and budgeted down to a place where the afficianados walk around daily saying "this was supposed to be ______ or ____" (the easy example is the now legendary "Beastly Kingdom" but there are many others)

You are mistaken.

World Showcase was supposed to include an attraction at every pavilion. The show building for the German boat ride and the "Meet the World" attraction in Japan were built but never used for their intended purpose. Equatorial Africa was originally supposed to be there on opening day. Then it was supposed to open "soon" as part of a second phase.

By the way, we had newspapers and television in the 1970s and 1980s too. We even knew what was going on in the world. I wouldn't be surprised if the average American was more aware of the world 30 years ago than today. In today's era of Facebook and specialty sites such as DISboards, it's much easier to tune out the world than in the era of Walter Cronkite and newspaper editors who felt an obligation to print what the public needed to know.

 

[Horace Horsecollar]

Please identify the page numbers in "Married to the Mouse" that describe how the "initial countries paid a hefty portion of costs." Perhaps you would care to cite the text too.

I'm now going to answer my own question.

I just looked at "Married to the Mouse." The author, Prof. Richard E. Foglesong, did write something that suggests that the companies paid for the pavilions.

On page 103, Foglesong writes, "Germany, Mexico, Canada, France, the United Kingdom, Japan and Italy agreed to build pavilions for World Showcase." Oddly, Foglesong omits China.

Foglesong provides no details and cites no sources. He doesn't explained what he means by "agreed." My guess is that Fogelsong made an assumption based on how World's Fairs work.

The reality is that none of these countries paid for their World Showcase pavilions.